ML043270654
| ML043270654 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Point Beach  |
| Issue date: | 11/17/2004 |
| From: | Morgan M NRC/NRR/DRIP/RLEP |
| To: | Division of Regulatory Improvement Programs |
| Morgan M, NRR/DRIP/RLEP, 415-2232 | |
| References | |
| Download: ML043270654 (7) | |
Text
November 17, 2004 LICENSEE:
Nuclear Management Company, LLC FACILITY:
Point Beach Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2
SUBJECT:
SUMMARY
OF TELEPHONE CONFERENCE HELD ON OCTOBER 27, 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 APPLICATION The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff (the staff) and representatives of Nuclear Management Company, LLC (NMC) held a telephone conference on October 27, 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 application. The conference call 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 had an opportunity to comment on this summary.
/RA/
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/encls: See next page
ML043270654 DOCUMENT NAME: E:\\Filenet\\ML043270654.wpd OFFICE PM:RLEP SC:RLEP NAME MMorgan SLee DATE 11/17/04 11/17/04
Point Beach Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2 cc:
Jonathan Rogoff, Esq.
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 Inspector's Office U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 6612 Nuclear Road Two Rivers, WI 54241 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 Roger A. Newton 3623 Nagawicka Shores Drive Hartland, WI 53029 James E. Knorr License Renewal Project Nuclear Management Company, LLC 6610 Nuclear Road Point Beach Nuclear Plant Two Rivers, WI 54241 Dennis L. Koehl Site Vice President Point Beach Nuclear Plant Nuclear Management Company, LLC 6610 Nuclear Road Two Rivers, WI 54241
DISTRIBUTION: Note to: Licensee: Nuclear Management Co., LLC, Re: Pt. Beach Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2, Dated: November 17, 2004 Adams accession no.: ML043270654 HARD COPY RLEP RF Project Manager 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 P. Lougheed, RIII J. Strasma, RIII A. Vegel, RIII H. Chernoff W. Ruland C. Marco L. Raghavan T. Mensah OPA LIST OF PARTICIPANTS FOR TELEPHONE CONFERENCE TO DISCUSS THE POINT BEACH NUCLEAR PLANT, UNITS 1 AND 2 LICENSE RENEWAL APPLICATION OCTOBER 27, 2004 Participants Affiliations T. Mielke Nuclear Management Company; LLC S. Schellin Nuclear Management Company; LLC J. Thorgersen Nuclear Management Company; LLC M. Heath Nuclear Regulatory Commission M. Razzaque Nuclear Regulatory Commission M. Morgan Nuclear Regulatory Commission
DRAFT REQUESTS FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION (D-RAI)
POINT BEACH NUCLEAR PLANT, UNITS 1 AND 2 LICENSE RENEWAL APPLICATION October 27, 2004 The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff (the staff) and representatives of Nuclear Management Company, LLC (NMC) held a telephone conference call on October 27, 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 application (LRA). The following D-RAIs were discussed during the telephone conference call.
2.3.1.1 Class 1 Piping/Components System RAI 2.3.1.1-1 In the LRA Tables 2.3.1-1, 2.3.1-6 and 2.3.3-1, heat exchangers have been identified as component type within the scope of license renewal. However, specifically for these heat exchangers, the pressure boundary was identified as the only intended function requiring aging management, but not their heat transfer function. The staff requests the applicant to clarify why the heat transfer function need not be identified as within scope requiring aging management.
Discussion: The applicant indicated that the question is clear. This D-RAI will be sent as a formal RAI.
2.3.1.2 Reactor Vessel RAI 2.3.1.2-1 Staff position on reactor vessel flange leak-off lines is that unless a plant specific justification is provided, the components should be in scope requiring aging management. Please confirm whether any of the component type listed in Table 2.3.1-2 (Reactor Vessel) or Table 2.3.1-6 (Non-Class 1 RCS Components System) of the LRA include the subject components. If not, then the subject components should be identified as within scope requiring aging management, or provide a plant specific justification.
Discussion: The applicant indicated that the question is clear. This D-RAI will be sent as a formal RAI.
2.3.1.4 Pressurizer (PZR)
RAI 2.3.1.4-1 LRA Drawings 541F091 Sh.2 and 541F445 Sh.2 show that the pressurizer relief tank (PRT) is in scope; whereas its sub-components, such as the PRT spray, the rupture disk, and the associated pipings are shown to be outside the scope. The staff believes that failure of PRT spray, rupture disk, and/or the associated pipings can result in failure of the PRT itself to perform its intended function. The staff, therefore, requests the applicant to include the PRT spray, rupture disk, and the associated pipings within the scope of license renewal, or to
provide an explanation as to how failure of the PRT sub-components will not degrade the intended functions of the PRT.
Discussion: The applicant indicated that the question is clear. This D-RAI will be sent as a formal RAI.
RAI 2.3.1.4-2 In Table 2.3.1-4 (Pressurizer) of the LRA, PZR spray head was not listed as a component type subject to an AMR. But the LRA drawings 541F091 Sh.1 and 541F445 Sh.1 show that the PZR spray head are in scope. Please clarify. The staff believes that loss of the spray head due to aging will result in the failure of the pressure control function of the PZR which may be relied upon during and following design-basis events (DBE) and/or regulated events. If the spray head was excluded from the scope, then the following additional information is requested:
a) The staff requests the applicant to justify how the components (spray head and associated pipings inside pressurizer) which are relied upon for pressure control function during plant transients, as stated in the LRA (page 2-79), do not require any aging management during the extended period of operation?
b) The staff requests the applicant to clarify if the current licensing basis (CLB) for fire protection(FP) complies with certain sections of Appendix R, particularly Section III.G, which provides the requirements for the fire protection safe shutdown capability. Discuss if the pressurizer spray head and associated piping are credited and relied upon in the fire protection safe shutdown analysis to bring the plant to cold shutdown conditions within a given time for compliance with Appendix R. If it is credited in the fire protection safe shutdown analysis, the pressurizer spray head and associated piping would satisfy 10 CFR 50.48, Appendix R requirements; and therefore, should be included within the scope of license renewal. The specific intended function of the subject components which meets the 10 CFR 54.4(a)(3) requirements is the spray function, and the particular components which help perform this function are the section of piping and the spray head located inside the pressurizer. Note that the subject components do not have pressure boundary function. The staff requests the applicant to describe whether the loss of spray function can make it impossible to bring the plant to cold shutdown conditions within the given time for compliance with Appendix R. If so, then the staff requests that the spray head and the associated piping inside pressurizer having the spray function be included within the scope requiring aging management so that it should provide a reasonable assurance that an adequate spray function will be maintained inside the pressurizer during the extended period of operation.
Discussion: Based on the discussion with the applicant, the staff indicated and the applicant agreed that this question required further clarification about the spray heads. Applicant will clarify information/response.