NL-13-127, 10 CFR 50.59(d) Report for Indian Point Energy Center Unit 3

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
10 CFR 50.59(d) Report for Indian Point Energy Center Unit 3
ML13281A787
Person / Time
Site: Indian Point Entergy icon.png
Issue date: 09/30/2013
From: Robert Walpole
Entergy Nuclear Operations
To:
Document Control Desk, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
NL-13-127
Download: ML13281A787 (6)


Text

Indian Point Energy Center 450 Broadway, GSB v--- Enterg '~~'En ~Buchanan, P.O. Box 249 N.Y. 10511-0249 Robert Walpole Manager, Licensing Tel 914 254 6710 NL-13-127 September 30, 2013 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission ATTN: Document Control Desk 11545 Rockville Pike, TWFN-2F1 Rockville, MD 20852-2738

Subject:

10 CFR 50.59(d) Report for Indian Point Eneray Center Unit No. 3 Indian Point Unit No. 3 Docket No. 50-286 License No. DPR-64

Dear Sir or Madam:

Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.59 (d)(2), please find in Attachment 1 a 50.59 report listing and summary report of the changes, tests and experiments implemented at Indian Point Unit 3 between April 8, 2011 and March 31, 2013, and or utilized in support of the UFSAR update.

The 50.59 Evaluations set forth in the report represent the changes in the facilities, changes in procedures, and tests and experiments implemented pursuant to 10 CFR 50.59. provides a summary of these evaluations implemented for the period defined above.

There are no new commitments made by Entergy contained in this letter. If you have any questions, please contact me at (914) 254-6710.

Sincerely, RW/as - 50.59 Report Listing - 50.59 Summary of Changes, Tests and Experiments cc: see next page

NL-13-127 Docket No. 50-286 Page 2 of 2 cc: Mr. Douglas Pickett, Senior Project Manager, NRC NRR DORL Mr. William Dean, Regional Administrator, NRC Region 1 Ms. Bridget Frymire, New York State Department of Public Service Mr. Francis J. Murray, Jr., President & CEO, NYSERDA NRC Resident Inspector's Office

ATTACHMENT 1 TO NL-13-127 50.59 REPORT LISTING ENTERGY NUCLEAR OPERATIONS, INC.

INDIAN POINT NUCLEAR GENERATING UNIT NO. 3 DOCKET NO. 50-286

Docket No. 50-286 NL-13-127 Attachment 1 Page 1 of 1 50.59 REPORT LISTING 50.59 EVALUATION NUMBER Rev. No. Unit 3 - 2011 Report 50.59 EVALUATION TITLE 12-3001-00-EVAL 0 Replacing the PIPEFLOW Hydraulic Analysis Computer Program with a New Hydraulic Analysis Computer Program for Analyzing Design Basis Service Water System Performance

ATTACHMENT 2 TO NL-1 3-127 50.59

SUMMARY

OF CHANGES, TESTS AND EXPERIMENTS ENTERGY NUCLEAR OPERATIONS, INC.

INDIAN POINT NUCLEAR GENERATING UNIT NO. 3 DOCKET NO. 50-286

Docket No. 50-286 NL-13-127 Attachment 2 Page 1 of 1 50.59 Summary of Changes, Tests and Experiments 50.59 Evaluation Rev. No. TITLE No.

12-3001-00-EVAL 0 Replacing the PIPEFLOW Hydraulic Analysis Computer Program with a New Hydraulic Analysis Computer Program for Analyzing Design Basis Service Water System Performance Brief Description of the Change, Test or Experiment:

As described in UFSAR Section 9.6.1, the PIPEFLOW hydraulic analysis computer program is currently being used to demonstrate design function of the service water system under various postulated design basis configurations. The proposed activity is to use another hydraulic analysis computer program (PROTO-FLO) in place of the PIPEFLOW hydraulic analysis computer program. This activity requires evaluation under 10 CFR 50.59 to determine if using another hydraulic analysis computer program in place of PIPEFLOW is a departure from a method of evaluation described in the UFSAR.

Summary of the associated 10 CFR 50.59 Evaluation The 50.59 Evaluation determined that use of the PROTO-FLO computer program in place of the PIPEFLOW computer program is not a departure from a method of evaluation since it was shown that both computer programs use the same calculational methodology (framework); that is, both programs solve the same set of equations to obtain flow rate and pressure at each node point in the service water system hydraulic model. The programs differ in the use of pipe and fitting resistance coefficients and by the numerical analysis used to solve the system of equations. However, this is simply a change to one or more elements of the method of evaluation that yielded predicted flows that are essentially the same of more conservative. The change was also shown to be within the constraints and limitations of the original IP3 operating license 1973 AEC SER (including Supplements 1 & 2), and the 1989 NRC SER that approved the use of limited size breaks in the IP3 service water system. Therefore, use of the PROTO-FLO computer program in place of the PIPEFLOW computer program does not require prior NRC approval.