Letter Sequence Other |
|---|
|
Results
Other: ML022280438, ML031070343, ML031070351, ML031070357, ML031070368, ML031070397, ML031070410, ML031070421, ML031070452, ML031070463, ML031070472, ML031080417, ML031130250, ML031130427, ML031140030, ML032160436, ML033320066, ML033430375
|
MONTHYEARML0301606982002-01-15015 January 2002 Docket Information in Support of Staffs Review of H. B. Robinson, Unit 2 License Renewal Application Project stage: Approval ML0222804382002-08-16016 August 2002 Notice of Intent to Prepare an Environmental Impact Statement & Conduct Scoping Process for License Renewal for H. B. Robinson Steam Electric Plant, Unit No. 2 Project stage: Other ML0222801252002-08-29029 August 2002 Notice of Public Meeting at Coker College to Discuss Environmental Scoping Process for Robinson, Unit 2, License Renewal Application Project stage: Meeting ML0227402602002-09-25025 September 2002 Meeting Handouts to Discuss the Environmental Scoping Process for the LRA for Robinson, Unit 2 Project stage: Meeting ML0301706392003-01-16016 January 2003 Summary of Teleconference with National Marine Fishery Service and South Carolina Department of Natural Resources in Support of the Staffs Review of the H.B. Robinson, Unit 2 License Renewal Application Project stage: Meeting ML0303006192003-01-24024 January 2003 Summary of Teleconference with Carolina Power & Light in Support of Staffs Review of H.B. Robinson, Unit 2 License Renewal Application Project stage: Meeting ML0304301542003-02-11011 February 2003 Docket Information in Support of the Staffs Review of the H. B. Robinson, Unit 2, License Renewal Application Project stage: Approval ML0310804172003-02-28028 February 2003 Federal Fish & Wildlife Permit, Dated 02/28/2003 & Migratory Bird Depredation Permit Standard Conditions Project stage: Other ML0310703432003-03-0606 March 2003 /Data Cover Sheet Project stage: Other ML0310703512003-03-0606 March 2003 FW: Robinson Gross Generation 01 02 (Table) Project stage: Other ML0310703572003-03-11011 March 2003 F.W. Robinson Emailing: - Emailing: peedee2K1 Project stage: Other ML0310703682003-03-14014 March 2003 2003 Federal Bird Permit, Dated 2/28/03, E-mail Date: 3/14/03 (Cvr. Sheet) Project stage: Other ML0310703972003-03-19019 March 2003 Cost of Replacement of Yokes Project stage: Other ML0308701572003-03-19019 March 2003 Summary of Teleconference with Carolina Power and Light in Support of the Staffs Review of the H.B. Robinson, Unit 2 License Renewal Application Project stage: Meeting ML0310704102003-03-25025 March 2003 750 and 751 Cost Benefit Rev3.doc Dated 03/25/2003 (Data W/Table) (Robinson Nuclear Plant RHR Valves 750 and 751) Project stage: Other ML0310704212003-03-25025 March 2003 750 and 751 Cost Benefit Rev 3.doc (Cvr. Sheet) March 25, 2003 Project stage: Other ML0310704522003-03-26026 March 2003 Document 2 Dated 03/26/2003 Project stage: Other ML0310704632003-04-0303 April 2003 Radiant Energy Shield SAMA, Dated 4/3/03 Project stage: Other ML0310704722003-04-0808 April 2003 IPEEE Fire Analysis, Dated 04/08/2003 Project stage: Other ML0310702092003-04-15015 April 2003 Docket Information in Support of the Staffs Review of the H.B. Robinson, Unit 2, License Renewal Application Project stage: Approval ML0311304272003-04-22022 April 2003 (S. Bolden) - Biological Assessment for License Renewal at H.B. Robinson Steam Electric Plant, Unit 2 (Tac No. MB5226) Project stage: Other ML0311302502003-04-22022 April 2003 Biological Assessment for License Renewal at H.B. Robinson Steam Electric Plant, Unit 2 Project stage: Other ML0311400302003-04-30030 April 2003 Biological Assessment - H.B. Robinson Steam Electric Plant, Unit 2, (Nuclear) License Renewal Review Hartsville, South Carolina, April 2003 Project stage: Other ML0312600842003-05-0505 May 2003 Notice of Availability of the Draft Plant-Specific Supplement to the Generic Environmental Impact Statement Regarding H.B. Robinson Steam Electric Plant, Unit 2 Project stage: Draft Other ML0312604322003-05-0505 May 2003 Request for Comments on the Draft Plant-Specific Supplement 13 to the Generic Environmental Impact Statement Regarding H.B. Robinson Steam Electric Plant, Unit 2 (Tac No. MB5226) Project stage: Draft Other ML0322706002003-06-25025 June 2003 Corrected Transcript of Proceedings, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission: H.B. Robinson Steam Electric Plant, Draft EIS Public Meeting - Afternoon, Hartsville, Sc ML0321604362003-06-25025 June 2003 E-Mail from L. England to Jan Kozyra Dam Releases Project stage: Other ML0322706012003-06-25025 June 2003 Corrected Transcript of Proceedings: U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission: H.B. Robinson Steam Electric Plant Draft EIS Public Meeting - Evening Session, Hartsville, Sc, Enclosure 3 ML0322706042003-08-15015 August 2003 Summary of Visit to Robinson Site in Support of the Staffs Review of the H.B. Robinson, Unit 2, License Renewal Application (Tac No. MB5226) Project stage: Approval ML0322706032003-08-15015 August 2003 Summary of Meeting Held in Support of the Environmental Review for the H.B. Robinson Steam Electric Plant, Unit 2, License Renewal Application (TAC No. Mb 5226) W/Encls. 1 & 4 Project stage: Meeting ML0333200662003-10-17017 October 2003 Comment (8) of Joseph F. Cockrell, U.S. Department of the Interior Regarding License Renewal at H.B. Robinson Steam Electric Plant, Unit 2 Project stage: Other ML0334303752003-12-12012 December 2003 Final Supplement 13 to the Generic Environmental Impact Statement for H.B. Robinson Steam Electric Plant, Unit 2 License Renewal Project stage: Other ML0334505172003-12-31031 December 2003 NUREG-1437 S13, Generic Environmental Impact Statement for License Renewal of Nuclear Plants. Project stage: Acceptance Review 2003-03-14
[Table View] |
Text
C:\\MyFiles\\Checkout\\750 and 751 cost benefit Rev3.doc Page 1 of 2 Robinson Nuclear Plant RHR Valves 750 & 751 March 25, 2003 During the preparation of the IPEEE it was identified RNP had two valves that were outliers, RHR-750 and RHR-751. These valves had a calculated HCLPF of 0.28g. A reanalysis was performed in 1998 that looked at the response at the actual elevation of the valves and calculated a HCLPF of 0.39g. This is a value above the 0.3g deemed appropriate for RNP using the guidance of NUREG 1407. RNP now has demonstrated that all components of interest in the IPEEE are above the 0.3g HCLPF and has no outliers. It further demonstrated that these valves have approximately 100% design margin to the 0.2g Design Basis Earthquake.
It should be noted that no credit is taken for the orientation of the valves in this sensitivity case. The valves are oriented approximately 25 degrees apart in relation to a north-south line, which may reduce the likelihood that both valves will fail in a given seismic event. When one valve fails the probability is assumed to be 1.0 for failure of the second valve.
The LERF (Dose Risk and Offsite Economic Cost Risk based of NUREG 1488 values) benefit from going from the existing calculated HCLPF of 0.39g to an expected 0.6g for a yoke of a different material is as follows:
Acceleration Range (g)
Benefit in Dollars 0.4 - 0.5 69,001 0.5 - 0.6 92,238 0.6 - 0.7 132,061 0.7 - 0.8 123,989 0.8 - 0.9 176,350 0.9 - 1.0 59,963 1.0+
354,637 Total Range 1,008,239 It is inappropriate to try and determine the benefit of improving the HCLPF further for these valves without looking at the effects of a more intense earthquake on the rest of the plant. For RNP the mean frequency of exceedance differs by more than an order of magnitude for similar earthquakes between EPRI NP6395-D and NUREG 1488. For NUREG 1488 for RNP for the earthquakes of interest, the mean values exceed those of the 85 percentile indicating an unusual distribution of expert opinion. Figure 1 of NUREG 1488 reads, can lead to unrealistically large estimates of recurrence rate at larger magnitudes. It is expected that use of the EPRI data and the above technique of multiplying delta risk with the associated fragility value would reduce the benefit by at least a factor of 15. Using the approach from the IPEEE with EPRI values gives an
C:\\MyFiles\\Checkout\\750 and 751 cost benefit Rev3.doc Page 2 of 2 exceedance for 0.39g HCLPF of 9E-6. Multiplying this by the 0.05 (95% probability that no more than 5% fail) gives a risk of 4.5E-7 which converts to $39,420. This all leads to a low confidence of any cost benefit computed.
Changes to the cost estimate write-up. The value that should be used for dose is
$2000/Rem not $10,000/Rem. There may be some future outage where yoke replacement could be done and not be on critical path. There is a lot of desire to continue to shorten outages and this becomes less likely with time. If the valves require major maintenance (none scheduled) most of the dollars associated with dose would also go away if yoke replacement was done at the same time.