ML12355A184

DB follow-up RAIs Shield Building Cracks 12 19 2012

ML12355A184
Person / Time
Site:	Davis Besse
Issue date:	01/04/2013
From:	Cuadradodejesus S License Renewal Projects Branch 1
To:	Lieb R FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Co
CuadradoDeJesus S, 415-2946
References
TAC ME4640
Download: ML12355A184 (7)

Text

UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. 20555-0001 January 4, 2013 Mr. Raymond A 'Lieb, Vice President Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Company 5501 North State Route 2 Oak Harbor, OH 43449

SUBJECT:

REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION FOR THE REVIEW OF THE DAVIS-BESSE NUCLEAR POWER STATION LICENSE RENEWAL APPLICATION RELATED TO THE SHIELD BUILDING MONITORING PROGRAM (TAC NO. ME4640)

Dear Mr. Lieb:

By letter dated August 27,2010, FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Company submitted an application pursuant to Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations Part 54 for renewal of Operating License NPF-3 for the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station. The staff of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC or the staff) is reviewing this application in accordance with the guidance in NUREG-1800, "Standard Review Plan for Review of License Renewal Applications for Nuclear Power Plants." During its review, the staff has identified areas where additional information is needed to complete the review. The staff's requests for additional information are included in the enclosure. Further requests for additional information may be issued in the future.

Items in the enclosure were discussed with Cliff Custer, of your staff, 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 by telephone at 301-415-2946 or bye-mail at Samuel.CuadradoDeJesus@nrc.gov.

Sincerely, h?;:;m I

//4~S1?

cuadr~e~sl proj~ager Projects Branch 1 Division of License Renewal Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Docket No. 50-346

Enclosure:

As stated cc w/encl: Listserv

DAVIS-BESSE NUCLEAR POWER STATION LICENSE RENEWAL APPLICATION REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION RELATED TO THE SHIELD BUILDING MONITORING PROGRAM RAI B.2.43-2a

Background:

By letter dated November 20,2012, the applicant responded to a request for additional information (RAI) regarding the proposed monitoring methods for the shield building (SB) cracking. The RAI response indicates that the proposed inspection sample size of 20 core bores will cover the three areas of cracking (flute shoulders, upper 20 ft of the building, and the steam line penetrations) and is adequate to identify any changes in the laminar cracking, without further impulse response testing during the period of extended operation.

Issue:

As part of evaluating the applicant's plan for monitoring the SB cracking with core bores, the staff needs to understand the technical basis for the size of the sample. For example, is the sample based purely on statistics or is it based on the long term effect of the concrete cracks on

. the ability of the reinforcement to carry design loads and the safety significance of the cracking.

In an earlier RAI response, dated April 5, 2012, it was indicated that the structural impact of the cracking would be determined via testing. A summary description of the test results and discussion of how the test results demonstrate that the sample size is sufficient has not been provided.

Request:

Provide a discussion of the technical basis for the adequacy of the sample size. If the sample size was based on laboratory testing, provide a summary of the testing. Include an explanation of the testing completed as well as the results, and how this information relates to the structural capacity of the SB and supports the adequacy of the sample size.

RAI B.2.43-3a

Background:

. By letter dated November 20,2012, the applicant responded to an RAI regarding the scope of the proposed Shield Building Monitoring Program. The RAI response notes that there were four conditions required to cause the SB laminar cracking and that the SB is the only plant structure

. that has all of these conditions. The response further states that the deSign features of all other concrete structures within the scope of license renewal prevent the occurrence of similar cracking, and this was verified via core bores and impulse response testing of an auxiliary building wall, which was a bounding location.

ENCLOSURE

- 2 Issue:

1. The staff believes that testing to verify cracking did not occur in other structures should be conducted on a structure comparable to the SB. It is not clear to the staff why the auxiliary building is considered a comparable structure to the SB, since the wall that was tested was coated while the SB was uncoated. A comparable structure should have as many characteristics that match the SB as possible (e.g., similar rebar density, similar wall thickness, similar environmental exposure, lack of coating).

2. In past RAI responses, the applicant has explained that some other structures within the scope of license renewal have exterior coatings; however, they are not relied upon to prevent sub-surface laminar cracking. In addition the coatings are not included in the scope of license renewal.

Request:

1. Explain why the auxiliary building is comparable to the SB, or identify other comparable structures and provide technical justification for why testing is unnecessary on those structures or how it will be verified that cracking has not occurred in those structures.

The response should identify any uncoated structures within the scope oflicense renewal.

2. Identify which coatings are included in the scope of license renewal and the acceptance criteria that will be used for those coatings. Provide technical justification for excluding the coatings that are not within license renewal.

Letter to Raymond A. Ueb from Samuel Cuadrado De Jesus dated January 4, 2013

SUBJECT:

REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION FOR THE REVIEW OF THE DAVIS-BESSE NUCLEAR POWER STATION LICENSE RENEWAL APPLICATION RELATED TO THE SHIELD BUILDING MONITORING PROGRAM (TAC NO. ME4640)

DISTRIBUTION:

HARD COPY:

DLR R/F E-MAIL:

PUBLIC RidsNrrDlrResource RidsNrrDlrRpb1 Resource RidsNrrDlrRpb2 Resource RidsNrrDIrRer1 Resource RidsNrrDIrRer2 Resource RidsNrrDlrRerb Resource RidsNrrDlrRpob Resource RidsNrrDciCvib Resource RidsNrrDciCpnb Resource RidsNrrDciCsgb Resource RidsNrrDraAfpb Resource RidsNrrDraApla Resource RidsNrrDeEmcb Resource RidsNrrDeEeeb Resource RidsNrrDssSrxb Resource RidsNrrDssSbpb Resource RidsNrrDssScvb Resource RidsOgcMailCenter Resource E. Keegan B. Harris (OGC)

M. Mahoney

Mr. Raymond A. Lieb, Vice President Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Company 5501 North State Route 2 .

Oak Harbor, OH 43449

SUBJECT:

REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION FOR THE REVIEW OF THE DAVIS-BESSE NUCLEAR POWER STATION LICENSE RENEWAL APPLICATION RELATED TO THE SHIELD BUILDING MONITORING PROGRAM (TAC NO. ME4640)

Dear Mr. Lieb:

By letter dated August 27; 2010, FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Company submitted an application pursuant to Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations Part 54 for renewal of Operating License NPF-3 for the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station. The !?taff of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC or the staff) is reviewing this application in accordance with the guidance in NUREG-1800, "Standard Review Plan for Review of License Renewal Applications for Nuclear Power Plants." During its review, the staff has identified areas where additional information is needed to complete the review. The staff's requests for additional iriformation are included in the enclosure. Further requests for additional information may be issued in the future.

Items in the enclosure were discussed with Cliff Custer, of your staff, 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 by telephone at 301-415-2946 or bye-mail at SamueI.CuadradoDeJesus@nrc.gov..

Sincerely, Samuel Cuadrado De Jesus, Project Manager Projects Branch 1 Division of License Renewal Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Docket No. 50-346

Enclosure:

As stated cc w/encl: Listserv DISTRIBUTION:

See next page ADAMS Accession No ..*ML12355A184 *concurred via email I OFFICE ~LR/RPB2* PM:DLR/RPB1 BC:DLR/RPB1 PM:DLR/RPB1 iI NAME IKing SCuadrado DMorey SCuadrado 5L:5 II DATE 1/3/13 1/3/13 1/4/13 I I " 112 OFFICIAL RECORD COpy

... M L12355A 184 *concurred via email OFFICE LA:DLR/RPB2* PM:DLR/RPB1 BC:DLR/RPB1 PM:DLR/RPB1 NAME IKing SCuadrado DMorey SCuadrado DATE 1/3/13 1/3/13 1/4/13 1/4/13 Letter to Raymond A. Lieb from Samuel Cuadrado De Jesus dated January 4, 2013 SUB~IECT: REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION FOR THE REVIEW OF THE DAVIS-BESSE NUCLEAR POWER STATION LlCE;NSE RENEWAL APPLICATION RELATED TO THE SHIELD BUILDING MONITORING PROGRAM (TAC NO. ME4640)

DISTRIBUTION:

HARD COPY:

DLR RlF E-MAIL:

PUBLIC RidsNrrDlrResource RidsNrrDlrRpb1 Resource RidsNrrDlrRpb2 Resource RidsNrrDIrRer1 Resource RidsNrrDIrRer2 Resource RidsNrrDlrRerb Resource RidsNrrDlrRpob Resource RidsNrrDciCvib Resource RidsNrrDciCpnb Resource RidsNrrDciCsgb Resource RidsNrrDraAfpb Resource RidsNrrDraApla Resource RidsNrrDeEmcb Resource RidsNrrDeEeeb Resource RidsNrrDssSrxb Resource RidsNrrDssSbpb Resource RidsNrrDssScvb Resource RidsOgcMailCenter Resource E. Keegan B. Harris (OGC)

M. Mahoney