ML20031E168
| ML20031E168 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | 05000471 |
| Issue date: | 05/07/1981 |
| From: | Rubenstein L Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Tedesco R Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19247D013 | List: |
| References | |
| FOIA-81-283 NUDOCS 8110150172 | |
| Download: ML20031E168 (3) | |
Text
o,,,,,.
,,e u s.,,I.
.k a
UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMr*lSSION
' pr,
l..,[ h.,..f' j';
j wasec mn. o. c. 20sss MAY 7 1981
/
S>
l V... 4,r
}
[(f Robert L. Tedesco, A/D for Licensing, DL NOTE FOR:
L. S. Rubenstein A/D for Core and Containment Systems, DSI FROM:
EPDB SER INPUT FOR PILGRIM 2 THI MATTERS
SUBJECT:
.By memorandum dated May 6,1981, the Emergency Fre EPDB's memorandum noted that the applicant had of 10 CFR Part 50.34(e).
not provided sufficient detail on the type of structures for the TSC and EOF as well as the location of the SPDS and other instrumentation an equipment.
In a telephone conversation on May 6,1981, Brian Grimes and I agreed to replace the SER input enclosed in EPDB's May 6,1981 memorar.dum with that We believe that the enclosed SER input expresses enclosed in this note.
core clearly our position on the information to be provided by the applicant and is in a form that is more readily usable by DL.
i
.K-
.fs&
uR>c
~
L. S.'
benstein, Assistant Director for Core and Containment Systems Division of Systems Integration
Enclosure:
Safety Evaluation Report cc w/ enclosure:
D. Eisenhut 1
R. Mattson g Grimes
% c.
S. Ramos E. Adensam
- As pro D. Scaletti E. Williams D. Lasher
@ T, Le-0 4
8110150172 610827 PDft FOIA SHO M 61-'283 POR
a ENCLO_S_URE : SAFETY EVALUATION REPORT _
?
Rul e: 10 #.FR 50.?i(e)(2)(iv):
/
Provide a plant safety parameter display (SPDS) console that will display to operators a minimum sat of pararnaters defining the safety status of the plant, capable of displaying a full range of important plant parameters and data trends on demud, and capable of indicating when process limits are being approached or exceeded (I.D.2).
Acceptance Criteria:
NUREGs 0718 (Licensing Requirements for Pending Applications for Con-struction Permits and Manufacturing Licenses) and 0737 (Clarification of TMI Action Plan Requirements) state that the SPDS requirements and criteria are given in NUREG 0695.
NUREG 0696 (Functional Criteria for Emergency Response Facilities) details the criteria for the SPOS regarding types of parameters to be monitored; staffing; display types and features; and equipment type, location, size, power source, reliability and qualiff-cation.
Discussion:
The SPDS is described in PSAR Amendments 42 and 43 as a computer-based system capable of displaying a full range of important plant parameters and their trends on demand.
The system will indicate when these parameters are approaching or exceeding specified safe process limits.
It will be of high quality and designed to function reliably under both normal and accident environments.
SPDS display consoles are stated to be located in the Main Control Room, the Technical Support Center, and the Emergercy Operations Facility.
The applicant has agreed to supply an SPDS that meets the requirements of NUREG 0696 and has in figure IC2,1C8 and IC10 shown the general location of the SPDS display consoles.
==
Conclusion:==
We can conclude that this information' and the commitment to meet th.)
requirements of NUREG 0696 together fulfill the requirements of 10 CFR 50.34 (e)(2)(iv) and are acceptable.
Rule: 10 CFR 50.34(e)(2)(xxvii):
Provide a Technical Support Center (TSC), an onsite Operation Support Center (OSC), and an Emergency Operations facility (EOF) (III.A.l.2).
Acceptance Criteria:
NUREGs 0718 and 0737 state that the requirements for the TSC, OSC and EOF are given in detail.in NUREG 0696.
NUREG 0696 provides criteria governing location, size, functions, equipment needs, staffing and other items for these facilities.
~
~
.q v.
Discussion:
The functional descriptions of the TSC, OSC and EOF are provided on (1)
These pages 13.3-27 through 13.3-29 of Amendment 40 of the PSAR.
descriptions meet the acceptance criteria given in NUREG 0696.
The' location of the TSC, OSC and EOF are shown on the maps in figures (2) 106 and 1C9 and the location of the OSC in the plant is given in figure 1C7 of PSAR Amendment 43. A description of the location and design of the EOF is given in Amendment 43 and it is stated that backup EOF functions can be performed from the Region II Headquarters of the Massachusetts Civil Defense Preparedness Agency 'in Bridgewater, Mass., approximately 18 miles from the site. This information satis-fies the requirements and criteria given for these facilities.
(3) The size and layout of the TSC, OSC and EOF are shown in figures 107, 108, IC10 and 1C11 of PSAR Amendment 43. A description of where emergency personnel are to be located in ecch facility is given in figure 13.3-4 and pages 13.3-19 through 13.3-27 of PSAR Amendment 41 dild on page 1C-54 of PSAR Amendment 43.
The habitability features of the TSC and the E0E as described on (4) page IC-54 of PSAR Amendment 43 meet the acceptance criteria for the habitability features.
The applicant has commicted to provide remote display of the SPDS (5) variables in the TSC and E0F, ind he has committed to supplying other types of emergency instrumentation and communication facilities that are specified in NUREG 0696.
Concl usion_:
For all the preceding items we find the applicant's response meets the
- However, criteria of 10 CFR 50.34(e)(2)(xxvii) as detailed in NUREG 0696.
the applicant will be required to submit for review, prior to construction of these facilities, a conceptual design which more fully describes the principal emergency instrumentation e.nd equipment, and illustrates the approximate location of this equipment.
l l
l
,e