ML19221B047
| ML19221B047 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 03/31/1979 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| References | |
| NUREG-75-087, NUREG-75-087-09.3.3, NUREG-75-87, NUREG-75-87-9.3.3, SRP-09.03.03, SRP-9.03.03, NUDOCS 7907120309 | |
| Download: ML19221B047 (6) | |
Text
NU R EG-75/087 pm rec v f
So
+
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
.C h,e"#\\'....j STANDARD REV EW PLAN 9
OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION SECTION 9.3.3 EQUIFMENT AND FLOOR DRAINAGE SYSTEM PEVIEJ RESPONSIBILITIES Primary - Auxiliary Systems Branch (ASB) l Secondary - Ef fluent Treatment Systens Branch (ETSB)
Contain ent Systems Branch (CSB)
P3diciogical Assessment Branch (RAB)
Power Systens Brancn (PSB) l I.
- EAS OF PEVIEW The equiprent and flcor drainage systen (EFDS) is designed to assure th3t waste liquids, valve and prp leakof f s, and tank drains are directed to the proper area for processing or disposal. The ASB reviews the eq3iprent and floor drainage systen, including the collecticn and disposal of liquid ef fluents outside containment. This includes piping and pumps from equipment or floor drains to the surps, and anj addi-tirn31 equipnent th3t nay be neces ary to reute effluents to the drain tanks and then to the radmaste systen 1.
The ASB reviews the EFDS capability to collect and dispose of all waste liquid effluents so that they will be processed in a centrolled and safe nanner. ASB will deternine that:
a.
The systen is capable of handling the volune of leakage expected, including the capacities of the sumps, drain tanks, and surp pumps.
b.
The systen is capable of preventing a backficw of water that night result fron naxkun flood levels to areas of the plant containing safety-related equipment.
c.
There is no potential for inadsertent transfer of contaninated f' aids to a non-contaminated drainage systen.
2.
The seismic design and quality group classifications of piping ana equiprent, and the bases for the classifications chosen are reviewed.
I Secondary reviews will be perfor d by other branches and the results used by the ASB to complete the overall evaluation of the systen. The secondary reviews are as fallows. The ETSP will provide verification that the radWaste systen is capable of USNRC STANDARD REVIEW PLAN Stenderd r inew pleae are propered for the guedence of the Omco o' Nucteer Reactor Reguter+on ete f responsible for the review of acphcottons to construct end r
operate pas leer power plants These documente ore made eve +iebse to the pubbc se part of the Commission a polec y to mf orm the nucteer mdustry and the general pis fee of regulatory procedures and potec%e Standard rew ow plane ore not ouboistures f or regulatory guides or the Commission s rogdevono end comphonce wettt ther le not requ4.W The ston/ard review plan sections are keyed to Revision 2 of the Sveriderd Formet end Content of Sef ety Arwtysis Repons for Muc4eer Power Pte..ts Not e i er etione of t'.e henoore Formet have a correspondmg review pian s
Pubhehod stenderd rem paens w4M e,-
, ee,: oorso d+c eity es appropnets to accommodete omments and to reflect new %f ormation and emperience Comments and e.ggestione f r improvement win se considered and should be sent to the U S Nucteer Reg Astory Commession O'fice of Nucteer Reactor Regutetsen. Weehmeton D C 20M6 namo3mq 148 2/6
- i
collecting, sampling, analyzing, and processing the ef fluents from the EfDS consistent with the requirerents fer disposal of rada3ste raterial. The CSS will verify that portions of the drain system penetrating the containment barricr are designed with acceptable isolation features to maintain containment integrity for all operating conditions including accidents. RAB vill verify that the systen will r eet occupational radiation protection criteria of Regulatory Guide.
PSB ve"ifies that power supplies for safety-related portions of the EfDS meet ;riteria appropriate to its safety function.
II. ACCEPTANCE CRITERIA 1.
Acceptability of the design of the equipnent and floor drainage systen, as described in the applicant's safety analysis report (SAR) is based on the system being designed to g.revent the flooding of areas housing safety-related equiprent and to prevent the inadvertent transfer of contaminated fluids to non-contaminated drainage systems for disposal.
2.
There are no general design criteria or regulatory guides that are dircctly applicable to the safety-related performance requirements for the EFDS. The ASB uses the following criteria to detemine if portions.. the EFDS are safety related:
a.
If the sjstem is capable of detecting leaks in safety systems that utilize the drainage system sumps, and is the only means for such leakage detection, it is considered safety-related in this reg 3rd, b.
If the system can cause the inundation of safety-related areae due to d.ain backflow that ray result from malfunction of active components, blockage or l
the probable maximu'i flood, it is considered safety-related in this area.
c.
If the system is connected so that an inadvertent transfer of contaminated fluids to nor -contaninated drainage systems can occur, it is considered s3fety-related in this area.-
3.
The general design criteria and regulatory guides utilized in review of those portions of the systen where failure or malfunction could result in adverse effects on essential systens or components (i.e., necessary for safe shutdown, accident prevention, or accidant mitigatio1) are as follows:
a.
General Design Criterion 2. as related to the capability of withstanding the effects of natural phenomena such as earthquakes, tornadoes, hurricanes, and floods.
Rev. 1 9.3.3-2 I
b.
General Design Criterion 4, with respect to the capability of withstanding the effects of external missiles and internally generatcd miasiles, pipe whip and jet impingement forces associated with pipe breaks.
Regulatory Guide 1.29, as related to the seismic design classification of c.
components.
d.
Regulatory Guide 8.8, as related to maintaining occupational radiation exposure as low as practicable.
Branch Technical Positions ASB 3-1 and MEB 3-1, as related to breaks in e.
high and moderate energy piping systems cutside containme't.
I For those areas of review identified in subsection 1 of this SRP section as being the rtsponsibility of other branches, the acceptance criteria and their methods of application are contained in the SRP sections corresponding to those branches.
III. REVIEW PROCEDURES The procedures below are used during the cc istruction permit (CP) review to determine that the design criteria and bases and the preliminary design as set forth in the preliminary safety analysis report meet the acceptance criteria given in subsection II.
For review of operating license (OL) applications, the procedures are utilized to verify that the initial design criteria and bases have tieen appropriately implemented in the final design as set forth in the final safety analysis,eport.
Upon request from the primary reviewer, the secondary review branches will provide input for the areas of review st 9d in subsection I.
The primary reviewer obtains and uses such in at as required to assure that this review procedure is complete.
I The reviewer will select and emphasize materi.1 from this SRP section, as may be appropriate for a particular case.
1.
The SAR is reviewed to see that the EFDS description section, layout drawings, and piping and instrumentation diagrams (P& ids) show the ETDS layout and aquipment, including pumps and valves necessary for routing ef fluents, the minimun, 6 3in tank capacity system flow requirennts, connections to areas containing safety-related equipment or to non-contaminated drain systems, and any use made of the EFDS for leakage detection for safety-related systems. The reviewer determines which portions of the EFDS have safety functions or can adversely affect safety-related systems, using the criteria of subsection 11.2, above.
These " essential" portions of the EFDS are then reviewed on the basis of the criteria cf subsection II.3, as is described in the pa,'agraps that follow.
9 m m 9.3.3-3 Rev. i
2.
The EfDS performance requirements section of the SAR is reviewed to confirm that it describes component allowable operational degradation (e.g., drain blockage, sump pump leakage, or failures) for saftty-related portions of the system and describes the procedures that will be followed to detect and correct th9se conditions if they become excessive. The reviewer deterr.ines that essential portions of the system can sustain the loss of any active component and meet minimum system requirements. The system P&lDs, layout drawings, and component descriptions and characteristics a'e then reviewed for the following point 4 a.
Essential portions of the EFDS are correctly identified and are isolable from the non essential portions of the system to the extent required by system performance requirements.
b.
Essential portions of the EFDS are classified Quality Group C or higher and seismic Category I.
Components and system descriptions in the SAR are reviewed to verify that the seismic and safety classifications have b'en included, and that the P& ids indicate any points of change in piping quo.ity group classification.
3.
The reviewer verifies that the system safety functions will be maintained, as required, in the event of adverse environmental phenomena such as earthquakes, tornadoes, hurricanes, and floods, or in the event of certain pipe breaks.
The reviewer evalusies the system, using engineering judgment, failure modes and effects analyses, and the results of reviews performed under other SRP sections, l
te determine that; Failure of non essential portions of the system, or of other systems not a.
designed to seismic Category I Standards and located close to essential portions of the system, or of non-seismic Category I structures that house, support, or are close ta essential portions of the EFDS, will not preclude operation of the essential portions of the EFDS. Reference to SAR Chaptar 2 (which describes site features) and the general arrangement and layout drawings will be necessary. Statements in the SAR to the effect that the above conditions are met are acceptable.
b.
System capability to prevent drain or flood water frcm backing up in the drainage system into areas housing safety related equipment has been incor-porated. Statements in the SAR that this capability is proviGed are acceptable.
c.
Provisions are made in the system to control and direct the flow of radio-active waste fluids to the radwaste area.
It will be acceptable if the system P& ids and design criteria show that the potential for inadvertent traasfer of co taminated fluids to noncontaminated drainage system for disposal has been precluded.
Rev. I 9 3'3~4 i f, C
') Q t O
I f iUl
d.
Essential portions of the system are protected from the effects of high and moderate energy line breaks. cayout drawings are reviewed to assure that no high or moderate energy siping systems are close to essential portions of the EFDS, or that pro'.ectivn f rom the ef fects of f ailui e will be provided.
The means of providinr, such protection will be given in Section 3.6 of the SAR, and the procedures for reviewing this information are given in the corresponding SRP sections.
l 4.
The descriptive information, P& ids, EFDS drawings, and failure modes and effects analyses in the SAR are reviewed to assure that essential portions of the system can function as required following design basis accidents, assuming a concurrent failure of a single active component. The reviewer evaluates the analyses presented in the SAR to assure function of required components, traces the availability of these components on system drawings, and checks that the SAR contains verification that minimum system flow requirements are met for each accident situation f or the required time spans.
For each case, the design will be acceptable if minimum system requirements are met.
IV.
EVALUATION FINDINGS The reviewer verifies that sufficient information has been provioed and his review supports conclusions of the following type, to be included in the staff's safety evaluation report:
"The equipment and floor drainage system includes all piping from equipment or floor drains to the sump, the sump pumps, and the assoc ated pumps anc piping network necessary to route effluents to the drain tanks and then to the radwaste system.
[The review has determined the adequacy of the applicant's proposed l
design iiiteria and bases for the equipment and floor drainage system, and the requirements for continuous removal of liquids fram areas containing safety-related eg.!pment during normal, abnormal, and accident conditions. (CP)] [The review has determir.ed that the applicant's design of the equipment and floor drainage systems is in conformance with the design criteria and bases.
(OL)]
"The basis for acceptance in the staff review has been conformance of the appli-cant's des.1s and design criteria for the essential portions of the equipment and floor drainage system and necessary auxiliary supporting systems to the Commission's regulations as set forth in the general design criteria, and to applicable regulatory guides, staff technical positions, and industry standards.
"The staff concludes that the design of the equipment and floor drainage system conforms to all applicable regulations, guides, staff positions, and industry standards, and is acceptable."
148 282 9.3.3-5 Rev. I
V.
REFERENCES _
l.
10 CF'i Part 50, Appendix A, General Design Criterion 2. " Design Bases for Protection Igainst Natural Phenomena. '
10 CFR Part 50, Apperdix A, General Design Criterion 4, " Environmental and Missile Design Bases.'
3.
Regulatory Guide 1.29, " Seismic Design Classification.'
4.
Regulatory Guide 1.26, " Quality Group Classifications and Standards For Water,
Steam, and Radioactive-Waste-Containing Components of Nuclear Power Plants.
5.
Regulatory Guide 8.8, "Information Relevat
.a Maintaining Occupational Radiaticr.
Exposure As low As Practicable ( L clear Reactors).'
6.
Branch Technical Positions ASB 3-1, " Protection Against Postulated Piping Failures in Fluid Systems Ou. side Centainment," attacned to SRP Section 3.6.1, l
and MEB 3-1, " Postulated b.eak and Leakage Locations in Fluid System Piping Outside Containment, 4'.tached to SRP Section 3.6.2.
l 9
O Rev. 1 9,3.3-6