ML20211B058
| ML20211B058 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Fort Saint Vrain  |
| Issue date: | 05/30/1986 |
| From: | NRC |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20210K074 | List: |
| References | |
| GL-83-28, TAC-53002, TAC-53840, NUDOCS 8606110463 | |
| Download: ML20211B058 (2) | |
Text
'
c2 % 9
[&p jo, UNITED STATES g) h NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION p
vvASHINGTON, D. C. 20555
%,,,l
,/
ENCLOSURE SAFETY EVALUATION REPORT GENERIC LETTER 83-28. ITEMS -3.1.3 AND 3.2.3 POST-MAINTENANCE TESTING (RTS COMPONENTS, ALL OTHER SAFETY-RELATED COMPONENTS)
FORT ST. VRAIN N'JCLEAR GENERATING STATION DOCKET NO.: 50-267 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 Public Service Co.
of Colorado, the licensee for the Fort St. Vrain 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 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.
Recause of this similarity, the responses to both items were evaluated together.
REQUIREMENT Licensees and applicants shall identify, if applicable, an.y post-maintenance 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.
8606110463 860530 PDR ADOCK 05000267 P
EVALUATION The licensee, for the Fort St. Vrain Nuclear Generating Station responded to 2
these requirements with submittals dated November 4, 1983 and June 12, 3
1985. The licensee stated in these submittals that there were no post-maintenance testing requirements in Technical Specifications for either the 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 Technical Specifications that degraded safety, we find the licensee's responses acceptable for Items 3.1.3 and 3.2.3 of Generic letter 83-28.
REFERENCES j
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.
l 2.
Public Service Company of Colorado letter to NRC, 0. R. Lee to D. G. Eisenhut, Director, Division of Licensing, NRC, " Response to Generic Letter 83-28", November 4,1983, P-83359.
l l
3.
Public Service Company of Colorado letter to NRC, J. W. Gahm to E. H. Johnson, Regional Administrator, Region IV, NRC, " Response to l
Generic Letter 83-28", June 12, 1985, P85204.
l
-.