ML20003A239
| ML20003A239 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Big Rock Point File:Consumers Energy icon.png |
| Issue date: | 03/01/1976 |
| From: | Reeves E Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8102030181 | |
| Download: ML20003A239 (5) | |
Text
P00R ORIGINAL MAR,'
Jl sit: t T. 0 "iu-1S 5
-t M.lvL.sLi. :
t Cul5L6.a.la i v.lLJ Lv..! A4Y
' J,is.1 Ll'a Y t,1b 1.tu h. int bu..u:i vF..ill.a. nLi.u u.i Fi.bs.bMY 24 It?L, itl.GA.
1.;t. L..cdGL.,C Li si.
Lt4 LI..u aYbh!.
Li. Feeruarf 24, 197o. representatives of Consur.crs I r Cor.;st.y (Crto) an. Lucir consultant, db5 Corporation, met Cit'a the
- 1. ar 2.c;;ulatery cc, mission (?d.C) staff in Bethesd.t, laryland. A lisi
- attcadees is attcened.
m o vaquested the r,cetint to disciiss its position and p pose.ls relatin,-
tr. thc!r g rev!ous request for exegtion fren one speci fi 5.in:le failure requirement (Section 1.li.l.) of 10 Cr': 50 Appendix K.
"ewell) 1 riefly reviewed the back; rourui rel tii to the tru (r. 1 e.xe.ption retowt-1.
CFrc, letter dated July 25, 1975. as supplemented by lettc. dated bs.ust 22.1. 7!., sub:'itted an Energency Core Coolin.; Systen ( ~ ~JL)
_remr. lysis of the Loss of-Coolant Accident. Their letter of Aa,;vst.:d,1175. contained additional infer.ation relatin, to i
sint,le failares. CPCo contoids that c, ipe break in one core sprny linc wuc.: co.., led with tue failure of a spray valve in tt.e reuund.u.t core s,:raj liac is not credible.
t u,. i c.< c:
..a, Cori. oration hei. ort LJeu-P-ul..Revison C " Big Rock-ruiat..ucicar l oser I lant t.: er c..cy Lore Coolint afste;.. und..ssoc:ateu
.,yste s t.valaation were distributed.
'ine roi ort tiill bc includsd c.
ca. caelosure to LL:Lo':, re,.ly to the Lo.c.: ission 's :.<. tor...da.. a:.d vru r vi seec.a.cr.31, IJ7L.
nr. de sell advised in.;t tan reply will v.: 4:alleu oa 1 obruary 27, l. 74..
I N
e
,e L.
1. l l
Tib M Sb(@(
orrec s >
a eua= a es e >
D'T'
- us sa sovenaassar painitises orssor sera.oos.see
. ' {,.
f.,
f
\\
2.
NUS Corporation (G. C. Rudy) presented the Failure Mode Effects Analysis (FFEA) - Short Term Cooling. He identified certain areas that NUS considered as deficiencies.
Section 2.0 of the' i
NUS Report 5069-P-01 includes the list of deficiencies _.,
3.
CPCo (R. B. Sewell) discussed the NUS reported deficiencies and
?I noted CPCo's position on each item.
Some of the deficiencie's
-t will be corrected during the current refueling outage, others
'{
i[
will be evaluated further and others will be corrected only if the requested life time exemption is not granted.
4.
CPCo (R. B. Sewell) presented the FMIA - Long Term Cooling Analysis.
He noted that the crossconnect valve between the corc spray and redundant core spray headers will be left open instead of shut, f
Operator action would have been required to open the valve, thus a single failure of the valve to open wculd have jeopardi:ed long term cooling.
A second change being proposed is elimination of a basket type strainer in the cooling water supply to the core spray heat exchanger.
Otherwise, strainer pluggage would jeopardize the long term cooling.
S.
NUS (R. W. Hess) presented the Hydraulic Analysis Results and failure conditions analy:ed.
The minimum flow criteria for core spray is at 1 cast 250 gpa at a reactor coolant pressure of 75 psig.
Analysis results are in Section 5.2 of NUS Report 5069-P-01.
CPCo (R. B. Sewell) completed the presentation regarding the hydraulic analysis.
The analysis indicates that the Reactor Depressurization System, currently being installed, should assure the required core spray flow rate is met (without operator action) in 595 seconds.
This actuation time ensures that the fuel rod cladding temperature would not exceed 2200*F.
The CPCo analysis was accomplished with die spray system crossconnect valve shut.
They estimate that operator action will not be required with the crossconnect open.
But this will require further evaluation to assure that the minimum core spray flow is achievable with the crossconnect valve open. ' The results will be submitted as a supplement to the Feb ruary 27, 1976 submittal.
6.
A detailed Risk Analysis based on WASH-1400 was presented by CPCo (R. B. Sewell).
The analysis related to the single failure criteria for which CPCo has requested an exemption.
Results were as follows:
a.
1reak in no::le spray lir.e with single failure of the ring pray valve:
Calculated Risk = 1.8 x 10-8'per year J{;
[
b.
Break in ring spray line with single failure of the no::le spray,
valve:
Calculated Risk (with loss of off-site power) = 3.7 x 10-'
71_
per year
P00R ORIGINAL.
c.
Sar.e conditions as b. above except without a loss et p'f-sito pewer.
Calculated i.is!. = 1.0 x It'-b per yent
.I
!!r. Sewell noted that risks of these rnar.nitudes should be accerptchle; 3
therefore. CPCo feels that the exerption should bc :: ranted.
if 7.
In event the requested c>emtion is not c.rartm' by the corvirsion.
CP' o describcd tl.e costs and se'iedule for acco 911shint the adde
- plant mdifientions ns follors
..pproxinately 1.2 nillion dollars to include procurer ent an.!
a.
installetion b.
Approximately 1.5 million dollars for replacement electrical power at $30,000 per day.
They would propose extending a refueling outage about one week rather than shutting down for five weeks during an operating cycle.
c.
Based on a 104 week procurement and installation schedule the earliest refueling outage when the changes could be accomplished would be April 1979.
8.
In response to a question previously asked by the NRC staff, CPCo indicated that the modification could not be simplified by rearranging existing core spray valves because the series spray valves do not have the same design pressure ratings.
The valves nearest the reactor vessel are rated for 1700 psig while the other valves are rated for 900 psig.
Big Rock Point operating pressure is 1350 psig, thus paralleling the valves is unacceptabic.
'.o cd.!itiont.1 questions were raised by the T'r str%.
O fkfylbenk Cifwed b tCru ch Pro.k/LLBO
!:.h u r.1 /. Tceves
n--.r iec-e n r:tir
. wet ors. ira :' ':
!Ivl sion o" Wr: tin
- 'er,ct e rs
' ;y ].v.rre 6.10;
.it 1 eht er i
.. >c:.c1J cc 11
..uclear t.i censin. A.:...li.i:,t r.:ter
- $ p Lons a... 4 O i'O..cr Lo,usiaj 21e..en..ichi_ n Avenu.-
Ja cl.s o..,. d c..i.
-,1 OR:gRB._
YRORB#2 2
o,,.c.,
EA, eve :ah DLZiamann so.. m.
- i 2[2,7/16 -.. -.0/ h.))6 ea,, n Forms ABC Sle (Rev. P.S$) ABChi 0240
% v. s.s sovanument emeense erreces nov4.see-tes
.<._-..n
1 0
LIST OF ATTENDEES CPCo MEETING OF FEBRUARY 24, 1976 CPCo (b
C. R. Bilby R. B. Sewell C. E. Bayless M
D. E. DeMoor R. H. Macri NUS E D. Wilder R. W. Hess G. C. Rudy NRC STAFF E. A. Reeves R. P. Snaider R. Woods F. Rosa N. Anderson L Olshan P. Arberton P. Sheraanski R. Baer D. L. Zieman..
it m-b
~
~
P00R O'RIGINAI.
MEETING StBB!ARY DISTRIBlfrION:
" Docket NRC PDR Ilocal PDR 3RB#2 Reading
. sR Reading
. Rusche T. Case V. Stello K. R. Goller D. Eisenhut T. J. Carter
[t. A. Purple G. E. Lear R. W. Reid L. C. Shao R. L. Baer A. Schwencer B. K. Grines Project Manager OELD OIGE (3)
RMDiggs R. Fraley, ACRS (16)
T. B. Abernathy J. R. Buchanan NRC Partjcipants:
L. Sluggle w
I h.
9
- --,