ML20238E652

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

ML20238E652
Person / Time
Site:	Palisades, 05000000
Issue date:	09/30/1978
From:	Ziemann D Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:	Bixel D CONSUMERS ENERGY CO. (FORMERLY CONSUMERS POWER CO.)
Shared Package
ML20238E606	List: ML20238E604 ML20238E644 ML20238E652 ML20238E697 ML20238E702
References
TAC-7089, NUDOCS 8709150124
Download: ML20238E652 (2)

Text

.

.1 1

j H}/

DISTRIBUTION:

Docket File

.TJCarter flRC PDR

_ Gray File [0RB#2) l/

L PDR

.JBurdoin

/&

Dechet ta.:

60 4 S5 ORBf4 Rdg

.DTondi p

RIngram

. _Glainas f

RReid ELConner

{

RSilver i

Consuners Power Concany Attorney, OELD I

?

ATTH:

"r. David Dixel DZiemann

{

l Nuclear Licensing Atininistrator HSmith j

212 West fiichigan Avenue OI&E (3) 1 I

Jaci. son, "ichigan 49201 DEisenhut J

TERA, DSB r,entl eoen:

ACRS (16)

JRBuchanan On August 2,1978, representatives from utilitics ur.ing Connustion i

Engineering (CE) HSSS and froo CE net in Bethesda, fiaryland to I

discuss the action requirements in the event of Reactor P7tection Systen (RPS) channel inoperability. Enclosure 1 is the ninutes of this necting. The aceting was held to clarify our position on this subject as presented in our letter dated January 18, 1978 and to gain an understanding of your position as indicated in your response dated March 21, 1978.

This same subject had been discussed pre-vlously on March 16, 1976.

In our previous correspondence, we requested that you subnlt an appli-cation for license anendment to change the Palisados Technical Specifications (TS) Section 3.17 to require inoperable RPS channels to be placed in the " tripped" status within one hour af ter being declared inoperable. We further stated that you coula request that i

ve undertate a specific facility review of your RPS to determine the suitability of operating the RPS in a two-out-of-three logic.

Your response requested such a specific facility RPS review ana we propcse that the Palisoces RPS review be scheduled sfor this nonth.

The exact date will oc coordinated through your Operating Reactor Branch Project Manager (ORPH). Enclosure 2 'is the RPS review itens I

that will be nf interest to our review tem.

)

i J

l As you know, our staf f has conducted the RPS review at the Calvert Clif f s and St. Lucie units. A copy of the resultant Safety Evaluation j

for St. Lucie, presenting the finding of the RP$ review (pages 3 to f>),

j is provided for your infor"ation es Enclosure 3.

Our conclusion was I

1

)

8709150124 780910 PDR ADOCK 05000255 P

PDR

/

h

L 1

ic6

'Consuners' Power Company-

- 2'-

, that~ allowing indefinite bypass of one of the tour RPS is not justified,'but since-the four channel CE system does have sone l

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 is justified.

As an alternative to the onsite liRC review of your RPS, we will consider-issuance of the Calvert Cliffs and St. Lucie. type TS of your RPS if you provide an application including documentation i

of your RPS similarity to tNse.cf Calvert Cliffs and St. Lucie. Any such application should be submitted within 30 days of the date of this letter.

Si ncerely, Dennis L. Ziemann, Chief Operating Reactors Branch #2 Division of' Operating Reactors

.Enlosures:

1.

ficeting Sunmary 2.

Review Iteo 3.

Safety Evaluation cc w/ enclosures: See next page l

l 4

l l

l l

l i

I, l1

.i i

'I 1

ORBf4:00R ORBf2:00R C-PSS: DOR..

C-0RB#2:00R AD-ESP:00R _

C-0RBf4: DOR ELConner:rf RSilver Glainas DZiemann.

BGrimes.

RReid

{

~

9/ /78 9/ /78 9/ /78.

9/ /78 9/./78 9/ /78 l

r"

]

e