ML20012F322

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Discusses ESF Sys Slave Relay Alternate Test Methodology. Implementation Schedule for Design Mods to Relay Will Be Submitted by 900601
ML20012F322
Person / Time
Site: Comanche Peak  Luminant icon.png
Issue date: 04/02/1990
From: William Cahill, Walker R
TEXAS UTILITIES ELECTRIC CO. (TU ELECTRIC)
To:
NRC OFFICE OF INFORMATION RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (IRM)
References
TXX-90129, NUDOCS 9004110141
Download: ML20012F322 (2)


Text

gw-

,p.

mesem emme.

MM Log # TXX 90129 h j File # 907.3 r C 1UELECTRIC April 2,1990 Wnhem J. caWQ. Jr.

k,c.auw Ver henkns U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission l Attn: Document Control Desk Washington, D. C. 20555

$UBJECT: COMANCHE PEAR STEAM ELECTRIC STATION (CPSES)

DOCKET NOS. 50 445 AND 50 446 CPSES SLAVE RELAY ALTERNATE TEST METHODOLOGY REF: TU Electric letter TXX-89522, from Mr. William J. Cahill, Jr. to the NRC, dated July 28, 1989 Gentlemen:

In the referenced letter TU Electric provided an advance FSAR change submittal relating to the Engineered Safety Features (ESF) Systems slave relay i test methodology. Subsequently, FSAR Section 7.3 was amended (Amendment 77) to describe an additional method used for testing those final actuation device circuits that cannot be operated by an individual slave relay, or actuation of which will cause plant espset/ equipment damage and for which no additional block testing circuitry is provided. For these devices, the equipment is declared inoperable, disabled (i.e., removing fuses, opening breakers, etc.)

and continuity checks are performed to determine if the slave relay has 1

changed states.

A working meeting was held at CPSES on January 30, 1990, between TV Electric and the NRC to discuss the specific circuits to which this test methodology is applicable. TU Electric committed to provide documentation regarding each circuit being tested, the potential impact of the testing on safety (e.g., if j system is inadvertently not restored to its initial condition) and proposed l design modifications such that this test methodology is no longer required, or justification why design modifications are not t.ecessary. If a design {

modification is proposed, an implementation schedule should be provided, i

l i

)'

i f.h ,

P

' O 400 North Olive Street I..B. 81 Dallas, Texas 75201

- ~

TXX 90129 Page 2 of 2 TV Electric wili submit the above information by June 1, 1990.

Sincerely,

$(Yb .v)"'0 yf.

William J. Cahill, Jr.

By: NW I d5 RogePD, Walker Manager of Nuclear Licensing VPC/vid c - Mr. R. D. Martin, Region IV Resident Inspectors, CPSES (3)

I

!