ML20138P606

SER Accepting Licensee Response to Items 3.1.3 & 3.2.3 of Generic Ltr 83-28.No post-maint Test Requirements Found in Tech Specs That Degraded Safety

ML20138P606
Person / Time
Site:	Rancho Seco, 05000000
Issue date:	10/09/1985
From:	Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:
Shared Package
ML20137S264	List: ML20137S257 ML20138P603 ML20138P606
References
GL-83-28, NUDOCS 8511070279
Download: ML20138P606 (2)

Text

-

l ENCLOSURE SAFETY EVALUATION REPORT GENERIC LETIER 83-28, ITEMS 3.1.3 AND 3.2.3 POST-MAINTENAhCE TESTING (RT5 COMPONENTS, ALL OTHER SAFETY-RELATED COMPONENTS)

RANCHO SECO NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION DOCKET NO. 50-312 INTRODUCTION AND

SUMMARY

Generic Letter 83-281 describes intermediate term 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 Sacramento Municipal Utilities District, the licensee for the Rancho Seco Nuclear Generating Station 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 referencessat the end of this report.

The requirements for these two items are identical with the exception that Item 3.1.3 app'l'ies 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 requirements, with supporting justification, shall be submitted for staf'f approval.

8511070279 851009 PDR ADOCK 05000312 P PDR

EVALUATION The licensee for the Rancho Seco Nuclear Generating Station responded to these 2

requirements with a subnittal dated May 23, 1985 . The licensee stated that there were no post-maintenance testing requirements 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 the Technical Specifications that degraded safety, we find the licensee's response ccceptable for Items 3.1.3 and 3.2.3 of Generic Letter 83-28.

REFERENCES l

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, R. J. Rodriguez, Sacramento Municipal Utility District, to H. L. Thompson, NRC, May 23, 1985.

1 I

l 5

l l

. -