ML20238E644

Sumarizes 780802 Meeting W/Utils & C-E in Bethesda,Md Re Action Requirements in Event of Reactor Protection Sys Channel Inoperability.Meeting Held to Clarify NRC Position on Subj as Presented in .W/O Encls

ML20238E644
Person / Time
Site:	Palisades, Maine Yankee, 05000000
Issue date:	09/30/1978
From:	Reid R Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:	Groce R YANKEE ATOMIC ELECTRIC CO.
Shared Package
ML20238E606	List: ML20238E604 ML20238E644 ML20238E652 ML20238E697 ML20238E702
References
TAC-7089, NUDOCS 8709150119
Download: ML20238E644 (2)

Text

_ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ . _

4 p* *

{

DISTRIBUTION: . ..

Docket File .

,..Glainas -

NRC PDR DTondi l

L PDR . .JBurdoin _

Docket No.: 50-309 Rdg ,

L RIngram . . ,

CNelson , . _

ELConner . . ,

Yankee Atonic Electric Company r , OELD ., _ ,

ATTl4: Mr. Robert !!. Grace ' ~

Licensing Engineer DEisenhut - - -- i l

20 Turnpike Road ACRS (16)

Westboro,11 massachusetts 01581 ~

h nan ((

Gentlemen: UTJCarter , .

Gray File , , .,

On August 2,1978, representatives front utilities using Combustion Engineering (CE) NSSS and from CE met in bothesda, Maryland to discuss the action requirements in the event of Reactor Protection System ( APS) channel inoperability. Enclosure 1 is the ninutes of this necting. The r;;eeting was held to clarify our position on this subject as presented in our letter dated October 26, 1977 and to gain an understanding of your position as indicated in your response dated December 1,1977 This sane subject had been discussed pre-viously on liarch 16, 1976.

In our previous correspondence, we requested that you submit an 'applf-cation for license anendment to change the 11aine Yankee Technical Specifications (TS) Section 3.9 to require inoperaole RPS channels to be placed in the " tripped" status within one hour after being declared

/ inoperaDie. He further stated that you could request that we under-

! take a specific facility review of your RPS to determine the suitabil-i ity of operating the RPS in a two-out-of-three logic. Your response requested such a specific facility RPS review and we propose that the

!!aine Yankee RPS review be schedulndfor the month of October 1976.

The exact date will be coordinated through your Operating Reactor Branch Project lianager (ORPH). Enclosure 2 is the RPS review items that will be of interest to our review team.

As you know, our staff has conducted the RPS review at the Calvert Cliffs and St. Lucie units. A copy of the resultant Safety Evaluation for St. Lucie, presenting the finding of the RPS review (pages 3 to 5),

is provided for your infonsation as Enclosure 3. Our conclusion was I

i R AD K I  %,------

/ w=n Yankee'Atoaic Electric Co. that allowing indefinite bypass of one of -the four RPS is not 1

. justified,- butisince the four channel CE system does have some independence, bypassing for 48 hours5.555556e-4 days <br />0.0133 hours <br />7.936508e-5 weeks <br />1.8264e-5 months <br /> during testing or. maintenance of one RPS channel > 1s justified.

As an alternative to the onsite HRC review of your RPS, we will consider issuance of the Calvert Cliffs and St. Lucie type TS of y'our RPS'if you provide an application including documentation of Lyour RPS similarity to those of Calvert Cliffs and St. Lucio. Any ,

such . application should.be submitted within 45 days of the date of this letter.

Sincerely, Robert 11. Reid, Chief Operating Reactors Branch _ #4 Division of Operating Recctors Enlosures:

1. .Heeting Summary ,

2. Review Item-

3. Sa fety . Eva s ua tion 1 cc w/ enclosures: See next page t-e N

ORB #4:00R ORB #4: DOR C-PSB; DOR AD-E&P: DOR _C-0RBf4: DOR ELConner:rf CNelson Glainas _ DGrimes RReid _

9/ /78 9/ /78 9/ /78 9/./78 9/ /78 ,<<y.

t ,

i

)