ML15051A507

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Summary of Telecom Drai Sets 4, 5 and 6 - November 14 2014
ML15051A507
Person / Time
Site: Fermi DTE Energy icon.png
Issue date: 03/19/2015
From: Melendez-Colon D
Division of License Renewal
To:
DTE Electric Company
Melendez-Colon D, 415-3301
References
DLR-15-0117, TAC MF4222
Download: ML15051A507 (12)


Text

UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. 20555-0001 March 19, 2015 LICENSEE: DTE Electric Company FACILITY: Fermi 2

SUBJECT:

SUMMARY

OF TELEPHONE CONFERENCE CALL HELD ON NOVEMBER 14, 2014, BETWEEN THE U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION AND DTE ELECTRIC COMPANY, CONCERNING DRAFT REQUESTS FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION IN SETS 4, 5, AND 6, PERTAINING TO THE FERMI 2 LICENSE RENEWAL APPLICATION (TAC NO. MF4222)

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC or the staff) and representatives of DTE Electric Company (DTE or the applicant) held a telephone conference call on November 14, 2014, to discuss and clarify the staffs draft requests for additional information (D-RAIs) 2.3.3.2-2, 2.3.3.14-1, 2.3.3.16-1, 2.3.3.17-3, 2.3.3.17-5, 2.3.3.17-7, 2.3.4.3-5, and 2.3.4.3-6 concerning the Fermi 2 license renewal application. The telephone conference call was useful in clarifying the intent of the staffs D-RAIs. provides a listing of the participants and Enclosure 2 contains the D-RAIs discussed with the applicant, including a brief description on the status of each item.

The applicant had an opportunity to comment on this summary.

/RA/

Daneira Meléndez-Colón, Project Manager Projects Branch 1 Division of License Renewal Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Docket No. 50-341

Enclosures:

1. List of Participants
2. Summary of Telephone Conference Call cc w/encls: Listserv

ML15051A507 *concurred via email OFFICE LA:RPB1:DLR PM:RPB1:DLR PM:RPB1:DLR BC:RPB1:DLR PM:RPB1:DLR NAME YEdmonds DMeléndez-Colón JDaily YDiaz-Sanabria DMeléndez-Colón DATE 3/2/15 3/17/15 3/17/15 3/19/15 3/20/15 TELEPHONE CONFERENCE CALL FERMI 2 LICENSE RENEWAL APPLICATION LIST OF PARTICIPANTS November 14, 2014 PARTICIPANTS AFFILIATIONS Daneira Meléndez-Colón U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC)

Edward Smith NRC Lynne Goodman DTE Electric Company (DTE)

Kevin Lynn DTE Alan Cox Entergy Andy Taylor Entergy Steve Clair Entergy ENCLOSURE 1

SUMMARY

OF TELEPHONE CONFERENCE CALL FERMI 2 LICENSE RENEWAL APPLICATION November 14, 2014 The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC or the staff) and representatives of DTE Electric Company held a telephone conference call on November 14, 2014, to discuss and clarify the following draft requests for additional information (D-RAIs) concerning the license renewal application (LRA).

D-RAI 2.3.3.2-2

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-N-2082 (F-3) the staff could not locate a seismic or equivalent anchor on nonsafety-related line M-3584 continued from drawing LRA-M-2678 and the plant air system to safety-related storage tank (C4101A001).

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.

Discussion:

The applicant noted a minor error. The staff agreed to revise the sentence as follows:

  • Delete N from drawing number. Change made.

D-RAI 2.3.3.14-1

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 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 the continuation of piping within ENCLOSURE 2

the scope of license renewal could not be located; therefore, acceptable scoping of SSCs could not be verified.

License Renewal Boundary Drawing Continuation Issue Number & Location LRA-M-2032, locations G-7 and G-4 Drawings indicated by REF-1 and REF-8 at location G-7 and REF-8 and REF-18 at location G-4 do not provide sufficient information to located license renewal boundary.

LRA-M-2032, location D-2 Continuation from drawings M-2259 and M-4797, drawings not provided.

LRA-M-20032-1, location D-4 Continuation not provided for origin of M-2547 to Radwaste Building Equipment Drains Sump and Pumps LRA-M-2223, locations B-6 and B-7 Continuations of five lines from drawings M-2048 and M-2833. Drawings M-2048 and M-2833 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.

Discussion:

The applicant noted some minor errors. The staff agreed to revise the sentence as follows:

  • Delete one 0 from LRA-M-20032-1. Change made.
  • Change Radwaste Building Equipment Drains Sump Pumps to Turbine Building Equipment Drains. Change made.

D-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 Continuation Issue Number & Location 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-2036-05 Location (C-6), and I2346-08 (location C-6). Drawings not provided.

LRA-M-2002, Locations F-7, H-7, E-6, and Six within scope 10 CFR 54.4(a)(2) drain F-5 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 E-5 Four within scope 10 CFR 54.4 continuing 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 Four within scope 10 CFR 54.4(a)(2) lines to F-6 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.

Discussion:

The applicant noted some minor errors. The staff agreed to revise the sentence as follows:

  • I-2036-05 Location (C-6) should be I-2336-05 location C-6. Change made.
  • I2346-08 (location C-6) should be I-2346-08 location D-6. Change made.
  • LRA-M-2002 locations E-4 and E-5 should be LRA-M-2002 locations E-4 and F-5.

Change made.

D-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 Continuation Issue Number & Location 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 B-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.

Discussion:

The applicant noted a minor error. The staff agreed to revise the sentence as follows:

  • LRA-M-2017-2, location B-7 should be LRA-M-2017-2, location H-7. Change made.

D-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-MA-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.

Discussion:

The applicant noted a minor error. The staff agreed to revise the sentence as follows:

  • LRA-MA-4100 should be LRA-M-4100. Change made.

D-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 in 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 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 Continuation Issue Number & Location 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, 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.

Discussion:

The applicant noted some minor errors. The staff agreed to revisions as follows:

  • LRA-M-4100, location E-3 is the same as draft RAI 2.3.3.17-6. Draft RAI 2.3.3.17-6 will not be issued.
  • LRA-M-2008, location B-7 should be LRA-M-2008-1, location B-7. Change made.

D-RAI 2.3.4.3-5

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 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 Continuation Issue Number & Location LRA-M-2003, location F-4 Drawing LRA-M-2003 (F-4) has a within scope 10 CFR 54.4(a)(2) line continuing to drawing LRA-M-4504-1. Drawing LRA-M-4504-1 was not provided.

LRA-M-2003, locations E-5 and F-5 Drawing LRA-M-2003 (E-5 and F-5) has a within scope 10 CFR 54.4(a)(2) line continuing to drawing I-2314-03 (H-3).

Drawing I-2314-03 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.

Discussion:

The applicant noted a minor error. The staff agreed to revise the sentence as follows:

  • LRA-M-4504-1 should be M-4504-1. Change made.

D-RAI 2.3.4.3-6

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 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 Continuation Issue Number & Location LRA-I-2336-05, locations C-2, E-4, E-5, and Drawing LRA-I-2336-05 has four within scope E-6 10 CFR 54.4(a)(2) lines to drawings M-2165 and I-2334-20. Drawings M-2165 and I-2334-20 were not provided.

LRA-I-2336-06, locations B-7 and B-8 Drawing LRA-I-2336-06 (B-7 and B-8) has two within scope 10 CFR 54.4(a)(2) lines continuing to drawing I-2333-07. Drawing I-2333-07 was not provided.

LRA-I-2336-26, location E-4 Drawing LRA-I-2336-26 (E-4) has a within scope 10 CFR 54.4(a)(2) line continuing to drawing I-2334-05. Drawing I-2334-05 was not provided.

LRA-M-2336-26, location D-4 Drawing LRA-M-2336-26 (D-4) has an 8-inch-diameter 10 CFR 54.4(a)(2) line continuing from an unspecified drawing (and location) with a note From Guard Piping.

LRA-M-2346-05, location E-7 Drawing LRA-M-2346-05 (E-7) has a within scope 10 CFR 54.4(a)(2) line continuing to drawing I-2346-06. Drawing I-2346-06 was not provided.

License Renewal Boundary Drawing Continuation Issue Number & Location LRA-M-2346-05, locations F-4, E-4, and D-4 Drawing LRA-M-2346-05 has three10 CFR 54.4(a)(2) lines continuing to unspecified drawings with notes To Portable Drum, To Main Oil Tank, and To Waste Oil Tank, respectively.

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.

Discussion:

The applicant noted some minor errors. The staff agreed to revise the sentences as follows:

  • LRA-M-2336-26 should be LRA-I-2336-26. Change made.
  • LRA-M-2346-05 should be LRA-I-2346-05. Change made.

The applicant requested 5 weeks (35 days) to respond to this request. The RAIs will be issued as revised.

SUBJECT:

SUMMARY

OF TELEPHONE CONFERENCE CALL HELD ON NOVEMBER 14, 2014, BETWEEN THE U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION AND DTE ELECTRIC COMPANY, CONCERNING DRAFT REQUESTS FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION 2.3.3.2-2, 2.3.3.14-1, 2.3.3.16-1, 2.3.3.17-3, 2.3.3.17-5, 2.3.3.17-7, 2.3.4.3-5, AND 2.3.4.3-6 PERTAINING TO THE FERMI 2 LICENSE RENEWAL APPLICATION (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 E. Keegan B. Wittick D. McIntyre, OPA B. Harris, OGC D. Roth, OGC M. Kunowski, RIII B. Kemker, RIII V. Mitlyng, RIII P. Chandrathil, RIII C. Lipa, RIII S. Sheldon, RIII