ML19338D383

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Requests Assistance in Obtaining Info from Applicants Necessary to Resolve Task Action Plan Items & non-TMI Open Issues.Summary of Required Data Encl
ML19338D383
Person / Time
Issue date: 06/19/1980
From: Satterfield R
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To: Schwencer A, Youngblood B
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Shared Package
ML19338D384 List:
References
NUDOCS 8009230075
Download: ML19338D383 (7)
v • d • e


Text

_

k A//M T-7 g

44

-=

5 JUN 191980 f

bb

~

7 i 1'

MEMORANDUti FOR:

B. J. Youngblood, Chief, Licensing Branch No. 1, D0L f

A. Schwencer, Chief, Licensing Branch No. 2, 00L; Acting Chief, Licensing Branch No. 3, D0L FROM:

R. H. Satterfield, Chief, Instrumentation & Contml Systems Branch, DSI SUSJECT:

INFORMATION REQUIRED BY ICSB TO RESOLVE TASK ACTION PLAN AND NON-THI OPEN ISSUES

Reference:

Memo from R. Tedesco on OL'Scheduli19 Information dated June 11, 1980 The referenced memo provided a matrix of scheduling dates for the upcoming OLs. We find that, for many of the iters wer are responsible for, we have received none of the information needeo to complete our review. The purpose j

of this memorandum is.to identify those items that we believe are the responsibility of ICSB and to request your assistance in o.btaining the information from the applicants needed to resolve these items.

i provides. a sumary of Task Action Plan items requiring ICSB input and indiodes the assigned ICSB reviewer for each item. Enclosure 2 provides

~

a break down of these Task Action Plan items by fuel loading, full power, and dated requirements to indicate where infomation is required from each of the upcoming OL applicants to complete ICSB's review effort. We. request that the Project Managers for each plant listed, provide our reviewers with the infomation required (or the FSAR amendment number containing the information).

If the information is yet to be submitted, we need the expected submittal date. provides a list of Non-THI outstanding items for the first 10 OLs upcoming. This list of outstanding issues was taken in part from R. Tcdesco's memos of May 12 and 19,1980.* In addition we have added the following three items to a nutber of the cases for the reasons noted.

1.

Bulletin 79-27 required a response to concerns on instrument bus failures from North Anna 2, Diablo Canycn, McGuire, Salen 2, Sequoyah, and Zimmer.

~

We believe that all other appli: ants will need to address-these concerns.

C 2.

Bulletin 80-06 addressed concerns re. lated 'to ESF reset controls. This

/ [/ )

Bulletin dH not require a response from NTOL applicants. Ouu to this J !.

p.l concern, a draft let.ter to all OL applicants (Enclosure 4) was prepared i

by ICSB to olicit a response to these concerns. Some apolicants have f

o e ~, n e n nei n n 2 cent oo ro ycnen w m En n,noided s y nrnvu a 2 72n+421 SB 2., '

-froM-f--

to respond to Bulletin 80-01. All applicants did not receive the IC

,,,,,, request"fer"iFforratton"and 'attion"ts"recutred"to" request"a"rescense

= = = = = > those..that..did. mat..ntre.i.ve..lt....

un>

NBC Pou MThg6Ted5FEMUed memo indi' ahs=4E65-for etMon ee equipment qualification.

80e9230 o7 5

[

gf.,

l :

i.

3.

Bulletin 79-21 addressed concerns related to level instrument errors due to environmental effects on the instrument reference leas used in the measurerent i

sys tem.' A generic question (Enclosure 5) was prepared to request a response to these concerns. All applicants did not receive the ICSS request for information and action is required to request a response from those that did l

not receive it.

I i

As with responses to Action Plan items, Project Managers should help a:sure that ICSB reviewers receive infonnation provided by OL applicants to close out Non-TMI issues.

I Sumaries of Non-TMI issues and assigned ICSB reviewers for the last 10 plants included in the referenced memo will be prepared at a later date.

Original signed by:

Thomas M. Dunn.ing T. G. Dunning, Section Leader

~Ihitriine tationi Co f~ol Syste s Branch j

~

n nr m

Division of Systems Integration l

Enclosures:

l As stated

\\

cc:

D. Ross I

P. Check R. Tedesco j

~

B. Buckley l

L. Kintner R. Birkel A. Droinerick

~ 11. Rood T. Houghton J. Kerrigan C. Stahle T. Bournia J. Wilson W. Kane R. Stark-S. Bunvell

0. Lynch D. Hood DISTRIBUTION:

I. Peltier Central File ICSB Members ICSB Reading File RSatterfield JCS.B ded,.,Ig$...

TDunn.i n9.!cc.

.RSa,t,{,f,1,e,1,d

. 9L..lt.!80'.V9!..;$I80 n c,omu m <,.m c= ou.

-u,

FNCLOSURE 1 TASK ACTION PLAN ITEMS RE_ QUIRING ICSB INPUT PRIORITY

_ TASK ACTION PLAN ITE,M_

ICSB ACTION REQUIRED LEAD BRANClf ICSB REVIEWER CATEGORY SCHEDULE II.B.1 Reactor Coolant System Controls to be installed in RSB(W. Jenson)

R. Stevens NTOL Design by 1-1-R0 Vents

  • Control Room. May require Installation by 1-1 H1 review.

II.D.3 Relief and Safety Valve Review design for indicating ICSB(Rosenthal)

R. Stevens NT0L Implementatio t on ort Position Indication position on flow.

comnfete. Implemant-ation on Ols prior to full power.

II.E.1.1 AFW System Evaluation

  • Provide lead reviewer with ASB(LeTave)

Tha tcher/Ste vens/Kendall NT0L ors - see action plan dasign info as required.

OLs - prior to full power

!!.E.1.2 AFW System Automatic Review designs - draft SER f lCSB(Tha tcher/

Thatcher /Stevens/rendall NTOL ors - January 1, 1981 Initiatica and Flow input.

Stevens/ Kendall i Ols - Prior to fuel Indication

  • loading.

II.E.4.2 Isolation Dependability Review details of isolation CSB(fields)

R. Wilson NTOL ORS - See Action Plan circuitry OLs - Prior to full power II.F.1 Additional Accident Revies adequacy nf instru-ICSB(Morris)

B. Morris NTOL ors 1-B1 Vonitoring Instrument-mentation provided.

OLs By 1-1-Al or prior to a tion fuel load.

II.F.2 Identification of and Review adequacy of instru-CPB(Phillips)

B. Morris NT0L ors 1-81 Recovery from Conditions mentation provided.

Ols 1-81 or prior to leading to Inadequate fuc1 loading.

Core Cooling

  • II.K.1 IE Pulletins Review responses to items 17 'tSB(? )

21 - R. Wilson NT0L See Action P'an 21, 23, and 28. Table C.I..

23 - B. Morris of Action Plan.

28 - J. Burdoin e

9

LNCLOSURE 1 (CON'T)

PRIORITY TASK ACTION PLAN ITEM ICSB ACTION REQUIRED LEAD BRANCH ICS3 RE'.** EWER CATEGORY SCl!EDULE II.K.3 Final Recommendation of ' Review Responses of Items

(?)

1, 5, 9, 10 - J. Burdoin NT0L

' See Action Plan B&O Task Force 1, 5, 9, 10, 14, 15, 16, 14, 15, 16, 18, 21, 22, 18, 21, 22, 27, 44 of Table 27, 44 Thatcher /Stevens C.3, Task Action Plan II.K.2 Commission Orders Peview Responses to Items 9 RSB(?)

R. Wilson Priority See Action Plan on B&W Plants and 10 of Table C.2 of Task Group I Action Plan.

II.C.3 Systems Interaction

  • Yet to be decided. There

$1B B. Morris Priority See Action Plan is a need to assess the Group I effects of HELBs on unqualified equipment.

!.D.2 Plant Safety Assist. HFEB 1, determining HFEB(Bel tracchi)

11. Li Priority Issue Requ'rements by Parameter Display requirements applicable to Group i August 1980. Implement Console
  • Instrumentation to be install +

by January 1982.

ed. Review adequacy of equip.

designs w/HFEP.

II.E.5 Design Sensitivity Assess role of control /protec-RSB Rosenthal/Wils6n Priority See Action Plan of B&W Reactors

  • tion systems play in respond.

Group !!

ing to plant upsets

!!.F.3 Reg. Guide 1.97 Peview and comment on changes ICSB(Lanik)

G. Lanik Priority FY-82.

to the guide. Issue letters Group !!

to all licensees requiring compliance.

!!.H.1 TMI Safety Evaluation

  • Assist TMI Program Office as TMI Program Office Priority As required, required.

Group !

II.F.5 C'assification of In conjunction with 050, IEEE, OSD(Wenzinger)

(?)

Produce draff guide Ins trementa tion, develop criteria for Class II E by September 19R0.

control and electrical Systems.

equipnent.

e eMe we pee e ee--*"

wwe-

$.weh

ENCLOSURE 2 N

5 m

N 4

2 ".

d'

~

N O

5~

? 5 T

~ "

~

~

~

r s

L' 2

8 R3 2 t

5 e a

i o

x u

e TASK ACTION PLA'4 ITEM E 3 3 E N

5 S %

E O S

}h*E O Y 0 h:

a

% 'a 5

i 'a 2,

8 C 7 %3 c.,

o a w x r v,

u, v

u, a

v a

v, w u a a m a x n FL & LO PWR Test Requirenents II.D.3 R

R R

C R

R C

C R

R R

R R

R R

R R

R R

R II.E.1.2 (CTL Grade)

R R

R C

R R

C C

R R

R R

R R

R R

R R

R R

II.F.2 R

R R

C R

R C

C R

R R

.R R

R R

R R

R R

R C - Complete II.K.1 C.1.17 Westinghouse R

R R

C R

C C

R R

C.I.21 B&W R

R C.I.23 GE R,R R

R R

R R

C.I.28 DWR R

R R

C R

R C

C R

R R

R R

II.K.3

~~

R C

C R

R C.3.9 Westinghouse R

R R

C C.3.12 Westinghouse R

R R

C R

C C

R R

R > Response Required FP Requirements II.B.1 PWR R

R R

R R

R R

R R

R R

R R

II.E.1.1 PWR R

R R

R R

R R

R.

R R

R R

R II.K.2 C.2.9 B&W

.- i -

R R

R

  • Not applicable C.2.10 B&W R

Dated Requirenents II.B.1 R

R R

R R

R R

R R

R R

R R

II.E.1.2 (Safety Gr.)

R R

R R

R R

R R

R R

R R

R II.F.1 R

R R

R R

R R

R R

R R

R R

R R

R R

R R

R II.F.2 R

R R

R R

R R

R R

R R

R R

R R

R R

R R

R Prop. Dated Requirements II.K.3 C.3.13 GE R

R R

R R

R R

C.3.15 GE R

R R

R R

R R

C.3.18 GE R

R R

R R

R R

C.3.21 GE R

R R

R R

R R

C.3.22 GE R

R R

R R

R R

C.3.27 GE R

R R

R R

R R

b

' ~

ENCLOSURE 3 INSTRUMENTATION AND CONTROL SYSTEMS BRANCH NON-TMI OUTSTANDING ISSUES P3IORITY PLANT OPEN ITEMS REVIEWER 1

s 4

1 Diablo Canyon

1. 79-27 Response D. Wilson
2. 80-06 Response D. Wilson 2

Farley Unit 2

1. 79-27 Response D. Wilson
2. 80-06 Response D." Wilson
3. Level Inst. Errcrs R. Kendall 3

McGuire

1. 79-27 Response D. Wilson
2. 80-06 Response D. Wilson

' Level Inst. Errors R. Stevens

4. Contmt. Press Xmtr Qual.

R. St' evens 4

North Anna 2

1. 79-27 Response D. Wilson
2. 80-06 Response D. Wilson 5

San Onofre

1. Site Visit D. Thatcher
2. PPS PWR Supply Independence D. Thatcher
3. Bypass of RPS Channel D. Thatcher
4. 79-27 Response D. Wilson
5. 80-06 Response D. Wilson
6. Level Inst. Errors R. Kendall 6

Su,mer

1. Site Visit H. Li
2. 79-27 Response D. Wilson
3. 80-06 Response D. Wilson
4. Level Inst. Errors R. Kendall 7

Salem Unit 2

1. 79-27 Response D. Wilson
2. 80-06 Response D. Wilson 8

Sequoyah

1. 29-27 Response D. Wilson
2. 80-06 Response D. Wilson 9

LaSalle

1. Technical Specifications D. Thatcher
2. Physical separation and D. Thatcher elect, isolation
3. ATWS.

D. Thatcher

4. Test techniques does not D. Thatcher satisfy IEEE Std. 279-1971 (pull fuses)
5. Class IE sys, sensors may-D. Thatcher j

exceed range in the worst case

6. Drawings incomplete to com-D. Thatcher plete odr review
7. RCI should be classified D. Thatcher safety-grade

,*,.3

~.w

--m 4

--g-y T

e5

-'T-

"h4 T"-

T"'l 7

2-i PRIORITY PLANT OPEN ITEMS REVIEWER

8. Additional analysis required D. Thatcher to substantiate only one pump for the SCSC-ECWS pumps in the RHR loop required during a LOCA
9. Safety-related display.does D. Thatcher not satisfy IEEE 279-2971
10. Rod block monitor should D. Thatcher meet all criteria applic-able to a reactor trip system
11. MSIV leakage cont. sys. is D. Thatcher not single failure proof
12. Site visit to be conducted D. Thatcher by the Staff
13. 79-27 Response D. Wilson
14. 80-06 Response D. Wilson
15. Level Inst. Errors R. Kendall 10 Shoreham
1. Insts. Required for Safety H. Li
2. Leak Detn. System H. Li
3. Non-Safety grade Equip.

H. Li H. Li

4. LPCI System

~ H. Li

5. Startrek System
6. Motor Space Heater H. Lf
7. Rx Trip Power Supply H..Li,
8. 79-27 Response D. Wilson D. Wilson
9. 80-06 Response i

R. Kendall

10. Level Inst. Errors i

j h

l 4e-w-.

e..

-.. - - -

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=ML19338D383&oldid=4735874"