GNRO-2015/00063, Response to Request for Additional Information Regarding License Amendment Request to Revise Technical Specifications for Containment Leak Rate Testing

From kanterella
Revision as of 15:47, 20 June 2019 by StriderTol (talk | contribs) (Created page by program invented by StriderTol)
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Response to Request for Additional Information Regarding License Amendment Request to Revise Technical Specifications for Containment Leak Rate Testing
ML15302A042
Person / Time
Site: Grand Gulf Entergy icon.png
Issue date: 10/28/2015
From: Kevin Mulligan
Entergy Operations
To:
Document Control Desk, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
GNRO-2015/00063
Download: ML15302A042 (14)
v • d • e


Text

Entergy GNRO-2015/00063October28,2015 u.s.Nuclear Regulatory CommissionAttn:DocumentControlDeskWashington,DC20555-0001 Entergy Operations, Inc.P.o.Box756PortGibson,MS39150 Kevin MulliganSiteVicePresidentGrandGulfNuclearStationTel.(601)437-7500

SUBJECT:

GrandGulf NuclearStationResponsetoRequestforAdditionalInformationRegardingLicense AmendmentRequesttoReviseTechnical Specifications for ContainmentLeakRateTestingGrandGulf NuclearStation,Unit1DocketNo.50-416LicenseNo.NPF-29

REFERENCES:

1.Grand Gulf NuclearStation,Unit1-RequestforAdditionalInformationRegardingLicense AmendmentRequesttoReviseTechnical Specifications for ContainmentLeakRateTesting(TACNO.MF6310)2.EntergyLetter,"ApplicationtoReviseTechnical Specifications for PermanentExtensionofTypeCLeakRateTestingFrequencyandReductionofType BandCGraceIntervals," GNRO-2015/00026, dated May 27,2015 (ADAMS AccessionNo.ML15147A599).3.Grand Gulf NuclearStation,Unit1-Issuanceof Amendment RegardingMaximumExtendedLoadLineLimitAnalysisPLUS(TACNO.MF2798),dated August31,2015

DearSirorMadam:

EntergyOperations,Inc.isproviding,inthe Attachment,responsestotheReference1RequestforAdditionalInformation(RAI).The Significant Hazards Consideration determination providedinReference2isnotalteredbytheadditional informationprovidedintheattachedRAI responses.

.Additionally,EntergyOperations,Inc.plansto implement License Amendment205regardingMaximumExtendedLoadLineLimit AnalysisPLUSwithin180daysfromthedateofissuanceoftheamendment.License Amendment205willreducethe containmentpeakaccidentpressurefrom14.8poundspersquareinchgauge(psig)to12.1psig.TheRAIresponsesprovided,inthe Attachment,onlyaddresstheReference1RAI.Thislettercontainsnonew commitments.Ifyouhaveany questionsorrequireadditionalinformation,pleasecontactMr.JamesNadeauat 601-437-2103.

GNRO-2015/00063Page2of2 I declare under penalty of perjurythatthe foregoingistrueandcorrect; executed on October 28, 2015.Sincerely,---y.1"""'---_--------

KM/sas

Attachment:

Grand Gulf NuclearStationReeto Request for Additional Information Regarding License Amendment RequesttoRevise Technical Specifications for ContainmentLeakRate Testingcc:with Attachment u.S.Nuclear Regulatory CommissionATTN:Mr.A.

Wang, NRR/DORLMailStop OWFN/8 G14 Washington,DC20555-0001 u.S.Nuclear Regulatory CommissionATTN:Mr.MarcL.Dapas Regional Administrator,RegionIV1600East Lamar Boulevard Arlington,TX76011-4511Mr.B.J.SmithDirector,Divisionof Radiological Health Mississippi DepartmentofHealthDivisionof Radiological Health3150Lawson Street Jackson,MS39213 NRC Senior Resident Inspector Grand Gulf Nuclear Station Port Gibson,MS39150 Attachment to GNRO-2015/00063 Grand Gulf Nuclear Station Response to Request for Additional Information Regarding License Amendment RequesttoRevise Technical Specifications for ContainmentLeakRateTesting Attachment to GNRO-2015/00063Page1of11 By applicationdatedMay 27,2015 (Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS)AccessionNo.ML15147A599), Entergy Operations, Inc.(Entergyorthelicensee)requestedchangestothe technical specifications(TS)forGrand Gulf NuclearStation,Unit1(GGNS).The proposed changes would permittheexistingTitle10ofthe Code of Federal Regulations(10CFR)Part50, Appendix J,"Primary Reactor ContainmentLeakageTestingfor Water-Cooled Power Reactors,"TypeCLocalLeakRateTest(LLRT) frequencytobeextendedfrom5yearsupto75monthsona permanentbasisanda permanentreductionof10CFR50, AppendixJ,TypeBandTypeCtestgraceintervals.TheU.S.NuclearRegulatory Commission (NRC)staff has determined that additional informationisneededto completeitsreviewofthe subject license amendment request(LAR).Thefollowing questions constitutetheNRC's requestforadditional information(RAI).GGNSprovidesits responses subsequenttoeachNRCRAIquestion,asfollows:

RAI-1:Theregulationat10CFRSection50.54(0),requires primary reactor containments for water-cooledpowerreactorstobe subjecttothe requirements of AppendixJto10CFRPart50,"LeakageRateTestingof Containment of Water Cooled Nuclear Power Plants." Appendix J specifies containmentleakagetesting requirements, includingthetypesoftestsrequiredtoensurethe leak-tight integrityoftheprimary reactor containment,systems,and components that penetrate the containment.

In addition, Appendix J discusses leakage rate acceptancecriteria,test methodology, frequency oftesting,andreporting requirementsforeachtypeoftest.OptionBto10CFRPart50, Appendix J, requiresthattestintervalsforTypeA,TypeB,andTypeCtestingbe determinedbyusinga performance-based approach.Performance-basedtestintervalsarebasedon consideration of operatinghistoryofthe componentandresultingriskfromitsfailure.

'Performance-based' for AppendixJreferstoboththe performance history necessarytoextendtest intervalsandthecriteria necessarytomeetthe requirementsofOption B.TheNRC staff approved the NuclearEnergyInstitute(NEI)94-01,Revision3,"Industry Guideline for Implementing Performance-BasedOptionof10CFRPart50, AppendixJ,"(ADAMS AccessionNo.ML12221A202)byNRCfinalsafety evaluationreportdatedJune 8,2012 (ADAMS AccessionNo.ML121030286).

Accordingly,ifa licensee considers an extended testintervalof greaterthan60months,thereviewto establish the surveillancetestintervalsshould include programmatic controlstoprovide additional assurancethatthe increased probability of componentleakageiskepttoaminimum.

In Attachment1of Entergy's application,"EvaluationoftheProposed Change,"Section3.4.2,"UseofGraceintheDeferralofTypeBandTypeC Testing," the licenseenotes:"Forroutine schedulingoftestsatintervalsover60months,refertothe additional requirementsofSection11.3.2"(i.e.,ofNEI94-01,Revision3-A (ADAMS AccessionNo.ML12221A202)).However,the evaluationdoesnot addresshowthe recommended"additional considerations" (i.e.,"as-found tests,""schedule," and"review")ofSection11.3.2wereappliedtotheTypeBandTypeCLLRTdata containedinLAR Attachment 1, Tables3.3.1-1and3.3.1-2.ThestaffrequeststhatEntergyprovidethe informationrelatedtothe programmaticcontrolsto supportextendedTypeCLLRTtest intervalsbeyond60months.

Attachment to GNRO-2015/00063 GGNS ResponsetoRAI-1:Page2of11InresponsetoRAI-1, GGNS first provides clarificationthattheabove referenced statement:"Notes:Forroutine schedulingoftestsat intervalsover60months,refertothe additional requirements of Section11.3.2"wassimplya quotedportionfromthree paragraphs excerptedfromNEI94-01,Revision3-A,Section10.1,relatedto schedular grace, extractedandinsertedintoLARSection3.4.2,"UseofGraceintheDeferralofTypeBandTypeC Testing,"toshowthatGGNSwouldbeapplyingthe 9-monthgraceperiodtobothTypes BandCtestingonly.ThisLARsectionwasnot intended toaddress specific details for implementation of programmaticcontrolsto support extendingTypeCLLRTtest intervalsbeyond60months.Perthe guidanceprovidedin NEI-94-01,Revision3-A,GGNS addressed the programmaticcontrolsduringits eligibility analysis performedforeach potentially eligibleTypeCcomponent,andthe documentationofsuchis available for internal/externalreviewin accordancewithNEI94-01,Revision3-A,Section12.2,Records.

NEI-94-01,Revision3-A,Section3.2,statesinpart,that,"If a licensee considers extended test intervals of greaterthan60monthsforaTypeBoraTypeCtested component,thereviewto establish surveillance test intervalsshouldincludetheadditional considerations:..."andthenit provides informationrelatedtothe"As-found Tests,""Schedule,"and"Review." These programmatic controls are addressedasfollows:

As-Found(AF)Tests:Theentire population of containmentisolationvalves(CIVs) subject toLLRTatGGNSwas evaluated to identify successful past performance as determinedbytheAF leak-rateofeach successive periodicLLRTbeing comparedtoandverifiedasbeinglessthan the associated administrative leakagelimit.Three consecutiveAFtestswereutilizedasthe acceptancecriteriafor successful past performanceaspersection11.3.2,asadded conservatism and assurancethatCIV performance warranted extendingthetestintervalfrom60to75months.

Schedule:Theentire populationofCIVs subjecttoLLRTat GGNS was evaluatedtoassessthe effectiveness of schedulingofLLRTsonthe extendedinterval,both currentlyat60monthsandinthefutureat75months.TheGGNSwork management system employs repetitiveworktasks that scheduleCIVLLRTs.The resultant scheduleissuchthatan approximate evenly distributed numberofCIVsaretestedeachrefuelingoutagewithall componentsbeingtestedatthe maximum extendedtestinterval.A numberofCIVsaretestedwhiletheplantisin operation (Operating Modes1,2Or3)addingtotheoveralleven distributionofLLRTs.Review.TheGGNS ContainmentLeakRate TestingProgramandits implementation processes and procedureswerereviewedto ensure consideration of plant-specific CIV performancehistories,datareviewandanalysis, establishment of appropriate LLRT frequencies and risk-impact assessment were presentandongoingintermsof evaluatingexistingornew proposed extendedtestintervals.Theexisting programmatic guidance was determinedtobepresentand effective in maintaining,reducingor extendingLLRTtest intervalsaswarranted.

RAI-2: The staffnotesthatonJuly18,2012,theNRC approved License AmendmentNo.191(ADAMS AccessionNo.ML121210020)forGGNSto increase the maximum steady state reactor corepowerlevelby approximately 15 percentfromtheoriginallicensed thermalpowerlevelof3,833 megawattthermal(Le., extended poweruprate(EPU)).The licensewasalso amended toincludeanewLicense Condition2.C.(44),whichstates,inpart,thatleakratetests associated Attachment to GNRO-2015/00063Page3of11 with surveillance requirements requiredbyTS 5.5.12arenot requiredtobe performed until their next scheduled performance dates.License Condition 2.C.(44)states thattheleakrate tests required in refueling outageRF-18(i.e.springof 2012)weretobe performedattheEPU calculated peak containment pressure orwithinEPU drywell bypass leakagelimits,as appropriate.

License AmendmentNo.191 changed the license basis"Ps"of11.5 pounds per square inch gauge(psig)tothe current licensebasis(CLB)"P,"of14.8psigas reflected in currentTS5.5.12.The staff requests additional information regarding the LLRTPa valuesusedto performTypeBandTypeC tests containedinLAR Attachment 1, Table 3.3.1-1"Types BandCLLRT Combined As-Found/As-Left Trend Summary."1)How manyofthe78 component TypeBtestsandofthe151 componentTypeCtests were performedattheCLBP avalueof14.8psig during 2012 (RF-18)and 201419)?GGNS ResponsetoRAI-2-1):

For clarification, Refueling Outage RF-18 occurredinthespringof2012.

Thirty-two (32)ofthe78 componentTypeB testsand143ofthe151 component TypeCtestswere performedattheCLBP a valueof14.8psig during 2012 (RF-18)and2014(RF-19).

These values include Type Band C component tests performed duringCycle19 (Operating Modes1,2or3).2)Wereanyofthe Type B component and Type C component tests performedattheCLB P avalueof14.8psig before RF-18 (2012)?GGNS ResponsetoRAI-2-2):

No Type B component or Type C component tests were performedattheCLBP a valueof14.8psig priortothestartof RF-18 (2012).3)How many Type B penetration tests and Type C containment isolationvalvetesthaveyettobe performedattheCLBP avalueof14.8psig?

GGNS Response to RAI-2-3): The number of Type B penetration testsyettobe performedattheCLBP avalueof14.8psigis forty-six(46).The number of TypeCCIV testsyettobe performedattheCLBP avalueof14.8psigis four (4).4)Whenwasthelast10CFR50, Appendix J, Type A ILRT performedonthe containment at GGNS?Whatwasthe ILRT leakage(i.e.,totalof Type A+B+C)rateforthis ILRT?Whatwastherangeofthe containment internal test pressure, Pa, during this ILRT?GGNS Response to RAI-2-4):Thelast10CFR50, Appendix J, Type A ILRT performedonthe containment at GGNSwasin2008.The ILRT leakage(i.e.,totalofType A+B+C)rateforthisILRTwas Attachment to GNRO-2015/00063Page4of11 120,624sccm.Therangeofthe containmentinternaltestpressure,P a ,duringthisILRTwas12.48psigto12.5psig.5)Thelast paragraphofLARSection3.3.1, Attachment1(page11of26),reads:"Table 3.3.1-1 providestheLLRTdatatrend summariesforGGNSsince2005and encompasses previousILRTs."ThiswouldimplythatmorethanoneILRTwas performedbetweentheyearsof2005and2014

-,IfmorethanoneILRTwasperformedduringthis timeframe,pleaseprovidetheILRT leakagerateandtherangeofthe containmentinternaltestpressure,P a.recordedduringtheILRT(s) performed.

GGNS ResponsetoRAI-2-5):TherehasonlybeenoneTypeAtest performedbetweentheyearsof2005and2014anditwas performedin2008.Thelast paragraphofLARSection3.3.1 (Attachment 1,Page11of26)reads,"Table 3.3.1-1 provides the LLRT data trend summariesforGGNSsince2005and encompasses previous ILRTs." This sentence contains a typographical errorinthat"ILRTs"shouldbe"ILRT"andisrevisedfor clarificationasfollows:"Table3.3.1-1providestheLLRTdatatrend summariesforGGNSsince2005and encompasses the previous ILRT." RAI-3: The staff notes thatane-mailfrom EntergytotheNRCdated August24,2011(ADAMS AccessionNo.ML112370085), predicted an increaseinthetotalTypeB+TypeCleakagerateof13.75 percent (i.e., 0.182.+/-0.160),duetothe changeinthe license basis"Ps"of11.5psigtotheCLB"P,"of14.8psig.Uponreviewand analysisofthedata containedinLAR Attachment1,Table3.3.1-1,thestaffnotesthatthe aggregate"AFMinPath"TypeB+TypeCLLRTleakagehasgoneupby65 percentsincetheNRCissuedLicense AmendmentNo.191.{(5918+12885+18984+18057)

+4}+({24453+21595)

+2}=1.65Performinga similar calculation, largerratiosof2.57forthe"ALMaxPath"and2.43forthe"ALMinPath"are obtainedfromthedata containedinTable3.3.3-1oftheLAR.Thestaff requeststhatEntergyprovidean explanationoftheseratiosinlightoftheGGNS prediction.

GGNS ResponsetoRAI-3: The subjecte-mail(ML11.2370085)provideda mathematical extrapolationoftheTypeAtestresultsof2008froma performance test pressureof11.5psigtotheCLB"Ps"of14.8psig.Thetextofthee-mailisasfollows: "An evaluation was performedtoconfirmthat leakagetestresultsbasedonthe formerPawouldstillbe expected to satisfy the appropriate acceptancecriteriawhentestedatthenew higherPa.Basically,the leakagewasscaledbya factorof1.134basedonthe relationshipofthe leakageratetothe squarerootofthepressure.Areviewofthetestingresultsat GGNS demonstrates that substantialmarginexistsbetweenthe extrapolatedresultsandthe relevant acceptancecriteria.Allthe increased leakagerateswerefoundtocomplywiththe current Tech Spec requirementsthatincludemargin Attachment to GNRO-2015/00063Page5of11toLa.Thus, adequate marginisstill availableforthe higher test pressure.A summaryofkey results from that presentation is presented below." wt%/day0.2100.238 0.5115 0.75La perTS SR wt%/day 0.160 0.182 0.40920.6LaperTSSR3.6.1.1.1 wt°,lo/day 0.370 0.420 0.682 La perTSSR3.6.1.1.1scfh76.7'87.0100TSSR 3.6.1.3.8 scfh 166.3 188.6250TSSR 3.6.1.3.8 The subject e-mailisalso referenced in Enclosure 2, Section3.1.2,ofthe GGNS EPU license amendmentNo.191 safety evaluation (Reference GGNS-Issuance of Amendment re: Extended Power Uprate (TAC No.ME4679), Enclosure 2: Safety Evaluationbythe Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Related to AmendmentNo.191to Facility Operating License No.NPF-29 (ML121210020>>. , Section 3.1.2,"LeakRateTest: New License Condition 2.C.(44)," states the following:

"3.1.2 LeakRateTest: New License Condition 2.C.(44)IntheEPULAR (Reference1[ML102660409]), the licensee proposedtoaddthe following new license condition.

Accordingly, Facility Operating License No.NPF-29 would be revisedtoadd new paragraph 2.C.(44), which would state: (44)Leak rate tests associated with Surveillance Requirements (SR)3.6.1.1.1, 3.6.1.3.5, and 3.6.1.3.9, as requiredbyTS 5.5.12andin accordancewith10 CFR 50, Appendix J, OptionB,and SRs3.6.5.1.1and 3.6.5.1.2arenot requiredtobe performed until their next scheduled performancedates.The testswillbe performedattheEPU calculated long-term peak containment pressure or within EPU drywell bypass leakagelimits,as appropriate.

By letter dated September9,2011 (Reference28[ML112521284]), the licensee revised the proposed license condition 2.C.(44)to delete"long-term"fromthe phrase"EPU calculated long-term peak containment pressure." Accordingly, Facility Operating License No.NPF-29 would be revisedtoaddnew paragraph 2.C.(44), which would state: (44)Leak rate tests associated with Surveillance Requirements (SR)3.6.1.1.1, 3.6.1.3.5, and 3.6.1.3.9, as requiredbyTS 5.5.12andin accordancewith10CFR50, Appendix J, OptionB,and SRs3.6.5.1.1and 3.6.5.1.2arenot requiredtobe performed until their next scheduled performancedates.The testswillbe performedattheEPU calculated peak containment pressure or within EPU drywell bypass leakagelimits,as appropriate.

Attachment to GNRO-2015/00063 NRC Staff Evaluation10CFR[50}, Appendix J LeakRateTestingPage6of11 By letter dated September9,2011 (Reference28[ML112521284]), the licensee revised the proposed license condition (paragraph 2.C.(44)of NPF-29)to delete"long-term"fromthe phrase"EPU calculated long-term peak containment pressure"andtoaddthe following sentencetoTS 5.5.12: The calculated peak containment internal pressure for the design basislossof coolant accident, Pa, is 14.8 psig.These changes were made as resultofthe NRC staff conclusion that the licensee's interpretation of"long-term peak containment pressure" was inconsistentwiththe Appendix J criteria.Assuch,the licensee proposed to performthe10CFR50 Appendix J testingperTSSRs 3.6.1.1.1, 3.6.1.3.5, and 3.6.1.3.9atthe revised valueofPa(14.8psig)atthe next scheduled test date insteadofatthe timeofEPU implementation.

The licensee justified this proposalbyan evaluation (Reference207[ML112370085])

demonstrating that the leakage test results basedona former P a (11.5 psig)would still be expected to satisfy the appropriate acceptance criteria when testedattheEPUvalueofP a(14.8psig).TheNRC staff considers the evaluation acceptable because the licensee has shown that the predicted leakagesattheEPU valueofPaof14.8psigare boundedbythe acceptable leakage limitsper10 CFR 50 AppendixJ.TheNRC staff therefore considers it acceptable for the licensee to perform the above SR testsatthe next scheduled date." The extrapolationisonlyvalid for the single point in time thatitwas performed.Thedata providedinthe table shown above"predicted" what the measured test results wouldbeat14.8psigforthe values measuredat11.5psig.

Theuseofthis extrapolated valueasa predictor of future ILRT and LLRT results is inappropriateandis outside the scopeofthe information providedbythe e-mail.In addition, the datainthe e-mailcouldnottakeinto account future changesinthe performance of TypeBand Type C components as displayedinLAR Table 3.3.1-1.The major contributorstothe increase in LLRT leakage were identified and discussedinLAR Table 3.3.1-2.As statedintheLAR Section3.3.1,the reviewofthe Types Band C test results from 2005 through 2014 for GGNS has shown an exceptional amount of margin between the actualFound(AF)and As-left (AL)outage summationsandthe regulatory requirements as described below:TheAF minimum pathway leak rate average for GGNS shows an average of 8.58%of0.6 Lawithahighof 12.350/0of0.6 La or 0.074 La.The AL maximum pathway leak rate average for GGNS shows an average of 28.49%of0.6 Lawithahighof 47.0%of0.6 La or 0.282 La.LAR Table 3.3.1-1 provided the LLRT data trend summaries for GGNS since 2005 and encompasses the previous ILRT.This summary shows that therehasbeenno As-Found failure that resulted in exceedingtheTS 5.5.12 limitof0.6 La (198,000 sccm)and demonstrates a history of successful tests.The AF minimum pathway summations representthehigh quality of maintenance of Types Band C tested components whiletheAL maximum pathway summations Attachment to GNRO-2015/00063Page7of11 represent the effective managementofthe Containment LeakageRateTestingProgrambytheprogramowner.

RAI-4: LAR Attachment1(page17of26),Section3.4.1,"Limitations and Conditions ApplicabletoNEI94-01,Revision3-A,"second paragraph of"Response to Condition2,ISSUE1"readsinpart:Whenthepotential leakage understatementadjustedleakratetotalforthoseTypeC componentsbeingtestedona 75-month extendedintervalis summedwiththe adjustedtotalof thoseTypeC componentsbeingtestedatlessthanthe 75-monthintervalandthetotaloftheTypeB tested components,iftheMNPLRis greaterthanthe GGNS administrative leakage summationlimitof0.50La,butlessthanthe regulatorylimitof0.6La,thenananalysisand correctiveactionplanshallbepreparedtorestoretheleakage summationvaluetolessthantheGGNS administrative leakage limit.This paragraphcouldbe interpretedtomeanthata componenttestedat70 monthswouldnotbeadjustedforthe understatement adjustment factorof1.25,whichwouldnotbe consistentwiththeintentofNEI94-01,Revision3-A.Pleaseclarifythe meaningofthecitedparagraph.

GGNS ResponsetoRAI-4: GGNS provides clarificationtotheoriginalLAR responsetoNEI94-01,Revision3-A,Condition2,ISSUE1.Specifically, Condition2,ISSUE1states: "ExtendingtheTypeC,LLRTintervalsbeyond5yearstoa 75-monthintervalshouldbe similarly conservativeprovidedan estimate ismadeofthepotential understatementandits acceptability determinedaspartofthetrendingspecifiedinNEITR94-01,Revision3,Section12.1." Therefore, for clarification,theresponse to Limitations and Conditions, Condition2,ISSUE1isrevised,asfollows(Note:

mark-upinthisRAIresponseshowsnewtextas bolded and underlined for clarification):"Thechangeingoingfroma 60-month extendedtestintervalforTypeCtested componentstoa 75-monthinterval,as authorized underNEI94-01,Revision3-A, representsanincrease of 250/0intheLLRTperiodicity.Assuch,GGNSwill conservativelyapplyapotentialleakage understatement adjustment factorof1.25totheactual As-Leftleakrate,whichwillincrease the As-Left leakagetotalforeachTypeC component currently on greater thana month test interval up to the 75-month extended test interval.Thiswillresultina combined conservativeTypeCtotalforall 75-monthLLRTsbeing"carriedforward"andwillbeincluded wheneverthetotal leakage summationisrequiredtobeupdated (either whileon-lineorfollowinganoutage).Whenthepotential leakage understatement adjustedleakratetotalforthoseTypeC componentsbeingtestedon greater than a 60-month test interval up to the 75-month extended test interval is summedwiththe non-adjustedtotalofthoseTypeC componentsbeingtestedat less thanorequaltoa 60-monthtestinterval,andthetotaloftheTypeB tested components,ifthe MNPLR is greaterthantheGGNS administrative leakage summationlimitof 0.50 La,butlessthanthe regulatorylimitof0.6La,thenananalysisand correctiveactionplanshallbe preparedtorestorethe leakage summationvaluetolessthantheGGNS administrative leakagelimit.The correctiveactionplanshallfocusonthose componentswhichhave contributedthemosttothe increaseinthe leakage summationvalueandwhat manner of timely correctiveaction,as deemed appropriate; best focuses on the preventionoffuture component leakage performance issues."

Attachment to GNRO-2015/00063 RAI-5:NEI94-01, Revision 3-A, Section11.3.2,reads,inpart:Page8of11Ifa licensee considers extended test intervals of greaterthan60 monthsforaTypeBoraTypeC tested component, the review to establish surveillance test intervals should include the additional considerations:

  • As-found Tests-In order to provide additional assurance that the increased probability of component leakageiskepttoa minimum,andis reasonablywithinthe envelope of industrydata,a licensee should consider requiring three successive periodic as-foundteststo determine adequate performance." LAR Attachment 1 (page15of26), Section 3.3.2,"TypeBandTypeC Tested Components on Extended Intervals," reads: The percentageofthetotal number of GGNS Type B tested components (78)thatareon 120 month extended performance-basedtestintervalis65%.

The percentageofthetotal number of GGNS Type C tested components(151)thatareon60 month extended performance-based test interval is 58°1<>.GGNS'sMay 27,2015, proposed amendment will change the licensingbasisfortheplantby referencingNEI94-01, Revision3-A,inTS5.5.12,"10CFR50, Appendix J, Testing Program."Pertheabove, Section 11.3.2ofNEI94-01, Revision 3-A, requiresatleasttwo successive teststobe successfulattheCLB P,valueof14.8psigto extend Type Band TypeC test intervalsbeyond60 months:a.Does Entergyplanto re-baseline the subset(i.e.,65 percentof78)of GGNS Containment Type B penetrations currently on 120-month extended performance-based test intervalattheEPUpeak containment pressureof14.8psig?

Will Entergyusethe proposed licensing basis criteriaofat least two successive, successfulTypeB penetration tests before increasingthetest interval frequency beyond 60 monthsforthis subset of individual containment penetrations?

GGNS ResponsetoRAI-5a.:No-Entergy doesnotplanto re-baseline the subset of GGNS ContainmentTypeB penetrations currentlyonthe 120-month extended performance-based test intervalatthe EPU peak containment pressureof14.8psig.

Refertothe GGNS ResponsetoRAI-3, which provides discussionoftheNRC staff position whichpreviouslyestablished the acceptability of GGNS to perform requiredTSTypeBlocalleakratetestsattherevised P avalueof14.8psigatthenext scheduled testdate.The currentLLRT schedule for thoseTypeB components currentlynoton extended interval will continuetobe implemented to determine as-found test results as conductedatthetest pressureof14.8psigto assess eligibility for interval"extensionuptothe maximum allowed120months.Atleasttwo successive, successful as-found Type B tests will continuetobethecriteriausedwhen determining eligibility for interval extension.

Attachment to GNRO-2015/00063Page9of11b.Does Entergyplanto re-baseline the subset(i.e.,58 percentof121)of GGNSContainmentType C containment isolation valve penetrations currently on 60-month extended performance-based test intervalattheEPU peak containment pressureof14.8 psig?Will Entergyusethe proposed licensing basis criteriaofat least two successive, successful Type C containment isolation valve penetration tests before increasing the test interval frequency beyond 60 monthsforthis subset of individual containment penetrations?

GGNS ResponsetoRAI-5b.:No-Entergy doesnotplanto re-baseline the subset of GGNS Containment TypeCCIV penetrations currentlyonthe 60-month extended performance-based test intervalattheEPUpeak containment pressureof14;8psig.

Refer to GGNS ResponsetoRAI-3, which provides discussionoftheNRC staff position whichpreviouslyestablished the acceptability of GGNS to perform required TS TypeClocalleakrate testsattherevised P,valueof14.8psigatthenext scheduled testdate.The current LLRT schedule for those Type C components currentlynoton extended interval will continuetobe implemented to determine as-found test results as conductedatthe test pressureof14.8psigto assess eligibility for interval extensionuptothe maximum allowed 75 months.At least two successive, successful as-found Type C tests will continuetobethecriteriausedwhen determining eligibility for interval extension.

RAI-6: LAR Table 3.3.1-2,"Types Band C LLRT Program Implementation Review," Attachment 1(page13of26), containsalistingofthe respective containment isolation valve LLRT failuresfromthelasttwo refueling outages (RF-18in2012and RF-19in2014):1)With respecttothe"Administrative Limit SCCM" column of Table 3.3.1-2, the staff requests clarificationforits safety evaluationasto whether the GGNS10CFR50, Appendix J, Testing Program, already contains individual component administrativelimitsthatare constrainedsoasto achieve the GGNS administrative summationlimitof 0.50 La.GGNS Response to RAI-6-1):No.The current GGNS component Administrativelimitsarenot constrainedinany manner.The GGNS pathway administrativelimitof0.50Laisa separate entity being implemented to provide a margin managementtooltothe regulatory-basedlimitof0:60Laandusedto validate the acceptabilityofthe extension of Type C componentstothe 75-month maximum LLRT interval.2)LAR Section3.3.2,"TypeBand Type C Tested Components on Extended Intervals"reads:"The percentageofthetotal number of GGNS Type B tested components (78)thatareon 120-month extended performance-based test intervalis65%."Basedonthis,onecould conclude that 35 percentofthetotal population of Type B penetrationsdidnot successfullypasstwo consecutive Type B test without failure.However, Table Attachment to GNRO-2015/00063Page10of11 3.3.1-2 doesnotlistany failures of Type B penetration testsforthetwomost recent GGNS refuelihg outages (RF-18andRF-19).The staff requests that Entergy provide the implied additional historical information about the Type B test failures experienced at GGNS since 2005.GGNS Response to RAI-6-2):TheLAR Table 3.3.1-2 delineatestheonly as-found LLRT failuresthathave occurred during RF-18 (2012)and RF-19(2014),allof which were Type C components.

Similarly, therehavenotbeen any Type B component as-found administrative limit LLRT failuressince2005.

RAI-7: The staff notes thatNEI94-01, Revision 3-A, Section 11.3.1,"Performance Factors," indicates that prior to determining and implementing extended test intervals for TypeBand Type C components, an assessmentofthe plant's containment penetrationandvalve performanceshouldbe performed and documented.

Factors that should be considered during the assessment include,butarenot limitedto:"past component performance";"service";"design";"safetyimpact";and"cause determination".

However, the technical evaluation sectionofthe LAR does not address how these factorswillbe incorporatedintothe GGNS plant-specific 10CFR50, Appendix J, Testing Program.The staff requests that Entergy provide the details of how GGNS considered, or plans to consider, these factorsinits10CFR50, Appendix J, Testing Program.GGNS ResponsetoRAI-7: The followingNEI94-01, Revision 3-A, Performance Factors, were addressed during the eligibility analysis performedforeach potentially eligible Type C component in GGNS to determineifthe extended LLRT interval extension of greaterthan60 monthsbutlessthan75 monthscouldbe implemented.(Please note that the resultsofthe following reviews were documented for retention in accordancewithNEI94-01, Revision 3-A, Section 12.2, Records.):

Past Component Performance:

The entire population of CIVs subject to LLRT at GGNS was evaluated to identify successful past performance as determinedbytheAFleakrateofeach successive periodic LLRT being comparedtoand verifiedasbeinglessthanthe associated administrative leakage limit.Three consecutive AF tests were utilizedasthe acceptance criteria for successful past performance as per sectionNEI94-01, Revision3-A,11.3.2.

This criteria provides an added amount of conservatism and assurance that CIV performance warranted extending the test intervalfrom60 monthsto75 months.Service: The entire populationofCIVs subject to LLRT at GGNS was evaluated to identify LLRT failures as determinedbytheAFleakratebeing greaterthanthe associated administrative leakagelimit.Foreach identified failure, the associated Condition Report, Cause Determination and maintenance work order was reviewed to assess and identify contributions that service conditions, frequency of valve cycling, or age-related degradation mechanisms mayhavehadonthefailure.Ifthe review identifiedanysuch contributions, they werenotedand recommendations were made concerning their impact on eligibilityforthe extended test intervalof75months.

Attachment to GNRO-2015/00063Page11of11 Design:Theentire populationofCIVs subjecttoLLRTatGGNSwas evaluatedtoidentifyLLRTfailuresas determinedbytheAFleakratebeing greaterthanthe associated administrativeleakagelimit.Foreach identifiedfailure,the associated ConditionReport,Cause Determination and maintenance work orderwasreviewedtoassessandidentify contributionsthatvalvedesignrelatedissues(wrongdesignfortheserviceconditions, excessivecycling, enforcement of vendor recommendationsrelatedto maintenance/componentlife,etc.)mayhavehadonthefailure.Ifthereview identifiedanysuch contributions,thentheywerenotedand recommendationsweremade concerning their impact on eligibilityforthe extendedtestintervalof75months.

Safety Impact:Theentire populationofCIVs subjecttoLLRTatGGNSwas evaluated forsafetyimpactintermsofpotential impactoffailureinlimitingreleasesfrom Containment underaccidentconditions.AreviewoftheGGNSLevel-1Model,Revision3,PSA Summary Report and associated clarification documentation pertainingtothescope ofCIVsclassifiedasrisk,and discussionwiththe GGNS PRA Engineer determinedthattherelative importance (risk significance)ofatotaloffour(4)CIVsintheGGNSLLRT population warranted considerationfornot extending theirLLRTintervaltothe maximumintervalof75months.Assuch,thesefour(4)CIVswillremainon their currentLLRTintervalandbe excluded from furthertestinterval extensions regardlessoffutureLLRT performance.

Cause Determination:Theentire populationofCIVs subjecttoLLRTatGGNSwasevaluatedtoidentifyLLRTfailuresas determinedbytheAFleakratebeing greaterthanthe associated administrativeleakagelimit.Foreach identifiedfailure,the associated ConditionReport,Cause Determination or equivalent correctiveactionprocessreportwasreviewedtoassess identification of common-modefailureandcreationand implementation of correctiveactiontopreventfailure reoccurrence.Ifthereview identified any deficiencies,theywerenotedand recommendationsweremade concerning their impact on eligibilityforthe extendedtestintervalof75months.

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=GNRO-2015/00063,_Response_to_Request_for_Additional_Information_Regarding_License_Amendment_Request_to_Revise_Technical_Specifications_for_Containment_Leak_Rate_Testing&oldid=1715857"