ML25224A060
| ML25224A060 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Susquehanna  |
| Issue date: | 07/07/2025 |
| From: | Audrey Klett Plant Licensing Branch 1 |
| To: | Danni Smith Susquehanna |
| Klett A | |
| References | |
| EPID L-2025-LLA-0020 | |
| Download: ML25224A060 (1) | |
Text
From:
Audrey Klett To:
Smith, Derek Cc:
Thomas Buffone
Subject:
RE: Supplement to Audit Plan for SSES LAR L-2025-LLA-0020 Date:
Monday, July 7, 2025 2:29:00 PM Hi Derek, Below are additional audit questions from the review team regarding the subject audit:
Document EC-080-1012, Revisions 3 U1 L3 and L8, Section 4, part c, states [Full scale is the factory set range of switch calibration, equivalent to the indicator range =
0 - 60 water level. This would calculate to be 0.025*60 = 0.15]. It is mentioned in part c that the Switch Repeatability has an accuracy 0.25% full scale; however, the noted calculation is set for a Switch Repeatability of 2.5% which wouldnt match with the resulting calculation of 0.15. Does the Switch Repeatability have an accuracy of 0.25% or 2.5% full scale?
For Document EC-080-1012, Revisions 3 U1 L3 and L8, Section 6 describes the Process Measurement Accuracy (PMA). Part A in Section 6 states [PMA is defined in GE NEDC-31336 section 3.3.5]; however, the full paragraph stated in Section 6, part A matches the paragraph for Process Element Accuracy (PEA) in GE NEDC-31336 Section 3.3.5, Part 1, while Part 2 closely matches the definition for PMA. It is also noted in Document EC-080-1012 that the full paragraph stated in Section 7 for PEA matches the paragraph for PMA in GE NEDC-31336, Section 3.3.5, Part 2, while Part 1 closely matches the definition for PEA. The NRC staff requests the licensee to verify the reference callouts and confirm whether this affects the assumptions and uncertainties towards the results established by these definitions.
The NRC staff has the same requests (from Document EC-080-1012, Revision 3 U1 L3 and L8) for Document EC-080-1008, Revision 3 U1 L3 and L8.
The NRC staff requests the licensee to explain why it uses the drift data from a Unit 2 transmitter for the Unit 1 determinations (e.g., are the units have differing environmental conditions)? How much would process setpoints associated with individual units change if the calculations used a drift data set associated with a transmitter in that designated unit?
Audrey Klett, Senior Project Manager U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Division of Operating Reactor Licensing Plant Licensing Branch 1 301-415-0489