ML20085H507

Ro:Possibility That Tests for Operability on Loss of Secondary Coolant Well Pump Power May Not Meet Tech Spec Surveillance Requirement 3.2.2(2) Discovered.Minutes of 911007 Executive Committee Meeting Encl

ML20085H507
Person / Time
Site:	05000083
Issue date:	10/03/1991
From:	Vernetson W FLORIDA, UNIV. OF, GAINESVILLE, FL
To:	Ebneter S NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II)
Shared Package
ML20085H497	List: ML20085H491 ML20085H507
References
NUDOCS 9110280293
Download: ML20085H507 (2)

Text

, _.

.; a, zuuumun 1-

, NUCLEAR ENGINEERING SCIENCES DEPARTMENT A

. Nuclear Reactor Facility ,

University of Florida uve.ow 0 1

NUCttAt 9tACf00 OVEDfNO Cainevhe,M%s 22411 n.no m wm.ses. um Potential Tech Spec Violatbn -

Section 3.2.2 e

October ?,1991 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Region II 101 Marietta Street, N.W.

Suite 2900 Atlanta, GA 30323 Attention:- Stewart Ebneter Regional - Administretor .

Re: University of Florida Training-Reactor Facility _ License: R-56 Docket No. 50-83 As per telephone conversation on 3 October 1991 with Mr. Bill Klein and Mr. Doug Collins relative to tests for nperability on the loss of secondary coolant well pump power, there is some question as to whether _we have been meeting the Tech Spec surveillance -

requirements on loss of secondary coolant well pump power per Section 3.2.2(2). This -

point was raised as a result of questions by an NRC license examiner on 2 October 1991.

We have-performed one_ test to confirm the . loss of power coes cause a trip as required

~

and are investigatingL whether only the loss of power will cause the trip. Our cirrent feeling is that the existing surveillance has been adequate. Nevertheless, we cre scheduling a meeting of our Reactor Safety Review Subcommittee Executive. Committec

' prior to_ operation of the reactor and will report on the status of our determinations within the requisite two weeks. Since we are now considered to meet surveillance l requircraents, per test today, we will restart upon RSRS Executive Committee approval.

Individual members. of the RSRS have recommended NRC notification as per Section -

6.6.20f the UFTR Tech Specs which is the reason. for this submission.

2 Y  :

~

l: Williani ~G. Verneis6n L Director, Nuclear Facilitics 3 October 1901

!. WGV/p cc: R. Piciullo :

EsRS-c 9110280293 911016 * * * * " ^ ' " ' " * *

!.. PDR ADOCK 05000083 3 PDR

A l 1 AQlll;N I' l I ,

1 NUCl. EAR ENGINEERING SCIENCES DEPAPMENT j I

Nuclear Reac!or Facility 1 g Universliy of Florida  :

c c.v J m .- - i l newaAcmomo .

1

. n mn

• ween wm.w.ua October 8,1991 htEMORANDUht TO: hi.J Ohanian, Chairman, Reactor Safety Review Subcommittee

' FROM: W.G. Vernetson N

SUBJECT:

Executive Committee Meeting hiinutes The meeting occurred on October 7,1991,from 4:20 p.m.to 4:55 p.m. with Dr. Ohanian and Mr Munroe both briefed on the potential Tech Spec violation discovered by Mr. Pat ick Isaac, the NRC license examiner as conununicated in his exit interview. (See Attachment 1). --The communicc' ions with Region 11 as documented the prompt notification letter (Attachment II) and'in a telephone conversation on Octcvei 4 with Craig Dassett were also reviewed. Finally, the checks completed on October 7,1991 were presented including .

the fact that, temoving power to the secondary pump with secondary flow maintained above 60 gpm with the wide range drawer set above I kW does cause a trip with 10 second delay Tech Spec per the requirements _ in Section 3.2.2(2) Table 3."just as the low flow causes a trip. After review of the applicable Tech Specs Pages 4,5,7,8and 9(Attachment 111), the Executive Comiaittee agreed the intent of the Tech Specs seems to have been met but the additional check of the trip on lou of well pump power alone- should be incorporated separately into the usual quarterly wram checks just as the loss of pump -power trip is checked _ separately cn the primary coolant pump. The members al:;o agreed that the check of the trip using city water flow should be the preferred method 'with a temporary bypass of the low flow trip _ allowed, if the city water flow is less than 60 gpm. All members agreed the UFTR was approved to resume normal operaticus.

brf Opaortsdy/At9rmn,k 3 Acem(%,e e

e