ML19341C908
| ML19341C908 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Arkansas Nuclear  |
| Issue date: | 02/26/1981 |
| From: | Trimble D ARKANSAS POWER & LIGHT CO. |
| To: | Reid R Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| 1R-0281-12, 1R-281-12, NUDOCS 8103040471 | |
| Download: ML19341C908 (2) | |
Text
r-~y i
IS/
M-
.i m
'I O
z Ej ARKANSAS POWER & LIGHT COMPANY j
c.,
PC' T_ OFFICE BOX 551 LITTLE ROCK. ARKANSAS 72203 (501) 371-. 000 y
S
, di
- i
' fit 1 February 26, 1981 g7 c-:
r:C a
t:
1R-0281-12 Director of Nuclear Reactor Regulation ATTN:
Mr. Robert W. Reid, Chief Operating Reactors Branch #4 Division of Licensing U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Comm.
Washington, D.C.
20555
SUBJECT:
Arkansas Nuclear One - Unit 1 Docket No. 50-313 License No. DPR-51 Additional Cycle 5 Information on Failed Fuel Evaluations (File: 1510.5)
Gentlemen:
Our letter dated February 19, 1981 supplied information on the ANO-1 Cycle 5 startup with five failed fuel assemblies. On February 23, 1981 additional or supplementary information was requested in a telephone conference call with your Mr. Guy Vissing.
This letter will document the information supplied and provide more detail on APSL's effcrts in this matter.
As stated in our February 19, 1981 submittal AP6L has taken significant steps to minimize the impact of using failed fuel assemblies during ANO-1 Cycle 5 operation which go well beyond that required for safety reasons. APSL is also continuing to work with B6W to determine the cause of the failed fuel during Cycle 4 operation.
At this point we cannot predict whether our findings will be conclusive.
- However, APSL will submit a report to the NRC on the outcome as stated in our February 19, 1981 submittal.
Per our February 23, 1981 conference call we will submit a report on the progress of the findings in six months from the date of this letter.
If the evaluation uncovers a generic problem, AP6L will use the existing Technical Specification and/or 10 CFR 21 reporting requirement format as appropriate.
If the evaluation shows a plant specific type problem we will report the appropriate information by August 26, 1981, as agreed to above.
8103040fEk d
P.iEMBER MioOLE SCUTH UTluTIES SYS TEM
E f
.t Mr. Robert W. Reid -February 26, 1981 Also, as' requested in the February 23 conference call, we have completed a rough. conservative estimate on the cost of replacement power to reshuffle for Cycle 5 from this point in time to remove the five failed fuel assemblies.
On an outage extension basis, replacement power costs alone would come to an estimated $7.5 million.
Additional delays may be caused by licensing activities to have such a reload scheme approved by the NRC. Also,'this cost does not include such items as-B6W costs for reanalysis, AP6L manhour costs (engineering and operations) and potential fuel costs associated with premature discharge of Batch 6 fuel.
Very truly yours, David C. Trimble Manager, Licensing DCT:LDY:1p N
i l
I i
l l
t
_