ML20211D128
| ML20211D128 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Hatch  |
| Issue date: | 10/15/1986 |
| From: | Gucwa L GEORGIA POWER CO. |
| To: | Muller D Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| SL-1402, TAC-62029, NUDOCS 8610220112 | |
| Download: ML20211D128 (5) | |
Text
- - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - _ _
e Georg!a Power Company 333 Piedmont Avenue Atlanta. Georgia 30308 Telephore 404 526 6526 Maling AdSess:
Post Off.ce Box 4545 s
Atf anta, Georgia 30302 g
Georgia Power L T. Gucws to mot' em en t. L system Manager Nuclear Safety and Licensing SL-1402 0800C October 15, 1986 Director of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Attention:
Mr.
D.
Muller, Project Director BWR Project Directorate No. 2 Division of Boiling Water Reactor Licensing U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.
20555 NRC DOCKET 50-366 OPERATING LICENSE NPF-5 EDWIN I.
HATCH NUCLEAR PLANT UNIT 2 ADDITIONAL INFORMATION RELATIVE TO ANALOG TRANSMITTER TRIP SYSTEM INSTRUMENTS Gentlemen:
On September 30, 1986, Mr.
G. R.
Rivenbark of your office requested that Georgia Power Company provide the NRC with certain additional information relative to our July 18, 1986, submittal, " Request to Revise Setpoints for Certain Analog Transmitter Trip System Instruments."
Enclosed please find the requested information.
If you have questions in this regard, please contact this office at any time.
Sincerely, L. T. Gucwa JDH/ac Enclosures 1 and 2 c: Georgia Power Company U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission Mr.
J.
P.
O'Reilly Dr. J.
N.
Grace, Regional Administrator Mr. J. T. Beckham, Jr.
Mr.
P.
Holmes-Ray, Senior Resident GO-NORMS Inspector-Hatch 0
8610220112 861015 hdg PDR ADOCK 05000366
\\
P PDR
f ENCLOSURE 1 l
i NRC DOCKET 50-366 OPERATING ~ LICENSE NPF-5 EDWIN I. HATCH NUCLEAR PLANT UNIT 2 ADDITIONAL INFORMATION RELATIVE TO ANALOG TRANSMITTER TRIP SYSTEM INSTRUMENTS Ouestion 1:
Is the information provided in the June 7, 1984, submittal to the NRC on the Analog Transmitter Trip System still accurate regarding setpoint methodology?
Pesponse:
The information provided in Georgia Power Company's (GPC) June 7,
- 1984, submittal to the NRC regarding setpoint methodology as it relates to GPC Letter SL-978, dated July 18, 1986, (Request to Revise Setpoints for Certain Analog Transmitter Trip System. Instruments) is still accurate, with the following clarifications:
Question No. Indicated in June 1984 GPC Submittal Clarification 1-8 GPC's June 7, 1984, submittal to the NRC stated:
Unless otherwise noted in our submittal, ~ the analytical limit used in our setpoint calculations were the original analytical limits used in the HNP safety analysis.
This statement is still accurate, with the exception of a new analytical limit which was proposed to the NRC in GPC Letter SL-978, dated July 18,.1986.
1-11 GPC's' June 7, 1984, submittal to the NRC stated:
For Rosemount transmitter appli-
- cations, an evaluation was performed which allowed exclusion of the radiation harsh environment effects.
At that time, only a few Rosemount transmitters were installed.
For the majority of current 0800C El-1 10/15/86
ENCLOSURE 1 ADDITIONAL INFORMATION RELATIVE TO ANALOG TRANSMITTER TRIP SYSTEM INSTRUMENTS Rosemount applications, the setpoint calcula-tions included consideration of the radiation and static pressure effects.
These effects were included in the calculations, or evaluations were performed to allow this exclusion in accordance with our June 1984 submittal.
1-12 Same clarification as Question 1-11.
'l-13 The response to Question 1-13 only covers Barton transmitters.
No -extrapolations of the Rosemount data were necessary to generate the setpoints.
Question 2:
How were the comparisons made' between the Barton and Rosemount
' transmitters in order to generate a composite allowable value and trip setpoint?
Response
To calculate composite values, GPC took the following steps:
a.
The Rosemount allowable and trip setpoint values were calculated from the analytical limit, using the methodology previously approved by the NRC in Amendment 39 to the Unit 2 Technical Specifications.
(The Barton. allowable and trip setpoint values already-existed from previous calculations.)
b.
The differences between the analytical limit and the calculated allowable value for the Rosemount and Barton transmitters were compared.
(Reference Enclosure 1.)
The greater difference was selected, and by using the gtrater difference, the composite allowable value was calculated as the analytical limit, plus or minus (whichever is applicable) the greater difference.
In cases j
where-Technical Specifications changes were
- required, the Rosemount transmitters exhibited the greater difference between the analytical limit and the calculated allowable value.
t i
i i
0800C-El-2 10/15/86 i
ENCLOSURE 1 ADDITIONAL INFORMATION RELATIVE TO ANALOG TRANSMITTER TRIP SYSTEM INSTRUMENTS c.
The differences between the calculated allowable value and the calculated trip setpoint for both the Rosemount and Barton transmitters were compared.
The greater difference was selected, and by using the greater difference, the trip setpoint was calculated as the composite allowable value, plus or minus (whichever is applicable) the greater difference.
4 9
I i
l 0800C El-3 10/15/86
ENCLOSURE 2 E6 METHODOLOGY FOR CALCULATING COMPOSITE TRANSMITTER VALUES CASE FOR R, > B, = Bd> d
( Existing Barton
( Replacement Rosemount
( Composite Analytical Limit Transmitter Transmitter Transmitter Values B<
i R<
R '<
i i
Barton Allowable Composite Allowable Value -
f Value Romunt Proposed Technical
(
AhwaNe
(
Specifications Value y,,,,
B<
d R<
d B<
Rosemount d
(
Barton Trip
(
Trip Setpoint int
(
Composite Trip Setpoint LEGEND B - Barton inaccuracies Bd-Barton drift + leave-alone range y
N Ri-Rosemount inaccuracies D
m d-Rosemount drift + leave-along range R
_