ML051520227
| ML051520227 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Seabrook  |
| Issue date: | 06/03/2005 |
| From: | Nerses V NRC/NRR/DLPM/LPD1 |
| To: | Peschel J, Warner M Florida Power & Light Energy Seabrook |
| Nerses V, NRR//DLPM, 415-1484 | |
| References | |
| GL-04-002, TAC MC4716 | |
| Download: ML051520227 (5) | |
Text
June 3, 2005 Mr. Mark E. Warner, Site Vice President c/o James M. Peschel Seabrook Station FPL Energy Seabrook, LLC PO Box 300 Seabrook, NH 03874
SUBJECT:
SEABROOK STATION, UNIT 1 - REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION (RAI) RELATED TO GENERIC LETTER 2004-02, POTENTIAL IMPACT OF DEBRIS BLOCKAGE ON EMERGENCY SUMP RECIRCULATION AT PRESSURIZED-WATER REACTORS (TAC NO. MC4716)
Dear Mr. Warner:
By letter dated March 4, 2005, FPL Energy Seabrook, LLC (the licensee) provided the 90-day response to U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) Generic Letter (GL) 2004-02 for Seabrook Station, Unit 1. The GL requested the licensee perform an evaluation of the emergency core cooling system and containment spray system recirculation functions in light of the information provided in the GL and, if appropriate, take additional actions to ensure system function. Additionally, addressees were requested to submit to the NRC the information specified in the GL.
The NRC staff has completed its preliminary review of your response and has determined it needs additional information requested in the enclosure to complete our review.
This RAI requests additional information about your overall plans and schedules and not any information on detailed plans or extensive analyses. In light of this, please provide the additional information requested in the enclosure within 45 days of receipt of this letter.
If you have any questions, please contact me at (301) 415-1484.
Sincerely,
/RA/
Victor Nerses, Senior Project Manager, Section 2 Project Directorate I Division of Licensing Project Management Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Docket No. 50-443
Enclosure:
Request for Additional Information cc w/encl: See next page
June 3, 2005 Mr. Mark E. Warner, Site Vice President c/o James M. Peschel Seabrook Station FPL Energy Seabrook, LLC PO Box 300 Seabrook, NH 03874
SUBJECT:
SEABROOK STATION, UNIT 1 - REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION (RAI) RELATED TO GENERIC LETTER 2004-02, POTENTIAL IMPACT OF DEBRIS BLOCKAGE ON EMERGENCY SUMP RECIRCULATION AT PRESSURIZED-WATER REACTORS (TAC NO. MC4716)
Dear Mr. Warner:
By letter dated March 4, 2005, FPL Energy Seabrook, LLC (the licensee) provided the 90-day response to U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) Generic Letter (GL) 2004-02 for Seabrook Station, Unit 1. The GL requested the licensee perform an evaluation of the emergency core cooling system and containment spray system recirculation functions in light of the information provided in the GL and, if appropriate, take additional actions to ensure system function. Additionally, addressees were requested to submit to the NRC the information specified in the GL.
The NRC staff has completed its preliminary review of your response and has determined it needs additional information requested in the enclosure to complete our review.
This RAI requests additional information about your overall plans and schedules and not any information on detailed plans or extensive analyses. In light of this, please provide the additional information requested in the enclosure within 45 days of receipt of this letter.
If you have any questions, please contact me at (301) 415-1484.
Sincerely,
/RA/
Victor Nerses, Senior Project Manager, Section 2 Project Directorate I Division of Licensing Project Management Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Docket No. 50-443
Enclosure:
Request for Additional Information cc w/encl: See next page DISTRIBUTION:
PUBLIC PDI-2 R/F RidsOgcRp RidsAcrsAcnwMailCenter RidsNrrDlpmLpdi2 (DRoberts)
RidsNrrPMVNerses RidsNrrLADBaxley RidsRgnIMailCenter DCullison/DSolorio RidsNrrDlpmDpr RidsNrrDssaDpr MWebb RidsNrrLACRaynor Accession No.: ML051520227
- RAI input from SPLB without any major change OFFICE PDIV-1/PM PDIII-2/PM PDIV-1/LA DSSA/SPLB/SP PDI-2/PM PDIV-1/SC PDIII-2/SC NAME MWebb/JHopkins DBaxley DCullison/DSolorio*
VNerses DTerao/GSuh DATE 6/2/2005 6/2/05 5/23/05 6/2/05 6/3/05 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY
Seabrook Station, Unit No. 1 cc:
Mr. J. A. Stall Senior Vice President, Nuclear and Chief Nuclear Officer Florida Power & Light Company P.O. Box 14000 Juno Beach, FL 33408-0420 Mr. Peter Brann Assistant Attorney General State House, Station #6 Augusta, ME 04333 Resident Inspector U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Seabrook Nuclear Power Station P.O. Box 1149 Seabrook, NH 03874 Town of Exeter 10 Front Street Exeter, NH 03823 Regional Administrator, Region I U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 475 Allendale Road King of Prussia, PA 19406 Office of the Attorney General One Ashburton Place, 20th Floor Boston, MA 02108 Board of Selectmen Town of Amesbury Town Hall Amesbury, MA 01913 Ms. Deborah Bell Federal Emergency Management Agency Region I J.W. McCormack P.O. &
Courthouse Building, Room 401 Boston, MA 02109 Mr. Tom Crimmins Polestar Applied Technology One First Street, Suite 4 Los Altos, CA 94019 Mr. Stephen McGrail, Director ATTN: James Muckerheide Massachusetts Emergency Management Agency 400 Worcester Road Framingham, MA 01702-5399 Philip T. McLaughlin, Attorney General Steven M. Houran, Deputy Attorney General 33 Capitol Street Concord, NH 03301 Mr. Bruce Cheney, Director New Hampshire Office of Emergency Management State Office Park South 107 Pleasant Street Concord, NH 03301 Mr. Gene F. St. Pierre Station Director Seabrook Station FPL Energy Seabrook, LLC P.O. Box 300 Seabrook, NH 03874 Mr. M. S. Ross, Managing Attorney Florida Power & Light Company P.O. Box 14000 Juno Beach, FL 33408-0420 Mr. Rajiv S. Kundalkar Vice President - Nuclear Engineering Florida Power & Light Company P.O. Box 14000 Juno Beach, FL 33408-0420
Seabrook Station, Unit No. 1 cc:
James M. Peschel Regulatory Programs Manager Seabrook Station FPL Energy Seabrook, LLC PO Box 300 Seabrook, NH 03874 David Moore Vice President, Nuclear Operations Support Florida Power & Light Company P.O. Box 14000 Juno Beach, FL 33408-0420 Marjan Mashhadi Senior Attorney Florida Power & Light Company 801 Pennsylvania Ave., NW Suite 220 Washington, DC 20004
REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION REGARDING GENERIC LETTER 2004-02, POTENTIAL IMPACT OF DEBRIS BLOCKAGE ON EMERGENCY SUMP RECIRCULATION AT PRESSURIZED-WATER REACTORS FPL ENERGY SEABROOK, LLC SEABROOK STATION, UNIT 1 DOCKET NO. 50-443 By letter dated March 4, 2005, FPL Energy Seabrook, LLC (the licensee) provided the 90-day response to U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) Generic Letter (GL) 2004-02 for Seabrook Station, Unit 1. The GL requested that addressees perform an evaluation of the emergency core cooling system and containment spray system recirculation functions in light of the information provided in the GL and, if appropriate, take additional actions to ensure system function. Additionally, addressees were requested to submit to the NRC the information specified in the GL. The staff has completed its preliminary review of your response and has determined it needs the following additional information to complete our review:
In your 90-day response to GL 2004-02, you indicated that you intend to use future test results, industry guidance, and NRC guidance to account for chemical precipitants in your evaluation and their availability will impact the schedule for performing an evaluation. The cooperative NRC-Electric Power Research Institute tests in progress at the University of New Mexico are designed to determine if chemical effects occur, but are not designed to measure head loss associated with any chemical effects. The staff notes that some chemical effects have been observed in the initial three tests.
For addressing chemical effects, you state the evaluation may occur after the September 1, 2005, response due date, depending on the schedule for testing and the availability of industry guidance. This is contrary to the information request in GL 2004-02, which requests that chemical effects be addressed in the September 1, 2005, response. This delay is also contrary to the staffs position that there are sufficient bases to address sump vulnerability to chemical effects and that the September response will be incomplete if the evaluation is incomplete, the design is not complete, or there is no schedule for upgrades. In this light, please discuss your plans and schedule for evaluating chemical effects. In addition, please discuss any plans for performing testing to support your evaluation of this effect.
ENCLOSURE