ML19340A384
| ML19340A384 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Sequoyah  |
| Issue date: | 03/05/1980 |
| From: | NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE) |
| To: | |
| References | |
| PNS-II-80-007, PNS-II-80-7, NUDOCS 8003260320 | |
| Download: ML19340A384 (1) | |
Text
i t
y?.
~
4 UNITED STATES
[} f NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
- E WASHINGTON. D. C. 20555 g g{ /'
- f OCT 2 1980
+....
Docket Nos.: 50-416/417 Mr. J. P. McGaughy, Jr.
l Assistant Vice President - Nuclear Production Mississippi Power and Light Company P. O. Bax 1640 Jackson, Mississippi 39205
Dear Mr. McGaughy:
SUBJECT:
REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION - GRAND GULF NUCLEAR STATION, UNITS 1 AND 2 As a result of our review of the information contained in the Final Safety Analysis Report for the Grand Gulf Nuclear Station, Units 1 and 2, we have developed the enclosed reque:t for additional infomation.
Included are questions from the Reactor Systems Branch and the Quality Assurance Branch.
We request that you amend your Final Safety Analysis Report to reflect your responses to the enclosed requests as soon as possible and to inform the Project Manager, Joseph A. Martore, of the date by which you intend to respond.
Sincerely, hes.)
Robert L. Tedesco Assistant Director for Licensing Division of Licensing 1
Enclosure:
As stated cc: See next page I
8 01o g393p
[
t'
\\
4 cc:
Robert B. McGehee,Esq.
Wise, Carter, Child, Steen & Caraway P. O. Box 651 Jackson, Mississippi 39205 Troy B. Conner, Jr., Esq.
Conner, Moore & Corber 1747 Pennsylvania Avenue, N. W.
Washington, D. C.
20006 Mr. Adrian Zaccaria, Project Engineer Grand Gulf Nuclear Station Bechtel _ Power Corporation Caithersburg, Maryland 20760 Mr. Alan G. Wagner,' Resident Inspector P. O. Box 469 Port Gibson, Mississippi 39150 Mr. John Richardson P. O. Box 1640 Jackson, Mississippi 39205 S
O O
O 4
9
t o
Fire Protection - Quality Assurance Request for Additional Information
. ?l.3 Section C of Table 9A-1 of Amendment 41 of the FSAR for the Grand Gulf Nuclear Station,
- 1pp Unit Nos.1 & 2 indicates that formalized quality assurance requirements have not been 9A) applied to the fire protection system during design and construction, but that the fire protection system will be covered by applicable policies in MP&L's operational QA program following turn over of the system to Plant Staff. The fire protection sys-tem is not subject to the quality assurance requirements as defined in Appendix B to 10 CFR Part 50, since it does not directly prevent or mitigate the consequences of accidents.
It is nonetheless true that proper functioning of the fire protection sys-tem must minimize the adverse effect of fires upon structurcs, systems, and components important to safety, as made clear in Criterion 3 of Appendix A to 10 CFR Part 50. Con-sequently, according to Criterion 1 of Appendix A to 10 CFR Part 50, quality assurance requirements should be applied to the fire protection program to an appropriate extent.
The extent of a suitable orogram is described in Section C of Appendix A to Branch Tech-nical Position APCSB 9.5-i.
This position provides that the quality assurance orgae4 zation manage the QA activities for fire protection and that 10 specific quality assur-ance criteria be applied to fire protection activities.
Although the design and construction of the fire protection system for Unit 1 is completed, (Ref. September 18, 1980 conference call with MP&L) we believe that the QA activities for fire protection should be appropriately applied to any ongoing or remaining portions of design and construction dealing with the fire protection system ifor Unit 2 as well as to the operational phase of both units. Accordingly, we request you modify your. response in Section C of Table 9A-1 of the FSAR to address this position.
In addition, describe the measures which assure that the QA activities that apply to fire protection for Grand Gulf Unit Nos.1 & 2 are under the management control of the QA organization.
Please identify the specific organization (s) that exercise this con-trol. The description of the management control measures should address the activities for: (a) formulating and/or verifying that the fire protection QA program elements in-corporate suitable requirements and are acceptable to the management responsible for fire protection; and (b) verifying the effectiveness of the QA activities for fire protection through review, surveillance, and audits.
(Performance of other QA program functions for meeting the fire protection program requirements may be performed by qualified personnel outside of the QA organization.)
Also, describe the measures which assure the quality of purchased equipment and material when the supplier is not qualified under MP&L QA program (Ref. first sentence of note 3-a).
Describe the involvement of the QA organization when material / equipment is identified as being non-safety related (Ref, second sentence of note 3-b).
- g..
t I
=
iw e
v
REACTOR SYSTEMS BRANCH 0211. 202
- Reference and provide the layout studies done tn assure that nn interference (4.6.2.3.1.2) exists that will restrict the passage of control rods, Also reference the pre-operational, tests that are used to show acceptable performance.
Q211.' 203 For 'the majority of events analyzed in Section 15, the i
7 (15.0) recirculation flow control mode (automatic or manual) asstmed in the analysis is not specified.
Our concern is that the mode selected may not result in the most severe margins on MCPR and peak vessel pressure.
a) Spe:ify the recirculation flow control irode asstmed for each evcut analyzed in Sc: tion 15.
q b) Spe:ify the chan6e in MCPR and peak ve al pressure for each i
event if the opposite recirculation f control mode had been i
s asstmed in the analysis.
i Q211. 204 The ~resconse to. Item 221.3 indicates that 8x8 fuel bundles (15.0) with two water rods will be used at Grand Gulf instead of the 8 x 8 fuel btedles with one water rod.
a) Have the transients and a:cidents in Section 15 been evaluated with 8 x 8 fuel bundles using one or two water reds?
b) If the transients and accidents in Section 15 were analyzed with the one water rod fuel bundles, would any significant changes in MCFR, peak vessel pressure, percent of rods experiencing boiling transition, and radiological consequences be expe: Led if the twa water rods design was used in the analyses? Dis:uss any changes to the above ev.ent parameters in quantitative terms.
C211 205 Explain why a scrr. does not o :tr for the analysis of the " fast (15.3 2 3 3)- closure of one recirculation valve" trar.sient in the Grand Gulf FSARs Q211. 206 (5.2.2)
Provide (6.3) as'surance that,otr relief valve design is qualified (incitding testir6 after being subjected to an envirorment representative of an extended time period at normal operating conditions) to support yote asstmption that seven of the eight ADS valves will operate.
A. quantitative history of safety / relief valve operation, incitding similar valves in other plants, should be incitded in this evaluation.
0211. 207 If _ the air supply line upstream of the ball check valve for all (5.2.2) non-ADS safety / relief valve air acetmulators were to break l
upstream of the b.all check valve, would there be an indication in i
the-control roem'of this break and an ' indication of the acctmulator ' status? If indications are given, what operator action would be required?
If no indication is given, justify why none is needed.
0211.'208 SDecify whether the fast scram -system has been act:nunted for in tha (5.2.2) overpresstrization analysis?
.a
,.,