ML023520062
| ML023520062 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Nine Mile Point  |
| Issue date: | 12/17/2002 |
| From: | Tam P NRC/NRR/DLPM/LPD1 |
| To: | Laffrey J Nine Mile Point |
| References | |
| TAC MB6536 | |
| Download: ML023520062 (4) | |
Text
From:
Peter Tam To:
internet:John.Laffrey@nmp.cn.com; INTernet:Lynn.Beverage@nmp.cn.com Date:
12/17/02 3:59PM
Subject:
Nine Mile Point 2, UFSAR Revision 15 (TAC MB6536)
John:
I completed our limited review of the subject revision and have a number of questions (below).
I propose to discuss these with you during my next site visit. Please call me to discuss when we can do that (the discussion should last no more than half a work day).
The following questions are provided solely to prepare you for an onsite discussion.
They do not state an NRC staff position, nor do they formally request for additional information.
When did the last refueling outage end?
Chapter 1 Section 1.2.9.13, Main Steam Radiation Monitoring System - The high radiation trip signals are no longer stated to be used by the RPS to initiate a reactor scram. Is this a design change? If so, was it per 10 CFR 50.59 or approved by amendment?
Chapter 2 Section 2.4.13.3, page 2.4 The groundwater table was changed from "below the reactor mat elevation" to "slightly above the reactor mat bottom elevation." What happened that led to this change?
Chapter 3 Section 3.1.2.21, page 3.1 The "main steam line (MSL) high radiation" trip is deleted.
Reason?
Table 3.5 "Rod sequence control" was deleted from this table. Reason?
Chapter 6 Section 6.3.2.2.4, page 6.3 RHR-LPCI flow is delayed from 65 seconds to 66.3 seconds.
What caused this change? Is this addressed in the new Reference 3 of Section 6.3.6?
Section 6.3.3.3, page 6.3 A small increase in temperature (from 100 degrees to 200 degrees). What caused this "small" increase? Can a delta of 200 degrees still be considered small? Is this addressed in the new Reference 3 of Section 6.3.6?
Chapter 7
Section 7.2.1.4, page 7.2-10a; Table 7.2-1; Section 7.3.1.1.2, page 7.3-12; Table 7.3 The variable "main steam line high radiation" is deleted from the reactor protection system. Is this a design change? If so, was it done under 10 CFR 50.59 or by an NRC amendment?
Chapter 9 Page 9.1 The SFC [Spent Fuel Pool Cooling and Cleanup] system used to maintain the average reactor coolant temperature below 140 F. The revision change the average temperature to 150 F. What led to the increased average temperature?
Pages 9.1-15, 9.1-18, 9.1-19, 9.1 Is the re-write the result of a re-analysis of spent fuel pool performance? What prompted the re-analysis? Is full-core off load in the original licensing basis?
Page 9.1 What is so unique about refueling outages that "begin in December to mid-April"?
How about refueling outages that do not begin in such period?
Page 9.1 The alternate decay heat removal system used to be able to maintain temperatures under item 1, 2 and 3 to be under 102, 107 and 140 F. These temperatures are now changed to 110, 110 and 150 F. What is the reason for this apparent decrease in performance?
Figure 9.1.28 - We are missing this figure. Please provide a copy.
Chapter 10 Page 10.2 The testing interval of main stop valves, control valves and CIVs was changed from 18 months to 24 months. Was this a Tech. Spec. change?
Chapter 12 While there was no significant change to the text of this chapter, a large number of figures were revised. Please provide a summary statement (1 or 2 sentences) as to the nature of these figure revisions.
We are missing Fig. 12.3-69, Sheet 1 of 4.
Chapter 13 Pages 13.1-3, 13.1-4, Figures 13.1-1, 13.1 You have requested the NRC to drop the position "Senior Constellation Officer Responsible for Nine Mile Point" from the mailing NRC list, yet you added information on this position. Please clarify.
Chapter 14 Many tables were reissued with apparently no change. Reason?
Chapter 15
Page 15.4-18, -19, A new subsection, "Result of Analysis for Removing MSIV Isolation" was added to the control rod drop accident. Reason?
Pages 15.7-15 and A new subsection, "Inoperable Secondary Containment Analysis" was added to the fuel handling accident. Reason?
Peter S. Tam, Senior Project Manager Project Directorate I-1 Division of Licensing Project Management Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation e-mail: pst@nrc.gov Tel.: 301-415-1451 CC:
INTernet:Denise.Wolniak@nmp.cn.com; internet:steven.leonard@nmp.cn.com Mail Envelope Properties (3DFF902D.F36 : 10 : 20510)
Subject:
Nine Mile Point 2, UFSAR Revision 15 (TAC MB6536)
Creation Date:
12/17/02 3:59PM From:
Peter Tam Created By:
PST@nrc.gov Recipients Action Date & Time Denise Transferred 12/17/02 03:59PM Wolniak CC (INTernet:Denise.Wolniak@nmp.cn John Transferred 12/17/02 03:59PM Laffrey (internet:John.Laffrey@nmp.cn.com Lynn Transferred 12/17/02 03:59PM Beverage (INTernet:Lynn.Beverage@nmp.cn.c steven Transferred 12/17/02 03:59PM leonard CC (internet:steven.leonard@nmp.cn Post Office Delivered Route Denise INTernet:nmp.cn.com John internet:nmp.cn.com Lynn INTernet:nmp.cn.com steven internet:nmp.cn.com Files Size Date & Time MESSAGE 7907 12/17/02 03:59PM
Options Auto Delete:
No Expiration Date:
None Notify Recipients:
Yes Priority:
Standard Reply Requested:
No Return Notification:
None Concealed
Subject:
No Security:
Standard To Be Delivered:
Immediate Status Tracking:
Delivered & Opened