ML20211Q660

Discusses GL 92-01,Rev 1,Supplement 1,Reactor Vessel Structural Integrity. Notes Entergy Submitted Info Requested in Reporting Item (1) on 950811 & Reporting Items (2) - (4) on 951113 & 970618.Calculations Under Evaluation

ML20211Q660
Person / Time
Site:	Arkansas Nuclear
Issue date:	10/16/1997
From:	Kalman G NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned)
To:	Hutchinson C ENTERGY OPERATIONS, INC.
References
GL-92-01, GL-92-1, TAC-M92642, NUDOCS 9710220406
Download: ML20211Q660 (4)

Text

. .

60- Wd fa nu,% -

p 4 UNITED STATES

• }t NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISS!ON WASHINGTON, D.C. SomeHoot

%, /

October 16, 1997 Mr. C. Randy Hutchinson Vice President, Operations AND Entergy Operations, Inc.

1448 S. R. 333 Russellville, AR 72801

SUBJECT:

GENERIC LETTER 92-01, REVISION 1, SUPPLEMENT 1 CLOSE0VT FOR ARKANSAS NUCLEAR ONE, UNIT 2 (TAC NO. M92642)

Dear Mr. Hutchinson:

On May 19, 1995, the Nuclear Regulaltory Commission (NRC) issued Generic letter 92-01, Revision 1, Supplement 1 (GL 92-01, Rev.1, Supp.1), " Reactor Vessel Structural Integrity." In GL 92-01, Rev. 1, Supp. 1, the NRC requested -

that nuclear licensees perform a review of their reactor pressure vessel structural integrity assessments in order "to identify, collect, and re) ort any new data pertinent to the analysis of the structural integrity of t1eir reactor pressure vessels (RPVs) and to assess the impact of that data on their RPV integrity analyses relative to the requirements of Section 50.60 of Title 10 of the code of Federal Regulatfons (10 CFR 50.60),10 CFR 50.61, Appendices G and H to 10 CFR Part 50 (which encompass pressurized thermal shock (PTS) and upper shelf energy (USE) evaluations), and any potential impact on low temperature overpressure (LTOP) limits or pressure-temperature (R-T) limits."

More specifically, in GL 92-01, Rev.1, Supp.1, the NRC requested that addressees provide the following information in their responses:

(1) a description of those actions taken or planned to locate all data .

relet .nt to the determination of RPV integrity, or an explanation of why the existing data base is considered complete as previously submitted; p(O{s (2) an assessment of any change in best-estimate chemistry based on consideration of all relevant data; g

(3) a determination of the need for the use of the ratio procedure in \

accordance with the established Position 2.1 of Regulatory Guide 1.99, Revision 2, for those licensees that use surveillance data to provide a basis for the RPV integrity evaluation; and (4) a written report providing any newly acquired data as specified above

" and (1) the results of any necessary revisions to the evaluations of RPV integrity in accedance with the requirements of 10 CFR 50.60, 10 CFR 50.61, Appendices G and H to 10 CFR Part 50, and any potential impact of the LTOP and P-T limits in the technical specifications, or (2) a certification that previously submitted evaluations remain valid.

I.ll .l I.II,llll lllll l l Rist a & t- n r. , -

9710220406 971016 PDR ADOCK 050003e,0 UU Sd IJOy$M hh P PDR

i Revised evaluations and certifications were to include consideration of Position 2.1 of Regulatory Guide 1.99, Revision 2, as applicable, and any new data. The information in Reporting item (1) was to be submitted within 90 days of the issuance of the GL. The information in Reporting items (2) - (4) was to be submitted within 6 months of the issuance of the GL.

The staff has noted that Entergy submitted the information requested in Reporting Item (1) on August 11, 1995, and the information requested in Reporting Items (2) - (4) on November 13, 1995, and June 18, 1997. Your response indicates that pertinent data bases were reviewed and based on an evaluation of the data, you concluded that the ANO-2 vessel integrity and LTOP limits do not need to be revised prior to reaching 21 effective full power years. The information provided fulfills the actions required by GL 92-01, Rev. 1, Supp. I and our tracking number for that work, TAC No. M92642 has been closed.

Your letter dated June 18, 1997, noted that our safety evaluation associated with ANO-2 Technical Specification Amendment 180 dated March 7, 1997 questioned the validity of existing calculations for vessel fluence through 21 EFPY. We are reevaluating your fluence calculations through 21 EFPY using data submitted with your June 18, 1997 letter.

Sincerely, ORIGINAL SIGNED BY:

George Kalman, Senior Project Manager Project Directorate IV-1 Division of Reactor Projects III & IV Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Docket No: 50-368 cc: See next page DISTRIBUTION:

Docket File GKalman PUBLIC CHawes PD4-1 r/f TGwynn, RIV EAdensam (EGA1) OGC JClifford ACRS Document Name: AR92642.LTR OFC PM/PD4-1 LA/PD4-1 D:PD4-1 NAME G M an/sp CHawesGGl( JC b ord DATE [b /-) '/97 lD/d/97 /41 k97 COPY YES/NO YES/N0 YES/N0 0FFICIAL RECORD COPY

1 l

s Revised evaluations and certifications were to include consideration of Position 2.1 of Regulatory Guide 1.99, Revision 2, as applicable, and any new data. The information in Reporting Item (1) was to be submitted within 90 days of the issuance of the GL. The information in Reporting Items (2) -- (4) was to be submitted within 6 months of the issuance of the GL.

The staff has noted that Entergy submitted the information requested in Reporting Item (1) on August 11, 1995, and the information requested in Reporting Items (2) -- (4) on November 13, 1995, and June 18, 1997. Your response indicates that pertinent data bases were reviewed and based on an evaluation of the data, you concluded that the ANO-2 vessel integrity and LTOP limits do not need to be revised prior to reaching 21 effective full power years. The information provided fulfills the actions required by GL 92-01, Rev. 1, Supp. I and our tracking number for that work, TAC No. M92642 has been closed.

Your letter dated June 18, 1997, noted that our safety evaluation associated with ANO-2 Technical Specification Amendment 180 dated March 7, 1997, questioned the validity of existing calculations for vessel fluence through 21 EFPY. We are reevaluating your fluence calculations through 21 EFPY using data submitted with your June 18, 1997, letter.

Sincerely, M '

George Kalman, Senior Project Manager-Project Directorate IV-1 Divisica of Reactor Projects III & IV Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Docket No: 50-368 cc: See next page O

a

..-m.mww w~,%w-..,,--_me _

-.e.

Mr. C. Randy Hutchinson Entergy Operations, Inc. Arkansas Nuclear One, Unit 2 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 Jacksors, 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 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

--~ -. ~. .. _ . - - - . . _ _ . _ . . . .. . . . _ _ . . - . . ._m.. _ . . _ . . . . ._ . . . _ _ . _ . _ ,