ML20153C936
| ML20153C936 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Arkansas Nuclear  |
| Issue date: | 08/26/1988 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20153C935 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8809010366 | |
| Download: ML20153C936 (2) | |
Text
.
p at:g
+1 jo UNITED STATES g
9.
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION if W ASHINGTON, D. C. 20555
%,...../
SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION EVALUATION OF SCHEDULAR EXEMPTION FOR FILING OF THE ANNUAL REVISIONS TO THE FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORTS FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE N05. DPR-51 AND NPF-6
@]KANSASPOWERAND_LIGHTCOMPANY ARKANSAS NUCLEAR ONE, UNITS 1 AND_2 D0_CMT NOS. 50-313 AND 50-358
1.0 INTRODUCTION
By letter dated May 13, 1988, Arkansas Power & Light (AP&L or the licensee) requested a one-time exemption from the requirements of 10 CFR 50.71(e) to t,
extend the annual Final Safety Analysis Report revision filing date for Arkansas Nuclear One, Units 1 and 2 (ANO-1 and 2) from July 22 to October 20, 1988. The filing date extension was requested because the licensee-initiatedSafetyAnalysisRepcrt(SAR)UpgradeProject,beguninApril 1987, was not able to be completed in time to neet the July 22, 1988 due date req';irement for the annual FSAR update, as originally intended, because of resources expended during the sixth refueling outage in Unit 2.
The SAR Upgrade Project has involved a chapter-by-chapter detailed techni-cal review of the SARs by numerous key plant personnel and contractors from all relevant disciplines.
It's goal is to assure consistency between the SAR text and the as built plant configuration and design resulting in a better defined ano more comprehensive licensing basis. This in turn shculd provide better support for, and thus enhance, the quality of safety I
related activities associated with the operation of ANO-1 and 2.
2.0 EVALUATION A FO-day delay in submission of the annual FSAR updates will not adversely affect public health and safety.
In light of the expected improvenents from the SAR Upgrade Project in the quality of safety-related activities associated with the operation of ANO-1 and 2, a net benefit to the public i
health and Safety should be realized. Therefore, the exemption should bc granted.
s 3.0 FNVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS The NRC staff has previously concluded, pursuant to 10 CFR 51.32, that the issuance of these exemptions will not have a significant impact on the qualityofthehumanenvironment(53FR29398, August 4,1988).
88090!,0366 880826 PDR ADOCK 0500031:3 P
O e
2-
4.0 CONCLUSION
We have concluded that the proposed exemptions would result in benefit to the public health and safety that compensates for any decrease in safety that may result from the grant of the exemptions. Therefore, a special circumstance exists pursuant to 10 CFR 50,12(a)(2)(iv) supporting the grant of this exemption.
Principle Contributor:
C. Harbuck Dated: August 26, 1988 9
I t
i L
J L
R d
i l
i 1
1
._