ML20206F499
| ML20206F499 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Washington Public Power Supply System |
| Issue date: | 06/11/1986 |
| From: | NRC |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20206F481 | List: |
| References | |
| GL-83-28, NUDOCS 8606240486 | |
| Download: ML20206F499 (2) | |
Text
.
N ENCLOSURE SAFETY EVALUATION REPORT GENERIC LEIIER 83-78, ITEMS 3.1.3 AND 3.2.3 POST-MAINTENANCE TESTING (RTS COMPONENTS, ALL OTHER SAFETY-RELATED COMPONENTS)
WASHINGTON NUCLEAR POWER 1 (WNP-1)
DOCKET NO.: 50-460 INTRODUCTION AND
SUMMARY
I Generic Letter 83-28 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 Washington Public Power Supply System, the applicant for Washington Nuclear Power 1 for Items 3.1.3 l
and 3.2.3 of the Generic Letter. The actual documents reviewed as part of this evaluation are listed in the references at the end of this report.
The requirements for these two items are identical with the exception that Item 3.1.3 applies 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-mainter.ance test requirements in existing Technical Specifications which can be demonstrated to degrade rather than enhance safety. Appropriate changes to these test re-quirements, with supporting justification, shall be submitted for staff approval.
8606240486 860611 PDR ADOCK 05000460 A
1.
EVALUATION The applicant for Washington Nuclear Power 1 (WNP-11 provided a general response 1
for Items 3.1 and 3.2 of Generic Letter 83-28 by letter dated March 30, 1984.
The letter noted that since WNP-1 was in an extended construction delay, the Technical Specifications had not been written.
However, the applicant committed to address the concerns of Items 3.1.3 and 3.2.3 in proposed Technical Speci-fications prior to fuel load. We consider this acceptable.
CONCLUSION It is probable that the concerns of Items 3.1.3 and 3.2.3 will be resolved by the industry and the NRC prior to fuel load for WNP-1. This, in combination with the applicant's commitment to submit proposed Technical Specifications for staff review prior to fuel load, is considered sufficient for close-out of these items.
l 1
REFERENCES
'T 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, G. C. Sorensen, Washington Public Power Supply System, to E. G. Adensam, NRC, March 30, 1984.
1
t CONFORMANCE TO GENERIC LETTER 83-28 ITEMS 3.1.3 AND 3.2.3 WNP, UNIT NOS. 1 AND 3 R. Haroldsen l
l Published December 1985
~
EG&G Idaho, Inc.
Idaho Falls, 10 83415 Prepared for the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington 0.C.
20555 Under DOE Contract No. DE-AC07-76ID01570 FIN No. 06002 dl l.
7 l
u e
ABSTRACT This EG&G Idaho, Inc., report provides a review of the submittals from WNP Units 1 and 3, for 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., NRR and I&E Support Branch.
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission funded the work under the authorization, B&R 90-19-19-11-3, FIN No. 06002.
Docket Nos. 50-460 and 50-508 4
ii
- e. -
- =m.d e, e.e m. e wow.. -e *. - * * = = +,. -. -
CONTENTS A B S T RA CT...............................................................
ii FOREWORD...............................................................
11 1.
INTRODUCTION......................................................
I 2.
REVIEW REQUIREMENTS...............................................
2 3.
REVIEW RESULTS....................................................
3 3.1 Evaluation...................................................
3 3.2 Conclusion...................................................
3 4.
REFERENCES........................................................
4 4
l e
tii
1 I
\\
CONFORMANCE TO GENERIC LETTER 83-28 ITEMS 3.1.3 AND 3.2.3 WNP UNITS 1 AND 3 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, applicants for operating licenses, and holders of construction permits.
This letter included required actions based on the 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 i
Plant".2 This report documents the EG&G Idaho, Inc, review of the submittals from WNP Units 1 and 3 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.
a J
I e
1 l
a l
-. ~
1 f
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 applies this same requirement to 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 for WNP Units 1 and 3 were reviewed to determine compliance with items 3.1.3 and 3.2.3 of the generic letter.
First, the submittals from these plants were reviewed to determine that these two items were specifically addressed.
Next, the submittals were checked to determine if any post-maintenance test items specified in the technical specifications were identified that were suspected to degrade rather than enhance safety, i
2
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 l
rather than enhance safety.
Item 3.2.3 applies this same requirement to all other safety-related components. Any propnsed technical specification changes resulting from this action shall receive a pre-implementation review by NRC.
The relevant submittals for WNP Units 1 and 3 were reviewed to determine compliance with items 3.l.3 and 3.2.3 of the generic letter.
First, the submittals from these plants were reviewed to determine that these two items were specifically addressed.
Next, the submittals were checked to determine if any post-maintenance test items specified in the technical specifications were identified that were suspected to degrade I
rather than enhance safety.
1 l
2
.a 3.
REVIEW RESULTS FOR WNP UNITS 1 AND 3 3.1 Evaluation Washington Public Power Supply System, the applicant for WNP Unit Nos. I and 3, provided a general response for items 3.1 and 3.2 of Generic Letter 83-28 for the WNP Unit 1 plant in their submittal dated March 30, 3
1984. The submittal states that the WNP-1 nuclear plant is in a state of extended construction delay, that the technical specifications have not been written, that a draft of the technical specifications is expected one year prior to fuel load and that the concerns of items 3.1.1 through 3.1.3 will be considered in the preparation of the technical specifications.
The applicant also provided a submittal for the WNP-3 plant dated 4
July 17, 1985. This submittal was a request for an amendment to the construction permit which will delay construction of the WNP-3 plant for an indefinite period.
3.2 Conclusion It is evident that the concerns of items 3.1.3 and 3.2.3 of Generic Letter 83-28 will be resolved on an industry wide basis prior to completion of the technical specifications for either the WNP-1 or WNP-3 plants and will be resolved for these plants during the review and approval process of their technical specifications. Therefore, the staff considers these items to be closed for this evaluation.
D 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, fiUREG-1000, Volume 1, April 1983; Volume 2, July 1983.
3.
Letter, G. C. Sorensen, Washington Public Power Supply System, to E. G. Adensam, NRC, March 30, 1984.
4 Letter, G. C. Sorensen, Washington Public Power Supply System, to H. R. Denton, NRC, July 17, 1985.
4 4
_a
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.
Letter, G. C. Sorensen, Washington Public Power Supply System, to E. G. Adensam, NRC, March 30, 1984.
4 Letter, G. C. Sorensen, Washington Public Power Supply System, to H. R. Denton, NRC, July 17, 1985.
l l
i 5
4
.