|
|
Line 2: |
Line 2: |
| | number = ML102030352 | | | number = ML102030352 |
| | issue date = 07/28/2010 | | | issue date = 07/28/2010 |
| | title = Crystal River Unit 3 Nuclear Generating Plant - Preliminary Review of Progress Energy'S 10 CFR 50.59 Evaluation | | | title = Nuclear Generating Plant - Preliminary Review of Progress Energy'S 10 CFR 50.59 Evaluation |
| | author name = Paige J C | | | author name = Paige J C |
| | author affiliation = NRC/NRR/DORL/LPLII-2 | | | author affiliation = NRC/NRR/DORL/LPLII-2 |
Revision as of 07:17, 13 April 2019
Letter Sequence Request |
---|
|
|
MONTHYEARML0933602292009-12-0404 December 2009 Summary of Meeting with Progress Energy on Crystal River Unit 3 Containment Building Concrete Delamination Project stage: Meeting ML1020801032009-12-10010 December 2009 E-mail from Caponiti, Kathleen to RidsNrrDorlLpl2-2 Resource; Et Al; Subject: Crystal River Unit 3 Nuclear Generating Plant- Summary of November 20, 2009, Meeting with Pgn Regarding the Crystal River Unit 3 Containment Building Concrete Del Project stage: Meeting ML1016601412010-06-17017 June 2010 Notice of Forthcoming Meeting with Progress Energy to Discuss Licensee'S Plans for Repairing the Containment at Crystal River, Unit 3 Project stage: Request ML1019405242010-06-30030 June 2010 2010 June 30 NRC Technical Meeting Project stage: Request ML1019003912010-07-0909 July 2010 Forthcoming Conference Call with Crystal River Unit 3 Nuclear Generating Plant - Progress Energy to Discuss the Licensee'S 10 CFR 50.59 Evaluation Project stage: Request ML1020303522010-07-28028 July 2010 Nuclear Generating Plant - Preliminary Review of Progress Energy'S 10 CFR 50.59 Evaluation Project stage: Request ML1020303412010-07-28028 July 2010 Nuclear Generating Plant - Preliminary Review of Progress Energy'S 10 CFR 50.59 Evaluation Project stage: Request ML1020903352010-08-17017 August 2010 Summary of June 30, 2010, Meeting with Progress Energy, on Containment Investigation and Repair Activities at Crystal River, Unit 3 Project stage: Meeting ML1022802912010-08-25025 August 2010 July 15, 2010, Summary of Conference Call with Florida Power Corporation on Nrc'S Preliminary Review of Florida Power Corporation'S 10 CFR 50.59 Evaluation Project stage: Approval ML13240A5012013-08-27027 August 2013 NRR E-mail Capture - Point Beach Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2 - Acceptance Review Regarding the NFPA-805 License Amendment Request Project stage: Acceptance Review 2010-07-28
[Table View] |
|
---|
Category:- No Document Type Applies
MONTHYEARML21288A4302021-10-18018 October 2021 Enclosure - Crystal River Unit 3 Nuclear Generating Plant - Correction to Safety Evaluation Related to the Issuance of Amendment No. 259 Approving the Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installation Only Emergency Plan ML12056A0522012-03-12012 March 2012 Enclosure 6 - List of Power Reactor Licensees and Holders of Construction Permits in Active or Deferred Status RA-11-025, Enclosure 1, Attachment 2 - Duke Energy Corporation and Progress Energy, Inc. Organization Charts Post Merger2011-09-0202 September 2011 Enclosure 1, Attachment 2 - Duke Energy Corporation and Progress Energy, Inc. Organization Charts Post Merger ML1116400572011-06-0707 June 2011 Public Meeting - Crystal River Nuclear Plant - Attendees 3F0311-07, Attachment B, Response to Request for Additional Information Required for the Development of the Confirmatory LOCA and Non-LOCA Models2011-03-15015 March 2011 Attachment B, Response to Request for Additional Information Required for the Development of the Confirmatory LOCA and Non-LOCA Models ML1027201382010-10-29029 October 2010 Williams Q&A - Request #3 Info-Pugh-PART 6 ML1027201152010-10-29029 October 2010 Williams Q&A- Request #3 Info-Pugh-PART 5 ML1029200682010-09-20020 September 2010 Ncr Number 358724, Assignment Number 23, Crystal River, Unit 3 Containment ML1029200642010-09-20020 September 2010 Petrographic Studies of Concrete for Construction Engineering Consultants ML1029205062010-09-20020 September 2010 Adverse Condition Investigation Form, CAP-NGGC-0200-3-18 ML1023504542010-08-18018 August 2010 P11 Company Background ML1020303412010-07-28028 July 2010 Nuclear Generating Plant - Preliminary Review of Progress Energy'S 10 CFR 50.59 Evaluation ML1020303522010-07-28028 July 2010 Nuclear Generating Plant - Preliminary Review of Progress Energy'S 10 CFR 50.59 Evaluation 3F0610-08, Pef Letter to FDEP NPDES Permit Renewal App CR 4 & 5 January 25, 20102010-06-28028 June 2010 Pef Letter to FDEP NPDES Permit Renewal App CR 4 & 5 January 25, 2010 ML1019303152010-06-0909 June 2010 Onsite Ground/Surface Water Monitoring Questionnaire for Crystal River ML1013200412010-05-12012 May 2010 Crystal River Public Meeting Attendees Sheet ML1010603282010-04-0909 April 2010 Talking Points ML1029903622010-03-0404 March 2010 6.1 Uneven Force Along Tendon ML1007504222010-03-0404 March 2010 Sgr Action Plan for Concrete Cracks ML1028709882010-01-11011 January 2010 5.4 Concrete Form Release ML1028710452010-01-0404 January 2010 6.2 Inadequate Tendon ML1028710472010-01-0101 January 2010 5.5 Exhibit 1 Permeability V w2c from Mehta ML1028710972010-01-0101 January 2010 5.5 Exhibit 2 Mix Design from Dome Repair ML1029202952009-11-27027 November 2009 Item 176 1992 Bs Event RB Temperature (4 Pages) ML1027203852009-11-0202 November 2009 Calculation S07-0033, Revision 0, NRC SIT Member Questions to Licensee (Request 43 Response Information, Attachment 2, Part 2 of 3 ML1027206552009-10-30030 October 2009 Williams Q&A - Request #24 - Q18 RFO14-IWE Exam ML1027208212009-10-30030 October 2009 Williams Q&A- Request #24 - Q18 RFO15-IWE Exam Liner UT ML1027208232009-10-30030 October 2009 Williams Q&A - Request #24 - Q18RFO15-IWE Exam Liner Containment Inspection ML1027300762009-10-30030 October 2009 WR 341602 6th-Surv.pdf ML1027201932009-10-29029 October 2009 Williams Q&A - Request #22 - Q16 Response ML1027201482009-10-29029 October 2009 Williams Q&A - Request #3 Info-Pugh-PART 7 ML1027201702009-10-29029 October 2009 Williams Q&A - Request #3 Info-Pugh-PART 8 ML1027302522009-10-29029 October 2009 Williams Q&A - Request #3 Info-Pugh-PART 4 ML1027201982009-10-28028 October 2009 Williams Q&A - Request #30 - Question 24 ML1029107252009-10-28028 October 2009 Interview Cliff Peters Gary Goetsch ML1029107542009-10-24024 October 2009 Interview Gary Goetsch ML1029107562009-10-23023 October 2009 Iwl of 10-25-09 ML1027202052009-10-22022 October 2009 NRC SIT Member Questions to Licensee (Request 42 Q36 Response Information) ML1007504152009-10-14014 October 2009 Update for 10/14/09 from Plant Issue Tracking Application ML1007502742009-10-0707 October 2009 Plant Issue Tracking, Crystal River Information for 10/7/09 ML1007504232009-10-0505 October 2009 Action Request: CR3 Sgr Hydrodemolition Exposed Cracks ML1013903992009-05-11011 May 2009 Attachment to E-mail from Paul Roberts, May 11, 2009, Questions on the Use of Carborundum Neutron Absorbing Material in the Spent Fuel Pool ML0914607852009-04-16016 April 2009 Utility Element and Generalized Future Land Use Map Received for Gary W. Maidhof, Dept Director, Dept of Development Services, Citrus County, Gov'T at April 16, 2009, Scoping Meeting in Crystal River, Fl ML1027103312009-02-0101 February 2009 Document CR-N1002-504, Revision 1, Final Report for the 30th Year Containment Iwl Inspection, Fm 6.5 Exhibit 6 ML0906404392009-01-28028 January 2009 Enclosure 5: Case Study 1: Structure of TS for Ultrasonic Flow Meters - Meeting Summary of the January 27 & 28 Meeting with Nrc/Tstf 3F0608-05, Response to Request for Additional Information Regarding Relief Requests 07-001-SS, Revision 0, Alternate Criteria for the Reactor Vessel Support Skirt to Perform Limited VT-3 Visual Examination on 3 Areas 120 Degrees Apart .2008-06-0505 June 2008 Response to Request for Additional Information Regarding Relief Requests #07-001-SS, Revision 0, Alternate Criteria for the Reactor Vessel Support Skirt to Perform Limited VT-3 Visual Examination on 3 Areas 120 Degrees Apart . ML0732400242007-10-25025 October 2007 Examples of Max Thermal Power License Conditions ML0634705992006-12-14014 December 2006 Plant Service List ML0527000442005-09-21021 September 2005 Attachment 10, FAQ Log 9/21/05 ML0404104922004-02-20020 February 2004 Order EA-03-009 Service List 2021-10-18
[Table view] |
Text
SUBJECT:
PRELIMINARY REVIEW OF PROGRESS ENERGY'S 10 CFR 50.59 EVALUATION Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR), Section 50.59 establishes the conditions under which licensees may make changes to the facility or procedures and conduct tests or experiments without prior NRC approval. Regulatory Guide 1.187, "Guidance for Implementation of 10 CFR 50.59, Changes, Tests and Experiments," and Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) 96-07, rev. 1, "Guidelines for 10 CFR 50.59 Implementation," provide guidance for evaluating and reporting changes under 10 CFR 50.59. Progress Energy discussed its 10 CFR 50.59 approach for Crystal River's, Unit 3 delaminated containment repair activities during the June 30, 2010 meeting.
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission's (NRC's) inspection program includes a module to assess each licensee's use of 10 CFR 50.59 for evaluating and reporting changes, tests and experiments. The NRC Regional (Region II for Crystal River) inspectors have the responsibility and the lead for monitoring the licensees' activities under 10 CFR 50.59. Due to the complexity and safety significance of the containment delamination and repairs at Crystal River, Unit 3, the office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation (NRR) is providing support to the Region II review of Progress Energy's 10 CFR 50.59 screening and evaluation. Below is NRC feedback generated from the preliminary review of the licensee's 10 CFR 50.59 evaluation and information presented during the June 30, 2010 public meeting.
Summary of NRC feedback General feedback
- Most significant NRC feedback was generated from the three criteria below from 10 CFR 50.59(c)(2).
- The NRC would review the 50.59 evaluation after it is complete by the licensee via inspection. Below are examples of issues we believe may need to be further addressed or explored as you proceed with your 50.59 evaluation.
- The NRC staff supports the licensee's commitment to conduct a structural integrity test to assure the structural integrity of the containment as presented during the June 30 th public meeting.
Result in more than a minimal increase in the likelihood of occurrence of a malfunction of a structure, system, or component (SSC) important to safety previously evaluated in the FSAR (as updated)?
NRC feedback:
- From looking at NEI 96-07, rev. 1, Section 4.4 discusses compensatory actions to address nonconforming or degraded conditions. NEI 96-07 states, "If the licensee corrective action is either to accept the condition "as is" resulting in something different than its as-designed condition, or to change the facility or procedures, 10 CFR 50.59 should be applied to the corrective action, unless another regulation applies, e.g.,
10 CFR 50.55a. In these cases, the final corrective action becomes the proposed change that would be subject to 10 CFR 50.59." Accordingly, the evaluation should address leaving the through-wall vertical cracks "as is" does not impact its current design bases of the containment structure under design loads and load combinations described in the FSAR.
- The licensee should demonstrate that the repaired containment structure meets applicable codes described in the FSAR.
Result in a design basis limit for a fission product barrier as described in the FSAR (as updated) being exceeded or altered?
NRC feedback:
- Containment pressure (which the licensee is not changing) is a design basis limit.
- Even though the minimum design tendon tension force is not included in the FSAR, the parameter is fundamental to the barrier's integrity.
- The design basis calculations and structural integrity test is a means to provide reasonable assurance that the containment after the repair can withstand its design pressure during an accident.
- Also, as stated during the June 30, 2010 public meeting, the licensee is increasing the specified minimum design compressive strength of the existing containment concrete from 5000 psi to 5800 psi, which the minimum design compressive stress is identified in the FSAR.
Result in a departure from a method of evaluation described in the FSAR (as updated) used in establishing the design bases or in the safety analyses?
NRC feedback:
- Per NEI 96-07, rev. 1, Section 4.3.8, if the licensee plans on using a different method of evaluation as described in the FSAR, then the licensee needs to show that the results are essentially the same as, or more conservative than, previous results.
- Similarly, licensees can also use different methods without first obtaining a license amendment if those methods have been approved by the NRC for the intended application.
- In summary, if the licensee changes the methodology from the one used for original calculations and analyses, this item under 10 CFR 50.59 will be answered "yes." However, no licensing action (i.e., license amendment) is needed per NEI 96-07, rev. 1, if the licensee meets the criteria in Section 4.3.8.
- The licensee should evaluate the impact of leaving the through wall vertical cracks "as is" on the design and analysis method of evaluation described in the FSAR.