ML18044A770

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Forwards Request for Info Re Containment Environ Conditions & Sys Required for Accident Mitigation for Review of Environ Qualification of Class IE Electrical Equipment.Nrc Will Estimate Time for Containment Temp to Return to Near Normal
ML18044A770
Person / Time
Site: Big Rock Point, Palisades  File:Consumers Energy icon.png
Issue date: 03/28/1980
From: Ziemann D
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To: Hoffman D
CONSUMERS ENERGY CO. (FORMERLY CONSUMERS POWER CO.)
References
TASK-03-12, TASK-3-12, TASK-RR NUDOCS 8004210190
Download: ML18044A770 (16)
v • d • e


Text

  • -

r*

_. -~-* -

~

--~--** *** *.

.... ;.1.~::.::.._;;*

\\.

  • . 1.
!<et Nos. 50-155,

' 50-255 2 8 19$0 DISTRIBUTION:

  • -** ~-

Docket Nos. 50- 155, -ru-55* :::>

NRC PDR 50-155, 50-255 :

Local PDR 50~155, 50-255.

TERA' -

Mr.* David P. Hoffman Nuclear Licensing Administrator. : -

Consumers Power Coflllany 212 West ~ichigan Avenue -**

P.artford, Connecticut *. 06101.

~

Dear Mr~ Colins ii:

~----*.

ORB #2 Reading

. NRR Reading.

. DLZiematin *

-HSniith

  • RSilver TJCarter

_. -WRusse 1J.

~

-~ Attorney, OELD.

OI&E (3).

RE:

ENVIRONMENTAL. QUALIFICATION OF_. ~LECTRICAL EQU.'i.PMEtH..

~*-.. -*. *.

1 ** -

Reference 1:. Guidelines for-eval.uating *environmental qualification of.Class*

IE Electrical Equipment in operating *reactors - Enclosure 1 to*

  • NRC letter to licensees, dated February 15, 1980.

Reference 2:. Guidelines for identification of that safety cqufpment' of SEP operating reactors for which environmental qualification is to be addressed - Enclos_ure 2 to same lett-er.

In a previous let;ter, dated March 6, 1980, we provided an accelerated review schedule for this program~ *We also indicated that with re.spect to containment environmental conditions and systems *required for accident *mitigation, we would request additional information and provide some clarificatio'n of the guidelines (References 1 and 2)..

The clarifjcations, the*information that we will need,.and the dates*vte will.need it are described in Enclosures l, 2 and 3.

In some cases, we need information prior to the nominal "submittal dates" listed on the basic-schedule in our letter of March 6, 1980.

However, considering the nature of these.itews, \\"ebeljeve that you can easily-provide them when they are needed.

One *c-larificatfon. is that the NRC staff will estimate, for each facility, the time it takes for containment temperature and pressure conditions to return to near normal. -In addition, our approach for dealing with plant.

specific co.ntai nrr.ent temperat~re* and *pressure ana 1yses is described *.

  • The information-_ requested by this letter and.by ~ur previous letter. dated M_arch 6,

Please provide tne infpr-

  • mation described in the: enclosures by the *dates indicated. - As stated in the-;*.** * **

enclosures, \\'le \\'lill be discussing some of the items with your personnel in* the..

near future.* Contact us if you have _any questions or comments. on these matters. ** *.

Sincerely, b'riginaJ sic:nC'd by Der,nis L. Zic-ma~n

  • DATE~

f........ *.*.*::::.

it:.
1
{

UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 Docket Nos. 50-155, 50-255 Mr. David P. Hoffman Nuclear Licensing Administrator Consumers Power CorrqJany 212 West Michigan Avenue Hartford, Connecticut 06101

Dear Mr. Counsil:

March 28, 1980 RE:

ENVIRONMENTAL QUALIFICATION OF ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT Reference l: *Guidelines for evaluating environmental qualification of Class IE Electrical Equipment in operating reactors - Enclosure l to NRC letter to licensees, dated February 15, 1980.

Reference 2~ Guidelines for identificati.on of that safety equipment of SEP operating reactors for which environmental qualification is to be. addressed - Enclosure 2 to same letter.

In a previous letter, dated March 6, 1980, we provided an accelerated review schedule for this program *. We also indicated that with respect to containment environmental conditions and systems required for accident mitigation, we would request additional information and provide some clarification of the guidelines*

(References l and Z)~

The clarifications, the information that we will need, and the dates we will need it are described in Enclosures 1, 2 and 3.

In some cases, we need information prior to the nomi na 1 "submi tta.l dates" 1 i sted on the basic schedule in our letter of March 6, 1980.

However, considering the nature of these items, we believe that you. can easily provide them wh~n they are needed.

One clarification is that the NRC staff will estimate, for ea'.ch facility, the time it takes for containment temperature and pressure conditions to return to near normal.

In addition, our approach for dealing with.plant specific containment temperature and pressure analyses is described.

The information requested by this letter and by our previous letter dated March 6, 1980, is being requested pursuant to 10 CFR 50.54{f) *. Please provide the infor-mation described in the enclosures by the dates indicated.

As stated in the enclosures, we.will be discussing some of the items* with your personnel in the near future *. Contact us if you have any questions or comments on these matters.

Sincerely,

~~~~~ {.*7.u,.*~~

Dennis L. Zieman~* Chief Operating Reactors Branch #2 Division of Operating Reactors

Mr. David P. Hoffman cc w/enclosures:

M~ I. Miller, Esquire Isham, Lincoln & Beale Suite 4200 One First National Plaza Chicago, Illinois 60670 Mr. Paul A. Perry, Secretary Consumers Power Company 212 West Michigan Avenue Jackson, Michigan 49201 Judd l. Bacon, Esquire Consumers Power Company 212 West Michigan Avenue Jackson, Michigan 49201 Myron M. Cherry, Esquire Suite 4501 on*e IBM Plaza Chicago, Illinois 60611 Kalamazoo Public Library 315 South Rose Street Kalamazoo, Michigan 49006 Hunton & Williams George C. Freeman, Jr., Esquire P.

  • 0
  • Box 1535

-Richm6nd, ~i~ginia 2321~

Peter w. Steketee, Es~uire 505 Peoples Building Grand Rapids, Michigan 49503 Charlevoix Public Library l 07 Clint on.Street Charlevoix, Michigan 49720 Ms. Mary P. Sinclair Great Lakes Energy Alliance 5711 Summerset Drive.

Midland, Michigan 48640 March 28, 1980 Charles Bechhoefer, Esq., Chairman Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel

u. S. Nuclear Regulatory Corrrnission Washington, D. c.

20555 Dr. George c. Anderson Department of Oceanography University of-Washington Seattle, Washington 98195 Dr. M. Stanley Livingston 1005 Calle Largo

  • Santa Fe, New Mexico 87501 Sheldon, Harmon and Weiss 1725 I Street, N~ W~

Suite 506 Washington, D. c.

20006

  • Mr. John O'Nei.11, II Route 2, Box 44 Maple City, Michigan. 49664 Herbert Grossman, Esq.; Chairman Atomic Safety and Licensing Board
u. S. Nuclear Regulatory Corrrnission Washington, D. c.

20555 Dr. Oscar H. Paris Atomic Safety and Licensing BoTard U. S. Nuclear Regu 1 atory Corrrni ss ion

20555 Mr. Frederick J. Shon Atomic Safety ahd Licensing Board

u. s. Nucle.ar Regulatory Corrrnission.

Washington, D. c.

20555 Big Rock Point Nu cl ear Power Pl ant ATTN:

Mr. C. J. Hartman Plant Superintendent Charlevoix, Michigan 49720

Mr. David P. Hoffman cc

  • w/enc 1 osures:

Chainnan County Board of Supervisors Charlevoix County Ch~rlevoix, Michigan 49720 Office of the Governor (2)

Room l - Capitol Building Lansing, Michigan 48913 Director, Technical Assessment Division Office of Radiation Programs

{AW-459)

U. s. Environmental Protection Agency.

Crystal Mal 1 * #2 Arlington, Virginia 20460 U. S. Envi~onmental Protection Agency Federal Activities Branch Region V Office ATTN:

EIS COORDINATOR

. 230 South Dearborn Street Chicago, Illinois 60604 Resident Inspector c/o U. S. NRC P. O. Box 87 South Haven, Michigan Palisades Plant.

ATTN:

Mr. J. G. Lewis Plant Manager Covert, Michigan 49043 Township Supervisor Covert Township Route 1, Box 10 49090 Van Buren County, Mi chfgan 49043 Christa-Mari a Route 2, Box 108C Charlevoix, Michigan 49720 March 28, 1980

ENCLOSURE l SCHEDULE FOR AND DISCUSSION OF SUBMITTALS Emergency Plant Procedures(l)

Palisades Already provided Oyster Creek Already provided.

Gi nna*

Al ready provided Zion 2 Already provided Indian.Point 3 A 1 ready

. provided Zion 1.

Already provided

  • Indian Point 2 Al ready provided Millstone l Already provided Haddam Neck Already provided Dresden 2 As soon as possible San Onofre A 1 ready provided Dresden 1.

As soon as.

possible Yankee Rowe As soon as possible Lacrosse As soon as possible Big Rock Point As soon as possible Data for Calculation of Containment Pressure and Temperature Decay (2)

Currently under review (3)

Currently

  • under review(3)

Currently under re vi ew ( 3)

Not needed Not needed May l Not needed May May May l May May l Information on Systems to Mitigate Events Currently under re vi ew(4)

May l (5)

Information on Containment T e!Jlleratu re and Pressure(6)

May l May l

  • Denotes submittal dates which are the same as the general submittal dates given in on overall schedule in our letter of March 6, 1980.

See following pages for numbered notes.

NOTE:.,:

1.

We have previously discussed the emergency procedures with your personnel.

They are part of the main submittal as defined in item (4) of Reference 2.

We are requesting them earlier. simply as an aid to begin considering, as soon as possible, the systems required to mitigate postulated events.

In this light, send copies of the procedures that are currently in effect,

  • regardless whether or not you may be changing them in the future.

If you revise them prior.to the site visit by adding or deleting equipment, please let us know.

However, we do not intend for these to be forma 1 file copies that require updating.

2.

The data ne.eded for the calculation of containment temperature and pressure decay are defined in Enclosure 2.

Thi.s is a basic requirement for judging whether or not the qualification tests meet the guidelines as discussed in Section 5.2 of Reference 1.

Since the data relate only to the roost current LOCA analysis on the docket that defines the service conditions for equipment qualification, they should be readily available and may have already been submitted in many instances.

3. *Since we need the Enclosure 2 information on Palisades, Oyster Creek and Ginna qui:te early, we will telephone your personnel to request, spec-ifically, the items we cannot readily find in the docket.
4.

The systems required to mitigate events are currently under review for

  • Palisades.

The material submitted on this subject for this plant will subsequently be elevated to the level of other plant submittals by specific questions.

5.

In re.lation -to our other letter on* the basic schedule, Oyster Creek should consider this as a further specific request for information;.i.e., submit the listings related to systems needed to mitigate the postulated eve11ts the same as most of the other facilities. -

6. pertains only if performing a new plant-specific containment ana-

. lyses.

With respect to containment pressure and temperature conditions, all plants will have previously identified the roost current approved LOCA analysis that has been submitted and wi 1l have provided pertinent data (see Note 2 and ).

Accardi ng to the guidelines (Reference l):

A.

Some plants (PWRs with prOITJlt automatic redundant containment spray systems) simply use the existing LOCA analysis as the.basis for qua l i-f i cation.

B.

Other plants (PWRs that do not have such spray systems) are to include a plant specific steam line break analysis in the basis for qualification.

C.

BWRs are to use 340°F for 6 hours6.944444e-5 days <br />0.00167 hours <br />9.920635e-6 weeks <br />2.283e-6 months <br /> as. the basis for judging whether individual co111>onent qualifications meet the guidelines.

However, at the meet i n*g on February 21, 1980, some 1 i censees indicated that they might want to use plant specific analyses-to justify less severe conditions.

This would be an exception to the guidelines rather than something required or permitted in the guidelines. In the long run, the technical issue is the same -* whether or not a plant specific analysis justifies less severe conditions than 340°F for 6 hours6.944444e-5 days <br />0.00167 hours <br />9.920635e-6 weeks <br />2.283e-6 months <br />.

We plan to pursue the following matters with each licensee within about the next month:

1) Whether PWR containment spray system features, such as time delays, single failure. vulnerabilities or high pressure setpoints, might be changed rather than performing plant specific analyses.
2) Whether some of the BWRs should simply be treated under the PWR guidelines due to their unique design.

For example, Oyster Creek appears to have an effective containment spray system that meets our guidelines and would suppress high temperatures.

3)

Which BWR licensees plan to use plant specific analyses to justify less severe conditions.

  • 4)

Whether any plant specific analyses that may already exist (for PWRs or BWRs) appear to be suitable.

5)

Whether newer analyses done elsewhere appear suitable. For example, since Zion and Indian Point are relatively modern Westinghouse plants there may be existing analyses on similar plants that could quickly provide reason-able temperature estimates.

I.t may turn out that in some cases that pl ant specific analyses are needed and a new analysis will have to be performed.

If it is not possible to submit the new analysis by the submittal dates listed, your best estimate of the conditions that you believe you can eventually justify ~hould be provided, along with the schedule that you can meet for providing the new analysis results.

In the meantime, Enclosure 3.. describes the information that we will need

. for review in those cases where plant specific analyses are to be used -.

  • either to satisfy the guidelines {PWRs without automatic redundant spray) or to justify an exception to the guidelines (BWRs that choose to justify 340°F for 6 hours6.944444e-5 days <br />0.00167 hours <br />9.920635e-6 weeks <br />2.283e-6 months <br />).

As indicated in the guidelines, where the IJl>St current LOCA analysis is.to be used {PWRs with automatic redundant sprays), we need no furthe information and plan no further review of that analysis for the purpose of this accelerated environmental qualification review program.

Later, however, we will evaluate the containment integrity analyses under SEP Topics VI-2.d and VI~3.

ENCLOSURE 2 DATA NECESSARY FOR THE STAFF CALCULATION OF CONTAINMENT TEMPERATURE ANO PRESSURE DECAY TIME.

One of the early items in our review consists of the staff calculating, prior to the site visit where possible, the time that it will take for containment temperature and pressure cond.itions to return to essentially the conditions that existed prior to the assumed accident. This wi 11.be needed in order to judge the adequacy.of the qualification test duration as discussed in Section 5.2 of Reference 1.

in order to perform these calculations quickly, we 'will base.them' on the current LOCA analysis and we will need the following information with respect to that analysis (by submittal or reference to previous submittals).

I. Reference the roost current LOCA analysis on the docket that defines the service conditions to be used. in equipment qualification.

With respect to that analysis, provide the following:*

A.

Containment Net Free Volume B.

Passive Heat Sinks Identify structures, components and equipment that act as passive heat sinks within the containment.

Provide the following information:

1) total exposed heat transfer surface area with *clarification if the exposed area is for one or both sides of the material
2) total equivalent thickness
3) thermo-physical properties (i.e.,

conductivity).

c.

Initial Containment Conditions density, specific h~at and thermal Initial containment atmosphere conditions for:

  • . 1) temperature
2) pressure
3) relative humidity O.

Containment Spray System

1) Parameters and their set points to activate spray *
2)

Spray system activation time The time associated with each of the folfowing is needed (indicate whether or not they are addi t 1 ve) :

a) time elapsed until signal to activate spray system is reached b) time elapsed between reaching signal to activate spray and contact*

closure (tot a 1 instrumentation lag ti me) c) time required for diesel generator to attain full operating speed d) time required for loading of containment spray pump e) time requir~d to open isolation valve f) time required for containment spray pump to achieve full speed g) ti.me required to fill spray system piping and deliver water to spray header

3)

Identify the spray heat exchanger type, such as U-tube, crossflow, or counterflow.

E.

Fan Cooler System

1)

Delay. time *before the fan cooler beco~s effective for heat remi:>val (similar information to Item D.2 above)

2)

Heat removal capability of the fan cooler.

Provide a curve or table of the energy removal rate as a function of containment temperatures.

The containment temperature should be in the range of 70°F to 400°F.

F.

Identify any other containment heat removal* system that affects the con-tainment temperature response.

Provide the same type of information as in I tern D above.

G.

Provide a discussion of th~ single failure assumed in the analysis.

H.

Mass and Energy Release Data Provide the mass and energy release rate data for the postulated pipe break considered.

  • II.* Figure l and 2 represent typical ECCS and spray systems relied on to mitigate the consequences of a pipe break.

Provide the information indicated in the figures; if the plant specific systems differ from the attached figures. revise the drawings to represent your facility.and provide the appropriate information.

When providing system parameters, indicate whether the values given assume a single failure and specify the single failure assumption.

Spray GPM

'f r-----i -----

GPM Ga11ons oF Spill cP~

Temp

. FIGURE.1 INJECTIOf'I PHASE

Residual Spray Flow To Core GPM I

"l Reactor To Spil 1 GPM GPM q Containment Spray Flow Total Recirc. Flow GPM Containment Spray H~ UA x106.*

Cooling Water Temp OF RHR (Shutdown) HX UA x106 Cooling Water Temp or GPM FIGURE 2 RECIRCULATION PHASE Cooling Water Flow GPM Cooling

~ater Flow GPM RECIRCULATION PHASE

ENCLOSURE 3-IN FORMATION NECESSARY FOR STAFF REVIEW OF PLANT SPECIFIC CONTAINMENT ANALYSES In some cases (described in Note 6 of Enclosure 1), plant specific containment analyses (other than the current LOCA analyses) will be needed.

For those cases, we will need the following infonnation about the plant specific analyses for our review:

I. Any changes to the infonnation provided in response to Enclosure 2, including Figures l and 2.

II. Mass and Energy Release Data Provide the mass and energy release rate data for the pipe breaks considered.

Reference to existing data previously submitted to the staff 1s acceptable.

Reference or describe lll!thods used to calculate mass and energy releases.

Additional information required which describes the plant mass and energy inventories (PWR):

l ) *Reactor rated power

2)

Steam flow rate per steam generator at ful 1 speed

3) Fluid mass in each steam generator at full power and hot shutdown

. 4) Fluid energy in each steam generator at full power and hot shutdown

5)

Steam line flow area

6) nme when steam isolation valves will close following a main steam line break
7)

Mass of unisolated steam between a steam generator and the isolation valve following closure of 111ain steam isolation valves.

8) Additional aaass of unisolated steam if the 111in steam 1solltion valve nearest the break fails to close.
9)

Main feedwater line flow area

10) Hain feedwater enthalpy
11) Tiine when main feedwater isolation valves will close following a main steam line break
12) Mass and te~erature of feedwater between a steam generator and the fee<Mater isolation valve
13) Mass and te~erature of feedwater above 240°F between a steam generator and any redundant feedwater isolation valve 14} 'Mass and teq>erature of all feedwater above 240°F

--'-'--'=-*---,, ___ JE))__

Au_~-11ia_n:_.feegwa~er flow rate and enthalpy

17)

Time when core-flooding system will begin injection following a LOCA

  • 18). Fluide mass in the reactor system at full power and hot shutdown
19)
  • Fluid-energy in the reactor system at full power and hot shutdown
20) - Hot and cold leg line flow areas
21) Core flooding system flow rate. and t~erature
22)

Sensible heat in the core and reactor system netal that is above 240°F.

at full power operation

23). Initial hot and cold leg te~eratures Additional information required which describes the plant mass and energy inventories (BWR - except dual cycle):

1 )

Reactor rated power

2)

Steam fl<)w rate at full power

3)
  • FliJid mass in the* reactor system at full power and hot shutdown
4)

Fluid. energy in the reactor system at full power and hot shutdown

5)

Steam line flow area

6)

Time when steam isolation valves will clOse following a main steam -

1 i ne break

7)

Mass of unisolated steam between the 'reactor vessel and the isolation valve following closure of main steam isolation valves.

8)

Additional mass of unisolated steam if the main steam isolation valve nearest the break fails* to close

9)

Main feedwater line flow area

.10)

11)
12)

Main feedwater enthalpy Time. when main feedWater isolation valves will. close following a main steam line break Mass and tel'!l>er'ature of feedwater between the reactor vessel and the feedwater isolation valve T

';I.

  • 13)

Mass and te~erature.of feedwater above 240°F between the reactor vessel and any redundant feedwater isolation valve "14)

Mass and t!fll>erature of all feedwater above 240°F

15)

Time when core spray injection will begin following a main steam 11ne break

16)

Core spray flow rate and telJl)erature

17)

Time when core flooding system will begin injection following a main steam line break lS)

Core flooding system flow rate and t~~rature

19)

Sensible heat in the core and reactor system metal that is above 240°F at full pawer operation When pro vi ding system parameters, indicate whether the values given assume a single failure and specify the single failure. assu01'tion.

Figures*1 and 2 represent typical ECCS and spray sytstems relied on to mitigate the consequences of a pipe break.

Provide the information indicated in the figures, if the plant specific systems differ from the attached figures, revise the drawings to represent your facility and provide the appropriate information.

Spray 6PM GPM Gallons Spill GPM Temp FIGURE 1 - INJECTION PHASE

To Residual Spray Flow Core GPM Reactor To Spill GPM GPM

.. 5 -.

Containment Spray Flow

.&PM Total Recirc. Flow GPM

... Containment Spray HX UA x106 Cooling Water Temp Of RHR.(Shutdown) HX UA x106 Cooling Water Temp o*F

. Coo11ng GPM.

Water Flow Cooling Water Flow GPM RECIRCULATION PHASE FIGURE 2

  • RECIRCULATION PHASE

_.,.

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=ML18044A770&oldid=5025635"