ML18149A193
| ML18149A193 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Surry  |
| Issue date: | 06/19/1986 |
| From: | NRC |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML18149A192 | List: |
| References | |
| GL-83-28, NUDOCS 8606250565 | |
| Download: ML18149A193 (2) | |
Text
e e
SUPPLEMENTAL SAFETY EVALUATION REPORT SORRY POWER STATION, UNITS 1 AND 2 GENERIC LETTER 83-28, ITEM 4.3 REACTOR TRIP SYSTEM RELIABILITY AUTOMATIC ACTUATION OF SHONT TRIP INTRODUCTION AND
SUMMARY
ENCLOSURE Generic Letter 83-28 was issued by NRC on July 8, 1983, indicating actions to be taken by licensees based on the generic implication of the Salem ATWS events.
Item 4.3 of the generic letter requires that modifications be made to improve the reliability of the reactor trip system by implementation of an automatic actuation of the shunt attachment on the reactor trip breakers.
Subsequent to the review of the licensee's submittal of November 4, 1983, the staff issued a safety evaluation report on November 15, 1984, indicating the acceptable and unacceptable aspects of the design and requested the licensee to submit additional information for the staff's approval.
By letters dated April 1, September 9, October 7, October 31, and December 30, 1985, the licensee submitted additional information.
The staff has reviewed this information, except for the proposed technical specifications, and finds it acceptable.
The proposed technical specifications will be evaluated separately.
EVALUATION The licensee stated that Westinghouse had performed both environmental and seismic testing of the DB-50 Shunt Trip attachments and the Auto Shunt Trip Panels in accordance with WCAP-8587 and the results of these tests qualified the equipment in accordance with IEEE-323-1974 and IEEE-344-1975 as specified in WCAP-8587.
-~----
. PDR Aoot,~ 860619 p
~ osooo2so PDR
~ -----
~
a.- Upon review of this information, the licensee concluded that the shunt trip attachment and automatic shunt trip panel are seismically qualified for use at the Surry Power Station. The staff, therefore, considers this issue to be satisfactorily resolved.
The licensee submitted schematic wiring diagrams for staff review of the breaker indicating lights on the main control boards for the reactor trip and bypass breakers. A closed breaker will be indicated by a red light, an open breaker by a green 1 i ght. Neither l i g_ht wi 11 be lit for a bypass breaker until it is racked into the operating position. Bypass breaker cell interlocks in series with breaker 11a 11 contacts will prevent both bypass breakers from being closed at the same time.
We find the design of the circuitry to the status indicating lights to be acceptable.
CONCLUSION All issues under Generic Letter 83-28, Item 4.3, have now been found acceptable by the staff except for the review of the proposed technical specifications which will be considered under a separate safety evaluation.
,('