ML20195C931

SER Accepting Util Response to Generic Ltr 83-28,Item 2.1 (Part 2) Re Vendor Interface Programs (Reactor Trip Sys)

ML20195C931
Person / Time
Site:	Rancho Seco
Issue date:	06/08/1988
From:	Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:
Shared Package
ML20195C481	List: ML20195C475 ML20195C557 ML20195C931
References
GL-83-28, NUDOCS 8806220331
Download: ML20195C931 (3)

Text

• -

g ENCLOSURE 2

• o UNITED STATES

~

=

! n NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION g ,i WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555

• • • • • l SAFETY EVALUATION REPORT GENERIC LETTER 83-28 ITEM 2.1 (PART 2)

VENDOR INTERFACE PROGRAMS (RTS COMPONENTS)

RANCHO SEC0 NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION DOCKET NO. 50-312

1.0 INTRODUCTION

On February 25, 1983, both of the scram circuit breakers at Unit I 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 after 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. Prior to this incident, on February 22, 1983, at Unit 1 of the Salem Nuclear Power Plant, an automatic trip signal was generated based on steam generator low-low level during plant start-up. In this case, the reactor was tripped manually by the operator almost coincidentally with the automatic trip.

Following these incidents, on February 28, 1983, the NRC Executive Director for Operations (EDO), directed the staff to investigate and report on the generic implications of these occurrences at Unit 1 of the Salem Nuclear Power Plant.

The results of the 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 Salem Nuclear Power Plant." As a result of this investigation, the Commission (NRC) requested (by Generic Letter 83-28 dated July 8,19831 )

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

8806220331 880608 2 DR ADOCK 0500

This report is an evaluation of the response submitted by Sacramento Municipal i Utility District, the licensee for the Rancho Seco Nuclear Generating Station, 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 conform that an interface has been established with the NSSS or with the vendors of each of the components of the Reactor Trip System which includes:

periodic conmunication between the licensee / applicant and the NSSS or the vendors of each of the components of the Reactor Trip System, and, a system of positive feedback which confinns receipt by the licensee /

applicant of transmittals of vendor technical information.

2.0 EVALUATION The licensee for the Rancho Seco Nuclear Generating Station responded to the requirements of Item 2.1 (Part 2) with submittals dated November 4,1983, May 23, 1985, and April 20, 1987. The licensee stated in these submittals that Babcock and Wilcox is the NSSS vendor for the Rancho Seco plant and that the RTS is included as part of the B&W interface program established for this plant.

The response also confirms that this interface program includes both periodic communication between B&W and the licensee and positive feedback from the licensee in the form of signed receipts for technical information transmitted by B&W. The program further requires that a biennial listing of documents received by the plant be sent to each vendor or supplier for confinnation that l all applicable information has been received.

i - __ ___ _ - ___ _

3.0 CONCLUSION

Based on our review of these responses, 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 REFERENCE _S

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. Sacramento Municipal Utility District letter to NRC, R. J. Rodriguez to Director of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, "Required Actions Based on Generic Implications of Salem ATWS Events (Generic Letter 83-28)," November 4,1983.

S. Sacramento Municipal Utility District letter to NRC, R. J. Rodriguez to Director of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, "Generic Letter 83-28, Request for Additional Information,"

May 23, 1985.

1 i 4. Sacramento Municipal Utility District letter to NRC, R. J. Rodriguez to Director of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, "Generic Letter 83-28 Item 2.2, Equipment Classification ,

l and Vendor Interface," April 20, 1987.

1

i. .

_ . _ _ _ _ _ _ - . _ _ _ _ _ _