ML20046C692
| ML20046C692 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | 05200001 |
| Issue date: | 08/06/1993 |
| From: | Fox J GENERAL ELECTRIC CO. |
| To: | Poslusny C Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9308110376 | |
| Download: ML20046C692 (2) | |
Text
]
GE Nuclear Energy General bettnc Depany 175 Conner Aienue. San Jcse. CA 95125 August 6,1993 Docket No. STN 52-001 Chet Poslusny, Senior Project Manager Standardization Project Directorate Associate Directorate for Advanced Reactors and License Renewal Office of the Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Subject:
Submittal Supporting Accelerated ABWR Schedule - Equipment Survivability (Issue #29)
Dear Chet:
Enclosed is the background and the GE response to the Equipment / Instrumentation Survivability Issue #29. We conclude that the SSAR adequately addresses this issue and no further consideration of this issue is required.
Please provide a copy of this transmittal to John Monninger.
Sincerely, D
suX Jack Fox i
Advanced Reactor Programs l
ec: Alan Beard (GE)
Carol Lluchholz (GE)
Jack Duncan (GE)
Norman Fletcher (DOE) 4 Jl%L 241 l
110000 10 #
9308110376 930806 9
PDR ADOCK 05200002 d
l A
PDR d
l
u 8
Instrumentation Survivability per 10CFR50.34(f) and 10CFR50.44 Ilackground:
The subject of equipment sunivability for the A13WR during a severe accident was introduced in SECY-90416. This issue was addressed in a letter fromJack Fox to Chet Poslusny dated Niay 25,1993 entitled Closure of April 25 Afecting Issues (CEB93-16). That letter addressed to survivability of equipment and instrumentation related to mitigation and recovery for hypothetical severe accidents. In the senior management meeting between GE and the NRC held in San Jose on June 10,1993, the staffindicated that the discussion of mechanical equipment was acceptable but that the instrumentation discussion did not meet the requirements of 10CFR50.34(f) and 10CDF50.44. The staff volunteered to send a copy of an submittal from an operating power plant which was accepted by the staff. On July 21, GE received a copy of the Perry Submittal on Hydrogen Control.
Requirements of 10CFR50.34(f) and 10CFR50.44:
The requirements for instrumentation sunivability are addressed in 10CFR50.34(O (2)(ix). (The discussion in 10CFR50.44 is veg similar.) In this section, the requirements for a hydrogen control systems are addressed.
Subsection C indicates that the equipment necessary for safe shutdown and containment integrity must be addressed in the development of the hydrogen control system.
Response
Subsection 19A.2.21 of the AllWR SSAR addresses the requirements of the hydrogen control system. The ABWR containment is inerted as described in subsection 6.2.5. Therefore, hydrogen combustion and detonation are not possible and the requirements of the regulation are met by inspection.
The Perg plant is a 51 ark III which is not an inerted containment design.
The description of compliance with the rule provided by Perry addresses the loads generated by the combustion and detonation of hydrogen. Since the A13WR is inerted, these loads do not apply.
In conclusion, the requirements of 10CFR50.34(f) and 10CFR50.44 for consideration ofinstrumentation sunivability in the solution for the hydrogen control issue have been addressed implicitly by the use of an inerted containment. No further consideration of this subject is required.
CEWJ3-lf>2 f
-