ML17138B635
| ML17138B635 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Fermi, Susquehanna, Columbia, LaSalle, Zimmer, Shoreham File:Long Island Lighting Company icon.png |
| Issue date: | 12/05/1980 |
| From: | Joshua Wilson Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8012170283 | |
| Download: ML17138B635 (29) | |
Text
qJ pe REOI
~4
~o)0
~u C
00
+r Y"
+
0
+a*++
UNITEDSTATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555
- Opt, g l980 Docket Nos.:
50-358, 50-397 50-322, 50-373 5 -3 APPLICANTS:
Cincinnati Gas and Electric Company Long Island Lighting Company Commonwealth Edison Company D'etroit Edison Company Pennsylvania Power and Light Company Washington Public Power Supply System FACILITIES:
Zimmer 1,
Shoreham 1, LaSalle 1, Fermi -2, Susquehanna 1,
WNP-2
SUBJECT:
SUMMARY
OF MEETING.HELD ON DECEMBER 2, 1980 A meeting was held in Bethesda, Maryland with the above named members of the Boiling Water Reactor-Licensing Review Group (BWR-LRG).
The purpose of 'the meeting was to discuss the current status of the LRG issues.
The list of attendees for this meeting is provided in Enclosure l.
I began the meeting by distributing a list of the LRG issues which indicated the current status (refer to Enclosure 2).
Each of these issues were discussed with the LRG members.
During the discussion of PSB issues, Fire Protection concerns were also discussed.
A status report of the LaSalle specific issues was also presented at the meeting.
This report is attached as Enclosure 3.
At the conclusion of the meeting, the LRG presented their consensus positions on recently issued concerns from the Core Performance Branch (provided as ).
The next meeting with the BWR-LRG was tentatively scheduled for February 1981.
Enclosures:
As stated
'c w/encls.:
See next page J
ry N. Wilson RC Manager for BWR-LRG
Mr.M. S. Pollock Vice P resi dent - Nucl ear Long Island Lighting Company 175 East Old Country Road Hicksville, New York 11801 ccsl Howard L. Blau, Esq.
Blau and Cohn, P.C.
217 Newbridge Road Hicksville, New York 11801 Jeffrey Cohen, Esq.
Deputy Commissioner and Counsel New York State Energy Office Agency Building 2
Empire State Plaza
- Albany, New York 12223 Energy Research
- Group, Inc.
400-1 Totten Pond Road Waltham, Massachusetts 02154 Irving Like, Esq.
Rei lly, Like and Schnieder 200 West Main Street
- Babylon, New York 11702 J.
P. Novarro Project Manager Shoreham Nuclear Power Station P. 0.
Box 618 Wading River, New York 11792 W. Taylor Reveley, III, Esq.
Hunton 5 Williams P. 0.
Box 1535 Richmond, Virginia 23212 Ralph Shapiro, Esq.
Camner 8 Shapiro 9 East 40th Street New York, New York 10016 Edward J.
- Walsh, Esq.
General Attorney Long Island Lighting Company 250 Old Country Road
- Mineola, New York 11501 Resident Inspector/Shoreham NPS c/o U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission P. 0.
Box B
Rocky Point, New York 11778 Honorabl.e Peter Cohalan Suffolk County Executive County Executive/Legislative Building Veteran's Memorial Highway Hauppauge, New York 11788 David Gilmartin, Esq.
Suffolk County Attorney County Executive/Legislative Buildi.ng Veteran's Memorial Highway Hauppauge, New York 11788 MHB Technical Associates 1723 Hamilton Avenue - Suite K
San Jose, California 95125.
Stephen
- Latham, Esq.
Twomey, Latham
& Schmitt P. 0.
Box 398
'33 West Second Street Riverhead, New York 11901 Joel Blau, Esquire New York Public Service Commission The Governor Nelson A. =Rockefeller Bldg.
.Empire State Plaza
- Albany, New York 12223 Ezra I. Bialik Assistant Attorney General Environmental Protection Bureau New York State Department of Law 2 World Trade Center New York, New York 10047
Jg
s" Mr, J.
S'. Abel
.Director of Nucl ea r Licensing Common>veal th Edison Company Post Office Box 767 Ch icago, Illinois 60690 cc:
Richard E. Ponell, Esq.
Isham, Lincoln 5 Beale One First National Plaza 2400 Chicago, Illinois-60670 Dean Hansell, Esquire Assistant Attorney General 188 West Randolph Street Suite 2315 Chicago, Illinois 60601 Mr. Roger Walker, Resident Inspector U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Post Office.Box 737 Str eator, Il1 inois 61364
~ y
\\
Mr. Norman W. Curtis Vice President
- Engineering and Construction Pennsylvania Power and Light Company 2 North Ninth Street Al 1 entown, Pennsyl vani a 18101 CC:
Mr. Earle M. Mead Project Engineering Manager Pennsylvania Power
& Light Company 2 North Ninth Street Allentown, Pennsylvania 18101 Jay Silberg, Esq.
- Shaw, Pittman, Potts Trowbridge 1800 M Street, N.
W.
Washington,,D.
C.
20036 Mr. William E. Barberich, Nuclear Licensing Group Supervisor Pennsylvania Power
& Light Company 2 North Ninth Street Allentown, Pennsylvania 18101 Edward M. Nagel, Esquire General Counsel and Secretary Pennsylvania Power
& Light Company 2 'North Ninth Street Allentown, Pennsylvania 18101 Bryan Snapp, Esq.
Pennsylvania Power
& Light Company 2 North Ninth Street Al 1 entown, Pennsyl vani a 18101 Robert M. Gallo Resident Inspector P.
0.
Box 52 Shickshinny, Pennsylvania 18655 John L.;.Anderson Oak Ridge National Laboratory Union Carbide Corporation Bldg. 3500, P. 0.
Box X
Oak Ridge, Tennessee 37830 Gerald R. Schultz, Esq.
Susquehanna Environmental Advocates P. 0.
Box 1560 Hikes-Barre, Pennsylvania 18703 Mr. E.B. Poser Project Engineer Bechtel Power Corporation P. 0.
Box 3965 San Francisco, California 94119 Matias F. Travieso-Diaz, Esq.
Shaw, Pittman, Potts Trowbridge 1800 M Street, N.
W.
Washington, D.
C.
20036 Dr. Judith H. Johnsrud Co-Director Environmental Coalition on Nuclear Power 433 Orlando Avenue State College, Pa 16801 Mr. Thomas M. Gerusky, Director Bureau of Radiati on Protecti on Department of Environmental Resources Commonwealth of Pennsylvania P.
0.
Box 2063
))arri sburg, Pa 17120 Ms. Colleen Marsh Box 538A, RD84 Mountain Top, PA 18707 Mrs. Irene Lemanowicz, Chairperson The Citizens Against Nuclear Danagers P. 0.
Box 377 RD//1 Berwi ck, PA 18503 Mr. J.W. Millard Project MAnager Mail Code 394 General Electric Company 175 Curtner Avenue San Jose, California 95125
Nr.
R, L. Ferguson Managing Director Washington Public Power Supply System P.
0.
Box 968 3000 George Washington Way Richland, Washington 99352 ccs:
Joseph B. Knotts, Jr.,
Esq.
Debevoise 5 Liberman 1200 Seventeenth
- Street, N.
M.
Washington, D.
C.
20036 Richard Q. Quigley, Esq.
Washington Public Power Supply System P. 0.
Box 968 Richland, Washington 99352 Nicholas Lewis, Chairman Energy Facility Site Evaluation Council 820 East Fifth Avenue Olympia, Washington 98504 Nr. 0.
K. Earle Licensing Engineer P. 0.
Box 968
- Richland, Washington 99352 Nr. Albert D. Toth Resident Inspector/WPPSS-2 NPS c/o U.
S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission P. 0.
Box 69 Richland, Washington 99352
~:
'Hr. Earl A. Borgmann
~
~
~
Vice President - Engineering Cincinnati Gas 5 Electric Company P; 0.
Box 960 Cincinnati, Ohio 45201 1
CC:
Troy B. Conner, Jr.,
Esq.
- Conner, Moore 8 Corber 1147 Pennsylvania
- Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C.
20006 Mr. William J.
Moran General Counsel Cincinnati Gas 8 Electric Company P. 0.
Box 960 Cincinnati; Ohio 45201 Hr. William G. Porter, Jr.
Porter, Stanley, Arthur and 'Platt 37 West Broad Street
- Columbus, Ohio 43215 Mr. James D. Flynn, Manager Licensing Environmental Affairs Cincinnati Gas 8 Electric Company P.
0.
Box 960 Cincinnati, Ohio 45201 David Hartin, Esq.
Office of the Attorney General 209 St. Clair Street First Floor Frankfot t, Kentucky 40601 Dr. Frank F..Hooper School of Natural Resources University of Michigan Ann Arbor, Michigan 48109 Charles.Bechhoefer, Esq., -Chairman Atomic Safety 8 Licensing Board Panel U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.
20555 Hr. Glenn 0. Bright Atomic Safety 5 Licensing Board Panel U.S. 'Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.
20555 Leah S. Kosik, Esq.
3454 Cornell Place Cincinnati, Ohio 45220 W. Peter Heile, Esn.
Assistant City Solicitor Room 214, City Hall Cincinnati, Ohio 45220 John D. Woliver, Esq.
Clermont County Camounity Council Box 181
- Batavia, Ohio 45103 Mrs. Mary Reder Box 270, Rt.
2 California, Kentucky 41007 Andrew B. Dennison, Esq.
200 Main Street
- Batavia, Ohio 45103 Robert A. Jones, Esq.
Prosecuting Attorney of Clennont County, Ohio 154 Main Street
- Batavia, Ohio 45103 Resident Inspector/Zimmer RFD 1, P. 0.
Box 2021 U, S.
Route 52
'Noscow, Ohio 45153.
+ ~
I
..Dr. Mayne H. Jens Assistant Vice President Engineering.& Construction Detroit Edison Company 2000 Second Avenue Detroit, Michigan 48226 cc:
Eugene B. Thomas, Qr., Esq.
David E. Howell, Esq.
LeBoeuf, Lamb,'eiby
& MacRae 21916 John'R 1333 New Hampshire
- Avenue, N., R...., "Haze1.Park, Michigan
. 48030 Mashington, D.
C.
2003'6 Peter -A. Marquardt, Esq.
Co-Counsel Thh Detroit Edison Company 2000 Second Avenue Detroit, Michigan 48226
\\
Mr. William J.
Fahrner
=Project'Manager - Fermi '2 The Detroit Edison Company 2000 Second Avenue Detroit, Michigan 48226 Mr. Larry E.
Schuerman Licensing Engineer - =Fermi 2
Detroit Edison Company 2000 Second Avenue Detroit, Michigan 48226
'Charles Bechhoefer, Esq
, Chairman Atomic Safety
& Licensing Board
'Panel U. S. Nuclear Regulatory'.Commission Mashington, D. C.
20555 Dr. David R. Schink Department of Oceanography Texas A & M University College Station, Texas 77840 Mr. Frederick J.
Shon Atomic Safety
& Licensing Board Panel U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Coamission Mashington, D.
C.
-20555
ENCLOSURE 1
List of Attendees NRC Staff Jerry Wilson Anthony Bournia Bob Bosnak Farouk Eltawila Wayne Hodges Jerry Mazetis Robert L. Tedesco Bill Morris J. L. Mauck G.
G. Rhoads Richard Stark L. L. Kintner.
I. A. Peltier G.
Thomas J.
Knox Tim Col.lins Stone 8 Webster (Shoreham)
John Murphy Lon Island Li htin Comoan Cincinnati Gas 8-Electric Comnany J.
D. Fl.ynn F. J. Svetkovich General Electric D
J.
Robare Tom Wortham Commonwealth Edison Comoan L. 0. De16eorqe Detroit Edison Com any
'Larry E.
Schuerman Wm. F. Colbert h
C. T. Coddinaton Phil Henrickson John P. Morin Washington Public Power Sup 1
S stem John A. Ellwanger Pat Powell Bechtel E. Connell, III
ISSUE RESPONSIBLE A/D ENCLOSURE LR(i STATUS LASALLE STATUS ACTION RSB-1 RSB-2 RSB-3 RSB-4 RSB-5 RSB-6 RSB-7 RSB-8 RSB-9/13 RSB-10 RSB-11 RSB-12 RSS-14 RSB-15 RSB-16 RSB-17 RSB-18 RSB-,19 RSB-20 RSB-21 RSB-22 RSB-23 RSB-24 RSB-25 RSB-26 Plant Systems
" (new MEB concern)
Unique Closed Onen Closed Qoen Closed Closed Open pen U'nique Unique
.Closed Closed Open Closed
" (plant Closed specific analysis) Open Closed Closed Open Open Open Ooen Closed Closed Open Open Ooen Closed Open Ooen Closed Open Ooen Closed Open Closed Lic. Cond.
Closed Closed Closed Closed Closed Ooen Ooen Onen Open Open Closed Lic. Cond.
ICSB-1 ICSB-2 ICSB-3 ICSB-4 ICSB-5 ICSB-6 ICSB-7 ICSB-9 ICSB-10 ICSB-11 II II II II Unique Unique N/A Unique Unique Unique Closed Open Ooen Closed Open Open N/A Open Open Open Open Open Ooen Closed C=Commonwealth Edison N=NRC
ISSUE PSB-1 PSB-2 PSB-3 PSB-4 PSB-5 PSB-6 PSB-2 PSB-8 CSB-1 CSB-2 CSB-3 CSB-4 CSB-5 MEB-1 MEB-2 MEB-3 MEB-4 MEB-5 NEB-6 MEB-7 MEB-8 MEB-9 MEB-10 MEB-11 MEB-12 MTEB-1 MTEB-2 MTEB-3 NTEB-4 RESPONSIBLE A/D Plant Systems Core E Containment Systems Components 8 Structures Materials 5 Qualifications LRG STATUS Open Unique Open Ooen Closed Unique Open Closed Open Closed Unique Open Open Cl osed Closed Closed Closed N/A Closed Closed Unique N/A Open N/A Uni oue Unioue Unique Unique Closed LASALLE STATUS Open Open Ooen Open Open
.Closed Open Closed Open Open Closed Open Ooen Closed Closed Closed Closed N/A Closed Closed Open N/A Open N/f Ooen Open Onen Ooen Onen ACT10ll C=Commonwealth Edison N=NRC
ENCLOSURE 3
STATUS OF LASALLE ISSUES 1.
Flood Potential - (2.4.2, 2.4.5)
The revised gradation for the riprap submitted in Amendment 41 to the FSAR is acceptable.
However, the as-built spillway.riprap does not conform to either the stated design in the FSAR or to good riprap erosion protection practices.
The applicant is taking remedial action.
When this action is completed, we -will inspect the as-built riprap.
2.
Low Shear Modulus - (2.6.1,.2.6.6)
The applicant has -coamitted to provide field testing data for verifying the shear modulus at low strain levels.
3.
Internallv Generated Missiles -- ('3.5.1)
The applicant must clarify the criteria used to determine "significant" damage to structure, systems and components (SSC)'nd show how these SSC are protected against missiles inside containment.
4.
Mark II Containment (a)
D namic S stem Anal sis Under Faulted Conditions (3.9.2, '3.9.5)
We require documentation of the applicant's reevaluation of'he reactor vessel, its internals,
- supports, and 'attached piping for combined loss-of-coolant accident and safety shutdown earthquake loads, including the, annulus pressurization effects.
(b)
Loadin Combinations, Desi n Transients and Stress Limits - (3.9.3, 3.9.'5)
We require documentation of the applicant's reevaluation of the safety-related sys'ems.and components based upon the load combinations, response combination methodology, and acceptance criteria required by us
~
(c)
Pool D namic LOCA and SRV Loads - (6.2.1.1)
We need additional information to complete our review in the following areas:
a.
T-quencher air clearing load specification, and b.
Pool temperature responses to safety relief valve transients.
5.
Com onent Su orts - (3.9.3}
The applicant has 'not.submitted its resolution of observed cracking of the jet F
pump holddown beams.
- 6; --Preservice and Inservice Testin of Pum s and Valves - 3.9.6}
The applicant has not submitted its.proposed program for the preservice and inservice testing of,pumps and valves.
7.
8.
Seismic uglification (a)
The applicant has not submitted the information describing the methods and criteria used to address the vibration fatigue cycle effects on the affected equipment due to the. required loading conditions, has not submitted the results of the in-situ impedance tests and has not completed the qualification program.
(b)
We have not completed our seismic qualification review team review.
Environmental /uglification - (3.11}
We are currently reviewing the applicant's NUREG-0588 environmental submittal, and we anticipate a site audit in December 1980.
9.
Balloonin and Ru ture - (4.2;3)
We have not completed our generic review and implemented new acceptance criteria for cladding models.
Therefore, we require that ECCS analyses in the FSAR be supplemented and be performed with the materials models of NUREG-0630.
10.
Combined Seismic and LOCA Loads on Fuel Assembl
- (4.2.3}
The applicant must perform analyses with GE approved analytical methods as reported in GE Report NEDE-21175-P to show compliance with our acceptance criteria.
11.
Channel Box Deflection - (4.2.3}
The applicant has not referenced NEDO-21354 and as a result has not committed to perform the recommended tests or the time interval for performing these tests.
12.
MCPR - (4.4.1, 4.4.2, 15.1)
The applicant must modify the operating limit MCPR based on the generator load rejection without bypass event satisfying the MCPR safety limit of 1.06.
13.
R~IIIYN 3 I
The applicant....". analyze the following transients:
(a) generator load rejection without bypass, (b) turbine trip without bypass and main steam isolation valve closure, and (c) for ASME Overpressure Protection - main steam isolation valve closure with flux scram.
14.
Control Rod S stem Modification - (4.6.2)
The applicant must show operability of the control rod drive system in order to justify elimination of the return line to the reactor vessel.
15.
Scram Dischar e Volume - (4.6.2)
We require the applicant to satisfy the requirements resulting from the generic study on scram discharge volume design.
t
'A 3
16.
Safet /Relief Valves - (5.2.2, '6.3.2)
Me require that the applicant perform.tests to show that flow through the safety relief valves is adequate to provide the necessary fluid relief for alternate shutdown cooling.
In addition, the applic -...
must submit drawing's indicating modification to the Crosby valves and the results of -review performed by the BMR Owner's Group on ttstS of these valves.
17.
ATMS - (5.2.2, 7.2.3, 15.2.'I)
(a)
Me ~equine that the applicant agrees to implement plant modifications on a schedular basis in conformance with the Commission's final resolution of ATMS.
In the event that, LaSalle starts operation before necessary plant-modifications are implemented, we require some interim actions be taken by LaSalle in order to reduce, further, the risk from ATMS -events.
The applicant will be required to:
(i)
Develop emergency procedures to train operators to recognize an ATMS event, including consideration of scram indicators, rod position indicators, flux
- monitors, vessel level and pressure indicators, relief valve and isolation valve indicators, and containment temperature,
- pressure,
.and radiation indicators.
(ii) Train operators to take actions in the event of an ATMS including consideration of.. immediately manual scramming the reactor by using the manual scram buttons followed by changing rod scram switches to the scram position, stripping the feeder breakers on the reactor protection system power distribution buses, opening the scram discharge volume drain valve, prompt actuation of the standby liquid control system, and prompt placement of the RHR in the pool cooling mode to reduce the severity of the containment conditions.
18.
Preservice and Inservice Ins ection Pro ram - (5.2.4)
The applicant has not submitted its -revised program of preservice and inservice inspection of Class 1, 2, and 3 components in accordance to 50.55 a(g).
19.
Detection of Inters stem Leaka e - (5.2.5)
The applicant must address leakage cri teria for check valves at the RCS/RCIC, RCS/RHR, RCS/LPCS, RCS/LPCI interfaces and show how leakage into the LPCS and LPCI system is detected.
25.
2 I I Itt 33 dt 5
5 II - 55.3.3, '5.3.2, 5.3.33 For Unit I, additional information for exemption for paragraphs
'V.A.2.a and IV.B of Appendix G must be submitted by the applicant.
For Unit 2, insufficient information are presented for use to complete our review.
II 21.
Flow Ca acit of Safet /Relief Valves in RHR (5.4.'2)
See item 16 above.
22.
Classification of RHR Isolation Valves - '(5.4.2) 23.
We require that the valves which serve to isolate the residual heat removal system from the reactor coolant system be classified category A/C in accordance with the provisions of Section XI of the ASME code.
Steam Bv ass of the Su ressi'on Pool - (6.2.1.1)
The applicant approach to suppression pool bypass is not consistent with Branch Technical Position CSB 6-5.
The applicant must commi t to perform a low power surveillance leakage test of the containment at each refueling outage.
Applicant plans to appeal the staff's position.
24.
Containment Leaka e 'Testin (6.2.6)
With respect 'to applying-with Appendix J, the following commitment and additional information is required:
(a)
Leak test of RHR shutdown return isolation valve be performed as Type C test utilizing air.
(b)
Additional information is required for isolation valves in lines for LPCS injection, HPCS injection, RHR/LPCI injection, and the RHR shutdown cooling return and the arrangements of'he vacuum breaker valves.
,25.
Assurance of 'Filled ECCS Line - (6.3.2)
The applicant must specify the test interval for the periodic venting of the ECCS injection lines to reduce the likelihood of air pocket, presence.
26.
27.
Perodic lestin of Valves Used to Isolate Reactor Coolant S stem - (6.3.2)
See item lg.above.
Post-LOCA ECCS Leaka e - (6.3.4)
We require the applicant to address the consequences and means of containing leakage from the first isolation valve outside the suppression pool.
28.
Ph sical Se aration and Electrical Isolation - (7. 1.4, 7.2.3, 7.3.3, 7.6.3)
Based on information supplied by 'the applicant, 'there is still concern regarding L="-lie's definition 'and/or treatment of associated circuits.
.We are reviewing the adequacy of the present design.
For the instrument cabinets where non-Class IE wiring is bundled with Class IE wiring, we require that the applicant demonstrate (by test or analysis) that the Class IE circuits and equipment are not degraded below an acceptance level by challenges by non-Class IE circuits.
30.
31.
In order to-perform some surveillance 'testing, it is necessary for the applicant to pull fuses.
We consider that this design does not satisfy the requirements of IEEE Std 279-1971 Paragraphs 4.11 and 4.20.
We consider this item closed.
The applicant.will only utilize 'this method at refueling.
The applicant must document its comitment.
Safet S stem Set pints - (7.1.4)
We have not.completed our review of the 'Technical Specifications.
We intend to review the information on setpoints in.+he Technical Specifications.
If any concerns are noted, we will require some clarification.
~Drawio a - (7.1.4, 7.3.3, 7.8.3)
Based on our audit of certain drawings during our site visit, we consider this item closed except for confirming documentation (drawings) to be supplied on the low-low set relief logic and documentation of the function of this system.
32.
RCIC Classification - (7.4.3) 33.
34.
35.
36.
The applicant has provided the information on their proposed design change for switchover.
We consider this item closed except for their submittal of the final design.
Safet
- Related Dis la
- (7.5)
We are reviewing this i tem as a result of the applicant's input.
Rod Block Monitor - (7.6.3)
We are reviewing this item.
The applicant has documented that the-rod block monitor is not required for any of the analyses in Chapter 15.
Low or De raded Grid~Volta e - (8.2.2)
The applicant committed to implement the second level undervoltage protection.
We require the design implementation information prior to our approval.
This information has not been provided.
Shared Diesel - Generator (8.3.2)
(a)
The applicant has informally committed to transferring automatically a number of vital support system loads for the shared diesel genera-tor.
This has been found acceptable pending verification of the design implementation.
Drawing showing the implementation have not been provided.
(b)
The applicant did not commit to transferring automatically the AC source of power to the 250 DC and 125 DC battery chargers.
The applicant indicated that the battery had sufficient capacity for the time required to manually reconnect the AC power.
We require manual -procedures be provided for our.review.
,37.
Reactor Containment Electrical 'Penetrations
- (8.4.1)
The reactor containment-electrical penetrations do not conform to Regulatory Guide 1.63.
The applicant has informed that we will not accept self-fusing characteristics of cable to provide protection against rupture of primary containment.
Applicant plans to appeal the staff's.position.
38.
Ade uac of the 120-Volt Alternatin Current Reactor Protection S stem A. 7 The applicant has committed to comply with the generic resolution.
This was found acceptable pending verification of the design implementation.
Drawings showing design implementation have not been provided.
39.
Thermal Overload Protection B
ass - (8.4.9)
'The applicant has indicated that provisions for bypassing thermal overload protection would meet position Cl of Regulatory Guide 1.106.
This was found acceptable pending documenting.
The documentation has not been provided.
40.
Ph sical Se aration Between Class IE and Non-Class IE Cables A site visit by the staff
( 1&E and ICSB) identified a number of locations where inadequate separation exists between Class IE and non-Class IE cables.
Separation criteria in the FSAR specifies that non-Class IE cables are separated
-by an -acceptable distance or barriers from Class IE cables.
-41.
Fire Protection - (9.5)
With respect to fire protection, the following additional information is required:
(a)
For the alternate shutdown panel, it was determined that simultaneous loss of several circuits and/or cabinets would jeopardize safe plant shutdown.
The applicant has not provided details of the design to alleviate -this condition.
(b)
The applicant agreed to evaluate the physical separation between cables for the control room redundant HVAC systems and identify areas where separation does not meet fire protection guidelines.
The results of this evaluation has not been provided'c)
The applicant has not documented that all primary shutdown cables are not located in the same room with the al,ternate shutdown panel.
(d)
Control cables for two series RHR valves are not separated by the required distance at two locations.
The applicant has stated though that these RHR valves are the only primary reactor, boundary interface protected by two series motor operated valves.
This needs to be documented to resolve this issue.
(e)
Separation of associated cables is a requirement resulting from Appendix R.
.Additional questions are being prepared to address this item.
(f)
Violation of, containment isolation due Lu a design basis fire is a requirement re'suiting from Appendix R.
Additional questions are being prepared to address this item.
42.
Radiation Protection Mana ement
( 12.5)
(a)
The Radiation Protection Manager should have a clear line of authority to the Plant Manager as indicated in NUREG-0731 and Regulatory Guide" 8.8.
Figure 1.7 of the Topical Report CE-IA, Rev.
14, does not delineate this line of authori ty between the Rad/Chem Supervisor and the Plant
,Superintendent.
(b) It is our position that the Rad/Chem Supervisor
'meet the minimum requirement of Regulatory Guide 1.8 which references ANS/18.1.
Your Rad/Chem Supervisor resume =indicates that he has a majority of his training and experience as a chemist and does not meet the requirements of Regulatory Guide 1.8.
43.
Industrial Securit (13.4)
As a result 'of our site visit and our review, there are 32 items of concern.
44.
Use of Nonreliable E ui ment in Anticipated 0 erational Transients - (15.1)
{a)
The aoplicant must analyze the generator load rejection without bypass and turbine trip without bypass transients without relying upon the use of the level 8 trip.
(b)
In analyzing anticipated operational transients, the applicant took credit.for equipment which has not been shown to be reliable.
Our position is that.this equipment be identified in the technical specifications with regard to availability, setpoints and surveillance testing.
The applicant must submit its plan for implementing this requirement along with any system modification that'may be required to fulfillthe requirement.
45.
Use of Non-Safet Grade E ui ment in Shaft Seizure - Accident - (15.2)
The applicant included the use of non-safety grade equipment in his analyses for shaft seizure and shaft break accidents.
lie require that these accidents be reanalyzed.without allowance for the use of non-safety grade equipment.
46.
Technical S ecifications - (16) lie have not completed our, review of Technical Specifications.
II 47.
ual it Assurance - (17.0)
The applicant must address deficiencies of those
- systems, structures and components which should be under the control of the operational quality assurance program (g-list).
48.
Financial ualifications - (20)
Ile have not completed our financial qualifications review.
r
ENCLOSURE 4
. ~
LRG HORYwING PAPER
'12/2/80 Issue CFB-1 " '.Loads Assessm'enb of Fue'1 Assemb1 Com onents d
The proposed addition of Appendix A to SRP 4.2 provides guidance for the analysis of Fuel Assembly Components and Acceptance Criteria for Fuel Assembly Response to externally applied forces.
The applicants fuel assembly capability should be. assessed accordingly.
Position Common
. General Electric has completed, development of fuel assembly loads modeling
.and results acceptance criteria both deemed to be in accordance mth the requirements of Appendix A to SRP 4.2.
The LRG lead plant (LaSalle) has been evaluated accordingly with'cceptable results.
LRG. plants Mil] be evaluated on, an appropriate schedule basis.
GE Mill issue a Licensing Topical Report revision early in 1981 to document the methodology and acceptance criteria utilized Reference LCSC
.Open ZPS SNPS EF-2 Mmp-2
'N/A SSES
~ 12/2/80 Issue CPB-2 Fuel Cladding Swellin 8
Ru ture Hodels The applicant has not provided information to assure that for the fuel cladding in.a 'LOCA "the degree of swelling and 'incidence of rupture are not underestimated" as required by Appendix K of 10CFR50.46.
The procedures proposed in NUREG-0630 introduce additional conservatism and should be utilized to perform supplemental calculations to the current ECCS analyses.
'Position
~Common)
The current analyses is FSAR Section 6.3.3 conservatively bounds the clad swelling and rupture model concerns of NUREG-0630.
Additional analyses would, be of little value to the ECCS performance evaluation review.
In any case, since General Electric has not begun to develop model changes suggested by NUREG-0630 it would not be possible to perform such an analysis in the near future.
This position is supported by three General Electric letters discussing existing model suitability; a GE letter providing comments to NUREG-0630 and a letter from ACRS to the NRC ot September 9,
1980 stating "The ACRS recommends that implementation of the NUREG-0630 models and other significant changes in the evaluation models be held in abeyance until a thorough revision of the Appendix K reguirements can be undertaken by the NRC staff."
These references are listed below.
Reference LCSC ZPS SNPS EF-2 1 IMP-2 Open 10/8/80 letter Tedesco to Borgmann
,Open
.,231. 5 1)
GE letter HFN-268-79 of November 2, 1979 from R.
H. Buchholz to Darrel G. Eisenhut, "ORNL Cladding, Swell and Rupture Data -
BMR Eval uati on. "
2)
GE letter HFN-278-79 of November ]6, 1979 from R.
H. Buchholz to
.. Darrel G. Eisenhut, "GE Cladding Haop Stress at Perforation."
3)
GE letter HFN-066-80 of Harch 24, 1980 from G.
G. Sherwood to Richard P. Denise.
0)
GE letter HFN-294-79 of December 7, 1979 from R.
H. Buchholz to Richard P. Denise, "Comments on thy, draft. report 'Cladding, Swelling and Rupture Hodels for LOCA Analyses,'URFG-0630 dated November 8 1979."
m 5)
ACRS letter of September 9,
1980 from Hilton S. Plesset to William J.
Dircks, "Cladding, Swelling and Rupture Models for LOCA Analysis NUREG-0630."
LRG llORI'Ii)G PAPER 12/2/80 Xssua CPB-B Channal Rnx Dssi n
The applicant has not referenced General Electric Licensing Topical'eport NEDE-21354-P which describ s the fuel channel design.
Of specific concern, is the commitment 'to control rod driveline friction tesi.ing recommended:in,Section 4.4.2 of HEOE-21354-P...
Position (Common)
The LRG members agreed to reference NEOE-21354-P in an appropriate FEAR section This Licensing Topical. Report is applicable to the fuel 'charm<'1
- 4esign being supplied. to all LRG plants.
All LGR plants are now designed in accordanice i~ith iiE"E-21354-P.
Operating plant experienc~
arid inspection has verified the adequacy of this design.
Therefore, the control rod driveline friction screening-type testing. suggested in Section 4.4.2 is not deemed necessary as a routine test for detecting the onset of control rod interference The periodic technical specification requirem nts for scram time testing and rod notch testing v>oui d provide an indication of a pending drive line friction -concern.
Should either of'hese tests suggest a drive friction problem,'the pressure test described in. NEDE-21354-P (4.4.2) can be used as an aid in isolating the cause of
'he drive malfunction.
Reference
'CSC
'pen ZPS SNPS EF-2 RHP-2 Open f211.137 SSES
LRG MORKING PAPER l2(2/GO 1ssue CPB-4
'ater Side Corrosion The applicant has not addressed the potential for fuel corrosion failur similar to that v(hich occurred at the Vermont Yankee.Plant.
Position
. Uni<nue As indicated in the General Electric presentation given to the HRC in Decemb r 1979, the failures appeared to be associated v(ith a metallic incursion in the feedwater.
This event has occurred only once in the BMR operating history and is unlikely to. occur.
1.
Plants'>ith non-copper bearing main condensor tubes are not expected to experience
%he clad perfarationsof this concern.
La Salle, Shoreham and Susquehanna do not have copper bearing condensors.
2.-
Plants arit adequately designed filters demineralizers are not expected to experience the clad perforations of this concern even Mith copper bearing condensor. tubes.
Zimner, Fermi 2 -and Hanford 2 are designed accordingly.
Reference LCSC Open
.ZPS SNPS EF-2 MNP-2 SSES
QEC g 1980 MEETING
SUMMARY
DISTRIBUTION
'Docket. FXl~e NRC PDR Local PDR TIC/NS IC/Tera NRR Reading LB81 Reading H. Denton E.
Case D. Eisenhut R. Purple B.
J..
Youngblood A. Schwencer F.. Miraglia J. Miller G. Lainas R. Vollmer J.
P. Knight R.
Bosnak F. Schauer R.
E. Jackson Project Manager
- Attorney, OELD M. Rushbrook OIE (3)
ACRS (16)
R. Tedesco N. Hughes 9EC 8
$980 J.
N. Wilson
~NIIC P ti J. Wilson, A. Bournia, B. Bosnak, F. Eltawila, W. Hodges, J. Mazetis, R. Tedesco, B. Norris, J.
- Nauck, G.
G.
- Rhoads, R. Stark, L. Kintner, I. Peltier, G. Thomas, J.
- Knox,
'T. Collins G.
V.
S.
V.
Z.
W.
D.
R.
W.
D.
P.
R.
0.
F.
W.
R.
L.
T,.
W.
J.
S.
W.
T F.
D.
M.
R.
C.
K.
G.
A.
D.
J, D,
P, D.
Lear Noonan Pawlicki Benaroya Rosztoczy Haass Muller Ballard Regan Ross
.Check Satterf iel d Parr
-Rosa Butler Kreger Houston Murphy Rubenstein Speis Johnston Stol z Hanauer Gammill Nurley Schroeder Skovholt Ernst
.Baer Berl inger Kniel Knighton Thadani Tondi Kramer Vassallo Collins Ziemann bcc:
Applicant 8 Service List
kR'