ML16131A066

Summary of Telephone Conference Calls Held on February 10 and 25, 2016, Between U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission and DTE Electric Company Concerning Response to RAI 4.3.3-3a Pertaining to Fermi License Renewal Application

ML16131A066
Person / Time
Site:	Fermi
Issue date:	05/10/2016
From:	Lois James Division of License Renewal
To:	Polson K DTE Electric Company
James J, NRR/DLR, 415-3306
References
TAC MF4222
Download: ML16131A066 (4)

Text

ML16131A066 *via email OFFICE PM:RPB1:DLR RARB:DLR DLR BC:RPB1:DLR PM:RPB1:DLR DMeléndez-Colón* YDiaz-Sanabria DMeléndez-Colón NAME CHovanec* AHiser*

RPlass for LJames for LJames for DATE 4/5/2016 3/29/2016 5/3/2016 5/10/2016 5/10/2016

TELEPHONE CONFERENCE CALLS FERMI 2 LICENSE RENEWAL APPLICATION LIST OF PARTICIPANTS FEBRUARY 10 AND FEBRUARY 25, 2016 PARTICIPANT AFFILIATION Daneira Meléndez-Colón U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC)

Allen Hiser NRC Christopher Hovanec NRC Lynne Goodman DTE Electric Company (DTE)

Kevin Lynn DTE Whitney Hemingway DTE Enclosure 2

SUMMARY

OF TELEPHONE CONFERENCE CALLS FERMI 2 LICENSE RENEWAL APPLICATION FEBRUARY 10 AND FEBRUARY 25, 2016 The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC or the staff) and representatives of DTE Electric Company (DTE or the applicant) held two telephone conference calls on February 10 and February 25, 2016, to discuss and clarify the applicants response to request for additional information (RAI) 4.3.3-3a concerning the Fermi 2 license renewal application (LRA).

Background:

By letter dated January 22, 2016, the applicant provided its response to RAI 4.3.3-3a. In this letter, the applicant stated that there were six locations where average transient temperatures were used to calculate Fen factors. The Fen factors for five of the six locations were recalculated to become consistent with the guidance in NUREG/CR-6909. The remaining location (Core P Nozzle) was already consistent with the guidance in NUREG/CR-6909. The feedwater nozzles were one of the five locations for which the Fen factor was recalculated. The feedwater nozzles have carbon steel, low alloy steel, and stainless steel locations subjected to EAF evaluation.

The Fen factor for the stainless steel feedwater nozzle location was originally determined using average transient temperatures. However, not all of the transients associated with the stainless steel location are simple transients; therefore, calculating an average temperature for this location is not consistent with the guidance in NUREG/CR-6909. The re-evaluation of the stainless steel location uses the maximum design temperature. Additionally, all three locations (carbon steel, low alloy steel, and stainless steel locations) of the feedwater nozzles were re-evaluated to treat the hot standby transient and RCIC injection as unique transients. The CUFen value for the stainless steel location was reduced from 6.37 to 5.55. The applicants response also stated that since the CUFen value still exceeds the limit of 1.0, after being recalculated, that it is expected that stress-based fatigue monitoring will be required for managing this location.

Based on the RAI response, the staff needed clarification regarding the general scope and application of the applicants stress-based fatigue monitoring method. Given the magnitude of the CUFen value for the stainless steel portion of the feedwater nozzles, the staff also sought clarification regarding assurance that the location would not enter the period of extended operation exceeding the limit of 1.0.

Discussion:

During a conference call held on February 10, 2016, the applicant and the staff discussed aspects of stress-based fatigue monitoring such as: magnitude of cycles, sequencing of cycles, and assumptions associated with the monitoring method. The timing for implementing the program was also discussed. The applicant stated that it has committed (Commitment No. 12d) to implementing stress-based fatigue monitoring no later than September 20, 2024. The implementation date for this commitment is six months prior to entering the period of extended operation, ensuring that the stainless steel portion of the feedwater nozzles will not enter the ENCLOSURE 2

period of extended operation exceeding the limit of 1.0. The applicant also stated that it had not yet selected a contractor to develop its stress-based fatigue monitoring method, although it had provided a general description of the method that will be used in the February 12, 2015, letter and revised the Fatigue Monitoring AMP to include the method.

During a conference call held on February 25, 2016, the applicant and the staff further discussed aspects of the applicants stress-based fatigue monitoring method and its description provided in the February 12, 2015, letter. The staff stated that the description of the method was not included in the Fatigue Monitoring AMP or associated commitment. The applicant stated that it would include a general description of the monitoring method in the AMP, including the application of the recommendations of RIS 2008-30. The applicant and staff also discussed the availability of the applicants stress-based fatigue monitoring methodology and application for auditing.

The applicant stated that it understood the staff need for additional information and that it will provide the information through a supplement to the RAI. The staff stated that a supplement to the RAI will be adequate.