ML17139D250
| ML17139D250 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Susquehanna  |
| Issue date: | 10/22/1985 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML17139D247 | List: |
| References | |
| GL-83-28, NUDOCS 8510280428 | |
| Download: ML17139D250 (2) | |
Text
~
~
Fnclosur e 2
SAFETY EVALUATION REPORT GENERIC L
R 83-8, I
E S
.1.3, 3.2.3 S-IN NN I
G R
NN LL F
L SUS UHNN S
L RI T2 N.
-3 INTRODUCTION AND
SUMMARY
Generic Letter 83-28 describes intermediate term actions to be taken by 1
licensees and applicants to address the generic issues raised by the two ATWS events that occurred at Unit 1 of Salem Nuclear Power Plant.
This report is an evaluation of the responses submitted by Pennsylvania Power and Light Company, the licensee for the Susquehanna Steam Electric Station, Unit 2 for Items 3. 1.3 and 3.2.3 of the Generic Letter.
The actual documents reviewed as part of this evaluation are listed in the references at the end of this report.
The requirements for these two items are identical with the exception that Item 3.1.3 applies these requirements to the Reactor Trip System components and Item 3.2.3 applies them to all other safety-related components.
Because of this similarity, the responses to both items were evaluated together.
RE UIREMENT Licensees and applicants shall identify, if applicable, any post-maintenance test requirements in existing Technical Specifications which can be demonstrated to degrade rather than enhance safety.
Appropriate changes to these test re-quirements, with supporting justification, shall be submitted for staff approval.
E
85 i0280429" 85i022 PDR
- DOCK 0500D387 P
PDR EVALUATION The licensee for the Susquehanna Steam Electric Station, Unit 2 responded to these requirements with a submittal dated November 4, 1983 The licensee 2
stated in this submittal that there were no post-maintenance testing require-ments in Technical Specifications for either reactor trip system or other safety-related components which degraded safety.
CONCLUSION Based on the licensee's statement that no post-maintenance test requirements were found in Technical Specifications that degraded
- safety, we find the licensee's responses acceptable for Items 3. 1.3 and ).2.3 of Generic Letter 83-28.
REFERENCES 1.
NRC Letter, D.
G. Eisenhut to all Licensees of Operating
- Reactors, Applicants for Operating License, and Holders of Construction Permits, "Required Actions Based on Generic Implications of Salem ATWS Events (Generic Letter 83-28)," July 8, 1983.
2.
Pennsylvania Power 5 Light Company letter to NRC, N.
W. Curtis to D.
G. Eisenhut, Director, Division of Licensing, NRC, "Susquehanna Steam Electric Station,
Response
to Generic Letter 83-28, ER 100450/100508 File 841-2, PLA-1827," November 4, 1983.