ML19305E431

Forwards Addl Info & Clarification Re Guide for Evaluating Environ Qualification of Class IE Electrical Equipment in Operating Reactors & for Identification of Appropriate Safety Equipment of SEP Reactors

ML19305E431
Person / Time
Site:	Indian Point
Issue date:	03/20/1980
From:	Schwencer A Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:	Berry G POWER AUTHORITY OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK (NEW YORK
Shared Package
ML100321102	List: ML19305E431
References
NUDOCS 8004240163
Download: ML19305E431 (15)

Text

N

,# "h g'%

(($, -- f j UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 7.g 'QM/, E E

WASHINGTON. D. C. 20$55

• *!GM'.)/

s -

March 20, 1980 Docket No. 50-286 Mr. George T. Berry, Executive Director Power Authority of the State of New York 10 Columbus Circle New York, New York 10019

Dear Mr. Berry:

RE: ENVIRONMENTAL QUALIFICATION OF ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT Reference 1:

Guidelines for evaluating environmental qualification of Class IE Electrical Equiptrent in operating reactors - Enclosure 1 to NRC letter to licensees, dated February,1980.

Reference 2: Guidelines for identification of that safety equipment of SEP operating reactc.s for which environmental qualification is to be addressed - Enclosure 2 to same letter.

In a previous letter, dated March 5,1980, we provided an accelerated review schedJle 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 1 and 2).

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

In so e cases, we need information prior to the nominal " submittal dates" listed on the basic schedule in our letter of March 5,1980. However, considering the nature of these items, we believe that you can easily provide them when they are needed.

One clarification is that the NRC staff will estimate, for each f acility, 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.

Please provide the information described in the enclosures by the cates indicated.

As stated in the enclosures, we will be di: cussing some of the items with your personnel in the near future.

Contact us if you have any questions or contnents on these matters.

Sincerelyf b

., /M.f,,... a..

nd' I. Schwencer, Chief Operating Reactors Branch #1 Division of Operating Reactors 3

8004240

Mr. George T. Berry Power Authority of the State of New Ycrk March 20, 1980

Enclosures:

As stated cc w/ enclosures:

White Plains Public Library Mr. J. P. Bayne, F.asident Manager 100 Martine Avenue Indian Point 3 Nuclear Power Plant White Plains, New York 10501 P. O. Box 215 Buchanan, New Yort 10511 Mr. Yito J. Cassan Assistant General Counsel Mr. J. W. Blake, Ph.D., Director Power Authority of the Environmental Prograns State of New York Power Authority of the 10 Columbus Circle State of New York N ew Y ork, New Y ork 10019 10 Columbus Circle New York, New York 10019 Anthony 2. Roisman Theodore A. Rebelowski Natural Resources Defense Council U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission 917 - 15th Street, N.W.

P. O. Box 38 Washington, D. C.

20005 Buchanan, New Yort 10511 Dr. Lawrence D. Quarles Ms. Ellyn Weiss Apartment 51 Sheldon, Harmon and Weiss Kendal at Longsood 1725 1 Street, N.W.

Kennett Square, Pennsylvania 19348 Suite 506 Washington, D. C.

20006 Mr. Ge:rge M. Wilverding Licensing Supervisor Power Authority of the State of New York 10 Columbus Circle New York, New Yort 10019 Mr. P. W. Lycn Manager - Nuclear Operations Power Authority of the State of New York 10 Columbus Circle New Y crk, New Y ort 10019 1

l

ENCLOSURE 1, SCHEDULE FOR AND DISCUSSION OF SUBMITTALS Data for Calculation of s

Containment

~Information on Pressure and Information on Containment Emergency Tegerature Systems to Te@ erature Plant Procedures (l)

Decay (2)

Mitigate Events and Pressure Palisades As soon as Currently Currently under May 1 possible under review review (4)

(3)

Oyster Creek Already Currently May 1(5)

May 1 provided under review (3)

Ginna Already Currently provided underreview(3)

Zion 2 Already provi ded Indian Point 3 Already p rovided Zion 1 Already provided Indian Point 2 Already provided Millstone 1 As soon as May 1 possible Haddam Neck As soon as May 1 possible Dresden 2 As soon as May 1 possible San Onofre As soon as May 1 possible i

Dresden 1 As soon as May 1 possible Yankee Rcwe As soon as May 1 possible Lacrosse As soon as May 1 possible Big Rock Point As soon as May 1 possible

• Den :es submittai dates which are the same as the general submittal dates given in en overall schedule in our letter of March 5,1980.

See folicwia.g pages for numbered notes.

2'.

4 NOTES:

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 systecs required to mitigate postulated events.

In this light, sand 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 formal file copies that require updating.

2.

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

This 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 most 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 quite early, we will telephone your personnel to request, specifically, the items we cannot readily find in the docket.

4.

The systems required to mitigste events are currently under review for Palisades. The material submitted on this subject for this plant will subsequently be clevated to the level of other plant submittals by specific questions.

5.

In relation to our other letter on the basic schedule. Oyster Creek should consider this as a further specific request fcr information; i.e., submit the listings related to systers needed to mitigate the postulated events the same as most of the other facilities.

6.

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

According to the guidelines (Reference 1):

A.

Some plants (PWRs with prompt automatic redundant containment spray systens) simply use the existing LOCA analysis as the basis for quali-fication.

\\

B.

Other plants (PWRs that do not have such spray systers) are to include i

a plant specific steam line break analysis in the basis for qualification.

i 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 component qualifications meet the guidelines. Hefever, at the meeting on February 21, 1980, some licensees indicated that they

4 t

might want to use plant specific analyses to justify less severe cenditions.

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 w'ithin about the next month:

1.

Whether PWR containment spray system features, such as tine delays, single failure vulnerabilities or high pressure setpoints, might be changed rather than performing plant specific analyses.

2.

Whether some.of the BWRs should sicply be treated under the PWR guidelines due to their unique design.

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

3.

Which BWR licensee 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 exanple, since Zion and Indian Pcint are relatively modern Westinghouse plants there may be existing analyses on similar plants that could quickly provide reasonable temperature estirates.

It may turn out that in some cases that plant specific analyses are needed and a new analysis will have to be performed.

If it i's not possible to submit the new analysis by the submittal dates listed, ycur best estimate of the conditions that you believe you can eventually justify should 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 chocse to justify less than 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 most current LOCA analysis is to be used-(PWRs with automatic redundant sprays), we need no further information and plan no further review of that analysis for the purpose of this accelerated environmental qualification review program. Later, however, we will reevaluate the containment integrity analyses under SEP Topics VI-2.d and VI-3.

i

/

ENCLOSURE 2 DATA NECESSARY FOR THE STAFF CALCULATION OF CONTAINMENT TEMPERATURE AND 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 conditions to return to essenti, ally the conditions that existed prior to the assumed accident. This will be needed in order to judge the adequacy of the qualification test duration as discussed in Section 5.2 of Reference 1.

In crder 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 most current LOCA analysis on the docket that definas 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., density, specific heat and thermal conductivity).

C.

Initial Containment Conditions Initial containment atmosphere conditions for:

1) terperature

2) pressure

3) relative humidity D.

Containment Soray System

1) Parameters and their setpoints to activate spray

2) Spray system activation tiae The tira associated with each of the following is needed (indicate whether or not they are additive):

. t a) time elapsed until signal to activate' spray system is reached b) tiae elapsed between reaching signal to activate spray and contact closure (total instrumentation lag time) c) time required for diesel generator to attain, full operating speed d) time required for loading of containment spray pump e) tine required to open isolation valve e

f) time required for containment spray pump to achieve full speed g) time 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 counterflew.

E.

Fan Cooler System I

1) Delay time before the fan cooler becomes effective for heat removal (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 Item D above.

F.

Provide a discussion of the 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 1 and 2 represent typical ECCS and spray systems relied on to mitigate the cor. sequences of a pipe break. Provide the information indicated in the figures; if tne plant specific systens 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 f ailure and specify the single failure assumption.

__m,

3-l l

i e

m V

b 4

L L

h Spray GPM AL l

i i

r

~

Y

^

RWST GPM s

[

i l

i l

Ga: lens V

• F Spill G P,v.

Temp

\\

FIGURE 1 INJECTION PHASE i

l

4.,

Containment' Spray Flow GPM i

4 d

A A

n 4

d A

6 i

Residual Spray GPM Flow Coolin9 GPM Water Flow i

To w

Core GPM V

(\\>

Reactor h

N N

Cooling 7

l Water Flow GPM Tc S:ill

~

J G:".

l Total Recire. Flow GPM i

l 0

Contain.ent Spray HX UA x10 Coolin; Water Temp

'F RECIRCULATION 6

RH:. (Sn;;down) HX UA x10 PHASE j

Cc:lir.; Water Temp

'F i

FIG'JRE 2 RECIRCULATION PHASE

ENCLOSURE 3 INFORMATION NECESSARY FOR STAFF REVIEW 0F 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 information about the plant specific analyses for our review:

I.

Provide the LOCA and/or steam line break analyses performed to define the service conditions inside the containment for use in determining the adequacy of the qualification of electrical equipment.

Include the following information in the discussion of your analyses:

A.

Containment Net Free Volume B.

Passive Heat Sinks l

t Identify structures, cocponents 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., density, specific heat and thermal condu ctivity).

C.

Initial Containment Conditions Initial containment atnosphere conditions for:

1) temperature

2) pressure

3) relative humidity D.

Containment Soray System

1) Parameters and their setpoints to activate spray system

2) Spray system activation time The time associated with each of the following is nae tc indicate s

whether or not they are additive):

a) time elapsed until signal to activate spray system is reached b) tine elapsed between reaching signal to activate spray and contact closure (total instrumentation lag time)

c) time required for diesel generator td attain full operating speed d) time required for loading of containment spray pump e) time required to open isolation valve f) time required for containment spray pump to a'chieve full speed g) time required to fill spray system piping and deliver water to spray header 3)

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

E.

Fan Cooler

[) Delay time before the fan cooler becomes effective for heat removal (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 teneratures.

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 contain-ment temperature response. Provide the same type of information as in Item D above.

G.

Provide a discussion of the single failures assumed in the analysis.

H.

Mass and Enera3 Release Data Provide the mass and energy release rate data for the pipe breaks considered.

Reference to existing data previously submitted to the staff is acceptable.

Reference or describe methods used to calculate mass and energy releases.

Additional information required which describes the plant mass and energy inventories (P%~4):

1) Reactor rated power

2) Steam flow rate per steam generator at full speed

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

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

5) Steam line flow area

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

7) Mass of unisolated stean between a steam generator and the isolation valve following closure of rain steam isolation valves.

)

l

8) Additional mass of unisolated steam if the main steam isolation valve nearest the break fails to clo:e.

9) Main feedwater line flow area

10) Main feedwater enthalpy

11) Time when main feedwater isolation valves will close following a main steam line break

12) Mass and temperature of feedwater between a steam generator and the feedwater isolation valve

13) Mass and temperature of feedwater above 240*F between a steam generator and any redundant feedwater isolation valve

14) Mass and temperature of all feedwater above 240*F

15) Time when auxiliary feedwater injection will begin following a main steam line break

16) Auxiliary feedwater 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 temperature

22) Sensible heat in the core and reactor system metal that is above 240 F at full power operation 23)

Initial hot and cold leg temperatures Additional information required which describes the plant mass and energy inventories (BWR - except dual cycle):

1) Reactor rated power

2) Steam flow rate at full power

3) Fluid mass in the reactor system at full power and hot shutdown

4) Fluid energy in the reactor system at full power and hot shutdown l

5) Steam line flow area

. 6) Time when steam isolation valves will close following a main steam line 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) Main feedwater enthalpy

[

11) Time when main feedwater isolation valves will close following a main steam line break

12) Mass and temperature of feedwater between the reactor vessel and the feeddater isolation valve

13) Mass and temperature of feedwater above 240*F between the reactor vessel and any redundant feedwater isolation valve

14) Mass and temperature of all feedwater above 240*F

15) Time when core spray injection will begin following a main steam line break

16) Core spray ficw rate and temperature

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

18) Core flooding system flow rate and temperature

19) Sensible heat in the core and reactor system metal that is above 240'F at full power operation I.

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

I II. 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 systers differ from the attached figures, revise the drawings to represent your f acility and provide the appropriate information.

l l

l l

I I

1

5-m o

A A

g 3

Spray GPM lk P

P i

v RWS' GP s

Gallons V

'F Spill GPM Temp FIGURE 1 - IriJECTI0fl PHASE l

u G

c a

b o

o a

6 Residual Spray gpg Flow Cooling GPM Water Flow To w'

Core GPM T

A-Reactor P

Cooling y

Water Flow GPM Tc Spill m

GPM Total Recire. Flow GPM 6

Cor.tainment Spray HX UA x10 Cooling Water Temp

• F RECIRCULATION 6

PHASE RH?. (Shutdown) HX UA x10 Cocling Water Temp

'F

~

FIGURE 2 - RECIRCULATION PHASE enm o

emm-m o

,+

9 e.-