ML17212A340

Forwards Request for Addl Info Re Facility Fsar.Response Should Be Submitted by 810710

ML17212A340
Person / Time
Site:	Saint Lucie
Issue date:	06/29/1981
From:	Tedesco R Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:	Robert E. Uhrig FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT CO.
References
NUDOCS 8107140885
Download: ML17212A340 (11)

Text

DISTRIBUTION

'ocket file LB¹3 Rdg file DEisenhut fJMiraglia JLee RLTedesco SHanauer RVollmer TMurley R.Mattson RHartfield, MPA OELD OIE (3)

VNerses bcc:

JUN 2 9 1981 TERA NRC/PDR L/PDR NSIC TIC ACRS (1

~ g5~'-

y $ g ~ (p~h+

)j)

Docket No.:

60-389 Dr. Robert E. Uhrig, Vice President Advanced Systems and Technology Florida Power 8 Light Company P. 0.

Box 629100 Miami, Florida 33162

SUBJECT:

ST.

LUCIE PLANT. UNIT 2 FSAR - REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFO From the review of your application for an operating license by the Contain-ment Systems

Branch, we find that we need additional information regarding the St. Lucie Plant, Unit 2 FSAR.

The specific information (which was provided to Mr. Sheetz on June 19.

1981) required is listed in the Enclosure.

Responses to the enclosed request should be submitted by July 10, 1981, If you cannot meet this date, please inform us within seven days after receipt of this letter of the date you plan to submit your responses.

Please contact Mr. Nerses (301-492-7468), St. Lucie 2 Project Manager, if you desire any discussion or clar ification of the enclosed report.

Sincerely, Orlgfnal signed by RObert L Ted8800 Robert L. Tedesco, Assistant Director for Licensing Division of Licensing

Enclosure:

As stated cc:

See next page 8i07i40885 8i0629 PDR ADOCK 0500038'P 0FF)eel): LP¹3 sURNAME/

g

($/A/t,~

DATE/

6P~i /g]

DL

.FJHi )kgl><....

~..l/.... k~......

DL L..

pl T esco

...6/V//a1......

~

~ ~

~ ~ ~ OtO ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ +'

• US8F0; 1980-3299i NRC FORM 318110/801 NRCM 0240 OFFIClAL RECORD COPY

~ ~

'I ~

I

'I

>VV t

VI

~ ~ ~

~

~

r I (4 I

~

~

k VI

'4 I

~

V

~ C 4-

>>cv r' f"= Ia 44>>'4f, i

f44 vl>>MM Ci X

I

<I" V

~ V

~ I' I

.I "'ll:r f4(>>f4 C

CI i

g ~ M>>kkll>>Cllv>> I I

I

~

Pri

~

4 MVI,

~ *'"IMMI M

~ ~

~ 4 "~

~

k.

>>Iu ft l

'a I,

4 I

I, lf ~

4l V

V 4 M I' If Mtv

~ ~

ffk>>

f A,l V

M M>>6 vc ':ll 'ti i

~ 1 4>>

f I

V h C

- ~

~ ~ C rrg ~

vvif fl4fftvrk I,

IVIX'CC MC

\\

I~ M V.M r*C

~ 4<4>>4 r fvv 4

c

~r

~

k NRC PDR Local PDR Docket File

'ranch File

,'Eisenhut

~ RPurple SHanauer TMurley DRoss RVollmer VNerses JLee (Licensina TMNovak GLainas JKnight VNoonan DMuller PCheck HKreger LRubenstein FSchroeder RHartfield, HPA ELD ZE (3)

BGrimes HErnst FMiraglia ASchwencer BJYoungblood JRMil1er NSIC ACRS (16)

TERA Project Manager)

Assistantl (Q-1's

& 'Q-2's only)

0

>>.~l t

]

I I

li tt,,

,t II It I

<PR REGIJ (4

P0 UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 JUN 29 19BI Docket No.:

50-389 Dr. Robert E. Uhrig, Vice President Advanced Systems and Technology Florida Power 8 Light Compa'ny P. 0.

Box 529100 Miami, Florida 33152

SUBJECT:

ST.

LUCIE PLANT, UNIT 2 FSAR - REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION From the review of your application for an operating license by the Contain-ment Systems

Branch, we find that we need additional information regarding the St. Lucie Plant, Unit 2 FSAR.

The specific information (which was provided to Mr. Sheetz on June 19, 1981) required is listed in the Enclosure.

Responses to the enclosed request should be submitted by July 10,

1981, If you cannot meet this date, please inform us within seven days after receipt of this letter of the date you plan to submit your responses.

Please contact Mr. Nerses (301-492-7468),

St. Lucie 2 Project Manager, if you desire any discussion or clarification of the enclosed report.

Sincerely,

Enclosure:

As stated Robert L. Tedesco, Assistant Director for Licensing Division of Licensing cc:

See next page

480 0

480.1 Docket (Nmber 50-389 Con+

'.,"..".. n+ Svs+ems Branch Figure 6.2-9 a..d Figu.= 6.2-10, with respect to containment

.==sure and temperature resp".".""s following a flSLB accident, shout-"

"-e revise" to show tne contain n

y assure/temperature response profiles (from time

= 0 second to 10 seconCs following the accident) for use in equip-ment qualification.

480.2 For compartment (e.g.', reactor cavi ty, secondary shield wall area, and pressurizer area) structural design evaluations, provide the design differential pressure and discuss whether the design differ-ential pressure is uniformly applied to the compartment structure or whether it i s spatial ly vari eC. 480.3 Provide analyses to determine the external forces and moments, result-ing from postulated hot leg and cold leg ruptures within the reactor cavity, on reactor vessel supports.

If applicable, similar analyses should be performed for steam generator and/or pressurizer compartments that may be subject to pressurization where significant component sup-port loads may result.

For each analysis, provide the following infor-mation:

(a)

Provide and justify the pipe break type,

area, and location.

Spe-cify whether the pipe break was postula'ted for the evaluation of the compartment structural

design, component support design, or both.

(b)

For each compartment, provide a table of blowdown mass flow rate and energy release rate as a function of time for the break which was used for the component support evaluation.

EVALUATION

riess rib= ar.r'. iu "+ifv

. t:e I

r.""=~.z"tlon sensitivitv c-, lri~c nartnr.-..".".

t

~

~

for one major componenT.

sup ts eva lu. i cns t:

~

structural anp~ysis model),

where transient force<. ann moments act-ing on the components are of concern.

Mhere cor,n ~nt loads are of primary interest, show the effect of noding variations on the transient forces and moments.

L'se this information to justify the nodal model selected for use in the component supports evaluation.

(d)

Graphically show the pressure (psia) and differential pressure (psi) response as functions of time for a representative number of nodes to indicate the spatial pressure response.

Discuss the basis for establishing the differential pressure on components.

(e)

Provide the peak and transient loading on the major components used to establish the adequacy of the support design.

This should in-f-(t) elude the load forcing functions (e.g., f (t), f (t),

) and tran-x y

sient moments (e.g.,

M (t),

M (t),

M (t)) as resolved about a spe-,

x y

z cific identified coordinate system.

The centerline of the break nozzle is recomnended as the X-axis and the center line of the ves-sel as the Z axis.

Provide the projected area used to calculate these loads and identify the location of the area projections on plan and section drawings in the selected coordinate system.

This information should be presented in such a manner that confirmatory evaluations of the loads and moments can be made.

480.4 Figure 6.2-71, regarding containment isolation valves, should be re-vised to show the containment isolation valve arrangements for each containment penetration.

In addition, the isolation valve arrangements

she'r. i n

. hi s f inure sh

) ~ l f no r nnsw stoqt ui Qn Qn va ) ve arrant) t'e en~un in +bn c ~ ~ r res-s i o ~lw (jlynw~trc as

~

~ ~ ~ ~

~

~ ~

~

~ ~

J

~ ~

~

~

~

~

g

~

non 5

FSAR Sections 6.2.4.1.)

an'n 7.3.1.1.4 indicate that either a hian con-tainment pressure signal or a high containment radiation level sional will generate a containment isolation actuation signal.

However, SRP Section 6.2.4 also recornands tha.

a high radiation signal. should not be considered one of the diverse containment isolation parameters.

There-

fore, we request that the safety injection actuation signal should be used as one of the parametrs for the initiation of containment isolation, and the above cited FSAR sections should be revised accordingly.

480. 6 FSAR Section 6.2.4.4 indicates that the following penetrations will not be considered possible sources of bypass leakage and, therefore, will not be subject to Type C leak rate testing:

a)

Main steam (Penetrations I and 2);

b)

Feedwater (Penetrations 3 and 4);

c)

Steam generator blowdown (Penetrations 5 and 6);

and d)

Steam generator blowdown sampling (Penetra'tions 30 and 49).

In order for us to determine the acceptability of this, discuss the conditions that will exist or the action to be taken to assure that outleakage will not occur after a

LOCA for a period of 30 days.

In this regard, discuss the pressure response of Ke steam geneators e

relative to the containment

pressure, in the short term,'nd the feasibility of reflodding the steam generators, in the long term, to preclude outleakage.

LI80 7

~

~,

)

~

s 1

I >6K >ecT.loll l ~ C. ~ '~ ~ C lllUi>>'0s>>=e i >>iG>>.

Uii i+

t/i>>

I >'UIC'.".l v' 4

~ ~

>> U

~

480.8 tainment is rr-'-:"-.-'..or the isolation of each of the contains'~ant emer-h

~

J>>

gency sump suctiu>> iincs ~

ror ti'iis type Gi isola iQ" "

~ ""-"rrc.".ge...".".

the piping between ine containment and the valve should be encl "sed in a leak-tight or controlled leakage housing (as described in SRP Section 6.2.4) leakage housing.

If, in lieu of a housing, conservative" design of the piping and valve is'ssumed to preclude a break of piping integrity, the design should conform to the'requirement of SRP Section 3.6.2.

Also, design of the valve and/or the piping compartment should provid the ca-pability to detect leakage from the valve shaft and/or bonne. seals and terminate the leakage.

Therefore, discuss the design of the containment emergency sump suction penetrations (Penetrations 32 and 33),

and the leakage detection and control provisions.

X Table 6.2-52, "Containment Penetraton and Isolation Valve Information','hould be revised to designate the fuel transfer tube (Penetration 25) and charging line (Penetration

27) as direct bypass leakage paths.

480.9 Provide the information as required by NUREG-0737 concerning the follow-ing TMI Action Plan items:

a)

II.E.4.2 - Containment Isolation Dependability; b)

II.F.1.4 Containment Pressure Monitor; and c)

II.F.1.6 Containment Hydrogen Monitor.

ST.

LUCIE Dr. Robert E. Uhrig, Vice President Advanced Systems and Technology Florida Power 8 Light Company P. 0.

Box 529100 Miami, Florida 33152 Harold F. Reis, Esq.

Lowenstein,

Newman, Reis, Axelrad

& Toll 1025 Connecticut

Avenue, N. 'W.

Washington, D. C.

20036 Norman A. Coll, Esq.

McCarthy, Steel, Hectory 8 Davis 14th Floor, First National Bank Building Miami, Florida 33131 Mr. Martin K. Hodder 1131 N.

E. 86th Street Miami, Florida 33138 Resident Inspector St. Lucie Nuclear Power Station c/o U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 7900 South A1A Jensen Beach, Florida 33457

g \\'I I'

t

~ '

'L 1