ML16245A464
| ML16245A464 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | 05000000, Oconee |
| Issue date: | 10/31/1979 |
| From: | Capra R Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Israel S Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| Shared Package | |
| ML093450149 | List:
|
| References | |
| FOIA-80-515, FOIA-80-555 NUDOCS 7911200278 | |
| Download: ML16245A464 (4) | |
Text
~EGATY~~K FILE ICOPY Distribution:
D F.. Ross Docket Files OCT 311979 T.Novak SB 'Rdg:& Chron Files W. Gammill RACapra D. Eisenhut Docket Nos.:5 269, 270 and'28-7 G.'Lainas.
R -Reid
'.Fairtile W F Kane MEMORANOUM FOR/.
S. 'Israel, Leader Systems Group, Bulletins & Orders Task Force FROM:
R. A; Capra, B&W Project Manager, Projects Group Bulletins & Orders Task Force THRU:
W. F. Kane,IActing.Leader' Projects Group
/
Bulletins& Or ders Task Force SUBJ~EG-T:
~
. EFFETT OF FEEDWATER SYSTEM MODIFICATION ON OCONEEWITn RESPECT TO THE.EORIGINAL STEAM LINE BREAK ANALYSIS ced hote fromD.Eisenhut to D. Ross, dated October 26, 1979, discusses the fact that the original steam line break-accident.inside.con tainment analysis performed by Duke Power Company for Oconee, Units 1, 2 and 3 may no longer be-valid.
This subject was discussed in a meeting between DOR (R. Reid, G. Lainas, M. Fairtile, E. Adensam, S. Wookey) and B&OTF (T. Npvak, G..Mazetis, R. Capra) about three weeks ago.
In that meeting, B&OTF agreed to review the effects of the steam line, break accident inside containment for the OconeeUnits as part of our review.of the EFW system modifications.
Based upon our agreement.
to-perform this review, W.;LeFave is following up on this matter. 'O October 16, 1979,.we requested that Duke re-perform the analysis using the new EFW system design.
A copy of thil1etter is also attached.
- 0. Eisenhut's note requests that S&OTF review this matter.for the other opera-'
ting plants. -I do not feel that this is under the charter of the B&OTF for two reasons:
(1) -The only modification in flow rate capacity, under B&OTF, was to the Oconee units. All other PWR's have requirements to upgrade the relia-.
bility and timeliness of delivery of ihe AFW system. Therefore, we have not done any modifications that should affect the analyses.
(2) If the original analyses was done inadequately, ie., did not consider punp runout conditions, this'should fall under DOR's area of responsi bility for resolution.
I would appreciate your comments on this matter sihce it should be resolved as soon as possible.
em & I.
& IE................
.... A r j ct..M. Tr ge OU NAM A p
. k E
DATE/1
.r.. A.
..S 0 de r T.k Fo.r mC FORM 31jtjes
- 24o0
- u.
OeVMNMNT PARINTING OFFICE.:
-o70
~ion:
D F. Ross Docket Files OCT 3 1 19 T. Novak SB Rdg & Chron F les W. Gamiill RACapra
- 0. Eisenhut ocket Nos.
269 270 and 287 G. Lainas Doe...R Reid M. Fairtile MflEM1ORANUMi FOR:
S. Israel, Leader Systems Group, Bulletins & Orders Task Force FROi:
R. A. Capra, B&W Project Manager, Projects Group Bulletins. & Orders Task Force THRU:
W. F. Kane, Acting Leader, Projects Group Bulletins & Orders Task Force
SUBJECT:
EFFETT OF FEEDWATER SYSTEN MODIFICATION ON OCONEE WITH RESPECT TO THE ORIGINALSTEAM LINE BREAK ANALYSIS The attached note fromD. Eisenhut to D. Ross, dated October 26, 1979,'
discusses the fact that the original steam line break accident inside con tainment analysis performed by Duke Power Conpany for Oconee, Units 1, 2 and
- 3.
ray no longer be valid.
This subject was discussed in a meeting between DOR !R. Reid, G. Lainas, fl. Fairtile, E. Adensam, S. Wookey) and B&OTF T. Novak, G. MazetisR. Capra) about three weeks ago. In that meeting, B&OTF.agreed to review the effetts of the steam line break accident inside containment for the Oconee Units as part of our review.of the EFW system modifications.
Based upon our agreement to perform this review, W. LeFave is following up on this matter.
On October 16, 1979, we requested that Duke re-perform the analysis using the new EFW system design. A copy of this letter is also attached.
D. Eisenhut's note requests that B&0TF review this matter for the other opera ting plants. I do not feel that this is under the charter. of the B&OTF for two reasons:
- 1) The only modification in flow-rate capacity, under B&OTF, -was to the Oconee units. All other PWR's have requirements to upgrade the relia-bility and timeliness of delivery of the AFW system. Therefore we have not done any modifications that should affect the analyses
- 2)
If the original analyses was done inadequately, le., did not consider, pump runout conditions, this should fall under DOR's area of responsih-,
bility for resolution.
I would appreciate your commenits on this matter since it should be resolved as soon as possible.
ownse.
&QTE
&0IF.........................................
per=
r jett-f1 rager.
ACap Ijk/......LIElXane9...........................................
I________rou.........
Dulletins & 0 ders Task Fol c D. ATEV N
.p./Z R
O 10c-romt 316.1 I&
5Upgg.o240 U.Sm. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OPPICE: 19718 - ISO -F709
S1)
(10 o
.UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 October 29, 1979 NOTE FOR: D. Ross FROM:
D. Eisenhut
SUBJECT:
EFFECT OF FEEDWATER SYSTEM MODIFICATION IN OPERATING PWR PLANTS ON ORIGINAL STEAM LINE BREAK ANALYSES In the Oconee FSAR,.Section 14 Safety Analysis for the steam line break (SLB) accident inside containment, Duke considered only one emergency FW pump, pumping through the break, and causing an increase in containment pressure due to the SLB accident, The plant modifications resulting from the TMI Bulletins and Orders may have affected the FSAR SLB analyses not only for Oconee but perhaps the other operating PWRs.
It is requested that this subject be specifically addressed in your review of the proposed modifications at Oconee.
It is further requested that this subject be reviewed for the other operating PWRs.
The containment pressure response to a SLB inside containment was the subject of a Part 21 notification from Virginia-Electric Power Company for North Anna 3 and 4, The problem at North Anna 3/4 involved inadequate consideration of the auxiliary FW flow under pump runout conditions, It seems appropriate that you should also consider this subject for any actions resulting from Bulletins and
-die-rsactivities.
Darrell G. Eisenhut, Acting Director Division of Operating Reactors Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation cc: WGammill WButl er GLainas RReid MFairtile
Docket Nos.:..
50-269, 50-270 and 50-287 OCT 16 1979 Mr. William 0. Parker Vfce President - Steam Production Duke Power Company P.O. Box 2178 422 South Church Street Charlotte, North Carolina 28242
Dear Mr. Parker:
SUBJECT:
EMERGENCY FEEDWATER FLOW RATE AND STABILITY TEST FOR OCONEE 1, 2. & 3 In your letter dated August 22, 1979, you requested exemption from the flow rate and flow stability test that we required in our May 18, 1979 evaluation of your compliance with the NRC Order of May 7, 1979.
We have reviewed-your request and conclude that the flow test we required in our May 18, 1979 evaluation will.not be necessary provided all motor-operated pumps are.available prior to three unit operation. The enclosed evaluation describes the details of our review and provides the basis for our conclusion.
As stated on page two of the enclosed evaluation, the addition of the two motor driven pumps to each unit requires that new analyses be performed regarding a main steam line break inside containment since the peak containment pressure may be affected due to.the emergency feedwater flow which is dependent on manual actions to isolate flow to the affected steam generator. In performing the analyses, you must consider the run out flow from the turbine-driven pump and
-one motor-driven.pump. Please provide -us a date by which we can expect to receive the revised analyses.
If you have ary additional questions, pleast do not hesitate to call me.
Sincerely, Oriinal sined byr Robert W. Reid, Chief Operating Reactors Branch No. 4 Division of Operating Reactors E'ncosure:
Su.olement 1 to Evaluation of Licensee's Compliance with the Order dated "av 7, 1979 cc:
See attached distribution list
=5es B&0
/F.
B&0.T S30 T/
DOR:DB&f
- D
.s NAME Iel.....
ovak.
MFairtile FIss ZAE~1..10// 79 10/1C/79 10/
/79 10/!'/790 0/
1\\/79 10///9
*~
C~
',f..
%I
,NM=N-r 00fN7IN~r nPOICIF! 1979-2a9-369