ML20236L301
| ML20236L301 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Wolf Creek  |
| Issue date: | 07/07/1998 |
| From: | Thomas K NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned) |
| To: | Maynard O WOLF CREEK NUCLEAR OPERATING CORP. |
| References | |
| TAC-M98738, NUDOCS 9807100304 | |
| Download: ML20236L301 (8) | |
Text
July 7. 1998 Mr. Otto L. M:yn:rd Presid:nt end Chlaf Executiva Officer
- Wolf Creek Nuclear Operating' Corporation -
. Post Office Box 411 Burlington, Kansas 66839
SUBJECT:
- " REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ON THE PROPOSED CONVERSION TO THE IMPROVED STANDARD TECHNICAL
- SPECIFICATIONS FOR WOLF CREEK NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION, UNIT NO.1 (TAC N.O. M98738).
Dear Mr. Maynard:
. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff is reviewing the Wolf Creek Nuclear Operating Corporation's proposed license amendment to convert the current technical specifications for
- Wolf Creek Nuclear Generating Station, Unit No.'1 to the improved Standard T6chnical Specifications. Wolf Creek Nuclear Operating Corporation provided their proposed license
' amendment request by letter dated May 15,.1997.'
The staff has reviewed selected portions of the application. Based on its review, the staff has determined that additional information is needed in Section 2.0, Safety Limits and Section 3.0, s Limiting Condition for Operation Applicability / Surveillance Requirement Applicability, as
. discussed in the enclosure. Since you worked with three other utilities'in preparing your
- submittal, the enclosure contair.s the. request for additional information (RAI) questions for all four utilities. However, you need only reply to the RAI questions associated with the Wolf Creek Nuclear Generating Station Unit No; 1 as identified in the table within the enclosure.
To assist the sta# in maintaining its review schedule, please respond to the questions
, pertaining to Wolf Creek. Nuclear Generating' Station, Unit No.1 within 30 days of the date
. of this' letter.- If you have any quesuons regarding the RAI, please contact me at -
.(301)415-1362. If all four utilities would like to have a common discussion, a single
-meeting, or phone call, it can be coordinated by contacting the NRR Lead Project Manager,
- Timothy J. Polich at (301) 415-1038.
Sincerely,.
Original Signed By f
Kristine M. Thomas, Project Manager Project Directorate IV-2
[
Division of Reactor Projects lil/lV Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Docket No. 50-482 DISTRIBUTION:
Docket OGC Ehclosnre: Request for AdditionalInformation PUBLIC ACRS PDIV-2 Reading PGwynn, RIV -
EAdensam (EGA1)- WJohnson, RIV ccw/ encl:.See next page.
WBateman f
KThomas
.WBeckner EPeyton j<
Document Name: WCITS.RAI JLuehman -
l L~
OI C '-
PD4-2 PD4-2 TSB (400 EN
'WBeckner-NAME -
KTh s
L DATEJ 7 /~) / 98 '
7 ~ "o / 98 7/ 7/98 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY DR l-
r t,
Mr. Otto L. Maynard July 7,1998 l
cc w/ encl:
t Jay Silberg, Esq.
Chief Operating Officer Shaw, Pittman, Potts & Trowbridge Wolf Creek Nuclear Operating Corporation
' 2300 N Street, NW P. O. Box 411 Washington, D.C. 20037 Burlington, Kansas 66839 Regional Administrator, Region IV Supervisor Licensing U.S. Nucionr Regulatory Commission Wolf Creek Nuclear Operating Corporation 611 Ryan Plaza Drive, Suite 1000 P.O. Box 411 Arlington, Texas 76011 Buriington, Kansas 66839 Senior Resident inspector U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Resident inspectors Office P. O. Box 311 8201 NRC Road Builington, Kansas 66839 Steedman, Missouri 65077-1032 Chief Engineer Utilities Division Kansas Corporation Commission 1500 SW Arrowhead Road Topeka, Kansas 66604-4027 Office of the Govemor State of Kansas Topeka, Kansas 66612 i
Attorney General l
Judicial Center 301 S.W.10th 2nd Floor Topeka, Kansas 66612 County Clerk I
Coffey County Courthouse
'j Burlington, Kansas 66839 Vick L. Cooper, Chief Radiation Control Program i
Kansas Department of Health and Environment Bureau of Air and Radiation j
forbes Field Building 283 Topeka, Kansas 66620 l
e FOUR LOOP GROUP (FLOG) IMPROVED TS REVIEW COMMENTS SECTION 2.0 - SAFETY LIMITS 2.0 1 NUREG-1431 Bases (markup)
B 2.1.1 Reactor Core SLs (Callaway [page B 2.0-1))
Comment: The BACKGROUND uses the acronym DNBR. The licensee should include
" departure from nucleate bolling ratio" first and then use the acronym DNBR.
FLOG Response:
2.0 2 NUREG-1431 Bases (markup)
B 2.1.1 Reactor Core SLs (Callaway and Coman::he Peak [pages 2.0-3])
Comment: The SAFETY LIMITS tefer te Figure B 1.1.1-1. This figurs was not included in the B 2.1.1 markup of NUREG-1431. Provide Figure B 1.1.1-1.
FLOG Response:
2.0-3 NUREG-1431 Bascs (markup)
B 2.1.2 RCS Pressure SL (All FLGG Plants [Callaway and Diablo Canyon [page B 2.0-8), Comanche Peak [pcge B 2.0-7), and Wolf Creek [page B 2.0-9))
Comment: The APPLICABLE SAFETY ANALYSES has been revised to include,"...The l
transient that establishes the required relief capacity, and hence valve size requirements and lift
. settings, is a ;;mpl :: lc;;; cf sicm;; l;;d turbine trip without a direct reactor trip. Cases with l
and without pressurizer spray and PORVs are analyzed. Cuda;; th; t;=:=, n; ant /
- en
- ; em nam;d, se
- p
- th;t th; Safety valves on the secondary plant side are assumed to open when the steam pressure reaches the seeendefy-plant safety valve settings, endmminel L
Main feedwater supply is m;;,;;:ned. lost at the.tirne of turbine trip.
Justify the revised STS Bases 2.1.2 changes.
FLOG Response:
V
' 2.0 4 NURGE-1431 Bases (markup)'
{
B 2.1.1 Reactor Core SLs (Diablo Canyon [page B 2.0-3])
l Comment: In the SAFETY LIMIT VIOLATIONS the licensee needs to correct,
- following SL violation responses are applicable to the reactor core Sa..."
FLOG Response:
l 2.0-5 '
NUREG-1431 Bases (markup)
B 2.1.1 Reactor Core SLs (Diablo Canyon [pages B 2.0-7, B 2.0-8, and B 2c0-9])
Comment: The header markup of Diablo Canyon B 2.1.1 Reactor Core SLs (pages B 2.0-7, B 2.0-8, and B 2.0-9) are incorrect. Corect the header for these pages to "RCS Pressure SL, B l
2.1.2."
FLOG Response:
'h 2.0-6 NUREG-1431 Bases (markup)
B 2.1.2 REC Pressure SL (Wolf Creek [page B 2.0-9])
. Comment: The APPLICABILITY states that,"...The SL is not applicable in MODE 6 because of th; r;;;';r v;;;;l h;;d ;l0;ur; tdt; er; n;; fully i,ht;ned the plant conditions making it I
l unlikely ; hat the RCS can be pressurized. The basis of this change is CTS 1.0, Table 1.2 and l
- TSTF-88.~ TSTF-88 has not been approved. If TSTF-88 is not approved in time for the draft Safety Evaluation (SE) to be prepared, the B 2.1.2, RCS Pressure SL, APPLICABILITY change will not be included in the improved Technical Specifications (ITS). Justification must be provided for this change.
)
FLOG Response:
I l.
l l
)
+
c.
4 FLOG RAI APPLICABILITY TABLE FOR ITS SECTION 2.0 RAI#
CALLAWAY l
-COMANCHE DIABLO CANYON
' WOLF CREEK PEAK 12.0-1 X
2.0-2 X
X 2.0 3-X X
X X
2.0-4 X
2.0 X 2.0-6 X
x s
(1 1:
I L
h,:
I' FOUR LOOP GROUP (FLOG)1MPROVED TS REVIEW COMMENTS i
l SECTION 3.0 - LIMITING CONDITIONS FOR OPERATION APPLICABILITY /
l SURVEILt.ANCE REQUIREMENT APPLICABILITY j
l l
3.0 1 L
ITS SR 3.0.3 CTS SR 4.0.3 (All FLOG Plants) 00C 1-20-A
)
l
{
Comment: The CTS Markups of CTS SR 4.0.3 for all FLOG plants do not accurately reflect j
the ITS end product, SR 3.0 3 (ITS 3 0.3 is compatible with the STS and acceptable). Cor.ect j
CTS Markup, or revise ITS Markup and provide justification.
1 FLOG Response:
1 I
l 3.0-2 l
ITS SR 3.4.13.2 / Administrative Controls Section 5.5.9 CTS 4.0.6.4a (Comanche Peak) i DOC 1-15-A 1
l Comment: The ITS revises the wording of CTS 4.0.6.4a.8. Is this also applicable to the other
)
FLOG plants in which the location of this paragraph is CTS SR 3/4.4.5; is it generic?
l FLOG Response:
3.0-3 ITS LCO 3.0.5 Bases (All FLOG Plants)
Comment: The STS Bases has been revised to address "the performance of required testing" versus the " performance of SRs," to be consistent with the TS. Submit a TSTF to revise the STS. Suggest that the first instance this wording is to be revised to state,"the performance of required testing including applicable SRs," since testing to restore squipment to an operable state will frequently include the performance of SRs.
l FLOG Response:
i 3.0 4 ITS SR 3.0.2 Bases (All FLOG Plants)
Comment: Justify the revised STS SR 3.0.2 Bases. The STS provides an explanation for the p
inapplicability; the ITS does not.
FLOG Response:
1 l
~
' 3.0 5 ITS LCO 3.0.1 & 3.0.2 CTS 3.0.1 & 3.0.2 (All FLOG Plants)
DOC 1-01-A Comment: The markup of CTS 3.0.1 and 3.0.2 do not agree with the markup of STS LCO 3.0.1 and LCO 3.0.2. The markup of STS LCO 3.0.1 and 3.0.2 are correct. Revise the CTS markup.
FLOG Response:
3.0-6 ITS LCO 3.0.4 CTS 3.0.4 (All FLOG Plants)
DOC 1-02-LS1 Comment: The markup of CTS 3.0.4 coes not agree with the markup of STS LCO 3.0.4. The markup of STS LCO 3.0.4 is correct. Revise the CTS markup.
FLOG Response:
3.0 7 ITS LCO 3.0.4 C;ses (Diablo Canyon)
Comment: The redline / strikeout markup of the STS LCO 3.0.4 Bases is incorrect. Correct the markup of the STS LCO 3.0.4 Bases.
FLOG Response:
4 4
4 FLOG RAI APPLICABILITY TABLE FOR ITS SECTION 3.0 RAI #
DIABLO COMANCHE WOLF CREEK CALLAWAY CANYON PEAK 3.0-1 X
X X
X 3.0-2 X
3.0-3 X
X X
X 3.0-4 X
X X
X 3.0-5 X
X X
X 3.0-6 X
X X
X 3.0-7 X
i k