ML103480762

From kanterella
Revision as of 00:14, 20 August 2018 by StriderTol (talk | contribs) (Created page by program invented by StriderTol)
Jump to navigation Jump to search

November 8, 2010 Summary of Teleconference W/ DNC to Discuss Generic Letter 2004-02 Supplemental Response Request for Additional Information (TAC No. MC4695)
ML103480762
Person / Time
Site: Millstone Dominion icon.png
Issue date: 01/12/2011
From: Sanders C J
Plant Licensing Branch 1
To:
Dominion Nuclear Connecticut
Sandeers, Carleen, NRR/DORL, 415-1603
Shared Package
ml103480717 List:
References
TAC MC4695, FOIA/PA-2011-0115
Download: ML103480762 (4)


Text

UNITED NUCLEAR REGULATORY WASHINGTON, D.C. 20555-0001 January 12, 2011 LICENSEE:

Dominion Nuclear Connecticut, Inc. (DNC)

FACILITY:

Millstone Power Station, Unit NO.3

SUMMARY

OF NOVEMBER 18, 2010, TELECONFERENCE WITH DNC TO DISCUSS GENERIC LETTER 2004-02 SUPPLEMENTAL RESPONSE REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION (TAC NO. MC4695) On November 18, 2010, a Category 1 public teleconference was held between the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) and representatives of Dominion Nuclear Connecticut, Inc. (DNC). The purpose of the meeting was to discuss remaining issues identified during NRC staff review of the Millstone Power Station, Unit NO.3 (MPS3) Generic Letter (GL) 2004-02, "Potential Impact of Debris Blockage on Emergency Recirculation during Design Basis Accidents at Pressurized-Water Reactors;'

supplemental response.

Specifically, the meeting focused on the response to NRCs request for additional information (RAJ) No.6, Item Nos. 3, 4, and 6, regarding head loss and vortexing, and DNCs draft holistic response to the NRCs RAls. The meeting was a follow-up to the April 8, April 20, and June 7, 2010, Category 1 public teleconferences 1 on Millstone Power Station, Unit Nos. 2 & 3 GL 2004-02 supplemental response; to the July 13, 2010, Category 1 public meeting 2 on MPS3 GL 2004-02 supplemental response; and to the July 28, 2010, Category 1 public teleconterence" on MPS3 GL2004-02 supplemental response.

This meeting was intended to give DNC the opportunity to discuss potential paths forward for responding to the NRC staffs RAI dated February 4,2010,4 specifically MPS3's RAI NO.6. The licensee provided draft responses to the NRC staffs RAJ dated April 8, 2010.

5 The licensee provided a revised copy of the draft responses based on discussions from the April 8, and April 20, 2010, teleconferences." By letter dated September 16, 2010,7 DNC submitted a final response to the NRCs RAls regarding MPS3 GL2004-02 supplemental response, except for RAI No.6, Item Nos.

3,4 and 6. On October 17,2010, DNC provided a revised draft response for RAI No.6, Item Nos.

3,4, and 6, and a holistic response to the NRCs RAls based on discussions from the previous teleconferences and meeting." 1 Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS)

Accession Nos. ML 101170575, ML 101250623, and ML 101590648 2 ADAMS Accession No. ML 10201026/handouts ML 101950505 3 ADAMS Accession No. ML 102220110 4 ADAMS Accession No. ML 100070068 5 ADAMS Accession No. ML 100980415 6 ADAMS Accession No. ML 101530556 7 ADAMS Accession No. ML 102640210 8 ADAMS Accession No. ML 103470650

-2The NRC staff provided overall feedback on the remaining head loss and vortexing concerns and the holistic evaluation, stating DNC should consider the following: The NRC staff understands that there are conservatisms in some aspects of DNC's testing, however the NRC staff still has concerns about the large differential between Rjg-33 and Rig-89 results. DNC should discuss the testing that has been done and the differences in the testing. The NRC staff does not believe the strainer submergence difference is sufficient to justify the difference in test results. Provide justification over which debris bed is more representative of MPS3. The NRC staff suggested strengthening the structural discussion. DNC has agreed that strengthening the discussion would be beneficial. The NRC staff believes that net positive suction head and flashing are areas where DNC has margin available, and the structural limit of the strainer is an area where there is little margin. If necessary, a holistic review by the independent review team will make an assessment of the overall margin at MPS3 based on the information DNC provides in the final response. The NRC staff does not believe biological effects have a major impact on the testing. Deaeration does not appear to be of a value that would affect the test results. DNC agreed to provide a final RAI response for RAI No.6, Item Nos. 3, 4, and 6, including a holistic argument, by December 22, 2010. No proprietary information was discussed at the meeting. No members of the public were in attendance. A list of attendees is provided in the Enclosure. If you have any questions, please contact me at 301-415-1603. Carleen . anders, Project Manager Plant Licensing Branch 1-2 Division of Operating Reactor Licensing Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Docket No. 50-423

Enclosure:

As stated cc w/encls: Distribution via Listserv Mark Sartain William Bartron Martin Legg Dave Dakers Joseph Rigatti Ron Tooker William Brown Wanda Craft Steward Bailey John Lehning Carleen Sanders Steven Smith Matthew Yoder LIST OF NOVEMBER 18, 2010, TELECONFERENCE DOMINION NUCLEAR CONNECTICUT, INC. MILLSTONE POWER STATION, UNIT GENERIC LETTER 2004-02 SUPPLEMENTAL Enclosure

-2The NRC staff provided overall feedback on the remaining head loss and vortexing concerns and the holistic evaluation, stating DNC should consider the following: The NRC staff understands that there are conservatisms in some aspects of DNC's testing, however the NRC staff still has concerns about the large differential between Rig-33 and Rig-89 results. DNC should discuss the testing that has been done and the differences in the testing. The NRC staff does not believe the strainer submergence difference is sufficient to justify the difference in test results. Provide justification over which debris bed is more representative of MPS3. The NRC staff suggested strengthening the structural discussion. DNC has agreed that strengthening the discussion would be beneficial. The NRC staff believes that net positive suction head, flashing, and chemical are areas where DNC has margin available, and the structural limit of the strainer is an area where there is little margin. If necessary, a holistic review by the independent review team will make an assessment of the overall margin at MPS3 based on the information DNC provides in the final response. The NRC staff does not believe biological effects have a major impact on the testing. Deairation does not appear to be of a value that would affect the test results. DNC agreed to provide a final RAI response for RAI No.6, Item Nos. 3, 4, and 6, including a holistic argument, by December 22, 2010. No proprietary information was discussed at the meeting. No members of the public were in attendance. A list of attendees is provided in the Enclosure. If you have any questions, please contact me at 301-415-1603.

/raj Carleen J. Sanders, Project Manager Plant Licensing Branch 1-2 Division of Operating Reactor Licensing Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Docket No. 50-423 As cc w/encls: Distribution via Listserv PUBLIC Branch Reading JLehning, NRR NRR RidsAcrsAcnw_MailCTR Resource RidsNrrDorlLpll-2 RidsOgcRp Resource RidsNrrPMMillstone Resource RidsNrrLAABaxter MYoder, NRR SBailey, NRR RidsRgnlMailCenter ADAMS Accession Nos.: Packaqe: ML 103480717; Mtg Notice: ML103120242; Mtg Summary: ML 103480762 *via email I OFFICE DORULPL 1-2/PM DORULPL 1-2/LA NRRlSSIB/BC DORULPL 1-2/BC I NAME CSanders ABaxter

  • SBailev HChernoff I DATE 1/12/11 1/12/11 1/612011 wI comments 1/12/11 Official Record Copy