ML19323A413
| ML19323A413 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Zion File:ZionSolutions icon.png |
| Issue date: | 03/20/1980 |
| From: | Schwencer A Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Peoples D COMMONWEALTH EDISON CO. |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8004210194 | |
| Download: ML19323A413 (15) | |
Text
Th} &
[p' ' 4 k 99 UNITED STATES y "., e g g NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMIS"ilON 3 g c g/j E
W ASHINGTO N, D. C. 20555 W/
March 20,1980 Docket No. 50-295 and 50-304 Mr. D. Louis Peoples Director of Nuclear Licensing Commonwealth Edison Company Post Office Box 767 Chicago, Illinois 60690
Dear Mr. Peoples:
RE: ENVIRONMENTAL QUALIFICATION OF ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT Reference 1:
Guidelines for evaluating environmental qualification of Class IE Electrical Equipment 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 reactors 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 sched;1e for this program. We also indicated that with respect to containment environmental conditions and systems required for accident mitigation, we would request additional inforcation and provide some clarification of the guidelines (References 1 and 2).
1 The clarifications, the information that we will need, and the dates we will need it are described in Enclosures 1, 2 and 3.
In sens cases, we need information prior to the nominal " submittal dates" listed on -he 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 facility, 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 dates indicated.
I As stated in the enclosures, we will be discussing some of the items with your personnel in the near future.
Contact us if you have any questions or coments on these matters.
Sincerely YWA'i o
A. Schwencer, Chief Operating Reactors Branch #1 Division of Operating Reactors 8 0 04 210 I h
Mr. D. Louis Peoples Cort.onwealth Edisor Company March 20,1980
Enclosures:
As stated cc w/ enclosures:
f Robert J. Vollen, Esquire 109 North Dearborn Street Chicago, Illinois 60602 Dr. Cecil Lue-Hing Director of Research and Development Metropolitan Sanitary District of Greater Chicago 100 East Erie Street Chicage, Illinois 60611 Zion-3'e.. ten Public Library Di strict 2693 Etnaus Avenue Zien, I'.linois 60099 i
Mr. Phillip P. Steptoe Ishar., Lincoln and Beale Counsel:rs at Law One First National Plaza 42nd.:1:o.
- Chi: age, Illinois 60603 Susan N. Sekuler, Esquire Assista.t Attorney General Environner.tal Control Divisien 188 Wes-F.andolph Street, Suite 2315 Chi:ag:, Illinois 60601 i
l
ENCLOSURE 1, SCHEDULE FOR AND DISCUSSION OF SUBMITTALS Data for Calculation of Containaent I'nformation on Pressure and Information on Containment Emergency Temperatu re Systems to Tegerature
[
Mitigate Events and Pressure Plant Procedures (l)
Decay (2)
Palisades As soon as Currently Currently under May 1 possible under review review (4)
(3)
Oyster Creek Already Currently May1(5)
May 1 provided under review (3)
Ginna Already Currently p rovided under review (3)
Zion 2 Already L
p rovided Indian Point 3 Already p rovided Zion 1 Already provided Indian Point 2 Alreah provided Millstone 1 As soon as May 1 possible Haddam Neck As st in as May 1 possible Dresden 2 As soon as May 1 possible San Onofre As soon as May 1 possible Dresden 1 As soon as May 1 possible Yankee Rcue As soon as May 1 possible Lacrosse As soon as May 1 possible f
Big Rock Point As soon as May 1 possible
- Denotes submittal dates which are the same as the general submittal dates given in en overall schedule in our letter of March 5,1980.
See f:llesing pagas for numbered notes.
NOTES:
1.
We have previously discussed the emergency procedures with your personnel.
l 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 systems required to mitigate postulated events.
In this light, send 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 whetjier 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 C
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 i
quite early, we will telephone your personnel to request, specifically, the items we cannot readily find in the docket.
4.
The systems required to mitigate events are currently under review for Palisades. The material submitted on this subject for this plant will subsequently be elevated 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 for information; i.e., submit the listings related to systems needed to mitigate the postulated events the same as most of the other facilities.
i t
6.
With respect to containment pressure and tegerature conditions, all plants will have previously identified the most current approved LOCA analysis that has been submitted and will have provided pertinent data (see Note 2 and l ).
According to the guidelines (Reference 1):
A.
Some plants (PWRs with progt automatic redundant containment spray i
systems) simply use the existing LOCA analysis as the^ basis fo quali-fication.
B.
Other plants (PWRs that do not have such spray systems) are to include a plant specific steam line break analysis in the basis for qualification.
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 cogonent qualifications meet the guidelines. However, at the meeting on February 21, 1980, scme licensees indicated that they l
l
[
. might want to use plant specific analyses to' justify less severe conditions.
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 time delays, single failure vulnerabilities or high pressure setpoints, might be changed rather than performing plant specific analyses.
2.-
Whether some of the BWRs should simply be treated under the PWR guidelines due to their unique design. For example, Oyster Creek appears to have an effe'ctive 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 example, since Zion and Indian Point are relatively modern Westinghouse plants there may be existing analyses on similar plants that could quickly provide reasonable temperature estimates.
It my turn out that in some cases that plant specific analyses are needed and a new analysis will have to be performed.
11i it is not possible to submit the new analysis by the submittal dates listed, your best estimate of the conditions that you believe r
you can eventually justify should bc 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 choose 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.
l
ENCLOSURE 2 OATA NECESSARY FOR THE STAFF CALCULATION OF CONTAINMENT TEMPERATURE AND PRESSURE DECAY TIME r
t 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.
f In order 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 I.
Reference the most current LOCA analysis on the docket that defines the service conditions to be used in equipment qualification. With respect to that analysis, i
provide the following:
i 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 i
4
- 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) temperature
- 2) pressure
- 3) relative humidity D.
Containment S: ray System
- 1) Parametr.rs and their setpoints to activate spray
- 2) Spray system activation tine The time associated with each of the following is needed (indicate whether or not they are additive):
a) time elapsed until signal to activate' spray system is reached i
b) time 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 r
d) time required for loading of containment spray pump e) time required to open isolation valve f) time required for containment spray pump to achieve full speed g) time required to fill spray system piping and deliver water to l
spray header
- 3) Identify the spray heat exchanger type, such as U-tube, crossflow, or counterflow.
E.
Fan Cooler System
- 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-taincent 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.
ZI. Figure 1 and 2 represent typical ECCS and spray systems relied on to mitigate the consequences of a pipe break. Provide the information indicated in the figures; if the plant specific systems 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.
l l
l L
3-i t
I t
A 4
4 A
A 4
Spray G?M l
21 I
w lV i
RWST O E'"'
Ga'lons y
.F SPIII EPM Temp
?
FIGURE 1 INJECTION PHASE
~
_4 Containaent Spray Flow GPM A
d A
A O
i' o
d A
6 i
Residual l
5 pray gpg Cooling GPM Water Flow Io w'
i Core GPM i
Cv
[h>
Reactor l
h
-w
~
Cooline y
Water Flow GPM i
TO Spill GPM l
y Total Recire. Flow GPM i
6 Containment Spray HX UA x10 i
Cooling Water Temp
- F RECIRCULATION 6
RM?. (Shutdown) HX UA x10 PHASE i
CO:lin; Water Temp
- F FIG',,RE 2 RECIRCULATION PHASE i
,e.
l ENCLOSURE 3 INFORMATION NECESSARY FOR STAFF REVIEW OF 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 Identify structures; conponents 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) temperature
- 2) pressure
- 3) relative humidity D.
Containment Soray System
- 1) Parameters and their setpoints to activate spray system
- 2) Spray system activation tine The time associated with each of the following is needed (indicate whether or not they are additive):
a) tire elapsed until signal to activate spray system is reached b) time elapsed between reaching signal to activate spray and contact closure (total instrumentation lag time) e
i i
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
- 1) Delay time before the fan cooler becomes effective for heat removal (similar information to Item D.2 above) j
- 2) Heat removal capability of the fan cooler. Provide a curve or table of the energy removal rate as a function of containment tegeratures.
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 te@ erature response. Provide the same type of information as in Item D above.
G.
Provide a discussion of the single failures assumed in the analysis.
l H.
Mass and Enerqv 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 (PWR):
i
- 1) Reactor rated power
- 2) Steam flow rate per steam generator at full speed J
- 3) Fluid mass in each steam generator at full power and hot shutdown
- 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 i
- 7) Mass of unisolated steam between a steam generator and the isolation l
valve following closure of main steam isolation valves.
l l
l 1
l
' 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 a steam generator and the feedwater isolation valve
~13) Mass and temperature of feedwater above 240*F between a steam generator and any redundant feeddater 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 1
- 17) Time when core flooding system will begin injection following a LOCA
- 18) Fluide nass 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 terperatures 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
- 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
- 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 flow rate and temperature
- 17) Time when core flooding system will begin injection following a main steam line break i
- 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 3
I.
When providing system parameters, indicate whether the values given assume a single failure and specify the single failure assumption.
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 systens differ from the attached figures, revise the drawings to represent your f acility and provide the appropriate information.
l I
l l
1
e I
l l
i h
Spray i
GPM h
m Y
1r RWST GPM l
I Gallons V
er Spill GPM Temp l
FIGURE 1 - ItiJECTION PHASE l
l l
l
-6.
Containment Spray Flow GPM A
d A
A n
a o
a 6
Residual Spray gpg Flow Cooling gpg Water Flow To Core GPM V
rh-Reactor 4
7 Cooling y
Water Flow GPM To Spill GPM Total Recire. Flow GPM 0
Containment Spray HX UA x10 Cooling Water Temp
'F RECIRCULATION 6
RHR (Shutdown) HX UA x10 PHASE Cooling Water Temp
- F
~
FIGURE 2 - RECIRCULATION PHASE
.