ML18139B971

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Forwards SER of Analysis Re Main Steam Line Break W/ Continued Feedwater Addition,Per IE Bulletin 80-04. Documentation Confirming Installation of Orifices to Limit Flow of Auxiliary Feedwater Requested
ML18139B971
Person / Time
Site: Surry  Dominion icon.png
Issue date: 07/14/1982
From: Varga S
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To: Leasburg R
VIRGINIA POWER (VIRGINIA ELECTRIC & POWER CO.)
References
IEB-80-04, IEB-80-4, NUDOCS 8207280280
Download: ML18139B971 (3)


Text

Docket Nos. 50-280 50-281 Mr. R.H. Leasburg JUL 14 I982 Distribution:

Docket File NRC PDR Local PDR ORB #1 Rdg DEisenhut OELD Vice President - Nuclear Operations Virginia Electric and Power Company Post Office Box 26666 OI&E (1)

DNei ghbors PHearn CParrish NSIC ACRS ( 10)

JHeltemes FRC Richmond, Virginia 23261

Dear Mr. Leasburg:

By letter dated May 8, 1980, you responded to NRC IE Bulletin No. 80-04, dated February 8, 1980 for Surry Power Station Unit Nos. l and 2.

The title of Bulletin No. 80-04 is "Analysis of a PWR Main Steam Line Break with Continued Feedwater Addition

  • 11 He have reviewed your analysis and conclude that the analysis is acceptable based on the installation of flow restricting orifices to limit the flow of auxiliary feedwater.

A copy of our Safety Evaluation is enclosed.

It is requested that you provide documentation within 30 days of receipt of this letter that the orifice; have been installed.

Enclosure:

As stated cc 1;1/encl:

See next page 8207280280 820714- -

PDR ADOCK 05000280 G

PDR CSBa._J:J

.... Fifretr~****...

t?Zq?:~:~:::::::::

NRG FORM 318 (10-80) NRCM 0240 Sincerely,

!Original signed by:*

s. A. Varga Steven A. Varga, Chief Operating Reactors Branch #1 Division of Licensing OFFICIAL RECORD COPY USGPO: 1981-335-960

--~----------------------

Mro Ro H. Leasburg Virginia Electric and Power Company cc:

Mr. Michael W. Maupin Hunton and Williams Post Office Box 1535 Richmond, V~rginia 23213 Mr. J. L. Wilson, Manager P. o. Box 315 Surry, Virginia* 23883 Swem Li bra ry College of William and Mary Williamsburg, Virginia 23185 Donald J. Burke, Resident Inspector Surry Power Station U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Post Office Box 166 Route l Surry, Virginia 23883 Mr. J. H. Ferguson Executive Vice President - Power Virginia Electric and Power Company Post Office Box 26666 Richmond, Virginia 23261 James P. O'Reilly Regional Administrator - Region II U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 101 Marietta Street, Suite 3100 Atlanta, Georgia -30303

  • f

. -----~ --::_

-~- --......

UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMM,ISSiON WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 SAFETY EVALUATION REPORT MAIN STEAM LrNE llREAK tH:TH CONTINUED FEEDWATER ADDITION SURRY NUCLEAR POWER PLANT, UNITS l AND 2 DOCKET NOS. 50-280/-281 Introduction

~: *-

T

-- -~,..... ---...... --

By letter dated May 8, 1980, Virginia *Electric and Power Company (the Licensee} res-ponded to NRC IE Bullettn 80-04, "Analysis* of a PWR Main Steam Line B'reak witft Continued Feedwater Addttion,n dated' Fe5.ruary 8, 1980.

)

Our Consultant, the Frankl in Researcn

  • Center (FRC}, ftas revtewed *the submittal made 5y tfte Licensee.

The FRC Technical Evaluation Report (JERl *ts attach.ed whtcfi provides the back-ground and results of tfte FRC review *

.Evaluation We have reviewed the FRC TER and concur in its bases and ftndi ngs with *the excepti'on of tfle FRC concl usfon tfl.at tfte AFW pumps will expertence runout condiUons*.

w*e feel tnat tlifs concl uston was tnadvertently drawn since on page 12, FRC states that tne fl ow restrtcttng ortfices should prevent the AFW pumps from experiencing the potentially damaging-operation at runout flow conditions*. s*ased on our revtew* we conclude the"following:

1. There is no potential for containment overpressurization resulting from a MStB* with continued feedwater additfon Because the main feedwater system*

ts i'solated and auxiltary feedwater flow res:trictions ltmtt flow to the affected stea~ generator;

2.

The Licensee should verify that the flow restricting orifices have been

, insta 11 ed in tfte AFW lines; and

3.

All potential water sources wete identified and, although the reactor may return-to-power, no DNB-viol atfon occurs; therefore, PS*AR reacttvtty increase analysis remains valid.

  • ~