ML20138M277

Conformance to Generic Ltr 83-28,Items 3.1.3 & 3.2.3,Big Rock Point Plant

ML20138M277
Person / Time
Site:	Big Rock Point File:Consumers Energy icon.png
Issue date:	10/31/1985
From:	Haroldsen R, Vanderbeek R EG&G IDAHO, INC.
To:	NRC
Shared Package
ML20136D104	List: ML20136D100 ML20136D145 ML20138M277
References
CON-FIN-D-6001 EA-6906, GL-83-28, TAC-52981, TAC-53819, NUDOCS 8511010053
Download: ML20138M277 (7)

Text

.

p .

. ATTACHMENT L

o L

i CONFORMANCE TO GENERIC LETTER 83-28 ITEMS 3.1.3 AND 3.2.3 .

[ BIG ROCK POINT PLANT

[.;. yzy .. . '.

~

.{ ~

i R. VanderBeek ..

R. Haroldsen -

EA - cf06 j Published October 1985

! EG&G Idaho, Inc. ,;

Idaho Falls, Idaho 83415 -

Prepared for the Nuclear Regulatory Commission '

Washington, D.C. 20555 Under DOE Contract No. DE-AC07-761001570 '

FIN No. 06001 0

1re

r. .

ABSTRACT This EG&G Idaho, Inc, report provides a review of the submittals from the Big Rock Point Plant for conformance to Generic Letter A3-28, items 3.1.3 and 3.2.3.

FOREWORD I,his report is supplied as part of the program for evaluating

, egg 71.icensee/ applicant conformance to Generic Letter 83-28 " Required Actions

' ~

based on Generic Implications of Salem ATWS fvents." This work is conducted for the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, Division of System Integration by EG6G 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.

.1 .

n Docket No. 50-155 TAC Nos. 52981 and 53819 11

m. . . . . . . . - _ . . . . . . _ _ _ . . . _ _ _ _ . _ . . . . . . . .

l CONTENTS ABSTRACT ...........................................,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, gj e

F OR E WO R D . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , gj

i. 1. INTRODUCTION ..............................'....,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, j

2. REVIEli REQUIREMENTS .............................................. 2

. 3. REVIEW RE SULTS FOR BIG ROCK POINT PLANT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

. 3.1 Evaluation .................... ........................'.... 3 i 3.2 ' Conclusion ................................................. 3

. 4. REFERENCES ......................................................, 4 r

r he

• Q:: . ., ~ .

l . -~- . _ .

m E

• t t

[

A L

~

i t

111

(

l

CONFORMANCE TO GENERIC LETTER 83-28 ITEMS 3.1.3 AND 3.2.3 BIG ROCK P0 INT PLANT e

l. INTRODUCTION 1 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, applicants 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, 4

' Geneti c Implications of ATWS Events at the Salem Nuclear Power Plant".2 I5?C"" This report documents the EG&G Idaho, Inc. review of the submittals ,

from the Big Rock Point Plant for conformance to items 3.1.3 and 3.2.3 of

~ '

Generic Letter 83-28. The submittals and other documents utilized in this evaluation,are referenced in section 4 of this report.

i:

o 1

( .

1

w . . - - . __

2. REVIEW REOUIREMENTS Item 3.1.3(Post-MaintenanceTestingofReactorTripSystem 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 submittals from the Big Rock Point Plant were reviewed to dstermine compliance with items 3.1.3 and 3.2.3 of the Generic Letter.

g First,tpsubmittalsfromthisplantwerereviewedtodeterminethatthese  ;.

7 wo ittes were specifically addressed. 'Second,-the submittals were 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 submittals were reviewed for evidence of special conditions or other significant information relating to the two items of

Concern.

b- The BWR Owners Group is presently addressing the Generic Letter 81-28 h item 4.5.33which is expected to result in proposed changes to the f technical specification requirements for surveillance testing frequency and .

out-of-service intervals for surveillance testing. The primary concern of item 4.5.3 is the surveillance tecting intervals. Items 3.1.3'and 3.2.3 -

are specifically directed at post-maintenance test requirements. These

~ c ncerns are essentially independent. However, the evaluations of these concerns are coordinated so that any correlation between these concerns will be adequately considered. Since no specific proposal to change the

- te'hnical c specifications have been proposed, there is no identifiable need at this time for correlating the reviews of item 4.5.3 with this review.

• 9 2

e .

3. REVIEW RESULTS FOR BIG ROCK POINT PLANT 3.1 Evaluation F

Consumer Power Company, the licensee for the Big Rock Point Plant, i provided responses to items 3.1.3 and 3.2.3 of Generic Letter 83-28 n November 7, 1983 February 2. 1984. October 2. 1984_, and_- '

$4 d ,

August 16, 1985. 6 the August 16, 1985 submittal the licensee states # asp >O B#'

ON ,

that a review of test and maintenance programs has not identified any 3't. 5 n

• post-maintenance testing required by the. Plant Technical Specifications that degrade rather than enhance safety.

3.2 Conclusion 5 .

p+. .. _ The licensee's responses to items 3.1.32nd 3.2.3 meet the .

requirements of the Generic Letter and are acceptable.

?

l .

i .

O o

+

v 3

I' -

, 4. REFERENCES

. 1 '.' NRC Letter, D. G. Eisenhut to all Licensees of Operating Reactors, Applicants for Operating License, and Holders of Construction Permits. .

W " Required Actions Based on Generic Implications of Salem ATWS Events j' (Generic Letter 83-28)", July 8, 1983.

2. Generic Implications of ATWS Events at the Salem Nuclear Power Plant, NUHt0-1000, Volume 1. April 1983; Volume 2, July 1083.

3. BWR Owners' Group Responses to NRC Generic Letter 83-28, Item 4.5.3, General Electric Company Proprietary Information, NEDC-30844,

,' January 1985.

• l'

A. Consumers Power Company letter to NRC, D. J. VandeWalle to

'D. G. Eisenhut, Director, Division of Licensing, NRC, " Docket

'- No. 50-155, License DPR-06--Big Rock Pcint Plant--Response to Generic

~li Letter.83-28, Required Actions Based on Generic Implications of Salem

ATWS Events," November 7, 1983.

}

fr,

5..~.ConSumersPowerCompanylettertoNRC,R.M.Krichto

' ~'

D. M. Crutchfield, Chief, Operating Reactors Branch No. 5, NRR, NRC, i " Docket 50-155--License DPR-6--Big Rock Point Plant--Integrated ~ :;

i Assessment of Open Issues and Completion Dates for Issue Resolution

. (Including Inte Report--Issues)gratedPlantSafetyAssessmentReportNUREG-0828--Dra,ft

--Revision 1," February 2, 1984. -

r 6. Consumers Power Company letter to NRC, J. L. Kuemin to Director,

- Nuclear Reactor Regulation, NRC, " Docket 50-155, License DPR-6--Big Rock Point Plant--Integrated Assessment of Open Issues Number 99 and 101," October 2, 1984.

e

ka 7.- Consumers Power Company letter to NRC, R. R. Frisch to Director,

[{ - Nuclear Reactor Regulation, NRC, " Docket 50-155-License DPR-6-Big Rock

Point Plant--Response to Requests for Additional Information on Generic Letter 83 28," August 16, 1985.

• b D- e

• I ju .

t

. e i *

- =

.: 0

~,

.C,.,:.- ,_ .. . .,.

.....,. ,-. _ . . ..,.,......;..,:..,.. . _ __ . . . ;._ ._ _ _ _ , _