ML11278A069

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Requests for Additional Information for the Review of the Seabrook Station, License Renewal Application
ML11278A069
Person / Time
Site: Seabrook NextEra Energy icon.png
Issue date: 10/07/2011
From: Richard Plasse
License Renewal Projects Branch 1
To: Freeman P
NextEra Energy Seabrook
Plasse R
References
Download: ML11278A069 (5)


Text

UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. 20555-0001 October 7, 2011 Mr. Paul Freeman Site Vice President NextEra Energy Seabrook, LLC P.O. Box 300 Seabrook, NH 03874

SUBJECT:

REQUESTS FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION FOR THE REVIEW OF THE SEABROOK STATION, LICENSE RENEWAL APPLICATION

Dear Mr. Freeman:

By [[letter::L-2010-101, Comment (1) of Larry Nicholson, on Behalf of Florida Power & Light Co., on Proposed NUREG-0800, Standard Review Plan for the Review of Safety Analysis Reports for Nuclear Power Plants; Branch Technical Position (BTP) 7-19, Guidance for .|letter dated May 25,2010]], NextEra Energy Seabrook, LLC, submitted an application pursuant to 10 CFR Part 54, to renew the operating license NPF-86 for Seabrook Station, for review by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC or the staff). The staff is reviewing the information contained in the license renewal application and has identified, in the enclosure, areas where additional information is needed to complete the review.

These requests for additional information were discussed with Richard Cliche, and a mutually agreeable date for the response is within 30 days from the date of this letter. If you have any questions, please contact me at (301) 415-2927 or e-mail richard.plasse@nrc.gov.

Sincerely, Rick Plasse, Project Manager Projects Branch 1 Division of License Renewal Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Docket No. 50-443

Enclosure:

Requests for Additional Information cc w/encl: Listserv

SEABROOK STATION LICENSE RENEWAL APPLICATION REQUESTS FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION Set 16 Follow-up RAI 3.1.1.60-02

Background

By letter dated January 5, 2011, the staff issued two requests for additional information (RAls) to the applicant, RAI 3.1.1-60-01 and RAI 3.1.1-60-02.

In its response to these RAls dated February 3, 2011, the applicant stated that its design is unique in that the flux thimble tube is a double walled concentric tube design with a capped inner tube and does not provide a pressure boundary function. During its review of the applicant's response, the staff noted that the applicant has the option to place the movable incore detectors back in service and questioned the exclusion of the flux thimble tube as a pressure boundary. A follow-up RAI 3.1.1-60-01/02 was asked on March 30, 2011. In its response dated April 22, 2011, the applicant provided additional bases for not including the flux thimbles as part of its reactor coolant system (RCS) pressure boundary.

Issue Following its review of the applicant's responses to the RAts, the staff seeks clarification as to where exactly the RCS pressure boundary is for the applicant's replacement detector assemblies and the original capped detector assemblies.

Request Verify the RCS pressure boundaries for the replacement and original capped incore detector assemblies. Specifically, identify components that constitute the RCS pressure boundary from the reactor vessel penetration to the seal table and any extensions beyond the seal table.

Provide AMR items for the components which are in scope of license renewal in accordance with 10 CFR 54.4(a) and subject to an aging management review and any applicable aging management program(s).

Follow-up RAI 4.3-1 c

Background

By letter dated April 22, 2011, the applicant responded to RAI 4.3-1 b stating that the pressure boundary portion of the American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) Class 1 valves were designed, analyzed, and qualified for service (including fatigue) in accordance with the rules of ASME Code Section III Subsection NB-3500. Updated final safety analysis report (UFSAR)

Table 5.2-1 identifies the code edition and addenda applicable to the design of the following types of Class 1 valves: pressurizer safety valves, motor-operated valves, manual valves, control valves, and pressurizer spray valves in the reactor coolant systems. UFSAR Table 5.4-13 also identifies the valves that are included in the reactor coolant pressure boundary.

ENCLOSURE

2 Issue The staff noted that, in the 1971 and later editions of the ASME Section III Code, paragraphs NB-3545.3 and NB-3550 required fatigue analyses for valves that have an inlet piping connection larger than 4 inches nominal pipe size unless the exemption requirements of NB 3222.4(d) are met. It is not clear to the staff if the fatigue analyses for all Class 1 valves, has been dispositioned as time-limited aging analysis (TLAA) in accordance with 10 CFR 54.21(c)(1).

Request If fatigue analysis were performed for Class 1 valves that have an inlet piping connection larger than 4 inches nominal pipe size as part of the design-basis, amend the license renewal application (LRA) to provide and justify the TLAA disposition for these analyses.

Or justify that the fatigue analyses for these Class 1 valves need not to be identified as a TLAA in accordance with 10 CFR 54.21 (c)(1).

If fatigue analyses were not performed for any Class 1 valves that have an inlet piping connection larger than 4 inches nominal pipe size, amend the LRA to identify these valves. Justify why fatigue analyses were not required for these Class 1 valves in accordance with the ASME Section III Code or the ASME Draft Pump and Valve Code, with reference to the applicable sections of the design code.

'.. ML11278A069 Sincerely, IRA!

Rick Plasse, Project Manager Projects Branch 1 Division of License Renewal Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation "concurrence via e-mail OFFICE LA:DLR*

PM:RPB1 :DLR OGC

~1:DLR PM: RPB1 :DLR NAME SFigueroa RPlasse MSpencer DMorey RPlasse DATE 10/6/2011 10/6/2011 10/6/2011 10/7/2011 1017/2011

Letter to P. Freeman from R. Plasse dated October, 7, 2011

SUBJECT:

REQUESTS FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION FOR THE REVIEW OF THE SEABROOK STATION, LICENSE RENEWAL APPLICATION DISTRIBUTION:

HARD COPY:

DLR RF E-MAIL:

PUBLIC RidsNrrDlr Resource RidsNrrDlrRpb1 Resource RidsNrrDlrRpb2 Resource RidsNrrDlrRarb Resource RidsNrrDlrRapb Resource RidsNrrDlrRasb Resource RidsNrrDlrRerb Resource RidsNrrDlrRpob Resource RidsNrrDraApla Resource MWentzel RPlasse DMorey DWrona EMiller ICouret, OPA EDacus,OCA MSpencer, OGC WRaymond, RI DTifft, RI NMcNamara, RI NSheehan, RI DScrenci, RI JJohnson, RI ABurritt, RI