ML18086A306

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Summary of 810326 Meeting W/Util to Discuss Proposed Tech Specs for Facility.List of Attendees Encl
ML18086A306
Person / Time
Site: Salem PSEG icon.png
Issue date: 04/22/1981
From: Kerrigan J
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
NUDOCS 8104270191
Download: ML18086A306 (9)
v • d • e


Text

---=.

---~--

~~------

APR 2 2 19811 APPLICANT:

PUBLIC SERVICE ELECTRIC AND GAS COMPANY FACILITY:

SALEM NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION, UNIT 2

SUBJECT:

SALEM 2 TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS A meeting was held on March 26, 1981 with representatives of RSE&G to discuss the proposed Salem 2 Technical Specifications. Attachment 1 lists the meeting attendees.

The significant items discussed were:

1) initial functional testing of hydraulic and mechanical snubbers may be delayed until the.first refueling (T.S. 3/4.7.9);
2) the drag force determined during the mechanical snubber functional test should not be determined as a function of system spring rate (T.S. 3/4.7.9);
3)
  • the* mechanical snubber functi.onal test should quantitatively ascertain activation (T.S. 3/4.7~9);
4) visual inspection of snubbers must take place within the time period specified in T.S. 4.7.9a; the draft license will be modified to assure that a T.S. listing of mechanical snubbers is provided within 4 months of power operation (T.S. 3/4.7.9);
5)

PSE&G 's procedure for surveillance testing of some of the reactor trip system instrumentation takes 4 hours4.62963e-5 days <br />0.00111 hours <br />6.613757e-6 weeks <br />1.522e-6 months <br /> to complete. :The T.S. al1ows the channel to be bypassed for l hour for surveillance. Since no other utility has identified this as a problem, we asked PSE&G to informally send in their procedure.

l~e also agreed to survey other plants to determine if this surveillance test is routinely putting them into the action statement.

We did note that if surveillance testing puts Salem.

into the action statement, an LER does not have to be filed (T.S. 3/4.J.1);

6) trip of main feedwater pumps start the motor-driven auxiliary feedwater pumps only.

We agreed to eliminate the requirement to start the turbine-driven pump provided that the I&C Branch concurs in this action.

We also agreed to examine P~E&G's request to eliminate the requirement to start

~he motor-driven pumps.

This request was formally submitted in a letter to NRC dated February 17, 1981 (T.S. 3/4.3}2, Table 3.3-3);

~s 1o;4 2 1 o I 't I p

J OFFICIAL RECORD COPY. '

fr USGPO: 1980-329'824

~-*-*k ----

~. APR 2 2 1981 i,' *
7) the containment radioactivity monitor which initiates containment purge isolation is designed to initiate closure only after recounting several times and, therefore, PSE&G requested that the response time include only from signal initiation to valve closure.

We agreed to consider this request (T.S. 3/4.3.2, Ta.ble 3.3-5);

8)

With regard to channel checks of accident monitoring instrumentation, PSE&G was unclear as to how to perform a channel check on a single channel.

In addition, PSE&G requested guidance on how to do channel checks on valve position indicators.

We agreed to provide the guidance requested,

(T.S. 3/4.3.3.7);

9)

The Salem subcooling meter is linked to the plant computer. Therefore, if the computer becomes inoperable, the subcooling meter becomes inoperable.

The current action statement allows only 48 hours5.555556e-4 days <br />0.0133 hours <br />7.936508e-5 weeks <br />1.8264e-5 months <br /> to restore the subcooling meter.

PSE&G's position is that the staff has backfitted operability requirements on the plant,computer through this T.S. They requested that this restriction be delet~d. The staff's position was that the requirement.

  • would not be deH~ted but that we would consider extendi'ng the allowable inoperable period to 7 days (~.s. 3/4.3.3.7);
10) The "Event V" tv.1$. in Units l and 2 are different.

For example, the Unit 2*

t.s. allows only 1 gpm leakage from *the RCS pressure isolation valves, whereas the un1t* 1 T.S~ allows* 5 gij;bn.

We told PSE&G that we understood.

that there were differences but that no modifications to the Unit 2 T.S.

were going to be made at this "time, because the requirements l~re different for Ols and ORs in this area C:r.s. 3/4.7.2);

11) PSE&G proposed to verify that power to the isolati~n valve operators on ~he accumulators is disconnected by using power lockout switches rather than by removing the breaker from the circujh This proposal resulted from th~,

shielding study required by NUREG-0578, which indicated that the breaker:.

would be inaccessible during. ah accident. The staff agreed to consider PSE&G's proposal (T.S. 3/4.5.1);

1'.,

12) PSE&G ~:gnnot operate Salem with a 90-hr restriction on the use of the containment pressure-vacuum relief valves (lo Htch)... b~cause of pressure

'~*,

buildup within the containment.

PSE&G argued that: Fa-rley was all owed to '..

  • gurge essentially continuously".

We stated that we :would get back to PSE&G on this issue (T,S. 3/4.6.1.7r;

  • /

.. OFF'l.~E.~ * * * * *** * * *** *** * * ***.* * *.* * * * *.* * * * * * * *. *** * * *: * ;;* ** *.* ** *. ** :.*.*.* *.****** * *.****** ; ***.********** ;* ********************. ~ ***.*************.**** '.* *********.** ;: ** *. * * *

... _ SUR_NA~E~ *'* ******* * **** * **** : *********.**.***.* ~:~:... *. : ** : :*................... * **.***.* ~......... :* ** **** ; **********.*** *'* ** ; *.**. ~ *************.**** *.* *** ***.**** ~. ~... ; *******

DATE~.

I..

~ * * * * * * * *

  • e*e * * * * * * * *
  • i~*"~RC FORM 318 (10/80) NRCM 0240.

... -~*OFFICIAL REC() RD COPY

    • USGP0.:1980:-:-329*824

I e

  • ...,;-. APR 2 2 1981

/

13) PSE&G proposed that the action statement on the D.C. buses be modified to allow a backup battery charger to be used for 7 days before requtring plant shutdown (T.S. 3/4.8.2.3);

14} The resident inspector requested that the term "functional 11 be explicitly defined in the T.S. as it applies to fire barrier penetrations.

We agreed to do this ( T. S. 3/ 4. 7. 1. 1) ;

  • 15} It appears that Appendix I related T.S. will not be incorporated into Appendix A for some time; therefore, the Salem 2 T.S. will incorporate radial ogical T.s. into Appendi_x B.

cc: Meeting Attendees G. Meyer Janis Kerrigan, Project Manager Licensing Branch No. 3 Division of Licensing OFFICE.,

SURNAME......... *............................................................................................................. *....................... *.~..........

DATE.............. ~....................................................... ~.......................... '*............................ ***.

~ "NRC FORM 318 110/80) NRCM 0240 I

OFFICIAL RECORD COPY*..

  • USGP0:.1980-329-824 1

~1 e

.;J l..

MEE TI NG sur*i1'-VrnY Di STIU GUT I 0:1 lJuckc 1. Fi le G. Lc;i r tmc POI~

LOC:ill 110 I~

S.

r,1~*;l i ck i NSIC

v. llcn,1 l'(l.)'d TERA
z.

f~usztoczy L [\\// 3 l*!12a di ng

\\*'

Hc1as s II. Denton D.

i*~<1llci**

E. Ct1s c R. Eul; a rJ D. Eiscnhut

\\*!. l<cgirn P.. Purple R. Mattson B.,J. Young:ilood P. Check A. Sch\\*1enccr F. Miragliu

0. Parr J. Mi 11 er F. Rosa G. Lain as H. £3 u t l e i~

. R. Vollmer

\\*!. Krc9er J. P. Knight R. llouston R. Bosnak T. l*lurphy F. Schauer L. Rubenstein R. E. Jackson T. Speis Project Manager J. Kerrigan H. Johnston Attorney, DELO

,J. Stolz J. Lee

s. Huniluer OJE (3)

H. Gu111mi 11 ACRS (16)

T. Murley R. Tedesco

r. Sell ruL~clcr D. Skovhol t M. Ems t NRC Particir:iants:

R. liacr

c. Bci*1 *in9cr
w. Ross K. Kniel E.

\\~ei.nkam D. Vi ts G. Kniuht.011 H. Shaw A. ThiHJun i L. Norrholm D. Ton cli K. Wichman J. Kramer M. Virgilio D. Vass a l1 o P. Collins D. Ziemann E. Adens am bee:

/\\pplicant & Service List G. Meyer

UNITED STATES NUCLEA.R REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 APR 2 2 1981

_50 ---- 3--1-_L APPLICANT:

PUBLIC SERVICE ELECTRIC AND GAS COMPANY FACILITY:

SALEM NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION, UNIT 2

SUBJECT:

SALEM 2 TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS A meeting was held on March 26, 1981 with representatives of PSE&G to discuss the proposed Salem 2 Technical Specifications. Attachment l lists the meeting attendees.

The significant items discussed were:

1)
2)
3)
4)
5)
6) initial functional testing of hydraulic and mechanical snubbers may be delayed until the first refueling (T.S. 3/4.7.9);

the drag fo~ce determined during the mechanical snubber functional test should not be determined as a function of system spring rate (T.S. 3/4.7.9);

the mechanical snubber functional test should quantitatively ascertain activation (T.S. 3/4.7.9);

visual inspection of snubbers must take place within the time period specified in T.S. 4.7.9a; the draft license will be modified to assure that a T.S. listing of mechanical snubbers is provided within 4 months of power operation (T.S. 3/4.7.9);

PSE&G's procedure for surveillance testing of some of the reactor trip*

system instrumentation takes 4 hours4.62963e-5 days <br />0.00111 hours <br />6.613757e-6 weeks <br />1.522e-6 months <br /> to complete.* The T.S. allows the channel to be bypassed for l hour for surveillance. Since no other utility has identified this as a problem, we asked PSE&G to informally send in their procedure.

We also agreed to survey other plants to determine if this surveillance test is routinely putting them into the action statement.

We did note that if surveillance testing puts Salem into the action statement, an LER does not have to be filed (T.S. 3/4.3.1);

I l.

trip of main feedwater pumps start the motor-driven 'auxil1ary feedwater pumps only.

We agreed to eliminate the requirement to start the turbine-driven pump provided that the I&C Branch concurs in this action.

We also agreed to examine PSE&G's request to elimina.te the requirement to start the motor-driven pumps.

This request was formally submitted in a letter to NRC dated February 17, 1981 (T.S. 3/4.3.2, Table 3.3-3);

'1

,f:._.

l. *.1

~-

I

~

I 1 ','

r,

I.

I

'v' 7}

8)
9)
10)
11)
12) APR 2 2 198~

the containment radioactivity monitor which initiates containment purge isolation is designed to initiate closure only after recounting several times and, therefore, PSE&G requested that the response time include only from signal initiation to valve closure.

We agreed to consider this request (T.S. 3/4.3.2, Table 3.3-5);

With regard to channel checks of accident monitoring instrumentation, PSE&G was unclear as to how to perform a channel check on a single channel.

In addition, PSE&G requested guidance on how to do channel checks on valve position indicators.

We agreed to provide the guidance requested (T.S. 3/4.3.3.7);

The Salem subcooling meter is linked to the plant computer.

Therefore, if th~ computer becomes inoperable, the subcooling meter becomes inoperabl~.

The current actiori statement allows only 48 hours5.555556e-4 days <br />0.0133 hours <br />7.936508e-5 weeks <br />1.8264e-5 months <br /> to restore the subcool ing meter.

PSE&G's position is that the staff has backfitted operability requirements on the plant computer through this T.S.

They requested that this restriction be deleted.

The staff's position was that the requirement would not be deleted but that we would consider extending the allowable inoperable period to 7 days (T.S. 3/4.3.3.7);

The "Event V 11 T.S. in Units l and 2 are different.

For example, the Unit 2 T.S. allows only l gpm leakage from the RCS pressure isolation valves, whereas the Unit l T.S. allows 5 gpm.

We told PSE&G that we.understood that there were differences but that no modifications to. the Unit 2 T.S.

were going to be made at this time, because the requirements )are.different for Ols and ORs in this area (T.S. 3/4.7.2);

PSE&G proposed to verify that power to the isolation valve operators. on the accumulators is disconnected by using power lockout switches rather than by removing the breaker from the circuit.

This proposal resulted from the shielding study required by NUREG-0578, which indicated that the breaker would be inaccessible during an accident.

The staff agreed to consider PSE&G's proposal (T.S. 3/4.5.l);

PSE&G cannot operate Salem with a 90-hr restriction on* the use of the containment pressure-vacuum relief valves (10 inch) because of pressure buildup within the containment.

PSE&G argued that Farley was allowed to purge essentially continuously.

We stated that we would get' back to. PSE&G on this issue (T.S. 3/4.6. l. 7);

(.

..r

... 13) PSE&G proposed that the action statement on the D.C. buses be modified to allow a backup battery charger to be used for 7 days before requiring plant shutdown (T.S. 3/4.8.2.3);

14) The resident inspector requested that the term "functional" be explicitly defined in the T.S. as it applies to fire barrier penetrations.

We agreed to do this (T.S. 3/4.7.1.1);

15) It appears that Appendix I related T.S. will not be incorporated into Appendix A for some time; therefore, the Salem 2 T.S. will incorporate radiological T.S. into Appendix ~B.,/ /

cc: Meeting Attendees G. Meyer

~1~

i gan,:--Project~anager Licensing Branch No. 3 Division of Licensing

Mr. R. L. Mittl, General Manager Licensing & Environment Engineering & Construction Departn~nt Public Service Electric & Gas Company 80 Park Plaza Newark, New Jersey 07101 cc:

Richard Fryling, Jr., Esq.

Assistant General Counsel Public Service Electric & Gas Company 80 Park Plaza Newark, New Jersey U7l0l I

Mark Wetterhahn, Esq.

Conner, Moore & Caber Suite l 050 1747 Pennsylvania Avenue, N. W.

Washington, D. C. *20006 Mr. Leif J. Norrholm c/o U. S. Nuc1ear Regulatory Commission Drawer I Hancocks Bridge, New Jersey 08038

NAME J. Kerrigan W. J. Ross E. J. Weinkam D. J. Vi ts H. K. Shaw E. A. Liden R. W. Beckwith J.P. Robafalvy L. J. No rrh o l m C. P. Johnson Keith Wichman Marty Virgilio ATTENDANCE LIST AFFILIATION NRC NRC NRC.

NRC NRC PSE&G

  • PSE&G PSE&G NRC PSE&G NRC NRC ATTACHMENT l
Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=ML18086A306&oldid=5011176"