ML103140545
| ML103140545 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Oconee, Mcguire, Catawba, McGuire  |
| Issue date: | 11/10/2010 |
| From: | Jacqueline Thompson Plant Licensing Branch II |
| To: | Ashe K, Hentz L Duke Energy Carolinas |
| References | |
| GL-08-001 | |
| Download: ML103140545 (3) | |
Text
From:
Thompson, Jon Sent:
Wednesday, November 10, 2010 11:00 AM To:
'Ashe, Ken'; 'Hentz, Lee A' Cc:
Kulesa, Gloria; Stang, John
Subject:
RAI REGARDING RESPONSE TO GENERIC LETTER (GL) 2008-01 Mr. Hentz The following Request for Information (RAI) from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staff pertains to the response of Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC (the licensee) to GL 2008-01.
Previously the licensee has responded to this GL by letters dated May 8, 2008 (Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS) Accession No. ML081340312),
October 13, 2008 (ADAMS Accession No. ML082900490), February 3, 2009 (ADAMS Accession No. ML090370415), and January 6, 2010 (ADAMS Accession No. ML100200272).
Guidance on NRC staff expectations is provided by Reference 1 which is generally consistent with the Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) guidance provided to industry in Reference 2 as clarified in later NEI communications. The NRC staff recommends that the licensee consult Reference 1 when responding to the following request for additional information (RAIs):
REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
- 1. Residual Heat Removal (RHR) venting is procedurally controlled; but without surveillance requirements. How is the frequency of venting determined or adjusted in the absence of surveillance requirements?
- 2. What is the rationale that permits delaying RHR system venting surveillance until the TSTF process is completed?
- 3. The surveillance procedures are stated to have a low threshold for as found gas, which is defined as a void fraction that would not be large enough to challenge system operability. Please provide specific volumes for as found gas that are considered acceptable for not challenging system operability and describe how these are determined with respect to the acceptable pump inlet void criteria described in section 1.4 of Reference 3. Is this void fraction dependent upon the temperature and pressure conditions under which the system is required to operate? If yes, what are they? What is the process that is followed if gas is found that is less than the acceptable threshold?
- 4. What is the status of the commitments listed in Attachment 5 of the Nine-Month Response?
- 5. Training was not identified in the GL Reference 4 but is considered to be a necessary part of applying procedures and other activities when addressing the issues identified in the GL. This was identified in the Reference 2 NEI template as an item that should be addressed in the GL. This is not addressed in the response. Please provide a brief description of planned training and its schedule.
REFERENCES
- 1. Ruland, William H., Preliminary Assessment of Responses to Generic Letter 2008-01, Managing Gas Accumulation in emergency Core Cooling, Decay Heat Removal, and Containment Spray Systems, and Future NRC Staff Review Plans, NRC letter to James H. Riley, Nuclear Energy Institute, (ADAMS Accession No. ML091390637), May 28, 2009.
- 2. Riley, James H., Generic Letter (GL) 2008-01, Managing Gas Accumulation in Emergency Core Cooling, Decay Heat Removal, and Contain Spray Systems Evaluation and 3 Month Response Template, Letter to Administrative Points of Contact from Director, Engineering, Nuclear Generation Division, Nuclear Energy Institute, Enclosure 2, Generic Letter 2008-01 Response Guidance, March 20, 2008.
- 3. Case, Michael J. NRC Generic Letter 2008-01: Managing Gas Accumulation in Emergency Core Cooling, Decay Heat Removal, and Containment Spray Systems, Letter from Director, Division of Policy and Rulemaking, Office of Nuclear Regulation, NRC, (ADAMS Accession No. ML072910759), January 11, 2008. Guidance to NRC/NRR/DSS/SRXB Reviews for writing TI suggestions for the Region Inspections, (ADAMS Accession No. ML10200053), August 18, 2010.
Please contact me if you are not able to respond to this RAI within 30 days of receipt.
Sincerely Jon Thompson, Project Manager Plant Licensing Branch II-1 Division of Operating Reactor Licensing Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation E-mail Properties Mail Envelope Properties (0A64B42AAA8FD4418CE1EB5240A6FED121A53AE168)
Subject:
RAI REGARDING RESPONSE TO GENERIC LETTER (GL) 2008-01 Sent Date: 11/9/2010 5:34:02 PM Received Date: 11/10/2010 10:59:00 AM From: Thompson, Jon Created By: Jon.Thompson@nrc.gov Recipients:
Ken.Ashe@duke-energy.com ('Ashe, Ken')
Tracking Status: None Lee.Hentz@duke-energy.com ('Hentz, Lee A')
Tracking Status: None Gloria.Kulesa@nrc.gov (Kulesa, Gloria)
Tracking Status: None John.Stang@nrc.gov (Stang, John)
Tracking Status: None Post Office:
HQCLSTR02.nrc.gov Files Size Date & Time MESSAGE 14427 11/9/2010 Options Expiration Date:
Priority: olImportanceNormal ReplyRequested: False Return Notification: False Sensitivity: olNormal Recipients received: