ML15112A271
| ML15112A271 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Oconee  |
| Issue date: | 10/14/1998 |
| From: | Labarge D NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned) |
| To: | Mccollum W DUKE POWER CO. |
| References | |
| TAC-MA3595, TAC-MA3596, TAC-MA3597, NUDOCS 9810190126 | |
| Download: ML15112A271 (4) | |
Text
October 14, 1998 Mr. W. R. McCollum Vice President, Oconee Site Duke Energy Corporation P. 0. Box 1439 Seneca, SC 29679
SUBJECT:
REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ON EMERGENCY POWER ENGINEERED SAFEGUARDS FUNCTIONAL TEST - OCONEE NUCLEAR STATION, UNITS 1, 2, AND 3 (TAC NOS. MA3595, MA3596, AND MA3597)
Dear Mr. McCollum:
By letter dated September 17,1998, you requested staff evaluation of an unreviewed safety question related to planned functional tests of the Keowee Emergency Power Engineered Safeguards System. As a result of this review, the staff has determined that additional information is needed before the review can be completed. As discussed with your staff, we request that you respond to the enclosed questions by October 19, 1998.
Sincerely, ORIGINAL SIGNED BY:
David E. LaBarge, Senior Project Manager Project Directorate 11-2 Division of Reactor Projects - 1/11 Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Docket Nos. 50-269, 50-270, and 50-287
Enclosure:
Request for Additional Information cc w/encl: See next page Distribution:
HBerkow LPlisco, RII Docket File LBerry COgle, RII PUBLIC DLaBarge JLazevnick O
PD 11-2 Rdg.
OGC CJackson JZwolinski ACRS Document Name: G:\\OCON EE\\OCOA3595. RAI To receive a copy of this document, indicate in the box:
"C" = Copy without attachment/enclosure "E" = Copy with attachment/enclosure "N" = No copy OFFICE PDil /y.,t PDIl-2/LA ee PDy NAME DL e
1Berry 4 ff Hber*-y DATE I
/98
//
7/98 10-/ 98 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY 9810190126 981014 r,
PDR ADOCK 05000269 I
F PDR
UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. 20555-0001 October 14, 1998 Mr. W. R. McCollum Vice President, Oconee Site Duke Energy Corporation P. 0. Box 1439 Seneca, SC 29679
SUBJECT:
REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ON EMERGENCY POWER ENGINEERED SAFEGUARDS FUNCTIONAL TEST - OCONEE NUCLEAR STATION, UNITS 1, 2, AND 3 (TAC NOS. MA3595, MA3596, AND MA3597)
Dear Mr. McCollum:
By letter dated September 17, 1998, you requested staff evaluation of an unreviewed safety question related to planned functional tests of the Keowee Emergency Power Engineered Safeguards System. As a result of this review, the staff has determined that additional information is needed before the review can be completed. As discussed with your staff, we request that you respond to the enclosed questions by October 19, 1998.
Sincerely, David E. LaBarge, Senior Project Manager Project Directorate 11-2 Division of Reactor Projects - III Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Docket Nos. 50-269, 50-270, and 50-287
Enclosure:
Request for Additional Information cc w/encl: See next page
Oconee Nuclear Station cc:
Mr. Paul R. Newton Mr. J. E. Burchfield Legal Department (PBO5E)
Compliance Manager Duke Energy Corporation Duke Energy Corporation 422 South Church Street Oconee Nuclear Site Charlotte, North Carolina 28201-1006 P. 0. Box 1439 Seneca, South Carolina 29679 J. Michael McGarry, III, Esquire Winston and Strawn Ms. Karen E. Long 1400 L Street, NW.
Assistant Attorney General Washington, DC 20005 North Carolina Department of Justice Mr. Rick N. Edwards P. O. Box 629 Framatome Technologies Raleigh, North Carolina 27602 Suite 525 1700 Rockville Pike L. A. Keller Rockville, Maryland 20852-1631 Manager - Nuclear Regulatory Licensing Manager, LIS Duke Energy Corporation NUS Corporation 526 South Church Street 2650 McCormick Drive, 3rd Floor Charlotte, North Carolina 28201-1006 Clearwater, Florida 34619-1035 Mr. Richard M. Fry, Director Senior Resident Inspector Division of Radiation Protection U. S. Nuclear Regulatory North Carolina Department of Commission Environment, Health, and 7812B Rochester Highway Natural Resources Seneca, South Carolina 29672 3825 Barrett Drive Raleigh, North Carolina 27609-7721 Regional Administrator, Region II U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Mr. Steven P. Shaver Atlanta Federal Center Senior Sales Engineer 61 Forsyth Street, S.W., Suite 23T85 Westinghouse Electric Company Atlanta, Georgia 30303 5929 Carnegie Blvd.
Suite 500 Virgil R. Autry, Director Charlotte, North Carolina 28209 Division of Radioactive Waste Management Bureau of Land and Waste Management Department of Health and Environmental Control 2600 Bull Street Columbia, South Carolina 29201-1708 County Supervisor of Oconee County Walhalla, South Carolina 29621
REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION EMERGENCY POWER ENGINEERED SAFEGUARDS FUNCTIONAL TEST 1
Was any consideration given to performing this test while Oconee Unit 3 is defueled or with the head removed and the refueling cavity flooded? Please briefly discuss any of these considerations.
- 2. The submittal indicates that the reactor head will be bolted and torqued. However, the steam generator hand holes will be open and one safety relief valve will be.
removed as the Technical Specification (TS) required Reactor Coolant System (RCS) vents. TS 3.1.2.9 requires an RCS vent capable of mitigating the most limiting low temperature overpressure (LTOP) event. Please describe the number of hand holes and total relieving area and describe the most limiting LTOP event considered when this test is being performed. Additionally, given that three High Pressure Injection (HPI) pumps, two low pressure injection (LPI) pumps and part of the flow from two reactor building spray (RBS) pumps will all be injecting into the RCS, how long do the operators have to terminate the test before the RCS fills?
Are there any consequences to overfilling the RCS?
- 3. Please provide a flow diagram of the LPI and RBS taking suction from both the suction header and the RCS drop line and the discharge flow path. What is the maximum credible amount of leakage out of the RCS through the LPI or RBS?
- 4. Please verify that the defense in depth concept being used for this test maintains ability to control RCS inventory and decay heat removal for Oconee Unit 3 with equipment that will not be subject to the transient electrical loading experienced during the test. Please describe the equipment that will not be affected by the transient electrical loading and what functions will be maintained.
- 5. Please verify that this license amendment request is for a one-time only test and that the Oconee licensing basis will not permanently permit this type of test.
- 6. In the Duke Energy September 17, 1998, letter it is stated that, "considering the frequency overshoot the Keowee units experience on emergency start, questions arose concerning whether the preferred loading design for the emergency power system is 60 percent loading or 90 percent loading. For this reason, the Keowee Emergency Power and Engineered Functional Test (KEP&ESF) is planned."
Please identify and discuss the questions that arose. Since there are some questions regarding the 90 percent loading capability and this capability has not been tested before, please describe what work has been done to verify to a reasonable degree that equipment will operate properly during the test. Provide CYME computer model results that show the expected motor response characteristics against their overload protection, and the associated Keowee response. Discuss why these results are expected to be realistic or conservative relative to the test and actual case.