ML20041F501
| ML20041F501 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Perry  |
| Issue date: | 03/02/1982 |
| From: | Schwencer A Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Davidson D CLEVELAND ELECTRIC ILLUMINATING CO. |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8203170024 | |
| Download: ML20041F501 (3) | |
Text
a y
\\
DISTRIBUTION:
Docket File RCapra gg 2 1982 LB#2 File JRosenthal DEisenhut/RPurple RTedesco bcc: TERA ASchwencer NSIC 1 Docket Nos.' 50-440/441:
y JStefano NRC PDR EHylton Local PDR Thessen, OELD ACRS (16) 01&E fir. Dalwyn R. Davidson Region III Vice President Resident Inspecto System Engineering & Construction SHanauer f
The Cleveland Electric Illuminating Company RMattson ey 3
P. O. Box 5000 HThompson J
/.', e s,'
J Cleveland, Ohio 44101 RVollmer PA, e,;q" 1 0 793 g [
RHa rtfield,
Dear Mr. Davidson:
JMauck zif %z3 C G
6 CRossi
'yry
Subject:
NRC Licensing Positions and Questions Regarding th e
fluclear Power Plant, Units 1 and 2 7
, ~r As a result of our continuing review of the Perry Nuclear Power Plant instrumentation and control system, it is the position of the flRC licensing staff that you revise the design of the circuitry for the Automatic Depressurization System and several manually controlled Engineered Safety Feature Systems for the reasons stated in Enclosure (1).
' Additionally, please advise when CEI will be prepared to meet with the f!RC staff to resolve the rcmaining open items pertaining to your draft response to my letter of November 17, 1981 and subsequent meeting, and to discuss the additianal questions forwarded to you by my recent letter of February 22, 1982, related to the Perry instrumentation and control system.
If there are any questions or clarifications required, please contact flr. John Stefano, the Perry project manager.
Sincerely, A. Schwencer, Chief
\\
Licensing Branch No. 2
,.)
Division of Licensing
- h.,
Enclosure.
l As stated i'
l l
cc: See next page 0
IBF2/PM DL 2.2/BC om7 >-
.n,9,;,p,t
,, S
.nc,e r, I
sun 8203170024 820302 i-PDR ADOCK 05000 FFICIAL ndCLdD LJPY l Nac uscqm_m.= -
I.
s i
t-Mr. Dalwyn R. Davidson Vice President, Engineering The Cleveland Electric Illuminating Company P. O. Box 5000 Cleveland, Ohio 44101 cc: Gerald Charnoff, Esq.
Shaw, Pittman, Potts & Trowbridge 1800 M Street, N. W.
Washington, D. C. 20006 Donald H. Hauser, Esq.
The Cleveland Electric Illuminating Company P. O. Box 5000 Cleveland, Ohio 44101 Resident Inspector's Office U.S. N.R.C.
Parmly at Center Road Perry, Ohio 44081 Donald T. Ezzone, Esq.
Assistant Prosecuting Attorney 105 Main Street Lake County Administration Center Painesville, Ohio 44077 Tod J. Kenney 228 South College, Apt. A Bowling Green, Ohio 43402 Daniel D. Wilt Wegman, Hesiler & Vanderberg 7301 Chippewa Road, Suite 102 Brecksville, Ohio 44141 Robert Alexander OCRE Interim Representative 2030 Portsmouth Street Suite 2 Houston Texas 77098 Terry lodge, Esq.
915 Spitzer Building Toledo, Ohio 43604
~
~
+
A' W
ae = y se e w+
- 9
- 9 is**
.--+**'f*-*
P -- ; + erg ===* +* -
{
\\
~~
Enclosure (1)
~
Licensing Positions on the InstruInentation and Control Systems for the Perry Plant 421.72 During our review of the testing procedures for the pilot solenoid
^
valves which control compressed air to the automatic depressuriza-tion system (ADS) relief valves, it became apparent, that the present Perry design does not provide a method to indicate the actual posi-tion of'the solenoid during this test.
In the GESSAR-238 NSSS pre-liminary design safety evaluation report (Docket No. STN 50-550)
O dated Marcb 1977, the NRC staff identified this as a potential pro-blem and tdok the position that the General Electric Company would be require'd to make provisions to improve the testability of the ADS solenoid valves during reactor operation. Therefore, the staff
~
requires that the applicant revise the design of the circuitry used to actuate the solenoids' to permit verification of solenoid opera-tiJn during tests.,
~
~
.v 421.73 Durf ng our review, it has become apparent that the logic for manual initiation for several Engineered Safety Feature (ESF) systems is interlocked with pennissive logic from various sensors.
In some ca-ses it appears that the permissive logic is dependent upon the same sensors as those used for automatic initiation of the system.
The
~
staif questions whether this design meets the intent of IEEE 279, Section 4.17. The staff requires the applicant to revise the design to provide the capability to manually initiate each safety system in-dependent of any permissive logic dependent upon-sensors or circuitry used for automatic initiationjr submit justification for interlocks f.or each ESF system in which the applicant proposes to retain the interldcks.
f 11 L
_.. l