ML20204B172
| ML20204B172 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Arkansas Nuclear  |
| Issue date: | 03/15/1999 |
| From: | Dick G NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned) |
| To: | Hutchinson C ENTERGY OPERATIONS, INC. |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20204B175 | List: |
| References | |
| TAC-MA1548, NUDOCS 9903220017 | |
| Download: ML20204B172 (3) | |
Text
_. ~. -. ~..
Mr. C. Rrndy Hutchinson March'15, 1999 Vice Pr:sident, Operations ANO Entsrgy Operations, Inc.
1448 S. R. 333 -
Russellville, AR 72801
SUBJECT:
- EVALUATION OF PROPOSED ALTERNATIVE TO AUGMENTED REACTOR VESSEL EXAMINATION FOR ARKANSAS NUCLEAR ONE, UNIT 1 (TAC NO. MA1548)
Dear Mr. Hutchinson:
~ By letter dated October 23,1997, Entergy Operations, Inc., submitted a request for an attemative to the augmented examination of certain reactor vessel shell welds, pursuant to the provisions of Title 10 of the Code of Federal Reaulations (10 CFR), Section 50.55a (g)(6)(ii)(A)(5).
The staff, with tech'nical assistance from its contiactor, the Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory (INEEL), has reviewed and evaluated the information in your request.
The staff did not adopt the evaluation and conclusion presented in the Technical Letter Report (TLR) prepared by INEEL in its entirety. The enclosed safety evaluation incorporates the TLR
~
and discusses its findings. The staff found that four out of eight reactor vessel shell welds of item B1.10 in Examination Category B-A of the American Society of Mechanical Engineers Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code,Section XI,1989 Edition, did not meet the volumetric examination requirement of essentially 100 percent due to physical constraints. Three out of four welds were volumetrically examined between 75 to 88 percent and one weld was examined to 33 percent. The staff has taken exception to the contractor's conclusion that insufficient
~
information was provided to support this request, and has determined that your proposed alternative for the welds would provide an acceptable level of quality and safety. Therefore, pursuant to 10 CFR 50.55a(a)(3)(i), your proposed alternative is authorized.
Sincerely,-
ORIGINAL SIGNED BY:
George Dick, Acting Director Project Directorate IV-1 f
i Division of Licensing Project Management Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation k
Docket No. 50-313 cc w/ encl: See next page N-g g
Enclosure:
As stated DISTRIBUTION:
Docket File PUBLIC PD4-1 r/f ACRS J. Zwolinski/S. Black P. Patnaik OGC N. Hilton G. Hill (2).
D. Lange, EDO K. Brockman, RIV C. Norsworthy (RCN) ~
L. Berry G. Dick Document Name: G:\\ANO1FINA\\ RELA 1548.WPD
- SE incorporated with no substantial changes "see previous concurrence
, n OFC PM/PD4_1 LA/PDi-A BC/ECGB*
OGC (A)D/PD4-1 h
NAME NHiltob LBerryh GBagchi **
RBachmann "
GDick DATE 4)/ 6 /99
/B/99 01/27/99 03/22/99 3 //3 /99 hO kEhNO.
YES/NO YES/NO YES/NO COPY f 7 990315 7 COPY POR K OS000313 P
.. - -.. - _. =
a utog g
UNITED STATES g
j NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. -8 =1 March 15, 1999 Mr. C. Randy Hutchinson Vice President, Operations ANO Entergy Operations, Inc.
1448 S. R. 333 Russellville, AR 72801
SUBJECT:
EVALUATION OF PROPOSED ALTERNATIVE TO AUGMENTED REACTOR VESSEL EXAMINATION FOR ARKANSAS NUCLEAR ONE, UNIT 1 (TAC NO. MA1548)
Dear Mr. Hutchinson:
By letter dated October 23,1997, Entergy Operations, Inc., submitted a request for an alternative to the augmented examination of certain reactor vessel shell welds, pursuant to the i
provisions of Title 10 of the Code of Federal Reaulations (10 CFR), Section 50.55a (g)(6)(ii)(A)(5).
l The staff, with technical assistance from its contractor, the Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory (INEEL), has reviewed and evaluated the information in your request.
The staff did not adopt the evaluation and conclusion presented in the Technical Letter Report (TLR) prepared by INEEL in its entirety. The enclosed safety evaluation incorporates the TLR j
and discusses its findings. The staff found that four out of eight reactor vessel shell welds of Item B1.10 in Examination Category B-A of the American Society of Mechanical Engineers Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code,Section XI,1989 Edition, did not meet the volumetric examination requirement of essentially 100 percent due to physical constraints. Three out of four welds were volumetrically examined between 75 to 88 percent and one weld was examined to 33 percent. The staff has taken exception to the contractor's conclusion that insufficient information was provided to support this request, and has determined that your proposed alternative for the welds would provide an acceptable level of quality and safety. Therefore, pursuant to 10 CFR 50.55a(a)(3)(i), your proposed alternative is authorized.
Sincerely, Geor Dick, Acting Director Project Directorate IV-1 Division of Licensing Project Management Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Docket No. 50-313 i
Enclosure:
As stated cc w/ encl: See next page i
l l
1
Mr. C. Randy Hutchinson Entergy Operations, Inc.
Arkansas Nuclear One, Unit 1 cc:
Executive Vice President Vice President, Operations Support
& Chief Operating Officer Entergy Operations, Inc.
Entergy Operations, Inc.
P. O. Box 31995 P. O. Box 31995 Jackson, MS 39286-1995 Jackson, MS 39286-199 Wise, Carter, Child & Caraway Director, Division of Radiation P. O. Box 651 Control and Emergency Management Jackson, MS 39205 Arkansas Department of Health 4815 West Markham Street, Slot 30 Little Rock, AR ' 72205-3867 Winston & Strawn 1400 L Street, N.W.
Washington, DC 20005-3502 Manager, Rockville Nuclear Licensing Framatone Technologies i
1700 Rockville Pike, Suite 525 Rockville, MD 20852 Senior Resident inspector U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission P. O. Box 310 London, AR 72847 Regional Administrator, Region IV U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 611 Ryan Plaza Drive, Suite 400 Arlington, TX 76011-8064 County Judge of Pope County Pope County Courthouse Russellville, AR 72801
.. -