ML19221A970
| ML19221A970 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 03/31/1979 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| References | |
| NUREG-75-087, NUREG-75-087-02.4.14, NUREG-75-87, NUREG-75-87-2.4.14, SRP-02.04.14, SRP-2.04.14, NUDOCS 7907120087 | |
| Download: ML19221A970 (3) | |
Text
N U R EG-75/087
. t o g' f
o 3"
't U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION T m, S
~
i STANDARD REVIEW PLAN e
s OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION SECTION 2.4.14 TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS AND EMERGENCY OPERATION REQUIREMENTS l
REVIEW RESPONSIBILIH ES Primary - Hydrology #ateorology Branch (H"3)
Secondary - None I.
AREAS OF REVIEJ The purpose of this section of the applicant's safety analysis report (SAR) is to identify the technical specifications and eraergency procedures required to implement flood protec-tion for safety-related f acilities and to assure an adequate water supply for shutdown and cooldown purposes.
If there is evidence of potential structural effects, the Structural Engineering Branch (SEB) will be requested by HMS to a:certain whether these ef fects are properly considered in the structural design bases for the plant; similarly, ASB will be requested by HMS to ascertain whether these effects are properly considered in the systems design bases for the plant. Guidance for determining whether these pr effects are considared properly is outlined in. the appropriate SEB and ASB SRP sections.
II.
ACCEr TANCE CRITERIA If the hydrologic design bases (discussed in Regulatory Guide 1.59) developed in preceding sections do not necessitate technical specifications or emergency procedures to ensure safety related plant functions, this section should so state. It technical specificatior.s or emergency procedures are necessary this section will be acceptable if the following are identified:
1.
The controlling hydrologic events, as developed in the preceding sections of SAR Chapter 2.
2.
The actions to be taken, and the effect of si ch actions on the protection of safety-related facilities and wat'er supplies.
3.
The appropriate water levels and conditions at which action is to be initiated, 4.
The apprcpriate emergency procedures, and the amount of time required to implement each procedure.
USNRC STANDARD REVIEW PLAN st.a
._.i...
._ ace.e **
....._.wvo.,*..__.....o'a...f.i......ati.a...**.....n..i.e......*...v...iic.....e.ei.n.
_._...........__.._.............c.......,_....._.._......,_....
........... _._........._.._...__..c.__..,.....-.
._._ _..__ 9. g._. 0 0 5 c.._....._...._._._,......__..._......u.._........,c._..._....,_.
... o c -
7907l20051
III. PEVIEW PROCEDURES The review procedures c?nsist of comparing the proposed specifications and procedures with the ficod protection and water supply cesign bases derived in the preceding sectionc or considered necessary by the staff. Data in, or derived from, the preceding sections are used to ite the time available to complete any required emergency action (e.g.,
sandb; installing flood gates and stop logs). This information will also serve to substo.
che water levels and other conditions used to initiate the action.
Specific questions on the structural adequacy of protective measures are referred to Structural Engineering Branch, and the general exper ence of the Corps of Engineers in i
such situations, as reflected in reports and manuals. is the principal basis for comparison.
Issues involving shutdown water supplies should be coordinated with Auxiliary Systems Branch.
IV.
EVALUATION FINDINGS For both construction permit and operating license reviews the findings will consist of a brief statement of technical specifications and emergency procedures and time required to implement flood protection of safety related facilities and assure an adequate water supply for safety-related equipment. The flood or water levels and other conditions at which action is to be initiated will also be stated.
If none are required, the findings will so state.
A sample Operating License statem m follows:
"The staff has taken a position that it would te prudent to shut the plant down before water could reach plant glade during severe hurricanes. The apolicant has maintained that design of the safety-related facilities includes provision for protection. The staff believes the imple.'entation of emergency proced es, required in the event of severe hurricanes to assure the watertightness of exterior doors and to minimize the possible equipment failure which could occur during such an event (should the applicant's single water barrier design provisions not be adequate),
would be extremely difficult from a practicai standpoint. The staff
. 9 fore, will require a provision in the plant's Technical 5pecificatim, requiring a flood alert, referring to emergency procedures, when wmter levels exceed elevation 15 feet MSL.
In the c se of PMH, this would allow a minimum of about four hours before water would cross plant grade (seme six hours before maximum water levels would be reached) to implement e.w gency action. Examples of required action are: assuring all exteric-accesses are closed and sealeo, adequatt diesel fuel oil supplies are protev ed, sandbagging of vulnerable areas may be undertaken, and any necessary emergency equip-ment is available and operational. The weather conditions during such a situation would be severe (high winds, rain, the likelihood of tornadoes in the area, etc.),
but implementation of outdoor emergency procedures is considered reasonable if accom-plished before maximum storm conditions occur.
Rev. 1 2.4.14-2
"The applicant has installed a control room water level alarm that is activated when the water level in the intake canal reaches elevation 17.5 feet MSL.
The staff will require the same technical specification to necessitate an orderly plant shutdown upon activation of the alarm. The requirement is prudent in view of the single line of defense inherent in the water barriers installed by the applicant. Failure of such barriers with the reactor t or near operating levels would allow a very limited time, during extreme weather conditions, for plant operating personnel to prevent a major accident. No other technical specification provisions are considered necessary for hydrologically related events."
V.
REFERENCES Data and inforrr ition presented in, or derived from, previous SRP sections in the 2.4 series provide the basic eferencc material for this section.
1.
Regulatorv Guide 1.59, " Design Basis Floods for Nuclear Power Plants."
l 2.
ANSI N170, " Standards for Determining Design Basis floodinc; at Power Reactur Sites" I
(1976).
l 3.
Regulatory Guide 1.127, " Inspection o; Water-Control Structures Associated with l
Nuclear Power Plants. "
l v
f 4.
Regulatory Guide 1.102, " flood Protection for Nuclear Power Plants."
9 us m 2.4.14-3 Rev. 1