ML13330A312
| ML13330A312 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | San Onofre  |
| Issue date: | 04/24/1981 |
| From: | Crutchfield D Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Dietch R Southern California Edison Co |
| References | |
| TASK-03-06, TASK-3-6, TASK-RR LSO5-81-04-045, LSO5-81-4-45, NUDOCS 8104290472 | |
| Download: ML13330A312 (7) | |
Text
April 24, 1981 Docket No. 50-206 LS05-81-04-045 c
Mr. R. Dietch, Vice President U.4 19 9
Nuclear Engineering and Operations 1
Southern California Edison Company 2244 Walnut Grove Avenue Post Office Box 800 Rosemead, California 91770
Dear Mr. Dietch:
SUBJECT:
SEP TOPIC 111-6, SEISMIC DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS SAN ONOFRE UNIT 1 Our letter to you dated August 4, 1980 requested in accordance with 10 CFR 50.54(f) of the Commission's regulations that you submit plans and proceed with a seismic reevaluation program for the San Onofre Unit 1 facility and that you provide justification for your conclusion that continued operation is justified in the interim until the seismic re evaluation program is complete. We have reviewed your seismic reevaluation program forwarded by your letters dated September 24, 1980 and February 23, 1981.
We have determined that your program is deficient with respect to scope of structures, systems and components to be evaluated.
Our August 4, 1980 10 CFR 50.54(f) letter specified as a minimum, that your program should provide for an evaluation of:
- 1. The integrity of the reactor coolant pressure boundary,
- 2. The integrity-of fluid and electrical distribution systems related to safe--shutdown and engineered safety features, and
- 3. The integrity and functionability of mechanical and electrical equipment and engineered safety feature systems (including con tainment).
We have reviewed the systems at the San Onofre Unit 1 facility which are important to safety and should be included in your seismic reevaluation program. These systems are identified in Enclosure (1).
You are requested to revise and resubmit within 30 days of receipt of this letter your seismic reevaluation program. Your revised program should include the systems identified in Enclosure (1) and their related structures and components. A schedule for completion of seismic reevalua tions, submittal of analysis results for NRC review and the installation of any necessary modifications should be included in your revised program.
OFFICE SURNAMEO SURN ME~.......................................................
DATE NRC FORM 31800/80 NRCM 0240 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY USGPO: 1980-329-824
-2 Your schedule, if different from our August 4, 1980 request, should be justified and should be consistent with your conclusion that continued operation is justified in the interim until the seismic reevaluation program is complete and any necessary modifications are implemented.
Sincerely, Dennis M. Crutchfield, Chief Operating Reactors Branch No. 5 Division of Licensing
Enclosure:
As stated cc w/enclosure:
Se next page SEPB:DL SEPB:D EI t KA na CBerliner 4//6/81 4/1 /81 OFFICE SE
......... S B B
S.AUP.L SURNAME)
PYChndk RHn. ann Ru sell ck DC ed inas DATE.
4/ /81....
/3 /81 4/
1 A c E
.o.
- o.
__0o 2
0_FF I
I A
R E
C O
R D
C
.U.
NRC FORM 318 110/80) NRCM 0240 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY
,USGPO:
1980-329-824
0 RcUNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 April 24, 1981 Docket No. 50-206 LS05-81-04-045 Mr. R. Dietch, Vice President Nuclear Engineering and Operations Southern California Edison Company 2244 Walnut Grove Avenue Post Office Box 800 Rosemead, California 917,70
Dear Mr. Dietch:
SUBJECT:
SEP TOPIC 111-6, SEISMIC DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS SAN ONOFRE UNIT 1 Our letter to you dated August 4, 1980 requested in accordance with 10 CFR 50.54(f) of the Commission's regulations that you submit plans and proceed with a seismic reevaluation program for the San Onofre Unit 1 facility and that you provide justification for your conclusion that continued operation is justified in the interim until the seismic re evaluation program is complete. We have reviewed your seismic reevaluation program forwarded by your letters dated September 24, 1980 and February 23, 1981.
We have determined that your program is deficient with respect to scope of structures, systems and components to be evaluated.
Our August 4, 1980 10 CFR 50.54(f) letter specified as a minimum, that your program should provide for an evaluation of:
- 1. The integrity of the reactor coolant pressure boundary,
- 2. The integrity of fluid and electrical distribution systems related to safe shutdown and engineered safety features, and
- 3. The integrity and functionability of mechanical and electrical equipment and engineered safety feature systems (including con tainment).
We have reviewed the systems at the San Onofre Unit 1 facility which are important to safety and should be included in your seismic reevaluation program. These systems are identified in Enclosure (1).
You are requested to revise and resubmit within 30 days of receipt of this letter your seismic reevaluation program. Your revised program should include the systems identified in Enclosure (1) and their related structures and components. A schedule for completion of seismic reevalua tions, submittal of analysis results for NRC review and the installation of any necessary modifications should be included in your revised program.
-2 Your schedule, if different from our August 4, 1980 request, should be justified and should be consistent with your conclusion that continued operation is justified in the interim until the seismic reevaluation program is complete and any necessary modifications are implemented.
Sincerely, Dennis M. Crutchfie d, CWH Operating Reactors Branch No. 5 Division of Licensing
Enclosure:
As stated cc w/enclosure:
Se next page
Mr. R. Dietch cc Charles R. Kocher, Assistant Director, Criteria and Standards General Counsel Division Southern California Edison Company Office of Radiation Programs Post Office Box 800 (ANR-460)
Rosemead, California 91770 U. S. Environmental Protection Agency David R. Pigott Washington, D. C. 20460 Samuel B. Casey Chickering & Gregory U. S. Environmental Protection Three Embarcadero Center Agency Twenty-Third Floor Region IX Office San Francisco, California 94111 ATTN:
EIS COORDINATOR 215 Freemont Street Jack E. Thomas San Francisco, California 94111 Harry B. Stoehr San Diego Gas & Electric Company P. 0. Box 1831 San Diego, California 92112 Resident Inspector/San Onofre NPS c/o U. S. NRC P. 0. Box 4329 San Clemente, California 92672 Mission Viejo Branch Library 24851 Chrisanta Drive Mission Viejo, California 92676 Mayor City of San Clemente San Clemente, California 92672 Chairman Board of Supervisors County of San Diego San Diego, California 92101 California Department of Health ATTN: Chief, Environmental Radiation Control Unit Radiological Health Section 714 P Street, Room 498 Sacramento, California 95814
ENCLOSURE (1)
SAFETY RELATED SYSTEMS, STRUCTURES AND COMPONENTS SAN ONOFRE 1 PLANT The scope of review for the seismic re-evaluation program should include the systems, structures, and components (including emergency power supply and distribution, instrumentation, and actuation systems) with the following functions:
- 1. The reactor coolant pressure boundary as well as the core and vessel internals. This should also include those portions of the steam and feedwater system extending from dnd including the secondary side of the steam generator up to and including the outermost containment isolation valve and connected piping of 2, inch or larger nominal pipe size, up to and including the first valve that is either normally closed or is capable of automatic closure during all modes of normal reactor operation.
- 2. Systems or portions of systems that are required for safe shutdown as identified in the SEP safe shutdown review (SEP Topic VII-3).
The system boundary includes those portions of the system required to perform the safety function and connected piping up to and including the first valve that is either normally closed or capable of automatic closure when the safety function is required.
- 3. Systems or portions of systems that are required to mitigate design basis events, i.e., accidents and transients (SEP Topics XV-1 to XV-24). The functions to be provided include emergency core cooling, post-accident containment heat removal, post-accident containment atmospheres cleanup, as well as support systems, such as cooling water, needed for proper function ing of these systems.
- 4. Systems and structures required for fuel storage (SEP Topic IX-1).
Integrity of the spent fuel pool structure including the racks is needed.
Failure of the liner plate due to the safe shutdown earthquake must not result in significant radiological releases, or in loss of ability to keep the fuel covered.
Failure of cooling water systems or other systems connected to the pool should not permit draining of the fuel pool.
Means to supply make up to the pool as needed must be provided.
- 5. Structures that house the above equipment.
For the San Onofre 1 plant, the staff considers the following systems, and associated structures, and components should be addressed:
a) Reactor Coolant System (RCS) b) Portions of Main Steam System c) Portions of Main Feedwater System
-2 d) Portions of systems directly connected to the RCS, up to and including isolation valves e) Control Rod Drives f) Auxiliary Feedwater System g) Residual Heat Removal System h
Portions of the Chemical and Volume Control System i) Portions of the Component Cooling Water System j)
Portions of the Salt Water Cooling Water System k) Portions of the Service Water System
- 1) Portions of the Instrument Air System m)
Safety Injection System n) Containment Spray/Refueling Water System o) Recirculation System (including hot leg recirculation) p) Spent Fuel Pool and Makeup As discussed above, a "system" also includes the power supply, instrumentation and actuation systems.