ML060240120

Seabrook Station, Unit No. 1 - Facsimile Transmission, Draft Request for Additional Information (RAI) to Be Discussed in an Upcoming Conference Call (TAC MC8434)

ML060240120
Person / Time
Site:	Seabrook
Issue date:	01/24/2006
From:	Miller G E NRC/NRR/ADRO/DORL/LPLB
To:	Roberts D J NRC/NRR/ADRO/DORL/LPLB
Miller G, NRR/DLPM, 415-2481
References
TAC MC8434
Download: ML060240120 (4)

Text

January 24, 2006MEMORANDUM TO: Darrell J. Roberts, Chief Plant Licensing Branch I-2 Division of Operating Reactor Licensing Office of Nuclear Reactor RegulationFROM:G. Edward Miller, Project Manager /RA/Plant Licensing Branch I-2 Division of Operating Reactor Licensing Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation

SUBJECT:

SEABROOK STATION, UNIT NO. 1 FACSIMILE TRANSMISSION,DRAFT REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION (RAI) TO BE DISCUSSED IN AN UPCOMING CONFERENCE CALL (TAC NO. MC8434)The enclosed draft RAI was transmitted by facsimile on January 24, 2006, toMr. Mike O'Keefe, FPL Energy Seabrook, LLC (FPLE). This draft RAI was transmitted to facilitate the technical review being conducted by the staff and to support a conference call withFPLE in order to clarify certain items in the licensee's submittal. The draft RAI is related to FPLE's submittal dated September 22, 2005, regarding a measurement uncertainty recapturepower uprate. Review of the draft RAI would allow FPLE to determine and agree upon a schedule to respond to the RAI. This memorandum and the attachment do not convey a formal request for information or represent an NRC staff position.Docket No. 50-443

Enclosure:

Draft Request for Additional Information MEMORANDUM TO: Darrell J. Roberts, Chief Plant Licensing Branch I-2 Division of Operating Reactor Licensing Office of Nuclear Reactor RegulationFROM:G. Edward Miller, Project Manager /RA/Plant Licensing Branch I-2 Division of Operating Reactor Licensing Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation

SUBJECT:

SEABROOK STATION, UNIT NO. 1 FACSIMILE TRANSMISSION,DRAFT REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION (RAI) TO BE DISCUSSED IN AN UPCOMING CONFERENCE CALL (TAC NO. MC8434)The enclosed draft RAI was transmitted by facsimile on January 24, 2006, toMr. Mike O'Keefe, FPL Energy Seabrook, LLC (FPLE). This draft RAI was transmitted to facilitate the technical review being conducted by the staff and to support a conference call withFPLE in order to clarify certain items in the licensee's submittal. The draft RAI is related to FPLE's submittal dated September 22, 2005, regarding a measurement uncertainty recapturepower uprate. Review of the draft RAI would allow FPLE to determine and agree upon a schedule to respond to the RAI. This memorandum and the attachment do not convey a formal request for information or represent an NRC staff position.Docket No. 50-443

Enclosure:

Draft Request for Additional Information DISTRIBUTION

Public IAhmedAHowe LPL1-2GEMiller Accession No.: ML060240120OFFICELPL1-2/PMLPL1-2/LANRR/EICB/BCNAMEGEMiller:em CRaynorAHowe DATE1/24/061/24/061/24/06 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY EnclosureREQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATIONSEABROOK STATION, UNIT NO. 1(TAC NO. MC8434)By letter dated September 22, 2005, FPL Energy Seabrook, LLC (FPLE or licensee) submitteda license amendment request (LAR) for a change to the Seabrook Station, Unit No. 1 (Seabrook) Technical Specifications requesting a measurement uncertainty recapture power uprate. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staff requests the following additionalinformation to complete its review.1.Section 2.1 of Attachment 1 to LAR 05-04 indicates that there are some external unifiedfracture mechanics (UFMs) (Caldon 2-path chordal devices) installed on the same pipe as the Caldon Leading Edge Flow Measurement (LEFM) Check Plus TM system. TheNRC staff understands the Caldon external UFMs to be single-path diameteral devices,not 2-path chordal devices, as stated. Please explain this apparent discrepancy. Additionally, please indicate whether these devices will be removed after installation ofthe Caldon LEFM Check Plus TM UFM system. If they are to remain in place, pleasedescribe the function they will perform. 2.Section 2.1 of Attachment 1 to the LAR states that the transmittal of data from theproposed UFM to the plant computer will be via fiber optic cable and data converters toprovide raw and conditioned data and diagnostic and quality information. Please explain the difference between raw and conditioned data and their respective functions. 3.In response to Criterion 4 of the NRC safety evaluation approving Caldon TopicalReports ER-80P and ER-157P, you stated that the calibration factor for the Seabrook spool piece will be established by testing at Alden Research Laboratory and the finalacceptance of the site-specific uncertainty analyses will occur after the completion of thecommissioning process. As such, the uncertainties listed in Table 2.3-1, "Total Power Uncertainty Determination," are the preliminary calculated values to be confirmed by the laboratory tests and the commissioning process. Please confirm that Table 2.3-1 contains the bounding values, and submit the uncertainty calculations referenced in the table notes for NRC staff review. Additionally, please explain how the laboratory calibration of the UFM will be confirmedduring in-situ site acceptance testing. 4.Section 2.5 of Attachment 1 to the LAR states that administrative controls will bedeveloped to specify that if the Caldon LEFM Check Plus TM system has experienced anoutage of one of the two sections (with four paths each), plant operation will beconsistent with a complete out-of-service condition (i.e., two sections out of service).

The Caldon Topical Report ER-157P was approved assuming t hat the UFM systemwould be considered out-of-service in the case of more than one path out-of-service. Per the description in the LAR, it appears that the system could by operat ed assumingfull accuracy with up to three paths out-of-service. Please clarify this apparent discrepancy. 5.RIS 2002-003, Attachment 1, Guideline I.1.F lists five aspects of calibration andmaintenance procedures, each to be specifically addressed for all instruments that affect the power calorimetric calculation. Section 2.4 of Attachment 1 to the LAR addresses the five aspects with respect to the UFM, but only the last three (I.1.F.iii through I.1.F.v) are addressed for all other instruments affecting the power calorimetric calculation. Please provide sufficient information to address the remaining two aspects for all instrumentation, including the plant computer, that affect the power calorimetriccalculation. Please note that Section 2.5.2 of Attachment 1 to the LAR states that a main plantcomputer system failure will be treated as a loss of both the Caldon LEFM Check Plus TMsystem and the ability to obtain a correct calorimetric power calculation using alternateplant instrumentation. As such, maintaining and controlling main plant computersoftware and hardware configuration is necessary for correct power calorimetric calculation. 6.In your submittal you addressSection VII.2.B of Attachment 1 to RIS 2002-03 withrespect to the safety parameter display system, however no additional information isprovided with respect to control room controls, displays, and alarms. Please provide a description of those parameters of the Caldon LEFM Check PlusTM system that will becontrolled, displayed, or alarmed in the control room.