ML080500131
| ML080500131 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Saint Lucie  (DPR-067, NPF-016) |
| Issue date: | 02/21/2008 |
| From: | Mozafari B NRC/NRR/ADRO/DORL/LPLII-2 |
| To: | Stall J Florida Power & Light Co |
| Mozafari B, NRR/ADRO/DORL, 415-2020 | |
| References | |
| TAC MD6173, TAC MD6202 | |
| Download: ML080500131 (5) | |
Text
February 21, 2008 Mr. J. A. Stall Senior Vice President, Nuclear and Chief Nuclear Officer Florida Power and Light Company P.O. Box 14000 Juno Beach, Florida 33408-0420
SUBJECT:
ST. LUCIE NUCLEAR PLANT, UNITS 1 AND 2 - REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION FOR ALTERNATIVE SOURCE TERM (TAC NOS. MD6173 AND MD6202)
Dear Mr. Stall:
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staff has determined that it needs additional information in order to complete its review of the subject license amendment requests for St. Lucie Plant - Units 1 and 2, sent by letters dated July 16, 2007, from Florida Power and Light Company. Enclosed is our request for additional information (RAI) for both the atmospheric dispersion and accident dose consequence parts of the review. RAIs were considered for the loss-of-coolant accident, fuel-handling accident, main steam line break, steam generator tube rupture, reactor coolant pump shaft seizure, control element assembly ejection, inadvertent opening of a main steam safety valve for Unit 1 only, letdown line break for Unit 2 only, and feedwater line break for Unit 2 only events.
The NRC staff considers that timely responses to RAIs help ensure sufficient time is available for NRC staff review and contribute toward the NRC=s goal of efficient and effective use of NRC staff resources. This request was discussed with Mr. Ken Frehafer of your staff on February 12, 2008, and it was agreed that a response would be provided within 30 days of the date of this letter. If you have any concerns, I can be contacted at 301-415-2020.
Sincerely,
/RA/
Brenda L. Mozafari, Senior Project Manager Plant Licensing Branch II-2 Division of Operating Reactor Licensing Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Docket Nos. 50-355 and 50-389
Enclosure:
RAI cc: See next page
REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION REGARDING PROPOSED LICENSE AMENDMENT REQUEST FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF ALTERNATIVE SOURCE TERM ST. LUCIE PLANT, UNITS 1 AND 2 (TAC NOS. MD6173 AND MD6202)
- 1) In St. Lucie Plant Unit 2 (SLP2) Table 1.8.1-1 of NAI-1101-043, Rev. 2 attachment to Florida Power & Light Company letter dated July 16, 2007, there is a difference in the north and south control room (CR) intake heights of 0.6m (2.09 ft). However, in the second paragraph of §1.6.3.1 within the same attachment, there is no clear distinction of different heights for the north and south CR intake, but the term approximately is used.
Outside air makeup is supplied through either of two outside air intakes located in the northern and southern walls of the Reactor Auxiliary Building at approximately elevation 78 feet.
Considering the north and south CR intake heights are 19 feet above sea level, the north and south CR intake elevations of 78 feet (as noted in the above statement) adjust to 59 feet (18.0m). Please confirm that the north and south CR receptor heights are accurately defined as 18.2m and 17.6m, respectively (as in Table 1.8.1-1), resulting in a midpoint CR receptor height of 17.9m. If it is determined that these values are incorrectly noted, please indicate what affect using the incorrect receptor heights may have on the CR dose estimates.
(Note: Take into account that these receptor heights are used in the onsite (i.e., CR) atmospheric dispersion analyses and the resulting /Q values serve as input to the dose consequence assessment.)
- 2) The following statement is found in §1.6.3.2, Emergency Operation, of NAI-1101-044, Rev. 2 attachment to letter dated July 16, 2007, for each SLP1 and SLP2:
Outside air intake dampers are adjusted to allow sufficient outside air makeup flow to maintain control room pressurization. By observing the radiation monitors located in the outside air intake ducts, the operator restores outside air makeup by selecting which set of isolation valves to open. After determining which outside air intake has the least, or zero, amount of radiation, the operator opens the isolation valves on that intake and adjusts the system dampers for proper flow.
Please confirm that plant procedures for both SLP1 and SLP2 identify the need for operators to stay aware of altering meteorological conditions throughout the 30-day event and how these changes may affect selection of the more favorable CR intake during emergency mode of operation and when initiating CR makeup air.
- 3) In NAI-1101-043, Rev. 2 attachment to letters dated July 16, 2007, for SLP1 and SLP2, Table 2.6-1 states that 0.5% of the fuel is assumed to experience fuel centerline melt.
However, Assumption #6 of §2.6.3 of the same attachment states that 0.05% of the
fuel is assumed to experience fuel centerline melt. Please confirm which value was considered in the dose analysis of the control element assembly ejection accident at SLP1 and SLP2.
- 4) RG 1.183, Regulatory Position 4.3, Other Dose Consequences, states that:
The guidance provided in Regulatory Positions 4.1 and 4.2 should be used, as applicable, in re-assessing the radiological analyses identified in Regulatory Position 1.3.1, such as those in NUREG-0737. Design envelope source terms provided in NUREG-0737 should be updated for consistency with the AST
[alternate source term]. In general, radiation exposures to plant personnel identified in Regulatory Position 1.3.1 should be expressed in terms of TEDE
[Total Effective Dose Equivalent].
In evaluating the submittal, the staff could not determine if RG 1.183, Regulatory Position 4.3 had been assessed for SLP1/2. Please provide additional information describing how Regulatory Position 4.3 is assessed for SLP1/2.
- 5) In §2.3.4 of both NAI-1101-043 and NAI-1101-044, the following statement is made:
Allowable levels of fuel failure for DNB [departure from nucleate boiling] and fuel centerline melt are determined for both the MSLB [main steam line break] outside of containment and the MSLB inside of containment. These allowable fractions are based on the dose limits specified in Table 6 of RG [Regulatory Guide] 1.183.
The activity released from the fuel that is assumed to experience DNB is based on Regulatory Positions 3.1, 3.2, and Table 3 of RG 1.183. The activity released from the fuel that is assumed to experience fuel centerline melt is based on Regulatory Position 1 of Appendix H to RG 1.183.
The staff could not determine the relationship between the allowable fractions discussed and the dose limits specified in Table 6 of RG 1.183. Please provide additional information describing the basis for the fractions of fuel damage assumed in the MSLB analyses for SLP 1/2 and the relationship, if any, to the dose limits specified in Table 6 of RG 1.183.
- 6) In Table 2.1-1 of both NAI-1101-043 and NAI-1101-044, under emergency core cooling system (ECCS) leakage the chemical form of the iodine in the sump water is defined as 0% aerosol, 97% elemental, and 3.0% organic. Assumption 22 of §2.1.2 of both NAI-1101-043 and NAI-1101-044, describes regulatory compliance with Regulatory Position 5.6, for ECCS leakage into the auxiliary building, and states that the form of the released iodine is 97% elemental and 3% organic. The NRR staff is unclear if the statement in Table 2.1-1 was intended to reflect Regulatory Position 5.6 describing the chemical form of the iodine released from ECCS leakage or the chemical form of the iodine in the sump water. Please provide additional information to clarify the cited statement in Table 2.1-1.
February 21, 2008 Mr. J. A. Stall Senior Vice President, Nuclear and Chief Nuclear Officer Florida Power and Light Company P.O. Box 14000 Juno Beach, Florida 33408-0420
SUBJECT:
ST. LUCIE NUCLEAR PLANT, UNITS 1 AND 2 - REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION FOR ALTERNATIVE SOURCE TERM (TAC NOS. MD6173 AND MD6202)
Dear Mr. Stall:
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staff has determined that it needs additional information in order to complete its review of the subject license amendment requests for St. Lucie Plant - Units 1 and 2, sent by letters dated July 16, 2007, from Florida Power and Light Company. Enclosed is our request for additional information (RAI) for both the atmospheric dispersion and accident dose consequence parts of the review. RAIs were considered for the loss-of-coolant accident, fuel-handling accident, main steam line break, steam generator tube rupture, reactor coolant pump shaft seizure, control element assembly ejection, inadvertent opening of a main steam safety valve for Unit 1 only, letdown line break for Unit 2 only, and feedwater line break for Unit 2 only events.
The NRC staff considers that timely responses to RAIs help ensure sufficient time is available for NRC staff review and contribute toward the NRC=s goal of efficient and effective use of NRC staff resources. This request was discussed with Mr. Ken Frehafer of your staff on February 12, 2008, and it was agreed that a response would be provided within 30 days of the date of this letter. If you have any concerns, I can be contacted at 301-415-2020.
Sincerely,
/RA/
Brenda L. Mozafari, Senior Project Manager Plant Licensing Branch II-2 Division of Operating Reactor Licensing Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Docket Nos. 50-355 and 50-389
Enclosure:
RAI cc: See next page DISTRIBUTION:
PUBLIC RidsOgcRp RidsNrrDraAadb LPL2-2 R/F RidsAcrsAcnwMailCenter RidsNrrPMBMozafari RidsRgn2MailCenter RidsNrrLABClayton (Hard Copy)
RidsNrrDorlLpl2-2 RidsNrrDorlDpr ADAMS Accession Number: ML080500131 NRR-088 OFFICE LPL2-2/PM LPL2-2/LA NRR/DRA/AADB: BC LPL2-2/BC NAME BMozafari BClayton RTaylor by memo dated TBoyce DATE 02/20/08 02/21/08 12/03/2007 02/21/08 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY
Florida Power and Light Company ST. LUCIE PLANT cc:
Mr. Mano Nazar Senior Vice President and Nuclear Chief Operating Officer South Region Florida Power & Light Company P.O. Box 14000 Juno Beach, FL 33408 Senior Resident Inspector St. Lucie Plant U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission P.O. Box 6090 Jensen Beach, Florida 34957 Craig Fugate, Director Division of Emergency Preparedness Department of Community Affairs 2740 Centerview Drive Tallahassee, Florida 32399-2100 M. S. Ross, Managing Attorney Florida Power & Light Company P.O. Box 14000 Juno Beach, FL 33408-0420 Marjan Mashhadi, Senior Attorney Florida Power & Light Company 801 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW.
Suite 220 Washington, DC 20004 Mr. Douglas Anderson County Administrator St. Lucie County 2300 Virginia Avenue Fort Pierce, Florida 34982 Mr. William A. Passetti, Chief Department of Health Bureau of Radiation Control 2020 Capital Circle, SE, Bin #C21 Tallahassee, Florida 32399-1741 Mr. Gordon L. Johnston Site Vice President St. Lucie Nuclear Plant 6351 South Ocean Drive Jensen Beach, Florida 34957-2000 Mr. Christopher R. Costanzo Plant General Manager St. Lucie Nuclear Plant 6351 South Ocean Drive Jensen Beach, Florida 34957 Mr. Terry Patterson Licensing Manager St. Lucie Nuclear Plant 6351 South Ocean Drive Jensen Beach, Florida 34957 Don E. Grissette Vice President, Nuclear Training and Performance Improvement Florida Power & Light Company P.O. Box 14000 Juno Beach, FL 33408-0420 Mr. Rajiv S. Kundalkar Vice President - Nuclear Technical Services Florida Power & Light Company P.O. Box 14000 Juno Beach, FL 33408-0420 Mr. J. Kammel Radiological Emergency Planning Administrator Department of Public Safety 6000 Southeast Tower Drive Stuart, Florida 34997 Mr. Bill Parks Operations Manager St. Lucie Nuclear Plant 6351 South Ocean Drive Jensen Beach, Florida 34957-2000 Mr. Seth B. Duston Training Manager St. Lucie Nuclear Plant 6351 South Ocean Drive Jensen Beach, Florida 34957-2000