ML17090A244

Summary of February 28, 2017, Meeting with Northern States Power Company, Doing Business as Xcel Energy, on the Integrated Leak Rate Test License Amendment Request for Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant CAC No. MF7359)

ML17090A244
Person / Time
Site:	Monticello
Issue date:	04/06/2017
From:	Robert Kuntz Plant Licensing Branch III
To:	Northern States Power Company, Minnesota
Kuntz R
References
CAC MF7359
Download: ML17090A244 (4)

Text

UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. 20555-0001 April 6, 2017 LICENSEE: Northern States Power Company doing business as Xcel Energy FACILITY: Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant

SUMMARY

OF FEBRUARY 28, 2017, MEETING WITH NORTHERN STATES POWER COMPANY, DOING BUSINESS AS XCEL ENERGY, ON THE INTEGRATED LEAK RATE TEST LICENSE AMENDMENT REQUEST FOR MONTICELLO NUCLEAR GENERATING PLANT (CAC NO. MF7359)

On February 28, 2017, a Category 1 public meeting was held between the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) and representatives of Northern States Power Company doing business as Xcel Energy (NSPM, the licensee) via teleconference. The purpose of the meeting was to discuss the license amendment request (LAR) to extend the interval for the integrated leak rate test for the Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant (MNGP). The meeting notice dated February 24, 2017, is available in the Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS) at Accession No. ML17055A751. A list of attendees is enclosed.

The NRC staff queried the licensee on its most recent submittal dated February 7, 2017 (ADAMS Accession No. ML17039A673), which was submitted in response to the staff's request for additional information (RAI). Specifically, the NRC staff requested additional clarification on the following items:

1. The change in population dose and conditional containment failure probability provided in response to item 6a of the staff's RAI.

2. The contribution of the identified sequences to core damage frequency (CDF) and large early release (LERF) provided in response to item 6a of the staff's RAI.

3. The change in total CDF and LERF from internal and fire events provided in response to item 6a of the staff's RAI.

4. The "1LERF attributed to containment accident pressurization (CAP) that would result from an integrated leak rate test (ILRT) extension which was provided in response to item 6a of the staff's RAI.

5. The results of class 3 and 7 given in response to item 6a.

Specific to item 1 above, the NRC staff noted that the results provided in the response were as stated in the response, above the "very small" limit in Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) Topical Report (TR) 94-01, Revision 2, "Industry Guideline for Implementing Performance-Based Option of 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix J" and Electric Power Research Institute Report No. 1009325, Revision 2, August 2007, "Risk Impact Assessment Of Extended Integrated Leak Rate Testing Intervals" (ADAMS Accession No. ML053610177). The NRC staff noted that the February 7, 2017, letter provided additional consideration for these results. The NRC staff queried the licensee on if there are additional considerations beyond those described in the letter for the results above "very small." The licensee stated that as discussed in the letter there are conservatisms in the analysis that when considered renders the results within consideration consistent with the guidance in Nuclear Energy Institute 94-01.

Specific to item 2 above, the NRC staff requested that the licensee elaborate on how each of the relevant sequences contribute to the CDF and LERF in the response. The licensee stated that they did not have the numbers at hand, but could provide them given time. The NRC staff responded that if specific contributions were required for the staff's review, the staff would issue an RAI.

Specific to item 3 above, the NRC staff noted that the results for CDF and LERF in response to item 6a of the RAI are lower than provided in the LAR. The staff queried the licensee on how the revised results were less than provided in the LAR. The licensee stated that the reduction is attributed to refinement in the probabilistic risk assessment model.

Specific to item 4 above, the NRC staff queried the licensee as to why the L\CDF does not directly translate into L\LERF (i.e., given that the accident sequence of interest for an ILRT extension all assume containment failure, why don't those sequence that result in a change in CDF also result in a change to LERF). The licensee stated that given the reliance on CAP there are accident sequences that are delayed accident progression and, therefore, do not result in LERF.

Specific to item 5 above, the staff noted that the results for Categories 3 and 7 provided in response to items 4 and 6a were not consistent with typical ILRT extensions. The licensee clarified that the results were different because of the reliance on CAP at MNGP.

No members of the public were in attendance.

Robert F. Kuntz, S Plant Licensing Br Division of Operating Reactor Licensing Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Docket No. 50-263

Enclosures:

List of Attendees cc w/encls: Distribution via Listserv

LIST OF ATTENDEES FEBRUARY 28. 2017. PUBLIC TELECONFERENCE WITH NORTHERN STATES POWER COMPANY DOING BUSINESS AS XCEL ENERGY LICENSE AMENDMENT REQUEST TO EXTEND THE INTERVAL FOR INTEGRATED LEAK RATE TESTING FOR MONTICELLO NUCLEAR GENERATING PLANT Nuclear Regulatory Commission Staff Robert Kuntz Dan O'Neal Mihaela Biro Xcel Energy Katherine Brandtjen Rick Loeffler Timothy Wellumson Anne Ward Paul Young Joe Mathews Randy Garding Adam Stein Shane Jurek Licensee Contractor (Jensen Hughes)

Matthew Johnson Rick Anoba Justin Sattler Kelly Wright Enclosure

Meetim s ummarv ML17090A244 Meetina Notice ML17055A751 OFFICE NRR/DORL/LPL3/PM NRR/DORL/LPL3/LA N RR/DORL/LPL3/BC NRR/DORL/LPL3/PM NAME RKuntz SRohrer DWrona RKuntz DATE 4/6/17 4/4/17 4/6/17 4/6/17