ML031290073

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search

RAI, Draft Request for Additional Information to Be Discussed in an Upcoming Conference Call
ML031290073
Person / Time
Site: Seabrook NextEra Energy icon.png
Issue date: 05/08/2003
From: Nerses V
NRC/NRR/DLPM/LPD1
To: Clifford J
NRC/NRR/DLPM/LPD1
Nerses V, NRR/DLPM, 415-1484
References
TAC MB4918
Download: ML031290073 (4)


Text

May 8, 2003 MEMORANDUM TO: James W. Clifford, Chief, Section 2 Project Directorate I Division of Licensing Project Management Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation FROM: Victor Nerses, Sr. Project Manager, Section 2 /RA/

Project Directorate I Division of Licensing Project Management Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation

SUBJECT:

SEABROOK STATION, UNIT NO. 1, FACSIMILE TRANSMISSION, DRAFT REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION (RAI) TO BE DISCUSSED IN AN UPCOMING CONFERENCE CALL (TAC NO. MB4918)

The attached draft RAI was transmitted by facsimile on May 8, 2003, to Mr. Mike OKeefe of FPL Energy Seabrook, LLC (the licensee). This draft RAI was transmitted to facilitate the technical review being conducted by NRR and to support a conference call with the licensee to discuss the RAI. The RAI was related to the licensees April 15, 2002 submittal concerning a relocation of cycle specific parameters to the Core Operating Limits Report (COLR). Review of the RAI would allow the licensee to determine and agree upon a schedule to respond to the RAI. This memorandum and the attachment do not convey or represent an NRC staff position regarding the licensees request.

Docket No. 50-443

Attachment:

Draft RAI

May 8, 2003 MEMORANDUM TO: James W. Clifford, Chief, Section 2 Project Directorate I Division of Licensing Project Management Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation FROM: Victor Nerses, Sr. Project Manager, Section 2 /RA/

Project Directorate I Division of Licensing Project Management Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation

SUBJECT:

SEABROOK STATION, UNIT NO. 1, FACSIMILE TRANSMISSION, DRAFT REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION (RAI) TO BE DISCUSSED IN AN UPCOMING CONFERENCE CALL (TAC NO. MB4918)

The attached draft RAI was transmitted by facsimile on May 8, 2003, to Mr. Mike OKeefe of FPL Energy Seabrook, LLC (the licensee). This draft RAI was transmitted to facilitate the technical review being conducted by NRR and to support a conference call with the licensee to discuss the RAI. The RAI was related to the licensees April 15, 2002 submittal concerning a relocation of cycle specific parameters to the Core Operating Limits Report (COLR). Review of the RAI would allow the licensee to determine and agree upon a schedule to respond to the RAI. This memorandum and the attachment do not convey or represent an NRC staff position regarding the licensees request.

Docket No. 50-443

Attachment:

Draft RAI DISTRIBUTION PUBLIC J. Clifford V. Nerses S. Colpo PDI-2 Reading Accession Number: ML031290073 OFFICE PDI-2/PM SRXB/SC NAME VNerses JUhle DATE 5/8/03 5/7/03 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY

DRAFT OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION RELOCATION OF CYCLE SPECIFIC PARAMETERS TO COLR FPL ENERGY SEABROOK, LLC SEABROOK STATION DOCKET NO. 50-443 (TAC NO. MB4918)

By application dated April 15, 2002, FPL Energy Seabrook, LLC (the licensee) requested to amend the COLR documents list. The staff has found that additional information, as noted below, is needed to complete its review of the request by the licensee.

1. In Generic Letter 88-16 entitled, Removal of Cycle-Specific Parameter Limits from Technical Specifications, the NRC established a generic process that eliminated the need to modify the technical specifications to update cycle-specific parameters. A central element of the process included the addition of a Core Operating Limits Report (COLR) to include cycle-specific parameters and NRC-approved methodologies. A licensee may add approved methodologies to the COLR list using the standard technical specification modification process. When the staff reviews license requests to relocate technical specifications to the COLR, it uses two important conditions to determine acceptability. These two conditions are the following: 1) the parameter is cycle specific; and 2) an NRC approved methodology exists to calculate the parameter in an acceptably conservative manner. An NRC-approved methodology would include equations, approved codes, references to approvals of codes if approved separately, a process to ensure that input is conservative for a plant-specific application, a process to make changes to the parameter, and a demonstration that the calculated parameter is conservative to account for the conditions under which it exists .

In addition to responding to the specific requests below, please provide information that assures the surveillance of the concentration is maintained when the value is moved to the COLR.

a) Please provide justification for meeting the two conditions above including a methodology that can be approved for relocating the RWST boron concentration to the COLR.

b) Please provide justification for meeting the two conditions above including a methodology that can be approved for relocating accumulator boron concentration to the COLR.

c) Please provide reference to the two conditions above or meet the conditions above including a methodology that can be approved for relocating refueling boron concentration to the COLR.

d) Please provide reference to the two conditions above or meet the conditions above including a methodology that can be approved for relocating the boric acid storage tank concentration.

2. How are procedures updated and communicated to the operators when cycle specific boron concentrations are moved to the COLR?
3. Is the licensee requesting to add WCAP 15025-P-A to the COLR list of documents? If so please address the limitations delineated in the staff safety evaluation of the WCAP.