ML18092A963
| ML18092A963 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Salem  |
| Issue date: | 12/06/1985 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML18092A962 | List: |
| References | |
| GL-83-28, NUDOCS 8601020515 | |
| Download: ML18092A963 (3) | |
Text
UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 ENCLOSURE 1 SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION RELATED To GENERIC LETTER 83-28, ITEMS 3.1.3 ANO 3.2.3 POST-MAINTENANCE TESTING( RTS COMPONENTS, ALL OTHER SAFETY-RELATED COMPONENTS)
SALEM NUCLEAR GENERATION STATION, UNIT Nos. 1 AND 2 DOCKET NOS. 5o-272 AND 50-311 INTRODUCTION AND
SUMMARY
Generic Letter 83-281 describes intennediate tenn actions to be taken by 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 Public Service Electric and Gas Company, the licensee for the Salem Nuclear Generating Station, Units 1,2 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.
REQUIREMENT 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. 186oi02o515 851216 ;
\\
PPDR ADOCK 05000272 PDR EVALUATION The licensee for the Salem Nuclear Generating Station, Units 1,2 responded to these requirements with a submittals dated July 22, 19832, November 7, 19833, and September 20, 19854* The licensee stated in these submittals that there were no post-maintenance testing requirements 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 3.2.3 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.
Letter, E. A. Liden, Public Service Electric and Gas Co. to S. A. Varga, NRC, July 22, 1983.
...... REFERENCES (CONT.)
- 3, Letter, E. A. L;den, Publ;c Serv;ce Electr;c and Gas Co. to S. A. Varga, NRC, November 7, 1983.
- 4.
Letter, C. A. McNeill, Jr., Public Serv;ce Electr;c and Gas Co. to S. A. Varga, NRC, September 20, 1985.
PRINCIPAL CONTRIBUTOR:
- D. Lasher Dated: December 6, 1985