ML17251A891
| ML17251A891 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Ginna  |
| Issue date: | 12/05/1986 |
| From: | Diianni D Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Kober R ROCHESTER GAS & ELECTRIC CORP. |
| References | |
| TASK-2.K.3.30, TASK-2.K.3.31, TASK-TM GL-83-35, TAC-48168, NUDOCS 8612170326 | |
| Download: ML17251A891 (10) | |
Text
Docket No. 50-244 Mr. Roger W. Kober, Vice President Electric and Steam Production Rochester Gas
& Electric Corp.
89 East Avenue Rochester, New York 14649
Dear Mr. Kober:
DEC OS 1M'UBJECT:
RESOLUTION OF TMI ACTION ITEM II.K.3.31 RELATED TO THE SMALL BREAK LOCA ANALYSIS FOR THE R.
E.
GINNA NUCLEAR POWER PLANT On June 6, 1985, we issued our Safety Evaluation (SE), for resolution of TMI Action Plan Item II.K.3.30 for the R.
E. Ginna Nuclear Power Plant.
We indicated that within one year of that date all licensees and applicants of Westinghouse NSSS design were required to submit plant specific analysis with NOTRUMP as required by TMI Action Plant Item II.K.3.31.
Additional guidance contained in Generic Letter 83-35 stated that this analysis may be submitted generically as long as the generic submittal included validation that the limiting break location has not shifted away from the cold legs to the hot or pump suction legs.
By letter dated July',
1986, you indicated that resolution of II.K.3.31 for R.
E. Ginna would be based upon generic NOTRUMP analysis submitted to the NRC as WCAP-11145 by the Westinghouse Owner's Group (WOG).
This WCAP was sent to the NRC by letter dated June 11, 1986 by L. D. Butterfield of the WOG.
The NRC staff approved use of WCAP-11145 by letter to Mr. Butterfield dated October 6, 1986.
We have reviewed the WOG submittal and have determined that the submittal adequately addresses TMI Action Plan Item II.K.3.31 for your facility including that the limiting break location has not shifted.
The details of our review are contained in the enclosed SE.
This completes our effort under TAC No. 48168.
Sincerely, Dominic C. Di anni, Project Manager Project Directorate ¹1 Division of PWR Licensing-A
Enclosure:
As Stated s es'amos g OSOOO244
'~i cc's See Next Page I
" R
~
POR ~
P Office:
LA/PAD¹1 Surname:
PShuttleVNZh I
Date:
PQP /86 PN/PAD61 0 PIP//PE DDiIanni/tg GLear
@/// /86 1Z/~/86
r t
lu l"
L'y l
ll 1
I J l II
~
0 l
I tl l
I
'I
Nr. Roger W. Kober Rochester Gas and Electric Corporation R.
E.
Ginna Nuclear Power Plant CC:
Harry H. Yoigt, Esquire
- LeBoeuf, Lamb, Leiby and HacRae 1333 New Hampshire
- Avenue, N.W.
Suite 1100 Washington, D. C.
20036 Ezra Bialik Assistant Attorney General Environmental Protection Bureau New York State Department of Law 2 World Trade Center New York, New York 10047 Resident Inspector R.E.
Ginna Plant c/o U.S.
NRC 1503 Lake Road
- Ontario, New York 14519 Stanley B. Klimberg, Esquire General Counsel New York State Energy Office Agency Buildino 2 Empire State Plaza
- Albany, New York 12223 Regional Administrator, Region I U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commi'scion 631 Park Avenue King of Prussia, Pennsylvania 19406 Supervisor of the Town of Ontario 1850 Ridge Road
- Ontario, Nevi York 14519 Jay Dunkleberger Division of Policy Analysis
& Planning New York State Energy Office Agency Building 2 Empire State Plaza
- Albany, New York 12223
-Distribution Copies:
~ Docket Files NRC PDR Local PDR PAD81 r/f PADII1 p/f TNovak, Actg.
DD NThompson, DHFT OGC-Bethesda EJordan BGrimes JPartlow GLear PShuttleworth DDiIanni ACRS (10)
LFNB-TAC 848168
\\
K H
I4
NUREG-0737 Item No. II.K.3.31 Plant-Specific Calculations to Show Compliance with 10 CFR 50.46 Supplemental Safety Evaluation by the The Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation for Ginna Nuclear Plant Section II.K.3.30 of NUREG-0737 outlines the Commission requirements for the industry to demonstrate that its small break LOCA methods continue to comply with the requirements of Appendix K to 10 CFR Part 50.
The technical issues to be addressed were listed in NUREG-0611 including comparison with semiscale experimental test results.
In response to Section II.K.3.30, the Westinghouse Owners Group elected to reference the NOTRUYiP code as the new licensing small break LOCA model.
The NOTRUMP code and methodology are described in WCAP-10079 and WCAP-10054.
The staff reviewed and approved NOTRUYiP as the new licensing tool for calculating small break LOCA response for Westinghouse plant designs.
The staff further concluded that the Westinghouse Owners Group had met the requirements of Section II.K.3.30.
Referencing the new computer code did not imply deficiencies in the WFLASH code (which was previously utilized for small break LOCA analysis) such that the code did not comply with Appendix K to 10 CFR Part 50.
The decision to use NOTRUMP was based on desires of the industry to perform licensing evaluations with a computer program specifically designed to calculate small break LOCAs with greater phenomenological accuracy than capable by WFLASH.
Section II.K.3.31 of NUREG-0737 required that each license holder or applicant submit a
new small break analysis using the model approved under II.K.3.30.
NRC Generic Letter 83-35 provided clarification for the II.K.3.31 requirements by allowing license holders and applicants to comply on a
generic basis by demonstrating that the WFLASH analyses are conservative when compared to analyses performed using NOTRUMP.
In response to this guidance,-.the Westinghouse owners submitted WCAP-11145 which contains generic comparisons to WFLASH analyses for various plant types.
These include comparisons for 2-loop plants of the Ginna design.
If plant specific analyses were performed for Ginna using NOTRUMP, lower peak clad temperatures should be expected in comparison with the generic NOTRUMP analysis (about 917'F lower than the 1,713'F PCT currently calculated with WFLASH SBLOCA EY;).
Although the calculated peak temperatures are significantly lower for the NOTRUMP analyses than for the WFLASH analyses the 4 inch break remains the limiting break size.
Staff review of WCAP-11145 has been completed arid accepted as a licensing basis for SBLOCA analysis.
The applicant has referenced WCAP-11145 (which consists of the results from calculations using approved methodology) in lieu of submitting a plant specific analysis and meets the criteria as stated in NRC Generic Letter 83-35.
The staff, therefore, concludes that the Ginna FSAR analyses of small break LOCA have been demonstrated to be conservative in comparison with the NOTRUNP Evaluation Yiodel.
This" meets the requirements of II.K.3.3l and 10 CFR 50.46 for Ginna.
Principal Contributor:
Larry 8ell Date:
DEC 0 5 l".85>
~i j~
December 2, 1986 DISTRIBUTION:
",Docket Fi.le w/o Enc~l.
PAD//1 R/f w/o Encl.
PShuttleworth w/Encl.
DDiIanni w/Encl.
DOCKET NO(S). 50-244 Nr. Roger ll. Kober Vice President Electric and Steam Production Rochester Gas
& Electric Corporation 89 East Avenue Rochester, New York 14649 R. E. GINNA NUCLEAR POl'lER PLANT The following documents concerning our review of the subject facility are transmitted for your information..
C3 Notice of Receipt of Application, dated C3 Draft/Final Environmental Statment, dated Cl Notice of Availabilityof Draft/Final Environmental Statement, dated CI Safety Evaluation Report, or Supplement No.
, dated Cj Notice of Hearing on Application for Construction Permit, dated CI Notice of Consideration of Issuance of Facility Operating License, dated D Monthly Notice; Applications and Amendments to Operating Licenses Involving no Significant Hazards Considerations, dated Cl Application and Safety Analysis Report, Volume D Amendment No.
to Application/SAR dated C3 Construction Permit No. CPPR-
, Amendment No.
dated D Facility Operating License No.
, Amendment No.
, dated D Order Extending Construction Completion Date, dated lg Other (Specify) for hearing requests and comments December 19, 1986.
Enclosures:
As stated Division of PNR Licensing-A Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation cc:
See Next Page OE F1CS~
SURNAME~
DATE+ f NRC FORM 318 1/84) NRCM 0240
/
7 1<
1 I
'I 1
4
=1 Pl
~ ~
i
~
V 5 ~
4 "I
I 4
I i
Nr. Roger M. Kober Rochester Gas and Electric Corporation R.
E.
Ginna Nuclear Power Plant CC:
Harry H. Voigt, Esquire
- LeBoeuf, Lamb, Leiby and YiacRae 1333 New Hampshire
- Avenue, N.W.
Suite 1100 Washington, D.C.
20036 Ezra Bialik Assistant Attorney General Environmental Protection Bureau New York State Department of Law 2 World Trade Center New York, New York 10047 Resident Inspector R.E.
Ginna Plant c/o U.S.
NRC 1503 Lake Road
- Ontario, New York 14519 Stanley B. Klimberg, Esquire General Counsel New York State Energy Office Agency Building 2 Empire State Plaza
- Albany, New York 12223 Regional Administrator, Region I U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 631 Park Avenue King of Prussia, Pennsylvania 19406 Supervisor of the Town of Ontario 1850 Ridge Road
- Ontario, New York 14519 Jay Dunkleberger Division of Policy Analysis 5 Planning New York State Energy Office Agency Building 2 Empire State Plaza
- Albany, New York 12223