ML20214Q181
| ML20214Q181 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Farley  |
| Issue date: | 11/17/1986 |
| From: | Rubenstein L Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Mcdonald R ALABAMA POWER CO. |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20214Q184 | List: |
| References | |
| TAC-63521, NUDOCS 8612050019 | |
| Download: ML20214Q181 (3) | |
Text
_
Novemb;r 17, 1986 Docket No. 50-348 DISTRTRUTION.
Docket File OGC-Bethesda NRC PDR E. Jordan Local PDR B. Grimes Mr. R. P. Mcdonald PAD #2 Rdg J. Partlow Senior Vice President H. Denton/R. Vollmer Alabama Power Company T. Novak N. Thompson Post Office Box 2641 C. Rossi T. Barnhart (4)
Birmingham, Alabama 35291-0400 ORAS ACRS (10)
D. Miller LFMB
Dear Mr. Mcdonald:
E. Reeves (2)
Gray File T. Sullivan G. Johnson
Subject:
Relief from ASME Section XI Evaluation Criteria of IWB-3514.1 for One Indication in Reactor Coolant Trip Ry letter dated November. 10, 1986, you requested relief from the evaluation criteria of IBW-3514.1 of ASME Code Section XT for Farley Nuclear Plant, linit No. 1.
Your request relates to disposition of surface indication found on the reactor conlant loop C pipe during the 10-year inservice inspection concluded during refueling outage No. 7.
You stated that expedited action is needed prior to retur11ng linit No. I to service, which is scheduled to begin November 13, 1986. You requested a one-time relief from the evaluation criteria of ASME Code,Section XI, 1974 Edition throuch the Summer 1975 Addenda and propose as an alternate the acceptance standards of ASME Code,Section XI,1983 Edition through the Summer 1983 Addenda for the disposition of this indication.
We previously granted certain reliefs for linit Nos. I and 2 which you requested pursuant to 10 CFR 50.55a(g) in our letters dated December 7,1979 August 24, 1983, February 10, and March 30, 1984 (one-time relief), January 10, and December ?7, 1985, and June 19, 1986. This request, also pursuant to 10 CFR 50.55a(g), is for a one-time relief from the evaluation criteria of ASME Code,Section XI, as noted above.
The enclosed Safety Evaluation delineates the relief which is granted to allow use of an alternate evaluation criteria.
However, since documentation supporting preservice examination results of the reactor coolant loop C pipe indication was not provided by the licensee, the licensee verbally commits to a reexamination of the flaw at or near the end of the first period of the second ten-year inservice inspectiM interval. The inspection findings shall be included in the next inspection report following the inspection.
The staff has determined that where stated the ASME Code requirements are impractical, the alternative methods to be performed will provide adequate assurance of the structural integrity of the components evaluated, and pursuant to 10 CFR 50.55a(a)(3) and 10 CFR 50.55a(g)(6)(1) the granting of this relief SM2fo8!!SNbhe G
Mr. R. P. Mcdonald is authorized by law and will not endanger life or property or the common defense and security, and is otherwise in the public interest.
In making this determination, we have given due consideration of the burden that could result if these requirements were imposed on your facility.
The request for relief complies with the standards and requirements of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (the Act), and the Commission's rules and regulations. The Commission has made appropriate findings as required by the Act and the Commission's rules and regulations in 10 CFR Chapter I.
A copy of our Safety Evaluation for granting of relief is enclosed.
l Sincerely, 1
l
[
/s/
l Lester S. Rubenstein, Director PWR Project Directorate #2 Division of PWR Licensing-A Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Enclosure:
i As stated cc w/ enclosure:
l See next page 1
i l
l l
- See previous concurrence j
- LA: PAD #?
- PM: PAD #2
- 0GC
~PD:
l DMiller EReev s:he LRubenstein 11//j//86 11/ ( 86 11/[/06 11////86 i
T~
DMT ~
b [ }G
'YI7l%
l 1
l a
Mr. R. P. Mcdonald /
will not endanger life or property or the comon defense an security, and is otherwise in the public interest.
In making this determin ion, we have given due consideration of the burden that could result if the requirements were imposed on your facility.
The request for relief complies with the standards afd requirements of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (the Act), and the Commission's rules i
and regulations. The Commission has made appropridte findings as required by the Act and the Comission's rules and regula ions in 10 CFR Chapter I.
l A copy of our Safety Evaluation for granting f relief is enclosed.
1 Sin erely, i
l j
Lester S. Rubenstein, Director PWR Pro.iect Directorate #2 Division of PWR Licensing-A j
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Enclosure:
As stated i
I cc w/ enclosure:
See next page
(
))
D w
h f" I
' l' L
o LA:yD#f,s P
. eeves:he LRubenstein 11/f/86 11/ /86 11/ /86
{
11// 8
/
I'
/
e i
i