ML080350166

(PA-LR) Draft January 8, 2008 NRC-VY/Entergy Meeting Summary

ML080350166
Person / Time
Site:	Vermont Yankee File:NorthStar Vermont Yankee icon.png
Issue date:	01/15/2008
From:	Rowley J NRC/NRR/ADRO/DLR
To:	Devince J, Mannai D, Metell H Entergy Nuclear Operations
References
TAC MD2297
Download: ML080350166 (10)

Text

Page 1 of I Jonathan Rowley - January 8, 2008 NRC-VY/Entergy meeting summary From: Jonathan Rowley To: dmannai@entergy.com; hmetell@entergy.com; jdevinc@entergy.com Date: 01/15/2008 4:22 PM

Subject:

January 8, 2008 NRC-VY/Entergy meeting summary Please review the attached meeting summary and provide comment as soon as possible if there are any.

file://C:\temp\GW} 00002.HTM 02/01/2008

Page 1 cAtem p\GW}OOQ1O.TMP C-'AteM'p\GVV)00010.TMP -Plaqýý'1,J11 Mail Envelope Properties (478D23FD.421 : 12 : 35182)

Subject:

January 8, 2008 NRC-VY/Entergy meeting summary Creation Date 01/15/2008 4:22:05 PM From: Jonathan Rowley Created By: JGR(nrc.gov Recipients Action Date & Time entergy.com Transferred 01/15/2008 4:22:45 PM dmannai (dmannai (ientergy.com) hmetell (htnetell(centergy.com) jdevinc (idevinc(&Dentergy.com)

Post Office Delivered Route entergy.com Files Size Date & Time MESSAGE 416 01/15/2008 4:22:05 PM TEXT.htm 320 Meeting with VY-Entergy summary - January 8, 2008.doc 101376 r 01/15/2008 4:15:36 PM Options Auto Delete: No Expiration Date: None Notify Recipients: Yes Priority: Standard ReplyRequested: No Return Notification:

Send Notification when Opened Concealed

Subject:

No Security: Standard To Be Delivered: Immediate Status Tracking: Delivered & Opened

LICENSEE: Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc.

FACILITY: Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station

SUMMARY

OF MEETING HELD ON JANUARY 8, 2008, BETWEEN THE U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION STAFF AND ENTEFRGY NUCLEAR OPERATIONS, INC. REPRESENTATIVES TO DISCUSS THE RESPONSE TO A REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION PERTAINING TO THE VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER STATION LICENSE RENEWAL APPLICATION On January 8, 2008, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff (the staff) met with members of Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc. (the applicant) in a public meeting to discuss the response to a request for additional information (RAI) made by the staff pertaining to the Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station (VYNPS) license renewal application. The applicant had an opportunity to comment on this summary.

A list of attendees is provided in Enclosure 1. The meeting agenda is provided in Enclosure 2.

Comments made by the public during the meeting are provided in Enclosure 3. A copy of the slides presented by the applicant is provided as Enclosure 4. A summary of the discussion follows:

Backqround In a letter dated November 27, 2007, the staff issued RAI 4.3.3-2 to the applicant. The purpose ofthe request was to gather additional information on the calculations used at VYNPS to reanalyze their time-limited aging analysis (TLAA) that addresses environmentally-assisted fatigue. In a letter dated December 11, 2007, the applicant provided its response to RAI 4.3.3-2 to the staff. The staff reviewed the response and expressed concerns with the methodology described in the submittal and statements made that shear stresses are negligible during a conference call with the applicant on December 18, 2007. During the call, the applicant indicated that some terminology misunderstanding may exist between the staff and Entergy. The applicant requested a face-to-face meeting to ensure the understanding pertaining to this highly technical issue was properly and effectively communicated.

Discussion During the meeting, the applicant made a slide presentation of the reactor pressure vessel nozzle environmental fatigue analyses for license renewal at VYNPS. The applicant attempted to clarify the terminology used in the response to RAI 4.3.3-2 and explain the methodology used. The applicant also attempted to demonstrate that the shear stresses in the nozzles were negligible.

The applicant explained that nozzle corner, blend radius, and inner radius are interchangeable terms for locations with geometrical discontinuities; locations where

stresses are a maximum. The applicant explained that their methodology incorporates the use of axisymmetric modeling rather than a 3-Dimensional (3-D) or 2-Dimensional (2-D) modeling. They explained that axisymmetric modeling is virtually 3-D except that rather than being modeled as piping joined to a cylinder, it is modeled as piping joined to a sphere with a multiplier to account for stress effects. With the aid of colored graphs, the applicant demonstrated specific nozzles where stresses are negligible. The applicant also discussed the various conservatisms used in their analysis.

Conclusion The applicant did not demonstrate that the shear stresses were negligible for all nozzles.

As such additional confirmatory work will be performed by the applicant and submitted to the staff for review and acceptance.

The applicant indicated that it will take the following actions: 1) Perform benchmarking calculations on the feedwater nozzle, which is the most limiting component, using the axisymmetric model; 2) attempt to prove that the Vermont Yankee specific benchmarking calculations bound the results for the other nozzles still in question; 3) calculate fatigue usage factors (CUFs) using NRC approved ASME Section III NB-3200 methods; and 4) compare the resulting CUFs to the previous environmental assisted fatigue calculations in an attempt to verify the previous calculations are adequate.

Jonathan G. Rowley, Project Manager Projects Branch 2 Division of License Renewal Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Docket No. 50-271

Enclosures:

1. Attendance List

2. Agenda

3. Public Comments

4. Presentation slides cc w/encls: See next page

DOCUMENT NAME: G:\ADRO\DLR\RLRB\ROWLEY\Meeting with VY-Entergy Summary - January 8, 2008.doc OFFICE LA:DLR PM:RPB2:DLR BC:RPB2:DLR BC:RER1:DLR NAME JRowley RFranovich KChang DATEICIAL R COPY MEETING BETWEEN THE NRC STAFF AND ENTERGY NUCLEAR OPERATIONS, INC.

VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER STATION LICENSE RENEWAL APPLICATION 6003 EXECUTIVE BOULEVARD ROOM EBB1B15 ROCKVILLE, MARYLAND MEETING ATTENDANCE LIST JANUARY 8, 2008 PARTICIPANTS AFFILIATIONS Jonathan Rowley U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC)

Samson Lee NRC John Fair NRC Kenneth Chang NRC PT Kuo NRC Rani Franovich NRC Robert Sun NRC Qi Gan NRC Kaihwa Hsu NRC Ricardo Rodriguez NRC Mary Baty NRC Perry Buckberg NRC Evelyn Gettys NRC Yeon-Ki Chung NRC Peter Wen NRC On Yee NRC Gary Hammer NRC David Mannai Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc. (Entergy)

John McCann Entergy Jay Thayer Entergy Matias Travieso-Diaz Entergy Michael Metell Entergy Garry Young Entergy Norm Rademacher Entergy Alan Cox Entergy Enclosure 1

PARTICIPANTS AFFILIATIONS James Fitzpatrick Entergy Scott Goodwin Entergy John Dreyfuss Entergy Joe Hopenfeld New England Coalition (NEC)

David Lochbaum Union of concerned Scientist THE FOLLOWING PARTICAPATED VIA TELEPHONE BRIDGELINE Sarah Hoffman Vermont Department of Public Service John Sipos New York Office of the Attorney General Paul Eddy New York Office of the Attorney General Joan Leary Matthews New York Office of the Attorney General Blaise Constantakes New York Office of the Attorney General Rudolf Hausler New York Office of the Attorney General Raymond Shadis NEC Claire Chang NEC Ulrich Witte NEC Ed Anthes Nuclear Free Vermont Rich Schaller Strategic Teaming and Resource Sharing Chalmer Myer Southern Nuclear Operating Company Bob Audette The Brattleboro Reformer Susan Smallheer The Rutland Herald Sally Shaw Fred Mogolesko Entergy Enclosure 1

MEETING BETWEEN THE NRC STAFF AND ENTERGY NUCLEAR OPERATIONS, INC.

VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER STATION LICENSE RENEWAL APPLICATION 6003 EXECUTIVE BOULEVARD ROOM EBB1 B15 ROCKVILLE, MARYLAND AGENDA JANUARY 8, 2008 I. Introduction and opening remarks 10 minutes II. Discussion of Response to Request for Additional Information 80 minutes (Response to RAI 4.3.3-2)

II1. Public Comments 30 minutes IV. Adjourn Enclosure 2

MEETING BETWEEN THE NRC STAFF AND ENTERGY NUCLEAR OPERATIONS, INC.

VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER STATION LICENSE RENEWAL APPLICATION ROCKVILLE, MARYLAND ROOM EBB1 B15 MEETING MINUTES JANUARY 8, 2008

Background

In a letter dated November 27, 2007, the staff issued RAI 4.3.3-2 to the applicant. The purpose of the request was to gather additional information on the calculations used at VYNPS to reanalyze their time-limited aging analysis (TLAA) that address environmentally-assisted fatigue.

In a letter dated December 11, 2007, the applicant provided its response to RAI 4.3.3-2 to the staff. The staff reviewed the response and had concerns about the methodology described in the submittal and statements made that shear stresses are negligible. The staff raised its concern in a conference call with the applicant on December,18, 2007. During the call, the applicant indicated that there was a terminology misunderstanding between the sides. The applicant requested a face-to-face meeting to ensure communications pertaining to this highly technical issue were effective.

Discussion During the meeting, the applicant presented a slide presentation regarding the reactor pressure vessel nozzle environmental fatigue analyses for license renewal at VYNPS. The applicant attempted to clarify the terminology used in the response to RAI 4.3.3-2 and explain the methodology used. The applicant also attempted to demonstrate that the shear stresses in the nozzles are negligible.

The applicant explained that nozzle corner, blend radius, and inner radius are interchangeable terms for locations with geometrical discontinuities; locations were stresses are a maximum.

The applicant explained that their methodology incorporates the use of axisymmetric modeling rather than a 3-Dimensional (3-D) or 2-Dimensional (2-D) modeling. They explained that axisymmetric modeling is virtually 3-D except that rather than being modeled as piping joined to a cylinder, it is modeled as piping joined to a sphere with a multiplier to account for stress effects. With the aid of colored graphs, the applicant demonstrated specific nozzles where stresses are negligible.

Conclusion The applicant did not demonstrate that the shear stresses where negligible for all nozzles so additional confirmatory work will be done and submitted to the staff for review and acceptance.

The applicant has to perform benchmarking calculations on the feedwater nozzle, which is the most limiting component, using the axisymmetric model. The applicant will attempt to prove that the Vermont Yankee specific benchmarking calculations bound the results for the other nozzles Enclosure 3

still in question. The applicant will calculate fatigue usage factors (CUFs) using NRC approved ASME Section III NB-3200 methods. The resulting CUFs are to be compared to the previous environmental assisted fatigue calculations in an attempt to verify the previous calculations are adequate.

Enclosure 3