ML20151K993
| ML20151K993 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | River Bend  |
| Issue date: | 06/21/1985 |
| From: | Houston D NRC - TECH SPEC REVIEW GROUP |
| To: | Virgilio M NRC - TECH SPEC REVIEW GROUP |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20151K803 | List: |
| References | |
| FOIA-85-511 NUDOCS 8507020079 | |
| Download: ML20151K993 (3) | |
Text
r
'o
[
'o UNITED STATES E
~,j NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 3
E WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555
[
June 21, 1985 Docket No. 50-d8 MEMORANDUM FOP: Martin J. Virgilio, Group Leader Technical Specification Review Group, OL FROM:
Dean Houston, Reactor Engineer Technical Specification Review Group, DL
SUBJECT:
RESOLUTION OF CONTRACTOR (EGAG) COMMENTS ON RIVER BEND TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (FINAL DRAFT)
On May 9,1985, a report was issued by EG&G describing their audit of the River Bend Technical Specifications (Final Draft) and identifying areas of the Technical Specifications that were either consistent or different in regard to the FSAR (thhough Amendment 18) or SER. For those areas which
.i were consistent, we have no further respons'e. For those areas which l
were different, we have addressed each item individually in the enclosure (Attachment 1) and have shown that appropriate-action has been taken
~
or that none is currently reouf red. A copy of this memorandum will be l
provided to EG&G prior to their audit of the revised River Bend Tech l
Specs againct the FSAR (through Amendment 20) and the SER (through SSER No. 2).
%,& W Y Dean Houston, Reactor Engineer Technical Specification Review Group l
Division of Licensing cc:.Rs BiriedJg I'Nidke (EG8G) l C. Schulten TS~C 70 2 0o '7 7 XA hf
.r
.n Resolution of Coments by EG&G Recardino River Bend Technical Specifications 1.
Concern (Section I-Note *)-The Technical Specifications do not specify a change in MCPR from 1.06 to 1.07 after reload.
Resolution The Technical Specifications address only the MCPR limit for the current core configuration. If MCPR limits change with a reload, GSU will have to request an amendment and a change to the Technical Specifications for the core configuration at that time. For the Technical Specifications at this time, no further revision is requi red.
2.
Concern
+
s (Section V*)-Technical Specification Table 3.6.4-1 does not list valve 4
1RH5-V240 at penetration IKJB-Z20. Also, two. typographical errors in valve identification were noted:
1821A0VF)1)A should be 1821A0VF010A 1
and 1821A0VF)328 should be 1821A0VF0328.
1 i
Pesoluti'on y
.~
The valve and penetration have been incorporated into Table 3.6.4-1 on
'j page 3/4 6-43.
The typographical errors have been confirmed and corrected as proposed. No further action is required.
i q
j 3.
Concern Q
(Section VIII-Item 13*)-The Technical Specifications do not specifically identify the SLCS interlock with valve C41-F031 for periodic testing.
1 Pesolution A.
The applicant has indicated that the surveillance identified above is lj included in SR 4.1.5.b.3 which requires verification of valve postion and flow paths every 31 days. No further action is required.
4.
Concern M
(Section VIII, Item 17*)-The Technical Specifications do not specifically
]!
identify the Digital Radiation Monitoring System (DRMS) for surveillance,
~
l Resolution The DRMS system provides the isolation signal for containment purge 4;
isolation valves. This function is listed as Item 1.C. in Table 3.3.2-1 and surveillance requirements for the system is listed as Item 1.C in Table 4.3.2.1-1.
Specific reference to the DRMS system does not appear in the Technical Specifications. No further action is required.
- -Identity of comment in EG&G Draft Report
- ~ ;,z l 5_.
Concern (Section III, item 18.b*)-The Technical Specifications do not specifically' discuss the periodic calibration of thermal overloads.
Resolution Surveillance requiren'ent 4.8.4.1.a.3 specifies testino of overcurrent protection devices such that the interruption of current will be within the associated thermal oserload time delay band width for the specific current. This is intended -to fulfill the calibration re-quirements as questioned above. No further action is required.
6.
Concern j
(Section VIII, Item 19*)-The Technical Specifications do not address a
the overcurrent devices for emergency lighting in the control room.
l Resoittion Technical Specification 3.8.4.2, "Other Overcurrent Protection Devices,"
does cover these areas - Main Control Room Lighting and RPS Alternate Source of Power. No further action is required.
l l
1 7.
Concern (Section VIII, Item 27.*)-The Technical Specifications in Sections 6.9.1.5 j
and 6.9.1.6 do not address SRV failures as required.
t Resolution Sections 6.9.1.5 and 6.9.1.6 of the Technical Specifications have been revised to include a sumary of SRV failures in the annual report and a discussion of SRV failures in the monthly report. No further action is required.
8.
Concern (Section VIII, Item 23*)-The Technical Specificati:ns do not incluc'e the L
bypass timer or manual inhibit switch for the ADS system.
l Pesolution The timer and switch for the ADS system have been installed and are included in the revised Technical Specifications in Tables 3.3.3-1, 3.3.3-2 and 4.3.3-1.
No further action is required.
4
- -Identity of coment in EG&G Draft Report if'.
...