ML20094C355
| ML20094C355 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 11/24/1975 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| References | |
| NUREG-75-087, NUREG-75-087-10.4.6, NUREG-75-87, NUREG-75-87-10.4.6, SRP-10.04.06, NUDOCS 9511020173 | |
| Download: ML20094C355 (4) | |
Text
_
NUREG 75/087
/p* **ou%,'
U,s. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMIS810N y'
'1 5
STANDARD REVIEW PLAN
%.eee.#
OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION SECTION 10.4.6 CONDENSATE CLEANUP SYSTEM REVIEW RESPONSIBILITIES Primary. Auxiliary and Power Conversion Systems Brant.h (APCSB)
Secondary. Effluent Treatment Systems Branch (ETSB) 1.
AREA $ OF REVIEW The condensate cleanup system (CCS) removes dissolved and suspended impurities due to corrosion from condenser or steam generator leaks that could be introduced into the CC$ by carryover from the main steam system. The CCS is not required for safe shutdown or miti-gation of postulated accidents. but is important in maintaining the primary coolant quality in direct cycle plants or the secondary coolant quality in indirect cycle plants.
The AFCSB reytews the CCS from the supply point downstream of the condensate pumps to the discharge point upstream of the feedwater heaters, and also to the interfaces with the effluent treatment systems.
1.
The APC$B reviews the CCS to determine that the system provides feedwater to the reactor for direct cycle plants or to steam generators for indirect cycle plants that meets water purity requirements. For plants with salt water cooled condensers the design measures taken to assure that the chloride concentration is limited to allowable values until the condensate and feedwater systems can be isolated in the event of a condenser tube rupture are reviewed.
2.
APC$B reviews the system to determine that the design satisfies the reconynendations of Branch Technical Position APCSB 3 1 with respect to breaks and cracks in high and moderate energy system piping.
3.
The applicant's proposed technical specifications are reviewed for operating license applications as they relate to areas covered in this plan.
Secondary reviews are perfonned by ETSB to determine the effect of the CC$ on fission and corrosion product concentrations and the effect of the quantity of spent resin and regen-erant solution on radwaste system requirements.
USNRC STANDARD REVIEW PLAN
. c.N,*.'*S.*'[$Yna'I'E.D"*.*E'04.7.NUY,*5."$7NEn7c".'EYW2No*.Ue*.iYn v*$$iU"js257MYd
- Y
- '.*' .".2,,,".3..:.L. **" " ~.* :"..;.*
'L.*.,.,".m?.* C ;":.*:<';'.C' ':w:.i.",'*.'.".2;'aC W:.**":?",':.".:,* : "$
,w 4l.h.d.4.n t( r.v w pt.A. We# be f.v6 4 p.rt.$ Hy. H.
t.W4.9.1.
.mm.4 9...mm.At..n4 4. p.n.ct n.nu inf.em.t6.a Md.4p.M.n C.mm.nt
- 4 4 9 tl.a. $.f.in.pt.w.m.e. Will b.
nW4.r.d.ed.h.464 b..Mt t th. u $ $$wel t $.gul.t.sy C.enet 6.a,0tn.. 8 leve6 t A.ut.'
R.gw6.t6ee Yruhangton. O C, as s4 11/24/75 9511020173 751124 PDR NUREO 75/087 R pop
I
!!. ACCEPTANCE CRITERIA Acceptability of the CCS design, as described in the applicant's safety analysis report
($AR), is based on the criteria below and on the degree of similarity of the design with that of previously reviewed plants with satisfactory operating experience. There are no
{
general design criteria that apply directly to the CC$.
1.
For direct cycle plants, the design of the CCS should conform to the reconnendations of Regulatory Guide 1.56, includh; Replatory Positions 1 through 6, and the Appendix, as related to the design of condensate domineralizer systems to maintain the proper water purity specified for the reactor. For indirect cycle plants the design should conform with Regulatory Positions 1 through 5 and the secondary water chemistry specifications of the nuclear steam supply system vendor.
2.
The design of the CCS should meet Branch Technical Positions APC$8 31 and MEB 31, as related to breaks in high and moderate energy piping systems outside containment.
111. REVIEW PROCEDURES The review procedures below are used during the construction permit (CP) review to determine that the design criteria and bases and the preliminary design as set forth in the preliminary safety analysis report (PSAR) meet the acceptance criteria given in Section !! of this plan.
For the review of operating licence (OL) applications, the procedures are used to verify that the initial design criteria and bases have been appropriately implemented in the final design as set forth in the final safety analysis report (FSAR).
The procedures for OL reviews include a determination that the content and intent of the technical specifications prepared by the applicant are in agreement with the requirements for system testing, minimum performance, and surveillance developed as a result of the staff's review. The reviewer will select and emphasize material from the paragraphs below, as may be appropriate for a particular case.
1.
Layout drawings are reviewed to ascertain there are no safety related components or systems located close to the high or moderate energy pipes of th4 CCS, or that protec.
tion from the effects of failures of these pipes is provided. The means of providing such protection will be given in Chapter 3.6 of the SAR and procedures for reviewing this infonnation are given in the corresponding review plans.
2.
The APC$8 evaluates'the system design information and drawings and, utilizing engineer.
ing judgement, operational experience, and performance characteristics of similar, previously approved systems, verifles thatt The system meets the requirements for condensate cleanup capacity, provides effluent a.
of the required purity, and contains adequate instrumentation to monitor the effectiveness of the system.
10.4.6 2 i
11/24/75
For plants witri salt or brackish water cooled condens3rs, the system nas adequate j
b.
capacity to maintain acceptable chloride concentrations in the feedwater system for a sufficient period of time to allow remedial action in the event of condenser tube failures, and the technical specifications and operational procedures ade-quately describe the method used to isolate the condensate and feedwater systems, The system is connected to radioactive waste disposal systems to allow disposal of j
c.
j spent resin or regenerant solutions when required.
IV. EVALUATION FINDINGS The reviewer verifies that sufficient information has been provided and his review supports conclusions of the following type, to be included in the staff's safety evaluativn report:
"The condensate cleanup system includes all components and equipment necessary for the t
removal of dissolved and suspended impurities which may be present in the condensate, The scope of the review of the condensate cleanup system for the j
plant included layout drawings, piping and instrumentation diagrams, and descriptive information for the system and for supporting systems essential to its operation. (The review has determined the adequacy of the applicant's proposed design criteria and design bases for the condensate cleanup system and the requirements for operation of the system. (CP).] (Thereviewhasdeterminedthatthedesignofthecondensate cleanup system and supporting systems is in conformance with the design criteria and design bases. (OL)]
1 "The basis for acceptance in the staff review has been conformance of the app cant's N
design criteria and design basis for the condensate cleanup system and supporting systems to applicable regulatory guides, staff technical positions, and industry standards.
"The staff concludes that the design of the condensate cleanup system conforms to all applicable guides, staff positions, and industry standards, and is acceptable."
V.
REFERENCES 1.
Regulatory Guide 1,56, " Maintenance of Purity in Boiling Water Reactors."
Branch Technical Positions APC$B 31, " Protection Against Postulated Piping Failures in 2.
Fluid Systems Outside Containment," attached to Standard Review Plan 3.6.1, and MEB 31,
" Postulated Braak and Leakane locations in Fluid systen Piping Outside Containment,"
attached to $tandard Review Plan 3.6.2.
10.4.6 3 11/24/76
\\
a--
.-w-N i
l l
l l
l 11/24n5 q
,i i---
-w,
i I
5RP
/c
</ 7