ML13330A241

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Responds to IE Bulletin 80-04, Analysis of PWR Main Steam Line Break W/Continued Feedwater Addition. Auxiliary Feedwater Sys Automatic Initiation Will Occur on Low Steam Generator Level W/Setpoint at 5% of Narrow Range Instrument
ML13330A241
Person / Time
Site: San Onofre Southern California Edison icon.png
Issue date: 03/06/1981
From: Baskin K
Southern California Edison Co
To: Crutchfield D
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
TAC-44128, TAC-44652, TAC-46861 IEB-80-04, IEB-80-4, NUDOCS 8103110655
Download: ML13330A241 (4)


Text

Southern California Edison Company P. 0. BOX 800 2244 WALNUT GROVE AVENUE ROSEMEAD. CALIFORNIA 91770 K. P. BASKIN TELEPHONE MANAGER OF NUCLEAR ENGINEERING, March 6, 1981 (213) 572-1401 SAFETY, AND LICENSING Director, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Attention: D. M. Crutchfield, Chief Operating Reactors Branch'No. 5 Division of Licensing U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.

20555 Gentlemen:

Subject:

Docket No. 50-206 Automatic Initiation of Auxiliary Feedwater System San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station Unit 1

References:

(1) D. G. Eisenhut letter to J. H. Drake dated November 15, 1979 (2) D. L. Ziemann letter to J. H. Drake dated December 21, 1979 (3) K. P. Baskin letter to D. G. Eisenhut dated January 16, 1980 (4) IE Bulletin No. 80-04 dated February 8, 1980 (5) H. L. Ottoson letter to R. H. Engelken dated May 19, 1980 (6) H. L. Ottoson letter to R. H. Engelken dated August 4, 1980 (7) K. P. Baskin letter to D. M. Crutchfield dated June 10, 1980 (8) K. P. Baskin letter to D. M. Crutchfield dated October 16, 1980 (9) K. P. Baskin letter to D. M. Crutchfield dated January 14, 1981 (10) D. L. Ziemann letter to J. H. Drake dated September 12, 1979 (11) K. P. Baskin letter to D. L. Ziemann dated February 14, 1980 (12) K. P. Baskin letter to D. M. Crutchfield dated November 25, 1980 Reference (1) provided an NRC request for information regarding Auxiliary Feedwater System (AFWS) flow requirements at San Onofre Unit 1 resulting from the NRR Bulletins and Orders Task Force review of operating reactors following the accident at Three Mile Island, Unit 2 (TMI-2).

Reference (2) provided an NRC determination that the modifications necessary to implement an automatically initiated AFWS be delayed until the impact of early initiation of AFWS flow (either automatic or manual) is determined for the main steam line break or main feedwater line break accident analysis. In Reference (3), it was indicated that in order to supply the information a complete reanalysis of the applicable transients and accidents would have to be performed.

Reference (4) was a request from the NRC Office of Inspection and Enforcement for information similar to that requested in Reference (2).

Reference (5) indicated that the response to the request in Reference (4) would be supplied in conjunction with submittal of the results of the reanalysis being performed in response to References (1) and (2).

D. M. Crutchfield, Chief March 6, 1981 Reference (6) provided a partial response to the requests of References (1), (2) and-(4) by submitting the results of our evaluation of the reactivity increase (core response) which results from a main steam line break with the addition of automatic AFWS flow as required by Item 2 of Reference (4).

The results indicated that the core response following a main steam line break is very insensitive to continued feedwater addition at San Onofre Unit 1. Therefore, the conclusions documented in the previously submitted main steam line break core response analysis remain valid and applicable.

Reference (7) provided the NRC with a report on the information presented at the meeting held on May 13, 1980 regarding the preliminary results of the main steam line break analysis and the Safety Injection Actuation System (SIAS) logic modifications which have now been installed to minimize the peak containment pressure. In addition, this report included preliminary results of the main steam line piping integrity evaluation and a review of the containment design and integrity tests. The final results of the main steam line piping integrity evaluation were submitted to the NRC by Reference (11).

The purpose of this letter is to provide the remaining information necessary to completely respond to the requests documented in References (1),

(2) and (4). to this letter provides the information requested in References (1), (2) and (4) which has not been previously submitted. The text of Enclosure 1 follows the format of Enclosure 2 to Reference (1) since the responses provided cover all the information requested in References (2) and (4) which has not been previously submitted.

The analysis provided in Enclosure 1 was based on the design details of the AFWS submitted to the NRC in Reference (8).

Since the submittal of Reference (8) the design of the system has progressed such that the following additional details became available and were used in the analysis.

The AFWS automatic initiation will occur on low steam generator level with the setpoint at 5% of the narrow range level instrument.

An automatic trip of the motor-driven auxiliary feedwater pump will be installed for pump runout protection on low discharge pressure.

A quick start rotor will be installed for the steam driven auxiliary feedwater pump.

The location of the AFWS initiation setpoint at 5% of narrow range indication was established to prevent spurious actuation within the bounds of the safety analysis. The trip of the motor-driven auxiliary feedwater pump assures the availability of the pump for manual operation following depressurization of the steam generators. Though the results of the analysis discussed below indicate that acceptable performance is obtained using the existing rotor of the turbine driver for the steam driven auxiliary feedwater pump, the quick start rotor provides improved system performance by minimizing the AFWS delay time.

With the exception of the quick start rotor, all of the aboye discussed design details will be implemented prtor to startup. The. qu4O.

start rotor will be installed as soon as practicable.

D. M. Crutchfield, Chief March 6, 1981 The information provided in Enclosure 1 documents the analysis of plant transients and accidents impacted by the modifications for automation of the AFWS. The existing design basis conditions as documented in the San Onofre Unit 1 FSAR were used. Since the objective of the analysis was to evaluate the response of the AFWS with regard to present day criteria, all of the events identified in Item 1 of Enclosure 2 of Reference (1) were reviewed. Though the Main Feedline Break Accident is not a design basis event for San Onofre Unit 1, it was evaluated to determine the response of the AFWS as designed.

The results of the analysis documented in Enclosure 1 indicate that for the design basis transients and accidents the AFWS is of sufficient capacity to meet current day criteria. In addition, the results of the analysis of the feedwater line break accident indicate that for the conservatively assumed sequence of events, the manual restart of the AFWS provides sufficient decay heat removal capacity so that for this event, present day criteria are also met. The impact of AFWS flow addition to the main steam line break accident is negligible.

The previous analysis provided in Reference (7) for main steam line break identified the worst case since the additional low power cases analyzed were less limiting.

The results of Enclosure L, in conjunction with the final results of the main steam line integrity evaluation submitted by Reference (9),

substantiate the conclusion preliminarily obtained and documented in Reference (7).

It is, therefore, concluded that there is reasonable assurance that a double-ended guillotine rupture of the main steam line is not credible, that the probable consequences of a MSLB accident are no more severe than the previously calculated peak temperatures and pressures for the containment following a LOCA (considering a best estimate calculation with respect to mass and energy generation and containment heat transfer), and in the event that post MSLB temperatures and pressures exceed those previously calculated following a LOCA, containment integrity will be maintained by virtue of the as-built strength of the containment. Based on this determination, no additional measures are required to assure containment integrity following postulated transients and accidents.

Reference (10) provided a request for information regarding the impact that the automation of the AFWS would have on the probability of inducing steam generator water hammer at San Onofre Unit 1. In Reference (11) it was indicated that the requested evaluation would be provided in conjunction with our submittal of the analysis results for automation of the AFWS. Accordingly, the evaluation of Enclosure 2 is provided which concludes that the automation of the AFWS will not impact the probability of inducing steam generator water hammer at San Onofre Unit 1.

In Enclosure 2 it is indicated that in order to further reduce the probability of water hammer at San Onofre Unit 1, new low flow indicators will be installed on the main feedwater lines.

These are not required as part of the TMI Lessons Learned.

As such, the TMI Lessons Learned implementation schedule is not applicable to this modification; however, the new flow meters will be installed as soon as practicable in order to minimize the probability of water hammer.

D. M. Crutchfield, Chief March 6, 1981 Also related to the subject of water hammer, Reference (12) provided the results of the evaluation to determine the effects of "classical" type water hammers on the feedwater piping system at San Onofre Unit 1. The first page of the enclosure to Reference (11) included a reference to the ASME Section III Code which should have been the ASME Section I Code. In order to correct that error, please replace the first page of the Enclosure to Reference (11) with Enclosure 3 of this letter.

If you have any questions or require additional. information, please contact me.

Very truly yours, 2:V Enclosures cc:

R. H. Engelken (NRC Office of Inspection and Enforcement, Region V)

Division of Reactor Operations Inspection (NRC Office of Inspection and Enforcement, Washington, D.C.)