ML17309A246

Forwards Revised Safety Evaluation of SEP Topic VII-3, Sys Required for Safety Shutdown. Second Channel of Component Cooling Water Surge Tank Level Indication Should Be Provided

ML17309A246
Person / Time
Site:	Ginna
Issue date:	03/25/1982
From:	Crutchfield D Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:	Maier J ROCHESTER GAS & ELECTRIC CORP.
References
TASK-05-10.B, TASK-07-03, TASK-5-10.B, TASK-7-3, TASK-RR LSO5-82-03-100, LSO5-82-3-100, NUDOCS 8203300132
Download: ML17309A246 (13)

Text

REGULATORY 1

RMA'TION DISTRIBUTION SYS

<<('RIDS)

ACCESSION.NBRo'8203300132.

DOC ADA]'E. 82/'03/25 NOTARI'ZED,,NO FACIL,50 244 'Rober-t Emmet Gfnna Nuclear <<Plants Unit is Rochester G

'AUTH~ NAME, AUTHOR AFFILIATION,,

<<CRUTCHF IELDs D ~

Operatinn Reactors Branch

',5

'RECl"P,PAME RECIPIENT AFFILIATION MAIEREJ ~ E ~

Rochester Gas P 'Electric >Corp ~

SUBJECT:

For wards r evised safety evalpatiqn, of 'SEp "TopicVII 3~ "Sys Rendu)red for Safety Shutdown."

Second'grange) of component cooling pater surge 'tank level indication ~should be

provided, OISTRISUTION iCOOEi SEORS iCOPIES iRECEIVEO:LTiR g ENCL J SIZE TITLE: SEP Dist (Draft or Final SER)

NOTES:1 copy SEP 'Sect.

Ldr.

DOCKET ¹ 05000244 05000244 RECIPIENT ID CODE/NAME AD/SA ORB ¹5 LA INTERNALs AEOD IE NRR/DL DEPY NRR/DL/ADL NRR/DL/SEPB

'SL NRR/DL/SEPB RF RGN1 EXTERNAL: ACRS DIST EX(2/00)

NRC,PDR NTIS

~COPIES L'TTR ENCL 1

ii 1

1 1

1 1

1 1

1 1

2 "2

1 1

1 10 10 11 11 1

1 RE C I'PIEN T ID 'CODE/NAME ORB ¹5 "BC LYONSEJ ~

-ELD NRR CATALINA NRR/DL DIR NRR/DL/SEPB NRR/DL/SEPB 'PF DIST EX(2/PZ ~ )

LPDR NS I-C COPIES L7TR ENCL 1

1 1

1

'25 25 1

1 1

1

'TOTAL NUMBER OF 'COPIES REQUIRED:

UTTR ENCL

0 t

~

N M

e tfi ') f )tw i

f$

il

~

I 'f)t a

Ml ~

tMMI \\

t If '

t W

0 If t fr'))

wM tff

~

Q()

t)W f

fM I

I'ifr tw

, Q rM

~ j M

n aa re~

~

I If 1$

ff I

M III)

%II If WM g W

M

~

p,q REC~,

Po OO

+**++

Docket No.

50-244 LS05-82-03-100 UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 March 25, l982 Mr. John E. Maier Vice President Electric and Steam Production Rochester Gas 5 Electric Corp.

89 East Avenue Rochester, New York 14649

SUBJECT:

SEP TOPIC VII-3, SYSTEMS REQUIRED FOR SAFE

SHUTDOWN, SAFETY EVALUATION REPORT - R.E.

GINNA The enclosed staff safety evaluation is a revision to the staff report dated June 24, 1981.

It has been revised to reflect'he findings of the integrated safety assessment team during a recent site visit.

As a result of the visit, the staff proposes that a second channel of component cooling water surge tank level =indication be provided.

This safety evaluation may be revised in the future if your facility design is changed or if NRC criteria relating to this topic are modified before the integrated assessment is completed.

Sincerely, wM Dennis M. Crutchfield, hief Operating Reactors Branch No.

5 Division of Licensing

Enclosure:

As stated cc w/enclosure:

See next page

Ginna Docket No. 50-244 Rev. 2/8/82 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 Resident 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 Supervisor of the Town of Ontario 107 Ridge 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 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

SYSTEMATIC.EVALUATION ROGRAM TOPIC VII-3 GINNA TOPIC:

VII-3, S stems Re uired For Safe Shutdown INTRODUCTION The systems aspects of the review of Systems Required for Safe Shutdown was conducted as part of Topic V-lO.B (RHR Reliability).

This safety evaluation is limited to the electrical instrumentation and control sys-tems identified as being required for safe shutdown.

Plant systems that are needed to achieve and maintain a safe shutdown condition of..the, plant, including the capability for prompt hot shutdown of the reactor from out-side the control room were:reviewed.

Included also, was a review of the design capability and method of bringing the plant from a high pressure condition to low pressure cooling assuming the use of only safety grade equipment.

The objectives of the review were to assure:

(1)

The design adequacy of the safe shutdown=system to (a) initiate automatically the operation of appropriate

systems, including the reactivity oontrol systems, such that specified acceptable fuel design limits are not exceeded as a result of anticipated opera-:

tional occurrences or postulated accidents and

(.b) initiate the operation of systems and components required to bring the plant to a safe shutdown.

(2)

That the required systems and equipment, including necessary in-strumentation and controls to maintain the unit in a safe condition during hot shutdown, are located at appropriate places outside the

'ontrol room and have a potential capability for subsequent cold shutdown of the reactor through the suitable procedures.

(3)

That only safety grade equipment is required to bring the reactor coolant system from a high pressure condition to a low pressure cooling condition.

II.

REVI EW CRITERIA The review criteria are presented in Section 2 of EG&G Report 0314J, "Electrical, Instrumentation, and Control Features of Systems Required for Safe Shutdown."

III.

RELATED SAFETY TOPICS AND INTERFACES'eview areas outside the scope of this topic and safety topics that are dependent on the pr esent topic information for completion are identified in Section 3 of EG8G Report 0314J.

IV.

REVIEW GUIDELINES The review guidelines are presented in Section 4 of EG&G Report 0314J.

V.

EVALUATION As noted in EG&G Report

0314J, the systems required to take Ginna from hot shutdown to cold shutdown, assuming only offsite power is available or only onsite power is available and a single failure, are capable of initiation to bring the plant to safe shutdown and are in compliance with current licensing criteria and the safety objectives of SEP Topic VII-3, except that long-term cooling (RHR) is susceptible to single E&IC failures which render this form of long-term cooling inoperable.

However, other systems are available for the removal of decay heat.

Report 0314J, also notes that sufficient battery capacity must be pro-vided to assure that GDC 17 can be satisfied.

In addition to:.our contractor' report, the integrated assessment team conducted a site visit during the week of March 8, 1982.

During that visit, it was determined that the component cooling water surge tank level indication was not redundant and, therefore, did not satisfy IEEE

,Std.

279-1971.

VI.

CONCLUSIONS With the exception of the component cooling water surge tank level in-

dication, Ginna satisfies all of the requirements for Safe Shutdown, including GDC 17, because of the number and quality of systems

provided, an 8 hour9.259259e-5 days <br />0.00222 hours <br />1.322751e-5 weeks <br />3.044e-6 months <br /> battery capacity and the capability to establish a delayed access line by backfeeding through the main transformer in less than eight hours.

The staff recommends that a redundant level indication be provided for the component cooling water surge tank.

<I N

~

0 Vc

< ~

r,r.s

DESIGNATED ORIGIML C~ML Bg March 25, 1982 Docket No. 50-244 LS05-82-03-100 Mr. John E. Maier Vice President Electric and Steam Production Rochester Gas

& Electric Corp.

89 East Avenue Rochester, New York 14649

SUBJECT:

SEP TOPIC VII-3, SYSTEMS REQUIRED FOR SAFE SHUTDOWN, SAFETY EVALUATION REPORT - R.E.

GINNA

)e oo I g",W ")~~'qq4 8

jT The enclosed staff safety evaluation is a revision to the staff report dated June 24, 1981.

It has been revised to reflect, the findings of the integrated safety assessment team during a recent site visit.

As a result of the visit, the staff proposes that a second channel of component cooling water surge tank level indication be provided.

This safety evaluation may be revised in the future if your facility design is changed or if NRC criteria relating to th'is topic are modified before the integrated assessment is completed.

Sincerely,

Enclosure:

As stated cc w/enclosure:

See next page 0'risen'al signe'8 5y:

saoV

@coo eeoo(o7)

/IIpO) g. S3 I ep'.

vJa~g Dennis M. Crutchfield, Chief Operating Reactors Branch No.

5 Division of Licensing OFFICE) Xfr~

~ ~

~

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o go'

~ ~

<crap S EPB

bl RHermann 35//82 3/g>/82 8203300132 820325 P DR ADOCK 05000244

'P PDR; SEPB WRussell

~ o

~

~ ~ ~ o ~ ~

~ ~ o ~ ~ ~ o ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

3/q'.1//82

~ \\ ~ ~ ~ o o ~ oeo ~ ~

~ ~ ~ oo ~ ~ ~ ~

ORB

~ o

~\\ ~ o

~ o

~

~ ~ os J Lyon

~ o ~ o ~ o ~ o ~\\ ~ ~ ~ O ~ ~ o ~ o ~ o ~ o ~

3/W/82

~ ~ ~ ~ o ~ ~ ~

~

~ ~ ~ o ~ ~ ~ ~

~ o ~

~ 0 0

Iield

~ o ~ ~ ~ ~ o ~ ~ ~ o ~ o ~ oo ~ ooeoo ~

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o ~ o

~ o ~ o ~ o ~ oo ~ ~

OFFIClAL RECORD COPY A ':DL inas Vu/82

~ ooooooooo/oooooooooooo

~

USGPO: 1981~o990

f..

4 t-r

4a E

Ginna Docket No. 50-244 Rev. 2/8/82 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 Envir onmental. 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 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 Supervisor of the Town of Ontario 107 Ridge 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 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

0 SYSTEMATl'C 'EVALUATION ROGRAM TOPIC VII-3 GINNA TOPIC:

VII-3, S stems Re uired For Safe Shutdown INTRODUCTION The systems aspects of the review of Systems Required for Safe Shutdown was conducted as part of Topic V-10.B (RHR Reliability).

This safety evaluation is limited to the electrical instrumentation and control sys-tems identified as being required for safe shutdown.

Plant systems that are needed to achieve and maintain a safe shutdown oondition of,.the; plant, including the capability for prompt hot shutdown of the reactor from'out-side the control room were:reviewed.

Included also, was a review of the design capability and method of bringing the plant from a high pressure condition to'ow pressure cooling assuming the use of only safety grade equipment.

The objectives of the review were to assure:

(1)

The design adequacy of the safe shutdown system to (a) initiate automatically the operation of appropriate

systems, including the reactivity oontrol systems, such that specified acceptable fuel design limits are not exceeded as a result of anticipated opera-:

tional occurrences or postulated accidents and (b) initiate the operation of systems and components required to bring the plant to a safe shutdown.

(2)

That the required systems and equipment, including necessary in-strumentation and controls to maintain the unit in a safe condition during hot shutdown, are located at appropriate places outside the control room and have a potential capability for'subsequent cold shutdown of the reactor through the suitable procedures.

(3)

That only safety grade equipment is required to br'ing the reactor coolant system from a high pressure condition to a low pressure cooling condition.

II.

REVIEW CRITERIA The review criteria are presented in Section 2 of EGSG Report 0314J, "Electrical, Instrumentation, and Control Features of Systems Required for Safe Shutdown."

S III.

RELATED SAFETY TOPICS AND INTERFACES'eview areas outside the scope of this topic and safety topics that are dependent on the present topic information for completion are identified in Section 3 of EG&G Report 0314J.

IV.

REVIEW GUIDELINES The review guidelines are presented in Section 4 of EGSG Report 0314J.

V.

EVALUATION As noted in EG&G Report

0314J, the systems required to take Ginna from hot shutdown to cold shutdown, assuming only offsite power is available or only onsite power is available and a single failure, are capable of initiation to bring the plant to safe shutdown and are in compliance with current licensing criteria and the safety objectives of SEP Topic VII-3, except that long-term cooling (RHR) is susceptible to single ERIC failures which render this form of long-term cooling inoperable.

However, other systems are available for the removal of decay heat.

Report 0314J, also notes that sufficient battery capacity must be pro-vided to assure that GDC 17 can be satisfied.

In addition to:,our contractor-'s report, the integrated assessment team conducted a site visit during the week of March 8, 1982.

During that visit, it was determined that the component cooling water surge tank level indication was not redundant and, therefore, did not satisfy IEEE Std. 279-1971.

VI ~

CONCLUSIONS With the exception of the component cooling water surge tank level in-,

dication, Ginna satisfies all of the requirements for Safe Shutdown, including GDC 17, because of the number and quality of systems

provided, an 8 hour9.259259e-5 days <br />0.00222 hours <br />1.322751e-5 weeks <br />3.044e-6 months <br /> battery capacity and the capability to establish a delayed access line by backfeeding through the main transformer in less than eight. hours.

The staff recommends that a redundant level indication be provided for the component cooling water surge tank.

~ X 4 0

1 P