ML20237B409

SER Accepting Util Response to Generic Ltr 83-28,Items 3.1.3 & 3.2.3 Re post-maint Testing (Reactor Trip Sys Components, All Other safety-related Components)

ML20237B409
Person / Time
Site:	Fermi
Issue date:	12/08/1987
From:	Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:
Shared Package
ML20237B391	List: ML20237B390 ML20237B409
References
GL-83-28, NUDOCS 8712160240
Download: ML20237B409 (2)

Text

' "

EllCLOSURE 1 u

[pana, o

', UNITED STATES

!j '

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

.'p - i t

- E WASHING TON, D. C. 20555

• % ,/,f s ****'

SAFETY EVALUATION REPORT GENERIC LETTER 63-28, items 3.1.3 AND 3.2.3 l

POST-MAINTENANCE TESTING (RTS COMPONENTS, ALL OTHER SAFETY-RELATED COMPONENTS)

FERMI-2 STATION DOCKET NO. 50-341

)  ;

1.0 INTRODUCTION

Generic Letter 83-28I describes intermcdi se 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 the Detroit Edison Company, the licensee for the Fermi-2 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. Because of this similarity, the responses to both items were evaluated together.

2.0 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 staff approval.

8712160240 871208 DR ADOCK 0500 41

.t 3.0 EVALUATION The licensee for the Fermi-2 Station responded to these requirements with an ,

initial submittal dated November 3, 1983 and a followup submittal dated November 29, 1984. -The licensee's response given in the submittals was found i by the staff to be inadequate and incomplete. The staff issued a request for additional information on December 12, 1986 for Items 3.1.3 and 3.2.3. The licensee responded with a submittal dated March 19, 1987. In this submittal, the licensee stated that there were no post-maintenance testing requirements

~

.g in Technical Specifications.

y

4.0 CONCLUSION

Based on the licensee's statement that no post-maintenance test requirements were found in Technical Specifications that degrade safety, we find the licensee's responses acceptable for Items 3.1.3 and 3.2.3 of Generic Letter 83-28. -

5.0 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. Detroit Edison Letter to NRC, " Detroit Edison Response to NRC Generic ,

Letter 83-28," dated November 3, 1983.

3. Detroit Edison Letter to NRC, " Clarification of Detroit Edison's Response to Generic Letter 83-28," dated November 29, 1984.

4. Detroit Edison Letter to NRC, " Additional Information Pursuant to l

l Generic Letter 83-28," dated March 19, 1987.

I

_____ ____ _ ___ -