1CAN060501, Arkansas, Unit 1 - License Amendment Request Response to NRC Request for Additional Information on Proposed Operating License Amendment Regarding Uprating of the Tripod Special Lifting Device

Arkansas, Unit 1 - License Amendment Request Response to NRC Request for Additional Information on Proposed Operating License Amendment Regarding Uprating of the Tripod Special Lifting Device

ML051660298
Person / Time
Site:	Arkansas Nuclear
Issue date:	06/06/2005
From:	James D Entergy Operations
To:	Document Control Desk, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
1CAN060501
Download: ML051660298 (5)

Text

t-E g Entergy Operations, Inc.

1448 S.R. 333

- -Entemvy RusselIville, AR 72802 Tel 479-858-4619 Dale E. James Acting, Director.

Nuclear Safety Assurance 1CAN060501 June 6, 2005 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Attn: Document Control Desk Washington, DC 20555

SUBJECT:

License Amendment Request Response to NRC Request for Additional Information on Proposed Operating License Amendment Regarding Uprating of the Tripod Special Lifting Device Arkansas Nuclear One, Unit 1 Docket No. 50-313 License No. DPR-51 REFERENCE 1 Entergy letter dated December 20, 2004, Proposed Operating License Amendment Regarding Uprating of the Tripod Special Lifting Device (1CAN120401)

Dear Sir or Madam:

In letter dated December 20, 2004 (Reference 1), Entergy requested an Operating License Amendment for Arkansas Nuclear One, Unit 1 (ANO-1) regarding the polar crane lifting tripod.

This tripod will be used to lift the increased load of the new reactor vessel head with the reactor building polar crane. On March 15, 2005, the NRC Staff requested additional information regarding the analysis performed for the ANO-1 lifting tripod. Attachment 1 provides Entergy's response to this request.

As discussed in Reference 1, Entergy requested approval of the proposed amendment by August 1, 2005. There are no commitments being made with this response. If you have any questions or require additional information, please contact Steve Bennett at 479-858-4626.

I dedare underpenaltyof perurythattheforegoing istrue and correct. Executed on June 6,2005.

Sincerely,

/ EJ/sk

Attachment:

Response to NRC Request for Additional Information on Proposed Operating License Amendment Regarding Uprating of the Tripod Special Lifting Device l

, 4-I CAN060501 Page 2 of 2 cc: Dr. Bruce S. Mallett Regional Administrator U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Region IV 611 Ryan Plaza Drive, Suite 400 Arlington, TX 76011-8064 NRC Senior Resident Inspector Arkansas Nuclear One P.O. Box310 London, AR 72847 U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Attn: Mr. Thomas W. Alexion MS 0-7D1 Washington, DC 20555-0001 Mr. Bernard R. Bevill Director Division of Radiation Control and Emergency Management Arkansas Department of Health 4815 West Markham Street Little Rock, AR 72205

Attachment I I CAN060501 Response to NRC Request for Additional Information on Proposed Operating License Amendment Regarding Uprating of the Tripod Special Lifting Device to 1CAN060501 Page 1 of 2 Response to NRC Request for Additional Information on Proposed Operating License Amendment Regarding Uprating of the Tripod Special Lifting Device RAI 1. In the last paragraph on Page 2 of Attachment 1, the licensee states that th6 resultant load factor is 0.02, which is well below, the 0.15 minimum dynamic factors; therefore, Entergy is applying a dynamic factor of 0.15 to the static load. Please provide the guidance used in determining the applicable dynamic load factor within Crane Manufacturers Association of America (CMAA) 70-1983, Specifications for Electric Overhead Traveling Cranes, and indicate whether the applied dynamic factor is consistent with the guidance.

ANO Response to RAI 1:

The guidance in CMAA 70-1983 is to use the greater of the following two values as a dynamic load factor:

1. Value calculated based on Hoist Speed, and

2. Minimum value = 0.15 As stated in the 9th line of the same paragraph of Reference 1, the hoist load factor 0.005 (Ref. CMAA 70-1983 - Section 3.3.2.1.1.4.2) is multiplied by the hoisting speed of 4 fpm (ANO-1 Polar Crane hoisting speed) to arrive at the resultant load factor of 0.02 (0.005 X 4=0.02).

The calculated dynamic load factor, 0.02, is less than the minimum dynamic load factor of 0.15.

Entergy is applying a minimum dynamic load factor of 0.15 to the static load to calculate the dynamic load.

RAI 2. On Page 3 of Attachment 1, the licensee provided a list of the equations used to calculate the allowable stresses. The licensee states that these allowable stresses are based on the allowable stresses provided in American National Standards Institute N14.6-1978 and in American Society of Mechanical Engineers Code, Section 111, and Paragraph NF-3322-1. It is not clearto the staff how these equations were developed.

Please clarify how you arrived at the numbers listed on your equations (i.e., the 7 bullets under "Given").

ANO Response to RAI 2:

The ANSI 14.6 guidance is to use 1/3 of the Yield Strength or 1/5 of the Ultimate Tensile Strength, whichever is more limiting as Allowable Tensile Stress (Fo.

There is no further guidance given to calculate other Allowables like Shear Stress, Bearing Stress, Tensile Stress (at the pin holes), Compressive Stress, etc.

_ 4W~ C wiX Attachment 1 to 1CAN060501 Page 2 of 2 Hence the various coefficients are calculated with the help of ASME Code. For example the Allowable Shear Stress is 2/3 of the Allowable Tensile Stress.

Detailed explanation for the factors used for various Allowable Stresses are as follows:

Allowable Tensile Stress is equal to "Ft" (which is the minimum of 1/3 of Sy or 1/5 of Su).

The ASME Allowable Shear Stress is O.4SY which compares to the ASME Allowable Tensile Stress of 0.6Sy. The ratio of these two allowable stresses is 2/3 (=0.4/0.6). Hence, for the purpose of this calculation, the Allowable Shear Stress is considered as 2/3 of the Allowable Tensile Stress (Ft) or the lesser of (2 /3 )(1/ 3 )Sy and (2/3)(1/5)Su. Therefore, the same conservative method used to determine the Allowable Tensile Stress is applied in determining the Allowable Shear Stress for this calculation.

In a similar manner, the ASME Allowable Bearing Stress is O.9Sy. The ratio of Allowable Bearing Stress to the Allowable Tensile Stress is 3/2 (=0.9/0.6).

Hence, the Allowable Bearing Stress is considered as 3/2 of Ft or the lesser of (3/2)(13)Sy and (3I2)(1I5)Su. Therefore, the same conservative method used to determine the Allowable Tensile Stress is applied in determining the Allowable Bearing Stress for this calculation.

The ASME Allowable Tensile Stress at the pin is 0.45Sy which is 3/4 (=0.45/0.6) of the Allowable Bending Stress (O.6Sy). Hence, the allowable Tensile Stress at the pin is considered as 3/4 of Ft or the lesser of (3 / 4 )(1/ 3 )Sy and (314)(1/5)Su.

Therefore, the same conservative method used to determine the Allowable Tensile Stress is applied in determining the Allowable Tensile Stress. at the pin for this calculation.

The ASME Allowable Compressive Stress is 0.66Sy which is 1.1 (=0.66/0.6) of the Allowable Bending Stress (0.6Sy). Hence, the allowable Compressive Stress is considered as 1.1 of Ft or the lesser of (1.1)(1/3)Sy and (1.1)(1/5)S".

Therefore, the same conservative method used to determine the Allowable Tensile Stress is applied in determining the Allowable Compressive Stress for this calculation.

The approach used in the calculation is similar to multiplying the design load by 3 for Yield (or by 5 for Ultimate) and comparing the results with ASME allowables.