ML20210B841

Response to Sapl Interrogatories Requesting Listed Documents Re SPDS

ML20210B841
Person / Time
Site:	Seabrook
Issue date:	09/12/1986
From:	Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel
To:
Shared Package
ML20210B791	List: ML20210B785 ML20210B841
References
OL, NUDOCS 8609180184
Download: ML20210B841 (10)

Text

~ ^

j 09/12/86

• DOCHETED U9E UNITED STATES OF AMERICA -

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION '86 SEP 17 A10:25 BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD [rf,((,{ [M w/c1 In the Matter of ) -

)

PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY OF ) Docket Nos. 50-443 OL-1 NEW liAMPSHIRE, et ~~

al. ) 50-444 OL-1

) On-site Emergency Planning '

(Seabrcok Station, Units 1 and 2) ) and Safety Issues 150 STAFF RESIWSE #IO SAPL'S INIIRRIWIUlIES AND RH]UESTS ITE DOC 1h1ENIE RIrARDim SIYJ6 (1) List all documentary or other materials the NRC Staff nay a; ploy in this proceeding to support its position (s) with respect to this contention. In addition to listing such docunents and et!wr materials, provide a copy of all of than pursuant to 10 C.F.R.12.741.

Response

1. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Cmmission, NUREG-0737, "Clarificaticn of 'm11 Action Plan Requirensnts," Novmter 1980, Supplemnt 1, Deomt>er 1982.

2. U.S. Nuclear . Regulatory Comnission, NUIEG-0800, "Stanciard Review Plan for Ileview of Safety Analysis Enports for Nuclear Pom;' Plants," Sec.18.2, lisnan Factors Review Guidelines for the Safety Paramoter Diaplay Systan (SPDS), Rev.

O, Novmber 1981.

3. Verification and Validation for Safety Parameter Display Systens, NSAC/39, Science Applications, Inc., December 1981.

INDO -

'd'3 G

• 4. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Conmission,-NUREG-0700, " Guide 1ines for Control Roan Design Reviews," Septernber 1981.

5. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Carimission, Draft NUREG-0835, "Itsnan Factors ,

Acceptance Criteria for the Safety Parameter Display Systen."

6. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Conmission, NUREG-0696, "Rinctional Criteria for Bnergency Response Faci 1ities," February 1981.

7. NUREG-0896, Supplement No. 3, " Safety Evaluation Report, Seabrook Station, Lhits 1 and 2," July 1985.

8. NUREG-0896, Supplement No. 4, " Safety Evaluation Report, Seabrook Station, Units 1 and 2," May 1986.

9. Mi1! stone, thit 3, Operating License, NPF-49, January 31, 1986.

PSMI Letters - SBN-499 4/14/83 SN-920 1/6/86 SBN-948 2/20/86 EN-987 4/02/86 sN-1183 8/26/86 SN-1185 8/28/86 D0aMNTATKN EXM11NED DURING 'IllE SPDS AUDIT (Available onsite, not docketed)

3 PX09-7, Rev.1, '%1ain Plant Conputer Systen liardware Configuration Manual,"

January 24, 1986.

j PX09-1, Rev. O, " Main Plant Conputer Systen Ranctional Description," April 12, ,

1984.

DC M-510004, Rev 48, "Cmputer Input-Output Parts List," May 9,1986.

E-I-42, Rev.11, " General Test Procedure, Station Cmputer," October 31, 1984.

, GT-1-07, Rev.11. " General Test Procedure Indicating / Control Loops," Decenber 19, 1984.

C-I-101, Rev. O, " Main Plant Conputer Systen," May 12, 1983.

"Cmputer Program Test, Inventory Critical Safety Function Status Tree," Rev.

O, May 19, 1986.

"SPDS Inventory Critical Safety Rinction Status Tree Subroutine," Rev. O, May 20, 1986.

" Inventory Critical Safety Rinction Status Tree Program Description," Rev. O, May 19, 1986, i

"SPDS Functional Requirenents for Seabrook Unit 1 Main Plant Cmputer Software Development, Inventory Status " no revision or date.

. -4_

" Background Infonnation for Westinghouse Owners Group Bnergency Response Guidelines; Critical Safety Ebnction Status Tree FIO.6; Inventory," HP/LP-Rev.

1, Septerber 1, 1983.

Main Plant Conputer Progran Subroutine, (Engineering Units Conversion).

Shin Plant Cmputer Program Subroutine, (data checks against reasonableness limits).

"New lianpshire Yankee Nuclear Production Cmputer battol Progran Manual," Rev.

O, Decetter 24, 1985.

Test procedure, "SPD6 Graphics Test."

Seabrook Station General Test Procedure, 'IPI-62-IV1, Rev. 2, " Radiation Monitoring Systen and Adjacent-to-Line Radiation abnitors."

" Gulf General Atanic Model IN-80, E-Il5-870 Microprocessor Software Design Documnt . "

PSMI SS#20110 IhE D05.05.01, Sec. 5 " Radiation Data Managanent Systen (IDE)

Link."

"Seabrook Station Energency Responso Facility Functional Description."

= (6) State with specificity the reasons why the staff believes that stack monitor and steun generator (or steamline) radiation need not be added to the Safety Parameter Display Systen (SPDS) until prior to restart following the first refueling outage.

i

Response

Stack monitor and steam generator radiation levels are already displayed on the Radiation Data Managenent Systen (IDE) display which is accessible in the main control room. The radiological control function incorporating these parameters in SPDS has not yet been inplemented.

(7) Does the staff hold that the period of operation prior to the first refueling outage is any safer than any other period of operation, and if so, upon what basis or bases?

Response

Insofar as the SPDS is concerned, the Staff has not considered the relative i

safety of one period of operation cartpared to another.

i ~

(8) State with specificity the reasons why the Draft License for Seabrook Station, NPF-56, holds that the following modifications should be included on the SPDS prior to restart following the first refueling outage. Provide the i stuff's reasons for requiring each of the 6 modifications listed below, treating each separately:

Response

SPDS is not required by NUREG-0737 as a precondition to licensing. The SPDS is a'summry display meant to bring together in one location the parameters describing the overall rafety status of the plant. All of the individual

• parameters are displayed elsewhere in the control room as part of the systen or functional display layout.

I. Continuous display of the top level critical safety function .

~

sunmary at the assigned SPDS control roan location.

Response I Ee Seabrook SPDS top level display and other conputer driven displays are accessible at any of seven Mr monitors in the control roan. Rus it is possible, at a given time, to select a series of seven displays on the monitors none of which would include the SPDS display. Although this allows for extrane L

flexibility of selection, it does not ensure that the NLREG-0737 requirement to continuously display safety status infonnation is met. SPDS is continuously accessible on the monitors, but it is not necessarily continuously displayed.

II. Addition of, or satisfactory justification for, not adding IUR

, flow and hydrogen concentration parameters to appropriate SPDS screens.

Response II NURIXi-0737, Supplanent i requires that the minimirn information sufficient to provide the operators infonnation about reactor core cooling and heat 3

renoval fran the primary system be provided. H e staff believes that this minimtzn infonnation includes RHR flow.

NUREG-0737, Supplanent i requires that the mininun infonnation sufficient to provide the operators infonnation about containnent conditions be provided.

) )

he staff believes that this mininun infonnation includes contairment hydrogen concentration.

III. Addition of a containnent isolation status screen on SPDS, or ,

inprovement to the current contairment isolation display to be ~

satisfactorily recognized fran the assigned SPDS location in the control roan.

Response III Although contairrnent isolation status is available in the control roan, it is not satisfactorily readable fran the assigned SPDS location as required by Supplanent 1 to NUREG-0737.

IV. Addition of a radiation monitoring screen to display at least steam generator (or steam line) and stack radiation, Response IV Radiological control is one function required to be included in SPDS, as specified by Supplanent I to NUREG-0737. He staff considers steam generator (or steamline) radiation and stack radiation to be the mininun status indicators of the radiological control function. We Radiation Data Managenent Systan provides a display, in the control roan, of radiation parameters, including steam generator and stack radiation. h ey are not yet provided on SPDS as part of a radiological control function.

I V. Inprovenent of the Heat Sink screen for consistency in labeling, l

and the Suberiticality screen for mode dependency so as not to mislead operators.

l

. Response V 1he standard label location for parameter values on the Seabrook SPDS is below each, decision block. One parameter value label on the Heat Sink screen , ~

is located above the block.

The suberiticality status is indicated in red (under extrane challenge) whenever reactor power exceeds 5%. Since plant mode is not used in the logic tree, this display will be red during nonnal power operation.

1 VI. Addition of approved isolation devices between the Reactor Vessel Level Instrunentation Systen (RVLIS) and SPDS.

Response VI

'Ihe RVLIS isolators (to protect RVLIS fran SPDS) have now been approved by the staff based on a test conducted by Westinghouse in August 1986.

(9) Name the person or persons who were responsible for deciding that the modifications listed in interrogatory 8 could be deferred and handled with license conditions and state when this decision was made.

Response

i

'1his recomnendation was principally made by Richard Eckenrode based on the l

onsite audit of May 20-21, 1986, and review of the contractor draft Technical Evaluation Report.

i I

i

o (15) List any other specific actions and/or requirements, if any, that the MC Staff is allowing Applicants to defer until the first refueling outage.

Response

" ~

insofar as'related to SPDS, the following actions are involved:

The GA IN-80 isolators will be replaced with non-fuse-dependent isolators.

The following open items must be resolved or the Applicants must demonstrate to the Staff's satisfaction that the open items will not degrade the performance of SPDS.

. Core cooling screen is no'. mode dependent.

. Data validation algorithns may not be sophisticated enough to ensure valid data are displayed.

Usefulness of lower level SPDS display format to the operator.

RVLIS and IDE availability not factored into overall SPDS calculations.

. System response tinn to worst conditions not verified.

. Display callup method is awkward.

o . Adequacy of contairrnent isolation display relative to primary SPDS location.

(21) State.whether or not the staff has reviewed the progran manual for the -

conputer systen methods of exchanging info 1Tnation relative to the SPD6.

If so, please state the staff's conclusions. If not, please state the staff's reasons for not having done so.

Response

The specific docunent referred to in the Interrogatory was not requested for review by the staff. The staff conducts an audit of the software docunentation, not a detailed review.- A full list of the docunents audited onsite is included in the rerponse to Interrogatory (1). Our consultants examined selected software docunentation for specific items. The method of transferring data was looked at as one iten and found to be satisfactory.

.