ML070470083

Draft Request for Additional Information (TAC Nos. MD3171 and MD3172)

ML070470083
Person / Time
Site:	Salem
Issue date:	02/12/2007
From:	Richard Ennis NRC/NRR/ADRO/DORL/LPLI-2
To:	Chernoff H NRC/NRR/ADRO/DORL/LPLI-2
Ennis R, NRR/DORL, 415-1420
References
TAC MD3171, TAC MD3172
Download: ML070470083 (4)

Text

February 12, 2007 MEMORANDUM TO: Harold K. Chernoff, Chief Plant Licensing Branch I-2 Division of Operating Reactor Licensing Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation FROM: Richard B. Ennis, Senior Project Manager /RA/

Plant Licensing Branch I-2 Division of Operating Reactor Licensing Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation

SUBJECT:

SALEM NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION, UNIT NOS. 1 AND 2, DRAFT REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION (TAC NOS. MD3171 AND MD 3172)

The attached draft request for information (RAI) was transmitted on February 12, 2007, to Mr. Jamie Mallon of PSEG Nuclear LLC (the licensee). This information was transmitted to facilitate an upcoming conference call in order to clarify the licensees amendment request for Salem Nuclear Generating Station (Salem), Unit Nos. 1 and 2, dated September 26, 2006. The proposed amendment would revise Technical Specification 6.9.1.9 to remove the revision number and date for the topical reports that contain the analytical methods used in the Core Operating Limits Report (COLR). The effect of this change is to allow the licensee to use current topical reports, as long as they have been approved by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC). The amendment would also add an NRC-approved topical report to the Salem Unit No. 2 COLR methods.

This memorandum and the attachment do not convey or represent an NRC staff position regarding the licensee's request.

Docket Nos. 50-272 and 50-311

Attachment:

Draft RAI

February 12, 2007 MEMORANDUM TO: Harold K. Chernoff, Chief Plant Licensing Branch I-2 Division of Operating Reactor Licensing Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation FROM: Richard B. Ennis, Senior Project Manager /RA/

Plant Licensing Branch I-2 Division of Operating Reactor Licensing Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation

SUBJECT:

SALEM NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION, UNIT NOS. 1 AND 2, DRAFT REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION (TAC NOS. MD3171 AND MD 3172)

The attached draft request for information (RAI) was transmitted on February 12, 2007, to Mr. Jamie Mallon of PSEG Nuclear LLC (the licensee). This information was transmitted to facilitate an upcoming conference call in order to clarify the licensees amendment request for Salem Nuclear Generating Station (Salem), Unit Nos. 1 and 2, dated September 26, 2006. The proposed amendment would revise Technical Specification 6.9.1.9 to remove the revision number and date for the topical reports that contain the analytical methods used in the Core Operating Limits Report (COLR). The effect of this change is to allow the licensee to use current topical reports, as long as they have been approved by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC). The amendment would also add an NRC-approved topical report to the Salem Unit No. 2 COLR methods.

This memorandum and the attachment do not convey or represent an NRC staff position regarding the licensee's request.

Docket Nos. 50-272 and 50-311

Attachment:

Draft RAI DISTRIBUTION PUBLIC RidsNrrDorlLpl1-2 JNakoski PDI-2 Reading RidsNrrPMREnnis PHearn RidsNrrDorlDpr FOrr ACCESSION NO.: ML070470083 OFFICE PDI-2/PM NAME REnnis DATE 2/12/07 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY

DRAFT REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION REGARDING PROPOSED LICENSE AMENDMENT REVISE TOPICAL REPORT REFERENCES SALEM NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION, UNIT NOS. 1 AND 2 DOCKET NOS. 50-272 AND 50-311 By letter dated September 26, 2006, PSEG Nuclear LLC (PSEG or the licensee) submitted an amendment request for Salem Nuclear Generating Station (Salem), Unit Nos. 1 and 2. The proposed amendment would revise Technical Specification 6.9.1.9 to remove the revision number and date for the topical reports that contain the analytical methods used in the Core Operating Limits Report (COLR). The effect of this change is to allow the licensee to use current topical reports, as long as they have been approved by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC). The amendment would also add an NRC-approved topical report to the Salem Unit No. 2 COLR methods.

The NRC staff has reviewed the information the licensee provided that supports the proposed amendment and would like to discuss the following issues to clarify the submittal.

1) Please describe how pre-existing oxidation is factored into the results for maximum (local) oxidation. If pre-existing oxidation was considered to be negligible because all the fuel is fresh fuel, please state that it is all fresh fuel. If pre-existing oxidation is considered in the reported results, or if pre-existing oxidation is not reflected in the results, please provide an estimate of the contribution of the pre-existing oxidation.

2) Section 4.2 of Attachment 1 to your submittal states that the standard integer break spectrum was used... Please identify the breaks that were calculated and the results (peak cladding temperature (PCT), O2, H2, and a PCT vs time plot) that were obtained for each analyzed break.

3) The small break loss-of-coolant accident (S0BLOCA) analyses results using the COSI version of the NOTRUMP code reflect a significantly reduced PCT versus the previous results. Please discuss and quantify each of the factors contributing to this large benefit.

4) To show that the referenced generically-approved SBLOCA analysis methodology applies specifically to each of the Salem units, provide a statement, for each unit, that PSEG and its vendor have ongoing processes that assure that the ranges and values of the input parameters for the Salem SBLOCA analyses conservatively bound the ranges and values of the as-operated plant parameters. (The discussion in Section 4.2 of Attachment 1 to your submittal does not address the concern regarding the ongoing applicability of the analysis when changes occur in the as-operated plant. For example, one of the items the processes referred to should assure is that the high pressure injection pumps continue to have sufficient flow capacity at SBLOCA pressures to deliver the flow assumed in the analyses.)

Attachment

Furthermore, if both Salem plant-specific analyses are based on the same model and/or same analyses, justify that the model or analyses apply to both Salem units. For example, if one Salem units design has a different vessel internals design than the other units vessel internals design, the same methodology may apply to both Salem units, but the same model may not apply to both units (i.e., in this case, each unit would have to provide its own plant-specific SBLOCA analysis).