ML14302A821

NRR E-mail Capture - Request for Additional Information (RAI) - South Texas Project (Stp), Unit 2 Steam Generator (SG) Tube Inspection Report

ML14302A821
Person / Time
Site:	South Texas
Issue date:	10/29/2014
From:	Balwant Singal Division of Operating Reactor Licensing
To:	Sterling L South Texas
References
MF4193
Download: ML14302A821 (3)

Text

NRR-PMDAPEm Resource From: Singal, Balwant Sent: Wednesday, October 29, 2014 10:41 AM To: Lsterling@stpegs.com

Subject:

Request for Additional Information (RAI) - South Texas Project (STP), Unit 2 Steam Generator (SG) Tube Inspection Report (TAC MF4193)

Attachments: MF4193-RAI.docx

Lance, By letter dated May 22, 2014 (Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS) Accession No. ML14161A146), STP Nuclear Operating Company (STPNOC) submitted information summarizing the results of the STP, Unit 2 refueling outage 2RE16 SG tube inspections. The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staff has determined that additional information is needed for the NRC staff to complete its review. The RAIs are described in the attachment to this e-mail.

The Draft Request for Additional Information (RAI) was transmitted on October 28, 2014 and STPNOC confirmed on October 29, 2014 that a clarification call is not needed. You are requested to provide your response within 30 days from the date of this e-mail. Please treat this e-mail as formal transmittal of RAIs.

Thanks.

Balwant K. Singal Senior Project Manager (Comanche Peak, STP, and Palo Verde)

Nuclear Regulatory Commission Division of Operating Reactor Licensing Balwant.Singal@nrc.gov Tel: (301) 415-3016 Fax: (301) 415-1222 1

Hearing Identifier: NRR_PMDA Email Number: 1669 Mail Envelope Properties (192BB59294514E41B5305C3C82867608016573DAA1A4)

Subject:

Request for Additional Information (RAI) - South Texas Project (STP), Unit 2 Steam Generator (SG) Tube Inspection Report (TAC MF4193)

Sent Date: 10/29/2014 10:40:41 AM Received Date: 10/29/2014 10:40:00 AM From: Singal, Balwant Created By: Balwant.Singal@nrc.gov Recipients:

"Lsterling@stpegs.com" <Lsterling@stpegs.com>

Tracking Status: None Post Office: HQCLSTR02.nrc.gov Files Size Date & Time MESSAGE 1081 10/29/2014 10:40:00 AM MF4193-RAI.docx 21625 Options Priority: Standard Return Notification: No Reply Requested: No Sensitivity: Normal Expiration Date:

Recipients Received: ZZZ

REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION STEAM GENERATOR TUBE INSPECTIONS REFUELING OUTAGE 2RE16 SOUTH TEXAS PROJECT, UNIT 2 DOCKET NUMBER 50-499 TAC NO. MF4193 By letter dated May 22, 2014 (Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS) Accession No. ML14161A146), South Texas Project Nuclear Operating Company (the licensee) submitted information summarizing the results of the steam generator tube inspections performed at South Texas Project, Unit 2 during refueling outage 2RE16.

In order to complete the review, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff requests the following additional information:

1. It is indicated on page 8 of the Attachment, under the Plug Inspection Results that no anomalies were noted. Please clarify whether all plugs were confirmed to be present and free from degradation.

2. It is indicated on page 8 of the Attachment, under the Bowl Inspection Results that the results were satisfactory. Please clarify whether any degradation was noted as a result of this inspection.

3. It is indicated on page 3 of the Attachment that the technical specifications require full-length bobbin inspection of all tubes. Please clarify since the technical specifications do not appear to have a specific reference to an inspection probe; rather, it requires, in part, use of probes capable of detecting degradation.

4. The foreign object search and retrieval was performed in every fourth column in three steam generators (SGs) and every second column in one SG. Please clarify the reason for the difference in scope.

5. A number of proximity signals were reported. Please discuss whether these signals have changed since SG installation. If so, discuss the reason for the changing signals.

Also, please discuss whether the number of signals has increased with time.

6. A number of dings were reported. Please discuss the cause of the dings and whether the number/severity has changed with time.

7. Please discuss the reason for the stud-hole gauging tests and discuss which stud holes were tested.