ML042260399
| ML042260399 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Point Beach  |
| Issue date: | 08/05/2004 |
| From: | Morgan M NRC/NRR/DRIP/RLEP |
| To: | Nuclear Management Co |
| Morgan M, NRR/NRC/DRIP/RLEP, 415-2232 | |
| References | |
| Download: ML042260399 (9) | |
Text
August 5, 2004 LICENSEE:
Nuclear Management Company, LLC FACILITY:
Point Beach Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2
SUBJECT:
SUMMARY
OF TELEPHONE CONFERENCE HELD ON JUNE 24, 2004, BETWEEN THE U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION AND NUCLEAR MANAGEMENT COMPANY, LLC, CONCERNING DRAFT REQUESTS FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION PERTAINING TO THE POINT BEACH NUCLEAR PLANT, UNITS 1 AND 2, LICENSE RENEWAL APPLICATIONS The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff (the staff) and representatives of Nuclear Management Company, LLC (NMC) held a telephone conference (telecon) on June 24, 2004, to discuss and clarify the staffs draft requests for additional information (D-RAIs) concerning the Point Beach Nuclear Plant License Renewal Applications. The telecon was useful in clarifying the intent of the staffs D-RAIs. provides a listing of the meeting participants. Enclosure 2 contains a listing of the D-RAIs discussed with the applicant, including a brief description on the status of the items.
The applicant has had an opportunity to comment on this summary.
/RA/ Sam Lee for Michael J. Morgan, Project Manager License Renewal Section A License Renewal and Environmental Impacts Program Division of Regulatory Improvement Programs Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Docket Nos.: 50-266 and 50-301
Enclosures:
As stated cc w/enclosures: See next page
ML042260399 DOCUMENT NAME: C:\\ORPCheckout\\FileNET\\ML042260399.wpd OFFICE PM:RLEP SE:RLEP LA:RLEP SC:RLEP NAME MMorgan (SLee for)
OYee MJenkins (Letter only)
SLee DATE 8/5/04 8/5/04 8/5/04 8/5/04
DISTRIBUTION: Dated: August 5, 2004 Accession No.: ML042260399 HARD COPY RLEP RF M. Morgan (PM)
O. Yee E-MAIL:
RidsNrrDrip RidsNrrDe G. Bagchi K. Manoly W. Bateman J. Calvo R. Jenkins P. Shemanski J. Fair RidsNrrDssa RidsNrrDipm D. Thatcher R. Pettis G. Galletti C. Li M. Itzkowitz (RidsOgcMailCenter)
R. Weisman M. Mayfield A. Murphy S. Smith (srs3)
S. Duraiswamy Y. L. (Renee) Li RLEP Staff L. Kozak, RIII J. Strasma, RIII A. Vegel, RIII H. Chernoff W. Ruland C. Marco L. Raghavan T. Mensah OPA
Point Beach Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2 cc:
Jonathan Rogoff, Esquire Vice President, Counsel & Secretary Nuclear Management Company, LLC 700 First Street Hudson, WI 54016 Mr. Frederick D. Kuester President and Chief Executive Officer We Generation 231 West Michigan Street Milwaukee, WI 53201 James Connolly Manager, Regulatory Affairs Point Beach Nuclear Plant Nuclear Management Company, LLC 6610 Nuclear Road Two Rivers, WI 54241 Mr. Ken Duveneck Town Chairman Town of Two Creeks 13017 State Highway 42 Mishicot, WI 54228 Chairman Public Service Commission of Wisconsin P.O. Box 7854 Madison, WI 53707-7854 Regional Administrator, Region III U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 801 Warrenville Road Lisle, IL 60532-4351 Resident Inspectors Office U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 6612 Nuclear Road Two Rivers, WI 54241 Roger A. Newton 3623 Nagawicka Shores Drive Hartland, WI 53029 Mr. Jeffrey Kitsembel Electric Division Public Service Commission of Wisconsin P.O. Box 7854 Madison, WI 53707-7854 David Weaver Nuclear Asset Manager Wisconsin Electric Power Company 231 West Michigan Street Milwaukee, WI 53201 John Paul Cowan Executive Vice President & Chief Nuclear Officer Nuclear Management Company, LLC 700 First Street Hudson, WI 54016 Douglas E. Cooper Senior Vice President - Group Operations Palisades Nuclear Plant Nuclear Management Company, LLC 27780 Blue Star Memorial Highway Covert, MI 49043 Fred Emerson Nuclear Energy Institute 1776 I Street, NW., Suite 400 Washington, DC 20006-3708 Dennis L. Koehl Site Vice President Point Beach Nuclear Plant Nuclear Management Company, LLC 6610 Nuclear Road Two Rivers, WI 54241 James E. Knorr License Renewal Project Nuclear Management Company, LLC 6610 Nuclear Road Point Beach Nuclear Plant Two Rivers, WI 54241 LIST OF PARTICIPANTS FOR TELEPHONE CONFERENCE TO DISCUSS THE POINT BEACH NUCLEAR PLANT, UNITS 1 AND 2, LICENSE RENEWAL APPLICATION JUNE 24, 2004 Participants Affiliation Michael J. Morgan U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC)
Hansraj G. Ashar NRC Thomas M. Cheng NRC Roger A. Newton Nuclear Management Company, LLC (NMC)
Jim E. Knorr NMC Mark J. Ortmayer NMC DRAFT REQUESTS FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION (D-RAI)
POINT BEACH NUCLEAR PLANT, UNITS 1 & 2 LICENSE RENEWAL APPLICATION June 24, 2004 The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff (the staff) and representatives of Nuclear Management Company, LLC (NMC) held a telephone conference call (telecon) on June 24, 2004, to discuss and clarify the staffs draft requests for additional information (D-RAIs) concerning the Point Beach Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2, license renewal applications (LRA).
The following D-RAIs were discussed during the telephone conference call.
D-RAI 3.5-1 In discussing Item Number 3.5.1-3 (Table 3.5.1) of the LRA, the applicant asserts that the Point Beach Nuclear Plant (PBNP) aging management review (AMR) results are consistent with NUREG-1801. NUREG-1801 under Item A3.1 (Page II A3.6) recommends further evaluation regarding the stress corrosion cracking of containment bellows. The applicant is requested to provide additional information regarding the containment pressure boundary bellows at PBNP, relevant operating experience, and method(s) used to detect their age related degradation.
Note: In many cases, VT-3 examination of IWE, and Type B, Appendix J testing cannot detect such aging effects (See NRC Information Notice 92-20).
Discussion:
The applicant indicated that the question is clear. This D-RAI will be sent as an RAI.
D-RAI 3.5-2 For seals and gaskets related to containment penetrations, in Item Number 3.5.1-6 of the LRA, containment ISI including containment leak rate testing have been stated as the aging management programs. For equipment hatches and air-locks at PBNP, the staff agrees with the applicants assertion that the leak rate testing program will monitor aging degradation of seals and gaskets, as they are leak rate tested after each opening. For other penetrations (mechanical and electrical) with seals and gaskets, the applicant is requested to provide information regarding the adequacy of Type B leak rate testing frequency to monitor aging degradation of seals and gaskets at PBNP.
Discussion:
The applicant indicated that the question is clear. This D-RAI will be sent as an RAI.
D-RAI 3.5-3 In Section 3.5.2.2.1.3, and in Item 9) of Table 3.5.0-1 (plant-specific response to WCAP-14756-A), the applicant asserts that the concrete temperatures around the high energy piping penetrations are well below the established threshold value of 200oF. However, PB OPR 000096 indicated that the concrete temperatures around the main steam and feed water lines were found to be about 380oF for an unknown period of time. Such sustained temperatures not only affect the concrete compressive strength and its elastic modulus, but they also accentuate the concrete creep and relaxation of prestressing tendons located in the vicinity of high temperature areas. The net effect could be lower tendon forces in these areas.
The applicant is requested to provide information regarding the actions taken: (1) to control the concrete temperatures in this areas, (2) to assess the condition of the concrete in these areas, (3) to assess the condition of penetration liners, and (4) to monitor the prestressing forces in the affected tendons. Also, the applicant is requested to discuss the consequences of the sustained high temperatures on the concrete and the prestressing tendons during the extended period of operation.
Discussion:
The applicant indicated that the question is clear. This D-RAI will be sent as an RAI.
D-RAI 3.5-4 In discussion of Item 3.5.1-12 in Section 3.5.2.2.1.4, the applicant notes that the liner corrosion has been found in both the PBNP Units due to borated water leakage, and that the applicant is performing Subsection IWE augmented inspections in this areas. The applicant is requested to provide a quantitative summary of extent of liner corrosion found in each unit, and the corrective actions taken. The applicant is requested to include a discussion of acceptable liner plate corrosion before it is reinstated to its nominal thickness.
Discussion:
The applicant indicated that the question is clear. This D-RAI will be sent as an RAI.
D-RAI 3.5-5 The further evaluation in Section 3.5.2.2.1.3 associated with line Item 3.5.1-27 (Table 3.5.1) of the LRA indicates that the reactor cavity cooling sub-system maintains acceptable ambient temperature at the primary shield and reactor vessel support structure. The applicant is requested to provide the following information related to the concrete temperatures and monitoring activities in the primary shield and reactor vessel support areas for PBNP Units 1 and 2:
The operating experience related to the functioning of the reactor cavity cooling sub-system including a range of temperatures maintained between the reactor vessel and the primary shield wall, and at the reactor vessel support, and means of monitoring these temperatures;
If a separate cooling system is installed to cool the primary shield wall concrete, provide the operating experience related to the functioning of this system, and means used to monitor the primary shield concrete temperatures; and
A summary of the results of the last inspection performed in these areas, such as concrete cracking, spalling, pop-outs, etc.
Discussion:
The applicant indicated that the question is clear. This D-RAI will be sent as an RAI.
D-RAI 3.5-6 Section 3.5.2.2.2.1, Aging of Structures Not Covered by Structures Monitoring Program, of the LRA (Page 3.5-385) states that since the embedded steel is not exposed to an environment which is considered aggressive, loss of material, cracking, and loss of bond due to corrosion of embedded steel are not probable aging effects at PBNP and have not been observed to date.
Based on the staffs past review experience, many cases of corroded embedded steel (rebars and/or anchors) were identified even the reinforced concrete elements exposed to the environment which is not aggressive. The applicant is requested to provide basis for its statement.
Discussion:
The applicant indicated that the question is clear. This D-RAI will be sent as an RAI.
D-RAI 3.5-7 Regarding the aging mechanism related to settlement, Section 3.5.2.2.2.1, Aging of Structures Not Covered by Structures Monitoring Program, of the LRA (Page 3.5-386) states that all structures at PBNP are either founded on spread footings, basemats, or basemats with steel foundation piles that are driven to refusal. Settlement monitoring and structural inspections indicate no visible evidence of uneven or excessive settlement since construction of the station.
Therefore, the applicant concludes that cracking, distortion, and an increase in component stress levels due to settlements are not probable aging effects at PBNP and have not been observed to date.
Based on the staffs experience, as long as the structural foundations are founded on soils, even with spread footings, basemats, or basemats with steel piles driven to the refusal, etc., it is expected that settlements will occur, especially for the sandy soil. These settlements, in most cases, cannot be detected by visual inspection. The applicant is requested to provide additional information and clarify that the statement, settlement monitoring and structural inspections indicate no visible evidence of uneven or excessive settlement since construction of the station, is based on the measurement instead of visual observation or judgment. Otherwise, there is a need for the further evaluation of aging management as recommended by NUREG-1801.
Discussion:
The applicant indicated that the question is clear. This D-RAI will be sent as an RAI.
D-RAI 3.5-8 Section 3.5.2.2.2.2, Aging Management of Inaccessible Areas, of the LRA (Page 3-387) states that since the below-grade/lake water environment is non-aggressive and the structures monitoring program requires periodic monitoring of ground/lake water to verify chemistry remains non-aggressive, the loss of material and change in material properties due to aggressive chemical attack are not probable aging effects at PBNP. Also, since the embedded steel is not exposed to an environment which is considered aggressive, loss of material, cracking, and loss of bond due to corrosion of embedded steel are not probable aging effects at PBNP. The staff agrees with this statement only for the case of uncracked reinforced concrete elements. However, the inaccessible concrete components such as exterior walls below grade and embedded structural foundations may crack due to settlement and corrosion of reinforcing steel may be expected. The applicant is requested to provide additional information to justify the validity of the LRA statement.
Discussion:
The applicant indicated that the question is clear. This D-RAI will be sent as an RAI.
D-RAI 3.5-9 Item 3.5.1-21 of LRA Table 3.5.1, Summary of Aging Management Evaluations in Chapters II and III of NUREG-1801 for Structures and component Supports, states that the aging management program will be plant-specific, and the Discussion column of the table refers to LRA Section 3.5.2.2.2.2. However, there is no plant-specific aging management program described in this LRA section. Clarification is needed by the applicant.
Discussion:
The applicant indicated that the question is clear. This D-RAI will be sent as an RAI.
D-RAI 3.5-10 In Section 3.5.2.2.2.1, Aging of Structures Not Covered by Structures Monitoring Program, of the LRA (Page 3-385), the applicant stated that the Structures Monitoring Program requires periodic monitoring of ground/lake water to verify chemistry remains non-aggressive. However, our review of the Structures Monitoring Program (Item B2.1.20 of Appendix B to the LRA) found that there is no program commitment to monitor the ground/lake water chemistry. Therefore, the applicant is requested to clarify this inconsistency.
Discussion:
The applicant indicated that the question is clear. This D-RAI will be sent as an RAI.
D-RAI 3.5-11 In LRA Table 3.5.2-2, the applicant indicates that aging effects (changing material properties and loss of material of all wood/door with the intended function of missile barrier are to be managed by Structures Monitoring Program. However, the staffs review of Item B2.1.20 of Appendix B to the LRA found that the scope of the Structures Monitoring Program does not include wood components. The applicant is requested to clarify how these aging effects are to be managed.
Discussion:
The applicant indicated that the question is clear. This D-RAI will be sent as an RAI.
D-RAI 4.5-1 The use of 10 CFR 54.21(c)(1)(ii) and (iii) is appropriate for concrete containment tendon prestress TLAA. However, the staff need to assess the plant specific operating experience regarding the residual prestressing forces in the containments and the methods used to arrive at the projected prestresses forces. Based on the analysis performed in accordance with 10 CFR 54.21(c)(1)(ii), the applicant is requested to provide the following information:
The estimated upper and lower bound lines, and the minimum required prestressing forces for each group of tendons for each containment.
Trend lines of the projected prestressing forces for each group of tendons based on the regression analysis of the measured prestressing forces (see NRC Information Notice 99-10 for more information). Also, show the actual measured prestressing forces that were used to obtain the trend lines.
Plots showing comparisons of prestressing forces projected to 40 years and 60 years with the minimum required prestress (or MRV) for each group of tendons for each containment.
Discussion:
Based on the discussion with the applicant, the applicant indicated that it will need to further study the D-RAI, and that this specific question should be deferred for clarification in a future conference call or a meeting. The staff agreed to the applicants proposal.
D-RAI 4.5-2 In Section 15.3.1 of Appendix A of the LRA, the applicant notes the Prestressed Concrete Containment Tendon Surveillance Program, as an activity related to this TLAA. The applicants description is qualitative. For the summary to be meaningful, as a minimum, the applicant should provide a Table showing the minimum required prestressing forces and the projected (to 60 years) prestressing forces for each group of tendons which would demonstrate the validity of the program and the corresponding TLAA results. The applicant is requested to supplement this information in Section 15.3.1 of Appendix A of the UFSAR Supplement.
Discussion:
The applicant indicated that the question is clear. This D-RAI will be sent as an RAI.