Letter Sequence RAI |
|---|
|
|
MONTHYEARML0205901602002-03-0505 March 2002
Memo to File Re Request for Additional Information Faxed to the Licensee Residual Heat Removal Service Water System and Ultimate Heat Sink Technical Specifications Modifications (TAC MB2119 and TAC MB2120)
Project stage: RAI
ML0206100032002-03-19019 March 2002
Request for Additional Information Residual Heat Removal Service Water System and Ultimate Heat Sink Technical Specifications Modifications (TAC Nos. MB2119 and MB2120)
Project stage: RAI
ML0219802582002-07-17017 July 2002
Safety Evaluation Input for Proposed Changes to the Susquehanna, Units 1 & 2 Technical Specifications Implementing Operability Requirements for the Ultimate Heat Sink Spray Valves (TAC Nos. MB2119 & MB2120)
Project stage: Approval
ML0300201132002-12-30030 December 2002
Technical Specifications Pages TS/37.7-1 - TS/3.7-3, TS/3.7-3a - TS/3.7-3b for Amendment 206, Susquehanna, Units 1 & Pages TS/3.7-1 - TS/3.7-3, TS/3.73a - TS/3.7-3b, for Amendment 180 Susquehanna, Units 2
Project stage: Other
ML0236500342002-12-30030 December 2002
Issuance of Amendment Nos. 206 & 180, Revising TS 3.7.1 to Add Operability Requirement & Surveillance Requirements for the Ultimate Heat Sink Spray Bypass & Large Valves. TACs MB2119 and MB2120
Project stage: Approval
2002-03-19
[Table View] |
|
|---|
Category:Memoranda
MONTHYEARML23094A1252023-03-31031 March 2023
Talen Part 21 Final Notification P21-03032023-FN R0 Re Defect Identified in Automatic Transfer Switch
ML22034A3932022-02-16016 February 2022
Calendar Year 2021 Security Baseline Completion Memo
ML21054A3032021-04-22022 April 2021
Memo to File: Final Ea/Fonsi of Independent Spent Fuel Storage Facilities Decommissioning Funding Plans Related to Susquehanna
ML17090A1332017-04-0505 April 2017
Notice of Meeting with Susquehanna Nuclear, LLC to Discuss the Nrc'S Assessment of Safety Performance at Susquehanna Steam Electric Station for 2016
ML17037B8502017-02-0606 February 2017
08/21/1975 Notice of Meeting with Architect Engineers of Mark II Owners to Discuss Load Combinations and Analytical Techniques for Determining Stresses in Mechanical Components and Structures of Mark II Containments
ML16088A2042016-03-28028 March 2016
Memo T Bowers from s Ruffin, Technical Assistance Requests - Review 2015 Tri-Annual Decommissioning Funding Plans for Multiple Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installations W/ Encl 2 (Template)
ML16088A2052016-03-28028 March 2016
Enclosure 1 - (72.30 DFP Reviews to Be Completed 2015) - Memo T Bowers from s Ruffin, Technial Assistance Requests - Review 2015 Tri-Annual Decommissioning Funding Plans for Multiple Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installations
ML15345A0912015-12-17017 December 2015
Closure of Issue Found During 2014 Regulatory Commitment Audit
ML15313A2392015-11-0606 November 2015
Request for Additional Information Proposed Relief Requests for the Third 10-Year Inservice Inspection Interval (TAC Nos. MF6302 Through MF6307)
ML15093A3052015-04-0303 April 2015
Memorandum to the Participants NRC Staff Notification of Proposed Issuance of Order and Conforming License Amendments Approving Indirect Transfer
ML14133A0592014-07-0101 July 2014
Summary of Closed Meeting Between Representatives of the Army Corps of Engineers, Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Exelon Generation Co, LLC, and PPL Susquehanna, LLC, to Discuss Dam Failure Analysis..
ML14085A4112014-05-0606 May 2014
Final TIA Response Susquehanna SGTS and Secondary Ventilation
ML14112A2392014-04-22022 April 2014
Notice of Forthcoming Closed Meeting to Discuss Dam Failure Analysis for Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station Units 2 and 3, Susquehanna Steam Electric Station Units 1 and 2, and Three Mile Island Nuclear Station Unit 1
ML13309A0802013-12-11011 December 2013
Memorandum to File: Transcript for 10 CFR 2.206 Petition from Beyond Nuclear (Et Al) Regarding General Electric Mark I and Mark II Boiling-Water Reactors
ML13043A4062013-02-12012 February 2013
Proposed Amendment No. 309 to License NPF-14 and Proposed Amendment No. 280 to License NPF-22: Change to Technical Specification Surveillance Requirement (SR) 3.8.1.9, 3.8.1.11,3.8.1.12, and 3.8.1.19 to Increase Diesel
ML13035A2482013-02-0101 February 2013
ME9609 Susquehanna Steam Electric Station Proposed Amendment No. 309 to License NPF-14 and Proposed Amendment No. 280 to License Npf -22: Change to Technical Specification Surveillance Requirement 3.8.1.19 to Increase Diesel Generator E Min
ML1114410162011-05-24024 May 2011
Summary of Susquehanna Annual Assessment Meeting, May 19, 2011
ML1014700962010-05-25025 May 2010
Summary of Annual Assessment Meeting with PPL Susquehanna, LLC, to Discuss Nrc'S Assessment of Safety Performance for Calendar Year 2009
ML0925103122009-09-0808 September 2009
Drop-in Visit from PPL Susquehanna, LLC - August 31, 2009
ML0919404402009-07-13013 July 2009
Meeting Summary, Public Meeting with PPL Susquehanna, LLC Re SCWE at Site
ML0915505712009-06-0101 June 2009
Meeting Minutes of the Plant License Renewal Subcommittee on April 1, 2009
ML0900803792009-01-30030 January 2009
Summary of Telephone Conference Call Held on 12/18/08, Between the U.S. NRC and PPL Susquehanna, LLC, Concerning TLAA RAI
ML0833101132008-12-0303 December 2008
Meeting Summary, Telephone Conference Call Between U.S. NRC and PPL Susquehanna, LLC, Concerning the Draft Request for Additional Information Pertaining to the Susquehanna Steam Electric Station Units 1 & 2, LRA
ML0832307862008-11-19019 November 2008
11/13/2008-Summary of Telephone Conference Call Between NRC and PPL, Concerning the Responses to RAIs Pertaining to the Susquehanna Steam Electric Station, Units 1 and 2, License Renewal Application
ML0828901522008-10-21021 October 2008
Summary of Telephone Conference Call Held on October 8, 2008, Between the USNRC and PPL Susquehanna, Llc. Concerning Draft Requests for Additional Information Pertaining to the, License Renewal Application
ML0822603532008-10-0101 October 2008
06/25/2008 Meeting Summary, Telephone Conference Call Between the NRC and PPL Susquehanna, LLC, Concerning Draft Request for Additional Information Pertaining to the Susquehanna, Units 1 and 2, License Renewal Application
ML0807400842008-03-14014 March 2008
Draft Regulatory Guide for Comment
ML0806303822008-03-0505 March 2008
Notice of Meeting with PPL Susquehanna, LLC (PPL) to Discuss Ppl'S Plan Regarding Compliance with the License Conditions Related to the New Steam Dryer During Extended Power Uprate Power Ascension for the Upcoming Refueling Outage
ML0728800512007-12-13013 December 2007
Summary of Telephone Conference Call Held on 10/03/07, Between the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission and PPL Susquehanna, LLC, Concerning Fire
ML0728511102007-11-16016 November 2007
Summary of Telephone Conference Call Held on October 3, 2007, Between the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission and PPL Susquehanna, LLC Concerning Open Items Pertaining to the Susquehanna, Units 1 and 2, License Renewal Application
ML0730200012007-10-25025 October 2007
FRN - Power Uprates (Susquehanna), November 14, 2007
ML0726401342007-10-24024 October 2007
Summary of Telephone Conference Call with PPL Susquehanna, LLC Concerning Requests for Additional Information
ML0728906522007-10-24024 October 2007
Summary of July 19th Conference Call Between NRC DLR Environmental Staff; PPL Susquehanna, LLC; and PPL Generating Regarding PPL Generation'S Letter of Intent to File a Combined License Application for a Potential New Unit at the SSES Site
ML0724900462007-09-18018 September 2007
and 09/05/2007 Summary of Telephone Conference Calls Between the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission and PPL Susquehanna, LLC, Concerning D-RAI
ML0723304142007-08-27027 August 2007
Summary of Telephone Conference Call Held on August 16, 2007, Between the Us NRC and PPL Susquehanna, Concerning Request for Additional Information Pertaining to the Susquehanna, Units 1 and 2, License Renewal Application
ML0721101752007-07-30030 July 2007
Notice of Meeting with PPL Susquehanna, LLC (Ppl), Susquehanna Steam Electric Station, Units 1 and 2, to Conduct a Working Level-Discussion Related to NRC Staff'S Reactor Systems Safety Review of Proposed Extended Power Uprate Application
ML0716400652007-06-14014 June 2007
Notice of with PPL Susquehanna, LLC (Ppl), Susquehanna, Units 1 and 2 to Conduct a Working Level-Discussion Related to the Steam Dryer Instrumentation Plan Finite Element Analysis Model Changes, Fabrication Improvements and Start-Up Limit.
ML0705800922007-03-0202 March 2007
Summary of Telephone Conference Call Held on February 12, 2007, Between the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission and PPL Susquehanna, Lcc, Concerning Requests for Additional Information Pertaining to the Susquehanna Steam Electric Station, Un
ML0629104092006-11-0909 November 2006
Review of Susquehanna Steam Electric Station Units 1 and 2 Amendment Request to Revise Technical Specifications 3.8.1
ML0624202762006-08-30030 August 2006
09/13/2006 Notice of Forthcoming Meeting with PPL Susquehanna, LLC (PPL) Susquehanna Steam Electric Station, Units 1 and 2 (SSES 1 and 2) on Pre-License Renewal Application
ML0608107012006-03-22022 March 2006
04/05/06 - Forthcoming Meeting with PPL Susquehanna, LLC (Ppl), Susquehanna Steam Electric Station, Units 1 and 2 (SSES 1 and 2) on License Renewal and Extended Power Uprate
ML0530704902005-11-0303 November 2005
Forthcoming Meeting with PPL Susquehanna, LLC (Ppl), Susquehanna, Units 1 and 2 to Conduct a Working level-discussion Related to the Schedule, Approach, and Strategy for the Proposed Extended Power Uprate Application..
ML0527103892005-09-29029 September 2005
Meeting with PPL Susquehanna 1 & 2, Schedule, Approach and Strategy for the SSES Unit 1 Cycle 14 and Cycle 15 Minimum Critical Power Ratio Safety Limit Submittals in Light of the Control Cell Friction Issues Experienced on Unit 1
ML0510804732005-04-29029 April 2005
Correction to Letter Approving the Use of the Privatel Model 960V Validated to Federal Information Processing Standard (Fips) 140-1
ML0403001132004-01-30030 January 2004
Correction of License Authority Files
ML0235404372002-12-18018 December 2002
Rquest for Additonal Information (RAI) for Emergency Plan (E-Plan) Revisions PLA-5567 - Attachment
ML0235200602002-12-18018 December 2002
Draft Request for Additional Information (RAI) Response Regarding Amendment Request for Emergency Plan (E-Plan) Revisions
ML0229705292002-10-24024 October 2002
Results of the Susquehanna Steam Electric Station Units 1 and 2 SDP Phase 2 Notebook Benchmarking Visit
ML0226002922002-09-17017 September 2002
Memorandum Regarding Report on the Status of Open TIAs Assigned to NRR
ML0219802582002-07-17017 July 2002
Safety Evaluation Input for Proposed Changes to the Susquehanna, Units 1 & 2 Technical Specifications Implementing Operability Requirements for the Ultimate Heat Sink Spray Valves (TAC Nos. MB2119 & MB2120)
2023-03-31
[Table view] |
Text
March 5, 2002 MEMORANDUM TO: Joel T. Munday, Acting Chief, Section 1 Project Directorate I Division of Licensing Project Management Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation FROM: Travis L. Tate, Project Manager, Section 2 /RA/
Project Directorate I Division of Licensing Project Management Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
SUBJECT:
REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION FAXED TO THE LICENSEE RE: SUSQUEHANNA STEAM ELECTRIC STATION, UNITS 1 AND 2, RESIDUAL HEAT REMOVAL SERVICE WATER SYSTEM AND ULTIMATE HEAT SINK TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS MODIFICATIONS (TAC NOS. MB2119 AND MB2120)
Attached is a list of questions received by e-mail from the technical review staff regarding the Nuclear Regulatory Commission staffs review of the licensees application dated June 1, 2001. The attached questions were faxed to the licensee on February 12, 2002, in order to provide clarification and to determine whether the questions relate to information that has been previously placed on the docket. The questions were discussed in a conference call with the licensee on February 14, 2002. This memo documents the questions faxed to the licensee prior to the staff initiating a formal request for additional information.
Docket Nos. 50-387 and 50-388
Attachment:
As stated CONTACT: Timothy G. Colburn, NRR (301) 415-1402
March 5, 2002 MEMORANDUM TO: Joel T. Munday, Acting Chief, Section 1 Project Directorate I Division of Licensing Project Management Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation FROM: Travis L. Tate, Project Manager, Section 2 /RA/
Project Directorate I Division of Licensing Project Management Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
SUBJECT:
REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION FAXED TO THE LICENSEE RE: SUSQUEHANNA STEAM ELECTRIC STATION, UNITS 1 AND 2, RESIDUAL HEAT REMOVAL SERVICE WATER SYSTEM AND ULTIMATE HEAT SINK TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS MODIFICATIONS (TAC NOS. MB2119 AND MB2120)
Attached is a list of questions received by e-mail from the technical review staff regarding the Nuclear Regulatory Commission staffs review of the licensees application dated June 1, 2001. The attached questions were faxed to the licensee on February 12, 2002, in order to provide clarification and to determine whether the questions relate to information that has been previously placed on the docket. The questions were discussed in a conference call with the licensee on February 14, 2002. This memo documents the questions faxed to the licensee prior to the staff initiating a formal request for additional information.
Docket Nos. 50-387 and 50-388
Attachment:
As stated CONTACT: Timothy G. Colburn, NRR (301) 415-1402 DISTRIBUTION:
PUBLIC E. Adensam T. Tate T. Colburn PDI-1 R/F J. Munday M. OBrien Accession Number: ML020590160 OFFICE PDI-1/LA PDI-2/PM PDI-1/PM PDI-1/SC(A)
NAME MOBrien TTate TColburn JMunday DATE 3/4/02 3/4/02 3/4/02 3/5/02 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY
REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION SUSQUEHANNA STEAM ELECTRIC STATION, UNITS 1 AND 2 RESIDUAL HEAT REMOVAL SERVICE WATER SYSTEM AND ULTIMATE HEAT SINK TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS MODIFICATIONS
- 1. The description of the residual heat removal service water (RHRSW) subsystems does not match the simplified schematic provided in Figure 1 nor the apparent arrangement in P&ID M-112 for the RHRSW system in that the discussion on page 2 states that each subsystem contains a return header, along with other components. The drawings and schematic indicate that there is only one return header per loop. Please clarify.
- 2. On P&ID M-112 for the RHRSW system, what water is being returned at coordinates E-9 and G-9?
- 3. On page 4, third paragraph in Attachment 1 to PLA-5319, you state that Operation and alignment of the RHRSW system is considered completely manual and does not involve any automatic actions. However, immediately preceding that statement you discuss automatic alignment of an ESW and RHRSW discharge path by (1) automatic opening of the (normally open) loop spray pond bypass valve upon a start of either an ESW or RHRSW in the associated loop; and (2) automatic closure of the large spray array valve and opening of the bypass valve following shut-off of the last ESW or RHRSW pump in the associated loop. Please confirm our understanding of the apparent inconsistency that these automatic actions are included in the system design and that any other alignment of the system/operation of the RHRSW system are manual (e.g. - no pump start signals).
- 4. The staff Safety Evaluation (NUREG 0776, Supplement 4) noted that the design of the ESW system was modified to prevent water hammer in the event of an automatic pump start by changing the normal position of the spray bypass valves to closed. How has the water hammer issue been addressed considering the current design has returned the normal position of this valve to open?
- 5. Please provide additional information regarding why the current application is explicitly removing the small spray bypass arrays from the Technical Specifications. As you note, each small array is subject to the same single failure (of a spray array bypass valve) that can make the same divisions large spray array inoperable. Appendix A to your application indicates that you considered adding a 30-day limiting condition for operation for the small spray array valves, and determined that the such an LCO posed an undue risk of a dual unit shutdown with no increase in overall safety.
A. As described, it appears that SSES has reanalyzed the UHS such that there are three 100 percent spray arrays for design basis accident conditions; two large arrays and the combination of the two small arrays. The staff SER for SSES, NUREG 0776, April 1981 indicates that the original analyses of the spray pond, Attachment
and independent staff calculations of the UHS, were performed assuming a single failure such that one spray pond cooling loop (one division/spray network, including both the large and the small arrays in the division) was available.
Please provide further details of the analyses (or provide the analyses) which demonstrate the adequacy of the spray pond using only one large spray array.
Also please provide the details of the design basis calculations which address the statement that the RHRSW/UHS requirements bound the ESW return path and UHS spray capacity requirement (new basis insert I).
B. Address whether the current analyses considered both thermal efficiency (maintain temperature of pond below design) and maximum water loss due to drift, etc., for the 30-day duration. These two aspects were discussed as based on separate analyses in NUREG 0776. Specifically address the effect of using only a single large spray; which will increase spray nozzle differential pressure that was analyzed and confirmed by spray pond testing during initial licensing.
C. If the small arrays were credited in some scenarios with other degraded or inoperable components, then it would appear that less severe allowed outage times would be allowed than those proposed in certain limiting conditions proposed in the technical specifications. For example in Table 1 of the application, the condition with two large spray arrays out of service indicates that this condition represents an inoperable UHS and would require entry into Technical Specification 3.0.3 for both units. If both small arrays were operable under these conditions, then the plant would have full UHS capacity for design basis conditions (as stated in your application), yet be following a technical specification to require simultaneous shutdown of both units. Other proposed LCOs (e.g. 3.7.1.A) with 8 hour9.259259e-5 days <br />0.00222 hours <br />1.322751e-5 weeks <br />3.044e-6 months <br /> completion times based on insufficient RHRSW capacity remaining with a large spray array valve inoperable would appear to be justified for 72 hour8.333333e-4 days <br />0.02 hours <br />1.190476e-4 weeks <br />2.7396e-5 months <br /> completion time with the availability of both small spray arrays.
It is likely you would request the NRC to provide an exemption for these conditions which could have been addressed in advance through this application.
- 6. The application states that the UHS analysis did not specifically address valve leakage; however, the flow values used for the RHRSW and ESW systems contain considerable margin from the actual flow values obtained from flow balances. Please provide the flow values used in the analyses and those typically obtained from flow balances.
- 7. You propose adding Technical Specification SR 3.7.1.4 to verify that the spray loop bypass valves close upon receipt of a closing signal. Why is the automatic opening of these valves not similarly being added to the technical specification? As stated in your application, these valves receive such a signal to ensure an adequate path exists for avoiding dead-headed conditions upon automatic starting of an associated RHRSW or ESW pump. Also, in this context, provide additional information explaining the SR 3.7.1.4 basis statement that The failure of the spray bypass valve to open on demand is not limiting and, therefore, would not cause the loop to be inoperable.
- 8. Proposed Technical Specification 3.7.1.B appears to be missing an 8-hour completion time for the condition of one Unit 1 RHRSW subsystem inoperable from the discovery of both Unit 2 RHRSW systems inoperable (similar omission for Unit 2 Technical Specifications). Please address omission of this completion time which is discussed in your application and one of the matrix completion times provided in application Table 1.
(Under such conditions Unit 2 would be in proposed Technical Specification 3.7.1.C and subject to an 8 hour9.259259e-5 days <br />0.00222 hours <br />1.322751e-5 weeks <br />3.044e-6 months <br /> completion time).
- 9. Clarify the 8 hour9.259259e-5 days <br />0.00222 hours <br />1.322751e-5 weeks <br />3.044e-6 months <br /> completion time associated with proposed Technical Specification 3.7.1.A. For example, if one of the loop B valves in Table 3.7.1-1 is inoperable (thereby placing both Units in LCO 3.7.1), and the Unit 1 loop A RHRSW subsystem is subsequently discovered to be inoperable; are both Units 1 and 2 required to complete within 8 hours9.259259e-5 days <br />0.00222 hours <br />1.322751e-5 weeks <br />3.044e-6 months <br />?
- 10. Basis insert G for Unit 2 appears to be improperly formulated (not appropriately revised from the Unit 1 basis insert G). Please provide appropriate change.
