ML20199F273
| ML20199F273 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Palo Verde  |
| Issue date: | 06/18/1986 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20199F260 | List: |
| References | |
| GL-83-28, TAC-59169, NUDOCS 8606240247 | |
| Download: ML20199F273 (2) | |
Text
'
s SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION GENERIC IMPLICATIONS OF SALEM ATWS EVENT GENERIC LETTER 83-28. ITEM 4.1 ARIZONA PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY, ET AL.
PALO VERDE NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION, UNITS 1, 2 AND 3 DOCKET NOS. STN 50-528, 50-529 AND 50-530 I.
INTRODUCTION On February 25, 1983, during startup of the Salem Unit 1 Nuclear Plant, both citcuit breakers in the Reactor Trip System failed to open automacically upon receipt of a valid trip signal. As a result of that event, the NRC's Office of Inspection and Enforcement issued IE Bulletin 83-01 which described the event and requested specified prompt corrective and prr.ventive actions by licensees. As the cause and ramifications of the event were more clearly developed, the NRC's Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation issued on July 8, 1983, Generic Letter 83-28, " Required Actions Based on Generic Implications of Salem ATWS Events." This
' letter addressed issues related to reactor trip system reliability and general manage capability. The letter was sent to all licensees of operating react 3, applicants for operating licenses and holders of construction permits.
One of the areas of reacter trip system reliability considered in Generic Letter 83-28 (GL 83-28), is that of vendor-recommended modifications. This is identified in GL 63-28 as Item 4.1.
This evaluation addresses the acceptability of the responce to this' item provided by Arizona Public Service Company, et al. (A?S) for the Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station, Units 1, 2 and 3 (PVNGS).
II.
EVALUATION Item 4.1. of GL 83-28 states "All vendor-recommended reactor crip breaker modifications shall be reviewed to verify that either:
(1) each modification has, in fact, been implemented; or (2) a written evaluation of the technical reasons for not implementing a modification exists."
This item of GL 83-28 also states licensees should submit a statement confirming this action has been implemented.
By letter dated November 3,1983, APS responded to a number of GL 83-28 items, lacluding Item 4.1.1.
Regarding-Item 4.1, this letter' skated a reciew of the latest vendor recommendations and station work'dccuments indicated that all vendor modifications to the reactor trip breakers available to PVNGS as of the date of the letter had been implemented.
In addition, APS stated that
~
to ensure all future vendor-recommended changes to the reactor trip breakers (in maintenance, testing or design) are appropriately addressed, the station procedure governing control of Technical / Instruction Manuals at PVNGS was being revised to include a " front-end" review by the Maintenance Engineering Department of all such changes prior to their incorporation.
8606240247 860618 PDR ADOCK 05000528 P
PDR P
d The APS response further states the Nuclear Engineering Department will also review all vendor-recommended modifications. In addition, APS Records Management will file these recommendations with the controlled vendor data and will distribute the recommendations to the Maintenance Department to assure they have been reviewed as discussed above.
III. CONCLUSION Based on confirmation by APS that all vendor-recommended modifications to the Reactor Trip System available at the time of the response had been j
implemented, and the provisions made for assuring future recommendations l
are also reviewed and incorporated as appropriate, we conclude APS has acceptably satisfied for PVNGS, the actions requested by Item 4.1 of Generic Letter 83-28. Accordingly, this item is closed.
Date:
Principal Contributor:
G. Zwetzig 4
l 4
i I
bos
- - + -
-,.