ML20058F344
| ML20058F344 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Big Rock Point File:Consumers Energy icon.png |
| Issue date: | 11/22/1993 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20058F082 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9312080075 | |
| Download: ML20058F344 (3) | |
Text
/
UNITED STATES e,
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION o
j i
wAsmwaTow, p. c. rossa
%,.... /
~
{
ENCLOSURE 1 LAJETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULA1110H NRC 90-01 SUPPLEMENT 1 BIG ROCK POINT PLANT CONSUMERS POWER COMPANY DOCKET NO. 50-155 i
- 1. INTRODUCTION i
NRC Bulletin 90-01, Supplement 1, was issued by the NRC on December 22, 1992, to inform addressees of activities taken by the NRC staff and the industry in evaluating Rosemount Transmitters, and to request licensees to take actions to resolve this issue. The Supplement requests utilities to review the information for applicability to their facilities, perform testing on the transmitter commensurate with its imprtance to safety and demonstrated failure rate, and modify, as appropriate, their actions, and enhanced surveillance programs. The Supplement also requested that the licensee provide a response that included a statement as to whether or not the licensee will take the actions requested, and a list of the specific actions that the licensee would complete, and the schedule for completing the actions.
i Additionally, when the specific actions committed to in the licensee's response were completed, the licensee was required to provide a statement confirming said completion.
If the licensee did not plan to comply with the Requested Actions as delineated in the Supplement, a statement was required 93120B0075 931122 DR ADDCK 0500 5
y, I.
o l
p-.
identifying those requested actions not taken, as W1 as an evaluation which i
provided the bases for those requested.Tctions not taken.
!l i
2.0 DISCUSSION AND EVALUATION j
l The licensee for the Big Rock Point Plant, Consumers Power Company, responded t
to NRC Bulletin 90-01, Supplement 1, in submittals dated January 8,1993, and
. l January 26, 1993.
The Requested Actions delineattU in Supplement 1, asked that licensees review plant records and identify any Rosemount Model 1153, Series B, Model 1153 Series D, and Model 1154 transmitters manufactured before July 11, 1989, that are used or may be used in the future in either safety-related systems or systems installed in accordance with 10 CFR 50.62 (the ATWS rule).
Additionally, the licensee was to commit to a specified enhanced surveillance monitoring frequency that corresponded to the normal operating pressure of the transmitters identified. Furthermore, the licensee was requested to evaluate l
i their enhanced surveillance monitoring program.
I l
The licensee's submittals indicated that two transmitters had modules replaced, and that four medium pressure transmitters had reached the psi-month threshold denoted for maturity. Additionally, it was indicated that the'four mature transmitters and four low-pressure transmitters did not require an enhanced surveillance monitoring program. The licensee utilizes static alignment checks to maintain the ability to detect failures.
i
,_w.,
u..y
-, ~, _ _,,
y
^
a, i,
-3_
l l
l l
A detailed evaluation of the licensee's response is documented in the enclosed I
contractor's report.
1 L
3.0 CONCLUSION
1 r
{
i l
The staff has reviewed the licensee's response to NRC Bulletin 90-01, Supplement 1, and concludes that the licensee conforms to the Requested Actions of NRC Bulletin 90-01, Supplement 1, and has completed the reporting r
requirements. Ccraliance with applicable requi,rements and connitments will be the subject of NRC audits or inspections in the future, i
Principal Contributor:
D. Spaulding Date: November 22, 1993
(
l l
l l
I w
e