ML110630290
| ML110630290 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Salem  |
| Issue date: | 03/03/2011 |
| From: | Richard Ennis Plant Licensing Branch 1 |
| To: | Chernoff H Plant Licensing Branch 1 |
| ENNIS R, NRR/DORL, 415-1453 | |
| References | |
| TAC ME4918 | |
| Download: ML110630290 (3) | |
Text
March 3, 2011 MEMORANDUM TO: Harold K. Chernoff, Chief Plant Licensing Branch I-2 Division of Operating Reactor Licensing Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation FROM: Richard B. Ennis, Senior Project Manager /ra/
Plant Licensing Branch I-2 Division of Operating Reactor Licensing Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
SUBJECT:
SALEM NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION, UNIT NO. 1, DRAFT REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION (TAC NO. ME4918)
The attached draft request for information (RAI) was transmitted on March 3, 2011, to Mr. Paul Duke of PSEG Nuclear LLC (the licensee). This information was transmitted to facilitate an upcoming conference call in order to clarify the licensee=s letter dated October 21, 2010, which submitted relief request S1-I4R-105 for Salem Nuclear Generating Station (Salem), Unit No. 1.
The proposed relief would allow PSEG to continue using a risk-informed inservice inspection program as an alternative to the examination requirements specified in Section XI of the American Society of Mechanical Engineers Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code for certain Class 1 and 2 piping welds.
This memorandum and the attachment do not convey or represent an NRC staff position regarding the licensees request.
Docket No. 50-272
Attachment:
Draft RAI
March 3, 2011 MEMORANDUM TO: Harold K. Chernoff, Chief Plant Licensing Branch I-2 Division of Operating Reactor Licensing Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation FROM: Richard B. Ennis, Senior Project Manager /ra/
Plant Licensing Branch I-2 Division of Operating Reactor Licensing Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
SUBJECT:
SALEM NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION, UNIT NO. 1, DRAFT REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION (TAC NO. ME4918)
The attached draft request for information (RAI) was transmitted on March 3, 2011, to Mr. Paul Duke of PSEG Nuclear LLC (the licensee). This information was transmitted to facilitate an upcoming conference call in order to clarify the licensee=s letter dated October 21, 2010, which submitted relief request S1-I4R-105 for Salem Nuclear Generating Station (Salem), Unit No. 1.
The proposed relief would allow PSEG to continue using a risk-informed inservice inspection program as an alternative to the examination requirements specified in Section XI of the American Society of Mechanical Engineers Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code for certain Class 1 and 2 piping welds.
This memorandum and the attachment do not convey or represent an NRC staff position regarding the licensee's request.
Docket No. 50-272
Attachment:
Draft RAI DISTRIBUTION PUBLIC LPL1-2 Reading RidsNrrDorlLpl1-2 Resource RidsNrrDorlDpr Resource RidsNrrPMSalem Resource JPatel, NRR/DRA/APLA KHoffman, NRR/DCI/CPNB ACCESSION NO.: ML110630290 OFFICE LPL1-2/PM NAME REnnis DATE 3/3/11 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY
DRAFT REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION RELATED TO RELIEF REQUEST S1-I4R-105 FOR THE FOURTH 10-YEAR INSERVICE INSPECTION INTERVAL SALEM NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION, UNIT NO. 1 DOCKET NO. 50-272 By letter dated October 21, 2010 (ADAMS Accession No. ML103060462), PSEG Nuclear LLC (PSEG, the licensee) submitted relief request S1-I4R-105 for Salem Nuclear Generating Station (Salem), Unit No. 1. The proposed relief would allow PSEG to continue using a risk-informed inservice inspection (RI-ISI) program as an alternative to the examination requirements specified in Section XI of the American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code (Code) for certain Class 1 and 2 piping welds.
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staff has reviewed the information the licensee provided that supports the proposed relief request and would like to discuss the following issues to clarify the submittal.
- 1. Attachment 3 of the licensees letter dated October 21, 2010, lists the following findings as gaps to the internal flooding requirements to the ASME Standard: IF-C1-01, IF-C2b-01, and IF-C2C-01. The resolution of these gaps state See Appendix E of the Internal Flooding report. Very low risk areas were not addressed using the same level of detail as for higher risk areas. A quantitative guideline is not provided which would discern low risk from high risk areas as is provided in resolution of supporting requirement IF-C3b-01. Since a qualitative approach is assumed to be used for screening, please provide an explanation which shows that meeting IF-C1-01, IC-C2b-01, and IF-C2C-01 in entirety would not result in greater pipe segments for high or medium categories in the risk matrix.
- 2. Attachment 2 of the licensees letter dated October 21, 2010, shows the number of welds to be examined in the fourth interval will decrease. However, the NRC staff cannot determine if the locations to be examined have changed. Are the inspection locations in the RI-ISI program that have been developed for the fourth 10-year interval the same locations as those in the third interval RI-ISI program approved in the NRC staff's October 1, 2003, safety evaluation? If not, please summarize the changes to the program and what caused those changes.
- 3. Has the percentage of Class 1 welds to be examined remained at approximately 8.5% for the fourth 10-year interval RI-ISI program?
Attachment