ML20039C876
| ML20039C876 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Perry  |
| Issue date: | 12/08/1981 |
| From: | Schwencer A Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Davidson D CLEVELAND ELECTRIC ILLUMINATING CO. |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8112310043 | |
| Download: ML20039C876 (3) | |
Text
- -
g Distribution:
Docket File LB#2 File DEC 8 1991 Attorney, OELD DEisenhut/RPurple RTedesco Docket Nos. 50-440 Aschwencer and 50-441 DHouston MService ISE (3)
GThomas,RSB Mr. Dalwyn R. Davidson Vice President - Engineering The Cleveland Electric Illuminating Company Post Office Box 5000 Cleveland, Ohio 44101
Dear Mr. Davidson:
Subject:
Request for Additional Infomation - Reactor Systems Perry Nuclear Power Plant, Unit Nos. 1 and 2 In the perfomace of the Perry licensing review, the staff has identified additional concerns in regard to reactor systems. The information that we require is identified in the enclosure. We plan to discuss these concerns with Bill Coleman of your staff during the week of December 14, 1981.
We request that you provide the information not later than December 31, 1981.
If you require any clarification of this request, please contact M. D. Houston, Project Manager at (301) 492-8430.
Sincerely,
,i.: /
Original signed by g
'/
A. Schwencer, Chief M
Licensing Branch No. 2 l>_; /),
Division of Licensing W, 7 m_ g)
Enclosure:
't Request for Additional Information
,x\\
cc w/ enclosure:
See next page bec: NRC PDR Local FDR NSIC TERA ACRS (18) 8112310043 811208 DR ADOCK 05000440 is PDR D.L M.4.....
DL:Lp, h,,
omco
, ASc,hw4 n,c,5Y,
.Uf,u s t, on : p,,h DHo er sumuud
..A.... El,, Tp S....
omy Nac rosu ais oo-so> nacu oua OFFICIAL RECORD COPY usom ini-muo
N s-Mr.- Dalwyn R. Davidson Vice Presiden't, Engineering The Cleveland Electric Illuminating Company P. O. Box 5000 Cleveland, phio. 44101 cc: Gerald Charnoff, Esq.
Shaw, Pittman, Potts & Trowbridge 1800 M Street, N. W.
Washington, D. C. 20006 Donald H. Hauser, Esq.
The Cleveland Electric Illy *minating Company P. O. Box 5000 Cleveland, Ohio 44101 Resident Inspector's Office U.S. N.R.C.
Parmly at Center Road Perry, Ohio 44081 Donald T. Ezzone, Esq.
Assistant Prosecuting Attorney 105 Main. Street Lake County Administration Center Painesville, Onio 44077
~
Todd.Kenney 228 South College, Apt. A Bowling Green, Ohio 43402 Daniel D. Wilt Wegman, Hesiler & Vanderberg 7301 Chippewa Road, Suite 102 Brecksville, Ohio 44141 Rcbert Alexander OCRE Interim Representative 2030 Portsmouth Street Suite 2 Houston Texas.77098 Terry Lodge, Esq.
915 Spitzer Building Toledo, Ohio 43604:.
~
1
~
. ~.
REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION 440.37 The applicant must submit analyses recalculating the MCPR for the limiting (15.0)
~ letter from' D. G. Eisenhut to events specified in the January 29, 1981 Holders of CP and OL for BWRs usi~ng ODYN.
440.38 Operation of Perry with partial feedwater heating might! occur during main-(15.0) tenance or as a result of a decision to operate with lower feedwater tempera-ture near end of cycle. Justify that this mode of operation will not result
-in (1) greater ma.ximum reactor vessel pressures'than those obtained with the assumptions used in Section 5.2.2, or (2) a more limiting MCPR than would be obtained with the assumptionstused in Section 15.0.
The basis for the maximum reduction in feedwater heating considered in the response should be provided (e.g., specific turbine operational limitations {
440.39 Reclassification of the generator load rejection and turbine trip transients (15.0) without bypass from moderate to infrequent events has not been accepted by the staff.
The frequency category in Table 15.b-1 and Sections 15.2.2.1.2.2 -
and 15.2.3.1.2.2 should therefore be changed from infrequent to moderate.
~ This change may result in the " generator load rejection with bypass off" transient being most limiting event for the category of events in Section 15.2 (Increase in Reactor Pressure)'
440.40 Per Table 15.0-1, the most limiting transient with respect to fuel thermal (15.1) f (15.2) margin is the loss of feedwater heater when in manual control. This result appears to be inconsistent with the GESSAR-238 NSSS and -251 NSSS findings whereby the most limiting event for the latter is generator load rejection without bypass.
Explain this difference. Secondly, for which core condition was the loss of feedwater heating transient analyzed (e.g., beginning-of-cycle or at the end-of-equilibrium cycle)? Justify selection of the most limiting core condition.
~
4 i
440.41 During meetings with' General Electric the staff has discussed the use of nonsafety-grade equipment for anticipated transient analyses.
It is our understanding that one of the mcst limiting events is the feedwater controller fr.ilure (maximum flow demand).
For this tra.nsient, the plant operating equipment at' have a signific~ ant role in mitigating this event are the turbine bypass system and the reactor vessel high water level (Level 8) trip that closes the turbine stop valves. To assure an acceptable level of performance, it is the staff's position that this equipment be iden-tified in the plant Technical Specifications with regard to availability, set points, and surveillance testing. Submit your plan for implementing this requirement along with any syst'em modifications that may be required to ful-fill the requirements.
440.42 For the recirculation pump seizure accident we note in Table 15.3-5 that' credit is taken for nonsafety-grade equipment to terminate this event.
Section 15.3.3 of the Standard Review Plan, Revision 2 requires use of
_only safety-grade equipment and that the safety functions be accomplished assuming the worst single failure of an active component. Reevaluate this accident with the above specific criteria, and provide the resulting t.CPR tand; percentage of fuel rods in boiling transition.
e
.