ML12118A045

E-mail Capture - Request for Additional Information License Amendment Request Dated November 22, 2011

ML12118A045
Person / Time
Site:	Catawba
Issue date:	04/26/2012
From:	Jacqueline Thompson Plant Licensing Branch II
To:	Hart R Duke Energy Carolinas
References
TAC ME7659, TAC ME7660
Download: ML12118A045 (3)

Text

NRR-PMDAPEm Resource From: Thompson, Jon Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2012 1:05 PM To: Hart, Randy Cc: Harrison, Donnie; Evans, Jonathan; Salgado, Nancy; Rudy, Lawrence J

Subject:

Request for Additional Information Re: License Amendment Request dated November 22, 2011

SUBJECT:

CATAWBA NUCLEAR STATION, UNITS 1 AND 2 (CATAWBA 1 AND 2), REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION (RAI) REGARDING THE LICENSE AMENDMENT REQUEST TO REVISE TECHNICAL SPECIFICATION (TS) 3.7.8, NUCLEAR SERVICE WATER SYSTEM (NSWS) (TAC NOS. ME7659 AND ME7660)

By letter dated November 22, 2011, (Agencywide Document Access and Management System Accession No. ML11327A149), Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC (Duke Energy, the licensee), submitted a proposed license amendment in the form of changes to the TSs for Catawba 1 and 2. The proposed change would revise the TSs to allow single discharge header operation of the NSWS (Duke Energy designation "RN") for a time period of 14 days.

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staff has reviewed the licensees submittal and determined that a request for additional informant (RAI) is needed in order to complete our review. The enclosed document describes this RAI. The scope of the RAI includes complex issues that may benefit from some interaction between the NRC staff and the licensee for the purpose of ensuring that the licensee understands the intent and scope of the RAI. Therefore, the NRC staff proposes that we hold a telephone conference to discuss this RAI. If the licensee determines that it does not need this discussion, then the response to this RAI is due within 30 days of this e-mail. If the licensee would like to hold this discussion, please contact me and a new due date will be set.

If you have any questions, please call me at 301-415-1119.

Sincerely, Jon Thompson, Project Manager Plant Licensing Branch II-1 Division of Operating Reactor Licensing Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Docket Nos. 50-413 and 50-414

Enclosure:

As stated REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION REGARDING THE LICENSE AMENDMENT REQUEST TO REVISE THE TECHNICAL SPECIFICATION TO ALLOW SINGLE DISCHARGE HEADER OPERATION OF THE NUCLEAR SERVICE WATER SYSTEM CATAWBA NUCLEAR STATION, UNITS 1 AND 2 DUKE ENERGY CAROLINAS, LLC DOCKET NOS. 50-413 AND 50-414 By letter dated November 22, 2011, (Agencywide Document Access and Management System Accession No. ML11327A149), Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC (Duke Energy, the licensee), submitted a proposed license amendment in the form of changes to the Technical Specifications (TSs) for Catawba Nuclear Station, Units 1 1

and 2 (Catawba 1 and 2). The proposed change would revise the TSs to allow single discharge header operation of the Nuclear Service Water System (NSWS) (Duke Energy designation "RN") for a time period of 14 days.

To complete its review, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staff requests the following additional information:

1. According to the submittal, the licensee concludes that the NSWS single discharge header alignment supports operation in this configuration[and] the increase in riskis minimal and acceptable.

Provide the quantitative results that are being compared against the Regulatory Guide (RG) 1.177 and RG 1.174 acceptance guidelines.

2. RG 1.200 states [a] peer review is needed to determine if the intent of the requirements in the standard [ASME [American Society of Mechanical Engineers] and ANS [American Nuclear Society]PRA [probabilistic risk assessment] Standard that provides both process and technical requirements for an at-power Level 1 and limited Level 2 PRA for internal events, internal flood, internal fire, seismic, wind, external flood and other external events] is met. RG 1.200 also states the results of the peer review and/or self-assessment and a description of the resolution of all the peer review or self-assessment findings and observations are included.

a. The submittal does not address an independent peer review according to the ASME/ANS PRA Standard, for any of the hazard groups, including internal events. The NRC expects applications to have had PRA peer reviews of all potentially significant hazard groups for an application. Please indicate what were the findings and observations of these reviews and how they were dispositioned for this application.

b. The licensee states that the [self] assessment indicated that 231 of the 306 Supporting Requirements (SRs) for Rev. 1 were fully met [but] 24 of the SRs were not applicable to Catawba at all. However, only 10 SRs were actually considered to have an impact on the PRA model and were addressed in the submittal. Please provide a detailed list addressing all SRs that were not met in the self assessment.

3. According to the submittal, the seismic analysis of the NSWS components and piping caused the seismic [cord damage frequency] CDF [to show] only a modest increase using very conservative bounding assumptions[due to] a sensitivity study [that] was performed to conservatively bound the impact of having a NSWS discharge line unavailable during a seismic event. Please provide a description of the change in seismic analysis and the resulting seismic CDF and [large early release frequency] LERF for this application.

4. Please provide a description of the internal fire PRA analysis and resulting change in internal fire CDF and LERF for this application.

5. Please provide a description of the internal/external floods PRA analysis and resulting change in internal flooding CDF and LERF for this application.

6. Please provide a description of the tornado/high winds PRA analysis and resulting change in the tornado/high winds CDF and LERF for this application.

2

Hearing Identifier: NRR_PMDA Email Number: 350 Mail Envelope Properties (0A64B42AAA8FD4418CE1EB5240A6FED1786C5E7C31)

Subject:

Request for Additional Information Re: License Amendment Request dated November 22, 2011 Sent Date: 4/26/2012 1:04:55 PM Received Date: 4/26/2012 1:04:00 PM From: Thompson, Jon Created By: Jon.Thompson@nrc.gov Recipients:

"Harrison, Donnie" <Donnie.Harrison@nrc.gov>

Tracking Status: None "Evans, Jonathan" <Jonathan.Evans@nrc.gov>

Tracking Status: None "Salgado, Nancy" <Nancy.Salgado@nrc.gov>

Tracking Status: None "Rudy, Lawrence J" <Lawrence.Rudy@duke-energy.com>

Tracking Status: None "Hart, Randy" <Randy.Hart@duke-energy.com>

Tracking Status: None Post Office: HQCLSTR02.nrc.gov Files Size Date & Time MESSAGE 5717 4/26/2012 1:04:00 PM Options Priority: Standard Return Notification: No Reply Requested: No Sensitivity: Normal Expiration Date:

Recipients Received: