ML20112G667: Difference between revisions

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(StriderTol Bot insert)
 
(StriderTol Bot change)
 
Line 14: Line 14:
| document type = CORRESPONDENCE-LETTERS, INCOMING CORRESPONDENCE, UTILITY TO NRC
| document type = CORRESPONDENCE-LETTERS, INCOMING CORRESPONDENCE, UTILITY TO NRC
| page count = 2
| page count = 2
| project = TAC:42527
| stage = Other
}}
}}


Line 29: Line 31:
==REFERENCES:==
==REFERENCES:==
1)PSCletterdatedMay 17, 1983 Lee to Collins (P-83178)
1)PSCletterdatedMay 17, 1983 Lee to Collins (P-83178)
: 2) PSC letter dated March 9, 1984 Brey to Collins (P-84079)
: 2) PSC {{letter dated|date=March 9, 1984|text=letter dated March 9, 1984}} Brey to Collins (P-84079)


==Dear Mr. Johnson:==
==Dear Mr. Johnson:==


This letter is to advise you of our efforts to environmentally qualify certain Post Accident Monitoring (PAM) equipment as required by 10CFR50.49 paragraph b(3). PSC had previously made a commitment, in our May 17, 1983 letter (Ref. 1, above), to have all PAM equipment qualified by December 31, 1984. That date was based on the submittal of a Reg. Guide 1.97 report to the NRC by August 31, 1984.
This letter is to advise you of our efforts to environmentally qualify certain Post Accident Monitoring (PAM) equipment as required by 10CFR50.49 paragraph b(3). PSC had previously made a commitment, in our {{letter dated|date=May 17, 1983|text=May 17, 1983 letter}} (Ref. 1, above), to have all PAM equipment qualified by December 31, 1984. That date was based on the submittal of a Reg. Guide 1.97 report to the NRC by August 31, 1984.
In our March 9, 1984 letter (Ref. 2), PSC informed the NRC that, due to delays in the NRC on-site Safety Parameter Display System (SPDS) pre-implementation review, we could not protide a RG 1.97 reoort by August 31, 1984. Consequently, the submittal date for the report was revised to February 28, 1985.
In our {{letter dated|date=March 9, 1984|text=March 9, 1984 letter}} (Ref. 2), PSC informed the NRC that, due to delays in the NRC on-site Safety Parameter Display System (SPDS) pre-implementation review, we could not protide a RG 1.97 reoort by August 31, 1984. Consequently, the submittal date for the report was revised to February 28, 1985.
We have just compiled a preliminary list of our PAM parameters.
We have just compiled a preliminary list of our PAM parameters.
Although a review of this preliminary list indicates that our existing PAM instrumentation is qualified, we will be unable to establish full qualification until our final list is prepared.
Although a review of this preliminary list indicates that our existing PAM instrumentation is qualified, we will be unable to establish full qualification until our final list is prepared.

Latest revision as of 11:13, 23 September 2022

Informs of Efforts to Environmentally Qualify Certain post-accident Monitoring Equipment Per 10CFR50.49.Equipment Identified in Reg Guide 1.97 & Existing in Harsh Environ Will Be Qualified by 850331
ML20112G667
Person / Time
Site: Fort Saint Vrain Xcel Energy icon.png
Issue date: 12/27/1984
From: Lee O
PUBLIC SERVICE CO. OF COLORADO
To: Johnson E
NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV)
References
RTR-REGGD-01.097, RTR-REGGD-1.097 P-84527, TAC-42527, NUDOCS 8501160472
Download: ML20112G667 (2)


Text

.

n PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY OF COLORADO P. O. B O X 840

  • OENVER. COLORADO 80200 OSCAR R. I.EE December 27, 1984 wec ==.iocar Fort St. Vrain Unit No. 1 P-84527 f O$ (6 fi4 0 Win %

Regional Administrator Region lv JAN - T 1985 U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Connission y 2

611 Ryan Plaza Drive, Suite 1000 .

Arlington, Texas 76012 Attn: Mr. E. H. Johnson

SUBJECT:

10CFR50.49 Environmental Qualification of Post Accident Monitoring Equipment .

REFERENCES:

1)PSCletterdatedMay 17, 1983 Lee to Collins (P-83178)

2) PSC letter dated March 9, 1984 Brey to Collins (P-84079)

Dear Mr. Johnson:

This letter is to advise you of our efforts to environmentally qualify certain Post Accident Monitoring (PAM) equipment as required by 10CFR50.49 paragraph b(3). PSC had previously made a commitment, in our May 17, 1983 letter (Ref. 1, above), to have all PAM equipment qualified by December 31, 1984. That date was based on the submittal of a Reg. Guide 1.97 report to the NRC by August 31, 1984.

In our March 9, 1984 letter (Ref. 2), PSC informed the NRC that, due to delays in the NRC on-site Safety Parameter Display System (SPDS) pre-implementation review, we could not protide a RG 1.97 reoort by August 31, 1984. Consequently, the submittal date for the report was revised to February 28, 1985.

We have just compiled a preliminary list of our PAM parameters.

Although a review of this preliminary list indicates that our existing PAM instrumentation is qualified, we will be unable to establish full qualification until our final list is prepared.

hO OY etrou>ocevaL lR818882ggfgg ro RW 9_-

l I'

P-84527 Page 2 i . ,

Therefore, we wish to revise our PAM equipment qualification schedule as follows: l l 1) Equipment identified in our RG 1.97 report, that currently ,

exists in harsh environments, will be qualified by March 31, 1985, as required by 10CFR50.49 paragraph g.

I 2)' Equipment required for Post Accident Monitoring that does not presently exist, will be qualified in accordance with

10CFR50.49, as it applies to an HTGR, prior to its installation at FSV.

$ If any questions concerning this matter should arise, please contact Mr. J. R. Reesy at (303) 571-8406.

Very truly yours, i

hhh

0. R. Lee, Vice President Electric Production

! ORL/SM:pa 1

l

~

I 4

f I

l h

1 1

4