ML20115H103
| ML20115H103 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Quad Cities  |
| Issue date: | 10/23/1992 |
| From: | Schrage J COMMONWEALTH EDISON CO. |
| To: | Murley T NRC OFFICE OF INFORMATION RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (IRM), Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9210270016 | |
| Download: ML20115H103 (2) | |
Text
.
A }; 1400 Opus Place i
Commonw3alth Edison -
-n-Downers Grove, Hlinois 60515
{
1 October-23, 1992 Dr. Thomas E. Murley, Director Offi a of Nuclear Reactor Regulation U.S. Nittlear Regulatory Commission Washington D.C.
20555 ATTN:
Document Control Desk l
Subject:
Quad Cities Station Units 1 snd 2 DCRDR Implementation; Indicating Lamp Replacement NRC_ Dor.kellot,_50:2513nL50:215
References:
(1)
J.R. Hojnarowski to J.A. Zwolinski letter dated December 27, 1985.
(2)
R. Auluck to D.L. Farrar lette' dated March 9,1987.
(3)
I.M. Johnson to T.E. Murley letter dated August 25, 1987.
(4)
R. A. Chrranowski to T.E. Murley letter c'ated November 20, 1989.
Dear Dr. Hurley,
During the Quad Cities Station Detailed Control Room Design Review (DCRDR), Commonwealth Edison (CECO) documented two Human Engineering Deficiencies (HEDs) related to indicating la.np replacement-problems -(Reference (1)).
These HEDs (171 and 172) were originally classified as " Implementation; Accept-As.Is".
The Staff took axception to that classification in Reference (2).
As a rasult of the NRC position, CECO changed the classification'of the two HEDs to "Implerrentation; 2nd Refuel Outage" (Reference (3)). CECO also described ongoing sctions to investigate long life LED. indicator bulbs as replacements for the current indicating lights.
CECO has evaluated the use of new indicator bulbs using LEDs, simila, to those used at Pennsylvania Power and Light's Susquehanna Plant (Refereate (4)).
This evaluation included installation of the LEDs in one full main-control room panel at Bra:dwood Station.
The consensus comments _from operating personnel was that the LEDs fccused the light in the upward ~
direction-and the position of the equipr:ent was not ascertainable from'.a distance. Since the evaluation of the Susquehanna; type ' EDs, CECc has continutd to sample-different LED configurations, lens caps, resistors, voltage combinations :and legend inserts in order to find _a suitable replace nent.
These. evaluations have'resulted in the conclusion that a b
Teasible and acceptable LED replacement roi.the current incandescent lamps does'not exist.
Based-upon the investigative effort to perform the evaluations described above, CECO believes.that the commitment for HEDs 171
'and 172 has been satisfied.
Vhl [-
S ft n 1 o c-
+
9210270016 9210 g_..
4 PDR ADOCK 0500 4
P
a
^
- eir. Thomas E. Murley October 23, 1992 If there are any questions or comments, please direct them to John L.
Schrage at 708-515-7283.
')-(__' ~ hp,p- -
John L. Schrage Nuclear Licensing Administrator cc:
A. Bert Davis, Regional Administrator-Rill L
N. Olshan, Project Manager-NRR T. E. Taylor, Senior Resident Inspector-Quad Cities Office of Nuclear Safety-IDNS i
i i
i ZNLD/2235
.