ML18039A738
| ML18039A738 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Browns Ferry  |
| Issue date: | 04/08/1999 |
| From: | Peterson S NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned) |
| To: | Scalice J TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY |
| Shared Package | |
| ML18039A739 | List: |
| References | |
| TAC-MA2209, NUDOCS 9904140176 | |
| Download: ML18039A738 (3) | |
Text
)'4 e
I Mr. J. A. Scalice
'hief Nuclear Officer and Executive Vice President Tennessee Valley Authority 6A Lookout Place 1101'Market Street Chattanooga, Tennessee 37402-2801 Apri1 8, 1999 ~
f'UBJECT:
BROWNS FERRY NUCLEAR PLANT, UNIT2-EVALUATIONOF THE SECOND 10-YEAR INTERVALINSPECTION REQUEST FOR RELIEF FROM ASME BOILER AND PRESSURE VESSEL CODE, SECTION XI REQUIREMENTS: RELIEF REQUEST 2-SPT-11, REVISION 1 (TAC NO. MA2209)
Dear Mr. Scalice:
By letter dated June 12,.1998, the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA)submitted its Request for Relief (RR) 2-SPT-11,'revision 1, from the requirements of the American Society for Mechanical Engineers, Boiler And Pressure Vessel Code,Section XI, for the Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant, Unit 2, Second 10-Year Interval Inservice Inspection interval.
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staff, with technical assistance from its contractor, the Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory (INEEL) has reviewed and evaluated your submittal.
Based on its review, the NRC staff has determined that the proposed alternativ, namely an engineering evaluation of the bolted connection in lieu of mandatory removal of all bolts when leakage is detected, would provide an acceptable level of quality and safety. Accordingly, relief is granted pursuant to 10 CFR 50.55a(a)(3)(i).
The relief is authorized by law, will not endanger life, property, or the common defense and security, and is otherwise in the public interest, giving due consideration to the burden upon the licensee that could result ifthe requirements were imposed.
The enclosure documents our evaluation.
Sincerely, Origiaa1 sigrMMI by:
Sheri R. Peterson, Chief, Section 2 Project Directorate II Division of Licensing Project Management Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
+GI cc: See next page Docket No. 50-260
Enclosure:
As stated DISTRIBUTION:
~Dodcet.Filed CNorsworthy (e-mail SE, RCN)
PUBLIC GHill (2)
BFN R/F MTschiltz Jwolinski/S Black GHatchett ADe Agazio OGC BCIayton ACRS S Peterson HBerkow LPlisco, Rll DOCUMENT NAME: G:(BFN~RRMA2209.wpd c Sfnbna2209ber
- See previous concurrence To receive a copy of this docunent, indicate in the box:
"C" = Copy without attachment/enclosure "E" = Copy with attachment/enclosure aH" = Mo co OFFICE PDII-2/PM PD I I-2/LA E
OGC*
PDII-2/ 0 PD NAME ADe A azi BCla ton RBachmann SPeterson HB rk DATE 04/
/99 04/
g
/98 03/18/99 04/
/99 04/
~ 99 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY
'P904l40l76,990408 PDR ADQCK 05000260 P
rg g
/14 a I
gP,A A500
~o o
." g
~O
++*++
UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON> D.C. 20555-0001 April 8, 1999 Mr. J. A. Scalice Chief Nuclear Officer and Executive Vice President Tennessee Valley Authority 6A Lookout Place 1101 Market Street Chattanooga, Tennessee 37402-2801
SUBJECT:
BROWNS FERRY NUCLEAR PLANT, UNIT2 - EVALUATIONOF THE SECOND 10-YEAR INTERVALINSPECTION REQUEST FOR RELIEF FROM ASME BOILER AND PRESSURE VESSEL CODE, SECTION XI REQUIREMENTS RELIEF REQUEST 2-SPT-11, REVISION 1 (TAC NO. MA2209)
Dear Mr. Scalice:
By letter dated June 12, 1998, the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA)submitted its Request for Relief (RR) 2-SPT-11, revision 1, from the requirements of the American Society for Mechanical Engineers, Boiler And Pressure Vessel Code,Section XI, for the Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant, Unit 2, Second 10-Year Interval Inservice Inspection interval.
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staff, with technical assistance from its contractor, the Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory (INEEL) has reviewed and evaluated your submittal.
Based on its review, the NRC staff has determined that the proposed alternative, namely an engineering evaluation of the bolted connection in lieu of mandatory removal of all bolts when leakage is detected, would provide an acceptable level of quality and safety. Accordingly, relief is granted pursuant to 10 CFR 50.55a(a)(3)(i).
The relief is authorized by law, willnot endanger life, property, or the common defense and security, and is otherwise in the public interest, giving due consideration to the burden upon the licensee that could result ifthe requirements were imposed.
The enclosure documents our evaluation.
cc: See next page Sincerely, Q..P~
Sheri R. Peterson, Chief, Section 2 Project Directorate II Division of Licensing Project Management Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Docket No. 50-260
Enclosure:
As stated