ML20107G156
Text
,
/
a e
.s A
UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION W ASHINGToN, D. C.
20555 MAR 6 1975 DOCKET NO.: 50-219 LICENSEE: JERSEY CEhTRAL P0hT.R 6 LIGilT COMPANY FACILITY; OYSTER CREEK NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION
SUMMARY
OF MEETING WITil JERSEY CENTRAL POWER S LIGHT COMPANY HELD ON FEBRUARY' 12, 1975 On February 12, 1975, a meeting was held with representatives of Jersey Central Power 6 Light Company (JCP6L) and General Public Utilities Corporation (GPU) to discuss responses to concerns posed by the Electrical, Instrumentation and Control System Branch. A list of attendees is enclosed.
The significant items discussed are presented below:
1.
Sensor Setpoint Drift (FTOL Review)
The enclosure to JCP6L's letter of January 8,1975, requested a meeting to discuss their investigation and to present the sensor set-point drift data developed in response to the NRC staff's concerns stated in our letter of Novembe,r 21,.1974.
C. Fedako reviewed the as-found setpoints for the following sensors:
Sensor Type Sensor Function (a)
Pressure Switch Sensors PGIV closure on low RE 23 A, B, C, D (Meletron, steam line pressure 20-1400 psig)
(b)
Pressure Switch Sensors Scram on high RE 03 A, B, C, D reactor pressure (Barksdale, 50-1200 psig)
(c)
Differential Pressure Cell Scram on low RE 05 A, B; RE 19 A, B, reactor water level (Yarway, 0-100 inches)
(d) Differential Pressure Cell Core spray, Containment RE 02 A, B, C, D spray, isolation condenser (Yarway, 0-1.00 inches)
DWSRB isolation.on low-low reactor water level GPU stated that their sampling of instrument performance did not cover each of the different tppes of instruments; rather, they looked at the
~
/
- w..,#
9604230126 960213 PDR FOIA DEKOK95-258 PDR m
i s
{
}
Hecting Summary MAR c $75 instruments that gave them the most problems (out-of-calibration reportable as abnormal occurrences).
2.
,' 1ve Motors (FTOL Review)
No information on valve motor failures was submitted with JCPSL's letter dated January 8, 1975.
C. Fedako presented information on eight valve motor failures which was develop,ed since the above letter was submitted.
3.
Summary a.
We stated that we would need the following information in order to complete the FTOL review of the EISC concerns:
2 (1)
Data on sensor setpoint drifts for additional sensors of the same type discussed above; (2)
Data on sensor setpoint drift for other types of sensors in use at the plant, (3) Assumed failure rate data for the instruments for the particular service application; (4) An evaluation of each instance of valve motor failure which (1) justifies that the present technical specification surveillance requirements and intervals do not require any change, and (2) shows that the assumed failure rate is not being exceeded. Each evaluation should identify the device number, manufacturer, model, name, assumed failure rate, and function; and (5) To complete the response to question 4b, JCPSL should address potential engineered safety feature initiation as the result of a design basis earthquake.
j b.
The above information was previously requested in our letter of November 21, 1974.
In addition, we suggested that JCPSL review pages 4.3-4 and 4.3-5 of their January 8,1975 submittal for completeness and applicability. The staff also stated that the response te question 4f be revised because there are manual bypasses contrary to the statement in JCPGL's response.
.ho rY-Y'&L W. A. Paulson Operating Reactors Branch #3 Division of Reactor Licensing
Enclosure:
Attendance List
i ~
~
. :,.. ~ -': -
....:... _ :1_
~'
~ ' ^ -
~
O
)
1-o ENCLOSURE MEETING WITH JERSEY CENTRAL POWER 6 LIGifr COMPANY FEBRUARY 12, 197S i
Nuclear Regulatory Commission i
R. Scholl, Technical Review C. Miller, Technical Review W. Paulson, Reactor Licensing, ORB #3 Jersey Central Power 6 Light Company R. W. Wulf General Public Utilities Service Corporation C. Fedako W. Schmauss N. Trikouros I
i 1
i 4
s
,7
--