ML14322A178
| ML14322A178 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Fermi  |
| Issue date: | 11/26/2014 |
| From: | Melendez-Colon D License Renewal Projects Branch 1 |
| To: | Kaminskas V DTE Electric Company |
| Melendez-Colon D, NRR/DLR/RPB1, 301-415- | |
| References | |
| TAC MF4222 | |
| Download: ML14322A178 (9) | |
Text
UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. 20555-0001 November 26, 2014 Mr. Vito Kaminskas Site Vice President - Nuclear Generation DTE Electric Company Fermi 2 - 280 OBA 6400 North Dixie Highway Newport, MI 48166
SUBJECT:
REQUESTS FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION FOR THE REVIEW OF THE FERMI 2 LICENSE RENEWAL APPLICATION - SET 5 (TAC NO. MF4222)
Dear Mr. Kaminskas:
By letter dated April 24, 2014, DTE Electric Company submitted an application pursuant to Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 54, to renew the operating license NPF-43 for Fermi 2, 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 Ms. Lynne Goodman, and a mutually agreeable date for the response is within 35 days from the date of this letter. If you have any questions, please contact me at 301-415-3301 or e-mail Daneira.Melendez-Colon@nrc.gov.
Sincerely,
/RA/
Daneira Meléndez-Colón, Project Manager Projects Branch 1 Division of License Renewal Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Docket No. 50-341
Enclosure:
Requests for Additional Information cc w/encl: ListServ
- Concurred via e-mail OFFICE LA:RPB1:DLR*
PM:RPB1:DLR PM:RPB1:DLR BC:RPB1:DLR PM:RPB1:DLR NAME YEdmonds DMeléndez-Colón ESayoc YDíaz-Sanabria (GCasto for) DMeléndez-Colón DATE 11/24/14 11/25/14 11/24/14 11/26/14 11/26/14
SUBJECT:
REQUESTS FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION FOR THE REVIEW OF THE FERMI 2, LICENSE RENEWAL APPLICATION - SET 5 (TAC NO. MF4222)
DISTRIBUTION:
E-MAIL:
PUBLIC RidsNrrDlr Resource RidsNrrDlrRpb1 Resource RidsNrrDlrRpb2 Resource RidsNrrDlrRerb Resource RidsNrrDlrRarb Resource RidsNrrDlrRasb Resource RidsNrrDlrRsrg Resource RidsNrrPMFermi2 Resource D. Melendez-Colon Y. Diaz-Sanabria M. Wentzel B. Wittick D. McIntyre, OPA C. Kanatas, OGC D. Roth, OGC M. Kunowski, RIII B. Kemker, RIII V. Mitlyng, RIII P. Chandrathil, RIII A. Stone, RIII S. Sheldon, RIII
ENCLOSURE FERMI 2 LICENSE RENEWAL APPLICATION REQUESTS FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION SET 5 (TAC NO. MF4222)
RAI 2.3.3.15-1
Background:
In license renewal application (LRA) Section 2.1.1.2.2 (1), Nonsafety-Related SSCs [systems, structures and components] Directly Connected to Safety-Related SSCs, the applicant stated, in part, For nonsafety-related SSCs directly connected to safety-related SSCs, components within the scope of license renewal include the connected piping and supports up to and including the first seismic or equivalent anchor beyond the safety-nonsafety interface, or up to a point determined by alternative bounding criteria.
Issue:
On drawings LRA-M-N-2048, locations E-6 and E-3, and LRA-M-N-2049, locations E-6 and E-3, the staff could not locate seismic anchors on the four nonsafety-related 4-inch-diameter lines to the safety-related diesel fuel oil tanks (R3000A002, R3000A001, R3000A004, and R3000A003).
Request:
The staff requests the applicant to provide additional information to locate the seismic or equivalent anchors between the safety-nonsafety interface and the end of the 10 CFR 54.4(a)(2) scoping boundary.
RAI 2.3.3.15-2
Background:
In LRA Section 2.2 the applicant stated, in part, that Tables 2.2-1list the mechanical systemsthat are within the scope of license renewal for Fermi 2.
Issue:
Table 2.2-1, Mechanical Systems within the Scope of License Renewal, does not list Section 2.3.3.15, Fuel Oil, as a system within the scope of license renewal.
Request:
The staff requests the applicant to provide additional information to clarify why LRA Section 2.3.3.15, Fuel Oil, is not included in Table 2.2-1.
RAI 2.3.3.16-1
Background:
LRA Section 2.1 describes the applicants scoping methodology, which specifies how systems or components were determined to be included within the scope of license renewal.
Issue:
One review method used by the staff is to confirm the inclusion of all components subject to an aging management review (AMR) by reviewing the results of the screening of components within the license renewal boundary. The staff noted, during its review of the drawings and locations (indicated in the table below) as supplied by the applicant, that continuations of piping within the scope of licensing renewal could not be located; therefore, acceptable scoping of SSCs could not be verified.
License Renewal Boundary Drawing Number & Location Continuation Issue LRA-M-2002, locations C-5 and D-5 Continuation not provided for four 10 CFR 54.4(a)(2) lines to drawings I-2314-03 (location G-3), I-2336-05 (location C-6), and I-2346-08 (location D-6). Drawings not provided.
LRA-M-2002, locations F-7, H-7, E-6, and F-5 Six within scope 10 CFR 54.4(a)(2) drain lines continuing to LRA-M-2985 locations G-8, H-8, F-6, and G-6. Could not locate continuations on LRA-M-2985.
LRA-M-2002, locations E-4 and F-5 Four within scope 10 CFR 54.4(a)(2) continuations to drawing LRA-M-2003(F-3).
Review of drawing LRA-M-2003 could not locate continuations from drawing LRA-M-2002.
LRA-M-2002, location F-5 10 CFR 54.4(a)(2) line continuing from unspecified drawing (and location) to valve F815.
LRA-M-2046, locations C-3, F-4, H-3, and F-6 Four within scope 10 CFR 54.4(a)(2) lines to drawing I-2400-04, locations E-6, F-4, F-4, and F-4, respectively. Drawing I-2400-04 not provided.
Request:
The staff requests the applicant to provide sufficient information to locate the license renewal boundary. If the continuation cannot be shown on license renewal boundary drawings, then provide additional information describing the extent of the scoping boundary and verify whether or not there are additional component types subject to an AMR between the continuation and the termination of the scoping boundary. If the scoping classification of a section of the piping changes over the continuation, provide additional information to clarify the change in scoping classification.
RAI 2.3.3.17-1
Background:
In LRA Section 2.1.1.2.2 (1), Nonsafety-Related SSCs Directly Connected to Safety-Related SSCs, the applicant stated, in part, For nonsafety-related SSCs directly connected to safety-related SSCs, components within the scope of license renewal include the connected piping and supports up to and including the first seismic or equivalent anchor beyond the safety-nonsafety interface, or up to a point determined by alternative bounding criteria.
Issue:
On drawing LRA-M-2271 (E-6) the staff could not locate seismic or equivalent anchors on nonsafety-related line M-3691 to safety-related valve F600, location E-6, or on the nonsafety-related line downstream of safety related valve F601, location E-6.
Request:
The staff requests the applicant to provide additional information to locate the seismic or equivalent anchors between the safety-nonsafety interface and the end of the 10 CFR 54.4(a)(2) scoping boundary.
RAI 2.3.3.17-2
Background:
LRA Section 2.1 describes the applicants scoping methodology, which specifies how systems or components were determined to be included within the scope of license renewal.
Issue:
One review method used by the staff is to confirm the inclusion of all components subject to an AMR by reviewing the results of the screening of components within the license renewal boundary. The staff noted, during its review of the drawings and locations, as supplied by the applicant, that continuations of piping within the scope of license renewal could not be located; therefore, acceptable scoping of SSCs could not be verified. Drawing LRA-M-2271 (E-3) has a within scope continuation To Service Building. A drawing continuation is not provided for this continuation downstream of valve F187.
Request:
The staff requests the applicant to provide sufficient information to locate the license renewal boundary. If the continuation cannot be shown on license renewal boundary drawings, then provide additional information describing the extent of the scoping boundary and verify whether or not there are additional component types subject to an AMR between the continuation and the termination of the scoping boundary. If the scoping classification of a section of the piping changes over the continuation, provide additional information to clarify the change in scoping classification.
RAI 2.3.3.17-3
Background:
LRA Section 2.1 describes the applicants scoping methodology, which specifies how systems or components were determined to be included within the scope of license renewal.
Issue:
One review method used by the staff is to confirm the inclusion of all components subject to an AMR by reviewing the results of the screening of components within the license renewal boundary. The staff noted, during its review of the drawings and locations (indicated in the table below) as supplied by the applicant, that continuations of piping within the scope of license renewal could not be located; therefore, acceptable scoping of SSCs could not be verified.
License Renewal Boundary Drawing Number & Location Continuation Issue LRA-M-2017-1A, location D-5 Has within scope continuation to drawing M-3804. Drawing M-3804 was not provided.
LRA-M-2017-2, location G-1 Has within scope continuation to drawing I-2181-2. Drawing I-2182-2 was not provided.
LRA-M-2017-2, location H-7 Has within scope continuation to the off-gas O2 analyzer. Drawing continuation is not provided for the continuation to the off-gas O2 analyzer.
Request:
The staff requests the applicant to provide sufficient information to locate the license renewal boundary. If the continuation cannot be shown on license renewal boundary drawings, then provide additional information describing the extent of the scoping boundary and verify whether or not there are additional component types subject to an AMR between the continuation and the termination of the scoping boundary. If the scoping classification of a section of the piping changes over the continuation, provide additional information to clarify the change in scoping classification.
RAI-2.3.3.17-4
Background:
LRA Section 2.1 describes the applicants scoping methodology, which specifies how systems or components were determined to be included within the scope of license renewal.
Issue One review method used by the staff is to confirm the inclusion of all components subject to an AMR by reviewing the results of the screening of components within the license renewal boundary. The staff noted, during its review of drawings, as supplied by the applicant, that continuations of piping within the scope of license renewal could not be located. Drawing LRA-I-2400-10, locations C-3, G-6, and D-6, has three within scope continuations to drawing 6I721-2400-11. Drawing 6I721-2400-11 was not provided.
Request:
The staff requests the applicant to provide sufficient information to locate the license renewal boundary. If the continuation cannot be shown on license renewal boundary drawings, then provide additional information describing the extent of the scoping boundary and verify whether or not there are additional component types subject to an AMR between the continuation and the termination of the scoping boundary. If the scoping classification of a section of the piping changes over the continuation, provide additional information to clarify the change in scoping classification.
RAI 2.3.3.17-5
Background:
In LRA Section 2.1.1.2.2 (1), Nonsafety-Related SSCs Directly Connected to Safety-Related SSCs, the applicant stated, in part, For nonsafety-related SSCs directly connected to safety-related SSCs, components within the scope of license renewal include the connected piping and supports up to and including the first seismic or equivalent anchor beyond the safety-nonsafety interface, or up to a point determined by alternative bounding criteria.
Issue:
On drawing LRA-M-4100 the staff could not locate seismic or equivalent anchors on nonsafety-related lines attached to safety-related valves F601 (location F-8), F603 (location D-6), F605 (location G-6), and F607 (location E-8).
Request:
The staff requests the applicant to provide additional information to locate the seismic or equivalent anchors between the safety-nonsafety interfaces and the end(s) of the 10 CFR 54.4(a)(2) scoping boundary.
RAI 2.3.3.17-7
Background:
LRA Section 2.1 describes the applicants scoping methodology, which specifies how systems or components were determined to be included within the scope of license renewal.
Issue:
One review method used by the staff is to confirm the inclusion of all components subject to an AMR by reviewing the results of the screening of components within the license renewal boundary. The staff noted, during its review of drawings and locations (indicated in the table below) as supplied by the applicant, that continuations of piping within the scope of license renewal could not be located; therefore, acceptable scoping of SSCs could not be verified.
License Renewal Boundary Drawing Number & Location Continuation Issue LRA-M-4100, location E-3 Drawing LRA-M-4100, location E-3, has a within scope continuation to drawing I-2400-03, location D-3. Drawing I-2400-03 was not provided.
LRA-M-2008-1, location B-7 Drawing LRA-M-2008-1, location B-7, has a within scope continuation to drawing I-2400-06, locations D-4 and D-5. Drawing I-2400-06 was not provided.
Request:
The staff requests the applicant to provide sufficient information to locate the license renewal boundary. If the continuation cannot be shown on license renewal boundary drawings, then provide additional information describing the extent of the scoping boundary and verify whether or not there are additional component types subject to an AMR between the continuation and the termination of the scoping boundary. If the scoping classification of a section of the piping changes over the continuation, provide additional information to clarify the change in scoping classification.
RAI 2.3.3.17-8
Background:
LRA Section 2.1 describes the applicants scoping methodology, which specifies how systems or components were determined to be included within the scope of license renewal.
Issue:
One review method used by the staff is to confirm the inclusion of all components subject to an AMR by reviewing the results of the screening of components within the license renewal boundary. On drawing LRA-M-2008, location C-6, the scoping boundary ends at valves F847 and F848.
Request:
The staff requests the applicant to provide additional information to clarify why lines 3314 and 3312 downstream of valves F847 and F848 are not within the scope of license renewal.
RAI 2.3.3.17-9
Background:
LRA Section 2.1 describes the applicants scoping methodology, which specifies how systems or components were determined to be included within the scope of license renewal.
Issue:
The staff confirms the inclusion of all components subject to an AMR by reviewing the results of the screening of components within the license renewal boundary. On license renewal drawing LRA-M-2008-1 (D-2) the bus cooler (S1200B001) is not subject to an AMR. Similar components are included within the scope of license renewal and subject to an AMR.
Request:
The staff requests the applicant to provide additional information to clarify why bus cooler S1200B001 is not subject to an AMR as are other coolers on drawing LRA-M-2008-1.