3F0808-02, Supplemental Response to NRC Generic Letter 2004-02, Potential Impact of Debris Blockage on Emergency Recirculation During Design Basis Accidents at Pressurized-Water Reactors, Revision 1
| ML082210372 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Crystal River  |
| Issue date: | 08/04/2008 |
| From: | Young D Florida Power Corp, Progress Energy Co, Progress Energy Florida |
| To: | Document Control Desk, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| 3F0808-02, GL-04-002 | |
| Download: ML082210372 (3) | |
Text
0Progress Energy Crystal River Nuclear Plant Docket No. 50-302 Operating License No. DPR-72 Ref: 10 CFR 50.54(f)
August 4, 2008 3F0808-02 Document Control Desk U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555-0001
Subject:
Crystal River Unit 3 - Supplemental Response to NRC Generic Letter 2004-02, "Potential Impact of Debris Blockage on Emergency Recirculation During Design Basis Accidents at Pressurized-Water Reactors," Revision 1
Reference:
Crystal River Unit 3 - Supplemental Response to NRC Generic Letter 2004-02,
-"Potential Impact of Debris Blockage on Emergency Recirculation During Design Basis Accidents at Pressurized-Water Reactors," dated February 29, 2008
Dear Sir:
On February 29, 2008, Florida Power Corporation, doing business as Progress Energy Florida, Inc., provided a supplemental response to Generic Letter (GL) 2004-02, "Potential Impact of Debris Blockage on Emergency Recirculation During Design Basis Accidents at Pressurized-Water Reactors," for Crystal River Unit 3 (CR-3). That supplemental response was prepared using guidance for the preparation of GL supplemental responses submitted to the Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) for industry distribution.
The purpose of this submittal is to provide corrected information to Specific Guidance for Review Area #3, "Specific Information Regarding Methodology for Demonstrating Compliance,"
Section #o, "Chemical Effects," Subsection #7, "WCAP Base Model," in the above referenced submittal. The chemical effects testing for CR-3 was performed based on draft calculations for chemical precipitate formation. The testing used the methods presented in WCAP-16530-NP, Revision 0, with refinements for phosphate inhibition as presented in WCAP-16785-NP, Revision 0.
Due to non-conservatisms in the draft calculation, the test used amounts of precipitates that were less than the final predicted amounts of precipitates. The results of the non-conservative test were determined to be acceptable due to the negligible impact of the precipitates on strainer head loss as demonstrated during the chemical effects testing.
Upon receipt of the final documentation pertaining to chemical precipitate generation and chemical effects testing, CR-3 personnel realized that the test vendor attempted to incorporate the WCAP-16530-NP chemical precipitate loads into the test by adding additional Aluminum Oxyhydroxide. This resulted in the total mass of Aluminum Oxyhydroxide used in the test being equal to that calculated in WCAP-16530-NP.
The mass of precipitates predicted by the WCAPs, the supplemental-response-reported mass of precipitates used for testing, and the actual mass of precipitates used for testing, are shown in the following table:
Progress Energy Florida, Inc.
Crystal River Nuclear Plant 15760 W. Powerline Street Crystal River, FL 34428
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 3F0808-02 Page 2 of 3 Precipitate WCAP-1 6530-WCAP-1 6785-Mass Actual Mass NP Calculated NP Calculated Reported to Used for Mass (Ibm)*
Mass (Ibm)*
be Used for Testing (Ibm)*
Testing in Supplemental
Response
(Ibm)*
Sodium Aluminum 47.5 47.5 38.8 38.8 Silicate Aluminum 38.1 25.1 18.0 38.1 Oxyhydroxide Calcium Phosphate 3.1 3.1 3.1 3.1 Total Precipitates 88.7 75.7 59.9 80 Ine presented masses are basea on me TUl-scale strainer.
I ne mass OT precipitates used in the test was scaled from these values based on the ratio of test strainer surface area to effective full-scale strainer surface area.
Although the chemical effects test was performed with less precipitate mass than predicted by the final chemical product formation calculation, the magnitude of the difference is less than reported in the supplemental response. As shown in the above table, only the mass of Sodium Aluminum Silicate was less than the calculated amount. Further, the total mass of the three chemical precipitates tested exceeds the total mass of chemicals predicted with the WCAP-16785-NP refinements. The original conclusion that chemical precipitates have a negligible effect on strainer head loss remains valid.
This submittal contains no new regulatory commitments.
If there are any questions regarding this submittal, please contact Mr. Dan Westcott, Supervisor, Licensing and Regulatory Programs at (352) 563-4796.
Sincerely,
$y49A Dale E. Young I
Vice President Crystal River Nuclear Plant DEY/dwh xc:
NRC Project Manager NRC Regional Office NRC Resident Inspector
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 3F0808-02 Page 3 of 3 STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF CITRUS Dale E. Young states that he is the Vice President, Crystal River Nuclear Plant for Florida Power Corporation, doing business as Progress Energy Florida, Inc.; that he is authorized on the part of said company to sign and file with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission the information attached hereto; and that all such statements made and matters set forth therein are true and correct to the best of his knowledge, information, and belief.
Dale E. Young Vice President Crystal River Nuclear Plant The foregoing document was acknowledged before me this day of
,2008, by Dale E. Young.
Signature of Notary Public MY COMMISSION # DD 408539 State of Florida EXPIRES: July 8, 2009 Bp~~
onded Thin Notary Public Uniderwriters (Print, type, or stamp Commissioned Name of Notary Public)
Personally Known Produced
-OR-Identification