ML20134A241
| ML20134A241 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | San Onofre  |
| Issue date: | 07/31/1985 |
| From: | Vanderbeek R EG&G, INC. |
| To: | NRC |
| Shared Package | |
| ML13324A698 | List: |
| References | |
| CON-FIN-D-6001 GL-83-28, NUDOCS 8508150239 | |
| Download: ML20134A241 (7) | |
Text
_, _ _ _
ENCLOSURE CONFORMANCE TO GENERIC LETTE'R 83-28 ITEMS 3.1.3 AND 3.2.3 SAN ONOFRE NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION UNIT NO. 1 R. VanderBeek Published July 1985 EG&G Idaho, Inc.
Prepared for the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission
'____'N Washington, D.C.
20555 s
h under DOE Contract No. DE-AC07-761001570 6fd /$d)dby '
FIN No. 06001 w.
4
ABSTRACT Tnis EG&G Idaho, Inc. report provides a review of the submittal from '
San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station Unit No. I fo-conformance to Generic Letter 83-28 Items 3.1.3 and 3.2.3.
FOREWORD This report is supplied as part of the program for evaluating licensee / applicant conformance to Generic Letter 83-28 " Required Actions based on Generic Implications of Salem ATWS Events." This work is being conducted for the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, Division of System Integration by EG&G Idaho, Inc., NRC Licensing Support Section.
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission funded the work under the authorization, B&R 20-19-19-11-3, FIN No. 06001.
Docket No. 50-206 TAC Nos. 53040 and 53879 11
CONTENTS ABSTRACT......................................................
11 FOREWORD......................................................
11 1.
INTRODUCTION.............................................
I 2.
REVIEW REQUIREPENTS......................................
2 3.
REVIEW RESULTS FOR SAN ONOFRE NGS UNIT NO. 1.............
3 3.1 Evaluation..........................................
3 3.2 Conclusion..........................................
3 4.
REFERENCES...............................................
4 iii
CONFORMANCE TO GENERIC LETTER 83-28 ITEMS 3.1.3 AND 3.2.3 SAN Uh0FRE NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION UNIT NO. 1 1.
INTRODUCTION I
On July 8,1983, Generic Letter No. 83-28 was issued by D. G. Eisenhut, Director of the Division of Licensing, Nuclear Reactor Regulation, to all licensees of operating reactors, ipplicants for operating licenses, and holders of construction permits. This letter included required actions based on generic implications of the Salem ATWS events. These requirements have been published in Volume 2 of NUREG-1000,
" Generic Implications of ATWS Events at the Salem Nuclear Power Plant".2 This report documents the EG&G Idaho, Inc. review of the submittal from San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station Unit No.1 for conformance to Items 3.1.3 and 3.2.3 of Generic Letter 83-28. The submittal and other documents utilized in these evaluations are referenced in Section 4 of this report.
O e
t 1
2.
REVIEW REQUIREMENTS Item 3.1.3 (Post-Maintenance Testing of Reactor Trip System Components) requires licensees and applicants to identify, if applicable, any post-maintenance test requirements for the reactor trip system (RTS) in existing technical specifications which can be demonstrated to degrade rather than enhance safety. Item 3.2.3 extends this same requirement to include all other safety-related components. Any proposed technical specification changes resulting from this action shall receive a pre-implementation review by NRC.
The relevant submittal from San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station Unit No. I was reviewed to determine compliance with Items 3.1.3 and 3.2.3 of the Generic Letter. First, the submittal was reviewed to determine that these two items were specifically addressed. Second, the submittal was checked to determine if there were any post-maintenance test items specified by the technical specifications that were suspected to degrade rather than enhance safety. Last, the submittal was reviewed for evidence of special conditions or other significant information relating to the two items of concern.
e e
2
3.
REVIEW RESULTS FOR SAN ONOFRE NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION UNIT N0.1 3.1 Evaluation Southern California Edison Company, the licensee for San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station Unit No.1, provioed responses to Items 3.1.3 and 3.2.3 of Generic Letter 83-28 on November 28, 1983.3 Within the responses, the licensee states that no post-maintenance testing requirements in the existing technical specifications have been demonstrated by experience to degrade rather than enhance safety.
3.2 Conclusion Based on the licensee's statement that no post-maintenance testing requirements with the technical specifications have been demonstrated by i
experience to degrade rather than enhance safety, we find the licensee's responses acceptable.
9 e
3
4.
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.
Generic Implications of ATWS Events at the Salem Nuclear Power Plant, NUREG-1000, Volume 1, April 1983; Volume 2 July 1983.
3.
Southern California Edison Company letter to NRC, M. O. Medford to D. M. Crutchfield, Chief,0perating Reactors Branch No. 5, NRC,
" Generic Letter 83-28: Required Actions Based on Generic Implications of Salem ATWS Events, San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station Unit 1",
Noverter 28, 1983.
l t
e 4