|
---|
Category:SAFETY EVALUATION REPORT--LICENSING & RELATED ISSUES
MONTHYEARML20217C9121999-10-12012 October 1999 SER Input Authorizing Licensee Proposed Request to Modify Definition of Core Alteration in Section 1.0 of TS & Update Sections 3/4.1,3.4.3 & 3/4.9 to Reflect Proposed Definition Change ML20198B3801998-12-14014 December 1998 SER Accepting one-time Request for Relief from Certain Provisions of Section XI of ASME Boiler & Pressure Vessel Code,Per 10CFR50.55a for Certain Plant Safety/Relief Valves ML20196B1441998-11-23023 November 1998 Safety Evaluation Accepting Licensee Response to GL 95-07, Pressure Locking & Thermal Bindings of Safety-Related Power-Operated Gate Valves ML20153C7621998-09-18018 September 1998 Safety Evaluation Acceping NRC Bulletin 95-002, Unexpected Clogging of RHR Pump Strainer While Operating in Suppression Pool Cooling Mode ML20236L8041998-07-0606 July 1998 Safety Evaluation Granting Licensee 980304 Request for Second 10-yr Interval Pump & Valve IST Program Plan,Rev 2, Including Changes to 2 ASME Boiler & Pressure Vessel Code Relief Requests Previously Submitted in Rev 1 ML20217Q7041998-05-0404 May 1998 Safety Evaluation Accepting Util Request to Leave Leak Chase Channels Plugged During Performance of Containment ILRT ML20203B1941997-12-0404 December 1997 Supplemental SE Accepting Proposed Changes Which Are Consistent W/Recognized Battery Stds & Station Blackout Rule ML20148T8571997-07-0303 July 1997 SER Accepting Temporary Use of Current Procedure for Containment R/R Activities Instead of Requirements of Amended 10CFR50.55a Rule to Be Reasonable ML20137D4961997-03-24024 March 1997 Safety Evaluation of Second 10-year Interval Inservice Insp Program Plan Requests for Relief CR-17 & CR-18 Commonwealth Edison Co,Lasalle County Station,Units 1 & 2 ML20135D4661996-12-0606 December 1996 Safety Evaluation Granting Relief Request RP-01 & Alternative Testing Imposed Per 10CFR50.55a(f)(6)(i) Based on Impracticality of Performing Required Testing ML20129D9401996-09-26026 September 1996 SER Accepting Licensee Cycle 8 Core Reload Design Submittal Re Application of Anfb Critical Power Correlation to Coresident GE9 Fuel as Described in TR EMF-96-021(P),Rev 1 ML20059E2871993-12-30030 December 1993 Safety Evaluation Supporting Amends 57,57,45,45,93,77,152 & 140 to Licenses NPF-37,NPF-66,NPF-72,NPF-77,NPF-11,NPF-18, DPR-39 & DPR-48 Respectively ML20128E4101992-12-0101 December 1992 Safety Evaluation Accepting Relief Requests RI-22 & RI-23 from ASME Code Requirements from Hydrostatic Pressure Testing Following Replacement of RCIC Steam Supply Inboard Isolation Valve as Part of ISI Program ML20059N0301990-08-22022 August 1990 Safety Evaluation Accepting Util Response to Generic Ltr 88-01, NRC Position on IGSCC in BWR Austentic Stainless Steel Piping ML20154E5461988-09-0707 September 1988 Safety Evaluation Supporting Amends 60 & 40 to Licenses NPF-11 & NPF-18,respectively ML20151X0121988-08-16016 August 1988 Safety Evaluation Re Inservice Testing Program & Requests for Relief ML20237C8761987-12-16016 December 1987 Safety Evaluation Supporting Facility IGSCC Insp,Per Generic Ltr 84-11 ML20237C9091987-12-16016 December 1987 Safety Evaluation Supporting Licensee Response to IE Bulletin 79-26,Rev 1, Boron Loss from BWR Control Blades, Per License Condition 2.C(6) ML20205R6681987-04-0101 April 1987 Safety Evaluation Supporting Continued Use of Static O-Ring Differential Pressure Switches ML20211P2551986-12-15015 December 1986 Safety Evaluation Supporting Util Compliance W/License Condition 2.C.(25)(d) Requirements Re Mods to Six Fire Door Stops ML20214U8501986-12-0404 December 1986 Safety Evaluation Re Util 861006 Response to IE Bulletin 79-26,Rev 1, Boron Loss from BWR Control Blades, to Satisfy License Condition 2.C(13).Response Acceptable ML20214T3991986-12-0202 December 1986 Supplemental Safety Evaluation Accepting Licensee 860613 Analysis & Justification for Cable Separation Criteria to Resolve Deficiencies Described in Sser 7,App D ML20213G3181986-11-12012 November 1986 Safety Evaluation Accepting local-to-bulk Temp Difference of 12 F.Draft Technical Evaluation Rept Encl ML20215K8741986-10-21021 October 1986 Safety Evaluation Accepting Offsite Dose Calculation Manual Updated Through Rev 12.Changes Incorporated in Revs 11 & 12 Comply W/Tech Spec 6.8.2 ML20215K9631986-10-16016 October 1986 Safety Evaluation Granting Interim Acceptance of Process Control Program Updated Through 850718 ML20212Q7191986-08-29029 August 1986 Safety Evaluation Supporting Amend 27 to License NPF-18 ML20205F0791986-08-11011 August 1986 Safety Evaluation Supporting 860213 Procedures for Design of Single Angle Members for HVAC Hanger Frames for Plant. Related Info Encl ML20205C4051986-08-0707 August 1986 Safety Evaluation Supporting Facility Restart Following 860601 Feedwater Transient.Licensee Action Plan,Supplemented by Listed Actions,Adequate Basis for Restart & short-term Operation.Supporting Drawings & Matls Encl ML20206M6161986-06-23023 June 1986 Safety Evaluation Supporting Responses to Generic Ltr 83-28 Item 2.1 (Part 1) Re Equipment Classification ML20195D4121986-05-27027 May 1986 Safety Evaluation Summary of Inservice Testing Program for Pumps & Valves.Program Acceptable Subj to Listed Conditions in Encl SER ML20195D4171986-05-27027 May 1986 SER Re Pump & Valve Inservice Testing Program NUREG-0519, Safety Evaluation of Final in-plant Safety/Relief Valve Test Evaluation Rept Per SER (NUREG-0519).Design Adequate to Accommodate Loads Associated W/Activation of One or More Safety Relief Valves1986-05-19019 May 1986 Safety Evaluation of Final in-plant Safety/Relief Valve Test Evaluation Rept Per SER (NUREG-0519).Design Adequate to Accommodate Loads Associated W/Activation of One or More Safety Relief Valves ML20198B4221986-05-15015 May 1986 Supplemental Safety Evaluation Supporting Util Cable Separation Criteria Per Sser (NUREG-0519),App D.Addition of Zipper Tubing to Divisional Cables for Automatic Depressurization Sys Relief Valves Resolved NRC Concern ML20203N5531986-04-30030 April 1986 Safety Evaluation Concluding That Util IGSCC Insp Performed in Accordance W/Generic Ltr 84-11 & Satisfactory.Small Concerns Re long-term Growth of Small IGSCC Cracks Present But Not Detected During Insp Remain ML20140D6501986-03-19019 March 1986 SER Supporting Test Program,Results & Commitment for Nonqualified GE Control Switches.License Conditions 2.C.(21)(c) & 2.C.(12)(a) for Units 1 & 2,respectively,will Be Satisfied When GE Switches Removed from Engine ML20210E0961986-02-0404 February 1986 Safety Evaluation Accepting Util 851113 Proposal for Amend Changing Tech Specs to Include Previously Approved Trip Setting on Low CRD Pump Discharge Water Header Pressure & to Delete Associated Surveillance Requirement ML20137D8081985-11-18018 November 1985 Safety Evaluation Supporting Use of Mechanical Stress Improvement Process in Primary Sys Stainless Steel Piping to Modify Residual Stress Pattern at Piping Butt Welds NUREG-0889, SER Conditionally Supporting Response to Procedures Generation Package1985-10-18018 October 1985 SER Conditionally Supporting Response to Procedures Generation Package ML20137S6391985-09-30030 September 1985 Safety Evaluation Supporting Elimination of Arbitrary Intermediate Pipe Breaks.Deviation from SRP Acceptable for Piping Sys Identified in Ref 2 Except Portion of RHR Sys Made of 304SS Matl ML20129D9511985-07-16016 July 1985 Safety Evaluation Supporting Acceptance Criteria for Firecode CT Gypsum Fire Stops ML20126K9121985-07-12012 July 1985 Revised SER Re Util 831105 & 850605 Responses to Generic Ltr 83-28,Item 1.1, Post-Trip Review Program. Program & Procedures Acceptable ML20129E8881985-05-24024 May 1985 SER of Util 831105 Response to Generic Ltr 83-28,Item 1.2 Re post-trip Review Data & Info Capabilities.Capabilities Acceptable 1999-10-12
[Table view] Category:TEXT-SAFETY REPORT
MONTHYEARML20217C9121999-10-12012 October 1999 SER Input Authorizing Licensee Proposed Request to Modify Definition of Core Alteration in Section 1.0 of TS & Update Sections 3/4.1,3.4.3 & 3/4.9 to Reflect Proposed Definition Change ML20217F9091999-09-30030 September 1999 Monthly Operating Repts for Sept 1999 for LaSalle County Stations,Units 1 & 2.With ML20217A1691999-09-22022 September 1999 Part 21 Rept Re Engine Sys,Inc Controllers,Manufactured Between Dec 1997 & May 1999,that May Have Questionable Soldering Workmanship.Caused by Inadequate Personnel Training.Sent Rept to All Nuclear Customers ML20212C4501999-08-31031 August 1999 Monthly Operating Repts for Aug 1999 for LaSalle County Station,Units 1 & 2.With ML20210R0671999-07-31031 July 1999 Monthly Operating Repts for July 1999 for LaSalle County Station,Units 1 & 2.With ML20210C1681999-07-0909 July 1999 Seventh Refueling Outage ASME Section XI Summary Rept ML20209H1501999-06-30030 June 1999 Monthly Operating Repts for June 1999 for LaSalle County Station,Units 1 & 2.With ML20195J7871999-05-31031 May 1999 Monthly Operating Repts for May 1999 for LaSalle County Station,Units 1 & 2.With ML20209E1431999-05-31031 May 1999 Cycle 8 COLR, for May 1999 ML20195B2591999-05-19019 May 1999 Rev 66a to CE-1-A,consisting of Proposed Changes to QAP for Dnps,Qcs,Znps,Lcs,Byron & Braidwood Stations ML20206N2071999-04-30030 April 1999 Monthly Operating Repts for Apr 1999 for LaSalle County Station,Units 1 & 2.With ML20205L8421999-03-31031 March 1999 Rev 2 to EMF-96-125, LaSalle Unit 2 Cycle 8 Reload Analysis ML20205L8301999-03-31031 March 1999 Administrative Technical Requirements App B (Amend 26) LaSalle Unit 2 Cycle 8 COLR & Reload Transient Analysis Results, for Mar 1999 ML20205R2721999-03-31031 March 1999 Monthly Operating Repts for Mar 1999 for LaSalle County Station,Units 1 & 2.With ML20205L8391999-03-22022 March 1999 Rev 2 to 960103, Neutronics Licensing Rept for LaSalle Unit 2,Cycle 8 ML20204C8141999-02-28028 February 1999 Monthly Operating Repts for Feb 1999 for LaSalle County Station,Units 1 & 2.With ML20199E4601998-12-31031 December 1998 Monthly Operating Repts for Dec 1998 for LaSalle County Station,Units 1 & 2.With ML20207C7371998-12-31031 December 1998 Annual Rept for LaSalle County Station for Jan 1998 Through Dec 1998 ML20205M7061998-12-31031 December 1998 Unicom Corp 1998 Summary Annual Rept. with ML20198B3801998-12-14014 December 1998 SER Accepting one-time Request for Relief from Certain Provisions of Section XI of ASME Boiler & Pressure Vessel Code,Per 10CFR50.55a for Certain Plant Safety/Relief Valves ML20206N2261998-12-0909 December 1998 LER 98-S03-00:on 981116,protected Area Was Entered Without Current Authorization for Unescorted Access Due to Programmatic Deficiency Error.Changed Badge Control Process ML20197K0981998-11-30030 November 1998 Monthly Operating Repts for Nov 1998 for LaSalle County Station,Unts 1 & 2.With ML20196B1441998-11-23023 November 1998 Safety Evaluation Accepting Licensee Response to GL 95-07, Pressure Locking & Thermal Bindings of Safety-Related Power-Operated Gate Valves ML20196A4191998-11-19019 November 1998 Safety Evaluation Accepting QA TR CE-1-A,Rev 66 Re Changes in Independent & Onsite Review Organization by Creating NSRB ML20195D3191998-10-31031 October 1998 Monthly Operating Repts for Oct 1998 for LaSalle County Station.With ML20154H6781998-09-30030 September 1998 Monthly Operating Repts for Sept 1998 for LaSalle County Nuclear Power Station,Units 1 & 2 ML20153D0191998-09-18018 September 1998 Part 21 Rept Re Defect in Gap Conductance Analyses for co- Resident BWR Fuel.Initially Reported on 980917.Corrective Analyses Performed Demonstrating That Current Operating Limits Bounding from BOC to Cycle Exposure of 8 Gwd/Mtu ML20153C7621998-09-18018 September 1998 Safety Evaluation Acceping NRC Bulletin 95-002, Unexpected Clogging of RHR Pump Strainer While Operating in Suppression Pool Cooling Mode ML20153C6771998-09-17017 September 1998 Part 21 Rept Re Defect Relative to MCPR Operating Limits as Impacted by Gap Conductance of co-resident BWR Fuel at Facilities.Operating Limit for LaSalle Unit 2 & Quad Cities Unit 2 Will Be Revised as Listed ML20151W0241998-08-31031 August 1998 Monthly Operating Repts for Aug 1998 for LaSalle County Station.With ML20237E2921998-08-21021 August 1998 Special Rept:On 980811,channel 5 of Lpms Became Inoperable. Caused by Channel Failed pre-amplifier Located Inside Primary Containment at Inboard Side of Electrical Penetration E-19.Initiated Repairs of Channel ML20237E2331998-08-21021 August 1998 Revised Pages of Section 20 of Rev 66 to CE-1-A, QA Topical Rept ML20237B4861998-07-31031 July 1998 Monthly Operating Repts for July 1998 for LaSalle County Nuclear Power Station Units 1 & 2 ML20236V7701998-07-31031 July 1998 Revised LaSalle Unit 1 Cycle 8 COLR & Reload Transient Analysis Results ML20236P8231998-07-14014 July 1998 Special Rept:From 980614-17,various Fire Rated Assemblies Were Inoperable for Period Greater than Seven Days.Caused by Test Equipment Being Routed Through Fire Doors.Established Fire Watches & on 980619 Assemblies Were Declared Operable ML20236N6751998-07-0909 July 1998 Part 21 & Deficiency Rept Re Notification of Potential Safety Hazard from Breakage of Cast Iron Suction Heads in Apkd Type Pumps.Caused by Migration of Suction Head Journal Sleeve Along Lower End of Pump Shaft.Will Inspect Pumps ML20236L8041998-07-0606 July 1998 Safety Evaluation Granting Licensee 980304 Request for Second 10-yr Interval Pump & Valve IST Program Plan,Rev 2, Including Changes to 2 ASME Boiler & Pressure Vessel Code Relief Requests Previously Submitted in Rev 1 ML20236P3611998-06-30030 June 1998 Monthly Operating Repts for June 1998 for LaSalle County Nuclear Power Station,Units 1 & 2 ML20249C4891998-06-22022 June 1998 Special Rept:On 980522,Fire Detection Zone 1-31 Was Noted out-of-service for More than 14 Days.Detection Sys Was Taken out-of-service on 980508 to Prevent False Alarms During Hot Work Activities.Sys Was Returned to Operable Status 980528 ML20248M3101998-05-31031 May 1998 Monthly Operating Repts for May 1998 for LaSalle County Nuclear Power Station,Units 1 & 2 ML20236V7771998-05-31031 May 1998 Rev 1 to 24A5180, Supplemental Reload Licensing Rept for LaSalle County Station Unit 1 Reload 7 Cycle 8 ML20217Q7041998-05-0404 May 1998 Safety Evaluation Accepting Util Request to Leave Leak Chase Channels Plugged During Performance of Containment ILRT ML20247M4491998-04-30030 April 1998 Monthly Operating Repts for Apr 1998 for LaSalle County Station ML20216F4941998-03-31031 March 1998 Monthly Operating Repts for Mar 1998 for LaSalle County Station,Units 1 & 2 ML20217N6581998-03-30030 March 1998 Special Rept on Fire Detection,Deluge Sys & Fire Rated Assemblies During Period of 980303-25.Established Fire Watches Until Affected Equipment Is Returned to Operable Status ML20216D9511998-02-28028 February 1998 Monthly Operating Repts for Feb 1998 for LaSalle County Station,Units 1 & 2 ML20247M4631998-02-28028 February 1998 Rev Monthly Operating Rept for Feb 1998 for LaSalle County Station ML20203D7241998-02-20020 February 1998 Special Rept:On 980118,Fire Detection Zones 1-18 & 2-18 Taken out-of-svc to Prevent False Alarms During Hot Work Activities on Auxiliary Electric Equipment Room Ventilation Sys.Fire Watches Will Remain in Place ML20202G9851998-01-31031 January 1998 Monthly Operating Repts for Jan 1998 for LaSalle County Station,Units 1 & 2 ML20199K1651998-01-23023 January 1998 Rev 65h to Topical Rept CE-1-A, Comm Ed QA Tr 1999-09-30
[Table view] |
Text
. .
ENCLOSURE 1 SAFETY EVALUATION REPORT FOR GENERIC LETTER 83-28, ITEM 1.2 - POST-TRIP REVIEW (DATAANDINFORMATIONCAPABILITY)
LASALLE COUNTY STATION UNITS 1 AND 2 DOCKET NOS.: 50-373, 50-374 I. INTRODUCTION On February 25, 1983, both of the scram circuit breakers at Unit 1 of the Salem Nuclear Power Plant failed to open upon an automatic reactor trip signal from the reactor protection system. This incident occurred during the plant start-up and the reactor was tripped manually by the operator about 30 seconds after the initiation of the automatic trip signal. The failure of the circuit breakers has been determined to be related to the sticking of the under voltage trip attachment. Prior to this incident, on February 22, 1983, at Unit 1 of the Salem Nuclear Power Plant, an automatic trip signal was generated based on steam generator low-low level during plant start-up. In this case, the reactor was tripped manually by the operator almost coincidentally with the automatic trip. Following these incidents, on February 28, 1983, the NRC Executive Director for Operations (ED0), directed the staff to investigate and report on the generic implications of these occurrences at Unit 1 of the Salem Nuclear Power Plant. The results of the s
staff's inquiry into the generic implications of the Salem unit incidents are reported in NUREG-1000, " Generic Implications of the ATWS Events at the Salem Nuclear Power Plant." As a result of this investigation, the Commission (NRC) requested (by Generic Letter 83-28 dated July 8, 1983) all licensees of operating reactors, applicants for an operating license, and holders of g
construction permits to respond to certain generic concerns. These concerns are categorized into four areas: (1) Post-Trip Review, (2) Equipment Classification and Vendor Interface, (3) Post-Maintenance Testing, and
~
(4) Reactor Trip System Reliability Improvements.
The first action item, Post-Trip Review, consists of Action Item 1.1,
" Program Description and Procedure" and Action Item 1.2, " Data and Information Capability." This safety evaluation report (SER) addresses Action Item 1.2 only.
II. REVIEW GUIDELINES The following review guidelines were developed after initial evaluation of the various utility responses to Item 1.2 of Generic Letter 83-28 and incorporate the best features of these submittals. As such, these review guidelines in effect represent a " good practices" approach to post-trip review. We have reviewed the licensee's response to Item 1.2 against these guidelines:
A. The equipment that provides the digital sequence *of events (SOE) record and the analog time history records of an inscheduled shutdown should provide a reliable source of the necessary information to be used in the post-trip review. Each plant variable which is necessary to determine the cause and progression of the events following a plant trip should be monitored by at least one recorder (such as a sequence-of-events recorder or a plant process computer) for digital parameters; and strip
charts, a plant process computer or analog recorder for analog (time history) variables. Performance characteristics guidelines for SOE and time history-recorders are as follows:
Each sequence of events recorder should be capable of detecting and recording the sequence of events with a sufficient time discrimination capability to ensure that the time response:
associated with each monitored safety-related system can be ascertained, and that a determination can be made as to whether the time response is within acceptable limits based on FSAR Chapter 15 Accident Analyses. The recommended guidelines for the SOE time discrimination is approximately 100 milliseconds. If current SOE recorders do not have this time discrimination capability the licensee should show that the current time discrimination capability is sufficient for an adequate
. reconstruction of the course of the reactor trip and post-trip events. As a minimum this should include the ability to adequately reconstruct the transient and accident scenarios presented in Chapter 15 of the plant FSAR.
Each analog time history data recorder should have a sample interval small enough so that the incident can be accurately reconstructed following a reactor trip. As a minimum, the licensee should be able to reconstruct the course of the transient and accident sequences evaluated in the accident analysis of O
Chapter 15 of the plant FSAR. The recommended guideline for the sample interval is 10 seconds. If the time history equipment does not meet this guideline, the licensee should show that the time history capability is sufficient to accurately reconstruct the transient and accident sequences presented in Chapter 15 of the FSAR. To support the post-trip analysis of the cause of the trip and the proper fun tioning of involved safety related equipment, each analog thr.e history data recorder should be capable of updating and retaining information from approximately five minutes prior to the trip until at least ten minutes after the trip.
All equipment used to record sequence of events and time history infonnation shoul'd be powered from a reliable and non-interruptible power source. The power source used need not be safety.related.
B. The sequence of events and time history recording equipment should monitor sufficient digital and analog parameters, respectively, to assure that the course of the reactor trip and post-trip events can be reconstructed. The parameters monitored should provide sufficient information to determine the root cause of the unscheduled shutdown, the progression of the reactor trip, and the response of the plant parameters and protection and safety systems to the unscheduled shutdowns. Specifically, all input parameters associated with reactor trips, safety injections and other safety-related systems as well as output parameters sufficient to record the proper functioning of these i.
systems should be recorded for use in the post-trip review. The parameters deemed necessary, as a minimum, to perform a post-trip review that would determine if the plant remained within its safety limit design envelope are presented in Table 1. They were selected on the I
basis of staff engineering judgment following a complete evaluation of utility submittals. If the licensee's SOE recorders and time history recorders do not monitor all of the parameters suggested in these tables the licensee should show that the existing set of monitored parameters are sufficient to establish that the plant remained within the design envelope for the accident conditions analyzed in Chapter 15 of the plant FSAR.
C. The information gathered by the sequence of events and time history recorders should be stored in a manner that will allow for data retrieval and analysis. The data may be retained in either hardcopy, (e.g.,computerprintout,stripchartrecord),orinanaccessible memory (e.g.,magneticdiscortape). This information should be presented in a readable and meaningful fonnat, taking into consideration good human factors practices such as those outlined in NUREG-0700.
3
- 0. Reten' tion of data from all unscheduled shutdowns provides a valutble p
h reference source for the determination of the acceptability of the plant l vital parameter and equipment response to subsequent unscheduled
,i shutdowns. Information gathered during the post-trip review is to be
- f
. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ . - . _ . . = . . .___ _ _ -._.
t l
- retained for the . life of the plant for post-trip review comparisons of L subsequent events.
~
III. EVALUATION AND CONCLUSION. ,
By letter dated November 5,1983, Commonwealth Edison Company provided I i ,
L information regarding its post-trip review program data and information capabilities'for LaSalle County Station Units 1 and 2. We have evaluated the ,
- licensee's submittal against the review guidelines described in Section II.
Licensee deviations from the Guidelines of Section II were reviewed with the licensee by telephone on May 14, 1985. A brief description of the licensee's L responses and the staff's evaluation of the response against each of 'the review guidelines is provided below i
A. The licensee has described the performance characteristics of the l equipment used to record the sequence of events and time history data needed for post-trip review. Based on our review, we find that the sequence of events recorder characteristics conform to the guidelines described in Section II A, and are acceptable. The time history recorder characteristics conform to these guidelines, except for 4J !
} sampling rates for balance-of-plant parameters (every 15 seconds) and
,3 post-trip record duration (7.5 minutes for balance-of-plant parameters and five minutes for nuclear steam supply system parameters). We find' the 15-second sampling rate for balance-of-plant parameters acceptable. 1 Based on information obtained during our telephone review, we find the record durations acceptable, since for both systems indefinite record 4
r-
, duration at a sampling rate of one sample per minute is available, and the nuclear steam supply system parameters are also recorded on strip chart recorders.
B. The licensee has established and identified the parameters to be monitored and recorded for post-trip review. Based on our review, we find that the parameters selected by the licensee include all of those
-identified in Table 1 and conform to the guidelines described in Section II B and are therefore acceptable.
C. The licensee has described the means for storage and retrieval of the information gathered by the sequence of events and time history
!. recorders, and for the presentation of this information for post-trip review and analysis. Based on our review, we find that this information l
will be presented in a readable and meaningful format, and that the storage, retrieval and presentation conform to the guidelines of Section II C.
l l D. The licensee's submittal indicafes that the data and information used during post-trip reviews will be retained in an accessible manner for the life of the plant. Based on our review, we find that the licensee's program for data retention conforms to the guidelines of Section II D, and is acceptable.
No
n, _ . _
Based on our review, we conclude that the licensee's post-trip review data o
and information capabilities for LaSalle County Station Units 1 and 2 are acceptable.
D Y,
TABLE 1 BWR PARAMETER LIST SOE Time History Recorder Recorder Parameter / Signal x Reactor Trip x Safety Injection x Containment Isolation x Turbine Trip x Control Rod Position x(1) x Neutron Flux, Power x(1) Main Steam Radiation (2) ,
Containment (DryWell) Radiation i
r x(1) x Drywell Pressure (Containment Pressure)
(2) Suppression Pool Temperature x(1) x Primary System Pressure x(1) x Primary System Level x MSIV Position x(1) Turbine Stop Valve / Control Valve Position x Turbine Bypass Valve Position x Feedwater Flow x Steam Flow
~
(3) Recirculation; Flow, Pump Status x(1) Scram Discharge Level x(1) Condenser Vacuum e
0,
SOE Time History Recorder Recorder Parameter / Signal x ACandDCSystemStatus(BusVoltage)
(3)(4) Safety Injection; Flow Pump / Valve Status x- Diesel Generator Status (on/Off, Start /Stop)
(1): Trip parameters (2): Parameter may be recorded by either an SOE or time history recorder.
(3): Acceptable recorder options are: (a) system flow recorded on an SOE
, recorder, (b) system flow recorded on a time history recorder, or (c) equipment status recorded on an SOE recorder.
(4): Includes recording of parameters for all applicable systems from the following: HPCI, LPCI, LPCS, IC, RCIC.
. ~ .
?\
I 1
l l
, I
- e. ~