NOC-AE-05001883, Response to a Request for Additional Information Regarding the 60 Day Response to Bulletin 2003-01: Potential Impact of Debris Blockage on Emergency Sump Recirculation at Pressurize

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Response to a Request for Additional Information Regarding the 60 Day Response to Bulletin 2003-01: Potential Impact of Debris Blockage on Emergency Sump Recirculation at Pressurize
ML052000279
Person / Time
Site: South Texas  STP Nuclear Operating Company icon.png
Issue date: 07/13/2005
From: Jordan T
South Texas
To:
Document Control Desk, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
BL-03-001, NOC-AE-05001883, STI: 31880802, TAC MB9615, TAC MB9616
Download: ML052000279 (4)
v • d • e


Text

Nuclear Operating Company SoGrh P0. Bar 289 Thdsw.pnls Tciz 77483 _______ _ TCJ35PctknbSLstion July 13, 2005 NOC-AE-05001883 10CFR50.54(f)

U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Attention: Document Control Desk One White Flint North 11555 Rockville Pike Rockville, MD 20852 South Texas Project Units 1 & 2 Docket Nos. STN 50-498, STN 50-499 Response to a Request for Additional Information Regarding the 60 Day Response to Bulletin 2003-01: "Potential Impact of Debris Blockage on Emergency Sump Recirculation at Pressurized-Water Reactors (TAC Nos. MB9615 and MB9616)

References:

1. Letter, Thomas J. Jordan to NRC Document Control Desk, "60-day response to NRC Bulletin 2003-01," dated August 7, 2003 (NOC-AE-03001569)
2. Letter, Thomas J. Jordan to NRC Document Control Desk, "Request for additional Information Regarding Bulletin 2003-01, Potential Impact of Debris Blockage on Emergency Sump Recirculation at Pressurized-Water Reactors Dated November 11, 2004 (NOC-AE-04001793). of this letter is in response to a request for additional information from the NRC staff regarding the STP Nuclear Operating Company's 60 Day Response to Bulletin 2003-01.

There are no commitments contained in this letter.

If there are any questions regarding this response, please contact Scott Head at (361) 972-7136 or me at (361) 972-7902.

I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct.

Executed on J,)t 13 r an Vice President, Engineering jaV Attachmentl: Response to a Request for Additional Information Regarding the 60 Day Response to Bulletin 2003-01.

STI: 31880802

NOC-AE-05001 883 Page 2 of 2 cc:

(paper copy) (electronic copy)

Bruce S. Mallett A. H. Gutterman, Esquire Regional Administrator, Region IV Morgan, Lewis & Bockius LLP U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 611 Ryan Plaza Drive, Suite 400 David H. Jaffe Arlington, Texas 76011-8064 U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Richard A. Ratliff Jon C. Wood Bureau of Radiation Control Cox Smith Matthews Texas Department of Health 1100 West 49th Street C. Kirksey Austin, TX 78756-3189 City of Austin Jeffrey Cruz J. J. Nesrsta U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission R. K. Temple P. O. Box 289, Mail Code: MN116 E. Alarcon Wadsworth, TX 77483 City of San Antonio C. M. Canady Jack A. Fusco City of Austin Michael A. Reed Electric Utility Department Texas Genco, LP 721 Barton Springs Road Austin, TX 78704

NOC-AE-05001 883 Attachment 1 Page 1 of 2 Response to a Request for Additional Information Regarding the 60 Day Response to Bulletin 2003-01: "Potential Impact of Debris Blockage on Emergency Sump Recirculation at Pressurized-Water Reactors

1. Has WOG COA A la been rejected by STP? (WOG COA A la is securing of one containment spray pump priorto recirculation).

STP Response:

STP has not rejected WOG COA Ala. STP is a three-train plant and has three Containment Spray (CS) Pumps. Based on single failure criteria, one out of the three CS Pumps may be secured and still meet the current design basis.

Therefore, STP has revised the appropriate Emergency Operating Procedures (EOPs) accordingly. Specifically if a CS actuation occurs and all three CS pumps are in service, then the EOPs will allow one CS pump to be secured.

2. Has WOG COA A lb been rejected by STP? (WOG COA A lb is securingof more than one containment spray pump prior to recirculation).

STP Response:

With less than two trains of CS, STP cannot ensure that doses to control room operators will remain less than General Design Criteria (GDC) 19 limits for the Design Basis Loss of Cooling Accident (LOCA) with the current licensed technology.

Therefore, STP will not incorporate COA Alb.

3. In what way do STPEOPs "presentlyand adequately address reflllingthe RWST?"- upon loss ofrecirculationor only when sump cloggingoccurs?

(WOG COA A5- Refill ofRefueling Water Storage Tank).

STP Response:

STP currently refills the RWST when the loss of recirculation capability occurs. In addition, STP has revised the "TRANSFER TO COLD LEG RECIRCULATION" procedure to commence refilling the RWST after verification of proper swap over to cold leg recirculation.

NOC-AE-05001 883 Attachment 1 Page 2 of 2

4. In what way does STPaddress WOG COA A6 6nject More than one RWST volume froma refilledRWSTorbybypassing the RWST?'

STP Response:

STP has the guidance to inject more than one RWST volume. The additional RWST total volume to be added will be coordinated with the Technical Support Center (TSC).

Text

Nuclear Operating Company SoGrh P0. Bar 289 Thdsw.pnls Tciz 77483 _______ _ TCJ35PctknbSLstion July 13, 2005 NOC-AE-05001883 10CFR50.54(f)

U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Attention: Document Control Desk One White Flint North 11555 Rockville Pike Rockville, MD 20852 South Texas Project Units 1 & 2 Docket Nos. STN 50-498, STN 50-499 Response to a Request for Additional Information Regarding the 60 Day Response to Bulletin 2003-01: "Potential Impact of Debris Blockage on Emergency Sump Recirculation at Pressurized-Water Reactors (TAC Nos. MB9615 and MB9616)

References:

1. Letter, Thomas J. Jordan to NRC Document Control Desk, "60-day response to NRC Bulletin 2003-01," dated August 7, 2003 (NOC-AE-03001569)
2. Letter, Thomas J. Jordan to NRC Document Control Desk, "Request for additional Information Regarding Bulletin 2003-01, Potential Impact of Debris Blockage on Emergency Sump Recirculation at Pressurized-Water Reactors Dated November 11, 2004 (NOC-AE-04001793). of this letter is in response to a request for additional information from the NRC staff regarding the STP Nuclear Operating Company's 60 Day Response to Bulletin 2003-01.

There are no commitments contained in this letter.

If there are any questions regarding this response, please contact Scott Head at (361) 972-7136 or me at (361) 972-7902.

I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct.

Executed on J,)t 13 r an Vice President, Engineering jaV Attachmentl: Response to a Request for Additional Information Regarding the 60 Day Response to Bulletin 2003-01.

STI: 31880802

NOC-AE-05001 883 Page 2 of 2 cc:

(paper copy) (electronic copy)

Bruce S. Mallett A. H. Gutterman, Esquire Regional Administrator, Region IV Morgan, Lewis & Bockius LLP U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 611 Ryan Plaza Drive, Suite 400 David H. Jaffe Arlington, Texas 76011-8064 U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Richard A. Ratliff Jon C. Wood Bureau of Radiation Control Cox Smith Matthews Texas Department of Health 1100 West 49th Street C. Kirksey Austin, TX 78756-3189 City of Austin Jeffrey Cruz J. J. Nesrsta U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission R. K. Temple P. O. Box 289, Mail Code: MN116 E. Alarcon Wadsworth, TX 77483 City of San Antonio C. M. Canady Jack A. Fusco City of Austin Michael A. Reed Electric Utility Department Texas Genco, LP 721 Barton Springs Road Austin, TX 78704

NOC-AE-05001 883 Attachment 1 Page 1 of 2 Response to a Request for Additional Information Regarding the 60 Day Response to Bulletin 2003-01: "Potential Impact of Debris Blockage on Emergency Sump Recirculation at Pressurized-Water Reactors

1. Has WOG COA A la been rejected by STP? (WOG COA A la is securing of one containment spray pump priorto recirculation).

STP Response:

STP has not rejected WOG COA Ala. STP is a three-train plant and has three Containment Spray (CS) Pumps. Based on single failure criteria, one out of the three CS Pumps may be secured and still meet the current design basis.

Therefore, STP has revised the appropriate Emergency Operating Procedures (EOPs) accordingly. Specifically if a CS actuation occurs and all three CS pumps are in service, then the EOPs will allow one CS pump to be secured.

2. Has WOG COA A lb been rejected by STP? (WOG COA A lb is securingof more than one containment spray pump prior to recirculation).

STP Response:

With less than two trains of CS, STP cannot ensure that doses to control room operators will remain less than General Design Criteria (GDC) 19 limits for the Design Basis Loss of Cooling Accident (LOCA) with the current licensed technology.

Therefore, STP will not incorporate COA Alb.

3. In what way do STPEOPs "presentlyand adequately address reflllingthe RWST?"- upon loss ofrecirculationor only when sump cloggingoccurs?

(WOG COA A5- Refill ofRefueling Water Storage Tank).

STP Response:

STP currently refills the RWST when the loss of recirculation capability occurs. In addition, STP has revised the "TRANSFER TO COLD LEG RECIRCULATION" procedure to commence refilling the RWST after verification of proper swap over to cold leg recirculation.

NOC-AE-05001 883 Attachment 1 Page 2 of 2

4. In what way does STPaddress WOG COA A6 6nject More than one RWST volume froma refilledRWSTorbybypassing the RWST?'

STP Response:

STP has the guidance to inject more than one RWST volume. The additional RWST total volume to be added will be coordinated with the Technical Support Center (TSC).

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=NOC-AE-05001883,_Response_to_a_Request_for_Additional_Information_Regarding_the_60_Day_Response_to_Bulletin_2003-01:_Potential_Impact_of_Debris_Blockage_on_Emergency_Sump_Recirculation_at_Pressurize&oldid=2591916"