ML20041F731
| ML20041F731 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | La Crosse File:Dairyland Power Cooperative icon.png |
| Issue date: | 03/09/1982 |
| From: | Crutchfield D Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Linder F DAIRYLAND POWER COOPERATIVE |
| Shared Package | |
| ML17341B650 | List: |
| References | |
| TASK-07-01.A, TASK-7-1.A, TASK-RR LSO5-82-03-058, LSO5-82-3-58, NUDOCS 8203170354 | |
| Download: ML20041F731 (4) | |
Text
- .
' March 9,1982 l
m D
Docket flo. 50-409 LSC5-82-03-058 e
1 REcauy 78 2;
P'SR 171982 %
Mr. Frank Linder q u wa term em C General Manager Q *Ef"'
.g Dairyland Power Cooperative 4@II_P.
2615 East Avenue South p
Lacrosse, Wisconsin 54601
Dear Mr. Linder:
SUBJECT:
SEP TOPIC VII-1.A. ISOLATION OF REACTOR PROTECTION SYSTEM FROM NON-SAFETY SYSTEMS, INCLUDING QUALIFICATION OF ISOLATION DEVICES, DRAFT SAFETY EVALUATION FOR LACROSSE i is our contractor's draft technical evaluation of the subject for your plant. is the staff's draft safety evaluation and it is based on Enclosure 1.
Both documents recomend that suitable isolation devices be provided between the nuclear and process instrumentation systems and the process recorders and meters.
In addition, the staff has concluded that isolation between the RPS power sources and their loads is advisable because insufficient information is available to demonstrate the adequacy of the present design. A similar S *0 y 6
lack of information suggests that modification of Nuclear Instrumentation l
Channels 5 and 6. is needed.
/
///
1 l
The need to actually implement these changes will be determined during the l
integrated safety assessnent. This topic assessment may be revised in thep;sW future if your facility design is changed or if NRC criteria relating to l
ADD,' 01 l
this topic are modified before the integrated assessment is completed.
(,. 5 l
Sincerely, g g.
Dennis M. Crutchfield, Chief 8203170354 8203o9 Operating Reactors Branch No. 5 PDR ADOCK 05000409 Division of Licensing P
Enclosures:
As stated cc w/ enclosures:
/ pW O
t 5ee next pa
- v
+i A:
r>
D.L........3 Dl......
. 0 R.B.# 5..:,P,M..
OR.4 QG,,,Td,, AD 4fn,,DL, 11:dk I
nann WRussell RDudley DC WMe DR as sunN4=c>
31.h......
.af.$./.g.....
. 31.fl.a.2..
/82
,/,82..
.3L,982...
z.g.r.,
om>
Nnc ronu sia 00-80) NRCM 0240 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY usom mi-m..
Mr. Frank Linder cc Frit:. Schubert, Esquire U. S. Environmental Protection Staff Attorney Agency Dairyland Power Cooperative Federal Activities Branch 2615 East Avenue South Region V Office La Crosse, Wisconsin 54601 ATTN:
Regional Radiation Representative 230 South Dearborn Street O. S. Heistand, Jr., Esquire Chicago, Illinois 60604 Morgan, Lewis & Bockius 1800 M Street, N. W.
Mr. John H. Buck Washington, D. C.
20036 Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Board U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Mr. R. E. Shimshak Washington, D. C.
20555 La Crosse Boiling Water Reactor Dairyland Power Cooperative Dr. Lawrence R. Quarles P. O. Box 135 Kendal at Longwood, Apt. 51 Genoa, Wisconsin 54632 Kenneth Square, Pennsylvania 19348 Ms. Anne K. Mdrse Charles Bechhoefer, Esq., Chairman Coulee Region Energy Coalition Atomic Safety and Licensing Board P. O. Box 1583 U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission La Crosse, Wisconsin 54601 Washington, D. C.
20555
" La Crosse Public Library Dr. George C. Anderson 800 Main Street Department of Oceanography La Crosse, Wisconsin 54601 University of Washington Seattle, Washington 98195 U. S. Nuciear Regulatory Commission Resident Inspectors Office Mr. Ralph S. Decker Rural Route #1, Box 276 Route 4 Box 190D
. Genoa, Wisconsin 54632 Cambridge, Maryland 21613 Town Chairman Thomas S. Moore Town of Genoa Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Board Route 1 U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Genoa, Wisconsin 54632 Washington, D. C.
20555 Chairman, Public Service Commission Mr. George R. Nygaard of Wisconsin Coulee Region Energy Coalition Hill Farms State Office Building 2307 East Avenue Madison, Wisconsin 53702 Lacrosse, Wisconsin 54601 Alan S. Rosenthal, Esq., Chairman James G. Keppler, Regional Administrator Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Board Nuclear. Regulatory Commission, Region III U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Inspection & Enforcement Washington, D. C.
20555 799 Roosevelt Road Glen Ellyn, Illinois 60137 Mr. Frederick Milton Olsen, III 609 North lith Street Lacrosse, Wisconsin 54601 i
Enclosura 2
~
SYSTEMATIC EVALUATION PROGRAM
~
TOPIC VII-1.A LACROSSE TOPIC:
VII-1. A, Isolation of Reactor Protection System From Non-Safety Systems, Including Qualification of Isolation Devices I.
INTRODUCTION Non-safety systems generally receive control s'gnals from the reactor protection system (RPS) sensor current loops.
The non-safety circuits are required to have isolation devices to insure the independence of the RPS channels.
Requirements for the design and qualification of isolation devices are quite specific.
Recent operating experience has shown that some of the earlier isolation devices or arrangements at operating plants may not be effective.
The objective of our review was to verify that operating reactors have RPS designs which provide effective and qualified isolation of non-safety systems from safety systems to assure that safety systems will function as required.
II.
REVIEW CRITERIA The review criteria are presented in Section 2 of EG&G Report 0071J,
" Isolation of Reactor Protection System from Non-Safety Systems."
III.
RELATED SAFETY TOPICS AND INTERFACES The scope of review for this topic was limited to avoid duplication of effort since some aspects of the review were performed under.related topics.
The related topics and the subject matter are identified below.
Each of the related topic reports contain the acceptance criteria and review guidance for its subject matter.
VI-7.C.1 Independence of Onsite Sources VIII-1.A Degraded Grid IX-6 Fire Protection There are no safety topics dependent on the present topic information because proper isolation has been assumed.
IV.
REVIEW GUIDELINES The review guidelines are presented in Section 3 of Report 0071J.
V.
EVALUATION Based on current licensing criteria and review guidelines, the plant reactor protection system complies with all current licensing criteria listed in Section 2.0 of this report except for the following:
1.
IEEE Standard 279, Section 4.7.2, requires isolation devices between RPS and control systems, There are no isolation devices between the
s O
o 2
nuclear flex monitoring and some process monitoring systems and the process recorders and indicating instruments that they drive.
2.
The power supplies for the RPS channels do not qualify as IE equip-ment.
Isolation between each RPS channel and its power supply is inadequate.
A sir.gle power source is common all three scram channels.
A single failure may prevent a scram.
3.
Range change modules are used in Channels 5 and 6.
Their location with regard to non-safety and safety equipment is not adequately documented.
Some form of isolation may be required.
VI.
CONCLUSION The staff's position is that suitably qualified isolators should be provided for exceptions 1, 2 and 3 noted above.
m O
0 i
1