ML19347F148
| ML19347F148 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Wolf Creek, Callaway  |
| Issue date: | 05/05/1981 |
| From: | Dromerick A, Edison G Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8105150327 | |
| Download: ML19347F148 (6) | |
Text
$
f
^
lAAY 3 198I Docket Nos.:
STN 50-492 and STN 50-483 APPLICANTS: Union Electric Comcany Kansas Gas and Electric Company FACILITIO: Callaway Plant, Unit I holf Creek Generating Station, Unit i
SUBJECT:
SUmARY CF PEETING HELD CN APRIL 28, 1981 WITH CALLAWAY AND WOLF CPEEK APPLICANTS A meeting was held on April 28, 1981 at the Bechtel offices in Gaithersburg, Maryland with representatives of the Union Electric Company, Kansas Gas ard Electric Company, SNUPPS Organization, Bechtel Power Corporation and Westinghouse Electric Corporation. This meeting was held as a result of our letter of April 13,1981 (Enclosure 1) to the applicants requesting that a series of meetings be held related to instrumentation and enntrol systens for the Callaway and Wolf Creek facilities. The agenda for these meetings was attached to our April 13, 1981 letter. The acenda items discussed at this meting are listed in Enclosure 2.
The list of attendees at this reeting is attached as Enclosure 3.
Significant points discussed are sumarized as follows:
1.
The applicants made a detailed presentation of the SHUPPS power block.
2.
The aoplicants requested clarification of the following Agenda Items:
(a) control system failures, Agenda Item 3, (b) logic for turbine trip, Agenda Item 11, (c) RTD bypass loop flow alarms, Agenda Item 15. (d) auxiliary feedwater initiation, Agenda Item 27, (e) ECCS initiation, Agenda Item 28, and (f) RHR isolation valves, Agenda Item 37. We provided clarification for each of these items and the applicants indicated that they understand our position regarding each of the items and will either revise the FSAR to address our concerns or discuss these matters further at a future meeting. With respect to Agenda Item 11, logic for turbine trip, the applicants indicated that they would provide an appropriate reference on Figure 7.2-1 (Sheet 16) of the FSAR.
3.
A detailed discussion of the separation criteric, Agenda Item 4. for Callaway and Wolf Creek was held. We indicated that we had no further need for additional information regarding this matter.
4 With respect to testing the remote shutdown capability, Agenda Item 29, the applicants indicated that a test to demonstrate this capability would be run at the first SNUPPS unit. Section 3A and 14.2.12.3.36 of the FSAR contain additional information on the test. We indicated that we wouhi review se inforranon on tne test ano aavise t21em of o"'c5 >.....any.. concerns..regardihg..this. catter..
I y
n = "' V...
...........[..........
c4...
8..1.. 0 5/..T612. Y k....
..l.
d.
.u.'~..
.c rc.u me e..c u me OFFICIAL RECOP.D COPY
T
,s 3' MAY 5 1981 5.
As a result of our discussion regarding ESW isolation, Agenda ! tem 41, we advised the applicants that we did not require any additional infomation related to this item. We will review the adequacy of the indication provided to inform the operator that automatic isolation by the safety circuits has occurred.
6.
We advised the applicants that we understand their position regarding component cooling water isolation, Agenda Item 42. We will review the adecuacy of the indication provided to inform the operator that automatic isolation by the safety circuits has occurred. A computer alam is currently provided to indicate isolation. The applicants agreed to make a presentation on these computer alarms at one of the planned meetings.
7.
With regard to steam generator power operated relief valves, Agenda Item 7, we requested that the applicants document the criteria for sizing the seismically qualified accumulators used for control and operation of these valves. The applicants indicated that they will provide the information.
We also asked the applicants to discuss at a future meeting the testing of the check valves which provide isolation between the seismic and nor-seismic portions of the system that provides air to the PORV's. We further asked the applicants to discuss the acceptance leak criteria for the check valves.
8.
The applicants advised us that the letdown capability for the reactor coolant system, Agenda Item 32, wculd include provisions for letdown using piping valves, and controls designed to the criteria used for systems perfor.ning a safety function. The controls for this capability were described. The FSAR will be revir.ed, as necessary, to include the design features described in the meeting.
9.
With regard to ECCS accumulator valves, Agenda Item 38, we advised the applicants that no additional information is required at this time.
- 10. We advised the applicants that they should provide a detailed description of the by-pass and inoperable status panel lights includino a figure showing the general layout of the panels (Agenda Item 5).
The appitcants indicated that they would provide this information. The appifcants also agreed to provide a list of the items indicated on the panel.
- 11. The applicants indicated that they would document analyses verifying that the PORY's will not be lifted on a turbine trip when below 50% power (P-9 setpoint). The analysis will be based on worst case assumptions and show the margin available to reaching the PORY setpoint (Agenda Item 13).
- 12. With respect to time responses, Agenda Item 24, we advised the applicants to i
provide (or revise existing) table (s) to clearly define the points between t
e - r..
. l.
-h.
.L.
..: re.is. m u e w c..c:4c OFFICIAL RECORD COPY
~ " ' " " "
F MAY 3 1981 which quoted time response values apply in the signal paths for reactor trip and engineered safeguards features actuation. We also indicated that design time response values for engineered safeguards features pumps, valves, and other components should either te specified in Chapter 7 of the FSAR or referenced. Assurance should be provided that these valves are consistent with those assumed in the analyses of Chapter 15.
- 13. We advised the applicants that we would like to how a detailed discussion at the May 18-20, 1981 meeting regarding the nuclear steam supply system and balance of plant testing of protection functions including the detafis of circuitry used to block protective functions during test. This discussion should include the reactor protection system and ESF functions (Agenda Item 25).
- 14. We advised the applicants that they should provide justification of why the reactor coolant pump breakers are not classified as safety related equipment, Agenda Item 46.
The applicants indicated that Westinghouse criteria states that RCP breakers need not be classified as safety related if the grid stability analysis indicates that frequency decay rates greater than 5 Hz per second are not credible. The applicants were requested to provide justification for the Westinghouse criteria of 5 Hz/sec. We advised the applicants that we would discuss the grid stability analysis with the Power Systems Branch to vertify that frequency decay rates greater than 5 Hz/sec. are not credible.
- 15. With respect to safety related displays provided at the remote shutdown panels, Agenda Item 35, the applicants advised us that the following safety parameters are displayed: (a) steam generator level, narrow and wide range
- one each per steam generator, (b) pressure on each steam ge.'erator, (c) redundant reactor coolant system pressures, (d) redundant pressurizer levels, (e) redundant auxiliary feedwater pump suction,'ressures and (f) auxiliary feedwater flew for each steam generator. T5 t applicant agreed to verify and inform us of the separation group aselrmt,t for each steam generator level channel.
16. Regarding Table 7.5.2, Agenda Item 3h the 4.gn icants stated that only lights associated with switches or controls will be located at the auxiliary shutdown panel. The applicants indicated that they will clarify and modify the table to indicate what (if any) " equipment bypass" displavs are located at the auxiliary shutdown control panel.
- 17. With respect to Agenda Iten 40, the appitcants indicated that 7.5e valve referred to on Page 7.6-7 of the SNUPPS FSAR is the motor operated block ulve.
This page will be revised accordingly.
t L
e *a
- """^**>
CATEk
$ec ie.
c e.ecu cuo OFFICIAL RECORD COPY
k
,-s MAY 5 1981
,4,
- 18. It was agreed that Agenda Items 19, 21 and 48 will be discussed further at future meetings.
oriM S ':.nea by g, y, ;.. c; ret A. W. Dromerick, Project Manager Licensing Branch No.1 Division of Licensing i
Gordon E. Edison, Project Manager Licensing Branch No.1 Division of Licensing
Enclosures:
As stated cc: See next page h
en cc) 0'., d g DL:LB#1 j[fj,DL;,' g,1),,
l
***"') D rw...e. r i,ck,/1,s.,GE,d i,s o,n,,
8,JY,oun gb J,oo,d.,
"'"k.51$781..,.5/4. / 8.1..,
,5.8./81 j
C=i T e u r s ac ec.sa v c: o OFFICIAL RECORD COPY
"*';"- 1
Mr. J. K. Bryan Mr. Glenn L. Koester Vice President - Nuclear Vice President - Nuclear i
Union Electric Coapany Kansas Gas and Electric Company P. 0. Box 149 201 North Market Street St. Louis, Missouri 63166 P. O. Box 208 Wichita, Kansas 67201 cc: Gerald Charnoff, Esq.
Shaw, Pittman, Potts, Dr. Vern Starks Trowbridge & Madden Route 1, Box 863 1800 M Street, H. W.
Ketchikan, Alaska 99901 Washington, D. C.
20036 Mr. William Hansen Kansas City Power & Light Company U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission ATTN:
Mr. D. T. McPhee Resident Inspectors Office Vice President - Production RR #1 1330 Baltimore Avenue Steedman, Missouri 65077 Kansas City, Missouri 64101 Ms. Treva Hearn, Assistant General Counsel Mr. Nicholas A. Petrick Missouri Public Service Commission Executive Director, SNUPPS P. O. Box 360 5 Choke Cherry Road Jefferson City, Missouri 65102 Rockville, Maryland 20850 Jay Silberg, Esquire Mr. J. E. Birk Shaw, Pittman, Potts & Trowbridge Assistant to the General Counsel 1800 M Street, N. W.
Union Electric Company Washington, D. C.
20036 St. Louis, Missouri 63166 Mr. D. F. Schnell Kansans for Sensible Energy Manager - Nuclear Engineering P. O. Box 3192 Union Electric Company Wichita, Kansas 67201 P. O. Box 149 St. Louis, Missouri 63166 Francis Blaufuse Westphalia, Kansas 66093 Ms. Mary Ellen Salava Route 1, Box 56 Mr. Tom Vandel Burlington, Kansas 66839 Resident Inspector / Wolf Creek NPS c/o USNRC Mr. L. F. Drbl P. O. Box 1407 Missouri - Kansas Section Emporia, Kansas 66801 American Nuclear Society 15114 Navaho Mr. Michael C. Keener Olathe,' Kansas 66062 Wolf Creek Project Director State Corporation Commission Ms. Wanda Christy State of Kansas 515 N.1st Street Fourth Floor, State Office Building Burlington, Kansas 66839 Topeka, Kansas 66612 Floyd Mathews, Esq.
Birch,Horton, Bittner & Monroe 1140 Connecticut Avenue, N. W.
Washington, D. C.
20036 h
1
1
\\
o
{
MEETING
SUMMARY
DISTRIBUTION l
m G. Lear NRC POR gg 51M1 V. Noonan Local POR S. Pawlickf TIC /NSIC/ Tera V. Benaroya N. Hughes Z. Rosztoczy LB#1 Reading W. Haass H. Denton D. Muller E. Case R. Ballard D. Eisenhut W. Regan
/
R. Purple D. Ross
- 8. J. Youngblood P. Check A. Schwencer Chief, Power Systems Branch F. :41raglia
- 0. Parr J. Miller F. Rosa G. Lainas W. Butler R. Vollmer W. Kreger J. P. Knight R. Houston j
R. Bosnak Chief, Radiological Assessment Branch F. Schauer L. Rubenstein R. E. Jackson T. Speis Project Manager A0romerick/GEdison W. Johnston Attorney, OELD J. Stolz i
M. Rushbrook S. Hanauer OIE(3)
W. Gammill ACRS (16)
- 7. Murley R. Tedesco F. Schroeder l
- 0. Skovholt M. Ernst NRC
Participants:
R. Baer C. Berlinger A. Oromerick, G. Edison, K. Kniel l
E. Rossi and T. Dunnin9 G. Knighton A. Thadani
- 0. Tondi J, Kramer D. Vassallo P. Collins D. Ziemann bec: Applicant & Service List
<s m
Y
'o p,
i 4 W to bilif a 7 7g8 k g
== u.s.,N J2P % h O/
~
h=. Up m
\\
'v APR I 31981 j
l
~
l Docket Hos.: STM 50 AR2 and STM 50 483 Union Electric Company Kansas Gas & Electric Company ATTN: Mr. J. K. B ryan ATTN: Mr. Glenn L. Koester Vice President Vice President - Nuclear P. O. Box 149 201 North Market Street St. Louis, Missouri 63166 Wichita, Xansas 67201
Dear Gentlemen:
Subject:
Agenda Items for Meetings vith SNUPPS Applicants on Instrumentation and Controls Enclosed is a list of items which the Instrumentation and Control Systems Branch would like to discuss at a series of meetings with you. The intent of the meetings is to obtain a better understanding of details of the SNUPPS design in order to expedite the operating license review. As a result of the meetings and continuation of our review, we anticipate that other questions and concerns will arise. Thus, the enclosed list should not be considered as a complete list of items to be resolved prior to issuing a Safety Evaluation Report.
We have not attempted to group items on the list in any carticular way. We suggest that you group the items in convenient sets such that each set can be discussed at an individual meetino lasting between one and five working days. We also suggest that each individual reeting include the minimum number of participants necessary to fully discuss the topics to be C3vered. However, you should be prepared to discuss the pertinent details of fluid syster* and mechanical equipment with which the instrumntation and controls interface.
As can be seen from the enclosed list, many of the items are related to the
'{
interface areas.
It would be useful if we could be provided with drawing nurters (and the
(:
drawings if not already submitted to us) of drawings to be used by you for I'
discussion of each item. If possible, we would like to have this information l;
two weeks in advance of the meeting where the drawing will be discussed.
'l l*
. _. ~.,
--.n, n n
~ -
E'n m __.
y_
1 nr 1
DUPLICATE DOCUMENT
!j Q
T,j t,i 4
Entire document previously vi
]
entered into system under-a d
ANO 1lDL))/n O))llllQ h
No. of pages:
/
l
\\
uma:= ~:== = m a.aa
-r
-