ML17297A660
| ML17297A660 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Palo Verde  |
| Issue date: | 08/03/1981 |
| From: | Kerrigan J Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8108130310 | |
| Download: ML17297A660 (14) | |
Text
AUG 3
198t Docket Nos.:
50-528/529/530 NOTE TO:
Files FROID:
J.
D. Ker rigan, Project Manager, Licensing 'Branch No. 3, DL
SUBJECT:
TELECONS llITH ARIZONA PUBLIC SERVICE (APS)
During the month of July, 1981, a series of telephone conversations with APS took place to discuss effluent treatment systems at Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station.
A summary of these discussions is found in the enclosure.
Orig~ Signed By.
Enclosure:
As stated cc:
See next page.
DISTRIBUTION Docket Fi,le 50-528/529/530 LPDR PDR NSIC
+Team LB83 Files JDKerrigan FMiraglia TChandrasekaran CWillis WGammi 11 pglqo4 i'108i303i0 8i0803 PDR ADOCK 05000528 A
LPDR J Janis D. Kerrigan, Project fIanager Licensing Branch No.
3 Division of Licensing OFFICEI SURNAME/
DATE Q DL:LB3 JD i an:j
$ /81 DL'gli'a
~
~ ~
~ ~ ~ ~
~ ~ ~
7/
81
~ ~ ~ I'1 ~
I
~
~ ~
~
~ I ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ ~
~ ~ 0 ~ ~ IJC
,NRC FORM 318 (10-80) NRCM 0240 OFFIClAL RECORD COPY US0 PO1 19S1~ 960
I
~ ~
P P
1j t
~
Mr. E.
E.
Van Brunt, Jr.
Vice President - Nuclear Projects Arizona Public Service Company P. 0.
Box 21666 Phoenix, Arizona 85036 PALO VERDE cc:
Arthur C. Gehr, Esq.
Snell h Wilmer 3100 Valley Center
- Phoenix, Arizona 85073 Charles S. Pierson Assistant Attorney General 200 State Capitol 1700 West Washington Phoenix, Arizona 85007 David N. Barry, Esq.,
Senior Counsel Charles R. Kocher, Esq., Assistant Counsel Southern California Edison Company P. 0.
Box 800
- Rosemead, California 91770-Margaret Walker Deputy Director of Energy Programs Economic Planning and Development Office 1700 West Washington Phoenix, Arizona 85007 Mr. Rand L. Greenfield Assistant Attorney General Bataan Memorial Building Santa Fe, New Mexico 87503 Resident Inspector Palo Verde/NPS
'U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission P. 0.
Box 21324 Phoenix, Arizona 85001 Ms. Patricia Lee Hourihan 6413 S. 26th Street Phoenix, Arizona 85040 Bruce Meyer son Arizona Center for Law in the Public Interest 112 North Fifth Avenue Phoenix, Arizona 85003
t',
I
ENCLOSURE 1
STATUS OF RESPONSES TO 17 ETSB QUESTIONS 1.
Res onsive and com lete The responses to 8 oj these 17 questions were found acceptable.
These are listed:
a) g.460.2 - Radiation monitors included in Table 3.2-1 which deals with quality classii'ization of structures, systems and components.
b) 0.460.4 - Acceptable testing for radioactivity of condensate storage facility and demimeralized water systems provided.
c).
g.460.8 - Acceptable testivg for TS liquid wastes provided.,
d) g.460.9. - Overflow provi'sion for Reactor Makeup Water Tank provided.
No provision for containing the tank contents in the event of tank fai'lure - Reason for non provi'sion acceptable.
For addi'tional comments-on thi's question, see at the end of Section 1'.
e) 0.460..11
- Typographical error for Kr-89 input concentration to GWMS from reactor drain tank corrected.
f).
g.460. 12 - Design of GWTS to stop continuous leakage paths adequate.
g).
g.460.. 15 - Response on evaporation pond contributi'on to SWMS adequate.
h) g.46Q.17 - Refueling and reactor makeup water tank concentration provi'ded iz CESSAR System 80 FSAR.
Additional comments on
.460.9 The technical specification surveillance requirements for liquid holdup tanks wi'll require. grab sampling (a representative
- sample, weekly),
capability for the reactor-makeup water tank.
See surveillance requirement
- 4. 11. 1.4 of NUREG-0212.
Thi's is because the outdoor tank i's not surrounded by liners, dikes-or walls capable of holding the tank contents in the event of its fai'lure.
When the technical specifications for the plant are formalized, this requirement will be incorporated.
2.
In telephone conversations with the appli'cant in July. 1981, appli'cant's attention was drawn to some. deficiencies i'n responses to th'e questions listed below.
The applicant has committed to correct these defi'ciencies by documenting additi'onal informati'on on these questions by August 31, 1981.
Applicant's. oral commi'tments on these questi'ons are acceptable.
pending documentation.
The additional izformation that wi 11 be required to be documented by August 31, 1981 are given:
a) g.460.5 This question deals with continuous process monitoring capability for the spent. fuel pool and refueling pool treatment systems.
Action - (i)
Appli'cant wi;11 include tlie 2 additional sample points, one for the SFP and tlie other for the FPF cleanup demimeral izer outlets in Table 9.3-3.
(For these sample points also, discrete sample analyses will be available).
(ii) Applicant will make it clear that appropriate sampling poimts will be available for the refueling pool also (currently, it appears that only tlie SFP is covered).
(ii'i) Applicant will correct tlie Figure number given in Column 9 correspondi'ng to fuel pool sampling points entries-to Fig. 9.1-9 in tlie Table 9.3-3.
b)
(.460.14 This question deals with tlie cost-benefit analysis.
Action-Applicant does not have to incorporate any change in the FSAR relating to this question.
However, the applicant will have to update the cost of money and reevaluate cost-benefit analysis using the updated cost of money in the Environmental Report (ER),.
The applicant is expected to complete thi's change in Supplement 3 to the ER which is due before the end of July.
c).
g.460. 13 - Thi's question deals with the correction of a large number of typograpliical errors in Table II.3-6.
Acti'on - Appli'cant wi'll correct all the typographical errors in Table II'.3-6.
d) g.460. 16 - Thi's questix)n deals wi'th solid waste output given in Table I'I'.4-6.
Acti,on-The applicant wi'll correct the typographi'cal error for I'.131 im Table I'I'-.4-6'.
Evaporator concentrates-soli'd wast~ output for I'-131 in )hat table. will be corrected as 1.4x10 (currently, it is 1.4xl0
)..
e).
(.460.1
- Tliis question deals with compli'ance with Reg.
GuMe 1.143.
Actian-Applicant will state compliance with the salient.features of the g.A. program for tlie Radwaste management systems given in sections 4 and 6 of Reg.
Guide 1.143.
(The applicant wi.ll also include the condenser vacuum pump/gland seal exliaust monitor sampler and waste gas decay tank monitor},.
Acceptable deviations to individual posi'tions stated inl".the guide would be spelled out briefly.
h' H'
f) g.46(L3
- Compli'ance with. Reg.
Guide 1.52, Rev.
2.
For additional comments on thi's question, see at the end of section 2,
Action - (i)
Applicant will elaborate the response to position C.2.g of Reg.
Guide 1.52, Rev.
2 which requires instrumentation to si'gnal, record and alarm pressure drops and flow rates through'the ESF filter systems in the control room.
Towards thi's purpose, the applicant will provide additional information i'n paragrapli 0 under Reg.
Guide 1.52 in Section 1.8 of the-FSAR.
This information will include:
a) the nature of alarm, i..e.,
both visual and audible; b) assurance that tFiis will be triggered by the computer and i's automatic and does not involve any operator acti'on; c) alarms will be available for both high. and low differential pressures in the control room and; d).
where the pressure differentials are measured for
- example, across the HEPAS, across the hepas and charcoal ab'sorbers, etc.;
e) the nature of the pressure measuring instrument i.e., recorder or indicator or transmitter, etc.
(ii) Applicant will elaborate the response to position C2j of Reg.
Guide. 1,52 Rev.
2 given in paragraph E under Reg.
Guide 1.52 i'n Section 1.8.
The applicant wi 11 explain how the radiation exposures to operating personnel will be maintai'ned at as low as is reasonably.
achievable levels during plant maintenance and thereby meet the guidelines of Reg.
Guide 8.8.
g).
9.460..6
- Compliance, with Reg.
Guide 1.140, Rev.
1.
For additional comments on this section, see the end of this section.
Action - (i)
Applicant will include the turbine building vacuum pump exhaust fi'lters and the containment ai'r cleanup re-circulation or kidney system filters in the Table 9A-1.
(ii) Applicant will elaborate the assurance relating to relative humidity of tFie exhaust air from the auxiliary bui'lding.
l
(iii') Applicant will state expli'city, what kind of instrumenta-tion is available for signalling, recording and alarming tfie pressure drops and flow rates through the normal filters.
Appli'cant will descr'ibe the nature of the alarm, i'.e., both vi'sual and audible, what causes the alarm, i'.e.,
high or low AP or both, whether the alarm i's automatic and where the a(Ps are measured.
h) g.46Q. 1Q - Thi.'s question deals with hydrogen and oxygen gas analyzers for the waste gas system.
For additi'onal comments on this quest~an, see at the end of this section.
Action - a.
Appli'cant will state explicitly that both high and high-high alarms are available at approximately 2 percent and 4 percent oxygen concentrations.
b.
Applicant will make correction regarding the gas surge header referred to in Section 1 1. 3. l. 1. 6.
i).
g.460..7 Source term information using the format given in Chapter 4 'of NUREG-0017 Action - a)
Appli.cant will give shim bleed rate under item'2d.
This is 0.48 gpm.
b).
Under item 3e, applicant will state that a blowdown flash tank has been provided and that the flashed steam is returned to the cycle via the 84 feedwater heaters.
(The appli'cant will delete the references to DFS for the fl.ash tank vent releases since the flash tank vent is not released to the environment).
cJ Under item 3f, applicant will give the fraction of feed-water to the steam generator processed through the condensate demimeralizer when it is on line.
d)
Appli'cant wi'll give. <information on condensate demineralizers, i'.e.,
average. flow rate, demineralizer type, number and size, regeneration frequenCy and whether ultrasonic resiz cleanizg i's used.
e).
Under 4a, applicant will add a eros's 'reference.
to the Section 11.2 where. liquid waste. source terms are discussed.
f)
The appli'cant will provide the vent size, release elevation, effluent veloci'ty and temperature. for the turbine bui'ldi'ng exhaust either under i'tern 6 or in section 11.3
~'
a
~
~
Additional Comments on uestions Under Section 2
- g. 460. 3 Comp 1 iance with Reg.
Gui de 1. 52,, Rev.
2 a) b)
Appli'cant has stated the testing requirements for the ESF filters in paragraphs N and N under Reg.
Guide 1.52 in Section 1.8 of the FSAR.
The applicant has been informed that when the Technical Specifications for Palo Verde Units 1, 2, and 3 are formalized, they will state that these will be. i~ accordance with Reg.
Guide 1.52, Rev.
2.
Applicant has been i'nformed that flow measuring instrumentations should be proyided for the ESF filter systems and the lack of these instrumenta-ti'ons will be identifi'ed as an open i'tern in the SER.
g.460.6 Compliance with Reg.
GuMe 1.140, Rev.
1 a) b),
c)
Applicant has been informed that the containment exhaust air should have a
RH < 70 percent for 705 filter effi'ciency for iodine capture by charcoal absorbers (The appli'cant had quoted 705 filter efficiency for these absorbers).
If an electric heater is needed in the exhaust filter system to assure this condi'tion, then it should be provided.
In case the applicant elects to provide the heater so as to take credit for 70% filter efficiency for the charcoal absorbers, t'e applicant should state it in'he FSAR by August 31.
Applicant is requested to clarify orally now what is proposed regarding this i'ssue.
Applicant has been informed that flow measuring instrumentation is required for the normal filters.
Appli'cant is required to clarify now, how the appli'cant proposes to measure flow rates through these normal filters.
Appl'icant should clarify now (can be done orally) whether the HEPA and pre-filters will be tested in accordance with C5C and C3N of Reg.
Guide 1.140.,
Rev. l.
(.460.10 --Hydrogen and oxygen gas analyzers a) b)
c)
Applicant has been imformed that at least one continuous gas analyzer should be located between th'e compressor and the decay tank as stated in the acceptance criteria of Standard Review Plan 11.3, Rev. l.
Applicant has been informed that the control feature should include the provision for automatic injection of the appropriate diluent into the system to reduce concentrations below the specifi'ed limit on automatic initi'ati'on of the "hi'gh-high'" alarm.
Applicant has been informed that the.lack of the above features will be identifi'ed as open items i'n the SER.
l I~
1