ML101800477

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Summary of Category 1 Public Meeting with PSEG Nuclear LLC, Regarding Response to Generic Letter 2004-02 for Salem Nuclear Generating Station, Units 1 and 2
ML101800477
Person / Time
Site: Salem  PSEG icon.png
Issue date: 07/14/2010
From: Richard Ennis
Plant Licensing Branch 1
To:
Ennis R, NRR/DORL, 415-1420
Shared Package
ml101800485 List:
References
GL-04-002, TAC MC4712, TAC MC4713
Download: ML101800477 (5)


Text

UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. 20555-0001 July 14, 2010 LICENSEE: PSEG Nuclear LLC FACILITY: Salem Nuclear Generating Station, Units 1 and 2

SUBJECT:

SUMMARY

OF JUNE 23, 2010, MEETING WITH PSEG NUCLEAR LLC, REGARDING RESPONSE TO GENERIC LETTER 2004-02 FOR SALEM NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION, UNITS 1 AND 2 (TAC NOS. MC4712 AND MC4713)

On June 23, 2010, a Category 1 public meeting was held between the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) and representatives of PSEG Nuclear LLC (PSEG or the licensee) via conference call. This meeting was a follow-up to the public meeting that was held on March 16, 2010, concerning PSEG's response to Generic Letter (GL) 2004-02, "Potentiallmpact of Debris Blockage on Emergency Recirculation during Design Basis Accidents at Pressurized Water Reactors.Tor Salem Nuclear Generating Station, Units 1 and 2 (Salem). A list of conference call participants is provided in the Enclosure.

During the meeting on March 16, 2010, the NRC staff and the licensee discussed PSEG's planned approach to address the NRCs request for additional information (RAI) dated February 4, 2010 (Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS)

Accession No. ML100220520), pertaining to the response to the GL for Salem. A summary of that meeting was issued by the NRC staff on April 7, 2010 (ADAMS Accession No. ML100770397). At the conclusion of the March 16th meeting, it was decided that a follow-up public meeting would be held after PSEG provides a revised draft response to the GL. PSEG's revised draft response was provided to the NRC staff on May 27,2010 (ADAMS Accession No. ML101540137). During the meeting on June 23, 2010, the NRC staff provided feedback to the licensee on the revised draft response to the GL. The following summarizes the discussion:

Chemical Effects The NRC staff stated that the solubility value shown on the top of page 272 of 273 of (384 parts per million (ppm)) of the revised draft response appears to be incorrect.

The staff has performed an independent calculation which resulted in a value of 12.7 ppm. The licensee stated that it would check the calculation. The staff stated that this issue would only need to be discussed again if the licensee retained the existing value or if the revised number doesn't support 160 F as a conservative estimate of the precipitation temperature.

Debris Characteristics The NRC staff and PSEG discussed the licensee's assumed size distribution for each type of debris as shown on page 25 of 273 of Attachment 1 of the revised draft response. The staff noted that the Salem size distributions for Kaowool and Owens-Corning insulation were not completely consistent with NRC staffs safety evaluation for Nuclear Energy Institute NEI 04-07,

'Pressurized Water Reactor Sump Performance Evaluation Methodology:' However, the staff

-2 concluded that the approach was acceptable for Salem due to the small amounts of these types of insulation relative to the amount of Nukon insulation.

Debris Transport During discussion regarding debris transport, the licensee stated that the distribution of small pieces between the front and back sides of the strainer is based on the assumption that 25% of the small debris is held up on the grating during blowdown. The NRC staff recommended that the licensee revise Section 3e.1.1, "Slowdown Transport," of Attachment 1 of the revised draft response (pages 39 - 40 of 273) to add this information. The licensee agreed to add this statement to the response.

The NRC staff and PSEG discussed the licensee's assumptions regarding the debris that is transported to inactive volumes as discussed on page 47 of 273 of Attachment 1 of the revised draft response. The staff requested that the licensee quantify and justify the credit being taken for debris sequestered in inactive volumes versus the amount transported to the screens. The staff added that if the amount of such debris assumed to be sequestered is a small fraction of the amount assumed to transport; this issue would likely be of low concern. The licensee estimated that this information would be provided in draft form to the staff by July 8, 2010 1 . The NRC staff stated that this issue needs to be discussed again before the licensee provides a final RAI response.

Net Positive Suction Head The NRC staff noted that the wording in the last paragraph of page 11 of 13 of Attachment 8 of the revised draft response (part of response to RAI 14(a)) appears inconsistent with the wording on page 178 of 273 of Attachment 1 of the revised draft response. The licensee stated that, contrary to the discussion in Attachment 8, Emergency Operating Procedure (EOP)

EOP-LOCA-5 does not require the operators to immediately stop the operating emergency core cooling system and containment spray pumps when the reactor water storage tank (RWST) low level setpoint is reached. The pumps are stopped on low-low level in the RWST. The licensee stated it would revise the draft response to RAI 14(a) to clarify the EOP procedure requirements.

1 PSEG provided the information regarding debris transport to inactive volumes to the NRC staff via e-mail on July 8, 2010.

-3 Members of the public were not in attendance. Public Meeting Feedback forms were not received.

Please direct any inquiries to me at 301-415-1420 or Rick.Ennis@nrc.gov.

Richard B. Ennis, Senior Project Manager Plant Licensing Branch 1-2 Division of Operating Reactor Licensing Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Docket Nos. 50-272 and 50-311

Enclosure:

List of Conference Call Participants cc w/encl: Distribution via Listserv

LIST OF CONFERENCE CALL PARTICIPANTS JUNE 23,2010, MEETING WITH PSEG RESPONSE TO GENERIC LETTER 2004-02 FOR SALEM NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION, UNITS 1 AND 2 Name Title Organization Rick Ennis Sr. Project Manager NRC/NRR/DORL Mike Scott Branch Chief NRC/NRR/DSS/SSIB John Lehning Reactor Systems Engineer NRC/NRR/DSS/SSIB Paul Klein Sr. Materials Engineer NRC/NRR/DCI/CSGB Matt Yoder Sr. Chemical Engineer I\JRC/NRR/DCI/CSGB Jeff Keenan Manager Licensing PSEG Nuclear LLC Bob Peterson Senior Manager Sargent & Lundy Helmut Kopke Project Associate Sargent & Lundy Kiran Mathur Senior Engineer PSEG Nuclear LLC Paul Duke Licensing Engineer PSEG Nuclear LLC Elliott Rosenfeld Nuclear Engineer New Jersey DEP Enclosure

Package: ML101800485 Meeting Notice: ML101540525 t' S ummary: ML101800477 Meelng OFFICE LPL 1-2/PM LPL 1-1/LA SSIB/BC LPL 1-2/BC NAME REnnis SLittie MScott HChernoff DATE 7/13/10 7/12/10 7/13/10 7/14/10