ML13074A038

From kanterella
Revision as of 11:19, 5 April 2018 by StriderTol (talk | contribs) (Created page by program invented by StriderTol)
Jump to navigation Jump to search

2013/03/12 NRR E-mail Capture - Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant - Requests for Additional Information (Electrical Engineering Branch) in Support of the Extended Power Uprate Review (TAC No. MD9990)
ML13074A038
Person / Time
Site: Monticello Xcel Energy icon.png
Issue date: 03/12/2013
From: Beltz T A
Plant Licensing Branch III
To: Fields J S
Northern States Power Co
References
TAC MD9990
Download: ML13074A038 (3)


Text

1NRR-PMDAPEm ResourceFrom:Beltz, TerrySent:Tuesday, March 12, 2013 6:12 AMTo:Fields, John S.Cc:gene.eckholt@xenuclear.com; McConnell, Matthew; Mathew, Roy; Carlson, Robert

Subject:

Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant - Requests for Additional Information (Electrical Engineering Branch) in Support of the Extended Power Uprate Review (TAC No. MD9990)Attachments:Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant - Requests for Additional Information Regarding the EPU Gap Analysis Review (EEEB).docx

Dear Mr. Fields:

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staff in the Electrical Engineering Branch of the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation is currently supporting the review of the Extended Power Uprate (EPU) license amendment request for the Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant. The staff has reviewed your supplemental response associated with the EPU Gap Analysis and determined that additional information is required to complete its review. Draft requests for additional information (RAI) are attached.

You may accept these draft RAIs as a formal Requests for Additional Information and respond to the questions by April 12, 2013. Alternatively, you may request to discuss the contents of the RAIs with the NRC staff in a conference call, including any change to the proposed response date.

Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns. Sincerely, Terry A. Beltz, Senior Project Manager Plant Licensing Branch III-1 Division of Operating Reactor Licensing Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation (301) 415-3049 Terry.Beltz@nrc.gov Hearing Identifier: NRR_PMDA Email Number: 628 Mail Envelope Properties (7E9EA9BB82325E46B07B0F04F99B40D87C560368BF)

Subject:

Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant - Requests for Additional Information (Electrical Engineering Branch) in Support of the Extended Power Uprate Review (TAC No. MD9990) Sent Date: 3/12/2013 6:12:08 AM Received Date: 3/12/2013 6:12:00 AM From: Beltz, Terry Created By: Terry.Beltz@nrc.gov Recipients: "gene.eckholt@xenuclear.com" <gene.eckholt@xenuclear.com> Tracking Status: None "McConnell, Matthew" <Matthew.McConnell@nrc.gov> Tracking Status: None "Mathew, Roy" <Roy.Mathew@nrc.gov>

Tracking Status: None "Carlson, Robert" <Robert.Carlson@nrc.gov> Tracking Status: None "Fields, John S." <John.Fields@xenuclear.com> Tracking Status: None Post Office: HQCLSTR01.nrc.gov Files Size Date & Time MESSAGE 1126 3/12/2013 6:12:00 AM Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant - Requests for Additional Information Regarding the EPU Gap Analysis Review (EEEB).docx 16819 Options Priority: Standard Return Notification: No Reply Requested: No Sensitivity: Normal Expiration Date: Recipients Received:

REQUESTS FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION ELECTRICAL ENGINEERING BRANCH EXTENDED POWER UPRATE REVIEW NORTHERN STATES POWER COMPANY - MINNESOTA (NSPM) MONTICELLO NUCLEAR GENERATING PLANT DOCKET NO. 50-263 1) Please explain what is meant by "Equipment Qualification Program Reconstitution." 2) Please provide the normal and accident levels for radiation, temperature, pressure, submergence, chemical spray effects, and humidity for all areas in which environmentally qualified equipment is installed in tabular form showing the Pre-EPU and EPU conditions, as well as the qualified values of EQ equipment in those areas.

3) Please modify Figures 27-1 and 27-2 to include the profile of the qualification level of EQ equipment to show that the EQ equipment will remain bounding under EPU conditions.

4) In response to Item 27, NSPM states the following:

"As indicated above the full EQ analysis is now completed with only minor exceptions." Please identify the "minor exceptions" and provide a discussion on each exception for its acceptability. 5) Provide the worst-case Design Basis loading under EPU conditions for the Class 1E station batteries and the capacity ratings for the Class 1E station batteries.