ML18030A389

Informs of Completion of Review of Ref Draft Final SE Re Spent Fuel Pool Cooling for Factual Accuracy

ML18030A389
Person / Time
Site:	Susquehanna
Issue date:	12/13/1994
From:	Byram R PENNSYLVANIA POWER & LIGHT CO.
To:	NRC OFFICE OF INFORMATION RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (IRM)
References
PLA-4238, NUDOCS 9412200083
Download: ML18030A389 (4)

Text

12/19/1994 B9: 55 61B-774-7968 FPL NUC l IC~ING P~ B2 Qjg Pennsylvania Power & Light Company Veo Neth Ninth Streets Awentown, PA 16101-1179 ~ 610/7744161 8sakr Nos -Nuaissr 010/754 7$ 02 Fav. 610/7F44NQ DEC ~ ~ ~SS4 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Attn.: Document Control Desk MaH Station Pl-137 Washington, D. C. 20555 SUSQUEHANNA STREAM ELEClREC STATION SPENT FUEL POOL COOING Docket Nos. 50-3$ l/NPP-14 and 5MIS/NPF-22 Eejirences: Letter Pom Joseph JF. Shea to RG. Byrant, "Susguehmna Stcam Electric Statton, Omits I and 2, Dry Sgbty Evaluation Regarding Spent Fuel Pool Cooling Issues", dated Novetnber 3, 1994

Dear Sir:

PAL has completed our review of the referenced draft Qnal safety evaluation regarding spent

%el pool cooling for factual accuracy. Our comments were discussed in a November 21, 1994 telecon between your Mr. Joseph Shea and Mr. Steve Jones and our Mr. Jim Kenny and others.

The following are the rcmairung comments noted at thc conclusion of the referenced tclccon.

PPkL SEE COMMENTS;

1) Page 7, Section 2.6, last sentence of Qrst paragraph reads: "Table 9.2-3 of reference 8 lists the design makeup rate for each ESV loop to each pool as 60 GPM."

CCHHMENT't is suggested that this statement be revised to; "Table 9.2-3 of reference 8 lists the design makeup rate for each fuel poo1 as 60 GPM."

Thc referenced FSAR table lists item 11 as "Makeup to Fuel Pools". Each ESW loop can supply 30 GPM to each pool. Note that calculations indicate that throttled flow of 35 GPM per line willbe achieved, Enclosure P.

12/13/1994 PFL HUG LIC ~Wc. B3 FII.E R41-2 PLA4238 Document Control Desk

2) Page 7, Section 2,7, the sentence which reads "However, the safety-related load center rooms are located within Zone I and Zone II, and the safety-related control structure chilled water system cools the air supplied to the load center rooms fmm the reactor building general area."

COMMENT'he above statement is correct for Unit 1 but not for Unit 2. 'Ibe Unit 2 safcty-related load center room is cooled by a direct cxIension cooling unit. The cooling water for the direct expansion unit is BS%'. This con6guration is described in FSAR Section 9.4.2.2.2.

Page 17, Section 4.2.1, the sentence which reads "Because thc control room indication is not fuHy qualified and redundant, the staE considers these alternative methods appropriate for backup indication."

COMMENYt When thc pools are crosstied, the level and temperature indication is redundant, Unit 1 is powered Gum distribution panel 1Y226 and Unit 2 is powered from 2Y226.

4) Page 26, Section 4,3.2, item (2); "Plant procedures ensure no ESW system heat loads are dissipated through a spray loop with a failed open spray bypass valve, except ECCS and RCIC room coolers,"

COMMENT:

This is accurate only after the est 8 hours9.259259e-5 days <br />0.00222 hours <br />1.322751e-5 weeks <br />3.044e-6 months <br /> of an accident. As modeled in EC416-1002, there are no restrictions with regard to the alignment of ESW during the initial 8 hours9.259259e-5 days <br />0.00222 hours <br />1.322751e-5 weeks <br />3.044e-6 months <br /> of the event. Thc analysis assumes that a<tet 8 hours9.259259e-5 days <br />0.00222 hours <br />1.322751e-5 weeks <br />3.044e-6 months <br />, all ESW beat loads on thc loop with the failed open bypass valve are shed with the exception of the ECCS and RCIC room coolers. This action to shed loads is prescribed in SSES emergency procedure EP-PS-102 to address the unlikely occurrence that the bypass valve could not bc closed.

5) Page 27, Section 4.3,3, second paragraph, last st~

in areas that require valve manipulation."

reads "Tlmre was no emergency

'ighting COMMENT:

Though no emergency lights are located in the areas that require valve manipulation, essential lighting is provided in those areas. The essential lighting power supplies are fcd

&om Class 1E 480VAC MCC's which are diesel generator backed.'

12/13/1994 69: 55 S18- -79ee PPL M.'C LICE HG P~ 84 3 PILE R41-2 PLA4238 Docunient Control Desk

6) Page 32, Section 4.4.2.1, assumption 8, which reads "emergency switchgear room 5m operating with cooling coils receiving 27 GPM of control strucbire chilled water at 47'F".

COblMXNT:

The above statement is correct for Unit 1 but not for Unit 2. The Unit 2 safety-related load center room is cooled by a direct eqension cooling unit, 'Qe cooling water for the direct expansion unit is ESW This configuration is described in FSAR Section 9.4.2,2.2.

7) Page 32, Section 4.4.2.1, it is sugsested that a tenth significant assumption be added which identifies that 30 day summer washer was assumed. The avcragc outdoor manmcr air temperature is calculated for a 24 hour2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> period using data and methodology contained in 1985 ASHRAE Fundamentals, The S'Yo summer design day average temperature was used for the entire 30 day period analyzed. Additionally, the solar gains were also calculated for the roof and walls of the reactor building (including the refueling Hoor).

Thus the analysis assumes 30 straight days of sunny hot weather.

8) Page 34, Section 4.4.22, top paragraph, the sentence which reads "PPdtL calculated the accumulation in the recircuhtion plenum by integrating thc calculated 'oisture concentration of condcn!ed vapor entrained in thc Qow entering the recirculation plenum (1000 CFM inleakagc plus pressure driven Qow)."

COMMENT; The calculation used a mass Qow balance to determine thc How to the recirculation plenum Qom the refbeling Qoor. It is recommended that the sentence be rewritten as follows; "PPM. calculated the moisture accumulation in the recirculation plenum by integrating the calculated mass Qow of comieriscd vapor entrained in thc Qow entering the recirculation plenum."

9) Page 34, Section 4.4,2.2, second scntcncc of the second paragraph, the sentence which reads "The unanalyzed condition was acctnnuhtion of condensate within the recirculation plenum to the cxtcnt that water overQowed into the SGTS ductwork,"

12/13/1994 89: 55 618-774-7968 F~ 85 4 FILE R41-2 PLA4238 Document Control Desk COMMENT'his statement is true for the two pool boil case but not for the single pool boil case which is being discussed in tMs section. In the two pool boil case, cormknsation in the plenum occurs at a tnuch Seter rate than in the SOTS ductwork such that the plenum 61ls faster than the duct and begins to overflow into the duct. In the single pool case, the opposite is true, the duct condensation fills the duct before the plenum elis and overflows into the duct.

In addition to the above comments, PPdhL wiH provide a separate response to the request contained on page 3S of the referenced document to deflne our use of the RHR system to prevent spent Sml pool boiling resulting Rom a seismic event.

Should you have any questions on this letter, please contact Mr. James M, Kenny at (610) 774-7904.

Very truly yours, CC: C Region I Mr. C. Poslusny, Jr., NRC Sr. Project Manager - OWN Ms. M. Banerjee, NRC Sr. Resident Inspector - SSES