ML13079A330

McGuire Nuclear Station - Restatement of License Condition Proposed in August 15, 2012 Response to Request for Additional Information Related to License Amendment Request for Measurement Uncertainty Recapture Power Uprate (TAC Nos. ME8213 a

ML13079A330
Person / Time
Site:	Mcguire, McGuire
Issue date:	03/07/2013
From:	Capps S D Duke Energy Carolinas
To:	Document Control Desk, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
TAC ME8213, TAC ME8214
Download: ML13079A330 (6)

Text

M Duke STEVEN D CAPPS* W'Energy Vice PresidentMcGuire Nuclear StationDuke EnergyMG01 VP / 12700 Hagers Ferry Rd.Huntersville, NC 28078980-875-4805980-875-4809 faxSteven. Capps@duke-energy. cornMarch 7, 2013 10 CFR 50.90U. S. Nuclear Regulatory CommissionWashington, D.C. 20555ATTENTION: Document Control DeskSubject: Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC (Duke Energy)McGuire Nuclear Station, Units 1 and 2Docket Nos. 50-369 and 50-370Restatement of License Condition Proposed in August 15, 2012Response to Request for Additional Information Related to LicenseAmendment Request for Measurement Uncertainty Recapture PowerUprate (TAC Nos. ME8213 and ME8214)This letter provides a restatement of a proposed License Condition described in an August 15,2012 response to an August 1, 2012 Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) request foradditional information (RAI) related to a March 5, 2012 McGuire Nuclear Station (MNS) Units 1and 2 License Amendment Request (LAR) submitted pursuant to 10 CFR 50.90 in support of ameasurement uncertainty recapture (MUR) power uprate.In the August 15, 2012 MNS MUR LAR RAI response, MNS agreed to a License Condition thatwould address the issue described in RAI question 41. On February 22, 2013, the NRCrequested that MNS provide an explicit restatement of the License Condition proposed in theresponse to RAI question 41. This restatement is provided in Enclosure 1.The restatement of the pioposed License Condition in Enclosure 1, which is consistent with theLicense Condition proposed in the August 15, 2012 response to RAI question 41, does notrevise or replace the August 15, 2012 response to RAI question 41. In addition, the conclusionsreached in the original determination that the MNS MUR LAR contains No Significant HazardsConsiderations and the basis for the categorical exclusion from performing anEnvironmental/impact Statement have not changed as a result of the proposed LicenseCondition restatement provided in this submittal.L'ww. du ke-energy curn74kco !

Nuclear Regulatory CommissionMarch 7, 2013Page 2Please contact Jeffrey N Robertson at 980-875-4499 if additional questions arise regarding thisLAR.Sincerely,S. D. CappsEnclosurescc: w/enclosureV. M. McCreeRegional Administrator, Region IIU.S. Nuclear Regulatory CommissionMarquis One Tower245 Peachtree Center Ave., NE, Suite 1200Atlanta, GA 30303-1257J. H. Thompson (addressee only)Project Manager (MNS)U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission11555 Rockville PikeMail Stop 0-8 G9ARockville, MD, 20852-2738J. ZeilerNRC Senior Resident InspectorMcGuire Nuclear StationW. L. Cox Ill, Section ChiefNorth Carolina Department of Environment and Natural ResourcesDivision of Environmental HealthRadiation Protection Section1645 Mail Service CenterRaleigh, NC 27699-1645 4 'Nuclear Regulatory CommissionMarch 7, 2013Page 3OATH AND AFFIRMATIONSteven D. Capps affirms that he is the person who subscribed his name to the foregoingstatement, and that all the matters and facts set forth herein are true and correct to the best ofhis knowledge.StevenD.CappsV resident, McGuire Nuclear StationSubscribed and sworn to me: ("7 ý Y-.k7) 2,0If(-:Datekoa"Public2jylUMy commission expires:/I ZD1 1ý -Date

'Nuclear Regulatory CommissionMarch 7, 2013Enclosure 1Enclosure IRestatement of License Condition Proposed in August 15, 2012 Response to a Requestfor Additional Information Related to License Amendment Request for MeasurementUncertainty Recapture Power UprateBy letter dated August 15, 2012 (Agencywide Documents Access and Management System,Accession No. ML12250A622), Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC (Duke Energy), submitted aresponse to an August 1, 2012 Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) request for additionalinformation (RAI) (Agencywide Documents Access and Management System, AccessionNo. ML12215A330) related to a March 5, 2012 McGuire Nuclear Station (MNS) Units 1 and 2License Amendment Request (LAR) (Agencywide Documents Access and ManagementSystem, Accession No. ML12215A330) submitted pursuant to 10 CFR 50.90 in support of ameasurement uncertainty recapture (MUR) power uprate. As part of the August 15, 2012 MURLAR RAI response, MNS provided a response to RAI question 41 from the August 1, 2012 NRCRAI. Both RAI question 41 and the MNS response from the August 15, 2012 submittal arecopied below:NRC Question 41Pressure-Temperature (P-T) limit curvesThe regulation at 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix G, Paragraph IV.A states that, "thepressure-retaining components of the reactor coolant pressure boundary [RCPB] thatare made of ferritic materials must meet the requirements of the American Society ofMechanical Engineers Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code [ASME Code, Section III],supplemented by the additional requirements set forth in [paragraph IV.A.2, "Pressure-Temperature (P-T) Limits and Minimum Temperature Requirements"]..." Therefore,10 CFR Part 50, Appendix G requires that P-T limits be developed for the ferriticmaterials in the reactor vessel (RV) beltline (neutron fluence > 1 x 1017 n/cm2,E > 1 MeV), as well as ferritic materials not in the RV beltline (neutron fluence< 1 x 1017 n/cm2, E > 1 MeV). Further, 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix G, requires that allRCPB components must meet the ASME Code,Section III, requirements. The relevantASME Code,Section III, requirement that will affect the P-T limits is the lowest servicetemperature requirement for all RCPB components specified in Section III, NB-2332(b).Page 1 of 3 q, Nuclear Regulatory CommissionMarch 7, 2013Enclosure 1The P-T limit calculations for ferritic RCPB components that are not RV beltline shellmaterials may define P-T curves that are more limiting than those calculated for the RVbeltline shell materials due to the following factors:1. RV nozzles, penetrations, and other discontinuities have complexgeometries that may exhibit significantly higher stresses than those forthe RV beltline shell region. These higher stresses can potentially resultin more restrictive P-T limits, even if the reference temperature (RTNDT)for these components is not as high as that of RV beltline shell materialsthat have simpler geometries.2. Ferritic RCPB components that are not part of the RV may have initialRTNDT values, which may define a-.more restrictive lowest operatingtemperature in the P -T limits than those for the RV beltline shellmaterials.Consequently, please describe how the current P-T limit curves at 34 EFPY for McGuireUnits 1 and 2 and the methodology used to develop these curves considered all RVmaterials (beltline and non-beltline) and the lowest service temperature of all ferriticRCPB materials, consistent with the requirements of 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix G, in theMUR power uprate LAR.McGuire Response to NRC Question 41Consideration of RV materials (beltline and non-beltline) and the lowest servicetemperature of all ferritic RCPB materials consistent with the requirements of10 CFR Part 50, Appendix G, is the subject of ongoing discussions between the industryand the NRC. During discussion of this RAI question with the NRC, the NRC Staffindicated they would require this issue be addressed as part of their MUR LAR reviewrather than waiting for resolution of the ongoing industry discussions. To this end, theNRC proposed issuance of a new MNS License Condition requiring submittal of a site-specific analysis or a topical report addressing RAI Question 41 within approximatelyone year after NRC approval of the MNS MUR LAR. MNS agrees that a LicenseCondition would address the issue raised in the RAI.On February 22, 2013, the NRC requested MNS provide an explicit restatement of the LicenseCondition proposed in the McGuire response to RAI question 41. This restatement, which isprovided in Table 1 of this Enclosure, is consistent with the License Condition proposed in theAugust 15, 2012 response to RAI question 41.Page 2 of 3 A# Nuclear Regulatory CommissionMarch 7, 2013Enclosure 1Table IRestatement of MNS Unit I and Unit 2 License Condition Pro~osed in the Auaust 15.mRestatement of IWINS Unit I and Unit 2 License Condition Prooosed in the Auaust 152012 Response to MNS MUR LAR RAI Question 41Proposed Unit I License ConditionThe Licensee shall perform an analysis, in the form of either a topical report or site-specific analysis, describing how the current P-T limit curves at 34 Effective FullPower Years (EFPY) for McGuire Unit 1 and the methodology used to develop thesecurves considered all Reactor Vessel (RV) materials (beltline and non-beltline) and thelowest service temperature of all ferritic Reactor Coolant Pressure Boundary (RCPB)materials, as applicable, consistent with the requirements of 10 CFR Part 50,Appendix G. This analysis shall be provided to the NRC within one year after NRCapproval of the March 5, 2012 McGuire Measurement Uncertainty Recapture (MUR)License Amendment Request.Proposed Unit 2 License ConditionThe Licensee shall perform an analysis, in the form of either a topical report or site-specific analysis, describing how the current P-T limit curves at 34 Effective FullPower Years (EFPY) for McGuire Unit 2 and the methodology used to develop thesecurves considered all Reactor Vessel (RV) materials (beltline and non-beltline) and thelowest service temperature of all ferritic Reactor Coolant Pressure Boundary (RCPB)materials, as applicable, consistent with the requirements of 10 CFR Part 50,Appendix G. This analysis shall be provided to the NRC within one year after NRCapproval of the March 5, 2012 McGuire Measurement Uncertainty Recapture (MUR)License Amendment Request.Page 3 of 3