ML17309A241

Submits Deficiencies Re Analysis of Switchover from Injection to Recirculation Following LOCA Per SEP Topic VI-7.B.Model Used May Not Be Sufficiently Detailed to Predict Vessel Water Level for Different Break Locations

ML17309A241
Person / Time
Site:	Ginna
Issue date:	03/09/1982
From:	Crutchfield D Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:	Maier J ROCHESTER GAS & ELECTRIC CORP.
References
TASK-06-07.B, TASK-6-7.B, TASK-RR LSO5-82-03-055, LSO5-82-3-55, NUDOCS 8203170193
Download: ML17309A241 (5)

Text

cl,is flEcll r QV r

O~

e A,

OO O

'lpP

+>>*++

Docket No. 50-244 LS05-82 03- 055 t~

i UNITP0 STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 March 9, 1982 Mr. John E. Maier, Vice President Electric and Steam Production Rochester Gas 8 Electric Corporation 89 East Avenue Rochester, New York 14649

SUBJECT:

SEP TOPIC VI-7.B, 'ESF SWITCHOVER FROM INJECTION TO RECIRCULATION MODE (AUTOMATIC ECCS REALIGNMENT)

I,s By letter dated December 31, 1981, we forwarded to you our draft evaluation of SEP Topic VI-7.B, "ESF Switchover from Injection to Recirculation Mode (Automatic ECCS Realignment)."

Your response dated February 16, 1982, stated that you disagreed with our assess-ment especially for the evaluation of time required for shutoff of operating pumps at the Refueling Hater Storage Tank (RWST) at the 10Ã level and the time required for ESF switchover after the pumps are shutoff.

OFFICE/

SURNAME/

DATEII Your analysis of switchover from injection to recirculation following a

LOCA is deficient in two areas:

R The first is the timing of pump switchoff following the 105 low-low RWST level alarm.

The analysis presented did not account for instru-ment and alarm setpoint errors.

Unless otherwise justified, we consider an overall error of 3% of full instrument span the minimum acceptable

value, In addition, the analysis did not provide justifi-cation for the pump flow rates used in the calculation.

We would 5 ~

like to see supporting experimental evidence to confirm that the flowrates used in the analysis are conservative.

c a7J The second area of concern is the boildown analysis of the vessel v <

water level following ECCS pump shutoff.

During this time the core is not fed with cooling water until ECCS flow is restarted We n.eed

~~ /~

justification of the values used for the initial conditions of the core, including water temperature, void fraction flow paths, and other pertinent data.

We believe the model used may not be sufficiently detailed to accurately predict vessel water level for different break locations. 'he effects of steam flow displacing water out of the core and break during boiloff, as well as steam backpressure were not considered, Therefore, we do not feel that you have provided sufficient justification to resolve

final,

,'20SS70>93 820809 PDR ADOCK 05000244'i v

~

l -

, ",,PDR s

, f >>

I i".) ~ ~ ~i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

NRC FQRM 318 (IO-80) NRCM 0240 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY USQPOs 1881-33S gg0

gal%

I

~

W4 gyes g-p',;

yy~pfy 1, Q,l

~ pgg

~ 5, '

f4

~ %t 4

4'Cll-f~

~)~

ggrj'

This evaluation will be a basic input to the integrated safety assess-ment for your facility.

The assessment maybe revised in the future if your facility design is changed or if the NRC criteria relating to this subject is modified before the intjgrated assessment is complete.

Sincerely, cc:,

See next page Dennis M. Crutchfield, Chief Operating Reactors Branch No.

5 Division of Licensing OFFICEI SURNAME$

OATE $

SEPB: DL

..ANang:.dk

..3/.S./82........

S B:DL WRussell

~ O O at(

~ ~ O ~ ~ ~ ~ O ~ O ~ ~ ~ ~

..w..b./m........

ORPPPPH

~ ~ ~ ~ thoro)io ~t ~ ~ ~ ~

~ ~

JLVons at ~ ~

t ~Otttt~

..0/8/.AR........

0

'BC

~t

~ O ~

D u c fiel A

SA:DL

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o ~ ~ 1

~ ~ ~ ~ ~

~ ~

~ ~ o ~

GL'arenas 3./0 /82

~ o ~

~ tt 1(to'

~ ~ ~

~

~ ~

~ O ~ \\ ~ ~t ~ O ~

~t ~ O ~ ~ O ~

~ ~ ~ ~

~\\ ~t ~ O ~ ~t ~ O ~ ~t ~tt~ O ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

NRC FORM 318 (10-80) NRCM 0240 OFFlC!AL RECORD COPY USGPO: 1991~iw0

NE I

Mr. John E. Maier CC Harry H. Voigt, Esquire

LeBoeuf, Lamb, Leiby and MacRae 1333 New Hampshire Avenue, N.

W.

Suite 1100 Washington, D. C.

20036 Mr. Michael Slade 12 Trailwood Circle Rochester, New York 14618 Ezra Bialik Assistant Attorney General Environmental Protection Bureau New York State Department of Law 2 World Trade Center New York, New York 10047 Resi dent Inspector R. E. Ginna Plant c/o U. S.

NRC 1503 Lake Road

Ontario, New York 14519 Director, Bureau of Nuclear Operations 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 U. S. Environmental. Protection Agency Region II Office ATTN:

Regional Radiation Representative 26 Federal Plaza New York, New York 10007 Herbert Grossman, Esq.,

Chairman Atomic Safety and Licensing Board U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D. C.

20555 Ronald C. Haynes, Regional Administrator Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Region I Office of Inspection and Enforcement 631 Park Avenue King of Prussia, Pennsylvania 19406 Supervisor of the Town of Ontario 107 Ri'dge Road West

Ontario, New York 14519 Dr. Emmeth A. Luebke Atomic Safety and Licensing Board U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D. C.

20555 Dr. Richard F. Cole Atomic 'Safety and Licensing Board U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D. C.

20555