ML19253C213
| ML19253C213 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Arkansas Nuclear  |
| Issue date: | 11/20/1979 |
| From: | Reid R Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Cavanaugh W ARKANSAS POWER & LIGHT CO. |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 7911300191 | |
| Download: ML19253C213 (3) | |
Text
Wkb
.v' 4 aaro,v UNITED STATES E),s.cf('%h NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
+
"f'
/
E WA3HINGTON D. C. 20555
',, IY 9
/
November 20, 1979 Docket No. 50-368 Mr. William Cavanaugh, III Vice President, Generation and Construction Arkansas Power & Light Company P. O. Box E51 Little Rock, Arkansas 72203
Dear Mr. Cavanaugh:
During our meeting of October 4, 1979, regarding the hot leg temperature indication anomaly at Arkansas Nuclear One, Unit No. 2, you could not determine a firm cause for the anomaly.
Inspections were to be made of the reactor vessel internals and we understand the inspections have been com-pleted. We request your report on the results of those inspections.
We also understand that your evaluation under 10 CFR Part 50.59 relating to the modifications to the hot leg temperature system has now been completed.
We will review your evaluation to determine if further reviews are necessary before startup of AN0-2.
We consider this anomaly a condition of operation which is not fully under-stood. Therefore, we request particular attention to this in your startup and surveillance of operation. In particular, we consider it important to monitor the temperature difference between temperature detectors in each hot leg during power ascension and to compare those differences with the experiences during the initial startup testing at the different power levels up to the 50 percent power level. Beyond the 50 percent power level, the temperature differences should be monitored and compared with the expected temperature differences for the particular power levels. You should develop criteria of acceptance and action as it relates to continued power increase, continued operation and reporting to the NRC.
Further, continued surveillance of the temperature anomaly should be provided throughout the first cycle of operation. The surveillance should have criteria for acceptance and action as it relates to continued operation and reporting to the NRC.
Since much of the above relates to your startup testing, we request a summary of your startup testing program which would describe the above considerations and the action criteria relating to the verification of proper reassembly of the reactor and vessel. Also we request your proposed criteria for continued operation, power increase and reporting to the NRC as it relates to the anomaly.
1440 207 7911300 l3 f
)
~
2-November 20, 1979 Mr. William Cavanaugh, III Your inspection results and startup testirg program and action criteria relating to the hot leg temperature anocaly should be submitted in sufficient tine to allow completion of our review prior to ascending above the 50 percent power level.
Sincerely, l
,km Robert W. Reid, Chief Operating Reactors Branch #4
?ivision of Operating Reactors cc: See next page 1440 ?08
.- s Arkansa; Power & Light Company cc:
Phillip K. Lyon, Esq.
House, Holms & Jewell 1550 Tower Building Little Rock, Arkansas 7220'.
Mr. David C. Trimble Manager, Licensing Arkansas Power & Light Company P. O. Box 551 Little Rock, Arkansas 72203 Mr. James P. O'Hanlon General Manager Arkansas Nuclear One P. O. Box 608 Russellville, Arkansas 72801 Mr. William Johnson U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission P. O. Box 2090 Russellville, Arkansas 72801 Mr. Robert B. Borsum Babcock & Wilcox Nuclear Power Generation Division Suite 420, 7735 Old Georgetown Road Bethesda, Maryland 20014 Troy B. Conner, Jr., Esq.
Conner, Moore & Corber 1747 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C.
20006 Arkansas Polytechnic College Russellville, Arkansas 72801 1440 109
'