|
---|
Category:CONTRACTED REPORT - RTA
MONTHYEARML20206F0721999-03-31031 March 1999 Technical Evaluation Rept on Third 10-Year Interval ISI Program Plan,Entergy Operations,Inc,Arkansas Nuclear One, Unit 1 ML20154K3011998-06-30030 June 1998 Technical Evaluation Rept, Third Ten-Year Interval Pump & Valve Inservice Testing Program, for Arkansas Nuclear One, Unit 1,Entergy Operations,Inc ML20138G5221996-10-25025 October 1996 Technical Evaluation Rept of IPE Submittal & RAI Responses for Plant,Unit 1 Npp ML20138K0621995-11-30030 November 1995 TER on IPE Submittal Human Reliability Analysis, Final Rept ML20138F0921995-11-30030 November 1995 TER on IPE Back End Analysis ML20138F0811995-11-27027 November 1995 TER on IPE Front End Analysis L-95-047, Technical Evaluation Rept for Arkansas Nuclear One,Units 1 & 2 Plants Odcm,Rev 21995-09-30030 September 1995 Technical Evaluation Rept for Arkansas Nuclear One,Units 1 & 2 Plants Odcm,Rev 2 ML20080B4931994-11-30030 November 1994 Evaluation of Utility Response to Suppl 1 to NRC Bulletin 90-01:Arkansas Nuclear One-1/-2, Dtd Nov 1994 ML20116A4741992-09-30030 September 1992 Emergency Feedwater System RISK-BASED Inspection Guide for the Arkansas Nuclear One Unit 2 Power Plant ML20127E3291992-09-30030 September 1992 TER Pump & Valve IST Program Ano,Unit 2 ML20118A0111992-03-31031 March 1992 TER Pump & Valve Inservice Testing Program Arkansas Nuclear One,Unit 1 ML20072R9611991-03-31031 March 1991 TER Review of ANO-1 CST Seismic Design ML20154H5451988-08-31031 August 1988 Evaluation of Risks Associated with AOT and STI Requirements at the ANO-1 Nuclear Power Plant ML20153D4321988-03-31031 March 1988 User'S Guide for Prisim Arkansas Nuclear One - Unit 1.Volume 1,Program for Inspectors ML20153D4951988-03-31031 March 1988 User'S Guide for Prisim Arkansas Nuclear One - Unit 1.Volume 2,Program for Regulators ML20150F3441988-03-31031 March 1988 PRA Applications Program for Inspection at Arkansas Nuclear One Unit 1.Docket No. 50-313.(Arkansas Power and Light Company) ML20236D9181987-07-31031 July 1987 Methodology and Application of Surrogate Plant PRA Analysis to the Rancho Seco Power Plant.Task 1 - Analysis of ANO-1 and Oconee PRAs ML20214R7431987-03-31031 March 1987 Rev 1 to Conformance to Item 4.5.2 of Generic Ltr 83-28, Arkansas Nuclear One-2,Calvert Cliffs 1 & 2,Fort Calhoun, Main Yankee,Millstone 2,Palisades,Palo Verde 1,2 & 3,San Onofre 2 & 3,St Lucie 1 & 2,Waterford 3 & WNP 3 ML20210Q4481987-01-0909 January 1987 Reactor Trip Sys Reliability Conformance to Item 4.5.2 of Generic Ltr 83-28,Arkansas Nuclear One Unit 2,Calvert Cliffs Units 1 & 2,Fort Calhoun,Maine Yankee,Millstone Unit 2, Palisades,Palo Verde Units..., Technical Evaluation Rept ML20214L2871986-08-25025 August 1986 Evaluation of Arkansas Power & Light Co Dcrdr of Arkansas Nuclear One - Unit 1 Plant, Technical Evaluation Rept ML20214L9881986-08-25025 August 1986 Evaluation of Dcrdr for Arkansas Power & Light Co Arkansas Nuclear One,Unit 2, Technical Evaluation Rept ML20212M2761986-07-31031 July 1986 Conformance to Generic Ltr 83-28,Item 2.1 (Part 1), Equipment Classification (Reactor Trip Sys Components), Arkansas 1 & 2,Calvert Cliffs 1 & 2,Crystal River 3 & Davis-Besse 1 ML20210K6841986-04-30030 April 1986 Conformance to Generic Ltr 83-28,Items 3.1.3 & 3.2.3, Arkansas Nuclear One 2,Calvert Cliffs 1 & 2,Palo Verde 1,2 & 3 & San Onofre 2 & 3 ML20154D3021986-01-21021 January 1986 Site Survey of Arkansas Nuclear One Unit 2 Maint Program & Practices, Technical Ltr Rept ML20155F9141985-10-31031 October 1985 Addendum a to First Internal Inservice Insp Program, Arkansas Nuclear Power Plant,Unit 1 Technical Evaluation Rept ML20140C7801985-10-31031 October 1985 Technical Evaluation Rept,Second Interval Inservice Insp Program,Arkansas Nuclear Power Plant Unit 1 ML20138N9261985-10-31031 October 1985 Audit Rept of Dcrdr for Arkansas Nuclear One,Unit 1, for Oct 1985 ML20210A5811985-10-30030 October 1985 Review of Licensee & Applicant Responses to Generic Ltr 83-28 (Required Actions Based on Generic Implications of Salem ATWS Events),Item 1.2,Arkansas Nuclear One, Units 1 & 2..., Technical Evaluation Rept ML20211L0471985-08-31031 August 1985 Conformance to Reg Guide 1.97,Arkansas Nuclear One,Unit 1 ML20137S2571985-08-31031 August 1985 Conformance to Generic Ltr 83-28,Items 3.1.3 & 3.2.3, Arkansas 1,Crystal River 3,Oconee 1,2 & 3,Rancho Seco & TMI-1 ML20209F8151985-06-30030 June 1985 Conformance to Generic Ltr 83-28,Items 3.1.3 & 3.2.3, Arkansas 1,Crystal River 3,Oconee 1,2 & 3,Rancho Seco & TMI-1 ML20112E0811985-03-31031 March 1985 Conformance to Reg Guide 1.97,Arkansas Nuclear One,Unit 1 ML20116B3661985-02-28028 February 1985 Conformance to Reg Guide 1.97,Arkansas Nuclear One,Unit 2 ML20106A6631984-09-24024 September 1984 Technical Evaluation Rept,Control of Heavy Loads, Arkansas Nuclear One Units 1 & 2 ML20083M3101984-04-0202 April 1984 Control of Heavy Loads - Phase Ii,Arkansas Nuclear One, Units 1 & 2, Draft Technical Evaluation Rept ML20087J8841984-02-29029 February 1984 Review of the Arkansas Nuclear One Generating Station Unit NO.1 Emergency Feedwater System Reliability Analysis ML20082S7671983-10-0707 October 1983 Technical Evaluation Rept on Tests Conducted to Verify Analyses Performed on Adequacy of Station Electric Distribution Sys Voltages for Arkansas Nuclear One,Unit 1 ML20087L9201983-09-30030 September 1983 Analysis of 800129 Turbine Trip at Arkansas Nuclear One Unit 2 ML20087L9141983-09-30030 September 1983 Analysis of 800624 Loss of Offsite Power Transient at Arkansas Nuclear One Unit 2 ML20087L9111983-08-31031 August 1983 Analysis of 800407 Loss of Offsite Power Transient at Arkansas Nuclear One Unit 1 ML20024B9571983-07-31031 July 1983 Draft DHR During Total Loss of Feedwater Event for C-E Sys 80 Plant. ML20077B8541983-07-20020 July 1983 Operating Reactor PORV Repts (F-37) TMI Action Plan Requirements:Generic Rept - B&W Designed Units, Technical Evaluation Rept ML20024C8521983-06-30030 June 1983 the Effect of Some Operations and Control Room Improvements on the Safety of the Arkansas Nuclear One,Unit One,Nuclear Power Plant ML20024E5151983-03-24024 March 1983 Review of Licensee Resolution of Outstanding Issues from NRC Equipment Environ Qualification SERs (F-11 & B-60), Arkansas Nuclear One Unit 2, Vols 1 & 2 ML20079P5731983-03-21021 March 1983 ECCS Repts (F-47) TMI Action Plan Requirements,Ar Nuclear One Unit 1, Technical Evaluation Rept ML20076C3641982-11-24024 November 1982 ECCS Repts (F-47),TMI Action Plan Requirements,Arkansas Nuclear One,Unit 2, Technical Evaluation Rept ML20127A2891982-10-0505 October 1982 Containment Leak Rate Testing Investigations, Progress Summary for Sept 1982 ML20065F2951982-09-28028 September 1982 PWR Main Steam Line Break W/Continued Feedwater Addition (B-69),AR Nuclear One,Unit 1, Technical Evaluation Rept ML20092J9021982-09-24024 September 1982 Technical Evaluation Rept,Arkansas Nuclear One,Unit 2, Seismic Qualification of Auxiliary Feedwater Sys ML20064M2781982-08-31031 August 1982 Interim Reliability Evaluation Program:Analysis of the Arkansas Nuclear ONE-UNIT 1 Nuclear Power Plant.Docket No. 50-313.(Arkansas Power and Light Company) 1999-03-31
[Table view] Category:QUICK LOOK
MONTHYEARML20206F0721999-03-31031 March 1999 Technical Evaluation Rept on Third 10-Year Interval ISI Program Plan,Entergy Operations,Inc,Arkansas Nuclear One, Unit 1 ML20154K3011998-06-30030 June 1998 Technical Evaluation Rept, Third Ten-Year Interval Pump & Valve Inservice Testing Program, for Arkansas Nuclear One, Unit 1,Entergy Operations,Inc ML20138G5221996-10-25025 October 1996 Technical Evaluation Rept of IPE Submittal & RAI Responses for Plant,Unit 1 Npp ML20138K0621995-11-30030 November 1995 TER on IPE Submittal Human Reliability Analysis, Final Rept ML20138F0921995-11-30030 November 1995 TER on IPE Back End Analysis ML20138F0811995-11-27027 November 1995 TER on IPE Front End Analysis L-95-047, Technical Evaluation Rept for Arkansas Nuclear One,Units 1 & 2 Plants Odcm,Rev 21995-09-30030 September 1995 Technical Evaluation Rept for Arkansas Nuclear One,Units 1 & 2 Plants Odcm,Rev 2 ML20080B4931994-11-30030 November 1994 Evaluation of Utility Response to Suppl 1 to NRC Bulletin 90-01:Arkansas Nuclear One-1/-2, Dtd Nov 1994 ML20116A4741992-09-30030 September 1992 Emergency Feedwater System RISK-BASED Inspection Guide for the Arkansas Nuclear One Unit 2 Power Plant ML20127E3291992-09-30030 September 1992 TER Pump & Valve IST Program Ano,Unit 2 ML20118A0111992-03-31031 March 1992 TER Pump & Valve Inservice Testing Program Arkansas Nuclear One,Unit 1 ML20072R9611991-03-31031 March 1991 TER Review of ANO-1 CST Seismic Design ML20154H5451988-08-31031 August 1988 Evaluation of Risks Associated with AOT and STI Requirements at the ANO-1 Nuclear Power Plant ML20153D4321988-03-31031 March 1988 User'S Guide for Prisim Arkansas Nuclear One - Unit 1.Volume 1,Program for Inspectors ML20153D4951988-03-31031 March 1988 User'S Guide for Prisim Arkansas Nuclear One - Unit 1.Volume 2,Program for Regulators ML20150F3441988-03-31031 March 1988 PRA Applications Program for Inspection at Arkansas Nuclear One Unit 1.Docket No. 50-313.(Arkansas Power and Light Company) ML20236D9181987-07-31031 July 1987 Methodology and Application of Surrogate Plant PRA Analysis to the Rancho Seco Power Plant.Task 1 - Analysis of ANO-1 and Oconee PRAs ML20214R7431987-03-31031 March 1987 Rev 1 to Conformance to Item 4.5.2 of Generic Ltr 83-28, Arkansas Nuclear One-2,Calvert Cliffs 1 & 2,Fort Calhoun, Main Yankee,Millstone 2,Palisades,Palo Verde 1,2 & 3,San Onofre 2 & 3,St Lucie 1 & 2,Waterford 3 & WNP 3 ML20210Q4481987-01-0909 January 1987 Reactor Trip Sys Reliability Conformance to Item 4.5.2 of Generic Ltr 83-28,Arkansas Nuclear One Unit 2,Calvert Cliffs Units 1 & 2,Fort Calhoun,Maine Yankee,Millstone Unit 2, Palisades,Palo Verde Units..., Technical Evaluation Rept ML20214L2871986-08-25025 August 1986 Evaluation of Arkansas Power & Light Co Dcrdr of Arkansas Nuclear One - Unit 1 Plant, Technical Evaluation Rept ML20214L9881986-08-25025 August 1986 Evaluation of Dcrdr for Arkansas Power & Light Co Arkansas Nuclear One,Unit 2, Technical Evaluation Rept ML20212M2761986-07-31031 July 1986 Conformance to Generic Ltr 83-28,Item 2.1 (Part 1), Equipment Classification (Reactor Trip Sys Components), Arkansas 1 & 2,Calvert Cliffs 1 & 2,Crystal River 3 & Davis-Besse 1 ML20210K6841986-04-30030 April 1986 Conformance to Generic Ltr 83-28,Items 3.1.3 & 3.2.3, Arkansas Nuclear One 2,Calvert Cliffs 1 & 2,Palo Verde 1,2 & 3 & San Onofre 2 & 3 ML20154D3021986-01-21021 January 1986 Site Survey of Arkansas Nuclear One Unit 2 Maint Program & Practices, Technical Ltr Rept ML20155F9141985-10-31031 October 1985 Addendum a to First Internal Inservice Insp Program, Arkansas Nuclear Power Plant,Unit 1 Technical Evaluation Rept ML20140C7801985-10-31031 October 1985 Technical Evaluation Rept,Second Interval Inservice Insp Program,Arkansas Nuclear Power Plant Unit 1 ML20138N9261985-10-31031 October 1985 Audit Rept of Dcrdr for Arkansas Nuclear One,Unit 1, for Oct 1985 ML20210A5811985-10-30030 October 1985 Review of Licensee & Applicant Responses to Generic Ltr 83-28 (Required Actions Based on Generic Implications of Salem ATWS Events),Item 1.2,Arkansas Nuclear One, Units 1 & 2..., Technical Evaluation Rept ML20211L0471985-08-31031 August 1985 Conformance to Reg Guide 1.97,Arkansas Nuclear One,Unit 1 ML20137S2571985-08-31031 August 1985 Conformance to Generic Ltr 83-28,Items 3.1.3 & 3.2.3, Arkansas 1,Crystal River 3,Oconee 1,2 & 3,Rancho Seco & TMI-1 ML20209F8151985-06-30030 June 1985 Conformance to Generic Ltr 83-28,Items 3.1.3 & 3.2.3, Arkansas 1,Crystal River 3,Oconee 1,2 & 3,Rancho Seco & TMI-1 ML20112E0811985-03-31031 March 1985 Conformance to Reg Guide 1.97,Arkansas Nuclear One,Unit 1 ML20116B3661985-02-28028 February 1985 Conformance to Reg Guide 1.97,Arkansas Nuclear One,Unit 2 ML20106A6631984-09-24024 September 1984 Technical Evaluation Rept,Control of Heavy Loads, Arkansas Nuclear One Units 1 & 2 ML20083M3101984-04-0202 April 1984 Control of Heavy Loads - Phase Ii,Arkansas Nuclear One, Units 1 & 2, Draft Technical Evaluation Rept ML20087J8841984-02-29029 February 1984 Review of the Arkansas Nuclear One Generating Station Unit NO.1 Emergency Feedwater System Reliability Analysis ML20082S7671983-10-0707 October 1983 Technical Evaluation Rept on Tests Conducted to Verify Analyses Performed on Adequacy of Station Electric Distribution Sys Voltages for Arkansas Nuclear One,Unit 1 ML20087L9201983-09-30030 September 1983 Analysis of 800129 Turbine Trip at Arkansas Nuclear One Unit 2 ML20087L9141983-09-30030 September 1983 Analysis of 800624 Loss of Offsite Power Transient at Arkansas Nuclear One Unit 2 ML20087L9111983-08-31031 August 1983 Analysis of 800407 Loss of Offsite Power Transient at Arkansas Nuclear One Unit 1 ML20024B9571983-07-31031 July 1983 Draft DHR During Total Loss of Feedwater Event for C-E Sys 80 Plant. ML20077B8541983-07-20020 July 1983 Operating Reactor PORV Repts (F-37) TMI Action Plan Requirements:Generic Rept - B&W Designed Units, Technical Evaluation Rept ML20024C8521983-06-30030 June 1983 the Effect of Some Operations and Control Room Improvements on the Safety of the Arkansas Nuclear One,Unit One,Nuclear Power Plant ML20024E5151983-03-24024 March 1983 Review of Licensee Resolution of Outstanding Issues from NRC Equipment Environ Qualification SERs (F-11 & B-60), Arkansas Nuclear One Unit 2, Vols 1 & 2 ML20079P5731983-03-21021 March 1983 ECCS Repts (F-47) TMI Action Plan Requirements,Ar Nuclear One Unit 1, Technical Evaluation Rept ML20076C3641982-11-24024 November 1982 ECCS Repts (F-47),TMI Action Plan Requirements,Arkansas Nuclear One,Unit 2, Technical Evaluation Rept ML20127A2891982-10-0505 October 1982 Containment Leak Rate Testing Investigations, Progress Summary for Sept 1982 ML20065F2951982-09-28028 September 1982 PWR Main Steam Line Break W/Continued Feedwater Addition (B-69),AR Nuclear One,Unit 1, Technical Evaluation Rept ML20092J9021982-09-24024 September 1982 Technical Evaluation Rept,Arkansas Nuclear One,Unit 2, Seismic Qualification of Auxiliary Feedwater Sys ML20064M2781982-08-31031 August 1982 Interim Reliability Evaluation Program:Analysis of the Arkansas Nuclear ONE-UNIT 1 Nuclear Power Plant.Docket No. 50-313.(Arkansas Power and Light Company) 1999-03-31
[Table view] Category:ETC. (PERIODIC
MONTHYEARML20206F0721999-03-31031 March 1999 Technical Evaluation Rept on Third 10-Year Interval ISI Program Plan,Entergy Operations,Inc,Arkansas Nuclear One, Unit 1 ML20154K3011998-06-30030 June 1998 Technical Evaluation Rept, Third Ten-Year Interval Pump & Valve Inservice Testing Program, for Arkansas Nuclear One, Unit 1,Entergy Operations,Inc ML20138G5221996-10-25025 October 1996 Technical Evaluation Rept of IPE Submittal & RAI Responses for Plant,Unit 1 Npp ML20138K0621995-11-30030 November 1995 TER on IPE Submittal Human Reliability Analysis, Final Rept ML20138F0921995-11-30030 November 1995 TER on IPE Back End Analysis ML20138F0811995-11-27027 November 1995 TER on IPE Front End Analysis L-95-047, Technical Evaluation Rept for Arkansas Nuclear One,Units 1 & 2 Plants Odcm,Rev 21995-09-30030 September 1995 Technical Evaluation Rept for Arkansas Nuclear One,Units 1 & 2 Plants Odcm,Rev 2 ML20080B4931994-11-30030 November 1994 Evaluation of Utility Response to Suppl 1 to NRC Bulletin 90-01:Arkansas Nuclear One-1/-2, Dtd Nov 1994 ML20116A4741992-09-30030 September 1992 Emergency Feedwater System RISK-BASED Inspection Guide for the Arkansas Nuclear One Unit 2 Power Plant ML20127E3291992-09-30030 September 1992 TER Pump & Valve IST Program Ano,Unit 2 ML20118A0111992-03-31031 March 1992 TER Pump & Valve Inservice Testing Program Arkansas Nuclear One,Unit 1 ML20072R9611991-03-31031 March 1991 TER Review of ANO-1 CST Seismic Design ML20154H5451988-08-31031 August 1988 Evaluation of Risks Associated with AOT and STI Requirements at the ANO-1 Nuclear Power Plant ML20153D4321988-03-31031 March 1988 User'S Guide for Prisim Arkansas Nuclear One - Unit 1.Volume 1,Program for Inspectors ML20153D4951988-03-31031 March 1988 User'S Guide for Prisim Arkansas Nuclear One - Unit 1.Volume 2,Program for Regulators ML20150F3441988-03-31031 March 1988 PRA Applications Program for Inspection at Arkansas Nuclear One Unit 1.Docket No. 50-313.(Arkansas Power and Light Company) ML20236D9181987-07-31031 July 1987 Methodology and Application of Surrogate Plant PRA Analysis to the Rancho Seco Power Plant.Task 1 - Analysis of ANO-1 and Oconee PRAs ML20214R7431987-03-31031 March 1987 Rev 1 to Conformance to Item 4.5.2 of Generic Ltr 83-28, Arkansas Nuclear One-2,Calvert Cliffs 1 & 2,Fort Calhoun, Main Yankee,Millstone 2,Palisades,Palo Verde 1,2 & 3,San Onofre 2 & 3,St Lucie 1 & 2,Waterford 3 & WNP 3 ML20210Q4481987-01-0909 January 1987 Reactor Trip Sys Reliability Conformance to Item 4.5.2 of Generic Ltr 83-28,Arkansas Nuclear One Unit 2,Calvert Cliffs Units 1 & 2,Fort Calhoun,Maine Yankee,Millstone Unit 2, Palisades,Palo Verde Units..., Technical Evaluation Rept ML20214L2871986-08-25025 August 1986 Evaluation of Arkansas Power & Light Co Dcrdr of Arkansas Nuclear One - Unit 1 Plant, Technical Evaluation Rept ML20214L9881986-08-25025 August 1986 Evaluation of Dcrdr for Arkansas Power & Light Co Arkansas Nuclear One,Unit 2, Technical Evaluation Rept ML20212M2761986-07-31031 July 1986 Conformance to Generic Ltr 83-28,Item 2.1 (Part 1), Equipment Classification (Reactor Trip Sys Components), Arkansas 1 & 2,Calvert Cliffs 1 & 2,Crystal River 3 & Davis-Besse 1 ML20210K6841986-04-30030 April 1986 Conformance to Generic Ltr 83-28,Items 3.1.3 & 3.2.3, Arkansas Nuclear One 2,Calvert Cliffs 1 & 2,Palo Verde 1,2 & 3 & San Onofre 2 & 3 ML20154D3021986-01-21021 January 1986 Site Survey of Arkansas Nuclear One Unit 2 Maint Program & Practices, Technical Ltr Rept ML20155F9141985-10-31031 October 1985 Addendum a to First Internal Inservice Insp Program, Arkansas Nuclear Power Plant,Unit 1 Technical Evaluation Rept ML20140C7801985-10-31031 October 1985 Technical Evaluation Rept,Second Interval Inservice Insp Program,Arkansas Nuclear Power Plant Unit 1 ML20138N9261985-10-31031 October 1985 Audit Rept of Dcrdr for Arkansas Nuclear One,Unit 1, for Oct 1985 ML20210A5811985-10-30030 October 1985 Review of Licensee & Applicant Responses to Generic Ltr 83-28 (Required Actions Based on Generic Implications of Salem ATWS Events),Item 1.2,Arkansas Nuclear One, Units 1 & 2..., Technical Evaluation Rept ML20211L0471985-08-31031 August 1985 Conformance to Reg Guide 1.97,Arkansas Nuclear One,Unit 1 ML20137S2571985-08-31031 August 1985 Conformance to Generic Ltr 83-28,Items 3.1.3 & 3.2.3, Arkansas 1,Crystal River 3,Oconee 1,2 & 3,Rancho Seco & TMI-1 ML20209F8151985-06-30030 June 1985 Conformance to Generic Ltr 83-28,Items 3.1.3 & 3.2.3, Arkansas 1,Crystal River 3,Oconee 1,2 & 3,Rancho Seco & TMI-1 ML20112E0811985-03-31031 March 1985 Conformance to Reg Guide 1.97,Arkansas Nuclear One,Unit 1 ML20116B3661985-02-28028 February 1985 Conformance to Reg Guide 1.97,Arkansas Nuclear One,Unit 2 ML20106A6631984-09-24024 September 1984 Technical Evaluation Rept,Control of Heavy Loads, Arkansas Nuclear One Units 1 & 2 ML20083M3101984-04-0202 April 1984 Control of Heavy Loads - Phase Ii,Arkansas Nuclear One, Units 1 & 2, Draft Technical Evaluation Rept ML20087J8841984-02-29029 February 1984 Review of the Arkansas Nuclear One Generating Station Unit NO.1 Emergency Feedwater System Reliability Analysis ML20082S7671983-10-0707 October 1983 Technical Evaluation Rept on Tests Conducted to Verify Analyses Performed on Adequacy of Station Electric Distribution Sys Voltages for Arkansas Nuclear One,Unit 1 ML20087L9201983-09-30030 September 1983 Analysis of 800129 Turbine Trip at Arkansas Nuclear One Unit 2 ML20087L9141983-09-30030 September 1983 Analysis of 800624 Loss of Offsite Power Transient at Arkansas Nuclear One Unit 2 ML20087L9111983-08-31031 August 1983 Analysis of 800407 Loss of Offsite Power Transient at Arkansas Nuclear One Unit 1 ML20024B9571983-07-31031 July 1983 Draft DHR During Total Loss of Feedwater Event for C-E Sys 80 Plant. ML20077B8541983-07-20020 July 1983 Operating Reactor PORV Repts (F-37) TMI Action Plan Requirements:Generic Rept - B&W Designed Units, Technical Evaluation Rept ML20024C8521983-06-30030 June 1983 the Effect of Some Operations and Control Room Improvements on the Safety of the Arkansas Nuclear One,Unit One,Nuclear Power Plant ML20024E5151983-03-24024 March 1983 Review of Licensee Resolution of Outstanding Issues from NRC Equipment Environ Qualification SERs (F-11 & B-60), Arkansas Nuclear One Unit 2, Vols 1 & 2 ML20079P5731983-03-21021 March 1983 ECCS Repts (F-47) TMI Action Plan Requirements,Ar Nuclear One Unit 1, Technical Evaluation Rept ML20076C3641982-11-24024 November 1982 ECCS Repts (F-47),TMI Action Plan Requirements,Arkansas Nuclear One,Unit 2, Technical Evaluation Rept ML20127A2891982-10-0505 October 1982 Containment Leak Rate Testing Investigations, Progress Summary for Sept 1982 ML20065F2951982-09-28028 September 1982 PWR Main Steam Line Break W/Continued Feedwater Addition (B-69),AR Nuclear One,Unit 1, Technical Evaluation Rept ML20092J9021982-09-24024 September 1982 Technical Evaluation Rept,Arkansas Nuclear One,Unit 2, Seismic Qualification of Auxiliary Feedwater Sys ML20064M2781982-08-31031 August 1982 Interim Reliability Evaluation Program:Analysis of the Arkansas Nuclear ONE-UNIT 1 Nuclear Power Plant.Docket No. 50-313.(Arkansas Power and Light Company) 1999-03-31
[Table view] Category:TEXT-PROCUREMENT & CONTRACTS
MONTHYEARML20206F0721999-03-31031 March 1999 Technical Evaluation Rept on Third 10-Year Interval ISI Program Plan,Entergy Operations,Inc,Arkansas Nuclear One, Unit 1 ML20154K3011998-06-30030 June 1998 Technical Evaluation Rept, Third Ten-Year Interval Pump & Valve Inservice Testing Program, for Arkansas Nuclear One, Unit 1,Entergy Operations,Inc ML20138G5221996-10-25025 October 1996 Technical Evaluation Rept of IPE Submittal & RAI Responses for Plant,Unit 1 Npp ML20138K0621995-11-30030 November 1995 TER on IPE Submittal Human Reliability Analysis, Final Rept ML20138F0921995-11-30030 November 1995 TER on IPE Back End Analysis ML20138F0811995-11-27027 November 1995 TER on IPE Front End Analysis L-95-047, Technical Evaluation Rept for Arkansas Nuclear One,Units 1 & 2 Plants Odcm,Rev 21995-09-30030 September 1995 Technical Evaluation Rept for Arkansas Nuclear One,Units 1 & 2 Plants Odcm,Rev 2 ML20080B4931994-11-30030 November 1994 Evaluation of Utility Response to Suppl 1 to NRC Bulletin 90-01:Arkansas Nuclear One-1/-2, Dtd Nov 1994 ML20116A4741992-09-30030 September 1992 Emergency Feedwater System RISK-BASED Inspection Guide for the Arkansas Nuclear One Unit 2 Power Plant ML20127E3291992-09-30030 September 1992 TER Pump & Valve IST Program Ano,Unit 2 ML20118A0111992-03-31031 March 1992 TER Pump & Valve Inservice Testing Program Arkansas Nuclear One,Unit 1 ML20072R9611991-03-31031 March 1991 TER Review of ANO-1 CST Seismic Design ML20059L5301990-09-21021 September 1990 Notification of Contract Execution,Mod 1,Task Order 8,to Nuclear Power Reactor Operations,Mods & Maint Insp Svcs. Contractor:Parameter,Inc ML20154H5451988-08-31031 August 1988 Evaluation of Risks Associated with AOT and STI Requirements at the ANO-1 Nuclear Power Plant ML20153D4321988-03-31031 March 1988 User'S Guide for Prisim Arkansas Nuclear One - Unit 1.Volume 1,Program for Inspectors ML20153D4951988-03-31031 March 1988 User'S Guide for Prisim Arkansas Nuclear One - Unit 1.Volume 2,Program for Regulators ML20150F3441988-03-31031 March 1988 PRA Applications Program for Inspection at Arkansas Nuclear One Unit 1.Docket No. 50-313.(Arkansas Power and Light Company) ML20236D9181987-07-31031 July 1987 Methodology and Application of Surrogate Plant PRA Analysis to the Rancho Seco Power Plant.Task 1 - Analysis of ANO-1 and Oconee PRAs ML20214R7431987-03-31031 March 1987 Rev 1 to Conformance to Item 4.5.2 of Generic Ltr 83-28, Arkansas Nuclear One-2,Calvert Cliffs 1 & 2,Fort Calhoun, Main Yankee,Millstone 2,Palisades,Palo Verde 1,2 & 3,San Onofre 2 & 3,St Lucie 1 & 2,Waterford 3 & WNP 3 ML20210Q4481987-01-0909 January 1987 Reactor Trip Sys Reliability Conformance to Item 4.5.2 of Generic Ltr 83-28,Arkansas Nuclear One Unit 2,Calvert Cliffs Units 1 & 2,Fort Calhoun,Maine Yankee,Millstone Unit 2, Palisades,Palo Verde Units..., Technical Evaluation Rept ML20214L9881986-08-25025 August 1986 Evaluation of Dcrdr for Arkansas Power & Light Co Arkansas Nuclear One,Unit 2, Technical Evaluation Rept ML20214L2871986-08-25025 August 1986 Evaluation of Arkansas Power & Light Co Dcrdr of Arkansas Nuclear One - Unit 1 Plant, Technical Evaluation Rept ML20212M2761986-07-31031 July 1986 Conformance to Generic Ltr 83-28,Item 2.1 (Part 1), Equipment Classification (Reactor Trip Sys Components), Arkansas 1 & 2,Calvert Cliffs 1 & 2,Crystal River 3 & Davis-Besse 1 ML20210K6841986-04-30030 April 1986 Conformance to Generic Ltr 83-28,Items 3.1.3 & 3.2.3, Arkansas Nuclear One 2,Calvert Cliffs 1 & 2,Palo Verde 1,2 & 3 & San Onofre 2 & 3 ML20154D3021986-01-21021 January 1986 Site Survey of Arkansas Nuclear One Unit 2 Maint Program & Practices, Technical Ltr Rept ML20155F9141985-10-31031 October 1985 Addendum a to First Internal Inservice Insp Program, Arkansas Nuclear Power Plant,Unit 1 Technical Evaluation Rept ML20138N9261985-10-31031 October 1985 Audit Rept of Dcrdr for Arkansas Nuclear One,Unit 1, for Oct 1985 ML20140C7801985-10-31031 October 1985 Technical Evaluation Rept,Second Interval Inservice Insp Program,Arkansas Nuclear Power Plant Unit 1 ML20210A5811985-10-30030 October 1985 Review of Licensee & Applicant Responses to Generic Ltr 83-28 (Required Actions Based on Generic Implications of Salem ATWS Events),Item 1.2,Arkansas Nuclear One, Units 1 & 2..., Technical Evaluation Rept ML20137S2571985-08-31031 August 1985 Conformance to Generic Ltr 83-28,Items 3.1.3 & 3.2.3, Arkansas 1,Crystal River 3,Oconee 1,2 & 3,Rancho Seco & TMI-1 ML20211L0471985-08-31031 August 1985 Conformance to Reg Guide 1.97,Arkansas Nuclear One,Unit 1 ML20209F8151985-06-30030 June 1985 Conformance to Generic Ltr 83-28,Items 3.1.3 & 3.2.3, Arkansas 1,Crystal River 3,Oconee 1,2 & 3,Rancho Seco & TMI-1 ML20112E0811985-03-31031 March 1985 Conformance to Reg Guide 1.97,Arkansas Nuclear One,Unit 1 ML20116B3661985-02-28028 February 1985 Conformance to Reg Guide 1.97,Arkansas Nuclear One,Unit 2 ML20106A6631984-09-24024 September 1984 Technical Evaluation Rept,Control of Heavy Loads, Arkansas Nuclear One Units 1 & 2 ML20083M3101984-04-0202 April 1984 Control of Heavy Loads - Phase Ii,Arkansas Nuclear One, Units 1 & 2, Draft Technical Evaluation Rept ML20087J8841984-02-29029 February 1984 Review of the Arkansas Nuclear One Generating Station Unit NO.1 Emergency Feedwater System Reliability Analysis ML20082S7671983-10-0707 October 1983 Technical Evaluation Rept on Tests Conducted to Verify Analyses Performed on Adequacy of Station Electric Distribution Sys Voltages for Arkansas Nuclear One,Unit 1 ML20087L9141983-09-30030 September 1983 Analysis of 800624 Loss of Offsite Power Transient at Arkansas Nuclear One Unit 2 ML20087L9201983-09-30030 September 1983 Analysis of 800129 Turbine Trip at Arkansas Nuclear One Unit 2 ML20087L9111983-08-31031 August 1983 Analysis of 800407 Loss of Offsite Power Transient at Arkansas Nuclear One Unit 1 ML20024B9571983-07-31031 July 1983 Draft DHR During Total Loss of Feedwater Event for C-E Sys 80 Plant. ML20077B8541983-07-20020 July 1983 Operating Reactor PORV Repts (F-37) TMI Action Plan Requirements:Generic Rept - B&W Designed Units, Technical Evaluation Rept ML20024C8521983-06-30030 June 1983 the Effect of Some Operations and Control Room Improvements on the Safety of the Arkansas Nuclear One,Unit One,Nuclear Power Plant ML20024E5151983-03-24024 March 1983 Review of Licensee Resolution of Outstanding Issues from NRC Equipment Environ Qualification SERs (F-11 & B-60), Arkansas Nuclear One Unit 2, Vols 1 & 2 ML20079P5731983-03-21021 March 1983 ECCS Repts (F-47) TMI Action Plan Requirements,Ar Nuclear One Unit 1, Technical Evaluation Rept ML20076C3641982-11-24024 November 1982 ECCS Repts (F-47),TMI Action Plan Requirements,Arkansas Nuclear One,Unit 2, Technical Evaluation Rept ML20127A2891982-10-0505 October 1982 Containment Leak Rate Testing Investigations, Progress Summary for Sept 1982 ML20065F2951982-09-28028 September 1982 PWR Main Steam Line Break W/Continued Feedwater Addition (B-69),AR Nuclear One,Unit 1, Technical Evaluation Rept ML20092J9021982-09-24024 September 1982 Technical Evaluation Rept,Arkansas Nuclear One,Unit 2, Seismic Qualification of Auxiliary Feedwater Sys 1999-03-31
[Table view] |
Text
4
., Enclosure 1 SAIC-85/1527-1 4
REVIEW OF LICENSEE AND APPLICANT RESPONSES TO NRC GENERIC LETTER 83-28 (Required l Actions Based on Generic Implications of Salem ATWS Events), Item 1.2 4
" POST-TRIP REVIEW: DATA AND INFORMATION CAPABILITIES" FOR ARKANSAS-NUCLEAR ONE, UNITS 1 AND 2 (50-313, 50-368) i Technical Evaluation Report Prepared-by Science Applications' International Corporation 1710 Goodridge Drive McLean, Virginia 22102 Prepared for U.S.- Nuclear Regulatory Commission
. Washington, D.C. 20555 Contract No. NRC-03-82-096~
... e 8511150066 85 }13 PDR ADOCK O PM '
P
,%.,. m ++
FOREWORD This report contains the technical evaluation of the Arkansas Nuclear One, Units 1 and 2, response to Generic Letter 83-28 (Required Actions Based on Generic Implications of Salem ATWS Events). Item 1.2 " Post Trip Review:
Data and Information Capabilities."~
.For~ the purposes of .this evaluation, the review criteria, presented in part 2 of this report, were divided into five separate categories. These-are:
a The parameters monitored by the sequence of events and the time 4
1.
history recorders,
- 2. The performance characteristics of the sequence of events recorders, r
- 3. The performance characteristics of the time history recorders,
- 4. The data output format, and
- 5. The leng-term data retention capability for post-trip review material.
All available responses to Generic Letter 83-28 were evaluated. The plant for which this . report is applicable did not adequately respond to any of these categories. ,
The report describes the specific methods used to determine the cate-gorization of the responses to Generic Letter 83-28. Si'nce this evaluation report was intended to apply to more than one nuclear power plant specifics regarding how each plant met (or failed to meet) the review criteria are not presented. Instead, the evaluation presents' a categorization of the responses according'to which categories of review criteria are satisfied and which are not. The evaluations are based on specific criteria-(Section 2) derived from the requirements as stated in the generic letter.
L e
i
- w = t
TABLE OF CONTENTS' I
4.
Section Page e
~
Introduction. . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
.1 1. -Background. . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . .-. . . . . . . . . 2
- 2. Review Criteria . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3
- 3. Evaluation. . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8~
l 4. Co ncl u s i o n . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9:
- 5. Re f e r e nc e s . . . . . . . . . . . . -- . . . . . . . . . . . . . ' . . 10 1
i L
4 I i
4 1
4 4
e.
t a
b
, ,,a y S -r . - = +
~ .
~
INTRODUCTION SAIC has reviewed the utility's response to Generic Letter 83-28, item 1.2 " Post-Trip Review: Data and Information Capability." The data and information capabilities, as described'in the~ response (see references),
either fail to meet the review criteria or provide insufficient information to allow determination of the adequacy of the data and information capabili-ties in the following areas.
e The parameters monitored by both the sequence-of-events and time history recorders.
e The sequence-of-events recorder (s) performance charac-teristics.
e- The time history recorder (s) performance characteris-tics.
e The output format of the recorded data-e The long-term data retention, ' record keeping, capa-bility. -
t 4
1
- 1. Background On February 25, 1984, both of the scram circuit breakers at Unit 1 of the Salem Nuclear Power Plant failed to open upon an automatic reactor trip signal from the reactor protection system. This incident occurred during the plant startup and the reactor was tripped manually by the operator about 30 seconds after the initiation of the automatic trip signal. The failure of the circuit breakers has been determined to be related to the sticking of the under voltage. trip attachment. Prior to this incident; on February 22,
.1983; at Unit 1 of the Salem Nuclear Pcder Plant an automatic trip signal was generated based on steam generator low-low level during plant startup.
In this case the reactor was tripped manually by the operator almost coinci-dentally with the automatic trip.' At that time, because the utility did not have a requirement for the systematic evaluation of the reactor trip, no investigation was performed to determine whether the reactor was tripped automatically as expected or manually. The utilities' written procedures required only that the cause of the trip be determined and identified the responsible personnel that could authorize a restart if the cause of the trip is known. Following the second trip which clearly indicated the problem with the trip breakers, the question was raised on whether the circuit breakers had functioned properly during the earlier incident. The most useful source of information in this case, namely the sequence of events printout which would have indicated whether the reactor was tripped automatically or manually during the February 22 incident, was not retained after the incident. Thus, no judgment on the proper functioning of the trip system during the earlier incident could be made.
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 is reported in NUREG-1000, " Generic
-Implications of ATWS Events at the Salem Nuclear Power Plant." Based on the results of this study, a set of required actions were developed and included in Generic Letter 83-28 which was issued on July 8,1983 and sent to all
~ licensees of. operating reactors, applicants .for operating license, and construction permit holders. The required actions in this' generic letter ,
consist of four categories.- These are: (1) Post-Trip Review, (2) Equipment 2
n
Classificatio'n -and Vender Interface.-~(3) Post Maintenance Testing, and (4)
Reactor Trip System Reliability Improvements.
~
The first required action of the generic letter, Post-Trip Review, is the subject of this TER and consists of action item 1.1 " Program Description and Procedure" and action item 1.2 " Data and Information Capability." In I the next section the review criteria used to assess the adequacy of-the utilities' responses to the requirements of action item 1.2 will be discussed.
- 2. -Review Criteria The intent of the Post Trip Review requirements of Generic Letter 83-28 is.to ensure that the licensee has adequate . procedures and data and information sources to understand the cause(s) and progression of a reactor trip. This understanding should go beyond a simple. identification of the course of the event. It should include the capability to determine the root cause of the reactor trip and to determine whether safety limits have been exceeded and if so to what extent. Sufficient information about the reactor trip event should be available so that .a decision on .the acceptability of a reactor restart can be made.-
The following are the review critieria developed for the' requirements of Generic Letter 83-28, action item 1.2:
The equipment that provides the digital sequence of events'(SOE) record'
~
and the _ analog time history records of an unscheduled shutdown should pro-vide a reliable source. of the necessary information to- be used in the post trip _ r_eview. Each plant vailable which is 'necessary .to determine the-cause(s) and' prog'ression of the event (s) fo-11owing a plant _ trip should be-
~
monitored by at -least one recorder [such as a' sequence-of-events recorder or
- a. plant process. computer for digital parameters; and strip charts, a' plant process computer or' analog recorder for analog (time-history) variables].
Each device used to record an analog or digital = plant variable should be-
' described in sufficient detail so that a determination can be made'as to.
whether.the.following performance characteristics are met:
-3
= - _ -
e Each sequence-of-events recorder should be capable of detecting and recording the sequence of events with a sufficient time discrimination capability to ensure that the time responses asso-ciated with each monitored safety-related system can be ascer-tained, and that a determination can be made as to whether the time response is within acceptable limits based on FSAR Chapter 15 Accident Analyses. The recommended guideline for the SOE time discrimination is approximately 100 msec. If current SOE recorders do not have this time discrimination capability the licensee or applicant should show that the current time discrimi-nation capability is sufficient for an adequate reconstruction of the course of the reactor trip. As a minimum this should include the ability to adequately reconstruct the accident scenarios pre-sented in Chapter 15 of the plant FSAR.
e Each analog time history data recorder should have a sample inter-val small enough so that the incident can be accurately reconstructed following a reactor trip. As a minimum, the licensee or applicant should be able to reconstruct the course of the accident sequences evaluated in the accident analysis of the plant FSAR (Chapter 15). The recommended guideline for. the sample interval is 10 sec. If the time history equipment does not meet this guideline, the licensee or applicant should show that the l current time history capability is sufficient to accurately recon-I struct the accident sequences presented in Chapter 15 of the FSAR.
e To support the post trip analysis of the cause of the trip and the proper functioning of involved safety related equipment, each analog time history data recorder should be capable of updating and retaining information from approximately five minutes prior to the trip until at least ten minutes after the trip.
e The information gathered.by the sequence-of-events and time history data collectors.should be stored in a manner that will allow for retrieval and analysis. The data may be retained in either hardcopy (computer printout, strip chart output. etc.) or in an accessible memory (magnetic disc or tape). This information ;
should be presented in a readable and meaningful format, taking i
4
)
l into consideration good human factors practices (such as those outlined in NUREG-0700).
e All equipment used to record sequence of events and time history information should be powered from a reliable and non-1 interruptible power source. The power source used need not be safety related.
The sequence of events and time history recording equipment should monitor sufficient digital and analog parameters, respectively, to assure I that the course of the reactor trip can be reconstructed. The parameters' monitored should provide sufficient information to determine the root cause I of the reactor trip, the progression of- the reactor trip, and the response of the plant parameters and systems to the reactor trip. Specifically, all input parameters associated with reactor trips, safety injections and other i safety-related systems as well as output parameters sufficient to record the proper functioning of these systems should be recorded for use in the post f
trip review. The parameters deemed necessary, as a minimum, to perform a post-trip review (one that would determine if the plant remained within its design envelope) are presented on Tables'1.2-1 and 1.2-2. If the appli-l cants' or licensees' SOE recorders and time history recorders do not monitor all of the parameters suggested in these tables the applicant or licensee should show that the existing set of monitored parameters are sufficient to establish that the plant remained within the design envelope for the appro-l priate accident conditions; such as those analyzed in Chapter 15 of the
! plant Safety Analysis Report.
Information gathered during the post trip review is required input for future post trip reviews. Data from all unscheduled shutdowns provides a valuable reference source for the determination of the acceptability of the plant vital parameter and equipment response to future unscheduled shut-downs. It is therefore necessary that information gathered during all post trip reviews be maintained in an accessible manner for the life of the plant.
I r l
t 5
t
4
. 4 -
- Table 1.2-1. PWR Parameter List
~
SOE Time History :
Recorder Recorder Parameter / Signal
- i :
l x- Reactor Trip !
(1) x- '
Safety Injection ,
x- - Containment Isolation
- (1) x Turbine Trip
} x Control Rod Position I- (1) x x Neutron Flux, Power I x , x Containment Pressure-I. .
~(2) Containment Radiation ,
j x Containment Sump Level (1) x x - Primary. System Pressure ,
j (1) x x Primary System Temperature
- (1) x ,
Pressurizer Level .
(1) x Reactor Coolant Pump Status
[ {
(1) x x_ Primary System Flow i
] .
j (3)- Safety ,Inj.;- Flow, Pump / Valve Status
} x MSIV Position j j x x Steam Generator Pressure !
(1) x x Steam Generator Level -
i (1) x x. Feedwater Flow j (1) x x Steam Flow (3) Auxiliary Feedwater System; Flow, [
j Pump /Value Status.
m x s AC and DC System Status (Bus Voltage) x Diesel Generator-Status.(Start /Stop,
. On/Off) -
- x. PORV Position -
M (1): Trip parameters (2): Parameter may be monitored by either an SOE or time history recorder.
- i- (3): Acceptable recorder options are: (a) system flow recorded.on;an SOE recorder, (b) system flow recorded on a time history recorder, or (c). i
{
equipment status recorded on an SOE recorder..
, e 6
+m __A____ _ _ _ _ . -. - _____-_m_____-__.#_ _ _ _ m_ .--_-.m____,..__.__m.__.____.___m.A.___ _-_ __m.--m___.___._m_ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ . - _ _ _ _ _ - . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - . - _ m - __m' --- "mm - *aa
Table 1.2-2. BWR Parameter List SOE Time History Recorder Recorder Parameter / Signal i
x Reactor Trip l x Safety Injection x Containment Isolation x Turbine Trip x Control Rod Position x (1) x Neutron Flux, Power x (1) Main Steam Radiation (2) Containment (Dry Well) Radiation x (1) x Drywell Pressure (Containment Pressure)
(2) Suppression Pool Temperature x (1) x Primary System Pressure x (1) x Primary System level x MSIV Position x (1) Turbine Stop Valve / Control Valve Position 3
x Turbine Bypass Valve Position x Feedwater Flow x Steam Flow (3) Recirculation; Flow Pump Status x (1) Scram Discharge Level x (1) ,
Condenser' Vacuum x AC and DC System Status (Bus Voltage)
(3)(4) Safety Injection; Flow. Pump / Valve Status x Diesel Generator Status (On/Off, Start /Stop)
(1): Trip parameters.
(2): Parameter may be recorded by either an SOE or time history recorder.
(3): Acceptable recorder options are: (a) system flow recorded on an SOE recorder, (b) system flow recorded on a time history recorder, or (c) equipment status recorded on an SOE recorder.
(4): Includes recording of parameters for all applicable systems from the following: HPCI, LPCI, LPCS, IC, RCIC.
7
, - . _ . _ . . . _ _ - ___-. __. .. _ __ __ _. _ . .~ _ _ .__..._ .
~
- 3. Evaluation l The parameters identified in part 2 of this report as a part of the I: review criteria are those deemed necessary to perform an adequate post-trip ,
i review. The recording of these parameters on equipment that meets the
- guidelines of the review criteria will result in a source of information ,
j that can be used to determine.the cause of the reactor trip and the plant response to the trip, including the responses of important plant systems. l The information provided does not indicate that the parameters specified in
- part 2 of this report are being recorded by.the sequence,of events and time j history recorders.
The rev'iew; criteria require that the equipment being used to record the j sequence of events and time history data needed for-a post-trip review meet j certain performance characteristics. These. characteristics. are intended to -
j ensure that, if the' proper parameters are recorded, the recording equipment
} will provide. an adequate source of information for an effective post-trip.
j review. The information provided ~ does not indicate that neither the ~ time f' history 'nor SOE equipment used would meet-the intent of the performance r
{ criteria outlined in part 2 of this report.
i lThe data and information recorded for use in the post-trip review 3
should be output in a format' that allows for ease of identification and use i of the data to meet the review criterion that calls for information in a ,
readable.and meaningful . format. The' information provided,-to date, does not
- indicate that this criterion'is met.
t-
} The data and information used during a post-trip review ~should be ~
- j- retained as-part of the plant files. This information could prove useful l l
during future post-trip reviews. Therefore, one criterion is that infor-:
p mation used during a post-trip review be' maintained in an accessible manner-ll
. for the life of the plant. The information' provided, to date, does not indicate that this. criterion will be ~ met. .
j- , ;
1 I
i i
! - _8
-. ~ , - -
__m____------,-.-------___..1--a. .---a,,.---.--a.-a.,- ----ma,-.-------.,,aa-ww .--__--.s_-_sa.-u-s,__-_
~
- 4. Conclusion The information supplied in response to Generic Letter 83-28 does not indicate that the post-trip review data and information capabilities are adequate in the following areas.
- 1. Based upon the information contained in the submittal, all of the parameters specified in part 2 of this report that should be recorded for use in a post-trip review are not recorded.
- 2. Time history recorders, as described in the submittal, do not meet the minimum performance characteristics.
- 3. The sequence of events recorders, as described in the submittal, do not meet the minimum performance requirements.
- 4. As described in the submittal, the recorded data may not be output in a readable and meaningful format.
- 5. The data retention procedures, as supplied in the submittal, may not ensure that the information recorded for the post-trip review is maintained in an accessible manner for _the life of the plant.
It is possible that the current data and information capabilities at this nuclear power plant are adequate to meet _ the intent ofothese review criteria, but were not completely described. . Under these circumstances, the licensee should provide an updated, more complete, description to show in more detail the data and information capabilities at this nuclear power plant. If the information provided accurately represents all current data and information capabilties, then the licensee should either show that the current. data and information capabilities are sufficient to meet the intent of the review criteria in part 2 of this report, or detail future modifica-tions that would enable the licensee to meet the intent of-the evaluation criteria.
9
s
. 1 l
i REFERENCES NRC Generic Letter 83-28. " Letter to all licensees of operating i reactors, applicants for operating license, and holders of construction permits regarding Required Actions Based on Generic Implications of Salem ATWS Events." July 8, 1983.
NUREG-1000, Generic Implications of ATWS Events at the Saler Nuclear Power Plant, April 1983.
Letter from J. R. Marshall, Arkansas Power and Light Company, to D. G.
Eisenhut, NRC, dated November 5,1983 Accession Number 8311150374 in response to Generic Letter 83-28 of July 8,1983, with attachment.
Generic Implications of Salem ATWS Event for Arkansas Nuclear Units 1 and 2.
e 10
.o
Enclosure 2 Suit 1ARY ANO-1
- 1. Parameters recorded: Unsatisfactory See attached table for discrepancies.
- 2. SOE recorders performance characteristics: Unsatisfactory Plant process computer: Ims time discrimination and a vital power supply (not necessarily uninterruptible)
(This is a redundant system that does not
~
NOVA Sequence of events:
~
monitor any parameters not recorded by the plant process com-puter.) 500ms time discrimination and a non-interruptible power supply.
- 3. Time history recorders performance characteristics: Unsatisfactory Plant process computer: Samples parameters at 30 sec. intervals from 5 minutes prior to 5 minutes post trip and at 2 sec. intervals from 30 seconds prior to 30 seconds post trip NOVA computer: Continuous monitoring of parameters sampled at 0.5 sec.
intervals
- 4. Data output format: Unsatisfactory Plant process computer: SOE data - no time of parameter change is provided Time history data - time, sensor channel _(data point) ID, and value are recorded NOVA computer: Results are plotted (no plots' are provided)
- 5. Data retention capability: Unsatisfactory
- Submittal did not specify the length of time post-trip data would be retained.
Desirable PWR Parameters for Post-Trip Review (circledparametersarenotrecorded)
SOE Time History Recorder Recorder Parameter / Signal x Reactor _ Trip (1) x Safety Injection x Containment Isolation (1) x Turbine Trip x Control Rod Position (1) x x Neutron Flux, Power x Containment Pressure
@ Containment Radiation
@ Containment Sump Level (1) x x Primary System Pressure (1) x x Primary System Temperature (1) x Pressurizer Level (1) x Reactor Coolant Pump Status (1) x x Primary System Flow (3) Safety Inj.; Flow. Pump / Valve Status x MSIV Positicn x x Steam Generator Pressure (1) x x Steam Generator Level (1) x x Feedwater Flow (1) x x Steam Flow -
3 Auxiliary Feedwater System; Flow.
Pump /Value Status
@ AC and DC System Status (Bus Voltage) x Diesel Generator Status (Start /Stop, On/Off)
@ PORV Position (1): Trip parameters (2): Parameter may be monitored by either an SOE or time history recorder.
(3): Acceptable recorder options are: (a) system flow recorded on an SOE recorder (b) system flow recorded on a time history recorder, or. (c) equipment status recorded on an SOE recorder.
-2
o q
~ '
ANO-2 t,
- 1. Parameters recorded: Unsatisfactory See attached table for discrepancies.
- 2. SOE recorders performance characteristics: Unsatisfactory Plant process computer: Imsec time discrimination and a vital power supply (but not necessarily uninterruptible)
Core Protection Calculators (CPC) CEAC: Provides parameter values in trip buffers, i.e., values at time of trip, power supply not specified
- 3. Time history recorders performance characteristic!. Unsatisfactory.
Plant process computer: A sampling rate of 30 secs. from 5 minutes prior to 5 minutes post trip and of 2 secs. from 30 seconds prior to 30 seconds post trip.
Critical Applications Program System (CAPS): One'second sample rate for an unspecified period,-CAPS are not powered from an uninterruptible source.
- 4. Data output format: Unsatisfactory Plant process computer: SOE output does not include time of data point; analog format is acceptable.
CPC and CEAC: Acceptable (parameter ID and value output at time of trip)
CAPS: Accep' table (time and parameter name. ID, and value are printed)
- 5. Data retention capability: Unsatisfactory Submittal did not specify length of time post-trip data would be retained.
3
7- 4 t o Desirable PWR Parameters for Post-Trip Review (circled parameters are not recorded)
SOE - Time History Recorder Recorder Parameter / Signal x Reactor Trip (1) x..
Safety Injection Containment Isolation (1) Turbine Trip Control Rod Position (1)x x Neutron Flux, Power x x Containment Pressure I (2) Containment Radiation x Containment Sump Level (1).x x Primary System Pressure (1) x Primary System Temperature (1) . Pressurizer Level (1) Reactor Coolant Pump Status (1) x Primary System Flow (3) Safety Inj.; Flow. Pump / Valve Status
@ MSIV Position x x Steam Generator Pressure' (1) x x - Steam Generator Level (1) x x Feedwater Flow (1) x x Steam Flow -
l @ Auxiliary Feedwater System; Flow,
- Pump /Value Status x AC and DC Sistem Status (Bus Voltage) x Diesel Generator Status (Start /Stop, On/0ff)
@ PORY Position (1): Trip parameters (2): Parameter may be monitored by either an SOE or time history recorder.
(3): Acceptable recorder options are: (a) system flow recorded on an SOE recorder, (b) system flow recorded on a time history recorder, or (c) equipment status recorded on an SOE recorder.
1 1
4 1
c - , , - -
- r w.m,.,..,- y ,_.,,m. --,-,,.w w +-T e-r e we + , - .=eiy -* t- -- *-n F-- ee-~- - < -