ML20086C820
| ML20086C820 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Shoreham File:Long Island Lighting Company icon.png |
| Issue date: | 11/23/1983 |
| From: | James Smith LONG ISLAND LIGHTING CO. |
| To: | Harold Denton Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| SNRC-985, NUDOCS 8311290151 | |
| Download: ML20086C820 (4) | |
Text
.
=_-
8 LONG ISLAND LIGHTING COM PANY 1
i M,, i SHOREHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION g
axemewwman.
P.O. BOX 618, NORTH COUNTRY ROAD + WADING RIVER, N.Y.11792 Direct Dial Number November 23, 1983 SNRC-985 Mr. Harold R.
Denton, Director Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.
20555 Trip Setpoints and Allowable Values Shoreham Nuclear Power Station - Unit 1 Docket No. 50-322
Dear Mr. Denton:
In response to your letter to Mr.
M.
S.
Pollock dated September 23, 1983, LILCO is providing in Attachment 2 a preliminary discussion and proposed schedule for responding to NRC Staff questions dealing with Shoreham Technical Specification trip setpoints and allowable values.
Very truly yours, J.
L.
Smith Manager, Special Projects Shoreham Nuclear Power Station JPM:ck cc:
C.
Petrone All parties listed in attachment 1 8311290151 831123 3
I PDR ADOCK 05000322 5
i A
PDR A
FC.8 935.1
~
- i.
ATTACHMENT 1 Lawrence Brenner, Esq.
Herbert H.
Brown, Esq.
Administrative Judge Lawrence Coe Lanpher, Esq.
Atomic Safety-and Licensing Karla J.
Letsche, Esq.
Board Panel Kirkpatrick, Lockhart, Hill U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Christopher & Phillips Commission 8th Floor Washington, D.C.
20555 1900 M.
Street, N.W.
I Washington, D.C.
20036 Dr. Peter A. Morris Administrative Judge Mr. Marc W. Goldsmith Atomic Safety and Licensing Energy Research Group Board Panel 4001 Totten Pond Road U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Waltham, Massachusetts 02154 Commission Washington, D.C.
20555 MHB Technical Associates 1723 Hamilton Avenue Dr. George A. Ferguson Suite K School of Engineering San Jose, California 95125 Howard University 2300 6th Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C.
20059 Stephen B. Latham, Esq.
Twomey, Latham & Shea Bordenick, Esq.
P.O.
Box 398 33 West Second Street Bernard M.
David A.
Repka, Esq.
Riverhead, New York 11901 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 1
Commission Washington, D.C.
20555 Ralph Shapiro, Esq.
i Cammer and Shapiro, P.C.
)
9 East 40th Street Mr. James Dougherty New York, New York 10016 j
3045 Porter Street Washington, D.C.
20008 i
Matthew J. Kelly, Esq.
State of New York l
Department of Public Service L
Three Empire State Plaza Albany, New York 12223 r
LILCO Response to NRC Letter Dated September 23, 1983 Request for Additional Information NRC Question 1.
As proposed, the Shoreham Nuclear Power Station Technical Specifications contain trip setpoints and allowable values for the protection systems that were obtained by applying the NSSS Vendor's setpoint methodology.
For Shoreham the trip setpoints are derived from the allowable values by taking into acccunt sensor drift and trip unit drift.
The staff finds this methodology for establishing the trip setpoints and allowable values' unacceptable.
The purpose of estab-lishing allowable values in the technical specifications was to account for the drift of that portion of the instrument channel that is surveillance tested at 31 day intervals.
The allowable values included in the Shoreham Technical Specifications will permit excess channel electronics drift to be hidden by the allowance for sensor drift for those channels where the measurement of sensor drift is not included in the 31 day surveillance test.
Therefore, the staff requests that you provide revised technical specification allowable values for those channels assumed to operate in the transient and accident analyses that includes only the drift assumed to occur over a 31 day period for that portion of the channel tested every 31 days.
LILCO Response The above issue concerning GE instrument setpoint methodo' logy is presently being discussed by the Licensing Review Groups (LRG I and II) with NRC Staff.
LILCO is a participant in those discussions.
The LRG intends to include within those discussions details of the methodology utilized by GE to account for instrument loop drift.
In a meeting scheduled with NRC Staff for mid-January 1984, GE will present, on behalf of the LRG I and II members, the instrument setpoint methodology for six protection system setpoints including loop drift allowance, operational and vendor data on trip unit drift, and the LRG position relative to establishing technical specification allowable values which address the drift assumed to occur over a 31 day period for that portion of the channel tested every 31 days.
We believe that the present schedule which has been established with the LRG and NRC Staff adequately supports closure of this NRC question on the Shoreham docket prior to fuel load.
-Page 1 of 2
LILCO Response to NRC Letter Dated September 23, 1983 Request for Additional Information NRC Question 2.
~
During our review of the Shoreham Technical Specifications, the staff could not determine the degree of on-line testing capability for the protection system actuation logic and other protection system components.
After referring to the FSAR, the staff con-cluded that the'information available was insufficient to resolve the concern.
Therefore, the staff requests that the applicant provide a detailed discussion regarding the capability for testing protection system actuation. logic and other protection system components.
This discussion should include but not be limited to the following:
sensors, actuation relays, slave Alays and actuation logic.
LILCO Response LILCO has initiated a program to ensure that all protection systems I&C surveillance procedures will address their respective Technical Specification requirements, and that all protection systems I&C logic circuits will be tested in accordance with those procedures and on a schedule consistent with the Technical Specifications.
As part of that program, LILCO has reviewed the FSAR, applicable reguletions, and the I&C logic surveillance procedures for two ESF
' systems (HPIC and Core Spray).
All I&C Technical Specification attributes have been incorporated.inte the procedures which deter-mine on-line testing.
Elementary drawings were checked.and marked up against their respective I&C surveillance procedures to ensure that testing gf~all required elements within the entire circuit have been so incorporated.
We would suggest a meeting with your staff during the' week of November 28, 1983 to review the results of this program and to discuss our schedule for completion.
We believe this program effectively demonstrates the suitability of the on-line testing for the protection system actuation logic and other protection system components and should satisfy the.above Staff question.
Page 2 of 2
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _