ML091940215: Difference between revisions

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(Created page by program invented by StriderTol)
 
(Created page by program invented by StriderTol)
 
(2 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 3: Line 3:
| issue date = 08/24/2008
| issue date = 08/24/2008
| title = Audit Summary Regarding the License Renewal Application for Beaver Valley Power Station, Units 1 and 2
| title = Audit Summary Regarding the License Renewal Application for Beaver Valley Power Station, Units 1 and 2
| author name = Howard K L
| author name = Howard K
| author affiliation = NRC/NRR/DLR/RPB2
| author affiliation = NRC/NRR/DLR/RPB2
| addressee name = Sena P P
| addressee name = Sena P
| addressee affiliation = FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Co
| addressee affiliation = FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Co
| docket = 05000334, 05000412
| docket = 05000334, 05000412
Line 13: Line 13:
| page count = 6
| page count = 6
| project =  
| project =  
| stage = Request
| stage = Other
}}
}}


=Text=
=Text=
{{#Wiki_filter:August 24, 2009 Mr. Peter P. Sena, III Site Vice President FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Company Beaver Valley Power Station Mail Stop A-BV-SEB1 P.O. Box 4, Route 168 Shippingport, PA 15077  
{{#Wiki_filter:August 24, 2009 Mr. Peter P. Sena, III Site Vice President FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Company Beaver Valley Power Station Mail Stop A-BV-SEB1 P.O. Box 4, Route 168 Shippingport, PA 15077


==SUBJECT:==
==SUBJECT:==
Line 23: Line 23:


==SUMMARY==
==SUMMARY==
REGARDING THE LICENSE RENEWAL APPLICATION FOR BEAVER VALLEY POWER STATION, UNITS 1 AND 2  
REGARDING THE LICENSE RENEWAL APPLICATION FOR BEAVER VALLEY POWER STATION, UNITS 1 AND 2


==Dear Mr. Sena:==
==Dear Mr. Sena:==


By letter dated August 27, 2007, FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Company submitted an application for review by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) pursuant to Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations Part 54 (10 CFR Part 54) to renew the operating license for Beaver Valley Power Station, Units 1 and 2 (BVPS). On June 26, 2009, the NRC staff completed an audit of the process used in the cycle counting reconstitution related to metal fatigue evaluation at the BVPS. The audit summary is enclosed.
By letter dated August 27, 2007, FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Company submitted an application for review by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) pursuant to Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations Part 54 (10 CFR Part 54) to renew the operating license for Beaver Valley Power Station, Units 1 and 2 (BVPS). On June 26, 2009, the NRC staff completed an audit of the process used in the cycle counting reconstitution related to metal fatigue evaluation at the BVPS. The audit summary is enclosed.
If you have any questions, please contact me at 301-415-2989 or by e-mail at Kent.Howard@nrc.gov.
If you have any questions, please contact me at 301-415-2989 or by e-mail at Kent.Howard@nrc.gov.
      /RA/   Kent Howard, Project Manager Projects Branch 2 Division of License Renewal Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulations Docket Nos. 50-334 & 50-412  
                                            /RA/
Kent Howard, Project Manager Projects Branch 2 Division of License Renewal Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulations Docket Nos. 50-334 & 50-412


==Enclosure:==
==Enclosure:==
As stated cc w/encl: See next page August 24, 2009 Mr. Peter P. Sena, III Site Vice President FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Company Beaver Valley Power Station Mail Stop A-BV-SEB1 P.O. Box 4, Route 168 Shippingport, PA 15077  
 
As stated cc w/encl: See next page
 
August 24, 2009 Mr. Peter P. Sena, III Site Vice President FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Company Beaver Valley Power Station Mail Stop A-BV-SEB1 P.O. Box 4, Route 168 Shippingport, PA 15077


==SUBJECT:==
==SUBJECT:==
Line 38: Line 42:


==SUMMARY==
==SUMMARY==
REGARDING THE LICENSE RENEWAL APPLICATION FOR BEAVER VALLEY POWER STATION, UNITS 1 AND 2  
REGARDING THE LICENSE RENEWAL APPLICATION FOR BEAVER VALLEY POWER STATION, UNITS 1 AND 2


==Dear Mr. Sena:==
==Dear Mr. Sena:==


By letter dated August 27, 2007, FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Company submitted an application for review by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) pursuant to Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations Part 54 (10 CFR Part 54) to renew the operating license for Beaver Valley Power Station, Units 1 and 2 (BVPS). On June 26, 2009, the NRC staff completed an audit of the process used in the cycle counting reconstitution related to metal fatigue evaluation at the BVPS. The audit summary is enclosed.  
By letter dated August 27, 2007, FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Company submitted an application for review by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) pursuant to Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations Part 54 (10 CFR Part 54) to renew the operating license for Beaver Valley Power Station, Units 1 and 2 (BVPS). On June 26, 2009, the NRC staff completed an audit of the process used in the cycle counting reconstitution related to metal fatigue evaluation at the BVPS. The audit summary is enclosed.
 
If you have any questions, please contact me at 301-415-2989 or by e-mail at Kent.Howard@nrc.gov.
If you have any questions, please contact me at 301-415-2989 or by e-mail at Kent.Howard@nrc.gov.       /RA/ Kent Howard, Project Manager Projects Branch 2 Division of License Renewal Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulations  
                                            /RA/
 
Kent Howard, Project Manager Projects Branch 2 Division of License Renewal Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulations Docket Nos. 50-334 & 50-412
Docket Nos. 50-334 & 50-412  


==Enclosure:==
==Enclosure:==
As stated


cc w/encl: See next page DISTRIBUTION
As stated cc w/encl: See next page DISTRIBUTION:
: See next page  
See next page ADAMS Accession Number: ML091940215 OFFICE          LA:DLR            PM:RPB2:DLR          BC:RPB1:DLR        BC:RPB2:DLR NAME            IKing            KHoward              JDozier            DWrona DATE            07/15/09          07/27/09              07/31/09            08/06/09 OFFICE          OGC              PM:RPB2:DLR NAME            LSubin (NLO)      KHoward (Signature)
DATE            08/12/09          08/24/09 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY


ADAMS Accession Number:  ML091940215 OFFICE LA:DLR PM:RPB2:DLR BC:RPB1:DLR BC:RPB2:DLR NAME IKing KHoward JDozier DWrona DATE 07/15/09 07/27/09 07/31/09 08/06/09 OFFICE OGC PM:RPB2:DLR NAME LSubin (NLO) KHoward (Signature) DATE 08/12/09 08/24/09 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY Letter to Peter P. Sena from Kent Howard dated August 24, 2009  
Letter to Peter P. Sena from Kent Howard dated August 24, 2009


==SUBJECT:==
==SUBJECT:==
Line 60: Line 63:


==SUMMARY==
==SUMMARY==
REGARDING THE LICENSE RENEWAL APPLICATION FOR BEAVER VALLEY POWER STATION, UNITS 1 AND 2 DISTRIBUTION
REGARDING THE LICENSE RENEWAL APPLICATION FOR BEAVER VALLEY POWER STATION, UNITS 1 AND 2 DISTRIBUTION:
:
HARD COPY:
HARD COPY: DLR RF E-MAIL: PUBLIC RidsNrrDlr Resource RidsNrrDlrRpb1 Resource RidsNrrDlrRpb2 Resource RidsNrrDlrRer1 Resource RidsNrrDlrRer2 Resource RidsNrrDlrRerb Resource RidsNrrDlrRpob Resource RidsNrrDciCvib Resource RidsNrrDciCpnb Resource RidsNrrDciCsgb Resource RidsNrrDraAfpb Resource RidsNrrDraApla Resource RidsNrrDeEmcb Resource RidsNrrDeEeeb Resource RidsNrrDssSrxb Resource RidsNrrDssSbpb Resource RidsNrrDssScvb Resource RidsOgcMailCenter Resource ------------- KHoward ESayoc NMorgan MModes, RI PCataldo, RI DWerkheiser, RI ENCLOSURE U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION - DIVISION OF LICENSE RENEWAL AUDIT  
DLR RF E-MAIL:
PUBLIC RidsNrrDlr Resource RidsNrrDlrRpb1 Resource RidsNrrDlrRpb2 Resource RidsNrrDlrRer1 Resource RidsNrrDlrRer2 Resource RidsNrrDlrRerb Resource RidsNrrDlrRpob Resource RidsNrrDciCvib Resource RidsNrrDciCpnb Resource RidsNrrDciCsgb Resource RidsNrrDraAfpb Resource RidsNrrDraApla Resource RidsNrrDeEmcb Resource RidsNrrDeEeeb Resource RidsNrrDssSrxb Resource RidsNrrDssSbpb Resource RidsNrrDssScvb Resource RidsOgcMailCenter Resource
-------------
KHoward ESayoc NMorgan MModes, RI PCataldo, RI DWerkheiser, RI
 
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION - DIVISION OF LICENSE RENEWAL AUDIT  


==SUMMARY==
==SUMMARY==
REGARDING THE LICENSE RENEWAL APPLICATION FOR THE BEAVER VALLEY POWER STATION, UNITS 1 AND 2 Docket Nos: 50-334 & 50-412
REGARDING THE LICENSE RENEWAL APPLICATION FOR THE BEAVER VALLEY POWER STATION, UNITS 1 AND 2 Docket Nos:     50-334 & 50-412 License Nos:     DPR-66 & NPF-73 Applicant:       FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Company, Inc. (FENOC)
 
Location:       NPOC Offices 11426 Rockville Pike, Suite 230 Rockville, MD 20852 Date:           June 26, 2009 NRC Staff:       K. Howard, Project Manager, Division of License Renewal (DLR)
License Nos: DPR-66 & NPF-73 Applicant: FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Company, Inc. (FENOC)  
C. Yang, Sr. Mechanical Engineer, DLR A. Hiser, Senior Technical Advisor, DLR O. Yee, Mechanical Engineer, DLR Licensee Staff: C. Custer, License Renewal Manager, FENOC C. Mancuso, FENOC L. Hinkle, FENOC S. Buffington, FENOC Approved By:     David J. Wrona, Chief Projects Branch 2 Division of License Renewal Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Jerry Dozier, Chief Engineering Review Branch 1 Division of License Renewal Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation ENCLOSURE
 
Location: NPOC Offices 11426 Rockville Pike, Suite 230 Rockville, MD 20852  
 
Date:   June 26, 2009 NRC Staff: K. Howard, Project Manager, Division of License Renewal (DLR) C. Yang, Sr. Mechanical Engineer, DLR A. Hiser, Senior Technical Advisor, DLR O. Yee, Mechanical Engineer, DLR Licensee Staff: C. Custer, License Renewal Manager, FENOC   C. Mancuso, FENOC   L. Hinkle, FENOC   S. Buffington, FENOC  
 
Approved By: David J. Wrona, Chief   Projects Branch 2   Division of License Renewal   Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Jerry Dozier, Chief   Engineering Review Branch 1 Division of License Renewal   Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation     Introduction On August 27, 2007, FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Company (FENOC or the applicant) submitted a license renewal application (LRA) for the Beaver Valley Power Station, Units 1 and 2 (BVPS). The Safety Evaluation Report of the BVPS LRA, dated June 2009 (ML091600216) describes the use of transient cycle counting in the BVPS "Metal Fatigue of Reactor Coolant Pressure Boundary Program."  During a meeting with the Advisory Committee of Reactor Safeguards (ACRS) license renewal subcommittee on February 4, 2009, ACRS members questioned the methodology used by the applicant to project transient cycles for use in evaluating metal fatigue of critical reactor coolant system (RCS) locations. During this discussion at the ACRS meeting, the applicant identified that it was completing a "reconstitution" of the heat-up (and cool-down) cycle history for BVPS, which would be used as a benchmark for future cycle accumulation as the units operated. Since the number of transient cycles experienced by RCS materials is directly tied to the fatigue usage by the material, the accuracy of the cycle count is critical to the accuracy of the determination of fatigue usage.
 
On June 26, 2009, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC or the staff) staff conducted an audit of this cycle reconstitution by the applicant. The focus of the audit was to gain understanding of the process used by the applicant in its cycle reconstitution, in particular through review of data for time periods when this reconstitution identified fewer cycles than a previous analysis completed in 2003.


Introduction On August 27, 2007, FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Company (FENOC or the applicant) submitted a license renewal application (LRA) for the Beaver Valley Power Station, Units 1 and 2 (BVPS). The Safety Evaluation Report of the BVPS LRA, dated June 2009 (ML091600216) describes the use of transient cycle counting in the BVPS Metal Fatigue of Reactor Coolant Pressure Boundary Program. During a meeting with the Advisory Committee of Reactor Safeguards (ACRS) license renewal subcommittee on February 4, 2009, ACRS members questioned the methodology used by the applicant to project transient cycles for use in evaluating metal fatigue of critical reactor coolant system (RCS) locations. During this discussion at the ACRS meeting, the applicant identified that it was completing a reconstitution of the heat-up (and cool-down) cycle history for BVPS, which would be used as a benchmark for future cycle accumulation as the units operated. Since the number of transient cycles experienced by RCS materials is directly tied to the fatigue usage by the material, the accuracy of the cycle count is critical to the accuracy of the determination of fatigue usage.
On June 26, 2009, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC or the staff) staff conducted an audit of this cycle reconstitution by the applicant. The focus of the audit was to gain understanding of the process used by the applicant in its cycle reconstitution, in particular through review of data for time periods when this reconstitution identified fewer cycles than a previous analysis completed in 2003.
In performing this audit, the NRC staff examined the data used by the applicant in its cycle reconstitution, including data used to substantiate the 2003 analysis and that used in the reconstitution. The NRC staff also interviewed FENOC representatives to obtain additional clarification related to the reconstitution. This summary documents the NRC staff activities during this audit.
In performing this audit, the NRC staff examined the data used by the applicant in its cycle reconstitution, including data used to substantiate the 2003 analysis and that used in the reconstitution. The NRC staff also interviewed FENOC representatives to obtain additional clarification related to the reconstitution. This summary documents the NRC staff activities during this audit.
Cycle Count Reconstitution During its audit, the NRC staff reviewed numerous documents, as listed below, and interviewed FENOC representatives regarding the methodology used in the reconstitution process.
Cycle Count Reconstitution During its audit, the NRC staff reviewed numerous documents, as listed below, and interviewed FENOC representatives regarding the methodology used in the reconstitution process.
DOCUMENT T ITLE R EVISION  Westinghouse calculation note, OPES(99)-044 Beaver Valley Power Station, Units 1 and 2 Historic Transient Baseline Revision 0 (Dated 4/3/2000) Letter to U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission providing Beaver Valley Power Station, Units 1 and 2 Monthly Operating Report Beaver Valley Power Station, Units 1 and 2 Monthly Operating Reports, covering period from 1996 to 1999 Revision 0 FENOC representatives described the source of the initial cycle count histogram, identified as "2003 Count" (hereinafter "previous data") in the attached figure, as coming from the Westinghouse calculation listed above. In the course of reviewing the previous data, the applicant identified errors in the data and decided to reanalyze ("reconstitute") the heat-up and cool-down transients for both BVPS units. The results of this reconstitution are illustrated in the attached figure as "Actual" counts of the cycles for Unit 1. The reconstitution results in a reduction of 11 cycles for Unit 1 and a minimal change in the number of cycles for Unit 2.
DOCUMENT                               TITLE                                    REVISION Westinghouse calculation note,         Beaver Valley Power Station, Units 1     Revision 0 OPES(99)-044                          and 2 Historic Transient Baseline         (Dated 4/3/2000)
Letter to U.S. Nuclear                 Beaver Valley Power Station, Units 1     Revision 0 Regulatory Commission                  and 2 Monthly Operating Reports, providing Beaver Valley Power         covering period from 1996 to 1999 Station, Units 1 and 2 Monthly Operating Report


During the audit, the staff compared the historic records of thermal events (mainly operating Mode changes during heat-up and cool-down operations) that can be identified in BVPS "Monthly Operating Reports" (MOR) against those described in Appendix A of the Westinghouse calculation. The data in Appendix A of the Westinghouse calculation is the basis for the "2003 Count" cycle count histogram illustrated in the attached figure. As described by the applicant, the cycle counts identified in Appendix A of the Westinghouse calculation represent a composite of plant operating data from different sources, including procedure sheets from the control room. However, in preparing Appendix A of the Westinghouse calculation, the time stamp information for the procedure sheets from the records at BVPS, was used to indicate implementation of the procedure, as opposed to the actual time when the procedure was implemented. The problem identified by the applicant is that this time stamp information indicates, in some cases, mode changes that are neither consistent with nor comport with other reported information, such as that provided in the MORs. Specifically, the temporal mismatch between the time stamps and other records, for example the MORs, resulted in time gaps that were accommodated by assumptions of intermediate mode changes in the plant operating condition in Appendix A of the Westinghouse calculation. In Appendix A of the Westinghouse calculation, the assumption of an intermediate mode change in the plant operating conditions resulted in the identification of "extra" thermal events that were mistakenly counted as accrued cycles. This was an incorrect interpretation of the temporal mismatch between the time stamps and other records.
FENOC representatives described the source of the initial cycle count histogram, identified as "2003 Count" (hereinafter "previous data") in the attached figure, as coming from the Westinghouse calculation listed above. In the course of reviewing the previous data, the applicant identified errors in the data and decided to reanalyze ("reconstitute") the heat-up and cool-down transients for both BVPS units. The results of this reconstitution are illustrated in the attached figure as "Actual" counts of the cycles for Unit 1. The reconstitution results in a reduction of 11 cycles for Unit 1 and a minimal change in the number of cycles for Unit 2.
The staff verified the validity of these incorrect interpretations by reviewing the records of interest for most months of 1996 and 1997, and a few in 1998, because it was in this three-year time frame that the discrepancy between the 2003 count and reconstitution achieved the disparity between the two counts. After 1999, the two curves became parallel indicating equivalent counts between the two analyses. By 2003, the total number of Unit 1 heat-up cycles accrued was 111 based on the 2003 counting but it was reduced to 100 based on the 2009 reconstitution.  
During the audit, the staff compared the historic records of thermal events (mainly operating Mode changes during heat-up and cool-down operations) that can be identified in BVPS "Monthly Operating Reports" (MOR) against those described in Appendix A of the Westinghouse calculation. The data in Appendix A of the Westinghouse calculation is the basis for the "2003 Count" cycle count histogram illustrated in the attached figure. As described by the applicant, the cycle counts identified in Appendix A of the Westinghouse calculation represent a composite of plant operating data from different sources, including procedure sheets from the control room. However, in preparing Appendix A of the Westinghouse calculation, the time stamp information for the procedure sheets from the records at BVPS, was used to indicate implementation of the procedure, as opposed to the actual time when the procedure was implemented. The problem identified by the applicant is that this time stamp information indicates, in some cases, mode changes that are neither consistent with nor comport with other reported information, such as that provided in the MORs. Specifically, the temporal mismatch between the time stamps and other records, for example the MORs, resulted in time gaps that were accommodated by assumptions of intermediate mode changes in the plant operating condition in Appendix A of the Westinghouse calculation. In Appendix A of the Westinghouse calculation, the assumption of an intermediate mode change in the plant operating conditions resulted in the identification of extra thermal events that were mistakenly counted as accrued cycles. This was an incorrect interpretation of the temporal mismatch between the time stamps and other records.
The staff verified the validity of these incorrect interpretations by reviewing the records of interest for most months of 1996 and 1997, and a few in 1998, because it was in this three-year time frame that the discrepancy between the 2003 count and reconstitution achieved the disparity between the two counts. After 1999, the two curves became parallel indicating equivalent counts between the two analyses. By 2003, the total number of Unit 1 heat-up cycles accrued was 111 based on the 2003 counting but it was reduced to 100 based on the 2009 reconstitution.
The staff's review focused on time periods in which the 2003 count (from Appendix A of the Westinghouse calculation) indicated a heat-up condition at the plant, but the reconstitution did not. In the cases examined, the MOR for the time period generally indicated that the plant was in Mode 1 operating at 100 percent or a somewhat lower power level. No mode changes, trips or other transient activities were identified in the MORs in these instances. For comparison, the staff reviewed other MORs where outages had occurred and noted the high level of detail provided for mode and power changes in the MOR for these instances. Based on this comparison, the staff gained confidence that the applicant's approach for the reconstitution appropriately dispositioned the actual plant condition during the time period when the disparity in cycle counts developed.


The staff's review focused on time periods in which the 2003 count (from Appendix A of the Westinghouse calculation) indicated a heat-up condition at the plant, but the reconstitution did not. In the cases examined, the MOR for the time period generally indicated that the plant was in Mode 1 operating at 100 percent or a somewhat lower power level. No mode changes, trips or other transient activities were identified in the MORs in these instances. For comparison, the staff reviewed other MORs where outages had occurred and noted the high level of detail provided for mode and power changes in the MOR for these instances. Based on this comparison, the staff gained confidence that the applicant's approach for the reconstitution appropriately dispositioned the actual plant condition during the time period when the disparity in cycle counts developed.
The staff notes that the reconstitution for the early periods of plant operation identified more cycles than the prior 2003 data; in addition, the applicant also identified an additional cycle during one of the time periods reviewed by the staff. The specific instance was during a power ascension period for which the applicant reviewed strip chart records of RCS temperature to identify the additional thermal cycle.
The staff notes that the reconstitution for the early periods of plant operation identified more cycles than the prior 2003 data; in addition, the applicant also identified an additional cycle during one of the time periods reviewed by the staff. The specific instance was during a power ascension period for which the applicant reviewed strip chart records of RCS temperature to identify the additional thermal cycle.
The applicant provided adequate responses to all of the audit team's questions and concerns.
The applicant provided adequate responses to all of the audit teams questions and concerns.
B V-1 2009 Event Reconstitution 0 50 100 150 2000246810 121416 18 2022 24 26 283032 34363840 424446 48 50 52 54 56 58 60YearsofServiceHeatup Events 2003 Count Actual109 Thru 12/31/20082 events per year4 events per year final 10 years of operation183 - final projection116 thru 10/15/2003 Figure 4 Beaver Valley Power Station,  Units 1 and 2 cc:  Joseph J. Hagan President and Chief Nuclear Officer FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Company Mail Stop A-GO-19 76 South Main Street Akron, OH  44308
BV-1 2009 Event Reconstitution 200 final 10 years of operation                      183 - final projection 4 events per 150                                                                                          year 116 thru 10/15/2003 Heatup Events 2 events per year 2003 Count 100 Actual 109 Thru 12/31/2008 50 0
 
0   2   4   6  8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 44 46 48 50 52 54 56 58 60 Years of Service Figure 4
James H. Lash Senior Vice President of Operations   and Chief Operating Officer FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Company Mail Stop A-GO-14 76 South Main Street Akron, OH  44308
 
Danny L. Pace Senior Vice President, Fleet Engineering FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Company Mail Stop A-GO-14 76 South Main Street Akron, OH  44308 Jeannie M. Rinckel Vice President, Fleet Oversight FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Company Mail Stop A-GO-14 76 South Main Street Akron, OH  44308
 
Paul A. Harden Vice President, Nuclear Support FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Company Mail Stop A-GO-14 76 South Main Street Akron, OH  44308 David W. Jenkins, Attorney FirstEnergy Corporation Mail Stop A-GO-15 76 South Main Street Akron, OH  44308
 
Manager, Fleet Licensing FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Company Mail Stop A-GO-2 76 South Main Street Akron, OH  44308 Director, Fleet Regulatory Affairs FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Company Mail Stop A-GO-2 76 South Main Street Akron, OH  44308 Manager, Site Regulatory Compliance FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Company Beaver Valley Power Station Mail Stop A-BV-A P.O. Box 4, Route 168 Shippingport, PA  15077
 
Regional Administrator, Region I U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 475 Allendale Road King of Prussia, PA  19406
 
Resident Inspector U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission P.O. Box 298 Shippingport, PA  15077
 
Cliff Custer FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Company Beaver Valley Power Station P.O. Box 4, Route 168 Shippingport, PA  15077
 
Steve Dort FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Company Beaver Valley Power Station P.O. Box 4, Route 168 Shippingport, PA  15077


Mike Banko FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Company Beaver Valley Power Station P.O. Box 4, Route 168 Shippingport, PA   15077}}
Beaver Valley Power Station,            Units 1 and 2 cc:
Joseph J. Hagan                              Manager, Fleet Licensing President and Chief Nuclear Officer          FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Company FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Company        Mail Stop A-GO-2 Mail Stop A-GO-19                            76 South Main Street 76 South Main Street                        Akron, OH 44308 Akron, OH 44308 Director, Fleet Regulatory Affairs James H. Lash                                FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Company Senior Vice President of Operations          Mail Stop A-GO-2 and Chief Operating Officer                76 South Main Street FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Company        Akron, OH 44308 Mail Stop A-GO-14 76 South Main Street                        Manager, Site Regulatory Compliance Akron, OH 44308                              FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Company Beaver Valley Power Station Danny L. Pace                                Mail Stop A-BV-A Senior Vice President, Fleet Engineering    P.O. Box 4, Route 168 FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Company        Shippingport, PA 15077 Mail Stop A-GO-14 76 South Main Street                        Regional Administrator, Region I Akron, OH 44308                              U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 475 Allendale Road Jeannie M. Rinckel                          King of Prussia, PA 19406 Vice President, Fleet Oversight FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Company        Resident Inspector Mail Stop A-GO-14                            U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 76 South Main Street                        P.O. Box 298 Akron, OH 44308                              Shippingport, PA 15077 Paul A. Harden                              Cliff Custer Vice President, Nuclear Support              FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Company FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Company        Beaver Valley Power Station Mail Stop A-GO-14                            P.O. Box 4, Route 168 76 South Main Street                        Shippingport, PA 15077 Akron, OH 44308 Steve Dort David W. Jenkins, Attorney                  FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Company FirstEnergy Corporation                      Beaver Valley Power Station Mail Stop A-GO-15                            P.O. Box 4, Route 168 76 South Main Street                        Shippingport, PA 15077 Akron, OH 44308 Mike Banko FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Company Beaver Valley Power Station P.O. Box 4, Route 168 Shippingport, PA 15077}}

Latest revision as of 04:14, 14 November 2019

Audit Summary Regarding the License Renewal Application for Beaver Valley Power Station, Units 1 and 2
ML091940215
Person / Time
Site: Beaver Valley
Issue date: 08/24/2008
From: Kent Howard
License Renewal Projects Branch 2
To: Sena P
FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Co
Howard K, NRR/DLR/RPB2, 415-2989
References
Download: ML091940215 (6)


Text

August 24, 2009 Mr. Peter P. Sena, III Site Vice President FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Company Beaver Valley Power Station Mail Stop A-BV-SEB1 P.O. Box 4, Route 168 Shippingport, PA 15077

SUBJECT:

AUDIT

SUMMARY

REGARDING THE LICENSE RENEWAL APPLICATION FOR BEAVER VALLEY POWER STATION, UNITS 1 AND 2

Dear Mr. Sena:

By letter dated August 27, 2007, FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Company submitted an application for review by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) pursuant to Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations Part 54 (10 CFR Part 54) to renew the operating license for Beaver Valley Power Station, Units 1 and 2 (BVPS). On June 26, 2009, the NRC staff completed an audit of the process used in the cycle counting reconstitution related to metal fatigue evaluation at the BVPS. The audit summary is enclosed.

If you have any questions, please contact me at 301-415-2989 or by e-mail at Kent.Howard@nrc.gov.

/RA/

Kent Howard, Project Manager Projects Branch 2 Division of License Renewal Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulations Docket Nos. 50-334 & 50-412

Enclosure:

As stated cc w/encl: See next page

August 24, 2009 Mr. Peter P. Sena, III Site Vice President FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Company Beaver Valley Power Station Mail Stop A-BV-SEB1 P.O. Box 4, Route 168 Shippingport, PA 15077

SUBJECT:

AUDIT

SUMMARY

REGARDING THE LICENSE RENEWAL APPLICATION FOR BEAVER VALLEY POWER STATION, UNITS 1 AND 2

Dear Mr. Sena:

By letter dated August 27, 2007, FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Company submitted an application for review by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) pursuant to Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations Part 54 (10 CFR Part 54) to renew the operating license for Beaver Valley Power Station, Units 1 and 2 (BVPS). On June 26, 2009, the NRC staff completed an audit of the process used in the cycle counting reconstitution related to metal fatigue evaluation at the BVPS. The audit summary is enclosed.

If you have any questions, please contact me at 301-415-2989 or by e-mail at Kent.Howard@nrc.gov.

/RA/

Kent Howard, Project Manager Projects Branch 2 Division of License Renewal Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulations Docket Nos. 50-334 & 50-412

Enclosure:

As stated cc w/encl: See next page DISTRIBUTION:

See next page ADAMS Accession Number: ML091940215 OFFICE LA:DLR PM:RPB2:DLR BC:RPB1:DLR BC:RPB2:DLR NAME IKing KHoward JDozier DWrona DATE 07/15/09 07/27/09 07/31/09 08/06/09 OFFICE OGC PM:RPB2:DLR NAME LSubin (NLO) KHoward (Signature)

DATE 08/12/09 08/24/09 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY

Letter to Peter P. Sena from Kent Howard dated August 24, 2009

SUBJECT:

AUDIT

SUMMARY

REGARDING THE LICENSE RENEWAL APPLICATION FOR BEAVER VALLEY POWER STATION, UNITS 1 AND 2 DISTRIBUTION:

HARD COPY:

DLR RF E-MAIL:

PUBLIC RidsNrrDlr Resource RidsNrrDlrRpb1 Resource RidsNrrDlrRpb2 Resource RidsNrrDlrRer1 Resource RidsNrrDlrRer2 Resource RidsNrrDlrRerb Resource RidsNrrDlrRpob Resource RidsNrrDciCvib Resource RidsNrrDciCpnb Resource RidsNrrDciCsgb Resource RidsNrrDraAfpb Resource RidsNrrDraApla Resource RidsNrrDeEmcb Resource RidsNrrDeEeeb Resource RidsNrrDssSrxb Resource RidsNrrDssSbpb Resource RidsNrrDssScvb Resource RidsOgcMailCenter Resource


KHoward ESayoc NMorgan MModes, RI PCataldo, RI DWerkheiser, RI

U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION - DIVISION OF LICENSE RENEWAL AUDIT

SUMMARY

REGARDING THE LICENSE RENEWAL APPLICATION FOR THE BEAVER VALLEY POWER STATION, UNITS 1 AND 2 Docket Nos: 50-334 & 50-412 License Nos: DPR-66 & NPF-73 Applicant: FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Company, Inc. (FENOC)

Location: NPOC Offices 11426 Rockville Pike, Suite 230 Rockville, MD 20852 Date: June 26, 2009 NRC Staff: K. Howard, Project Manager, Division of License Renewal (DLR)

C. Yang, Sr. Mechanical Engineer, DLR A. Hiser, Senior Technical Advisor, DLR O. Yee, Mechanical Engineer, DLR Licensee Staff: C. Custer, License Renewal Manager, FENOC C. Mancuso, FENOC L. Hinkle, FENOC S. Buffington, FENOC Approved By: David J. Wrona, Chief Projects Branch 2 Division of License Renewal Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Jerry Dozier, Chief Engineering Review Branch 1 Division of License Renewal Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation ENCLOSURE

Introduction On August 27, 2007, FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Company (FENOC or the applicant) submitted a license renewal application (LRA) for the Beaver Valley Power Station, Units 1 and 2 (BVPS). The Safety Evaluation Report of the BVPS LRA, dated June 2009 (ML091600216) describes the use of transient cycle counting in the BVPS Metal Fatigue of Reactor Coolant Pressure Boundary Program. During a meeting with the Advisory Committee of Reactor Safeguards (ACRS) license renewal subcommittee on February 4, 2009, ACRS members questioned the methodology used by the applicant to project transient cycles for use in evaluating metal fatigue of critical reactor coolant system (RCS) locations. During this discussion at the ACRS meeting, the applicant identified that it was completing a reconstitution of the heat-up (and cool-down) cycle history for BVPS, which would be used as a benchmark for future cycle accumulation as the units operated. Since the number of transient cycles experienced by RCS materials is directly tied to the fatigue usage by the material, the accuracy of the cycle count is critical to the accuracy of the determination of fatigue usage.

On June 26, 2009, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC or the staff) staff conducted an audit of this cycle reconstitution by the applicant. The focus of the audit was to gain understanding of the process used by the applicant in its cycle reconstitution, in particular through review of data for time periods when this reconstitution identified fewer cycles than a previous analysis completed in 2003.

In performing this audit, the NRC staff examined the data used by the applicant in its cycle reconstitution, including data used to substantiate the 2003 analysis and that used in the reconstitution. The NRC staff also interviewed FENOC representatives to obtain additional clarification related to the reconstitution. This summary documents the NRC staff activities during this audit.

Cycle Count Reconstitution During its audit, the NRC staff reviewed numerous documents, as listed below, and interviewed FENOC representatives regarding the methodology used in the reconstitution process.

DOCUMENT TITLE REVISION Westinghouse calculation note, Beaver Valley Power Station, Units 1 Revision 0 OPES(99)-044 and 2 Historic Transient Baseline (Dated 4/3/2000)

Letter to U.S. Nuclear Beaver Valley Power Station, Units 1 Revision 0 Regulatory Commission and 2 Monthly Operating Reports, providing Beaver Valley Power covering period from 1996 to 1999 Station, Units 1 and 2 Monthly Operating Report

FENOC representatives described the source of the initial cycle count histogram, identified as "2003 Count" (hereinafter "previous data") in the attached figure, as coming from the Westinghouse calculation listed above. In the course of reviewing the previous data, the applicant identified errors in the data and decided to reanalyze ("reconstitute") the heat-up and cool-down transients for both BVPS units. The results of this reconstitution are illustrated in the attached figure as "Actual" counts of the cycles for Unit 1. The reconstitution results in a reduction of 11 cycles for Unit 1 and a minimal change in the number of cycles for Unit 2.

During the audit, the staff compared the historic records of thermal events (mainly operating Mode changes during heat-up and cool-down operations) that can be identified in BVPS "Monthly Operating Reports" (MOR) against those described in Appendix A of the Westinghouse calculation. The data in Appendix A of the Westinghouse calculation is the basis for the "2003 Count" cycle count histogram illustrated in the attached figure. As described by the applicant, the cycle counts identified in Appendix A of the Westinghouse calculation represent a composite of plant operating data from different sources, including procedure sheets from the control room. However, in preparing Appendix A of the Westinghouse calculation, the time stamp information for the procedure sheets from the records at BVPS, was used to indicate implementation of the procedure, as opposed to the actual time when the procedure was implemented. The problem identified by the applicant is that this time stamp information indicates, in some cases, mode changes that are neither consistent with nor comport with other reported information, such as that provided in the MORs. Specifically, the temporal mismatch between the time stamps and other records, for example the MORs, resulted in time gaps that were accommodated by assumptions of intermediate mode changes in the plant operating condition in Appendix A of the Westinghouse calculation. In Appendix A of the Westinghouse calculation, the assumption of an intermediate mode change in the plant operating conditions resulted in the identification of extra thermal events that were mistakenly counted as accrued cycles. This was an incorrect interpretation of the temporal mismatch between the time stamps and other records.

The staff verified the validity of these incorrect interpretations by reviewing the records of interest for most months of 1996 and 1997, and a few in 1998, because it was in this three-year time frame that the discrepancy between the 2003 count and reconstitution achieved the disparity between the two counts. After 1999, the two curves became parallel indicating equivalent counts between the two analyses. By 2003, the total number of Unit 1 heat-up cycles accrued was 111 based on the 2003 counting but it was reduced to 100 based on the 2009 reconstitution.

The staff's review focused on time periods in which the 2003 count (from Appendix A of the Westinghouse calculation) indicated a heat-up condition at the plant, but the reconstitution did not. In the cases examined, the MOR for the time period generally indicated that the plant was in Mode 1 operating at 100 percent or a somewhat lower power level. No mode changes, trips or other transient activities were identified in the MORs in these instances. For comparison, the staff reviewed other MORs where outages had occurred and noted the high level of detail provided for mode and power changes in the MOR for these instances. Based on this comparison, the staff gained confidence that the applicant's approach for the reconstitution appropriately dispositioned the actual plant condition during the time period when the disparity in cycle counts developed.

The staff notes that the reconstitution for the early periods of plant operation identified more cycles than the prior 2003 data; in addition, the applicant also identified an additional cycle during one of the time periods reviewed by the staff. The specific instance was during a power ascension period for which the applicant reviewed strip chart records of RCS temperature to identify the additional thermal cycle.

The applicant provided adequate responses to all of the audit teams questions and concerns.

BV-1 2009 Event Reconstitution 200 final 10 years of operation 183 - final projection 4 events per 150 year 116 thru 10/15/2003 Heatup Events 2 events per year 2003 Count 100 Actual 109 Thru 12/31/2008 50 0

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 44 46 48 50 52 54 56 58 60 Years of Service Figure 4

Beaver Valley Power Station, Units 1 and 2 cc:

Joseph J. Hagan Manager, Fleet Licensing President and Chief Nuclear Officer FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Company FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Company Mail Stop A-GO-2 Mail Stop A-GO-19 76 South Main Street 76 South Main Street Akron, OH 44308 Akron, OH 44308 Director, Fleet Regulatory Affairs James H. Lash FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Company Senior Vice President of Operations Mail Stop A-GO-2 and Chief Operating Officer 76 South Main Street FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Company Akron, OH 44308 Mail Stop A-GO-14 76 South Main Street Manager, Site Regulatory Compliance Akron, OH 44308 FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Company Beaver Valley Power Station Danny L. Pace Mail Stop A-BV-A Senior Vice President, Fleet Engineering P.O. Box 4, Route 168 FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Company Shippingport, PA 15077 Mail Stop A-GO-14 76 South Main Street Regional Administrator, Region I Akron, OH 44308 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 475 Allendale Road Jeannie M. Rinckel King of Prussia, PA 19406 Vice President, Fleet Oversight FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Company Resident Inspector Mail Stop A-GO-14 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 76 South Main Street P.O. Box 298 Akron, OH 44308 Shippingport, PA 15077 Paul A. Harden Cliff Custer Vice President, Nuclear Support FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Company FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Company Beaver Valley Power Station Mail Stop A-GO-14 P.O. Box 4, Route 168 76 South Main Street Shippingport, PA 15077 Akron, OH 44308 Steve Dort David W. Jenkins, Attorney FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Company FirstEnergy Corporation Beaver Valley Power Station Mail Stop A-GO-15 P.O. Box 4, Route 168 76 South Main Street Shippingport, PA 15077 Akron, OH 44308 Mike Banko FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Company Beaver Valley Power Station P.O. Box 4, Route 168 Shippingport, PA 15077