ML110070495

NRC Staff Response to December 15, 2010, Teleconference Associated with Environmental Qualification Questions

ML110070495
Person / Time
Site:	Point Beach
Issue date:	12/16/2010
From:	Beltz T Plant Licensing Branch III
To:	Hale S Nextera Energy
beltz T, NRR/DORL/LPL3-1, 301-415-3049
References
TAC ME1044, TAC ME1045
Download: ML110070495 (2)

Text

ADAMS Accession No. ML110070495 From:

Beltz, Terry Sent:

Thursday, December 16, 2010 12:06 PM To:

'Steve.Hale@nexteraenergy.com' Cc:

'liz.abbott@fpl.com'; 'fritzie.flentje@nexteraenergy.com';

'james.costedio@nexteraenergy.com'; Mathew, Roy; McConnell, Matthew; Sahay, Prem; Pascarelli, Robert

Subject:

Point Beach Units 1 and 2 - NRC Staff Response re: December 15, 2010, Teleconference Associated with Environmental Qualification Questions

Dear Mr. Hale:

In a letter to the NRC dated December 13, 2010 (ADAMS Accession No. ML103480112),

NextEra provided additional clarification related to questions raised by the NRC staff in the Electrical Engineering Branch (EEEB) in the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation. The staff requested a teleconference with NextEra to further discuss the responses. Specifically, the NRC staff required further clarification to the EPU Harsh Environment temperature values listed in Table EEEB-1 associated with the steam line pressure transmitter instrument cables.

On December 15, 2010, a teleconference was held between NextEra and the NRC staff. At the conclusion of the teleconference, the NRC staff informed you that they would internally discuss the justification and bases for the environmental qualification responses as provided in the letter and subsequent teleconference. As a result of that internal discussion, the EEEB staff requests that I provide NextEra the following questions:

1. What guidance was used to qualify components impacted by the Point Beach EPU, AST, and HELB? Were the components qualified to Category 1 requirements?

2. Based on the December 15, 2010, teleconference, for cables, using double peak temperature alone is not acceptable to the NRC staff. Cables should be qualified in accordance with IEEE 323-1974 guidance. IEEE 323-1974 requires a double peak plus a 15°F margin.

3. The NRC staff requests a summary of thermal-lag analysis to show that the intended function of the equipment will have been completed before the peak temperature is reached. It must then be shown that when the peak temperature is reached and thermal soaking (thermal equilibrium) is reached, the equipment will not experience subsequent failure that would affect other safety systems or, mislead the operator during the DBE.

The sole purpose of this e-mail is to prepare you and others for the proposed conference call or meeting. This e-mail does not convey a formal NRC staff position, and does not formally request additional information.

Please don't hesitate to contact me if you have any questions or concerns.

Sincerely,

Terry A. Beltz, Senior Project Manager Plant Licensing Branch III-1 Division of Operating Reactor Licensing Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation (301) 415-3049 Terry.Beltz@nrc.gov