ML20127N540

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Submits General Questions Resulting from ACRS Subcommittee on Monticello 691129 Meeting
ML20127N540
Person / Time
Site: Monticello Xcel Energy icon.png
Issue date: 12/05/1969
From: Boyd R
US ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION (AEC)
To: Morris P
US ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION (AEC)
References
NUDOCS 9212010302
Download: ML20127N540 (2)


Text

-

~*

('

) (fR

.A. -

AN h

"**v UNITED STATES U

0 ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION g {') 1

)

g wasmuoton. o c. 4o546 December 5,1969 Peter A. Morrio, Director Division of Benetor Licensing GLI1ERAL QUESTIQ18 ARISD10 }TtCH ' DIE MulTICFILO SUUCUNI7' FEE MEETD10 At the Monticello Subcommittee Meeting on November 29 a number of items were raised by membero of the Subcommittee that bear on our N

Monticello review as well as other safety reviews.

I anticipate that nany of these questions will have to be faced at the December v

'g ACRS Meeting.

The more important of these problems are the-followingt 1

Both Dr. Okrent and Mr. Etherington requested that we prepare a supplemental report on the Monticello loose endo co we don't have tc " report orally" to the Committee.

From their reaction I feel that we should no longer promise to report orally on loose.end items, and in the future we should plan preparation of cupplemental reports where required.

2 Dr. Okrent requested our position on pipe whip, especially for new plants such as Shoreham and Duane Arnold. He appreciates that for planto already constructed we may accept a compromise position, but for construction permit reviews he would like our specific recommendations and conclusions.

This matter has been raised by Dr. Okrent previously and I have asked Bob Tedesco to prepare a proposed position on pipe whip.

3.

Dr. Okrent raised a number of questions on in-service inspection, using su h areas as the pressure vessel, pipe whipping, and systematic failures as examples.

His questions relate to how ve decide what's enough in-service inspection in general and what are we looking for so we can decide what's enou6h?

9212010302 691205 PDR ADOCK 05000263 A

PDR

- I,

.,t 1

1

- P e t o r. f., l': = r r.1 ;

.P.

li.ve, abor $, J "G9 i

h.

Os ig; 1.5 or co" Montinello repr:rt be 6tntet

% iL>le :10 er our runJ mtion te )nvo ecnu" uded tim t, tho DOC uj)) (n) lim 1t the pech-eJnd t e ; entur to t*ll imu the e3 nd nmit.irc tempernture, j

(b) 1 led i the fo':1 el 1. w ter rsnotitn to 1 thun preunt er t he tote 1 <:)nd raro,, (c) t w r innie the j

em t< w u c: Lun t rahJ i ent bol oro 1he core rf O, 'n rf Dec-er ", ry fo r ec ro ev.d ! rt.,

5: 17;t nr:0 kron J t la no erbrJ t u rd no to full ogn cuerchJur, nnd (:1) reduce ik eu it r!.-ercit u re <nJ r.

core (,ver.y 1,u,.it for un es t ewiv3 perkt n or sie ? "

\\

Dr. n n nt nr,t., to knoa de ;m Love any qualdfiettjonn on thie 1 2 3 ecnelualcui I bt ljevt thir v113 b1 o difficult quen th to nure r qu'mt.11.ivo?y.

1

' t.

S.

Dr. Rrent %bd, when ue ren uh te IhuMcn:n nn6 incpection requ i ren uin eq q d ng enri Lw ME, till' uc np)dy them ' to Idubtr. hircady in oparnti(n't If co, ) n 'r

-I would lilm io dir.':nec thue probb m t ith yua nmi other u.rtcro of i

the Djvicion vi th view tc+arar prev,rint defin$ tive otat eranto. for the Con;d ttet et tl'e lantector AG; ibeting.

,r y} ~ i

.. 3 f

r l

I'{

s u cV%

dr / % "',f e

0. Dayd /" cl a. t.

Director

~-

w TCr bbh

'k-l'C E'N I.I Divicion or h. ' r., tor Licensint cc:

F. Ochroeder D Levine D. Chovholt T. H. L'11 con R. leYounn D. Muner R. Tedecco C. Long R. Ircian3 D. Knuth B. Grimon

)

}.

--..--,,,a....-,.,.,

,..a-..:..,...

t

.