ML20062N505
Text
-
!(pannq[o, UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION n
N, t
WASHING TON. D. C. 20555 k,
y
[
October 29, 1979 '
T et J
c (f@,
h.
g('
n NOTE FOR:
D. Ross FROM:
D. Eisenhut
SUBJECT:
EFFECT OF FEEDWATER SYSTEM fiODIFICATION IN OPERATING PWR PLANTS ON ORIGINAL STEAM LINE BREAK ANALYSES In the Oconee FSAR, Section 14 Safety Analysis for the steam line break (SLB) accident inside containment, Duke considered only one emergency FW pump, pumping through the break, and causing an increase in containment pressure due to the SLB accident. The plant nodifications resulting from the T!1I Bulletins and Orders may have affected the FSAR SLB analyses not only for Oconee but perhaps the other operating PWRs.
It is requested that this subject be specifically addressed in your review of the proposed modifications at Oconee.
It is further requested that this subject be reviewed for the other operating PilRs.
The containment pressure response to a SLB inside containment was the subject of a Part 21 notification from Virginia ' Electric Power Company for North Anna 3 and 4.
The problem at florth Anna 3/4 involved inadequate consideration of the auxiliary FW flow under pump runout conditions, It seems approp~riate that you should also consider this subject for any actions resultf rig from Bulliti~ns and ~
~
0rdeFs Jctivities.__ _._
'I e_ OC.w Darrell G. Eisenhut, Acting Director Division of Operating Reactors Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation cc: WGamill llButler Glainas RReid MFairtile l
0203010202 810804 PDR FOIA MADDEN 80-555 PDR w---
i
O-t Docket Nos.: 50-269, 50-270 and 50-287 OCT 161979 fir. William 0.. Parker Vfce President - Steam Production Duke Power Company P.O. Box 2178
. 422 South Church Street Charlotte, North Carolina 28242
Dear Mr. Parker:
s
SUBJECT:
EMERGENCY FEEDWATER FLOW RATE AND STABILITY iTEST FOR OCONEE 1, 2, & 3 In your letter dated August 22, 1979, you requested exemotion from the flow rate and flow stability test that we required in our May 18, 1979 evaluation of your compliance with the NRC Order of May 7,1979.
!!e h' ave reviewed.your request and conclude that the flow test we required in our
,May 18, 1979 evaluation will not be necessary provided all motor-operated pumps t
are.available prior to three unit operation. The enclosed evaluation describes the details of our review and provides the basis for our conclusion.
4 As stated on page two of the enclosed evaluation, the addition of the two motor-driven pumps to each unit requires that new analyses be perfonned regarding a main steam line break inside containment since the peak containment pressure may be affected due to.the emergency feedwater flow which is dependent on manual actions to isolate flow to the affected steam generator.
In perfoming the analyses. you must consider the run out flow from the turbine-driven pump and one motor-driven pump. Please provide us a date by which we can expect to receive the revised analyses.
If you have any additional questions, pleasd do not hesitate to call me.
Sincerely.
- Origir:a1 s12 nod byr Robert W. Reid, Chief Operating Reactors Branch No. 4.
Division of Operating Reactors Encicsure:
Supole ent 1 to Eval;ation of Licensee's Com:liance with the
" Order dated "av 7,1979 tilO >
,l See attacned dis:ribution list h
cc:
8 m
Ag-
>!.. s s0. m..... 350. T/fg... 3M JE +.. )l. NR RR S.^
w.-..,
5
.b
- !A-.l
~'
n.,
4. %Ca=r.aio.c.
....S I s.ca e.l..
.. ?*.v
- k.....M F * '.'t.n e.........gRes s.....
,,10/f,k,,/,79,,,,,,10,/,@ 9,,,
._,F.i10//c/79........,. 10/.10./ 79
,, ), / ',' f 7 9,,,
,/gl/79 10 10
.~...,~,,~,.,,,,,m. m,.,,,. m 1 1:. ;..~.
L c
- . ?
.