ML19326A695
| ML19326A695 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Davis Besse  |
| Issue date: | 07/18/1975 |
| From: | Roe L TOLEDO EDISON CO. |
| To: | Anthony Giambusso Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19326A693 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8002270619 | |
| Download: ML19326A695 (6) | |
Text
.
4 g
m f
-~n i
TOLEDO s
O EDISON 1
LOWELL E. ROE s.c. %
..n
- .e4 n c.
...m File: 0017; 0220 tem ana4:
1 Docket 50-346 j
July 18, 1975 hi
):
Mr. A. Giambusso, Director Division of Reactor Licensing United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission l
Washington, D. C.
20555 j
Dear Mr. Ciambusso:
1 Enclosed are the minutes of the meeting held between the Toledo Edison Cot:rpany and the NRC on the first group of Toledo Edison (g*ny's comments on the "B & W Standardised Technical Specifications" which were transmitted to Leon Engle of the NRC in a letter dated May 28, 1975. These minutes are intended to assure that both the Toledo Edison Company and the :aC have the same understanding as to the resolution of the itema discussed at the meeting. Please notify us if you have any additions or corrections to these minutes.
Tours very truly, a
Enclosure cp e/l bec:
P. M. Smart, Esq.
L.
Henry, Esq.
cc:
G.
Charnoff, Esq.
R. Martin w/a D. H. Hauser, Esq.
L. Engle W/a E. C. Novak A. Schwencer w/a/
J. D. Lenardsen J. G. Evans J. B. Olmstead l
P. P. Anas i
A. H. Lazar I
I i
1 I
THE TCLECO ED: SON CCMPANY EClSCN PLAZA 300 MACISCN AVENUE TOLECO,CH:0 43652
<rooDX7Olo3
n.
/
'6-11-75 Meeting Minutes
Subject:
TECo Comments on "B & W Standardized Technical Specifications".
Attendees:
R. Bottimore - NRC R. Martin - NRC Region III E. C. Novak - TECo J. G. Evans - TECo G. L. Hurrell - TECo G. D. Humphreys - TECo F. Levandoski - B & W W. Brunson - B & W The meeting began at about 3 FM following the NRC/ Utility Group meeting.
R. Bottimore asked when the B & W input would be provided. Toledo Edison indicated that the B & W input would be provided by 8-1-75.
R. Bottimore stated that 8-1-75 would not support the review schedule and could jeopardize the operating license date cf issuance. Toledo Edison indicated that they j
would request a better date from B & W.
1 R. Bottimore further stated that some B & W input which required analysis could be a little late without jeopardizing the schedule, but the bulk of the B & W input is required as per the schedule.
The TECo co=ments werc.than discussed and the fc11cwing notes are keyed to the TECo comments..
i 1.3 OK, closed.
j 1.6 R. Bottimore has pursued this item with his superiors before with no success, but he will try again. For purposes of these notes the NRC response is No, closed.
1.8 First part - No, closed Second part - Open, R. Bottimore will pursue.
l 1.12 No, closed.
]
The definition should take exception for the incore detectors only.
l 1
1.17 Open, some change will be made by NRC.
1.18 Open, R. Bottimore will pursue.
1.23 OK, TEco is to provide proper terminology for the access doors.
1.24 Response Time Testing had been discussed earlier in the day at the B & W UG/NRC meeting. The NRC sees no further need for a meeting or Response Time Testing.
n i
I
m.
1.26 Open, the NRC is considering this comment internally.
Table 1.1.
First Part - No, closed.
The temperatures on this table for the HOT SHUTDOWN and HOT STANDBY MODES is to be based on the Decay Heat Removal System operational setpoint ie. 280 F for DB-1.
Second Part - Open, R. Bottimore will pursue.
2.1.1 Open, R. Bottimore will pursue.
2.1.1.
Needed as soon as possible.
2.1.2 Needed as soon as possible.
2.1.3 No, closed.
2.2.1 First Part - OK, closed Second Part - OK, closed.
2.2.1 Need B & W input.
2.2.1 OK, closed.
2.2.1 Need B & W input.
Bases 2.1.1 Need B & W input.
Bases 2.1.2 OK, closed.
Bases 2.2.1 OK, closed.
Bases 2.2.1 Need B & W input.
3.1.1.1 Open, R. Martin proposed specifying that the operable boron injection flow path be utilized.
R. Bottimore will pursue.
4.1.1.1.lb Need B & W input.
4.1.1.1.2 Need 3 & w input.
3.1.1.2 Open, R. Bottimore will pursue.
l 4.1.1.2 Open, R. Bottimore vill pursue.
?
3/4.1.1.3 Need B & W input.
3.1.1.4 OK, closed.
i j
4.1.1.4b OK, closed.
i 3.1.2.1 OK, closed.
I l i
m n. ~.
.4.1.2.1 No, closed.
TECo still feels that the comment is valid and will pursue further.
3.1.2.2 OK, closed.
4.1.2.2 Same as 4.1.2.1.
3.1.2.3 OK, closed.
4.1.2.3 First Part - OK closed.
Second Part - Same as 4.1.2.1.
4.1.2.4 Same as 4.1.2.1.
The meeting was adjourned at this point and was continued the next day via conference call.
6-12-75 Conference call between G. L. Hurrell, G. D. Humphreys and R. Bottimore.
3.1.2.5 Open, R. Bottimore believes that 3.1.2.5 and 4.1.2.5 are inconsistant. TECo will pursue.
4.1.2.5 Same as 3.1.2.5.
f 3.1.2.7 OK, closed.
4.1.2.7 Same as 4.1. 2.1.
3.1.2.8 First Part - OK, closed.
Second Part - OK, however, a figure must be supplied for the specification which shows the required concentration to volume relationship. TECd will supply the figure.
Third Part - OK, closed.
4.1.2.8 OK, closed.
3.1.2.9 OK, closed.
4.1.2.9 OK, closed.
3.1.3 OK, closed.
3.1.3.1 Need B & W input.
l 3.1.3.1 OK, closed.
3.1.3.1 OK, closed.
I i.
.n, m,
3.1.3.1 Need B & W input.
4.1.3.1.1 OK, closed.
3.1.3.2 OK, closed.
3/4.1.3.3 R. Bottimore stated that the core performance review staff was requiring that both the AIP and RPI channels be operable. The reviewers referenced by R. Bottimore were Marv Dunenfeld and Walter Brooks. Communication with these reviewers should be made via the NRC Project Manager for DB-1.
3.1.3.4 OK, closed.
3.1.3.4 OK, closed.
3.1.3.4 Need B & W input.
3.1.3.5 Open, specify 100% except for surveillance testing pursuant to Technical Specification 4.1.3.1.2.
3.1.3.6 Need B & W input.
4.1.3.6 No, closed.
~
R. Bottimore stated that the position of the rods must be determined once every 4 hours4.62963e-5 days <br />0.00111 hours <br />6.613757e-6 weeks <br />1.522e-6 months <br /> unless the computer is in operation. TECo still feels that once per 12 hours1.388889e-4 days <br />0.00333 hours <br />1.984127e-5 weeks <br />4.566e-6 months <br /> is sufficient and will pursue further.
4.1.3.7 OK, closed.
3.1.3.8 Need B & W input.
3.2.1 Need B & W input.
4.2.1 Open, R. Bottimore will pursue further.
3.2.2, 4.2.2 No, closed. The core performance reviewers require that these 3.2.3, 4.2.3 specifications be included in the Technical Specification.
3.2.4, 4.2.4 First Part - OK, TECo will provide proper terminology.
Second Part - Need B & W input.
Third Part - No, closed.
TECo still f99 s ghat the gommeng is valid and will pursue 1
further.
Table 3.3-1 No, closed.
The reviewer to be contacted via the NRC Project Manager for DB-1 is Mr. Don Tandi.
Table 3.3-1 Same as above.
I f
c, f *
- _m m.:.
Table 3.3-1 Open, TECo should run a certified test to show that 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br /> not enough time to perform testing on an RPS channel.
Table 3.3-2 Same as 1.24.
Table 4.3-1 OK, closed.
3.3.2.1 The DB-1 rewrite is not acceptable to the NRC.
R. Bottimore suggested using " incident levels" to conform to the format in the STS.
Resumed on 6/13/75, same participants as 6/12/75.
3.3.3.1 Open, R. Bottimore will pursue further.
Table 3.3-6 OK, closed.
3.3.3.2 OK, closed.
4.3.3.2 No, closed.
4.3.3.2 No, closed.
Table 3.3-7 & OK, closed.
4.3-4 Table 3.3-8 &
OK, closed.
4.3-5 Table 3.3-9 & Ok, closed.
4.3-6 3/4.3.3.6 OK, closed.
Bases for Section 3/4.1 First Part - OK, closed.
Second Part - Need B & W input.
Bases for Section 3/4.2 Need B & W input.
Bases for Section 3/4.3 OK, closed.
,