TXX-4641, Forwards Rev 4 to ODA-204, Preparation of Emergency Response Guidelines, Rev 0 to EOS-0.0, Rediagnosis & Rev 1 to Generic Plant Comparison, in Response to Preliminary License Condition Re Second Operating Cycle
| ML20138P397 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Comanche Peak  |
| Issue date: | 12/16/1985 |
| From: | Counsil W TEXAS UTILITIES ELECTRIC CO. (TU ELECTRIC) |
| To: | Noonan V NRC - COMANCHE PEAK PROJECT (TECHNICAL REVIEW TEAM) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20138P400 | List: |
| References | |
| TASK-1.C.1, TASK-1.D.1, TASK-TM TXX-4641, NUDOCS 8512260086 | |
| Download: ML20138P397 (2) | |
Text
-
Log # TXX-4641 F11e # 10010 TEXAS UTILITIES GENERATING COMPANY RMYW AY TOWER e 400 NORTIE Ot.IVE STREET, I.R. El
- DAI.A AS. TEX AN 78301 EMMAff."Ah December 16, 1985 Director of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Attention:
Mr. Vince S. Noonan, Director Comanche Peak Project Division of Licensing U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.
20555
SUBJECT:
COMANCHE PEAK STEAM ELECTRIC STATION (CPSES)
DOCKET N05. 50-445 AND 50-446 TMI ACTION ITEMS I.C.1 AND I.D.1 EMERGENCY RESPONSE GUIDELINE TASK ANALYSIS REF: 1) CPSES Supplemental Safety Evaluation Report (SSER)
No. 12 dated October 1985.
2)
H. C. Schmidt letter TXX-4216 to 8. J. Youngblood dated July 6, 1984.
3)
H. C. Schmidt letter TXX-4285 to 8. J. Youngblood dated August 24, 1984.
- 4) CPSES SSER No. 6 dated November 1984.
Dear Mr. Noonan:
Reference 1 provides an update to the NRC guidance for the evaluation and development of procedures for transients and accidents.
The guidance specifically defines a preliminary license condition which requires the completion of the function and task analysis for CPSES prior to startup of the Unit 1 second operating cycle.
In accordance with the above license condition, a detailed functional task analysis has been performed on the CPSES Emergency Response Guideline (ERG) procedures. The process for performing this analysis is contained in the attached CPSES Procedure ODA-204, Revision 4.
This procedure addresses concerns identified by the NRC review of ODA-204, Revision 3 (submitted by Reference 2).
Also attached is a representative analysis documentation package for CPSES Procedure EOS-0.0, Revision 0, Rediagnosis.
The analysis documentation packages for the remaining ERG procedures are available onsite.
8512260086 851216 PDR ADOCK 05000445 g
F PDR I(
1s A DIVISION OF TEXAR UTil2 TERN E12CTRIC CUAtPANY
5 1
i c>
Review of the task analysis documentation for all CPSES ERG Procedures resulted in only minor changes to the Westinghouse Generic Procedures.
The cnanges included:
)
Minor wording changes due to plant specific nomenclature.
Minor step sequence changes that did not violate the generic step sequence.
Incorporation of two or more generic steps into one plant specific step due to plant configuration.
These deviations are included in the specific data packages pertaining to the individual CPSES procedure. All of the above deviations were evaluated in detail to verify that the generic procedures were not compromised in any manner.
The Generic Plant Comparison Package was submitted by Reference 3.
This document (approved in Reference 1) has since been revised to incorporate a change that was added to the plant specific procedures.
The change consisted of removing the red path summary from all the generic procedure fold-out pages and inserting in its place the criteria for adverse containment.
For this reason, the Generic Comparison Package, Revision 1, is attached for your review.
The NRC evaluation of the Detailed Control Room Design Review (DCRDR) is reported in Reference 4.
Two of the essential elements of the DCRDR requiring resolution are the completion of a function and task analysis and the comparison of display and control requirements.
These elements were encompassed by the scope of the ERG task analysis.
Very truly yours,
/
W. G. Counsil RWH/grr Attachment c-Annette Vietti-Cook