ML062500457
| ML062500457 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Millstone, Surry, North Anna  |
| Issue date: | 09/07/2006 |
| From: | Stephen Monarque, Nerses V NRC/NRR/ADRO/DORL/LPLI-2, NRC/NRR/ADRO/DORL/LPLII-1 |
| To: | Christian D Virginia Electric & Power Co (VEPCO) |
| Monarque, S R, NRR/DORL, 415-1544 | |
| References | |
| TAC MC7520, TAC MC7521, TAC MC7529, TAC MC7530, TAC MC7531, TAC MC7532 | |
| Download: ML062500457 (11) | |
Text
September 7, 2006 Mr. David A. Christian Senior Vice President and Chief Nuclear Officer Virginia Electric and Power Company Innsbrook Technical Center 5000 Dominion Boulevard Glen Allen, VA 23060-6711
SUBJECT:
NORTH ANNA POWER STATION, UNIT NOS. 1 AND 2, MILLSTONE POWER STATION, UNIT NOS. 2 AND 3, AND SURRY POWER STATION, UNIT NOS. 1 AND 2 - REVIEW OF THE 2004 ANNUAL REPORT OF THE EMERGENCY CORE COOLING SYSTEM MODEL CHANGES (TAC NOS. MC7520, MC7521, MC7529, MC7530, MC7531, AND MC7532)
Dear Mr. Christian:
By letter dated June 30, 2005, Dominion Nuclear Connecticut, Inc., and Virginia Electric and Power Company (the licensees) submitted the 2004 Annual Report of Emergency Core Cooling System Model Changes Pursuant to the Requirements of 10 CFR 50.46, for North Anna Power Station, Unit Nos. 1 and 2, Millstone Power Station, Unit Nos. 2 and 3, and Surry Power Station, Unit Nos. 1 and 2. The licensees had submitted this report pursuant to the requirements of Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR), Part 50, Section 50.46.
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staff completed its review and addressed several issues that pertain to this annual report. Accordingly, the licensees are requested to review the NRC staffs comments and incorporate these comments as part of the 10 CFR 50.46 program.
Sincerely,
/RA/
/RA by GMiller for/
Stephen Monarque, Project Manager Victor Nerses, Sr. Project Manager Plant Licensing Branch II-1 Plant Licensing Branch I-2 Division of Operating Reactor Licensing Division of Operating Reactor Licensing Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Docket Nos. 50-338, 50-339, 50-336, 50-423, 50-280, and 50-281
Enclosure:
NRC Staffs Evaluation of 2004 Annual Report of Emergency Core Cooling System Model Changes cc w/encl: See next page
- Date of memo transmitting safety evaluation OFFICE NRR/LPL2-1/PM NRR/LPD2-1/LA NRR/LPL1-2/PM NRR/SBWB/BC NRR/LPL2-1/BC NAME SMonarque MOBrien VNerses(GMiller for)
JNakoski EMarinos DATE 08/29/2006 08/28/2006 08/29/2006 03/30/2006*
09/01/2006
STAFF EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION RELATED TO THE 2004 ANNUAL REPORT OF THE EMERGENCY CORE COOLING SYSTEM MODEL CHANGES PURSUANT TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF 10 CFR 50.46 FOR NORTH ANNA POWER STATION, UNIT NOS. 1 AND 2 MILLSTONE POWER STATION, UNIT NOS. 2 AND 3 SURRY POWER STATION, UNIT NOS. 1 AND 2
1.0 INTRODUCTION
By letter dated June 30, 2005, (Reference 1), Dominion Nuclear Connecticut, Inc., and Virginia Electric and Power Company (the licensees), submitted their annual report entitled Emergency Core Cooling System (ECCS) Model Changes Pursuant to the Requirements of 10 CFR 50.46, for North Anna Power Station, Unit Nos. 1 and 2 (North Anna 1 and 2), Millstone Power Station, Unit Nos. 2 and 3 (Millstone 2 and 3), and Surry Power Station, Unit Nos.1 and 2 (Surry 1 and 2).
The licensees provided a report describing plant-specific evaluation model changes associated with the Westinghouse and AREVA Small Break Loss-of-Coolant Accident (SBLOCA) and Large Break Loss-of-Coolant Accident (LBLOCA) ECCS Evaluation Models for North Anna 1 and 2, Millstone 2 and 3, and Surry 1 and 2. North Anna 1 and 2 has Westinghouse and AREVA fuel, therefore both evaluation model results were provided for the North Anna units.
Specifically, the licensees submitted the results of the following evaluations for the SBLOCA and LBLOCA analyses. The calculated peak cladding temperature (PCT) is listed after the evaluation.
Millstone 2 -
SBLOCA - AREVA Evaluation Model:
1808 EF Millstone 2 -
LBLOCA - AREVA Evaluation Model:
1823 EF Millstone 3 -
SBLOCA - Westinghouse Evaluation Model:
1009 EF Millstone 3 -
LBLOCA - Westinghouse Evaluation Model:
2004 EF North Anna 1 - SBLOCA - Westinghouse Evaluation Model:
1724 EF North Anna 1 - LBLOCA - Westinghouse Evaluation Model:
2086 EF North Anna 1 - SBLOCA - AREVA Evaluation Model:
1380 EF North Anna 1 - LBLOCA - AREVA Evaluation Model:
1925 EF North Anna 2 - SBLOCA - Westinghouse Evaluation Model:
1724 EF North Anna 2 - LBLOCA - Westinghouse Evaluation Model:
2086 EF North Anna 2 - SBLOCA - Areva Evaluation Model:
1370 EF North Anna 2 - LBLOCA - Areva Evaluation Model:
1861 EF Surry 1 and 2 - SBLOCA - Westinghouse Evaluation Model:
1750 EF Surry 1 and 2 - LBLOCA - Westinghouse Evaluation Model:
2133 EF The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staffs evaluation examined the acceptability of the submitted annual report.
2.0 REGULATORY EVALUATION
Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.46(a)(3)(ii), Acceptance criteria for emergency core cooling systems for light-water nuclear power reactors, the licensees submitted their annual report of the ECCS model changes.
Section 50.46(a)(3) has specific acceptance criteria pursuant to the content and composition of the licensees submitted annual reports of ECCS model changes.
3.0 TECHNICAL EVALUATION
The NRC staff has reviewed the licensees annual report.
The results of the review are presented below for each reported evaluation.
3.1 North Anna 1 and 2 Evaluations In general, previous to 2005, the licensees submitted annual and 30-day reports pertaining to the emergency core cooling system (ECCS) evaluation model changes.
It facilitates the NRC staffs evaluation when reports are not combined. Further, it would not be in accordance with the regulations to submit the reports as a combined report unless the significant change or error is discovered within 30 days of the date of the annual report. For reference see 10 CFR 50.46(a)(3)(ii).
As another general comment pertaining to the North Anna and Surry units, in many reports the licensees indicated that 10 CFR 50.46(a)(3)(ii) specifically requests that the 30-day report include a proposed schedule for providing a re-analysis or taking other action as may be needed to show compliance with 10 CFR 50.46 requirements. The pertinent part of this regulation reads If the change or error is significant, the applicant or licensees shall provide this report within 30 days and include with the report a proposed schedule for providing a reanalysis or taking other action as may be needed to show compliance with Section 50.46 requirements.
It is emphasized here, however, that in either case the regulation requires a proposed schedule to be submitted with the 30-day report. There must be a proposed schedule that lays out the timeline for conducting a re-analysis or a proposed schedule that lays out the timeline for taking other action as may be needed to show compliance with Section 50.46 requirements.
North Anna 1 - SBLOCA - Westinghouse Evaluation Model It appears to the NRC staff that the current accumulation of changes or errors in the model amount to 49 EF and it appears that those changes are now being tracked correctly. However, any additional changes or errors would require the submission of a 30-day report.
North Anna 1 - LBLOCA - Westinghouse Evaluation Model In Reference 5, the licensees stated Re-analyses of the large break LOCA accident for Surry and North Anna are scheduled to be completed by April 30, 2001 and August 31, 2001, respectively. This statement was made because a significant change occurred in 1999 that necessitated the issuance of a 30-day report (Reference 5). In the 30-day report, the licensees committed to do a re-analysis of the LBLOCA accident for the North Anna units by August 31, 2001. In the annual report submitted for 2003 (Reference 6), the licensees reported the same value for the analysis of record (AOR) PCT, indicating that the re-analysis was never performed. However, the re-analysis was performed by July 14, 2004 (Reference 4). The new AOR PCT is 2036 EF.
North Anna 1 - SBLOCA - AREVA Evaluation Model The NRC staff did not find any significant issues.
North Anna 1 - LBLOCA - AREVA Evaluation Model The AOR reports a clad temperature of 1853 EF. There are two prior permanent ECCS model assessments that amount to an absolute magnitude of 72 EF. There were no 30-day reports submitted for either of these changes, both of which would require reports to be submitted per 10 CFR 50.46(a)(3)(ii) if this model was the one used to generate the AOR.
The 30-day report of July 14, 2004 (Reference 4), indicates in Attachment 2 of this report that the Westinghouse LBLOCA analysis is the AOR. This being the case, no 30-day report would be required. Should the licensees desire to substitute the AREVA analysis as the AOR, NRC staff approval would be required and documented for the application of the generically approved methodology to the unit-specific analysis.
North Anna 2 - SBLOCA - Westinghouse Evaluation Model It appears to the NRC staff that the current accumulation of changes or errors in the model amount to 49 EF and it appears that those changes are now being tracked correctly. However, any additional changes or errors would require the submission of a 30-day report.
North Anna 2 - LBLOCA - Westinghouse Evaluation Model In their November 18, 1999 (Reference 5) letter, the licensees stated Re-analyses of the large break LOCA accident for Surry and North Anna are scheduled to be completed by April 30, 2001 and August 31, 2001, respectively. This statement was made because a significant change occurred in 1999 that necessitated the issuance of a 30-day report (Reference 5). In the 30-day report, the licensees committed to do a re-analysis of the LBLOCA accident for the North Anna units by August 31, 2001. In the annual report submitted for 2003 (Reference 6),
the licensees reported the same value for the AOR PCT indicating that the re-analysis was never performed. However, the re-analysis was performed by July 14, 2004 (Reference 4).
North Anna 2 - SBLOCA - AREVA Evaluation Model The NRC staff did not find any significant issues.
North Anna 2 - LBLOCA - AREVA Evaluation Model The AOR reports a clad temperature of 1789 EF. There are two prior permanent ECCS model assessments that amount to an absolute magnitude of 72 EF. There were no 30-day reports submitted for either of these changes, both of which would require reports to be submitted per 10 CFR 50.46(a)(3)(i) if this model was the one used to generate the AOR.
The 30-day report of July 14, 2004 (Reference 4), indicates in Attachment 2 of this report that the Westinghouse LBLOCA analysis is the AOR. This being the case, no 30-day reports would be required. Should the licensees desire to substitute the AREVA analysis as the AOR, NRC staff approval would be required and documented for the application of the generically approved methodology to the unit specific analysis.
3.2 Millstone 2 and 3 Evaluations Millstone 2 - SBLOCA - AREVA Evaluation Model The report states that the sum of the absolute magnitudes of the changes to the model since the last 30-day report are not significant. An examination of that referenced 30-day report, made by letter dated September 5, 2002 (Reference 2), revealed that the licensees failed to include a proposed schedule for taking other action as may be needed to show compliance with 10 CFR 50.46 requirements as required by 10 CFR 50.46(a)(3)(ii).
Although the licensees stated that they intended to perform no re-analysis or take any other actions, 10 CFR 50.46(a)(3)(ii) clearly requires a schedule to be included with every 30-day report.
Millstone 2 - LBLOCA - AREVA Evaluation Model The NRC staff did not find any significant issues.
Millstone 3 - SBLOCA - Westinghouse Evaluation Model The NRC staff did not find any significant issues.
Millstone 3 - LBLOCA - Westinghouse Evaluation Model The NRC staff did not find any significant issues.
3.3 Surry 1 and 2 Evaluations Surry 1 - SBLOCA - Westinghouse Evaluation Model The NRC staff did not find any significant issues.
Surry 1 - LBLOCA - Westinghouse Evaluation Model In their January 3, 2006, letter (Reference 7), the licensees committed to perform an analysis of the Surry 1 LBLOCA by September 30, 2006. This is an extension from their original commitment contained in their May 21, 2003, letter (Reference 6) to perform an analysis of the Surry 1 LBLOCA by March 31, 2006.
Surry 2 - SBLOCA - Westinghouse Evaluation Model The NRC staff did not find any significant issues.
Surry - LBLOCA - Westinghouse Evaluation Model In their January 3, 2006, letter (Reference 7), the licensees committed to perform an analysis of the Surry 2 LBLOCA by September 30, 2006. This is an extension from their original commitment contained in their May 21, 2003, letter (Reference 6) to perform an analysis of the Surry 2 LBLOCA by March 31, 2006.
4.0 REFERENCES
1.
Letter from E.S. Grecheck, Dominion Nuclear Connecticut, Inc., Virginia Electric and Power Company, to U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Millstone Power Station, Units 2 and 3 North Anna Power Station Units 1 and 2 Surry Power Station Units 1 and 2[,] 2004 Annual Report of Emergency Core Cooling System Model Changes Pursuant to the Requirements of 10 CFR 50.46, June 30, 2005, ADAMS Accession No. ML051860397.
2.
Letter from J.A. Price, Dominion Nuclear Connecticut, Inc., to U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Millstone Power Station, Unit No. 2[,] 30-Day Reporting of Changes to and Errors in Emergency Core Cooling System Models or Applications, September 5, 2002, ADAMS Accession No. ML022680036.
3.
Letter from J.P. OHanlon, Virginia Electric and Power Company, to U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, North Anna and Surry Power Stations Units 1 and 2 Report of ECCS Evaluation Model Changes and 30-day Report of ECCS Evaluation Model Changes per Requirements of 10 CFR 50.46," August 1, 1996, ADAMS Accession No.
89262:351 - 362.
4.
Letter from L.N. Hartz, Virginia Electric and Power Company, to U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, North Anna Power Station Units 1 and 2[,] 30-day Report of Emergency Core Cooling System (ECCS) Evaluation Model Changes Pursuant to the Requirements of 10 CFR 50.46," July 14, 2004, ADAMS Accession No. ML041960520.
5.
Letter from L.N. Hartz, Virginia Electric and Power Company, to U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Surry and North Anna Power Stations Units 1 and 2[,] 30-Day Report - Emergency Core Cooling System (ECCS) Evaluation Model Changes Pursuant to the Requirements of 10 CFR 50.46," November 18, 1999. ADAMS Accession No. ML993310055.
6.
Letter from L.N. Hartz, Virginia Electric and Power Company, to U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Surry Power Station Units 1 and 2 North Anna Power Station Units 1 and 2[,] Annual Report and 30-Day Report of Emergency Core Cooling System (ECCS) Evaluation Model Changes Pursuant to the Requirements of 10 CFR 50.46,"
May 21, 2003, ADAMS Accession No. ML031490403.
7.
Letter from L.N. Hartz, Virginia Electric and Power Company, to U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Surry Power Station Units 1 and 2[,] 30-Day Report of Emergency Core Cooling System (ECCS) Model Changes Pursuant to the Requirements of 10 CFR 50.46," January 3, 2006, ADAMS Accession No. ML060040035.
Principal Contributor: J. Burns Date: September 7, 2006
Virginia Electric and Power Company cc:
Ms. Lillian M. Cuoco, Esq.
Senior Counsel Dominion Resources Services, Inc.
Building 475, 5th Floor Rope Ferry Road Waterford, Connecticut 06385 Mr. Donald E. Jernigan Site Vice President Surry Power Station Virginia Electric and Power Company 5570 Hog Island Road Surry, Virginia 23883-0315 Senior Resident Inspector Surry Power Station U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 5850 Hog Island Road Surry, Virginia 23883 Chairman Board of Supervisors of Surry County Surry County Courthouse Surry, Virginia 23683 Dr. W. T. Lough Virginia State Corporation Commission Division of Energy Regulation Post Office Box 1197 Richmond, Virginia 23218 Dr. Robert B. Stroube, MD, MPH State Health Commissioner Office of the Commissioner Virginia Department of Health Post Office Box 2448 Richmond, Virginia 23218 Office of the Attorney General Commonwealth of Virginia 900 East Main Street Richmond, Virginia 23219 Mr. Chris L. Funderburk, Director Nuclear Licensing & Operations Support Innsbrook Technical Center Dominion Resources Services, Inc.
5000 Dominion Blvd.
Glen Allen, Virginia 23060-6711 Mr. Jack M. Davis Site Vice President North Anna Power Station Virginia Electric and Power Company Post Office Box 402 Mineral, Virginia 23117-0402 Mr. C. Lee Lintecum County Administrator Louisa County Post Office Box 160 Louisa, Virginia 23093 Old Dominion Electric Cooperative 4201 Dominion Blvd.
Glen Allen, Virginia 23060 Senior Resident Inspector North Anna Power Station U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 1024 Haley Drive Mineral, Virginia 23117
Millstone Power Station, Unit No. 3 cc:
Edward L. Wilds, Jr., Ph.D.
Director, Division of Radiation Department of Environmental Protection 79 Elm Street Hartford, CT 06106-5127 Regional Administrator, Region I U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 475 Allendale Road King of Prussia, PA 19406 First Selectmen Town of Waterford 15 Rope Ferry Road Waterford, CT 06385 Charles Brinkman, Director Washington Operations Nuclear Services Westinghouse Electric Company 12300 Twinbrook Pkwy, Suite 330 Rockville, MD 20852 Senior Resident Inspector Millstone Power Station c/o U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission P. O. Box 513 Niantic, CT 06357 Mr. J. W. "Bill" Sheehan Co-Chair NEAC 19 Laurel Crest Drive Waterford, CT 06385 Ms. Nancy Burton 147 Cross Highway Redding Ridge, CT 00870 Mr. Evan W. Woollacott Co-Chair Nuclear Energy Advisory Council 128 Terrys Plain Road Simsbury, CT 06070 Mr. Joseph Roy Director of Operations Massachusetts Municipal Wholesale Electric Company P.O. Box 426 Ludlow, MA 01056 Mr. David W. Dodson Licensing Supervisor Dominion Nuclear Connecticut, Inc.
Building 475, 5th Floor Roper Ferry Road Waterford, CT 06385 Mr. J. Alan Price Site Vice President Dominion Nuclear Connecticut, Inc.
Building 475, 5th Floor Rope Ferry Road Waterford, CT 06385