ML11335A076

Summary of Telephone Conference Call Held on November 17, 2011, Between the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission and STP Nuclear Operating Company, Concerning Clarifications to Some Responses to Requests for Additional Information - South Tex

ML11335A076
Person / Time
Site:	South Texas
Issue date:	12/06/2011
From:	Daily J License Renewal Projects Branch 1
To:
Daily J
References
Download: ML11335A076 (6)

Text

UNITED NUCLEAR REGULATORY WASHINGTON, D.C. 20555-0001 December 6, 2011 LICENSEE:

STP Nuclear Operating Company FACILITY:

South Texas Project

SUMMARY

OF TELEPHONE CONFERENCE CALL HELD ON NOVEMBER 17. 2011, BETWEEN THE U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION AND STP NUCLEAR OPERATING COMPANY, CONCERNING CLARIFICATIONS TO SOME RESPONSES TO REQUESTS FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION SOUTH TEXAS PROJECT UNITS 1 AND 2 LICENSE RENEWAL APPLICATION (T AC. NOS. ME4936. ME4937) The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC or the staff) and representatives of STP Nuclear Operating Company (STPNOC or the applicant) held a telephone conference call on November 17, 2011, to discuss and clarify some applicant responses to requests for additional information (RAls) for the South Texas Project, Units 1 and 2. license renewal application.

The telephone conference call was useful in clarifying the intent of the staff's RAls. Enclosure 1 provides a listing of the participants and Enclosure 2 contains a listing of the topics discussed with the applicant, including a brief description of the status of the items. As a result, three sets of actions were agreed to by the applicant (see Enclosure 2). The applicant had an opportunity to comment on this summary. John W. Daily, Sr. Project M nager Projects Branch 1 Division of License Renewal Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Docket Nos.: 50-498, 50-499

Enclosures:

As stated cc w/encls: Listserv TELEPHONE CONFERENCE SOUTH TEXAS LICENSE RENEWAL LIST OF NOVEMBER 17, PARTICIPANTS John Daily Bill Rogers Bryce Lehman Alice Erickson Dennis Morey Dan Naus Mike Berg Ken Taplett Gary Warner Albert (Chet) Mcintyre James Johnson Brett Lynch AFFILIATIONS NRC NRC NRC NRC NRC CNWRA-SWRI STPNOC STPNOC STARS COB STPNOC STARS COB STARS COB Enclosure 1

TOPICS STP LICENSE RENEWAL NOVEMBER 17, The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC or the staff) and representatives of STP Nuclear Operating Company (STPNOC or the applicant) held a telephone conference call on November 17, 2011, to discuss and clarify some applicant responses to requests for additional information (RAls) for the South Texas Project, Units 1 and 2, license renewal application.

The participants indicated that the call was useful in clarifying the questions discussed.

The applicant has agreed to the actions listed in 2(b), 2(c), and 2(d) below. Issues a) STP will give a status update on its work at submitting supplemental and RAI responses.

b) Discuss the STP response to RAI B2.1.32-06 regarding the Structures Monitoring Program and standing water between the Containment Building and the Fuel Building.

The following is a summary of the i) When will the applicant drain the (1) Will it be performed on a set frequency, prior to inspections, when the water reaches a particular level, etc.? (2) When will it be performed initially? What will the frequency of inspection be under the Structures Monitoring Program (SMP)? Is the u5 years" because it is exposed to ground water in leakage? It appears the response says this area will be inspected under the SMP; however, the staff believes the containment wall should be inspected under the ASME Code, Section IWL. Please clarify. Discussion/update on turbine building components in-scope or not. Discussion on values given in the RAI 4.7.1-1 response. For the Refueling Building Cask-handling overhead crane, the staff is not sure why STP says "(10 refuels)" and U(20 refuels)" respectively for their 40-year and 60-year calculations, even though STP stated cask loading is assumed to begin in year 30 of plant operation. The staff doesn't understand why this crane's work would be related to a refueling cycle, or if it's really based on something else, (e.g., number of casks to load up each year, or other basis). Plus, the upper value of 740 -it isn't clear why this number is 740. ENCLOSURE 2

-2 Results The applicant provided an update on its expected delivery dates for deliverables related to supplemental information and RAI Set 1 (except for one RAI) -11/22; RAI Set 2 (except for Aluminum-bronze issues) -11/22; RAI Set 5 -11/22; RAI Set 2 bronze issues -12/8; RAI Set 1 final RAI -12/8; and the annual update submittal, 11/30. The applicant agreed to submit a supplemental response related to RAI 82.1.32-06 that will clarify the questions above. The applicant agreed to supplement 82.1-2 to cover the following: Specify what specific NS systems, or portions of systems, were included in scope for (a)(2) as a result of the potential for interaction with the SR components in the turbine buildings, and; Provide information indicating the LR drawings that have highlighted portions to indicate these components. The applicant agreed to supplement its RAI response to more fully describe its reasoning that brought it to the values above, namely, the "10 refuels," "20 refuels," how the crane's work is related to a refueling cycle, and why the upper bound for the 60-year PEO is 740 lifts. The description should be such that an independent reviewer can reconstruct and follow the logic, and verify that the values are correct.

December 6, 2011 LICENSEE:

STP Nuclear Operating Company FACILITY:

South Texas Project

SUMMARY

OF TELEPHONE CONFERENCE CALL HELD ON NOVEMBER 17, 2011, BETWEEN THE U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION AND STP NUCLEAR OPERATING COMPANY, CONCERNING CLARIFICATIONS TO SOME RESPONSES TO REQUESTS FOR ADDITIONAL SOUTH TEXAS UNITS 1 AND 2 LICENSE RENEWAL APPLICATION (TAC. NOS. ME4936, ME4937) The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC or the staff) and representatives of STP Nuclear Operating Company (STPNOC or the applicant) held a telephone conference call on November 17, 2011, to discuss and clarify some applicant responses to requests for additional information (RAls) for the South Texas Project, Units 1 and 2, license renewal application.

The telephone conference call was useful in clarifying the intent of the staff's RAls. Enclosure 1 provides a listing of the participants and Enclosure 2 contains a listing of the topics discussed with the applicant, including a brief description of the status of the items. As a result, three sets of actions were agreed to by the applicant (see Enclosure 2). The applicant had an opportunity to comment on this summary. IRA! John W. Daily, Sr. Project Manager Projects Branch 1 Division of License Renewal Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Docket Nos.: 50-498, 50-499

Enclosures:

As stated cc w/encls: Listserv DISTRIBUTION:

See next page ADAMS Accession No' ML11335A076

.. *via e-mail OFFICE LA:DLR* PM:RPB1 :DLR BC:RPB1 :DLR PM:RPB1 :DLR NAME SFigueroa JDaily DMorey JDaily DATE 12/2/11 11216/11 1216111 12/6/11 OFFICIAL RECORD Memorandum to STP Nuclear Operating Company from J. Daily dated December 6, 2011

SUMMARY

OF TELEPHONE CONFERENCE CALL HELD ON NOVEMBER 17, 2011, BETWEEN THE U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION AND STP NUCLEAR OPERATING COMPANY, CONCERNING CLARIFICATIONS TO SOME RESPONSES TO REQUESTS FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION SOUTH TEXAS PROJECT UNITS 1 AND 2 LICENSE RENEWAL APPLICATION (TAC. NOS. ME4936, ME4937) DISTRIBUTION:

E-MAIL: PUBLIC RidsNrrDlr Resource RidsNrrDlrRpb1 Resource RidsNrrDlrRpb2 Resource RidsNrrDlrRerb Resource RidsNrrDlrRpob Resource RidsNrrDraApla Resource RidsOgcMailCenter JDaily TTran ICouret,OPA BSingal, DORL WWalker, RIV JDixon, RIV BTharakan, RIV WMaier, RIV VDricks, RIV NOKeefe, RIV AVegel, RIV GPick, RIV