ML090480061

From kanterella
Revision as of 13:55, 27 August 2018 by StriderTol (talk | contribs) (Created page by program invented by StriderTol)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Arkansas Nuclear One, Unit 2 - Email Regarding Risk-Informed Treatment, ANO2-R&R-004, Revision 1, Request to Use Risk-Informed Safety Classification and Treatment. Repair/Replacement Activities in Class 2 & 3 Moderate Energy Systems (TAC No
ML090480061
Person / Time
Site: Arkansas Nuclear Entergy icon.png
Issue date: 02/16/2009
From: Clark R W
Entergy Operations
To: Wang A B
Plant Licensing Branch IV
Wang, A B, NRR/DORL/LPLIV, 415-1445
References
TAC MD5250
Download: ML090480061 (4)


Text

From: CLARK, ROBERT W [RCLARK@entergy.com] Sent: Monday, February 16, 2009 11:09 AM To: Alan Wang; BICE, DAVID B

Subject:

RE: MD5250 R-I Treatment Alan, I have talked with the Engineering folks and they agreed to meet the fracture toughness requirements of the original code as part of the alternative repair / replacement requirements as discussed below. It is my understanding through David that all you need is this email. Please let me know if you need me to formally follow-up with a letter related to this.

If you need anything else related to this, please let me know.

Thanks Bob From: Alan Wang [1] Sent: Thursday, February 12, 2009 1:41 PM To: BICE, DAVID B; CLARK, ROBERT W

Subject:

FW: MD5250 R-I Treatment Dave, please see Keith's comment: "So I think we will need ANO-2 to say they agree to meet the fracture toughness requirements of the original code as part of the alternative repair/replacement requirements to authorize the alternative. "Let me know what you think and if you need a call to clarify. Alan From: Keith Hoffman Sent: Thursday, February 12, 2009 2:00 PM To: Alan Wang

Subject:

RE: MD5250 R-I Treatment Alan, I have almost completed my portion of the SE, but I have come across an issue that I have not seen addressed in any of the correspondence so far. I have not been involved since the beginning so I may have missed it. But here is the issue, 10 CFR 50.69 says that an applicant following the risk-informed approach can use an alternative treatment for repair/replacement

(with the exception of fracture toughness)-.. Fracture toughness requirements of the original construction code are also required to be met in ASME Code Case N-662, which provides alternative repair/replacement requirements for items classified in accordance with risk-informed processes. The NRC conditionally approved this code case for Class 2 and 3 components in the last to revisions of Reg Guide 1.147. The fracture toughness requirement was also addressed in the STP 50.69-like exemption SE. So I think we will need ANO-2 to say they agree to meet the fracture toughness requirements of the original code as part of the alternative repair/replacement requirements to authorize the alternative. Again, sorry for the late identification of this issue. I stopped by your office and it did not look like you were in today that is the reason for this long email. Let me know if we need to have a phone call.

Keith M. Hoffman Materials Engineer NRR/DCI/CPNB (301)415-1294 From: Alan Wang Sent: Monday, February 09, 2009 9:54 AM To: Keith Hoffman

Subject:

RE: MD5250 R-I Treatment Keith, when do you think you might have something. Thanks Alan From: Keith Hoffman Sent: Monday, February 09, 2009 8:58 AM To: Alan Wang

Subject:

RE: MD5250 R-I Treatment I need to talk with Terence today to find out who needs to agree, but I don't think there was anything from the NEI meeting that will prevent us from issuing the SE.

Keith M. Hoffman Materials Engineer NRR/DCI/CPNB (301)415-1294 From: Alan Wang Sent: Friday, February 06, 2009 1:42 PM To: Keith Hoffman

Subject:

RE: MD5250 R-I Treatment Keith, how did the NEI meeting go? Alan From: Keith Hoffman Sent: Monday, February 02, 2009 2:06 PM To: Alan Wang; Stephen Dinsmore Cc: Michael Markley; Randy Hall

Subject:

RE: MD5250 R-I Treatment Alan, I believe we are going to be able to approve the treatment. However, I was asked to wait until after the February 4th, Commission meeting with NEI on Risk Informed, Performance Based Regulation prior to issuing anything. We have heard that NEI will be escalating to the Commission an issue related to treatment with regard to 50.69 applications which is closely related to this Risk Informed request from ANO and we don't want to issue anything that could be in conflict with whatever might come out of this meeting. If nothing big comes out of the Commission meeting the treatment part of the SE should be done by early next week I think.

Keith M. Hoffman Materials Engineer NRR/DCI/CPNB (301)415-1294

From: Alan Wang Sent: Monday, February 02, 2009 1:43 PM To: Keith Hoffman; Stephen Dinsmore Cc: Michael Markley; Randy Hall

Subject:

FW: MD5250 R-I Treatment Steve and Keith, this is a 22 month old item. Can you let me know what the status of this is. Steve I believe you told me you would finish by 1/23. Keith do you think we are going to able to approve the proposed treatment by ANO? Alan From: Michael Markley Sent: Monday, February 02, 2009 7:50 AM To: Alan Wang Cc: Randy Hall

Subject:

MD5250 R-I Treatment Alan, This is now 22-months old. Please advise on the status and update for Thursday's meeting.

Mike E-mail Properties Mail Envelope Properties (2484AD580AAA9349BAEC5333CA9B357B052572CF)

Subject:

RE: MD5250 R-I Treatment

Sent Date: 2/16/2009 11:09:24 AM Received Date: 2/16/2009 11:09:24 AM From: CLARK, ROBERT W

Created By: RCLARK@entergy.com

Recipients:

Alan.Wang@nrc.gov (Alan Wang)

Tracking Status: None DBICE@entergy.com (BICE, DAVID B)

Tracking Status: None

Post Office:

LITEXETSP002.etrsouth.corp.entergy.com

Files Size Date & Time

MESSAGE 24159 2/16/2009

Options Expiration Date:

Priority: olImportanceNormal ReplyRequested: False Return Notification: False

Sensitivity: olNormal Recipients received: