ML19309A676

Forwards Request for Addl Info Re Auxiliary & Emergency Sys. Response Required by 730125

ML19309A676
Person / Time
Site:	Rancho Seco
Issue date:	12/26/1972
From:	Schwencer A US ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION (AEC)
To:	Davis E SACRAMENTO MUNICIPAL UTILITY DISTRICT
References
NUDOCS 8003310649
Download: ML19309A676 (4)

Text

- _.

n a.d,W C W. n.37'm W W W. W :

n..

.'..= v v-m

~w

-~w'

~

,N W,W 5

v W,CWWM.

"T.,

ym

\\ :% uw,ya m,:m q.; J 4.,g.m w sy w w ygsg qy ;pn,.

w.g.m. f.m.

y % p m m:g g g g w. p m m m t:.

y.

w.m g.wg.p,g m -

nm

! MbMdbh7NYNddMbNY

.NNMNUNN 9,b n A

.s.

r w.

DEC 2 6 M72 h

[m MA:' '

b

' ~

0 l

Docket Me. 50-312 n

a.gm A -

.y

,..c m.

,,. e 9 e -. - -

-. +.

,.,,.. ~...

y%

O Q

D i

b w.:.., x.

. pe ae

- - -..vu s-

. )...

l 3b

.w 4&%

,,..u7 k..E. K. Davia, General Ceuseel!

e

.~N 4e < W N'Secremente Municipal U.tilit!y Diltric,t

' " *. *e' E # ". N, s w ^"'"mw % y -.

9Y" a

m,,

y,.4v mal s seventi v. o.;nes issse

- e; c

.y mssw f inessmestes califerass 95813 3. D 7 OQ' '%IE.7 4

g

/

a y.n

.m,g;1 J n..a w m y&,,,> awpwm.n.x

.u w

-p n

s. ;;

s, 3

y, w

>a o

m

a m n n y s &s;h + w.

. vs

,, -.ww. w.m.

. g.y.,,

.y a g& +

p;&, wgg new~.

Mes~ the basia sf Tour,'esatiseiing 'veriew of' the FinalTSedsty" Ameljnds" W """~P

.m..e.... for t.h. e Ben,ehe ' Sees Beelea.r.G,_ener. ~ettag Stet,tes'#

^

.'.M,. ***d.additi===1

~f

~ ind'

- An

.-A a

pu e.g c.ee ation.regoired.lt.o..ese.gdete our evm1mma

~

m n

inasiruet'ien The :u a nW, cn. v..t wA b

-ru

- ~^

nm

- eyesifi,e inform.. ~....~..

e 11 meed in the emeleesse. e

,,~3:.x www d

.QEE,asdor[to maintain our licemainneview'sichedule,0sa M1f ne

~. - a us m.m m 9&m 3

m.-

.s n

w m.a car

,:.g g.xm n,

, n.gg reg.m f

1'

-c.a esepletely adequate zeeposee by January 25, 1973. P3enee} inform 9 ge; pet i,

, se % seven (7) days.af ter receipt of,.this letter of Tyear AM 4 l:

eenfSumation of the sehedule er the dete you will be ab3ii tot ZW d

p meet.r*If you cemet meet our specified date er if your-ly is meCimlly responsive to our re(easts [itiisihighly '

that

e -.s1 l. the.

embedule for sempletingV heJM r

'shes:,

E" t

.R.U T@

• heve tow [ eemanded; L assesUseiisissesment' "snaar'e' WS

^

We4 ire h5Nd[Bk' thMb j.[! [.%..

E 1.

h) h M, h h N.i A.

kg'(.

y e

c. & c them;ths,

.ef=

am.your _ -

. a n,o v.g e

soigd.n.uggp&m ~%A4pm, W:* W 4

1ma sum nyt

$.n qt GMg ;@n v

p.ggg ), ' +MM,a a F M M W T; V '.

/y.M< 'q[,.a, m.g1we y./.m et 9m7 prgr

.pg, y v, -

gy'w,y pt:m

,p y

teAy@?WR

,pyw. d e..at.

t Ws -

-p kW V'

l3 %ynN2PMyt,

yid WC&:n ~

u 3

' +

y

,:WY fNY Q w.W7Q

%M99.W.9%

?%f

, #4$WK A.-.

F

[

N ww

,w d;s

-m,wam w Ms fdf U

r.

W w

%d

1. 1 M

. +,.,

.A.y

.,A p*p'... gq... y.c.

.Wa -

J z. y*,;.g A<

g4

. r.;~

.n. 6@>

w

~

tY

. m+ Q.

• r t ;, y.s ink *W i

c.

c G.yg..'!.!y.%..4 p%n,

~

_ w.

Ff

" ~ ~

.y f ~ qy h

s m

1a g,

'D Q Q..

Au

~..c,.

• sx %

e e'..,.

.,n.<

.~

e @m.. eM-s:.e g g.*- r +.

p,

.w m

g.er d,

s.

~

4;gMs g

'.. W.

y Qb.tff;&y&& -Q M%Ne't'V ggm. ~.yg. 3 v 4,g y% y '

gig.&g

.,. u.

n. y v

,m,,- w

.:9

't. 7

.n

<.;.y f

"r

~ ~.

n a

n,.

t 4 m;~a

^

." ~,. m<.

.n w M.wy 4

t n.

wd %.

Q, e & Q,.

m JQ4 P.

WIQ'N.

eulay m y'T.

1r sy.. e

. w.

u :

.h.

,r m

4

, WN

.p h'4, ' [ ;. I

'.i g

f,

,6 6

, g y # W P(.E' 6 ' Q

,, p g k,.p 9.k.,

9 x ; ; _.

q%%@. qs pw. >.M

.4 w

D

,p.

3

.5Y'_

. f

?A 4

J*

r.:s 4 any ;. -

l1 a,y Ly __

__ y[,-.~.-

_1.},.,

i 7 u 7. 4 g

.f 1 y...

..;. b r i r.n,,;9.w 1 mm 1.

-N

$* 1 I

j amt y,..-, s

,~s,.

m

-a.

- M

.~

n s

ry

.1 _

J,fAr y

j T3 y. U' d R y

'?

1. N ' j_R R *t W % _

__l~~:'

~,.y

\\

. e,

~.

UNITED STATES

,'[

I ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION I 'I ' 3 i'l WASHINGTON, D.C. 20545

%,, ()

Y DEC 2 6 :972 Docket No. 50-312 Mr. E. K. Davis, General Counsel Sacramento Municipal Utility District 6201 S Street, P. O. Box 15830 Sacramento, California '95813

Dear Mr. Davis:

4 On the basis of our continuing review of the Final Safety Analysis Report for the Rancho Seco Nuclear Generating Station, we find that we need additional information to' complete our evaluation. The specific information required is listed in the enclosure.

In order to, maintain our licensing review schedule, we will need a completely adequate response by January 25, 1973. Please inform us within seven (7) days af ter receipt of this letter of your confirmation of the schedule or the date you will be able to meet.

If you cannot meet our specified date or if your reply is not fully responsive to our requests, it is highly likely that the overall schedule for completing the licensing review for this project will have to be extended. Sinca reassignment of the staff's efforts will require completion of the new assignment prior to returning to this project, the extent of extension will most likely be greater than the extent of delay in your response.

Sincerely,

.9 y&

A. Schwencer, Chief

1. '.@ Pressurized Water Reactors Branch No. 4 Directorate of Licensing

Enclosure:

Request for Additional Information t

cc: w/ enc 1 David S. Kaplan, Secretary and Attorney 6201 S Street, P. O. Box 15830 Sacramento, California 95813

REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION SACRAMENTO MUNICIPAL UTILITY DISTRICT RANCHO SECO NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION DOCKET NO. 50-312 9.0 AUXILIARY AND EMERGENCY SYSTEMS 9.49 The following is necessary to permit determination of the adequacy of the proposed nuclear service _ spray ponds for Rancho Seco.. Unit 1, when the unit cither experiences a loss-of-coolant accident or requires a normal shutdown and the existing nonseismic Class I makeup water sources are lost. Provide the results of analyses that demonstrate the capability of the ponds in each case to:

(1) provide adequate pond inventory assuming conservative meteorological conditions in each case which maximize water loss; (2) provide sufficient heat dissipation to limit service water operating temperatures within the design ranges of system components, assuming conservative meteorological conditions in each case which minimize such dissipation; and (3) that while satisfying either (1) or (2) the other is not violated. The analyses ~should use transient analysis methods with the following limitations:

(a) Hydrometeorological-parameters for the normal shutdown case should be based on a syntnesized 30-day period, where historical maximum or minimum parameters are increased or decrease? '(as applicable) by 10 percent to assure adequate heat dissipation and water supply inventory under severe conditions of plant operation. Data for such analyses are available in Local Climatological Data and Summaries (U.S.

Weather Service). Diurnal fluctuations of air and dew point temperatures could be established from cycles obtained from regional, long-term, meterological records.

(b) Hydrometeorological parameters for the LOCA case should be based on design basis accident meteorology.

(c) The adopted spray drif t and spray evaporation losses should be well documented by actual field data; however, in lieu of such documentation, a value of combined losses of not less than

' 4 percent of spray,flov for (1) above, and 2 percent of spray flow for (2) above, may be assumed for both the LOCA and normal shutdown cases. Surface evaporation should also be included, and should be determined by standard methods.

(d) A reasonable withdrawal of firewater, if applicable, should be assumed.

n

--mw-m w

,m-

.s f

(a) Nonseismic Class I makeup water systems should be assumed unavailable, unless it can be adequately demonstrated that obtaining the use of such a water supply within a reasonable period of time can be assured in all cases where natural or accidental phenomena may have caused the loss of nonseismic Class I systems.

(f) Since the heat input and analysis demonstrating the adequacy of the service water system extends over a 30-day period, the methods set forth in the October 1971 draft, " Proposed ANS Standard Decay Energy Release Rates Following Shutdown of Uranium-Fueled Thermal Reactors," should be used in establishing the heat input. Assume an equilibrium fuel cycle

• and increast the calculated heat inputs by the following percentages to cover the uncertainties over the indicated time spans.

3 1.

For the time Daterval O to 10 seconds add 20 percent to_the heat released by the fission products to cover the uncertainty in their nuclear properties.

2.

For the time interval 10 to 10 seconds add 10 percent to the heat released by the fission products to cover the uncertainty in their nuclear properties.

3.

For the time interval 10 to 10 seconds calculate the heat released by the hea'vy elements (using th9 best estimate of production rate for Rancho Seco Unit 1) and add 10 percent to cover the uncertainties in their nuclear properties.

j l

(g)

Incl' de a drawdown of the pond for " charging" the emergency u

service water supply system if required during initial pond startup and describe the basis for volume chosen.

(h) In your analysis consider the effect of hydraulic short-circuiting of the pond where physical and/or meteorological conditions would create such a condition thereby allowing sprayed water to be sucked directly into the intakes and recirculated.

(i) Establish the water loss from the ponds due to spray drift for various wind speeds using reliable data or conservatively estimate, assuming expontial vs2 tation, a 3 percent drif t loss at speeds of 25 mph,1.5 parcent at 7 mph, and 0.5 per-cent at 3 mph.

9.50 -In addition to the supporting analyses, present the following information in graphical form over rSe 30-day period:

• In this regard use the ANS formulation for finite operating time.

t

-~ \\

,m.

2 3

(a) The heat rate and total integrated heat input to the ponds due to the fission product decay heat.

(b) Theheatrateandtotalintegratedheaf'inputto.theponds due to the heat released by the heavy elements.

(c) The heat rate and total integrated heat input to the. ponds.

by-the Station Auxiliary Systems.

(d) The maximum allowable plant inlet service water temperature taking into account:

(1) the rate at which the heat must be removed; (ii) the service water flow rate; and (iii) the capabilities of the heat exchangers.

(e) The calculated service water pond inlet and outlet temperatures.

(f) The service water spray and total flow rates.

(g) The required NPSH for the service water pumps (taking the existing flow rates and water temperatures into account).

(h) The available NPSH for the service water pumps using the-conditions specified in Request 9.49 above..

9.51 In addition, it will be required that tests be made to verify the conservatisms of the various design and operational assumptions, and to assure the adequacy of heat dissipation capacity and initial inventory.- Please advise us of your proposed schedule for this test program.

4

,