ML20141E873

Supplemental Safety Evaluation Rept Accepting Licensee Response to NRC Bulletin 80-06, Engineered Safety Features Reset Controls

ML20141E873
Person / Time
Site:	Arkansas Nuclear
Issue date:	08/12/1982
From:	NRC
To:
Shared Package
ML20132B373	List: IA-97-183, Final Response to FOIA Request for Documents.Records in App a Encl & Will Be Available in PDR ML20132B367 ML20132B429 ML20141D942 ML20141D952 ML20141E873
References
FOIA-97-183 IEB-80-06, IEB-80-6, NUDOCS 9707010191
Download: ML20141E873 (2)

Text

- . . _- - . - . _ _ _ . . _ _ - - ,_ . __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

4 SUPPLEMENTAL SAFETY EVALUATION REPORT ARKANSAS NUCLEAR ONE - UNIT 2 LICENSE RESPONSE.T0 I&E BULLETIN 80-06 ENGINEERED SAFETY FEATURES (ESF) RESET CONTROLS .

8ACKGROUND:

In the Safety Evaluation Report on this matter, dated June 3,1981, we concluded that the licensee satisfied the concerns and requirements of I&E Bulletin 80-06 for ANO-2, subject to completion of modifications to control circuits of eighteen valves found to change position upon ESF. actuation system (ESFAS) reset, and subsequent testing. This conclusion was based on infomation and documents pro-vided by the licensee, and on our contractor's report (EGG 1183-4200), included with the SER.

Subsequent I&E inspection found that the licensee had not perfomed the verifica-tion test required by item 2 of IEB 80-06 and that modifications to the two contain-ment sump isolation valves were not implemented as stated by the licensee in letters of June 18, 1980 and January 26, 1981 to the NRC. However, the NRC inspection confirmed that the other sixteen valve control c,ircuits were satisfactorily modified and tested as noted in Region IV letters to AP&L dated April 9 and April 16, 1982.

EVALUATION:

The licensee by letter dated April 16, 1982 provided a re-evaluation of their response to IEB 80-06 for ANO-2.

'4e have reviewed this response and find that:

1) Ine licensee has provided satisfactory justification for not modifying various safety related components which they concluded would not reduce the rargin of safety if these components change state on reset. This 9707010191 970624 PDR FOIA PDR

= CHAPMAN 97-183

,- .-.~.- . - . - - - . - . - . - _ . _ - - - - . . . . . - _ . _ - - - . - . -

l* . .

i3 -

j, . .

l l  !

includes the containment sump isolation valves which are maintained in the l open (ESFAS) position at all times with key locked switches, and. verified l

open each shif t.

i I

2) The licensee comitted to modify thirteen additional components which could potentially change state on reset.

f 3) The licensee has conr.itted to perforin verification tests of all safety related comoonents, test planned modificati:ns, nd modify ar.d test any additional com-l ponents, if needed as a result of these previous tests, by the next refueling i

i cutage.

1 j

CONCLUSION:

i

^

The licensee has satisfied the requirements and concerns of I&E Bulletin 80-06, subject to completion of the licensee's comitments to perform the modifications i

and testing identified in their April 16, 1982 response.

I l

Therefore, we find the ESF reset controls for ANO-2 in compliance with NRC criteria.

Principal Contributor:

Phillip A. Bender t

I 1

3 l

i j

i i

i -