ML18038A753
| ML18038A753 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Nine Mile Point  |
| Issue date: | 07/29/1987 |
| From: | Neighbors J Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8708050142 | |
| Download: ML18038A753 (36) | |
Text
July 29, 198%
Docket No. 50-410 LICENSEE'ACILITY:
SUBJECT:
DISTRIBUTION c~
':E.J d
NRCPDR J. Partlow Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation Local PDR ACRS(10)
PDI-I Rdg.
B. Clayton Nine Mile Point Nuclear Power Station, Unit 2 (NMP-2)
J.
Johnson D. Neighbors J. Kudrick
SUMMARY
OF MEETING HELD ON JULY 20, 1987 WITH M. Evans NIAGARA MOHAWK POWER CORPORATION (NMPC)
R. Capra OGC T. Chandrasekaran The meeting was held in Bethesda,
- Maryland, on July 20, 1987.
Enclosure I provides a list of attendees.
The purpose of the meeting was to discuss a currently existing problem of NMP-2.
The hot weather this summer has caused higher than normal temperatures in Lake Ontario and because of this, plant operations are affected.
The Technical Specifications specify a reactor building drawdown time of 120 seconds after a
LOCA.
In order to meet this time, a differential temperature is required between the service water (lake water) and the reactor building of about 15 to 20'F depending on the assumptions in the drawdown analysis.
Since the service water (lake water) temperature is so high, the differential temperature requirements demands that the reactor temperature be maintained at an elevated level by deliberately heating the building.
The main discussions centered on the assumptions in the analysis and whether to reduce the differential temperature while maintaining a fixed drawdown time of 129 seconds or to extend the drawdown time.'he licensee's presentation is shown in Enclosure 2.
NMPC is to do some reevaluation and inform the staff shortly of its findings.
Another aspect of the discussion was the Technical Specification 'limit of 76'F on service water temperature.
With the lake water at 76'F, the plant cannot startup.
NMPC plans to ask for relief from this limit in the immediate future.
Enclosures:
As stated Jos D. Neighbor roject Manager Project Directorat
-1 Division of Reactor Projects, I/II cc:
See next page PDI-1 DNe 7/
ghbors
/87 8708050i42 870729 PDR ADQCK 050004io,
~
P PDR
0 ~
0 1 r,
k
'l t
L N
J rt
Mr. C. V. Mangan Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation Nine Mile Point Nuclear Station Unit 2 CC:
Mr. Troy B. Conner, Jr.,
Esq.
Conner 5 Wetterhahn Suite 1050 1747.-Pennsylvania
- Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C.
20006 Richard Goldsmith Syracuse University College of Law E. I. White Hall Campus
- Syracuse, New York 12223 Ezra I. Bialik Assistant Attorney General Environmental Protection Bureau New York State Department of Law 2 World Trade Center New York, New York 10047 Resident Inspector Nine Mile Point Nuclear Power Station P. 0.
Box 99
- Lycoming, New York 13093 Mr. John W. Keib, Esq.
Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation 300 Erie Boulevard West
- Syracuse, New York 13202 Mr. James Linvilie U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Region I 631 Park Avenue King of Prussia, Pennsylvania 19406 Peter E. Francisco, Licensing Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation 300 Erie Boulevard West
- Syracuse, New York 13202 Don Hill Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation Suite 550 4520 East West Highway
- Bethesda, Maryland 20814 Regi ona 1 Administr a tor, Regi on I U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 631 Park Avenue King of Prussia, Pennsylvania 19406 Mr. Paul D. Eddy New York State Public Serice Comoission Nine Mile Point Nuclear Station-Unit II P.O.
Box 63
- Lycoming, New York 13093 Mr. Richard M. Kessel Chair and Executive Director State Consumer Protection Board 99 Washington Avenue
- Albany, New York 12210
Q ~
ENCLOSURE I LIST OF ATTENDEES FOR NIAGARA MOHAWK POWER CORPORATION MEETING 'ON JULY 20, 1987 NRC D. Neighbors J. Kudrick M. Evans R. Capra T. Chandrasekaran NMPC R.
Hammelmann T.
Fay D. Hill P. Francisco R. Pasternak M. Wetterhahn (Conner E Wetterhahn)
Stone and Webster M. Allen M. Stocknoff
~ 0
0 ~
ENCLOSURE 2
AGENDA INTRODUCTION ANALYTICALMODEL (SINGLE VOLUME)
ORIGINAL FSAR ANALYSIS (CASE I)
BACKGROUND ANALYSES (CASE II AND CASE III)
CURRENT PLANT CONDITIONS REFINED ANALYSES (CASE I Ia AND CASE I I Ia)
POSSIBLE WORST CASE SCENARIO (NO LOOP)
THREE "D" MODEL
SUMMARY
~ ~
~
~
INTRODUCTION SECONDARY CONTAINMENT - DESIGN BASIS ENCI OSES REACTOR AND PRIMARY CONTAINMENT MINIMIZES LEAKAGE FROM THE PRIMARY CONTAINMENT TO THE OUTSIDE ATMOSPHERE DURING A LOCA ATMOSPHERE CONTROL SYSTEMS MAINTAIN A NEGATIVE PRESSURE OF 0,25 INCHES W,G.
WITH RESPECT TO THE ATMOSPHERE HEATING AND VENTILATING SYSTEM (NORMAL OPERATION)
UNIT COOLERS (NORMAL AND EMERGENCY OPERATION)
STANDBY GAS TREATMENT SYSTEM (EMERGENCY OPERATION)
LEAKAGE INTO SECONDARY CONTAINMENT SECONDARY CONTAINMENT - DESIGN EVALUATION FSAR SECTION 6.2.3,3 DEMONSTRATED THAT THE STANDBY GAS TREATMENT SYSTEM MET - ITS DESIGN OBJECTIVE OF MAINTAINING A NEGATIVE PRESSURE OF 0,25" W,G, WITHIN THE REACTOR AND AUXILIARYBAYS FOLLOWING A LOCA DRAWDOWN TIME TO ESTABLISH -0,25" W, G, ESTABLISHED AT 129 SECONDS CALCULATION APPROACH SINGLE VOLUME MODEL
~ 0
~
~
SINGLE VOLUME MODEL INLEAKAGE TRB Q TRANS SGTS TSW QUC WALLS, PIPING ELECTRICAL YiOTORS PARAMETERS AFFECTING DRAWDOWN TIME SYSTEM FLOW RATE INLEAKAGE
- BUILDING VOLUME HEAT LOAD
" - BUILDING HEAT REMOVAL RATE (BUILDING TEMPERATURE AND SERVICE WATER PUMPs NUMBER OF UNIT COOLERS IN OPERATION)
OUTS IDE AIR TEMPERATURE
" STRONGLY AFFECTS THE DRAWDOWN TIME
INLEAKAGE ASSUNED DRAWDOWN TIl1E LOCA LOOP DIV I DI ESEL AVAIL DIV I I DIESEL AVAIL DIV II 600V BOARD AVAIL UNIT COOLER SETPOINT SEC CONT A IR TEHP SER WATER TENP T
UNIT COOLERS AVAILABLE SPENT FUEL Pooi NORNAL LIGHTING HEAT LOAD ASSUf1ED CASE I
ORIG FSAR 3190 129 YES YES YES NO YES 85'F 104'F 81'F 23'F DIV I ONLY YES NO FSAR (CONSERVATIVE)
0
BAC GROU D
EVALUATING STUDIES EFFECTED BY SERVICE WATER TEMPERATURE ORIGINAL DRAWDOWN CALCULATION ASSUMED SERVICE WATER AT 81'F INCREASING SERVICE WATER TEMP TO 82'F INCREASED DRAWDOWN TIME BECAUSE OF DECREASE IN COOLER HEAT REMOVAL CAPABILITY RESULTING FROM REDUCED AT RE-EVALUATED DRAWDOWN TIME USING EXISTING STATIONS CONDITIONS (CASE I I)
ESTABLISHED ADMINISTRATIVE CONTROLS ON MINIMUM E T BETWEEN REACTOR BUILDING AMBIENT TEMPERATURE AND SERVICE WATER TEMPERATURE ESTABLISHED ADMINISTRATIVE CONTROL ON MINIMUM REACTOR BUILDING TEMPERATURE TO ENSURE UNIT COOLER IN SERVICE IDENTIFIED POTENTIALLY MORE CONSERVATIVE PLANT CONDITIONS WITH REGARD TO POSTULATED SINGLE FAILURES (CASE I I I)
NOTIFIED NRC UNDER 10CFR50
~ 72
~ ~
INLEAKAGE ASSUMED DRAWDOWN TIME LOCA LOOP DIV I DIESEL AVAIL DIV II DIESEL AVAIL DIV II 600V BOARD AVAIL UNIT COOLER SETPOINT SEC CONT AIR TEMP SER WATER TEMP UNIT COOLERS AVAILABLE SPENT FUEL POOL NORMAL LIGHTING HEAT LOAD ASSUMED CASE I ORIG FSAR
'190 (CFM) 129 (SEC)
YES YES YES NO YES 85'F 100'F 81'F 23'F DIV I ONLY YES NO FSAR (CONSERVATIVE)
CASE II 7/3/87 MOD FSAR 3190 (CFM) 129 (SEC)
YES YES YES NO YES 85'F 85'F 69'F DIV I ONLY NO NO MODIFIED (REDUCED)
~ ~
INLEAKAGE ASSUMED DRAWDOWN TIME LOCA LOOP DIV I DIESEL AVAIL DIV I I DIESEL AVAIL DIV II 600V BOARD AVAIL
'NIT COOLER SETPO INT SEC CONT AIR TEMP SER WATER TEMP T
UNIT COOLERS AVAILABLE SPENT FUEL POOL CASE I
ORIG FSAR
- 3190 (CFM) 129 (SEC)
YES YES YES NO YES 85'F 104'F 23'F DIV I ONLY YES CASE II 7/3/87 MOD FSAR 3190 (CFM) 129 (SEC)
YES YES YES NO YES 85'F 85 F
69'F 16'F DIV I ONLY NO CASE I I I 7/13/87.,
YES YES YES YES NO 85'F 97'F 77'F 20'F/REDUCED TO 18'F DIV I ONLY NO NORMAL LIGHTING HEAT LOAD AQ$ UMED NO NO NO FSAR (CONSERVATIVE)
MODIFIED (REDUCED)
.MODIFIED (INCLUDED DIV II COMPONENTS)
"NOTIFIED NRC (RED PHONE) 7/13/87
~ ~
RESULTS OF SURVEILLANCE TEST N2-OSP-GTS-R001 PERFORMED 7/17/87 INITIAL CONDIT IONS:
SERVICE WATER TEMPERATURE AMBIENT TEMPERATURE REFUEL FLOOR AVERAGE TEMPERATURE BUILDING QP AT START 74,45'F 65'F 84'F 0,0" W.C, TEST RESULTS:
DRAWDOWN TIME TO -.25" W,C, 66,18 SECONDS STEADY STATE INLEAKAGE FROM CHART 2100 CFM CHART INTERPRETATION:
CHART
¹1 SHOWS DISCHARGE FLOW OF THE FILTER TRAIN TO STACK
.INCREASING TO 3720 CFM AS THE TRAIN INITIATES AND STARTS BUILDING
- DRAWDOWN, AS THE PRESSURE CONTROLLER REACTS TO A
BUILDING PRESSURE OF
-,5" W, C, (CHART ¹2)
AND STARTS TO CONTROL BUILDING
- o.O S,C. .4"m C. \\ ~. ~ ~ .i ~ LO V e ~ INLEAKAGE ASSUMED DRAWDOWN TIME LOCA LOOP DIV I DIESEL AVAIL DIV I I DIESEL AVAIL DIV II 600V BUS AVAIL UNIT COOLER SETPOINT SEC CONT A IR TEMP SER WATER TEMP T UNIT COOLERS AVAILABLE NORMAL LIGHTING INCLUDED SPENT FUEL POOL HEAT it.QAD ASSUMED CASE I Ia MOD FSAR 3190 129 YES YES YES NO YES 85'F 91'F 77'F, 14'F DIV I + 2 SPARES NO NO MODIFIED (REDUCED) CASE I IIa SRP 3190 129 YES YES YES YES NO 85'F 93'F 77'F 16'F DIV I + 2 SPARES NO NO MODIFIED ( INCLUDED DIV I I COMP) ~ CASE IIIa - SRP SCENARIO INLEAKAGE (CFM) 3200 3000 2800 2600 2400 Pe 2200 Zg ('F) 10'2'4'6'8'ONDITIONS LOCA LOOP DIV I R DIV II START DIV II 600V LOAD CENTER FAILS UNIT COOLERS SET AT 85'F SERVICE WATER TEMPERATURE AT 76'F SPENT FUEL POOL HEAT LOAD NOT PRESENT DIV II EQUIPMENT HEAT LOADS PRESENT NO DIV II UNIT COOLERS OR SGTS MODIFIED FSAR HEAT LOAD ASSUMPTIONS ~ ~ POSSIBLE WORST POSSIBLE SCENARIO (OUTSIDE DESIGN'BASIS) INLEAKAGE ASSUMED DRAWDOWN TIME LOCA LOOP DI V I DIESEL AVAIL DIV I I DIESEL AVAIL DIV I I 600V BOARD AVAIL UNIT COOLER SETPOINT SEC CONT A IR TEMP SER WATER TEMP UNIT COOLERS AVAILABLE SPENT FUEL POOL "" NORMAL LI GHT ING HEAT LOAD ASSUMED 3190 129 YES NO YES YES 85'F 97'F 77'F 20'F DIV I + 2 SPARES NO NO (REQUIRES MOD TO SHED LIGHTING) DI V I 8 I I EQUIPMENT PLUS NON 1E HEAT LOADS ~ ~ DESCRIPTION OF ANNULUS AND THREE "D" COMPUTER MODELS THE ANNULUS COMPUTER CODE HAS THE FOLLOWING FEATURES: IT IS A SINGLE VOLUME MODEL IT MODELS THE OPERATION OF -THE SGTS THE BUILDING'S INLEAKAGE RATE IS MODELED OVER TIME THE BUILDING'S TOTAL TRANSIENT HEAT LOAD VERSUS TIME IS ENTERED THE BUILDING'S TOTAL UNIT COOLER HEAT REMOVAL IS MODELED BASED ON THE TRANSIENT AVERAGE BUILDING TEMPERATURE THE THREE "D" COMPUTER CODE CAN MODEL ALL OF THE ABOVE MENTIONED ANNULUS FEATURES THREE "D" ALSO ALLOWS THE REACTOR BUILDING TO BE MODELED AS MULTIPLE
- VOLUMES, THIS COMPARTMENTALIZATION BETTER REFLECTS THE HEAT LOAD DISTRIBUTION AND REMOVAL WITHIN THE REACTOR
- BUILDING, THE THREE "D"
MODEL TAKES ADVANTAGE OF THE HIGHER THERMODYNAMIC EFFICIENCY OF CERTAIN UNIT COOLERS THIS CANNOT BE REFLECTED BY AN ANNULUS CODE MODEL USING AN AVERAGE BUILDING TEMPERATURE. THIS ADDITIONAL MODELLING CAPABILITY OF THREE "D" SHOULD PRODUCE BETTER DRAWDOWN PERFORMANCES THAN AN EQUIVALENT ANNULUS MODEL, MAJOR HEAT SOURCES CAN BE LOCATED IN SUBCOMPARTMENTS, THESE SUBCOMPARTMENTS WILL HAVE LOCALIZED TEMPERATURES GREATER THAN THE AVERAGE BUILDING TEMPERATURE, THE RESULTING HIGHER ROOM TEMPERATURES ALLOW FOR MORE EFFICIENT HEAT REMOVAL THAN BY THE AVERAGE BUILDING TEMPERATURE USED BY THE ANNULUS CODE, ~ ~
SUMMARY
CURRENT PLANT OPERATIONS SUPPORTED BY:
ANALYSIS OF ORIGINAL FSAR CASE (MODIFIED) AND SRP CASE EXISTING PLANT CONDITIONS (TIGHT REACTOR BUILDING)
SAFETY EVALUATION (50,59)
"SECONDARY CONTAINMENT DESIGN BASIS" INCREASED SURVEILLANCE OF LEAK TIGHTNESS POWER LIMITATION 5OX IMPLEMENTATION OF ADMINISTRATIVE CONTROLS MINIMUM REACTOR BUILDING TEMPERATURE 85'F MINIMUM QT (REACTOR BUILDING - SERVICE WATER) 15'F JUSTIFY LONGER DRAWDOWN TIME WHICH WILL ALLOW SMALLER DT DEVELOPMENT OF EMERGENCY TECHNICAL SPECIFICATION CHANGE TO INCREASE SERVICE WATER FROM 76'F TO 77'F DEVELOPMENT OF TECHNICAL SPECIFICATION TO INCREASE SERVICE WATER TEMPERATURE FROM 76'F (77'F)
TO 82'F
- e. v H
'I