ML081620393
| ML081620393 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Robinson  |
| Issue date: | 10/23/2003 |
| From: | Bhagwat Jain Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards |
| To: | |
| References | |
| Download: ML081620393 (44) | |
Text
UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON REACTOR SAFEGUARDS WASHINGTON, D.C. 20555-0001 October 27,2003 MEMORANDUM TO:
ACRS Members FROM:
BhagwatJain, Senior Staff Engineer Technical Support Staff
SUBJECT:
CERTIFICATION OF THE MINUTES OF THE ACRS SUBCOMMITTEE MEETING ON PLANT LICENSE RENEWAL, SEPTEMBER 30,2003, ROCKVILLE, MARYLAND The minutes of the sUbject meeting, issued on October 17, 2003, have been certified as the official record of the proceedings of that meeting. A copy of the certified minutes is attached.
Attachment:
As stated cc via e-mail:
ACRS Members J. Larkins S. Bahadur R. Savio H. Larson S. Duraiswamy ACRS Staff Engineers
UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON REACTOR SAFEGUARDS WASHINGTON, D.C. 20555-0001 October 22, 2003 MEMORANDUM TO: Bhagwat P. Jain, Senior Staff Engineer Technical Support Staff FROM:
Graham M. Leitch, Chairman Plant License Renewal Subcommittee
SUBJECT:
CERTIFICATION OF THE MINUTES OF THE ACRS SUBCOMMITTEE MEETING ON PLANT LICENSE RENEWAL, SEPTEMBER 30,2003, ROCKVILLE, MARYLAND I hereby certify that, to the best of my knowledge and belief, the Minutes of the subject meeting issued October 17, 2003, are an accurate record of the proceedings for that meeting.
Date
CERTIFIED 10/23/2003 By Graham M. Leitch Issued: 10/17/2003 ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON REACTOR SAFEGUARDS PLANT LICENSE RENEWAL SUBCOMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES H. B. ROBINSON STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT, UNIT 2 OCTOBER 17, 2003 ROCKVILLE, MARYLAND Introduction The ACRS Subcommittee on Plant License Renewal held a meeting on September 30, 2003, with representatives of the Carolina Power and Light Company (CP&L) and the NRC staff. The purpose of this meeting was to discuss the license renewal application for Unit 2 of the H. B.
Robinson Steam Electric Plant, known as Robinson Nuclear Plant (RNP), and the NRC Staff's Safety Evaluation Report (SER) with open items. Mr. Bhagwat Jain was the cognizant ACRS staff engineer and Designated Federal Official (DFO) for this meeting. The meeting was convened at 12:30 p.m., September 30, 2003, and adjourned at 4:03 p.m. that day.
Attendees ACRS Members/Staff NRC Staff Carolina Power & Light Company Graham Leitch (Chairman)
T. Clements Mario V. Bonaca (Member)
Robert M. Reynolds Stephen L. Rosen (Member)
Sam Miranda (NRR)
Michael Heath John Sieber (Member)
John Fair (NRR)
Joseph W. Donohue John Barton (Consultant)
Hans Ashar (NRR)
Charles T. Baucon Bhagwat Jain (DFO)
David Jeng (NRR)
David Shum (NRR)
Sam Lee (NRR)
Jim Medoff, NRR Mark Hartzman (NRR)
Raj Goel ( NRR)
Ken Chang (NRR)
Amar Pal ( I'JRR)
A complete list of all attendees is attached to the Office Copy of these Minutes
The presentation slides and handouts used during the meeting are attached to the Office Copy of these Minutes. The presentations to the Subcommittee are summarized below. No request from the public was received to make an oral presentation.
Opening Remarks lG. Leitch, ARCS)
Mr. Leitch convened the meeting. He commented that in the past, Subcommittee review meetings had been scheduled for a full day. However, to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the license renewal process, this Subcommittee meeting is scheduled for half a day.
Staff Introduction (P.T. Kuo, NRR)
Mr. Kuo introduced the staff member who would be leading the staff presentation, Mr. S.K.
Mitra and Mario Cora, and remarked that this review had proceeded smoothly, and it represented the second application of the new license renewal review process.
Carolina Power & Light (CP&L) Company Presentations lR. Stewart. T. Clements, CP&L)
Background
By letter dated June 14, 2002, CP&L submitted its application to the NRC for renewal of the RNP operating license for up to an additional 20 years. This is the second application prepared in accordance with the Generic Aging Lessons Learned (GALL) report. The current operating licenses for RI'JP expires on July 31, 2010.
RNP, unit 2 is adjacent to unit 1, a coal-fired steam power plant. The plant is located on the edge of Lake Robinson, a manmade lake in Hartsville, South Carolina. The construction permit for RNP was issued by the NRC on April 13, 1967, and the operating license was issued September 23, 1970, pursuant to Section 104b of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended.
The unit consists of a Westinghouse pressurized water reactor nuclear steam supply system designed to generate 2339 MW-thermal, or approximately 769 MW-electric.
Mr. Stewart began the CP&L presentation with an overview of the plant history and status, shared resources between unit 1 and unit 2, operating experience, scoping methodologies, and commitments and commitment tracking system. Mr. Stewart stated that all NRC performance indicators and inspection findings are green.
License Renewal Application Scoping and Screening Process Mr. Stewart described the scoping criteria and screening process that CP&L used to develop the application. There are no major exception to GALL. The LRA was prepared in accordance with CP&L's quality assurance program (10 CFR 50, Appendix B) requirements. Several design features that are unique to RI'JP were identified, such as grouted tendons, containment liner insulation, shared site and some systems with older fossil unit, and dedicated shutdown diesel fuel oil tank. All systems which are shared with unit 1 are included in the scope of LRA.
2
Aging effects and Ageing Management (AM)
Mr. Stewart stated that there are 27 enhanced programs, and 10 new programs. CP&L committed to have 18 of these programs in place by mid 2004. Several of the programs depend upon yet to be developed positions which require approval by NRC (e.g., inspection program for Alloy 600, thermal shield, neutron instrumentation cable, etc). Ten existing AM programs were credited and Appendix B of the application describes the programs and their consistency with GALL. Plant-specific program descriptions include the 1O-criteria evaluation described in the SRP.
Interim Staff Guidance, commitments, and open items CP&L reported that it has addressed all issued Interim Staff Guidance Documents. All CP&L commitments are listed in the SER, and are tracked through the plant action tracking system, with annotations to the appropriate implementing procedures. All open items and 29 confirmatory items in the draft SER have been discussed with the NRC staff, and CP&L has provided acceptable responses to all of them. Mr. Stewart stated that all commitments will be identified in implementing documents and any change will be controlled by 10CFR 50.59 process. He further stated that the design configuration control process will incorporate guidance to ensure that requirements of 10 CFR 54.37 (b) are met.
Plant Operating Experience Mr. Stewart noted that all of the NRC performance indicators for RNP are green. Audits and inspections conducted by the Region II staff with regard to the LRA during March 31-April 4, 2003, June 9-27, 2003, and September 9-10,2003, did not have any findings.
Questions from Members Dr. Bonaca noted that the pressurizer spray head was not "in-scope" He asked how this could be, given that pressurizer spray is the primary cooldown method. The licensee responded that the analysis basis for plant operation does not include pressurizer spray, even though that is the normal method of reducing pressure. Any degradation in the operation of the spray nozzle would be noted during normal operation, because the spray nozzles are used for normal pressure control. This item was excluded from the scope based on its non safety function.
Mr. Leitch asked if the testing interval of ten-years for neutron flux instrumentation cable was adequate. The staff responded that based on operating experience, the staff finds the ten years inspection interval acceptable. The first inspection will be performed before the start of the license renewal period and after that it will be performed at every ten years interval.
Mr. Bonaca asked what enhancements to the structural monitoring program will be made to monitor concrete degradation in underground concrete systems, structures, and components due to the effect of aggressive ground water. The applicant stated that the groundwater pH is about 4.4 and the concentrations of chloride and sulphate ions is of the order of 20 to 30 parts per million (ppm) and the concentration of phosphate is 3
also very low, of the order of 0.05 ppm. The staff added that the applicant has committed to inspect the dam spillway and intake structures every ten years. At any time they perform an inspection, opportunistic inspection of below grade inaccessible concrete will also be performed.
Mr. Leitch asked the applicant its response to containment debris sump clogging issue relative to ensuring long term recirculation cooling following a LOCA. In particular, whether the insulation between the containment liner and the stainless steel sheathing will be affected and could potentially contribute to additional debris in the containment sump. Mr. Stewart responded that the function of the insulation is to limit the heat-up rate on the concrete during LOCA. There is a large missile shield around the primary components that would prevent anything from potentially impacting and knocking off this insulation. He further added that they have responded to the recent NRC Bulletin on the PWR sump clogging issue. In response to the bulletin, they are making some enhancements to their plant operating procedures and these procedures will be implemented by the middle of November 2003. In addition, a design review of the containment sump is also planned.
Mr. Rosen asked whether it would be possible to better define a schedule for the implementation of many of the commitments that the license had made, rather than just state that they would be completed "before the start of the license renewal period". This is information that would be useful to the ACRS, the staff, and the Regional inspectors, for planning purposes. The licensee reported that it will be replacing the reactor vessel head in fall 2005, and was strongly inclined to complete the other actions as soon as possible, consistent with the availability of data and components.
NRC Staff Presentation (S.K. Mitra. Mario Cora, PT Kuo, NRR and C, Julian, Region II)
Overview and Status The staff presented an overview of the SER, the subsequent resolution of the open items, and the findings of the associated onsite audit and inspections. Mr. S.K. Mitra opened his presentation with the observation that RNP is the second plant to fully implement the GALL process. All open items have been resolved.
Scoping and Screening Methodology Mr. Julian of Region II then described the process that the staff used to perform the license renewal scoping and screening, aging management program(AMP), and commitment tracking system inspections. This process was carried out by a consistent team of five staff members who performed three audit and inspections for a total period of about four weeks at the plant site. The team looked at the functions of systems, structures, and components (SSCs) defined by the licensee, the interfaces between SSCs, and the plant design drawings. It verified the consistency of the licensee designations among several different drawings. When a discrepancy was identified, the scope of the review was expanded, up to a review of the entire system. The inspections also confirmed that material condition of the plant was being adequately maintained and the existing AMPs are working well. In response to a question from 4
Mr. Leitch on electrical AMP for cable inspection, Mr. Julian responded that the applicant's electrical AMP is in its infancy.
Ageing Management Programs and Review Results (AMP)
Mr. Mitra described the staff process for evaluating the Aging Management Program of the licensee, using the guidance contained in the GALL report and additional guidance provided by the staff. Mr. Leitch noted that the staff review effort and the number of RAls had not dropped significantly from previous license renewal reviews. Mr. Kuo replied that the staff is re considering the process, and will likely focus its future efforts on on-site verification work. The staff has developed, and is using, a training program to ensure that all of the staff and contractor participants in LRA activities understand the GALL process. The training program is expected to help reduce future staff review effort.
The staff discussed the One-Time Inspection(OTI) Program that the licensee has committed to develop, which will include a detailed description of the components that will be inspected to confirm that aging effects are not present before the start of the license renewal period. The items for which the OTI is credited are identified in the SER, Appendix A.
Time Limited Aging Analyses Nine TLAAs were identified by the staff. Mr. Mitra described the Time Limited Aging Analyses that were performed by the licensee to evaluate reactor vessel neutron embrittlement and upper shelf energy, metal fatigue for certain components, environmental qualification issues over a longer plant lifetime than had originally been licensed, grouted concrete containment tendon prestress, and aging of boraflex and foundation pile corrosion. All of these issues have been resolved satisfactorily. In the case of reactor vessel neutron embrittlement and upper shelf energy, the staff performed its own independent calculations and found the applicant's analyses acceptable.
Subcommittee Comments. Concerns and Recommendations The Subcommittee Members commented that the LRA and the staff's SER were of good quality. Dr. Sonaca and Mr. Rosen stated that as more and more LRAs become consistent with GALL, plant operating experience becomes a more important factor in the license renewal review process. They both also expressed concern that as more and more plants reach the beginning of their extended period of operation, the staff would have to plan and dedicate its resources to track and verify implementation of commitments made by the applicants during the license renewal review process. Dr. Kuo responded that the staff appreciates the Members concern and the staff will plan for the resources as required. He also added that the commitment verification is part of the staff's inspection procedures.
The Subcommittee asked the staff and the applicant to provide more details on the following topics during the full Committee meeting in March 2004.
- Operating history and experience
- Major equipment replaced 5
- Major repairs
- Boric acid inspection program
- Disposition of relief request for relaxation of the order for reactor vessel head inspection
- Commitment tracking system Staff and Applicant Commitments During the full Committee meeting in March 2004, the staff and the applicant will provide more details on the topics requested by the Subcommittee.
Subcommittee Decisions and Follow-up Actions The Subcommittee will report its finding to the full Committee at the October 2, 2003 meeting.
Background Material Provided to the Subcommittee Prior to this meeting
- 1.
Subcommittee status report
- 2.
Proposed Schedule
- 3.
Safety Evaluation Report with open items Related to the License Renewal of the H. B. Robinson Steam Electric Plant, Unit 2, August 2003
- 4.
NRC-Region II Inspection Reports (# 50-261/03-08 and 50-261/03-09) dated May 8, 2003, and July 31,2003, respectively Note:
Additional details of this meeting can be obtained from a transcript of this meeting available for downloading or viewing on the Internet at
http://www.nrc.gov/ACRSACNW or can be purchased from Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc., (Court Reporters and Transcribers), 1323 Rhode Island Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20005 (202) 234-4433 Presentation Slides and Handouts Provided during the Subcommittee meeting 6
ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON REACTOR SAFEGUARDS PLANT LICENSE RENEWAL
Date(s)
Today's Date ATrENDEES
- PLEASE SIGN BELOW PLEASE PRINT AFFILIATION
~IJ
~~ t:~y1(CA/TS 2JOGiJ..EJJ 6PtA' G-r Z.1ELT /YI. &(/~tJLJJS O*<}(i.tY[, s
~J>Y J
--ML <-ha./kl
-H~t:k
~ s ccr"" \\....2 S'Jo"'\\Q~Y\\
C);A~(¢5 z: J3.AUc<J11 fuecrz 5re:wfflT
':s;. ;2ft, 1P.! ?~
$; /;1:7 b:t J)R4oWe.. G. V\\ ~ v:y t\\cc'K L\\\\ty1Z-
+
u w;> It LL~u=----_
I(
~~
lJ\\ A-Il..t,L b\\ Aa., yM,+vJ g - f-j~.
ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON REACTOR SAFEGUARDS PL.~ LICENSE REtIDVAL
-itA ~O L~
WA,.......Lk+Jlo"C~R__
, IZ If J L;"u12 L Date(s)
SEPTEMBER 30,.2003 Today's Date ATTENDEES* PLEASE SIGN BELOW PLEASE PRINT NRC Enployee
/J P;f<:/ DG/ G"-J c=:L~
NRR./ 'D $> A/SAY',B
~ ~ C.
(~,L....-..C_
~lfv\\.
~-C~~LS\\:-t~
<-::7cY.-\\-\\ A 10\\ e:.
(-. o~ \\,!0
ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON REACTOR SAFEGUARDS PL,~ LICENSE REtID'lAL Date(s)
SEPTEMBER 30,.2003 Today's Date ATTENDEES* PLEASE SIGN BELOW PLEASE PRINT NAME NRCEInployee (neB,,, 6 CorA CAUDLe-J{l~/4AL I\\) j<\\( ('D,el ~ (/~ ll: ~
N r- (2. I /) f ! £E I B
(
NRR tDRt"?I 'R LEp 15'd r ~o5ev~
/tJ#b/<I///L~
I 7
IVR£/])(2 (PI ~ Lg_~
,,,",:/2.. (7--.
Pi L If) C. I L I)
EM [(1 INr<.I( JDE
_..o..LJ""""c2k..T.....c..<;....:...Av~__
,~lU~~ &{~d,,-\\=F
RNP-SBO Offsite Power Recovery SOUTH BUS UNIT 2 238 I<V SWITCHYARD NORTH BUS NON-SEGREe.t.TED PHASE BUS 4.16 I<V BUS 2
- ~_'~_M
,...-----:Jo----
- r NON-SEGREe.t.TED PHASE BUS
- - - - - NON-SEGREe.t.1ED PHASE BUS 4.16 I<V BUS 4 r
- - - - -NON-SEGREe.t.TED- - - -
PHASE BUS RED = First Source of Offsite Power BLUE = Second Source of Offsite Power
ROBINSON NUCLEAR PLANT Progress Energy Presentation to ACRS Roger Stewart September 30, 2003 1
CONTENTS
.. Background
- Unit 1/Unit 2 Shared Resources
.. Operating experience RV Head Penetrations
.. Seoping and Screening Methodologies/
Exceptions to GALL
.. CommitmentslTraeking Background - RNP
.. Initial License granted July 31, 1970
.. Westinghouse 3 loop 2339 MWT PWR
- "Sister" plant to Turkey Point
.. All NRC Performance Indicators Green
- All NRC Inspection Findings Green
Operating Experience 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 Capacity 95.01 103.96 92.18 93.70 (9/22) 103.32 (proj.) 103.39 Refuel 9/24 to 10/24 4n to 5/12 10/12 to 11/14 Breaker to Breaker operation between spring 2001 and fall 2002 refueling. Other offline, minimal:
- 1/8/99 to 1/10/99 Maintenance Outage to repair WD-1728
- 6/21/00 to 6/22/00 Manual Trip due to Turbine EH oil leak
- 11/24/02 Turbine taken offline to repair steam leak
~*~&tqV RV Head Penetrations - Upper
- RO-20 Inspection
- No VHP nozzle or RCS pressure boundary leakage detected
- Inspection performed prior to issuance of NRC Bulletin
- Analyses confirmed leakage paths exist such that visual examination would detect leakage
- Westinghouse Analyses
- FEA performed by Dominion Engineering and Structural Integrity Associates
- Design and manufacturing information
- RO-21 Inspection - No indication or degradation identified that required repair
- Replacement Head Ordered for RO-23 (Fall 2005)
("'it~!t:_.
e.t:: **0000"""""'*u....Sy 4
RV Head Penetrations - Lower
- RNP Plans RO-22 (Spring 2004) Inspection
- Remote bare metal visual
- Developing Contingency Plans
- Identification of sources
- IPAffLAA technica.l work performed in accordance with Progress Energy Quality Assurance Program (Appendix B)
- Supplement provided to address ISGs
- Unique Aspects
- Grouted Tendons
- Dedicated Shutdown Diesel
- No Major Exceptions to GALL 5
Commitmentsrrracking
- 10 Existing Programs Credited with no changes required
- 37 Commitments for 27 Enhancements and 10 New Programs
- All Commitments have been entered into RNP Commitment Tracking Program
- 18 of the Commitments are anticipated to be accomplished "near-term"
- 19 of the Commitments are anticipated to be "transitioned"
- Transition Plan in place Commitmentsrrracking
- Once Implemented
+ Commitments are identified in implementing documents
+ Change controlled by 10 CFR 50.59 process
- Configuration control process will incorporate guidance to ensure that requirements of 10 CFR 54.37(b) are rTlet; Support by
+ License Renewal Training
- License Renewal Design Basis Document
- UFSAR Supplement 6
1
2
3
4
6
7
8
9
10
11
Performance Indicators 12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
September 30, 2003 MEMORANDUM TO: Graham Leitch, Chairman Plant License Renewal Subcommittee
~~
FROM:
John J. Barton, ACRS Consultant
SUBJECT:
APPLICATION TO RENEW THE OPERATING LICENSE FOR THE H. B. ROBINSON STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT, UNIT 2 Having completed my review of the License Renewal Application and Safety Evaluation Report (SER) for the H. B. Robinson Steam Electric Plant, Unit 2, I offer the following comments.
My reaction to this application is that it was well organized and easy to review. The same can be said for the staff's SER. The applicant fully utilized the Gall process and in doing, improved the effectiveness and efficiency of the renewal process. There being so few open items in the SER may be explained by the applicant's commitment to Gall.
The scoping and screening methodology was sound and the applicant considered the requirement of the NRC rule and the Statements of Consideration for the rule. The applicant also utilized guidance presented in the Nuclear Energy Institute's (NEi's) Industry Guidelines for Implementing the Requirements of 10 CFR Part 54 (NEI 95-10). In addition, the applicant also considered the NRC staff's correspondence with other applicants and with NEI in the development of this methodology. Utilizing this information led to a more thorough job in developing the application and, in my opinion, far less unresolved issues.
In my review of various sections of the License Renewal Application and SER, I have the following questions/comments:
- 1.
Section 2.5.2 -
Electricalll&C Component Commodity Groups Page 2.5-2 of the LRA Item 1 -
Electrical Bus This item has been eliminated from the aging management review. The item describes the isolated phase bus system (and associated bus duct), and the switchyard and transformer (and associated switchyard bus).
Question:
Is any of this equipment that has been eliminated from aging management needed to support a station blackout event?
- 2.
Sections 3.1 thru 3.6 -
Aging Management Programs for Plant Systems and Components In review of these sections of the License Renewal Application, it is noted that since the licensee committed to the aging management programs recommended in GALL, I have no specific issues.
Some component commodities do have programs that differ or are not addressed in Gall. In reviewing how the applicant addresses these differences, he proposes to use existing station programs for aging management. Examples of existing programs being recommended are the station water chemistry program, the station preventive maintenance program, and inspection program.
I consider that these station programs are satisfactory for the aging management or components not covered by Gall.
- 3.
General Comment Based on NRC inspection reports, conducted earlier this year at the Robinson Station, I am not certain of the status of the containment liner as far as NRC is concerned.
The configuration at Robinson is unique in that most of the liner is covered by insulation blankets. Is NRC satisfied that the condition of the liner behind the insulating blankets is in an acceptable material condition?
- 4.
Conclusion Based Upon My Review of the H. B. Robinson License Renewal Application and the NRC Staff Safety Evaluation Report My review of this application leads me to conclude that the applicant performed a thorough review of the station structures systems and components and developed a solid aging management program.
Upon resolution of the remaining open items to the staff's satisfaction, I see no reason the applicant should not be granted the requested life extension.
-2