ML17258A864
| ML17258A864 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Ginna  |
| Issue date: | 03/10/1981 |
| From: | Crutchfield D Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Maier J ROCHESTER GAS & ELECTRIC CORP. |
| References | |
| TASK-05-05, TASK-5-5, TASK-RR LSO5-81-03-009, LSO5-81-3-9, NUDOCS 8103110656 | |
| Download: ML17258A864 (18) | |
Text
RESULATORQNPORMAT ION DISTRIBUTION '+TEN (RIDS)
ACCESSION NBR:8103110656 DOC.DATE: si/03/10 NOTARIZED:
NO DOCKET FACIL:50 244 Robert Emmet Ginna Nuclear PlantE Unit 1z Rochester G
05000204 AUTH BYNAME AUTHOR AFFILIATION CRUTCHF IELD E D>>
Operating Reactors Branch 5
RECIP ~ NAME RECIPIENT AFFILIATION.
MAIERgJ,E
~
Rochester Gas L Electric Corp.
SUBJECT:
Forwards evaluation of SEP TopicV-5P "Reactor Coolant'ressure Boundary Leakage Detection,"
Requests notification if facility differs from assumed licensing basis.Evaluation is basis for safety assessment if no changes identified.
DISTRIBUTION CODE:
SEOIS COPIES RECEIYEDgLTR L'NCL 'I E:
TITLEs SEP Dist (outgoingi external)
NOTES: 1 copy:SEP Sect.
Ldr.
05000200 RECIPIENT ID CODE/NAME ACTION:
CRUTCHF IELD SNAIDER s R ~
COPIES RECIPIENT LTTR ENCL ID CODE/NAME 1
1 SMITHS'
~
1 COPIES LTTR ENCL 1
1 INTERNAL! AD/LIC/NRR CNALINAe G ~.
ILE OELD SEP BC SEPB RE'ADING EXTERNALS ACRS LPDR 1
1 1
3 1
1 1
1 1
16 16 1
1 AD/OR/NRR HELTEMES/AEOD N
G F
S ANT' ILE SEPB SECT LDR DIST EX(E/,QP, )
NSIC 1
1 1
1 1
1 1
1 2
2 22 22 1
1 TOTAL NUYYlBER OF COPIES REQUIRED:
LTTR ENCL
I II 0
I I.
f f
t t
r ll f
il C
9l t
P
'I X
fJ
~
II J'
Ih t
E
p,8 RE0 c~
o Cy t'
+>>*++
I UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 March 10, 1981 Docket No. 50-244 LS05-81-03-009 Mr. John E. Maier Vice President Electric and Steam Production Rochester Gas
& Electric Corporation 89 East Avenue Rochester, New York 14649
Dear Mr. Maier:
RE:
SEP TOPIC V-5, REACTOR COOLANT PRESSURE BOUNDARY LEAKAGE DETECTION R. E.
GINNA NUCLEAR POWER PLANT Enclosed is a copy of our evaluaton of SEP Topic V-5 for the R. E. Ginna Nuclear Power Plant.
This assessment compares your facility, as described in Docket No. 50-244, with the criteria currently used by the regulatory staff for licensing new facilities.
Please inform us within 30 days if your as-built facility differs from the licensing basis assumed in our assessment or this topic will be assumed complete.
This evaluation will be a basic input to the integrated safety assessment for your facility unless you identify changes needed to reflect the as-built conditions at your facility.
This assessment may be revised in the future if your facility design is changed or if NRC criteria relating to this subject are modified before the i ntegrated assessment is completed.
In future correspondence regarding this topic, please refer to the topic number in your cover letter.
Sincerely, Dennis M. Crutchfield, hief Operating Reactors Branch No.
5 Division of Licensing
Enclosure:
SEP Topic V-5 cc w/enclosure:
See next page
+Ed I Si(
lj lt
~
~
C
Nr. John E. Maier R.
E.
GINNA NUCLEAR POWER PLANT DOCKET NO. 50-244 CC Harry H. Voigt, Esquire
- LeBoeuf, Lamb, Leiby and HacRae 1333 New Haapshire
- Avenue, N.
W.
Suite 1100 Mashington, D.
C.
20036 Mr. Michael Slade 12 Trailwood Circle Rochester, New York 14618 Rochester Committee for Sci ent ifi c I nformat i on Robert E. Lee, Ph.D.
P. 0.
Box 5236 River Campus Station Rochester, New York 14627 Jeffrey Cohen New York State, Energy Office Swan Street Building Core 1, Second Floor Enquire State Plaza
- Albany, New York 12223 Director, Techni cal Development Programs State of New York Energy Office Agency Building 2 Empire State Plaza
- Albany, New York 12223 Rochester Public Library 115 South Avenue Rochester, New York 14604 Supervisor of the Town of Ontari o 107 Ridge Road Mest
- Ontario, New York 14519 Resident Inspector R. E. Ginna Plant
.c/o U. S.
NRC 1503 Lake Road
- Ontario, New York 14519 Richard E. Schaffstall, Executive Director for SEP Owners Group 1747 Pennsylvania
- Avenue, NW Washington, D.C.
20006 Director, Technical Assessment Division Office of Radiation Programs (AW-459)
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency Crystal Hall f2 Arlington, Virginia 20460 U. S. Environmental Protection Agency Region II Office ATTN:
E IS COORDINATOR 26 Federal Plaza New York, New York 10007 Herbert Grossman, Esq.,
Chairman Atomic Safety and Licensing Board U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Comnission Mashington, D. C.
20555 c
Dr. Richard F. Cole Atomic Safety and Licensing Board U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Comnission Washington, D. C.
20555 Dr.
Emneth A. Luebke Atomic Safety and Licensing Board U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Comnission Washington, D. C.
20555 Mr. Thomas B. Cochran Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc.
1725 I Street, N. M.
Suite 600 Mashington, D. C.
20006 Ezra I. Bialik Assistant Attorney General Environmental Protection Bureau New York State Department of Law 2 World Trade Center New York, New York 10047
l' Il'
~
~
GINNA SYSTEMATIC EVALUATION PROGRAM TOPIC V-5 REACTOR COOLANT PRESSURE BOUNDARY RCPB LEAKAGE DETECTION Introduction The safety objective of Topic V-5 is to determine the reliability and sensitivity of the leak detection systems which monitor the reactor coolant pressure boundary to identify primary system leaks at an early stage before failures occur.
Review Criteria The acceptance criteria for the detection of leakage from the reactor coolant pressure boundary is stated in the General Design Criteria of Appendix A 10 CFR Part 50.
Cri.terion 30, "guality of Reactor Coolant Pressure Boundary", requires that means shall be provided for detecting and, to the extent practical, identifying the location of the source of leakage in the reactor coolant pressure boundary.
Criterion 32, "Inspection of Reactor Coolant Pressure Boundary", requires that components which are part of the reactor coolant pressure boundary shall be designed to permit periodic inspection and testing to assess their structpral and leak tight integrity.
Review Guidelines IV.
The acceptance criteria are i,mplemented by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission in Section 5.2.5, "Reactor Coolant Pressure Boundary Leakage Detection",
and Section 5.2.4, "Reactor Coolant Pressure Boundary Inservice Inspection and Testing", of the Standard Review Plan.
The areas of the Safety Analysis Report and Technical Specifications are reviewed to establish that informa-tion submitted by the licensee is in compliance with Regulatory Guide 1.45, "Reactor Coolant Pressure Boundary Leakage Detection Systems",
and that the inservice inspection programs-are based on the requirements-of Section XI of the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel
- Code, "Rules for the Inservice Inspec-tion of Nuclear Power Components".
Although not a part of this review, the consequences of break and crack location in component fai;lures is analyzed and evaluated in Section 3.6.1, "Plant Desi'gn for Protection Against Postulated Piping Failures in Fluid Systems Outside Containment",
and Section 3.6.2, "Determination of Break Locations and Dynami'c Effects. Associ'ated with Postulated Rupture of Piping", of the Standard Review Plan.
Evaluation Safety Topic V-5 was evaluated in this review for compliance of the infor-.
mation submitted by the licensee with Regulatory Guide 1.45, "Reactor Coolant Pressure Boundary Leakage Detection Systems".
The information in the Safety Analysis Report and Technical Speci,fications was substantiated by telephone conversation with. the licensee.
Regulatory Guide 1.45 requires that at
least three separate detection systems be installed in a nuclear power plant to detect an unidentified leakage from the reactor coolant pressure boundary of one gallon per minute within one hour.
Leakage from identified sources must be isolated so that the flow rates may be monitored separately from unidentified leakage.
The detection systems should be capable of performing their functions following seismic events and capable of being checked in the control room.
Of the three separate leak detection methods
- required, two of the methods should be (1) sump level and flow monitoring and (2) airborne particulate radioactivity monitoring.
The third method may be either monitoring of condensate flow rate from air coolers or monitoring of airborne gaseous radioactivity.
Other detection
- methods, such as humidity, temperature and pressure, should be considered to be alarms or indirect indication of leakage to the containment.
The requi re-ments of Regulatory Guide 1.45 and Standard Review Plan 5.2.5 and plant incorporated systems that meet those requirements are tabulated in Enclosure l.
V.
Conclusions Our review indicates that the R.E.
Ginna plant is in compliance with Regulatory Guide 1.45.
V ENCLOSURE 1
TABLE 1:
REACTOR COOLANT PRESSURE BOUNDARY LEAKAGE DETECTION SYSTEM Svstem 1)
Sump Level Monitoring (Inventory)
Sump Pump Actuations Monitoring (Time Meters)
Airborne Particulate
) Radioactivity Monitoring Airborne Gaseous Radioactivity Monitoring
- 5) Condensated Flow Rate from Air Coolers
- 6) Containment Atmosonere Pressure Honitorinc
- 7) Containment Atmosphere Humidity Honitorino B) Containment Atmosoherc Temperature Monitorino 9)
CVCS Makeup Flowrate 1O) Portable Ultrasonic Detectors
- 11) Air Conditioner Coolant Temperature Rise Plant Incorporated S stem S.R.P.
5.2.5 or Reg Guide 1.45 Re uirement
- Yes, 1 or2 Mandatory
- Yes, 1 or 2
Mandatory Yes Mandatory Yes,4or5 Manda tory Yes,4 or 5
Mandatory Yes Optional Yes Optional Yes Optional Yes Optional I
Yes Optional No, 12) 13)
+ = Systems have not been specifically analyzed for RCPB leak detection
V
March 10, 1981
.Docket No. 50-244 LS05-81-03-009 Mr. John E. Maier Vice President Electric and Steam Production Rochester Gas 5 Electric Corporation 89 East Avenue Rochester, flew York 14649 Nj>> F
~el
Dear Hr. Maier:
RE:
SEP TOPIC V-5, REACTOR COOLANT PRESSURE BOUNDARY LEAKAGE DETECTION R. E. GINNA NUCLEAR POWER PLANT Enclosed is a copy of our evaluaton of'EP Topic V-5 for the R. E. Ginna Nuclear Power Plant.
This assessment compares your facility, as described in Docket No. 50-244, with the criteria currently used by the regulatory staff for licensing new facilities.
Please inform us within 30 days if your as-built facility differs from the licensing basis assumed in our assessment or this topic will be assumed complete.
This evaluation will be a basic input to the integrated safety assessment for your facility unless you identify changes needed to reflect the as-built conditions at your facility.
This assessment may be revised in the future if your facility design is changed or if NRC criteria relating to this subject are modified before the integrated assessment is completed.
In future correspondence regarding this topic, please refer to the topic number in your cover letter.
Sincerely,
Enclosure:
SEP Topic V-5 cc w/enclosure:
See next page 810811 0 Q Dennis M. Crutchfield, Chief Operating Reactors Branch No.
5 Division of Licensing OFFICE/
SURNAME)
,DATE)
SEPB:DL SGaqnon:dn
/ZS'81 SL/S L
~ ~ 0 ~ ~
~ ~
I
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
RHermann
~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
2/>+81
~ ~ ~ ~'i
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
C/S P
- DL WRu sell 2/h4/81 4 ~ ~ 0+I ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~ ~ ~
C/0
~ ~ f ~ ~ ~
~ ~ ~ ~
~
~
DCr d
g/$ /81 go ~ ogo ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
'DL as
/81
~
~
~ ~ ~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~
~ ~ ~ ~ t ~ ~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~
NRC FORM IB I /
) NRCM 0240 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY o USGFO: 198~29.824
e>s
~
~t
'L J
4 eI
UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 March 10, 1981 Docket No. 50-244 LS05-81-03-009 Mr. John E. Maier Vice President Electric and Steam Production Rochester Gas 8 Electric Corporation 89 East Avenue Rochester, New York 14649
Dear Mr. Maier:
RE:
SEP TOPIC V-5, REACTOR COOLANT PRESSURE BOUNDARY LEAKAGE DETECTION R.
E.
GINNA NUCLEAR POWER PLANT Enclosed is a copy of our evaluaton of SEP Topic V-5 for the R. E. Ginna Nuclear Power Plant.
This assessment compares your facility, as described in Docket No. 50-244, with the criteria currently used by the regulatory staff for licensing new facilities.
Please inform us within 30 days if your as-built facility differs from the licensing basis assumed in our assessment or this topic will be assumed complete.
This evaluation will be a basic input to the integrated safety assessment for your facility unless you identify changes needed to reflect the as-built conditions at your facility.
This assessment may be revised in the future if your facility design is changed or if NRC criteria relating to this subject are modified before the integrated assessment is completed.
In future correspondence regarding this topic, please refer to the topic number in your cover letter.
Si nce rely, Dennis M. Crutchfield, hief Operating Reactors Branch No.
5 Division of Licensing
Enclosure:
SEP Topic V-5 cc w/enclosure:
See next page
. Mr. John E. Maier R.
E.
GINNA NUCLEAR POWER PLANT DOCKET NO. 50-244 CC Harry H. Voigt, Esquire
- LeBoeuf, Lamb, Leiby and MacRae 1333 New Haapshire
- Avenue, N.
W.
Suite 1100 Washington, D.
C.
20036 Mr. Michael Slade 12 Trailwood Circle Rochester, New York 14618 Rochester Committee for Sci ent ifi c Informat i on Robert E. Lee, Ph.D.
P. 0.
Box 5236 River Campus Station Rochester, New York 14627 Jeffrey Cohen New York State Energy Office Swan Street Building Core 1, Second-Floor Esquire State Plaza
- Albany, New York 12223 Director, Technical Development Programs State of New York Energy Office Agency Building 2 Enquire State Plaza
- Albany, New York 12223 Rochester Public Library 115 South Avenue Rochester, New York 14604 Supervisor of the Town of Ontari o 107 Ridge Road West
- Ontario, New York 14519 Resident Inspector R. E. Ginna Plant
.c/o U. S.
NRC 1503 Lake Road
- Ontario, New York 14519 Richard E. Schaffstall, Executive Director for SEP Owners Group 1747 Pennsylvania
- Avenue, NW Washington, D.C.
20006 Director, Technical Assessment Division Office of Radiation Programs (AW-459)
U.
S. Environmental Protection Agency Crystal Mall f2 Arlington, Virginia 20460 U. S.
E nvi ronme nt a 1 P rote ct ion Agency Region II Office ATTN:
E IS COORDINATOR 26 Federal Plaza New York, New York 10007 Herbert Grossman, Esq.,
Chairman Atomic Safety and Licensing Board U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Comnission Washington, D. C.
20555 r
Dr. Richard F. Cole Atomic Safety and Licensing Board U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Comnission Washington, D. C.
20555 Dr. Eveleth A. Luebke Atomic Safety and Licensing Board U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Coranission Washington, D. C.
20555 Mr. Thomas B. Cochran Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc.
1725 I Street, N.
W.
Suite 600 Washington,.D.
C.
20006 Ezra I. Bialik Assistant Attorney General Environmental Protection Bureau New York State Department of Law 2 World Trade Center New York, New York 10047
t GINNA SYSTEMATIC EVALUATION PROGRAM TOPIC V-5 REACTOR COOLANT PRESSURE BOUNDARY RCPB LEAKAGE DETECTION I..
Introduction The safety objective of Topic Y-5 i,s to determine the reli.abi.lity and sensitivity of the leak detection systems which. monitor the reactor coolant pressure boundary to identify primary system leaks at an early stage before failures occur.
I.I.
Review Criteria The acceptance criteria for the detection of leakage from the reactor coolant pressure boundary is stated in the General Design Criteria of Appendix A, 10 CFR Part 50.
Cri,terion 30, "guality of Reactor Coolant Pressure Boundary", requires that means shall be provided for detecting and, to the extent practical, identifying the location of the source of leakage in the reactor coolant pressure boundary.
Criteri'on 32, "Inspection of Reactor Coolant Pressure Boundary", requires that components which are part of the reactor coolant pressure boundary shall be designed to permit periodic inspection and testing to assess their structpral and leak tight integrity.
III.
Review Guidelines The acceptance criteria are implemented by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission in Section 5.2.5, "Reactor Coolant Pressure Boundary Leakage Detection",
and Section 5.2.4, "Reactor Coolant Pressure Boundary Inservice Inspection and Testing", of the Standard Review Plan.
The areas of the Safety Analysis Report and Technical Specifications are reviewed to establish that informa-tion submitted by the licensee is in compli,ance with Regulatory Guide 1.45, "Reactor Coolant Pressure Boundary Leakage Detection Systems",
and that the inservice inspection programs are based on the requirements of Section XI of the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel
- Code, "Rules for the Inservice Inspec-tion of Nuclear Power Components".
Although not a part of this review, the consequences of break and crack location in component failures is analyzed and evaluated in Secti'on 3.6.1, "Plant Design for Protection Against Postulated Piping Failures in Fluid Systems Outside Containment",
and Section 3.6.2, "Determination of Break Locations and Dynami'c Effects. Associated with Postulated Rupture of Piping", of the Standard Revi,ew Plan.
IV.
Evaluation Safety Topic V-5 was evaluated in this review for compliance of the infor-mation submitted by the licensee with Regulatory Guide 1
~ 45, "Reactor Coolant Pressure Boundary Leakage Detection Systems".
The information in the Safety Analysis Report and Technical Specifications was substantiated by telephone conversation with. the licensee.
Regulatory Guide 1.45 requires. that at
least three separate detection systems be installed in a nuclear power plant to detect an unidentified leakage from the reactor coolant pressure boundary of one gallon per minute within one hour.
Leakage from identified sources must be isolated so that the flow rates may be monitored separately from unidentified leakage.
The detection systems should be capable of performing their functions following seismic events and capable of being checked in the control room.
Of the three separate leak detection methods
- required, two of the methods should be (1) sump level and flow monitoring and (2) airborne particulate radioactivity monitoring.
The third method may be either monitoring of condensate flow rate from air coolers or monitoring of airborne gaseous radioactivity.
Other detection
- methods, such as humidity, temperature and pressure, should be considered to be alarms or indirect indication of leakage to the containment.
The require-ments of Regulatory Guide 1.45 and Standard Review Plan 5.2.5 and plant incorporated systems that meet those requirements are tabulated in Enclosure l.
V.
Conclusions Our review indicates that the R.E.
Ginna plant is in compliance with Regulatory Guide 1.45.
ENCLOSURE 1
TABLE 1:
REACTOR COOLANT PRESSURE BOUNDARY LEAKAGE DETECTION SYSTEM System 1)
Sump Level Monitoring (Inventory)
Sump Pump Actuations Monitoring (Time Meters) 3 Airborne Parti cul ate
) Radioactivity Monitoring 4
Airborne Gaseous
) Radioactivity Monitoring 5)
Condensated Flow Rate from Air Coolers
- 6) Containment Atmosonere Pressure Monitorinc
- 7) Containment Atmosphere Humidity Honitorino B) Containm nt AtmosPhere Temperature Monitoring 9)
CVCS Makeup Flowrate 1O) Portable Ultrasonic Detectors
- 11) Air Conditioner Coolant Temperature Rise Plant Incorporated S stem S.R.P.
5.2.5 or Reg Guide 1.45
~Re uirement
- Yes, 1 or2 Mandatory
- Yes, 1 or 2
Mandatory Yes Mandatory Yes,4or5 Mandatory
- Yes, 4 or 5
Mandatory Yes Optional Yes Optional Yes Optional Yes Optional Yes Optional 12) 13)
- = Systems have not been specifically analyzed for RCPB leak detection