ML20196B856
| ML20196B856 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Trojan File:Portland General Electric icon.png |
| Issue date: | 12/02/1988 |
| From: | Cockfield D PORTLAND GENERAL ELECTRIC CO. |
| To: | NRC OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATION & RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (ARM) |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8812070066 | |
| Download: ML20196B856 (2) | |
Text
_
C M
M W W M cot 14mf David W. Cockheid Vice President, Nuclear December 2, 1988 Trojan Nuclear plant Docket 50-344 License NPF-1 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission ATTN Document Control Desk Washington, DC 20555 Dear Sirst Installation of "Anticipated Transient Without Scram (ATWS) Mitigating System Actuation Circuitry (AMSAC)"
In our letter of October 29, 1986, portland General Electric (PGE) commit-ted to installation of the AMSAC by the end of the 1989 refueling outage (approximately July 1989). That commitment was based on vendor selection in early-to mid-1908. Although vendor selection was made in early 1988, and was based in part on the ability to meet the required schedule, the vendor has not, to-date, supplied the necessary design information to allow the construction schedule to be met.
Therefore, an extension of the commit-ment date is needed for installation of AMSAC. PGE proposes to complete installation of AMSAC during the 1990 refueling outage (approximately July 1990).
The reasons for this extension are as follows:
1.
The vendor has not been able to deliver drawings that demonstrate a workable system.
The vendor has made two functional drawing submittals (September 21, 1988 and November 4, 1988) and,both have been rejected.
The f roblem apparently arises from a lack of understanding by the vendor of the PGE specification and AMSAC requirements.
The lack of a clear understanding of the functional requirements has af fected the vendor's ability to submit the other drawings that are required for the design packages. The connection drawings, for example, have slipped from September 12, 1988 to October 10, 1988 to beyond December 1988.
The lack of acceptable design information seriously affects the ability to develop and provide the necessary Design Change Packages (DCPs) to the onsite modifications group for proper resource and job planning.
Experience has shown that DCPs completed after December 15, of the year preceding the refueling outage, seriously impact outage planning, normally require a large number of changes to be made in the field, and generally have a negative impact upon the outage schedule, h207006688102
$ff
/
ADOCK 03 coo 344 p
j llp PDC
..-.. _, ~
Portisuici W BectricCortiumiy Document Control Desk December 2, 1988 Pane 2 2.
The vendor has informed PCE that the sof tware for the AMSAC system has not been totally developed at this date.
This problem in itself has caused the vendor to slip the delivery schedule by almost a month.
A verification with other companies using similar equipment has also shown initial software problems. This problem could jeopardize the functional capability of AMSAC. Additional time is needed for the vendor to develop workable software and to perform system checkouts before final Plant installation and operation.
PCE has attempted to resolve the delivery difficulties with the AMSAC vendor but with little success. As a result, a schedule extension of one year is requested.
Although AMSAC is intended to enhance safety, it is felt that extending the implementation schedule an additional year is justified by the demonstrated reliability of the Trojan Reactor Protection System.
In the interim, PCE will continue to rely upon operator action as specified in Functional Restoration Instruction (FR) S.1, Response to Nuclear Power Generation / Anticipated Transient Without Scram.
Sincerely.
CP Au-et Mr. John B. Martin Regional Administrator, Region V U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Mr. William T. Dixon State of Oregon Department of Energy Mr. R. C. Barr NRC Resident Inspector Trojan Nuclear Plant