ML20052F422

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Provides Draft Topics of Discussion from 800521 Meeting W/Util Re Risk Evaluation
ML20052F422
Person / Time
Site: Limerick  
Issue date: 11/02/1981
From:
NRC
To:
NRC
Shared Package
ML19250E879 List:
References
FOIA-81-416 NUDOCS 8205120447
Download: ML20052F422 (3)
v • d • e


Text

  • ~

f.nuce

,c6hwunw asrf pc e

/<<- h s e

.cw h y/24d'&~e deadeLe, cdNeud4 $ sw/,,,a '

9Nc;a<de <>< 66yc. n e <c.s'<ppwe<sZ

/

.. cA %ua A4rc- '/p'sA+>m L

s.

deeuM' Ayg.'

en a > a-A. cd 4.se sy14er. A di o':afy<r

'Q

.p<<L <e,&j /'9 sue a :</a d

e age <<a a+aa'.f'~fffA

'" " ~l

/be. awi <.,n/., uwc:<:./

/

f 6n-t;- 7t '?9s/////co i.'. 96 y

a A E&J N.')

4 hedc<<xs 246 ww/ m e CGdH&g/etwE.Ed 7'5:ane/

e ' pf kueyi6 bit @. <#xa M L ib - u,.:( tm

,d.

,fw.:s,,,g

.:,,,.}

3 k &,, a N i r a Y D.-c V '

/4 <rn <<

t.>,/

fa ' fwA W, &yheejed<<-1,4r _

<'C i:e:

(

.rJ cr w>'/&

g G:4w 'f2%,'.;%Ay022.5g""

  • de:.a
M&.L/'is"&9{ ~f.iekm rs n< 27 f *:jhrs 4lv,.s ee wmuu

<p uug.

s <xy<cs..'

l a=?EA-de /

xa ~~,el 7 tha e,,{ del 1

7 k P.. x m b n -

c%r., O&:e -wm, eru<uel<Neve -

$<a d nd 3

~s<,,zc.9<-ys,M.. 's,we-s.e / 4,._

<wnn ~ ps,,s....< <c.,.s p

4e m, v-

~. -.

.. 1 4 c ". & n.5

  • 4 ~. =<- Z % ~.

7 y w A5 x ;.m 9 ;jee < d< <>- t

.Q.'.l.7_....Y'A';..w^<<Z{r~..4 y

? Y!?

.Y/

- " ' P Y' 5$b f-ic

' 9205120447 811102 PDR FOIA DORSEY81-416 PDR

k.., *

  • r cuS f'}.

p sca yc7. G my~S-n - n,< s s,,

6 A

a 4.~ nafsaaAs

~

& n7/, m cm, cme upa.{'& 7 o

& uefy m CL,,,..'. /. s.7 4 % OL< r.'

& M,8

=

= m s.' O O / m a. /

\\ - - ~ - _

g M k

/

r n

eJ+ n -u.-x i ca st<~ s> /wr.'

e '.9 m y n< s s.weea,ese ~< &<i.>uu~a e4 I

y de-L e o a w p,,#

e o

e e

4 4

O 9

====.

e e e

, +,

e 0

g 9

p e

b e

e t

s e

o w

e g

a

. gA g.

"*-+

e

    • s.

9.

i l

l I,

g<. r a. m o ~ v y e f. >, c,

- - - - -------- " C -

s

/:cs

/<'.j. < L. ~yy

  • s a. ~

a: :,

I

~

.,)

7g

% ','/,f ~ 2' / e.{<s(,J/L/.~<W.:N i

U.7AQ,. /% m ~ [4L. x;t.., Cy1,.

i.

5 <g a + < s-I /5. p ~ m e y. p.: v. 1 Ch e>ly.U i

p

$- ; N-,, &*b Ne.- M hwal'-. ya-%:e /Y~

i.

7 g<c

.~. 2,u.cv Ja n x

.5 u 9..ai J c.. - y w f,a ~v./ g,

s.

R-

.c-f$.p.-

% GLG ue~-<as%

28 F2 m.: _ &.4, w c~

a.-~, c.',,*. m *cz Ek f?-r*-. >< A 4 ft %,A-/ ty yc.*.1!' A.

l u

& h~.,w - k i^ry, f D ~s

~

p LL e <. d4 ~ Lie e cfQ~<a.G zi -

y

<I:- J[G </e p.y VN'$4sf cu s,.,.J ff

/0, l

- Q 'iz s/, eny e w <-,ety-y.sf c

7.<

.-sL< t<G rysr.

G V-Q + b

~

/ 6 d J <' w f _ c a u J U u,, # g x g

%. g dc s-cLyM/

4, s,,.

L. ~ &

QA.

~

,/ <h. '., f

'd< m hy c[b e A l

6-a).

g- % c %

k% &-,

S. 7. c

_n. ;)- G c<.p..J-6 a,(,

t.

~

~

[w

,me c.:~ c e p /..

.,4

  • 2. i d u k & % c' g. --<f.

. s-, e e 2 :, &

~

eu C /;r 5.

$-u < $ dc k

.h.

/tc,g.

'aec.

C<p' eu.<-c f% - < <<< Mc & d, er s%.4Y4 &

~

c.

r c> J A gf. A %.'

,C'^ c V SC Y Q ( /tt

&c.t W

a s

.. x :...

~

=*

1

hMT W **'

..1 k( I,k.,,-

m.

>y...

DISTRIBUTION

- t...

Docket File JKnight h^,"~<*

NRC PDR VMoore j

f.[ '

Local PDR WKreger i

LBf3 P.Denise 7'

?,C DEisenhut.

ELD V5 l L. 2.c.

".. ~ '..

RPurple IE(3)

?~.

..l.' M M'W ' Docket Hos.:;- 50-362/363 N I":' M '" ' "'W 'RTedesco' e *

J-

~

~'

, **T

NP,,$5. '.

DScalletti

~bec: NSIC w.

.?

J2 JLee TIC

'/;.%

J01shinski ACRS (13)

M Mr. Edward G. Bauer, Jr.

'I-Vice President and General Counsel SIsrael l

MErnst

'.M-} ' -

' Philadelphia Electric Company i-L,;

RMattson

.s:P..- 2301 Market Street 19101 ECase

%;j, r,*TJN,

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania HDenton,;

.s, g

'.~. n:

. i.. Y W.

Dear'Mr. Bauer':

SUBJECT:

RISK EVALUATION - LIMERICK GENERATING STATION, U:IITS 1 and 2 W"V"

;,./
  • Due to a combination of factors which include high population densities and 61 %

.pronosed oower levels the risk from certain nuclear facilities is believed s

17.t'..

  • to represent a disproportionately high segment of the total societal risk from Q.l i

%.W.C freactor accidents 9;.The Limerick facility is one of the facilities which A base assumption 'of this judgment is that.i.f-p hd 9M.j;,,ig '. appears to present s'uch a risk.the Reactor Safety Study (WASH-1400) refer

".-/

-y E

7'F.3,

' Limerick site, the' societal risk from that plant would be higher than the 1 ff societal' risk from the WASH-1400 plant located at the WASH-1400 reference :,ite.y:.

gy-

.Because it is recognized that the Limerick facility desian and site specifics c.

. e..

?p(p 0 3 are not identical to those of the WASH-1400 reference plint, and in order to

.~

Q ;'.., ' further evaluate this risk considering Limerick si vecie and plant specific

+ //'

information, the staff requests that you conduct a relimina

-~ risk assessment W

MD.:../1," tof the Limm icle facility utilizing the WASH 1400 me n5ii6io

, but takinfinto gT,.'y 1 Lirieric(k-faci) s ty.~-ANE I'f.Necount s6nificgdiff'rerices betwee

  • T ? ?' Ji:..~N iM. c.

a M G fg

. J.".Y,

. V ;~ -

  • * ;, - = "rg-T '- 9..::'Y.

,itade;cfwy;&j ';

/

. ~ '

1 friT.".

Dominant high risk accident sequences to be evaluated should be selected based'.d., g

" '... " on Limerick plant-specific design, considerations. Mete orol ogi cal, _popul a.t.f on,_.'.f

y

. '.. - and hydrological data _ specific to the Limerick site.should be used in evaluating l g,

~

,,,.;J '.. the consequences of se ecte' l ' ~d'iiicidents6 4 '.W '. - ~ - -

9 y

3 c.,

  • $1-

' Various criticisms of the use of WASH-1400 should be recognized including those 9

'N

, J.,

criticisms identified in the Risk Assessment Review Group Report to the F's M.~d.J.,

?

W.'.pf,;U. S.' Nuclear Regul' tory'.Comission (NUREG/CR-0400), but since the

' '%the proposed Limerick study.is to evaluate a relative risk for the Limerick

.d

.-T -,bg,l.,_ facility as compared to the risk identified with the WASH-1400 refere C-6.y O

E 45W t'- h.' V'i

  1. '. # ' : '/
  • +.

,& & :.n::.;.'

.;...' - ~

Q

.-6' L

f.'..h. :.J:.-:.. dy*-

9

e.. 's 9 r

7

.. s Li?.if...:.

'O.. Ly.

$'.h(.,N[,;^~.

'hO

$)f

  • ~;.

m.n;.).

$Q.k,.h..f,?..d..

, :.;,ylw

. i. %.

pD

%7sdNM;2MS'I.$5N'sh59$14f-W SsMkSNh&s@Mebk

1. l...

r

,.. 1 y:.:n d+s' h*,h4 6 1980 '

7.9.

r.

u.

.,u..~;

7.4 2-Mr. Edward G. Bauer, Jr.

c h

.w-.f.?

.-4 d

Y.. '

We request that you' complete this evaluation and submit the results to us

.t. 5

'* '%' 5Wby December 1,1980.. As a first step in this activity, we suggest a meeting * !'*04 h[F Ywith* you and your staff on Wednesday.,May

~

21,1980 at 10:00 A.H. at our oF

~~

e.

4 Bethesda office._. The purposs~of the meetingTs to gife you the opp ~orfunity.

4.$ M. -

'to discuss your plaAs~for conducting the study and'toi ~ discus ~s any questions ~

~~

- ~ ~

6.. Y f.

you mar h. ave on this matter.--

A. :.u,

_ _. _..... c.

.. ~.,.

e w A.-

n..

Sincerely.

. ;.?.

.cc-e. c.

4..,:.

. ~.... -

131gnoy

+4.'#7,4H',..

t x

.,'>.3

. q a:

..:.... r.,s :.

.,a..

'NW*s$.*@.'Y.) M&. 4;.,.ON 5&*MI* C ';14 'f$ c usoW "

.. tr s.

OA.E '. -

Darrell G. Eisenhut, Director u s y

Division of Licensing

@S...@.-! :

Office of Huclear Reactor Regulation i.

j.

.r

j.

. v:h.. '"... cc :..S.ee Page. 3 I.

i ud,.. :

,T

^ :'

  • n' n

m

..,?n'*.~ ?.)..

,.?;

... s.. )

V-

-:. (. q r

m..

,n

$ a.,,$',$,$.,c.. H. k., :. ? % '. h...

N

.:..'... :J. 'N :.'. ) I..I ** T O,$..'!.I A

9

. c: a. ;....

2,..

w e:

'.w

. g.1

,*.e.

M.

4 g.14 ;.,' *

, J,,

p.,. y ;

..y w

1. s. n

..y.

v W h

[b',: Y\\h' t,

',' s * *\\b S Y e. ! '

.a'.

. &y*,'.

$t l.s.

... y',.

's.

-aag

., y.;. *= g.. ;,

, 4 ;,.

x z

'w&s,. 9..d:-:;? %a&j y n;., ;%....,

.0..,..

s.

. -<. r. w. a....

y.p..

gy t.

:--i.

+ ~

I O "

'.'.k.l.'

pny~K.R:;%..c>:n. N.. m..t.. A c. c, ;'.'. &... n W:'.

y.a

.c, y.c

, c. ~,..

r.

~-

.'.U & -;e.

- J.

...,. r >......,..,, ?:... ;..

M,a.n.

f ;,. e ';.n,

..:<U '* i,~' ;...i.. r.,..

V G k.,. ! M *g. ';,.s. p.. g.,.....

.-.. m. g.m;......

r...c u

e u..t..... w3n.

, m.,5 3.. e...... ~.. gs..,.

4.....'%i'.}s*uT.

.a:

-4 v.

Lc

.e - -

.'.. - l. ;:.;..',;...:

.,; '. :.;'dk: y. '.. ' '* <.

e, a..,

ry,i:.j3l&;;;?+F ~ ~V '. y s',';.far.f ' 2

~

. ; ;,,1,s a

  1. ' et.o V

t..: '

~:,...'.'

x.

s..

4

s. !;%,9

. ' b. '.f

~.

.s q. ' L :

p$.@"g

. p

.. Ws....; t :i? *.q l.' U. ',,. '.Ol.' 5., 44. ~.7.'l;

-'l l %.:>' : ' *

.. ~

r.-

..c -

c..,

. *n) y:d.'&..,.{.

t,,*% y.u L,.

\\

r._!.

y.,

.,.g

\\.

, *

  • 4

,4

., s. w...,..s n,a 3;

,g-y A

e f

s' m\\ k;-s.

y

,,.. ;, gs',. ~...

N

' s 6.

  • ?*'*

=

'.f tf.),'js.Q..'?,'

. '. f *' '

'..'r,.'.*

4~

g n........>,

2w... e

./. ~

\\r.

fr-C-

M

.s f4.. n e- ?: e. .'.

  • ~.?= g.*;
y. '..

jy~

.. ' j,,_, y..

!.d'.

g e

)

P Ja ti s.,.. g...:-

  • 1: v.-.,

g-

".s..

!g

. T.,..

,.' s -

.w-

.t.'. l Q'.,:s.".. ~'.f

.' *.' e

..v pa.

,y.;f..

1 %. k. s dr.R.%

Q..ve:

,r

$ =.

.... '.9. %.

Iw

.s m;, u...e; r *.-s,t.: ;s -

e f i

3 n.':... c,.. '

f+ -..

e m.... f. <sc.c....,= 4

  • ^.s.

s

  • * ~..

v *.

s n.,.sv.,. s....;:s, - - c.

a

. n.

.... ~.

.1

s...

1+

e.

.x.

pv.*\\:b..g%.p?;7. g.3. :t.,.v'?'. f.,.. %.... f. wr &K.. ;",.W,W %* '.

":n ~ '

M

.a

s..

b..d.,..,v.. :~......,~ym.... n..;.....w...

., s t

.! f;l;; M.jo:J., DOL'/. 'W'V E DST DOL ONRR M.::.;d. M H E W'A*:c.

p RMATTSON.

BGEISENHlIT HRDENTON J0LSHINSKI t

e

~q..

k a

  • v. y.. - ; <. y.

i

. y n

- ~

s

~

Wf e

y

9 q*rc o

hM.. gf b

UNITED STATES y. },

.,, h NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION g *g p

WASHl.dGTON. D. C. 20555 0

  • r a

. ;. f

....+

MAY 151980 Docket Nos. 50-352 and 50-353 MEMORANDUM FOR:

A. Schwencer, Chief, Licensing Branch No. 2, DL FROM:

D. Sells, Project Manager, Licensing Branch No. 2 DL

SUBJECT:

MEETING WITH APPLICAAT ON RISK EVALUATION -

LIMERICK GENERATING STATION DATE & TIME:

May 21, 1980 10:00 LOCATION:

Room P-ll4, Phillips Building Bethesda, Maryland PURPOSE: ~

To meet with Philadelphia Electric to discuss its plans for conducting a risk evaluation study.

PARTICIPANTS:

Philadelphia Electric R. Logue, G. Daebeler,'et al.

NRC H. Denton, D. Eisenhut, R. Tedesco, B. Grimes, A. Schwencer, S. Israel, D. Sells, J. Olshinski, et al.

D. Sells, roJect Manager Licensing Branch No. 2 Division of Licensing cc: See next page O

e n

p fof

/

T

I Mr. Edward G. Bausr, Jr.

li!AY 1. 5 1980 Vice President & General Counsel Philadelphia Electric Company 2301 Market Street i

Phil,adelphia, Pennsylvania 19101 y

ic: Troy B. Conner, Jr., Esq.

Conner, Moore & Corber 1747 Pennsylvania Avenue, N. W.

Washington, D. C.

20006 Deputy Attorney General Room 512, Main Capitol Building Harrisburg, Pennsylvaita 17120 Frank R. Clokey,.Esq.

Special Assistant Attorney General Room 218, Towne House Apartments P. O. Box 2063 Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17105 Honorable Lawrence Coughlin House of Representatives f

Congress of the United States Washington, D. C.

20515 i

Roger B. Reynolds, Jr., Esq.

324 Swede Street Norristown, Pennsylvania 19401 Lawrence Sager, Esq.

Sager & Sager Associates i

45 High Street i

4 Pottstown, Pennsylvania 19464 Joseph A. Smyth Assistant County Solicitor i

County of Montgomery s

Courthouse

, Norristown, Pennsylvania 19404 i

Eugene J. Bradley l

Philadelphia Electric Company Associate General Counsel 2301 Market Street i

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19101 Mr. Joseph C. Mattia Resident Reactor Inspector.

U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission P. O. Box 47 Sanatoga, Pennsylvania 19464 a a r

e e I 4 L

=

~t k

MAY 151980 MEETING NOTICE DISTRIBUTION Docket File J. Miller NRC PDR D. Crutchfield Local PDR BC Systematic Evaluation Program Branch

, TERA BC Operating Reactors Assessment Bra.ich Branch File R. Bosnak NRR Reading F. Schauer H. Denton R. Jackson E. Case G. Lear D. Eisenhut S. Pawlicki R. Vollmer V. Benaroya D. Ross Z. Rosztoczy S. Hanauer W. Haass R. Mattson R. Ballard B. Snyder W. Regan B. Grimes J. Saltzms.n R. Purpose R. Satterfield T. Novak F. Rose R. Tedesco W. Butler G. Lainas

0. Parr J. Knight R. Houston V. Noonan T. Murphy l

D. Muller W. Gamill i

P. Check T. Speis W. Kreger BC, Core Performance Branch L. Rubenstein J. Stolz F. Schroeder BC Human Factors Engineering Branch M. Ernst P. Collins H. Berkow D. Vassallo W. Russell D. Ziemann F. Miraglia K. Kniel F. Pagano D. Skovholt S. Varga G. Knighton T. Ippolito R. Baer R. Clark C. Berlinger R. Reid

. Israel Q-B. Youngblood Project Manager

,V, A. Schwencer Attorney, OELD BC, Licensing Branch #3 IE(3)

BC Emergency Preparedness SD (7)

Development Branch RES (3)

M. Service ACRS(16)

IE Region I IE Region II

~

IE Region III IE Region IV BCC: Applicant & Service List IE Region V NRC

Participants:

Others: -

i.25< < tid 0, h.g.vs2&

)f ; h a d & Y k 01 LL5, 5

2..sa.k.

  • r i

F

.\\j, \\~ g' ' ", "

rV

.c

.1

( c\\

c.

w _5 w.

. \\

~

/

C

,/

Na

'l g\\

9 a

2y

~ 1.

LIMERICK PRELIMINARY RISK ASSESSMENT 4.c s

y%

TECHNICAL PROGRAM DESCRIPTION PRESENTED IO U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION ITAY 21, 1980 3

D A

lJV~

'o cc & f,e

,.,, 7

~. -

'V

v.

I llMERICK PRELIMINARY RISK ASSESSMENT OBJECTIVES STUDY RESULTS AND PRESENTATION TO NRC PER flay 6,1980, LETTER Text ANALYSIS ResulTS SIMILAR TO INDI AN POINT AND ZION STUDY RESULTS e

4 O

e

_A.______._.___=____..___

_ _ '* O "" a:n e- -

    • N*-

x.

LIMERICK PRELIMINARY RISK ASS.ESSMENT APPROACH e

START WITH WASH 1400 REFERENCE BWR (PEACH BOTTOM) e IDENTIFY LIMERICK DESIGN DIFFERENCES e

UPDATE WASH 1400 EVEN,T/ FAULT IREES AND CONSEQUENCE ANALYSIS TO ACCOUNT 'FOR LIMERICK DESIGN DIFFERENCES e. COMPARE PROBABILITY RISK CURVES WASH 1400 REFERENCE BWR WASH 1400 REFERENCE BWR AT LIMERICK SITE v'-

LIMERICKATLIMERICKSITE(/dee)

'I i

i o

e

~

s I

L n

.. +

y 5-D EXPECTED OuTeuT OF PRELIMINARY RISK ASSESSMENT WASH 1400 AT llMERICK SITE WASH 1400 PROBABILITY LIMERICK AT ITS SITE (THIS STUDY)

RISK I

9 e

v.

LIMERICK PRELIMINARY RISK ASSESSMENT liORK SEQUENCE START WORK FLEET WITH NRC TASK 1 IDENTIFY DESIGN DIFFERENCES TASK 2 IDENTIFY AND ANALYZE ACCIDENT SEQUENCES TASK 3 DEVELOP AND APPLY CONSEQUENCE MODEL TASK 4 PREPARE

SUMMARY

PRESENTATION

~

TASK 5 REVIEW AND VERIFY

SUMMARY

PRESENTATION TO PECO TASK 6 REVISE AND ISSUE REPORT t

e W

D E

g..__

1 s.

TABLE 1 EXAMPLES OF DESIGN DIFFERENCES BETWEEN LIMERICK AND THE WASH 1400 REFER NCE BWR e

MARK ll CONTAINMENT NO TORUS HIGHER FREE CONTAINMENT VOLUME LESS COMPLEX GEOMETRY LESS SEVERE POOL SWELL LOADS LARGERSTANDBYLIQUIDCONTROLIkNKVOLUME e

e HIGHER HIGH PRESSURE COOLANT INJECTION FLOW e

LOWER REACTOR CORE ISOLATION COOLING MAXIMUM EXHAUST PRESSURE FouR (vS. TWO) INDIVIDUAL L0w PRESSURE COOLANT INJECTION e

POINTS FOUR EMERGENCY CORE COOLING SYSTEM ELECTRICAL DIVISIONS e

WITH DEDICATED DIESELS e

HIGH PRESSURE COOLANT INJECTION INTO CORE SPRAY SPARGER 9

MORE REACTOR WATER CLEANUP SYSTEM PUMPS MORE SAFETY / RELIEF VALVES (14 VS.11) WITH NEW e

TOP WORKS AND' NO SPRING SAFETI.ES i

  • Q*'.

-4==O= e8 's p.

I

v.

_ TABLE 1 (CONTINUED) e PIPING MATERIAL CHANGES CORE SPRAY PIPING (316L VS. 304)

RECIRCULATION PIPING (316 vS. 304)

LPCI/HEADSPRAY PIPING (316L vS. 304)

DRAIN LINE PIPES (316l VS. 304) e ANALOG IRANSMITTER IRIP UNITS e

NEW FEEDWATER N0ZZLE AND SPARGER DESIGN J

4 1

O e

1 l

l l

-4 W

m ee e

aW@

m Me

- Ma W

-D

t l_IMERICKPRELIMINARYRISKASSESSMENT IDENTIFY DOMINANT ACCIDENT SEQUENCES 9

e IDENTIFY INJTIATING EVENTS STARTING WIm l#SH llOO e

CONSTRUCT EVENT IREES TO DEPICT SUCCESS / FAILURE TO IDT SHtJIID@l e

UPDATE SYSTEM FAULT TREES FOR EACH SEQUENCE s

ANALYZE SEQUENm PROBABILITIES INCLUDES Cf DUE TO INSTRUMENT MISCALIBRATION INCLUTS CEF DUE TO ELECTRICAL /INSTRUENTATION C0ftDNALITY EXCLUDES Of DUE TO OPERATOR ACTION EXCLUDES O f DUE TO EAREQUAKE/ FIRE / SABOTAGE e

GROUP ACCIDENT SEQUENCES INTO CONSEQUENCE CATEGORIES CMF = COMMON MODE FAILURE v

a

o V

l.IMERICK PRELIMINARY RISK ASSESSMENT fhRK II CONTAINMENT ANALYSIS e

ASSESS ASST 1PTIONS USED IN l@SH l@

IDENTIFY DESIGN DIFFE'RENCES e

~e ANALYZESPECIFICCASESAsIEEDED OVERPRESSUREFAILUREIbDE STEAM FELOSION P0TErmAL DIAPHRAGMfLOOREFFECTS PEDESTALDESIM DWNCOMR ARRANGEMNT e

ASSIm PROBABILITIES TO FAILURE f0 DES FOR POSTULATED COREDISRUPTIVEACCIDENT y

e a

b 6

?

g

c.

M.

LIMERICK PRELIMINARY RISK ASSESSMENT DevetoePLANTUNIQUECONSEQUENCEIDDEL i

r ibDIEY CRAC) INPUT.TO INCLUDE:

e l

e SITESPECIFICWEATHER(HOURLY) e SITEPOPULATIONDENSITY e

PuwT FISSION PRODUCT INVENTORY e

Ano To CRAC ANALYSIS:

e EVACUATION Pows / EFFECTS o

6 8

O

?

x

sw s

o MEETING

SUMMARY

DISTRIBUTION Docket File J. Knight NRC PDR S. Hanauer Local PDR R. Tedesco TIC R. Bosnak NRR Reading S. Pawlicki

% ?*? 7 !2

  • L. 6 na F RC-F. Schauer H. Denton K. Kniel E. Case T. Novak H. Berkow Z. Rosztoczy D. Ross W. Butler D. Vassallo V. Benaroya D. Skovholt R. Satterfield J. Stolz V. Moore R. Baer W. Kreger
0. Parr M. Ernst L. Rubenstein F. Rosa S. Varga R. Denise C. Heltemes EP Branch Chief W. l'aass -

G. Chipman R. Houston J. Collins L. Crocker T. Murphy ACRS (16)

G. Lear F. Williams B. Youngblood R. Mattson R. Jackson R. DeYoung l

L. Hulman Project Manager _D, h6 L 6 Attorney, ELD NRCPartkcigants:

mhere pf. Se rv r e d_

~* o IE(3) ds O k *binSk.

D L tj

.11. Sekk'e.te_e r-S. Isra.e,' esr

' 5j'fTh f~. Co oths, OCA Appficant&ServiceList C

(,duc( Q []OELD B C:

P). 9 E SaGwc",' R E S A. VdAnM, Rlli B'<

E R. Frakn

s. New, y RERB m E.6

' L.

S e f& c,.s A (3 u w-

X l179.

e. C, b s T S. Ach drva., f1 A6 R O v l $ n c'i n, S T B 1

9 j

  • *%y

'g UNITED STATES

  • 8\\'

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION o

{

j WASHING) ON, D. C. 20555

%, *..../

Docket Nos. 50-352 and 50-353 4

MEMORANDUM FOR:

A. Schwencer, Chief Licensing Branch No. 2. DL FROM:

D. Sells, Project Manager Licensing Branch No. 2 DL

SUBJECT:

SUMMARY

OF MEETING WITH PHILADELPHIA ELECTRIC COMPANY A meeting was held on May 21, 1980 in Bethesda, Maryland, with Philadelphia Electric Company (PEC) to discuss the risk evaluation study that PEC was directed to conduct in a letter dated May 6,1980, (Enclosure 1). A list of attendees is attached as Enclosure 2.

After opening remarks by V. Boyer (PEC) and H. Denton (NRC), R. Mulford (PEC) gave a background presentation that outlined the history of the Limerick Generating Station Project. He specifically highlighted those aspects of the plant design which PEC believes constitute significant improvement over the PEC operated Peach Bottom facility.

Following this presentation, R. McCandless (GE) presented the technical program l

outline that is to be followed in meeting the requirements of NRC's May 6, 1980 letter to PEC.

General Electric will be the principle subcontractor to PEC for completion of the risk evaluation study and will call upon Science Application Incorporated (SAI) for support'.

In addition PEC has engaged S. Levine of NUS to provide additional consultation and assistance in the PEC review of the adequacy of the study.

A copy of the vu-graphs use'd in the presentation by 't. McCandless is attached (Enclosure 3).

The specific highlights centered around the development of probability risk curves that would display the relative risk of the Limerick plant compared to the reference BWR in WASH-1400.

The work sequence proposed for this study was also outlined as were a number of design differences between Limerick and the WASH-1400 reference BWR (see Enclosure 3).

During the course of the meeting a number of questions came up relating to the approach and format of the final report. As a result of these questions the NRC staff provided the fo11'owing specific guidance to PEC:

l GoaArn m _.

=

.. MAY 2 31980 1.

The report will address and provide probability risk curves for the WASH-1400 reference BWR, the Limerick design (plant specific configuration) at the Limerick site using WASH-1400 component failure data, coninon mode failures, and test and maintenance methodology except as modified by Limericktestandmaintenanceprocedures,(thetimeforrepairofequipment during outages should be the same as WASH-1400) and the Limerick design at the Limerick site using component reliability which may be different from WASH-1400 but which PEC considers apprepriate and for which PEC provides adequate justification.

WASH-1400 reference BWR at the Limerick site may be presented at PEC option.

i 2.

The NRC staff indicated that a computer treatment of the phenomena from core melt to containment failure was desired similar to that of WASH-1400.

PEC indicated this was their intent although different computer codes would be used.

3.

The NRC staff emphasized that the study must utilize the same option of the CRAC code as was used in WASH-1400 for the base case (Limerick at Limerick site using WASH-1400 do64).

It was also requested that the meteorological data used in the study be provided to the staff as soon as it-is developed.

4.

In response to a question concernin

'he treatment of hydrological i

considerations, PEC was told that i.. order to provide consistency with the base case, the hydrological considerations were not to be included 4

in the overall risk evaluation.

Hydrological considerations are to be addressed separately, specifically addressing radioisotope transport I

i time to major water sources and special problems that may result from this pathway.

l 5.

The staff directed PEC to use 1970 population data in order to provide a valid comparison with WASH-1400, but also requested a similar analysis J

for the projected midlife population surrounding the facility.

i i

6.

The staff requested that PEC advise them when the study was sufficiently

}

advanced to hold a second meeting to discuss methodology specifically, methodology and phenomeriology to be applied to the core sequence, contents, l

and an outline of the final report, any other specific items that may be

-i identified by PEC. The staff suggested that such a meeting might be appropriate.in about three weeks.

PEC was asked to contact D. Sells l

(Limerick project manager) to finalize the arrangements for this second i

t meeting.

3 i

1 4

.---,--l

^~~.*^."*LL

..L.,.,.,,,.,,,-._

,_,.,,,,,.._.7

. E O 1980 At the conclusion of the meeting it was agreed that an NRC staff visit to the Limerick simulator currently undergoing testing in Silver Spring, Maryland would be arranged with F. Leitch. The NRC project manager, D. Sells, will make the final arrangements.

The staff emphasized the need for an analysis in a relatively short time frame and requested to be kept informed of any slippage in the 120 day target date.

cb b D. Sells, Project Manager Licensing Branch No. 2 Division of Licensing Attachments:

As stated cc w/ enclosures:

See next page 4

O e

G B

e

'Y :

- - '~

Mr. Edward G. Bauer, Jr.

Vice President & General Counsel Philadelphia Electric Company MAY 2 31980 2301 Market Street Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19101 Y

'cc : Troy B. Conner, Jr., Esq.

Conner, Moore & Corber 1747 Pennsylvania Avenue, N. W.

Washington, D. C.

20006 Deputy Attorney General Room 512, Main Capitol Building.

Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17120 Frank R. Clokey, Esq.

Special Assistant Attorney General Room 218, Towne House Apartments P. O. Box 2063 Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17105 Honorable Lawrence Coughlia House of Representatives Congress of the United States Washington, D. C.

20515 Roger B. Reynolds, Jr., Esq.

324 Swede Street Norristown, Pennsylvania 19401 Lawrence Sager, Esq.

Sager & Sager Associates 45 High Street Pottstown, Pennsylvania 19464 Joseph A. Smyth Assistant County Solicitor County of Montgomery Courthouse Norristown, Pennsylvania -19404

' Eugene J. Br adley Philadelphia Electric Company Associate Gene' al Counsel r

2301 Market Street Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19101 Mr. Joseph C. Mattia Resident Reactor Inspector U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission P. O. Box 47 Sanatoga, Pennsylvania 19464 i

\\

LGicVosure V

.' '~ [q'a cuc,Ig u

UNITED STATES g

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION y

e WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 e

MAY 6 1980 g

50-3jf2/3f,._

Docket Nos.:

3 Mr. Edward G. Bauer, Jr.

Vice President and General Counsel Philadelphia Electric Company 2301 Market Street Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19101

Dear Mr. Bauer:

SUBJECT:

RISK EVALUATION - LIMERICK GENERATING STATION, UNITS 1 and 2 Due to a combination of factors which include high population densities and i

proposed power levels, the risk from certain nuclear facilities is believed to represent a disproportionately high segment of the total societal risk from reactor accidents.

The Limerick facility is one of the facilities which appears to present such a risk.

A base assumption of this judgment is that if the Reactor Safety Study (WASH-1400) reference plant were located at the Limerick site, the societal risk from that plant would be higher than the societal risk from the WASH-1400 plant located at the WASH-1400 reference site.

Because it is recognized that the Limerick facility design and site specifics are not identical to those of the WASH-1400 reference plant, and in order to further evaluate this risk considering Limerick site specific and plant specific information, the staff requests that you conduct a preliminary risk assessment of the Limerick facility utilizing the WASH-1400 methodology, but taking into account significant differences between the UASH-1400 reference plant and the Limerick facility.

Dominant high risk accident sequences to be evaluated should be selected based on Limerick plant-specific ' design considerations.

Meteorological, population, and hydrological data specific to the Limerick site should be used in evaluating the consequences of selected accidents.

j Various criticisms of the use of WASH-1400 should be recognized including those criticisms identified in the Risk Assessment Review Group Report to the U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission (NUREG/CR-0400), but since the purpose of the proposed Limerick study is to evaluate a relative risk for the Limerick facility as compared to the risk-identified with the WASH-1400 reference facility, it is believed that the use of WASH-1400 in this manner is proper.

s fpk C&.W_ AA

.j m_

MAy 6 1980 Mr. Edward G. Bauer, Jr.

2-We request that you complete this evaluation and submit the results to us within 120 days of the date of receipt of this letter. As a first step in this activity, we suggest a meeting with you and your staff on Wednesday, May 21,1980 at 10:00 A.M. at our Bethesda office.

The purpose of the meeting is to give you the opportunity to discuss your plans for conducting the study and to discuss any questions you may have on this matter.

Sincerely.

Il

/

r d.

sen i

c or Division o Licensing Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation cc: See Next Page 4

0 e

.w g

.s

=

e

.y

~.

t

-r Mr. Edward G, Bauer, Jr. f.iA'i 6 1980 s Vice President & General Counsel

1. Philadelphia Electric Company 7.2301 Market Street (Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19101

.c.m y;:.

.E' t

JlI j.. *.

\\

N.cc:. Troy B. Conner, Jr., Esq.

W.h.fConner, Moore &Corber b

Ng'%1747 Pennsylvania Avenue, N. W.y

}

A 20006 t a@ls. Washington, D. C.

9

. v..

w,.,

2. T

' Deputy Attorney General

^

s., M f Room 512, Main Capitol Building t'@....Har ri.sbur 9, Pennsylvania 17120

~

., n..

. tr.

'j;.g<,%g. -i. -:*M.....(Fr ank R. Clokey,' Esq.

'. .'Wp.g..

my:g.:

.i -

.)SpecialAssistantAttorneyGeneral.

i ny.t, Room 218, Towne House Apartments i

., % P. O. Box 2063 17105', '.

%%Harr

....n. x

' }f' f.% X.isburg, Pennsylvania ' V,. ' ;jN.h

...r

' 1.' '

l

- "Q:' eHouse of RepresentativesHono7able Lawrence Coughliii

]

.. ? MCongress'of the United States '

N 20515 f.$y:' Washington,D.C.

' W, '. t

?

t....

4.* Roger B. Reynolds, Jr., Esq.

,~

' '.3' l(t.324 Swede Street

'Norristown, Pennsylvania 19401 W;n. ' -

.:.;,.Lawr'ence Sager, Esq.

Sager & Sager Associates

-. 45 High Street Pottstown, Pennsylvani',,19464 a

y..

e., ';.y.,

.p. 4., 7 Joseph A. Smyth 9.*:';?.

County of Montgomery 4' M Assistant County Solicitor.',.

.,'t:f,j

.rN.

.. Courthouse C.::...Norristown, Pennsylvania lf 19404 2.

~ s

..;.. g?. z..,-

".', Eugene.J. Bradley

. ;c '

~

~

c.

c 2..!.:, Associate General CounselPhiladelphia Electric Company.

f'".

2301 Market Street l.v. '

i

f. Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19101 y,:M.' Mr. Joseph C. Mattia 'g?,j.

Q)':t

. g.: :-

"~!

Resident *Rdactor Inspector U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission

' P. O. Box 47 '

~

Sanatoga, Penn'sylvania 19464

,..k t

'..,. ~,..>.4..~.4 cr C,. 3

e. ' :

y

....-hi'i:$.y,i'.=.<I

=

.t.

,:7.

n h. y;

'r.,...,

,,s. 7 v.

.;;G..

. ~..

.vj.ec..u?.s ;. -_: nii6

~ ? :.,

'r 1

... s,.. : -

'.W:.. -? 2 1.,: %.9-k..

f..

.4 ir.

ENCLOSURE 2 ATTENDEES AT MAY 21, 1980 MEETING IN BETHESDA NRC PEC GE H. Denton, NRR V. Boyer h-' McCandless D. Eisenhut, DL R. Logue K. Holtzclaw D. Sells, DL R. Mul ford L. Frederick J. 01shinski, DL T. Conner W. Gang S. Is rael, DST E. Bradley L. Gifford F. Combs, OCA G. Leitch C. Woodhead OELD L. Noyes R. DiSalvo, RES C. Rush A. Lakner, RRAB R. Frahm, RRAB S. Hou, MEB L. Soffer, SAB J. Meyer, DST S. Acharya, AAB F. Coffman, SIB SAI NUS NIPSC P. Wood E. Schmidt M. Schwartz PA/ DER HOUSE INTERIOR COMMITTEE W. Dronsi fe H. Sambol P. Parshley

=

i

  • b.

e O

ENCLOSURE 3 o*

I.1MERfCKPRELIMINARYRISKASSESSMENT TECHNIC L PROGRAM DESCRIPTION PRESENTED IO U.S. NUCLEAR-REGULATORY-COMMISSION MAY 21, 1980 i

i PDeL k6 ODW?Q lS-

-- --- m oe mov e w+

f\\,

-w-*

-m-

LIMERICK PRELIMINARY RISK ASSESSMENT OBJECTIVES STUDY RESULTS AND PRESENTATION TO NRC PER MAY 6, 1980, LETTER TEXT ANALYSIS RESULTS SIMILAR TO INDIAN POINT AND ZION STUDY RESULTS 9

1 9

0 O

e Y'

n..--.

LIMERICK PRELIMINARY RISK ASSESSMENT APPROACH e

START WITH WASH 1400 REFERENCE BWR (PEACH BOTTOM) e IDENTIFY LIMERICK DESIGN DIFFERENCES UPDATE WAS,H 1400 EVEN,T/ FAULT IREES AND CONSEQUENCE e

ANALYSIS TO ACCOUNT'FOR LIMERICK DESIGN DIFFERENCES e

COMPARE PROBABILITY RISK CURVES WASH 1400 REFERENCE BWR WASH 1400 REFERENCE BWR AT LIMERICK SITE LIMERICK AT LIMERICK SITE 9

e p

h g--

. -- - --I-j

'Y'

_g.

9 e

EXPECTED OuTeur OF PRELIMINARY RISK ASSESSMENT WASH 1400 AT llMERICK SITE WASH 1400 PROBABILITY LIMERICK AT ITS SITE (THIS STUDY)

RISK e

o 1

Y......

~

g-

~-

- ~ -

LIMERICK PRELIMINARY RISK ASSESSMENT WORK SEQUENCE START WORK l1EET WITH NRC TASK 1 IDENTIFY DESIGtt DIFFERENCES TASK 2 IDENTIFY AND ANALYZE ACCIDENT SEQUENCES TASK 3 DEVELOP AND APPLY CONSEQUENCE MODEL TASK 4 PREPARE

SUMMARY

PRESENTATION I

TASK 5 REVIEW AND VERIFY

SUMMARY

PRESENTATION To PECO REVISE AND ISSUE REPORT IASK 6 I

O 4

n_

5

  • TABLE 1 EXAMPLES OF DESIGN DIFFERENCES BETWEEN LIMERICK AND THE WASH 1400 REFER $NCE BWR e

MARK ll CONTAINMENT NO TORUS HIGHER FREE CONTAINMENT VOLUME LESS COMPLEX GEOMETRY LESS SEVERE POOL SWELL LOADS e

LARGER STANDBY LIQUID CONTROL TANK VOLUME e

HIGHER HIGH PRESSURE COOLANT INJECTION FLOW e

LOWER REACTOR CORE ISOLATION COOLING MAXIMUM EXHAUST PRESSURE e

FouR (vs. TWO) INDIVIDUAL LOW PRESSURE COOLANT INJECTION POINTS e

FOUR EMERGENCY CORE COOLING SYSTEM LLECTRICAL DIVISIONS WITH DEDICATED DIESELS o

HIGH PRESSURE COOLANT INJECTION INTO CORE SPRAY SPARGER e

MORE REACTOR WATER CLEANUP SYSTEM PUMPS e

MORE SAFETY / RELIEF VALVES (14 vS.11) WITH NEW TOP WORKS AND NO SPRING SAFETIES

---e-cm...

om a

y a

  • ,p P+

em.e we

5 l

TABLE 1 (CONTINUED) e PIPING MATERIAL CHANGES CORE SPRAY PIPING (316L vs. 304)

RECIRCULATION PIPING (316 VS. 304)

LPC1/HEADSPRAY PIPING (316L vs. 304)-

l DRAIN LINE PIPES (316L VS. 304) e ANALOG IRANSMITTER IRIP UNITS e

NEW PEEDWATER N0ZZLE AND SPARGER DESIGN i

/

)

e 8

i f

l I

\\

1 l

n

LIMERICK PRELIMINARY RISK ASSESSMENT IDENTIFY DOMINANT ACCIDENT SEQUENCES e

IDENTIFY IN.ITIATING EVEtHS STARTING WITH WASH ll00 e

CONSTRUCT EVEIR IREES TO DEPICT SUCCESS / FAILURE TO lbT SHUTDOWN e

UPDATE SYSTEM FAULT TREES FOR EAm SEQUENC5 e

ANALYZESEQtNNCEPROBABILITIES INCLUDES 0F DuE TO INSTRtFENT MISCALIBRATION INCLUDES 0F DuE TO ELECTRICAL /INSTRIDENTATION CottDNALIT(

EXCLUDES UF DUE TO OPERATOR ACTION ExCLuoeS 0F DuE TO EARTHOLRKE/ FIRE / SABOTAGE e

GR0ue ACCIDEf6 SEQUENCES ItRO CONSEQUENCE CATEGORIES 1

CMF = COMMON MODE FAILURE r.g*,

pa.s-__

^- ~ ~ ~ ' '

0

LIMERICK PRELIMINARY RISK ASSESSMENT M K ll CM TAINMENT ANALYSIS e

ASSESS ASStPPTIONS USED IN WASH ll1T

}DENTIFY DESIGN DIFFERENCES e

e ANALYZE SPECIFIC CASES AS NEEDED DVERPRESSUREFAILUREIbDE STEAM EXPLOSION POTENTIAL DIAPHRAGMFLOOREFFECTS PEDESTALDESIm DmNCDER ARRANGEMENT e

ASSIm PROBABILITIES TO FAILURE % DES FOR POSTULATED COREDISRUPTIVEACCIDENT O

I t

i h

____________=___,ma_

M

s r

1 LIMERICK PRELIMINARY RISK ASSESSMENT DEVELOP PuwT UNIQUE CONSEQUENG IDML j

e IbDIFt CRAC INPlK.TO INCLUDE:

SITE SPECIFIC WEATHER (HOURLY) e e

SITEPOPULATIONDENSITY e

PuwT FISSION PR0auct INVENTORY-P e

Aoo TO CRAC ANALYSIS:

j e

EVACLRTION PuwSNFFECTS I

l I

. we a

=ww em

-

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=ML20052F422&oldid=4508853"