ML20154P262

Safety Evaluation Re Response to Generic Ltr 83-28,Item 2.1, (Part 2) Re Vendor Interface Program (Reactor Trip Sys Components).Program Meets Requirements of Item 2.1 (Part 2) of Generic Ltr 83-28

ML20154P262
Person / Time
Site:	Turkey Point
Issue date:	09/02/1988
From:	Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:
Shared Package
ML17345A365	List: ML20154P262
References
GL-83-28, NUDOCS 8809300179
Download: ML20154P262 (3)

Text

.

. .. e n g

• ,8 'e

~, UNITED STATES

?* .,r g NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION f

j WASHINGTON, D. C. 20665

\...../ EN_ CLOSURE 2 SAFETY EVALVATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION GENERIC LETTER 83-28, ITEM 2.1 (PART 2) 4 vet!0OT. INTERFACE PROGRAM (RTS COMPONENTS)

TURKEY POINT PLAMT, UNITS 3 AND 4 00CKET NOS. 50-250 AND 50-251

1.0 INTRODUCTION

On February 25, 1983, both of the scram circuit breakers at Unit 1 of the Salem Nuclear Power Plant failed to open upon an automatic reactor trip signal from the reactor protection system. This incident was terminated manually by the operator about 30 seconds atter the initiation of the automatic trip signal, The failure of the circuit breakers was determined to be related to the sticking of the undervoltage trip attachment. Pritir to this incident, on February 22,,

1 1%3, at Unit 1 of the Salen Nuclear Powe4 Plant, an automatic trip signal was generated based on steam generator low-lov level during plant start-up. In this case, the reactor was tripped manually by the operator almost coincidtntally with the automatic trip.

I Follcwing these incidents, on February 28, 1983, the NRC Executive Director for Operations (E00), directed the staff to investigate and report on the generic 1

implications of these occurrences at Unit 1 of the Salem Nuclear Power Plant, t The results of tne staff's inquiry into the generic implications of the Salem unit incidents are reported in NUREG-1000, "Generic Implications of the ATWS Events at the Salen Nuclear Power Plant." Asaresultofthisinvestigatign the Comission (NRC) requested (by Generic Letter 83-28 dated July 8,1983 ),

til licensees of operating reactors, applicants for an operating license, and holders of construction permits to respond to generic issues ratsed by the analyses of these two ATWS events.

This report is an evaluation of the response submitted by Florida Power &

Light Company, the licensee for the Turkey Point Plant, Units 3 and 4 for Item

. 2.1 (Part 2) of Generic letter 83-28. The actual documents reviewed as part of this evaluation are listed in the references at the end of the report.

Item 2.1 (Part 2) requires the licensee to confirm that an interface has been ,

established with the NSS$ or with vendors of each of the components of the l Reactor Trip System which includes:

periodic cocinunication between the licensee / applicant and the NSS$ or

the vendors of each of the components of the Reactor Trip System, and a system of positive feedback which ccnfirms receipt by the licensee /

applicant of transmittals of vendor technical information, i M Cd34al19

l i

l 2.0 EVALUATION The licensee for the Turke mentsofitem2.1(Part2)yPointPlant. Units with a submittal 3and4respondedtgtherequire-dated November 8, 1983 . The licensee i l

stated in this submittal that Westinghouse is the NSSS for the Turkey Point  !

Plant, Units 3 and 4, and that the RTS is included as part of the Westinghouse interface program established for this plant. The response also confirmed that this interface prcgram includes both periodic connunication between Westinghouse and the licenses and positive feedback from the licensee in the form of signed receipts for technical information transmitted by Westinghouse.

3.0 CONCLUSION

l Ban f on our review of their response, we find the licensee's statements confirm '

that a vendor interface program exists with the NSSS vendor for components that are required for performance of the reactor trip function. This program meets the requirements of Item 2.1 (Part 2) of the Generic Letter 83-28, and is therefore acceptable.

4.0 REFERENCES

6

1. NRC Letter, D. G. Eisenhut to all Licensees of Operating Reactors, l Applicants for Operating License, and Holders of Construction Permits, l "Required Actions Based on Generic Implications of Salem ATWS Events i (Generic Letter 83-28)," July 8, 1983. l

2. Florida Power and Light Company letter to NRC, J. W. Williams to D. G. Eisenhut, Director. Division of Licensing, "Generic Letter  ;

83-28," Noverter 8,1983. ,

Dated: September 2,1938 Principal Contributor:  !

D. Lasher 1

I l

I I

i l

f

[

I ENCLOSURE 2 i SYSTEMATIC ASSESSMENT OF LICENSEE PERFORMANCE *

. i l Functional Areas f l 1. Management Involvement in Assuring Quality, i N/A l 3

2. Approach to Resolution of Technical Issues from a Safety Standpoint.

1 Approach was direct and enabled verification of acceptability of their i i

program. Rating: Category 2

3. Respcnsiveness to NRC Initiatives.

Licensee described his program which met the requirements of this i generic letter item. Rating: Category 1

! 4 Enforcement History.  ;

] N/A j 5. Operational and Construction Events.  !'

N/A 1

4 1

6. Staffing (including Management). l N/A

7. Training and Qualification Effectiveness.

4 N/A 1

i J

l l

j l 1

i 8

l T l 1