ML082040316
| ML082040316 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Indian Point  |
| Issue date: | 07/21/2008 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Division of License Renewal |
| References | |
| Download: ML082040316 (12) | |
Text
IPRenewal NPEmails From: Kimberly Green Sent: Monday, July 21, 2008 12:05 PM To: STROUD, MICHAEL D; Tyner, Donna Cc: Barry Elliot; Stanley Gardocki; Roy Mathew
Subject:
Draft Telecon Summaries Attachments: Telecon Summary 06-24-08 Annual Update - BOP.doc; Telecon Summary 07-08-08 RV and Submerged Cable.doc Mike and Donna, Attached are the draft telecon summaries of June 24, 2008, on the Annual Update for balance of plant system, and July 8, 2008, on RV Neutron Embrittlement, and Submerged Cables. Please let me know if any corrections are necessary.
- Thanks, Kimberly Green Safety PM (301) 4151627 kimberly.green@nrc.gov 1
Hearing Identifier: IndianPointUnits2and3NonPublic_EX Email Number: 203 Mail Envelope Properties (Kimberly.Green@nrc.gov20080721120500)
Subject:
Draft Telecon Summaries Sent Date: 7/21/2008 12:05:05 PM Received Date: 7/21/2008 12:05:00 PM From: Kimberly Green Created By: Kimberly.Green@nrc.gov Recipients:
"Barry Elliot" <Barry.Elliot@nrc.gov>
Tracking Status: None "Stanley Gardocki" <Stanley.Gardocki@nrc.gov>
Tracking Status: None "Roy Mathew" <Roy.Mathew@nrc.gov>
Tracking Status: None "STROUD, MICHAEL D" <MSTROUD@entergy.com>
Tracking Status: None "Tyner, Donna" <dtyner@entergy.com>
Tracking Status: None Post Office:
Files Size Date & Time MESSAGE 393 7/21/2008 12:05:00 PM Telecon Summary 06-24-08 Annual Update - BOP.doc 62970 Telecon Summary 07-08-08 RV and Submerged Cable.doc 66042 Options Priority: Standard Return Notification: No Reply Requested: No Sensitivity: Normal Expiration Date:
Recipients Received:
LICENSEE: Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc.
FACILITY: Indian Point Nuclear Generating Unit Nos. 2 and 3
SUBJECT:
SUMMARY
OF TELEPHONE CONFERENCE CALL HELD ON JUNE 24, 2008, BETWEEN THE U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION AND ENTERGY NUCLEAR OPERATIONS, INC., RELATED TO THE INDIAN POINT NUCLEAR GENERATING UNIT NOS. 2 AND 3, LICENSE RENEWAL APPLICATIONBALANCE OF PLANT The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC or the staff) and representatives of Entergy Nuclear Operations Inc. (Entergy) held a telephone conference call on June 24, 2008, to obtain clarification on Entergys recent annual update concerning the Indian Point Nuclear Generating Unit Nos. 2 and 3 (IP2 and IP3), license renewal application (LRA). By letter dated June 11, 2008, Entergy submitted an annual update to LRA. The staff reviewed the information contained therein, and requested additional information/clarification on a few items. provides a listing of the participants, and Enclosure 2 contains a listing of the items discussed with the applicant, including a brief description of the resolution of the items.
The applicant had an opportunity to comment on this summary.
Kimberly Green, Safety Project Manager Projects Branch 2 Division of License Renewal Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Docket Nos. 50-247 and 50-286
Enclosure:
As stated cc w/encl: See next page
G:\ADRO\DLR\RPB2\Indian Point\Safety Review\Telecon Summaries\Telecon Summary 06-24-08 Annual Update - BOP.doc OFFICE LA:DLR PM:RPB2:DLR BC:RPB2:DLR NAME KGreen RFranovich DATE 07/ /08 07/ /08 07/ /08 TELEPHONE CONFERENCE CALL INDIAN POINT NUCLEAR GENERATING UNIT NOS. 2 AND 3 LICENSE RENEWAL APPLICATION LIST OF PARTICIPANTS JUNE 24, 2008 PARTICIPANTS AFFILIATIONS Kim Green U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC)
Stan Gardocki Mike Stroud Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc. (Entergy)
Don Fronabarger Entergy Ted Ivy Entergy John Curry Entergy Charlie Caputo Entergy Charlie Jackson Entergy ENCLOSURE 1
INDIAN POINT NUCLEAR GENERATING UNIT NOS. 2 AND 3 LICENSE RENEWAL APPLICATION ANNUAL UPDATE - BALANCE OF PLANT JUNE 24, 2008 Station Air System:
The applicant eliminated the station air compressor housing as a component type subject to an aging management review (AMR), but did not provide any reason for the elimination. The staff inquired about this elimination. Entergy stated that station air penetrates containment, so originally it placed the entire station air system in scope for 10 CFR 54.4(a)(2). However, later Entergy found a seismic anchor just outside of containment; therefore, the compressor does not need to be in scope.
Expansion Joints:
Expansion joints for IP3 have been added as a component type subjection to an AMR in the condensate suction pump system. Similar expansion joints exist for IP2. The staff requested clarification on whether the expansion joints for IP2 should be subject to an AMR with material type elastomer exposed to an internal environment of treated water. Entergy clarified that the IP2 expansion joints are within the scope of license renewal and subject to an AMR, and are evaluated with the condensate system.
ENCLOSURE 2
ENCLOSURE 2 LICENSEE: Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc.
FACILITY: Indian Point Nuclear Generating Unit Nos. 2 and 3
SUBJECT:
SUMMARY
OF TELEPHONE CONFERENCE CALL HELD ON JULY 8, 2008, BETWEEN THE U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION AND ENTERGY NUCLEAR OPERATIONS, INC., RELATED TO THE INDIAN POINT NUCLEAR GENERATING UNIT NOS. 2 AND 3, LICENSE RENEWAL APPLICATIONREACTOR VESSEL NEUTRON EMBRITTLEMENT AND SUBMERGED CABLES The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC or the staff) and representatives of Entergy Nuclear Operations Inc. (Entergy) held a telephone conference call on July 8, 2008, to obtain clarification on Entergys recent responses to requests for additional information concerning the Indian Point Nuclear Generating Unit Nos. 2 and 3, license renewal application. The telephone conference call was useful in clarifying the applicants responses. provides a listing of the participants, and Enclosure 2 contains a listing of the items discussed with the applicant, including a brief description of the resolution of the items.
The applicant had an opportunity to comment on this summary.
Kimberly Green, Safety Project Manager Projects Branch 2 Division of License Renewal Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Docket Nos. 50-247 and 50-286
Enclosure:
As stated cc w/encl: See next page
G:\ADRO\DLR\RPB2\Indian Point\Safety Review\Telecon Summaries\Telecon Summary 07-08-08 RV and Submerged Cable.doc OFFICE LA:DLR PM:RPB2:DLR BC:RPB2:DLR NAME KGreen RFranovich DATE 07/ /08 07/ /08 07/ /08 TELEPHONE CONFERENCE CALL INDIAN POINT NUCLEAR GENERATING UNIT NOS. 2 AND 3 LICENSE RENEWAL APPLICATION LIST OF PARTICIPANTS JULY 8, 2008 PARTICIPANTS AFFILIATIONS Kim Green U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC)
Barry Elliot NRC Roy Mathew NRC Mike Stroud Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc. (Entergy)
Don Fronabarger Entergy Ted Ivy Entergy Roger Rucker Entergy Charlie Caputo Entergy Floyd Gumble Entergy Nelson Azavedo Entergy Herb Robinson Entergy ENCLOSURE 1
INDIAN POINT NUCLEAR GENERATING UNIT NOS. 2 AND 3 LICENSE RENEWAL APPLICATION REACTOR VESSEL NEUTRON EMBRITTLEMENT INACCESSIBLE OR UNDERGROUND POWER CABLES JULY 8, 2008 RAI 4.2.2-2 By letter dated November 28, 2007, Entergy responded to the staffs request regarding Charpy upper shelf energy (USE) analyses for Indian Point Nuclear Generating Unit No. 2 (IP2). The RAI contained two parts. During a telephone conference on May 7, 2008, the staff asked the applicant to provide the same information Indian Point Nuclear Generating Unit No. 3 (IP3). By letter, dated June 11, 2008, Entergy provided the requested information for IP3, but only for part (b) of the original request. During the telephone conference call on July 8, the staff asked the applicant to confirm if the information previously supplied for IP2 for part (a) of the request applied to IP3. Entergy stated that the reactor vessel beltline plate material for IP3 is the same as the material for IP2. In a subsequent call, on July 11, 2008, the applicant confirmed that although the WCAP report referenced in the November 28, 2007 response only cites IP2, the materials in both vessels are the same and meet the same ASME code case and Combustion Engineering specification; therefore, the analyses would apply to IP3. The staffs evaluation will be documented in the safety evaluation report.
RAI 3.6.2.3-2 By letter dated May 28, 2008, the staff requested information regarding a138kV direct burial insulated transmission cables that is submerged. By letter, dated June 26, 2008, the applicant responded to the RAI. After it reviewed the response, the staff needed additional information regarding the qualification and testing of the cable as well as operating experience. The staff stated that there is operating experience identified in licensee event reports with regard to the failure of lead sheath cables. Entergy stated that it would talk to the owner of the cable and the vendor to see if additional information is available regarding the qualification and testing.
Entergy emphasized that the cable of interest is nonsafety-related and not designed to meet the single failure criterion. Further, there is a statement in GALL XI.E.3 that provides an exclusion regarding environments for which the cables are designed. The resolution of this issue will be documented in the safety evaluation report.
ENCLOSURE 2
ENCLOSURE 2