ML20127M311
| ML20127M311 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | 05200001 |
| Issue date: | 11/19/1992 |
| From: | Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards |
| To: | |
| References | |
| ACRS-T-1943, NUDOCS 9211300128 | |
| Download: ML20127M311 (398) | |
Text
{{#Wiki_filter:' O OFFICIAL TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS I - O( I TR04 (ACRS) Delete H. White Return Original to B. White ACRS P-315 l Thanks!
$$4bMt.
Barb:Wa Jo White
#27288 j; Agency: Nuclea r Re gula to ry Comtnis sio 1 Advisory Com ittee on Reactor Safeguards
Title:
Advanced Boiling Water Reactors (GE) Subcommittee Docket No. O LOCATION: Bethesda, Maryland DATE: Thursday, November 19, 1992 PAGES, 1- 295 (<I*-- .-
' j^
- f ,,
{ 50MheUfaOibiG00DifflIIiH ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
<O 1612 K St. N.W, Suite 300 c -, m ,- Washington, D.C. 20006 921130012$ 11l'9 (202) 2'33-3950 PDR ACRS T-1943 PDR ;
__ ___ ____ _ 3
, __ _ --- ----- -u- -- uc o-.& . .j' + b' 6 ., [g OF PROCEEDINGS OFFICIAL TRANSgRI , vy
--0;p .
- .a - %.. . .
LT 9(ACRSE. ,
'b
iddl$tej3 Whitei 1 M --, . x CReturi_OriginalLto.B. Whites b ' f [ ACRSjP-315 1' 3 m ; e% +. ' , m > l'J ' ; i s ye i.ThatN$15 N Y / ' NbA h8 $i
$, f
- 3. , [#27288 ;xg Qf 4
p
,# .~geng~ . Nuclear. Regulatory, Commission
' Advisory Commit tee? on Reactor: Sa feguards -
,, c , .
LTitle: =Adiranced 'noilina water neactors:(ca)
' Subcommittee ' '
.. , 't.
* ^
Dcrket Not i fi ~ ? , ,, l n :,. , [ '. i
- q :
' toCAp ' Be the sda,; ML. ryland10 '
9 ,
.>. 1) 4 . ;
.f - --i , _ .
$ 6 1
J s , DATP.: ; Thu rs' day , i Novemb e r.fl9.J19 9 2 " ,_ IPAGEE 1 -'295, l
, w 1 i
ms _,' ,
'4
, i 9 ;
< ~,- .
-r .
m' ,, , .. ,' , l a ,, , ,u is , ,. j. . . ~ , M+ M e **'i j 4 [
~ a.
w 7 g. g 3 gtW C 6 @ @t g y x c + l jp,f > ' '
'k' g_
b #;; ANN RILEY c: ASSOCIATESiLTD.'- 11612 KSt. N.W, Suite 300 l
' ~'-
me : p , . 9211300128 921:19 PDR ACRS E 300h h Yo$"7-
^
g 8
- i--(V :
T-1943 PDR 1 1 5 c 4 [ V t w ' . , h I,.
... .. . 3 PUBLIC NOTICE BY THE UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON REACTOR SAFEGUARDS DATE: November 19, 1992 The contents of this transcript of the proceedings of the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission's Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards, (date)
November 19, 1992 , as Reported herein, are a record of the discussions recorded at the meeting held on the above date. This transcript has not been reviewed, corrected or edited, and it may contain inaccuracies. I ANN RlLEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Court Reporters 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D. . C. 20006 (202) 293-3950 I
1 1 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 2 NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 3 *** 4 ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON REACTOR SAFEGUARDS 5 ***
- 6. Advanced Boiling Water _ Reactors (GE) Subcommittee 7 Nuclear Regulatory Commission 8 7920 Norfc1k Avenue 9 Bethesda, Maryland 10 Thursday, November 19, 1992 11 The meeting convened at 8:30 a.m., C. Michelson, '
12 Chairman of the-Subcommittee, presiding. 13 PRESENT FOR THE SUBCOMMITTEE: 14 C. Michelson 15 I. Catton 16 P. Davis 17 P. Shewmon 18 C. Wylie 19 ALSO PRESENT:- 20 R. Costner, Consultant 21 M. El-Zeftawy, Cognizant ACRS Staff Member. 22 23 24
-25 O ANN RlLEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd.
Court Reporters 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington,_ D. C.- 20006 (202)_-293-3950
i 2 () 1 2 PROCEEDINGS MR. MICHELSON: The meeting will now come to 3 order. This is a meeting of the ACRS Subcommittee on 4 Advanced Boiling Water Reactors. 5 I am Carlyle Michelson, Chairman of the 6 Subcommittee. 7 The ACRS members in attendance are Ivan Catton, l 8 Pete Davis, Paul Shewmon, and Charles Wylie. Tom Krecs is 9 not here yet. The consultant in attendance is Bob Costner. 10 The purpose of this meeting is to continue the
- 11 review of the Draft Final Safety Evaluation Report for the 12 GE ABWR design and residual issues.
13 Dr. Medhat El-Zeftawy is the Cognizant ACRS Staff 1 (~h
\,,,/ 14 member for thic meeting.
15 The rules for participation in today's meeting
- 16 have been announced as part of the notice of this reeting 17 previously published in the Federal Register on November 2, 18 1992, 19 A transcript of the meeting is being kept and will s
20 be made available as stated in the Federal Register notice. 21 It is requested that each speaker first identify himself or . 22 herself and speak with sufficient clarity and volume so that 23 he or she can be readily heard. 24 We have received no written comments or requests 25 for time to make oral statements from members of the public. " b)L ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Coud Repoders 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D. C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
i l- 3 1 1 We already have an agenda which we will stick to. 2 It is my understanding that GE would like to finish no later 3 than 3:00 tomorrow. We will certainly finish at 3:00 I ~ 4 tomorrow. 5 The chapters to be covered we have already seen in 2 l 6 the notice that Medhat sent out. 7 The format will be this. GE or the Staff will 8 make whatever presentations at any time they wish to make j 9 1. hem on the particular subject at that time. Beyond that, .' 10 the format will be for us to go through each chapter and I 11 give the members and consultant an opportunity to ask l { 12 whatever questions they may have as we work our way through i 13 the chapters. The purpose of this meeting is to clarify 14 your understanding of the draft final safety evaluation l 15 report so that we can ultimately write a report on this 16 project. l l 17 Does Staff have something they wish to say first? i-18 MR. POSLUSNY: I would like to ask that we spend a l j 19 couple of minutes on your comment about COL action. items. I
- 20 Staff would like to talk a little bit-about it. ,
l l 21 MR. MICHELSON: You would like to do that before
- 22. we get into any of the others?
- -23 MR. POSLUSNY
- Yes. It shouldn't take too long. >
i 24 MR. MICHELSON:. All right. f 25 Before you_ start, we have some comments from Jay- 'O ! ANN RILEY & ' ASSOCIATES, Ltd. ! Court Reporters
- 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300
- -Washington, D. C. 20006 i (202) 293-3950
. . - . . - - . . . .-~
h l 4 1 Carroll. He was unable to. attend today but he sent us l 2 comments. You have them. You may wish to look at some of l l 3 those. l 4 MR. WILSON: Mr. Chairman, by way of background, i j 5 the items identified in the SER, in what I believe is j 6 section 1.9, labeled COL Action Items, are to call out the l 7 areas of review that are outside the scope of the. design 8 certification review. Design issues such as site specific
- j. 9 design features and other types of issues _that relate
- 10 strictly to applicant or licensee would not be dealt with in !
L j 11 the design certification review, ) 12 As the reviewers who were going through their SRB
- I l 13 review and identifying areas of review, they wc 4 make note 14 in their safety evaluation report that this is an item that ~
} l 15 we have to take up when we are doing a combined license - 1 l 16 review. That's the general purpose of the combined license.
- 17 acti.on items, i
j 18 In the meeting we had last month, I believe Mr. i-l 19 Carroll brought up that he felt that we should go back-and 20 reexamine all of those COL action items and be sure that we 21 are reallyldoing-all of the design _ review we can be doing at 22 this stage and not unnecessarily putting' things off. We f t 23 made a commitment at that-time to do that. Due.to the press 24 of other business, we haven't done it yet, but we plan to do l 25 that in the near future. That kind of sets the groundwork i 1
- O
- ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd.
3 Court RepOners 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300
- Washington, D. C. 20006 i (202) 293-3950
_ _ _ . _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ . . _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ __ - .. -- _ _ . - ~ i 4 i i 5 , (} 1 2 and I will respond to your questions. MR, MICHELSON The COL action items are not ' i 3 unique to Chapter 2. They are throughout the documents. In 4 many cases they deal with design to be done in the future . 5 and what you are going to do on it. We questioned whether i I 6 you can do your safety evaluation today based on a design j 7 that you don't have and won't see until later. That's where i } 8 we have the problem. I don't have any problem with a COL { 9 that says that here is the design and here are certain 10 things we wish to verify later. You can use an ITAAC I j 11 probably better for that purpose than a COL action item.- 1 12 MR. POSLUSNY: A COL action item is.not like an I 13 ITAAC. In ITAAC we have come to agreement on what the
) 14 design should look like and the ITAAC is just to verify that 4
l 15 those design features and performance characteristics are i l 16 being met in the installation. A COL action item may be , 17 something like a training program that wouldn't be dealt 18 with by the reactor vendor but is something to-be dealt with
- 19 for the licensee.
20 MR. MICHELSON: There certainly are cases where a l 21 COL action item is appropriate. There are a number of
- 22 cases, and we will hit some of them as we go through the
- 23 chapters, where clearly they are inappropriate. If the 24 design isn't going to be done up front, we should put it 25 into a DAC process, which:is the onlyJother process
!O ! ANN RILEY & -- ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Coud Reponers 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite .300 Washington, D. C. 20006
- _(202) 293-3950
6 1 available to do future design, and do your safety evaluation 2 today. They are not put into the DAC process either; they 3 are put into a COL action item process, which I. think is a 4 misuse of that. ; 5 MR. COSTNER: Mr. Chairman, could we nave a little 6 enlightenment as to the limitations the Staff is placing on 7 the use of interfaces? The regulation seems to sa.y 8 interfaces must be used in certain cases. The Staff seems 9 to be taking the position that interfaces can only be used 10 for those things specifically made mandatory _in the 11 regulation. From my looking at the document, it appears 12 that interfaces would be very appropriate for many, many 13 cases where they have used COL action items. ? 14 MR. MICHELSON: That may turn ont to be the case. 15 We have to look at each one of these and see why they are 16 doing it like they are. Interfaces presumably take care of 17 where the design is not covered by the certificate. 18 MR. COSTNER: Yes, but they are using interfaces 19 only where the design is outside the horizontal boundaries 20 .of the certificate and not allowing interfaces when it is in 21 the vertical alignment, such as more detail. 22 MR. WILSON: Mr. Chairman, he is correct. We have 23 tried-to limit the use of the term " interface." It is- I 24 specifically called out in the regulations that once l 25 something is defined as an-interface additional requirements l l O ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Court Reporters-- 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D. - C. - 20006 (202) 293-3950'
7 () l' apply to it. So you have to-be very careful where you use 2 it. -It's true that in the pest we have used the word 3 " interface" to mean things that we are not now using because 4 of the effect of the regulation. 5 In this particular case the interface between a 6 site-specific design feature, like an ultimate heat sink or 7 an intake structure and the certified scope of the design, 8 those are the only real interfoces under Part 52. Or6ce you 9 identify what those site-epecific design features are and 10 determine what the necessary interfaces are, additional 11 requirements come into play. So you don't want to call 4 12 other things interfaces that we may have done in the past. 13 You have to use different terminology. That may be what Mr. 14 Costner is saying. 15 MR. COSTNER: Part 52 says you must have i 16 interfaces for those things. It doesn't say you cannot have 17 interfaces for other things. 18 MR. WILSON: But if you identify other things as 19 interfaces, then there are additional requirements that 20 would be applied to those, and you don't want to do that. 21 MR. COSTNER: Such as justification. 22 MR. WILSON: No. Such as conceptual designs and 23 ITAAC requirements and things like that that you wouldn't 24 want to bring into it. It would cause quite a bit of 25 confusion in implementing the regulations. So we have to be o ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Coud Reponers 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D. C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
8 1 very careful on what things we call interfaces.
'e MR. MICHELSON: You are going to give us a 3 presentation on the COL action item questions?
4 MR. POSLUSNY: No. 5 MR. MICHELSON: This is it? You had nothir; 6 formal, so we just ask questions? 7 MR. POSLUSNY: Yes. 8 MR. MICHELSON: There is nothing in Part 52 that 9 mentions the existence of a COL. How do you work it_into 10 t.he regulatory process? 11 MR. WILSON: Subpart C of Part 52 is for combined 12 licenses. In there is says you can reference a certified 13 design. l 14 MR. MICHELSON: We are-dealing with Subpart B. We 15 haven't gotten to a COL yet. 16 MR. WILSON: In order to do this part of the 17 teview, we have to look forward to-what would happen if 18 somebody referenced the design. These COL action items are 19 basically that, the Staff looking forward to whmt would 20 happen at the next stage. , 21 MR. MICHELSON: Let me ask a better question. Is 22 any of your final safety determination based on the 23 existence of this COL that is to be carried'out later? 24 MR. WILSON: It shouldn't be. Not at this stage. 25 _MR. MICHELSON: _As far as I can see, a COL is ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Court Reporters 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D. ' C. 20006 L (202) 293-3950: L . _ -. --
~ _ - - -- _ _ . - . - . . -_- . . - - - . . - . - - ..
____m 9 - 1 immaterial. You have got everything you need to know, and 2 if you don't, you get it, to make a final stfety_ 3 determination irrespective of what the COL says. 4 HR. WILSON: It's basically reminders to the Staff 5 that these are things to look at. 6 MR. MICHELSON: They are just a checklist of 7 things to be sure to take care of later, but we don't need 8 that information or even a promise of that information to 9 make our safety determinations. 10 MR. WILSON: Correct. 11 MR. WYLIE: I'm not so sure of th7t. They promise 12 they are going to meet certain-things. 13 MR. MICHELSON: I know, Charlie. They have been 14 doing design with COLs, and you can't do design with COLs. 15 That's the thing we are trying-_to establish. 16 MR. WYLIE: No, but you can promise that you are 17 going to do a design that you will verify at the COL stage, 1 18 and that's what they are doing. 19 MR. MICHELSON: No,-Charlie. If they can't make 20 their safety-determination now, it is immaterial whether 21 they have written a COL or not. That's my understanding of l 22 the process. S'o_you don't even look at-the COL promises. ( 23 You say, do I have enough information in front of me now-to 24 make a final safety _ determination? I think they are going 25 to find in a number of cases rhere it's no, because'it's the [) ANN RlLEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Court Reporters 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 LWashington, D. C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
..- . . - - . . . - . - . - - - . - - - - - . - - = - . . - . . . . - - - . - _ . - -
h i l 10 i 1- COL that is going to give you the information. 2 MR. WYLIE: That's right. 3 MR. MICHELSON: That is what we are going to get
! 4 to, that you can't do that.
I j 5 MR. WYLIE: You are just making a point. 1 6 MR. MICHELSON: I'm just making a point that we 7 can't use COLs to make the final safety determination. They {
- 8 agree, if I understand their response. Then they said they l 9 will give us cases where they are trying to do that. I 10 think you should have no trouble in Chapter 8 giving a 11 number of cases where that is what they are trying to do.
12 They don't have a design in front of them but they have a i 13 promise of a design in the form of a COL. Is that good 14 enough to grant a certificate? l 15 MR. WYLIE:- They have a design but they have got a j 16 lot of missing parts. l 17 MR MICHELSON: That's right, and are they i ! 18 important to safety? If they are, then they have got to be 19 known up front. That's what bothered Jay and others, that j 20 we don't have this information today, and do we need it? [ 21 If we need it, we can't use a COL process to get 22 it. We have-to use a design process to get it. The only l , 23 place the-agency-said we will make exceptions are the four 24_ DACs which they have identified.. There we are taking 25 promises today with certain restrictions on the protsises to l l !O i ANN RlLEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Court Reporters __ . 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suit 0 300
- Washington, D. C. 20006
- (202) 293-3950
- ~. ~_ . _- . - - -. .. . . - - -- .
- - . - - ~ . - - -
11 j() 1 make a final determination. This goes way beyond the DAC.- 2 We need to point out as we go, I think, where the 4
- 3 COL process is being misused.
i 4 Some of what we found in looking at the col is i j 5 that they could be properly rewritten so that they would be f 6 acceptable. It's just the way some of them are written it } 7 appears that you are waiting for a future design but you are i
- 8 making your sr.fety determination today. I think some
) 9 rewriting of some them might get you out of that, at least ! 10 the impropriety of the way it appears that some of it is 11 being done now. In other cases it's just not possible. You
- l. 12 have to do the design if you need it for your safety 13 determination.
14 I haven't had time to study all of Jay's comments, a a 15 We will have to address this issues again later. After the 16 meetings that we have today and tomorrow it may become clear-I 17 what the real problem is by starting to look at more of the l 18 examples. I think it is. going to be necessary to address l 19 it.
- 20 We will give you a copy of Jay's comments and give i
21 GE a copy as well. It may help a little bit in trying to l 22 determine where we are. I think we have got the i 23 clarification we need, namely, that the COL process is not 24 needed for the Staff's final safety determination. That's 25 the way we will judge'the CoLs.. If they aren't needed,-then O ANN RlLEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd.
- Coud Reponers i
1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D. C. 20006 l(202) 293-3950
12 () 1 2 it's a perfectly legitimate mechanism. All you are trying to do, I think, is create a 3 checklist._ We asked that you te orderly in some of these 1 4 areas, and I think you have done a very good job in that , 5 regard. It's just that we want to make sure that they 6 really are col action items. 7 Before we leave this, the COL action item and the 8 interfaces have kind of gotten mixed up a little bit. One 9 of the things.in the Part 52 that I find and some others 10 have found is not being carried out is that where interfaces 11 are being specified -- I will now quote you Part 5247.7 -- 12 it says the " interface requirements to be met by those 13 portions of the plant for which the application does not 14 seek certification, these requirements must be sufficiently 15 detailed to allow completion of the final safety analysis 16 report and design-specific probabilistic risk assessment 17 required." 18 Then it goes on in Part 8 to say that you " provide 19 justification that compliance with the interface 20 requirements of paragraph 7 of this section is verifiable 21 through inspection, testing or analysis.- The method to be 22 used for verification must be included as part of the 23 proposed ITAAC," and'so forth. 24 I don't find those justifications-at all where 25 interfaces are being proposed. Are those going to come- , ( ]) ANN .RlLEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. , Coud Repoders ! 1612 K. Street, N.W.,: Suite 300 l Washington, ' D. C. 20006 ! (202)'293-3950 -; o
13 1 later? l
- l 2 MR. POSLUSNY: What GE has done for at least a few 3 of the interfaces they have included in their ITAAC 4 submittal, pse .0-ITAACs for those areas. We have looked at 5 those. We expect them for all the six interfaces we have 6 identified. Whether or not we need justification beyond l
7 that, I'm not sure we have thought of that yet.
- 8 MR. WILSON
- The regulation only requires the 9 applicant to provide the method or show that they cyn )
10 develop an ITAAC when they come to the combined license 11 stage. GE has decided to go beyond that requirement and 12 actually provide the ITAAC. 1 13 MR. MICHELSON : This ITAAC has got to be provided (s) 14 up front. This is not a COL ITAAC. J 15 MR. WILSON: The interface itself you may not be 16 able to develop the ITAAC for until you know the site-17 specific design features. That's why the regulation A 18 required the justification and methodology for doing that. 19 All I am saying is GE has tried to get beyond the 20 regulation. . 21 MR. MICHELSON: The regulation clearly requires 22 that you identify the interface requirements. There is no i 23 argument there. 24 MR. WILSON: Yes. 25 MR. MICHELSON: Secondly, that you justify that, r% () ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Coud Reponers 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D. C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
14 1 that you can show that such requirements can be met through 2 the ITAAC process. 3 MR. WILSON: And they are going to do that by 4 providing the ITAAC. 5 MR. MICHELSON: That has to be provided up front. G The justification on how you are going to do this has to be 7 provided before you get,the certificate, not after. 8 MR. WILSON: All I am saying is that instead of 9 the justification, GE has decided to provide the ITAAC 10 itself. They have gone beyond the requirement. 11 MR. MICHELSON: That's not what it says. 12 MR. COSTNER: The regulation requires that you 13 justify that the ITAAC will indeed do what the ITAAC says. 14 MR. MICHELGON: So you do two things. 15 MR. WILSON: If you have the ITAAC, you don't have 16 to worry about that. 17 MR. COSTNER: No. The regulation doesn't permit 18 you to take that liberty. 19 MR. WILSON: I wrote it. I ought to-know. 20 MR. MICHELSON: We're reading it. 21 MR.-COSTNER: I'm sorry. That's what the lawyers 22 say it means. 23 MR. WILSON: I worked with one when we wrote it. 24 MR. COSTNER: It doesn't matter. When the lawyers
.25 intervene and they take you to court, then we want to make t O ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd.
Court Reporters 1612 - K. Street, N.W.,- Suite 300 Washington, D. C 20006 (202) 293-3950
. _ _ __ _ _ __ _ _ _ . _ _ _ ._ . _ . _ ~ _ . ._ _ _ _ . _ _ . _ . _ . . _. _. .. ._
l t l l; 15 > 1 sure that all this work doesn't go down the drain because 2 the lawyers can make it look like you meant something else. 3 MR. WILSON: I tinderstand. The point here is that j 4 you may not be able to develop the ITAAC at this stage, so l 5 in lieu of that, you provide a justification. GE feels they 6 can provide the ITAAC so they don't have to provide the > 7 justification. { 8 MR. MICHELSON: If one literally reads the 9 regulation, which is one good way of reading regulations, it i 10 says that the justification that compliance with the 11 inte~' ace requirements of paragraph 7 is verifiable through 12 inspection, and so forth. The method to be used for i 13 verification must be included as a part of that ITAAC, and ) 14 that ITAAC has to come up front. 15 I think you have got to do a little rare than the 16 ITAAC. I think you have to write the ITAAC and '. hen you 3 17 have to show that you can carry out that ITAAC, and then you 18 are all done. And that in the process of ccrrying it out it 39 will do what needs to be done under this section. 20 I don't think there is any real problem. I don't 21 think there was any question of electing whether you write-22 an ITAAC or not. I think the question is you do have to 23 write an ITAAC and you further have to justify that it. will , 24 do the job. That's what the regulation seems to be saying 25 if-you read it literally. O ANN RILEY:& ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Court Reporters 1612 K.- Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D. C. 20006 l(202). 293-3950
j l 16 (}- 1 MR. WILSON: For the record, I disagree. 2 MR. MICHEISON: That's okay. 3- MR. COSTNER: Mr. Chairman, I apologize for losing 4 my cool. e i 5 MR. MICHELSON: That's all right. ! 6 As long as the ITAAC is being written, that's j 7 great. I think you have to show that compliance with that i j 8 ITAAC, including the methods to be used, will do the job. . l 9 Then you have carried out the requirements of the-l 10 regulation. 11 It says the method must be included. There-is , l 12 little argument with those words. You wrote them. There
- 13 shouldn't be any argument with them.
) 14 MR. WILSON: Apparently there is.
! 15 MR.-MICHELSON: It says the~ method to be used must i 16 be included. We will see what you have when you get them. 1 i i- 17 We haven't seen those ITAACs yet. 18 Are those in house now, like for the ultimate heat i i 19 sink? 1 20 MR. POSLUSNY: Phase 3 is in there. There was an i 21 ITAAC in that document, the gray book, from what I remember. ! l {- 22 MR. MICHELSON: Yes, but that's certainly not ! 23 aptisfying what this is talking about. I'm talking about a l i
- 24. real ITAAC. Have you gotten a real ITAAC on the ultimate l- 25 heat sink?
- O ANN RlLEY-& ASSOCIATES, Ltd. '
Coud Reponers
- 1612 K. -Street,- N.W., Suite 300
- Washington,- D._ C. 20006 1
_(202) 293-3950 -i
17 () 1 2 MR. POSLUSNY: You're not going to be able to do a real ITAAC without a full design. 3 MR. MICHELSON: You've got to do enough of it to 4 meet the requirements of the regulations, which means enough 5 to make your safety determinations. 6 MR. WILSON: We're not making the safety 7 determination on the acceptability of the ultimate heat 8 sink. 9 MR. MICHELSON: No, but you are on the intcrface 10 requirements. 11 MR. WILSON: Right. 12 MR. MICHELSON: Also you are doing enough on the 13 ultimate heat sink to include it in your PRA. It says ir.-
/ 14 here you have to have a PRA'for the whole thing. You have 15 to know enough about it to put it in a PRA. So I would h't 16 expect to find it in a PRA when we get done.
17 MR. CHAMBERS: What goes in a PIG is basically a la proposed design or a possible design. It's not the design 19 knd there doesn't have to an ITAAC on that design. It has 20 to meet the interface requirements that you set up just like 21 several other possible designs may also meet that interface 4 22 requirement. The conceptual design and the assumptions 23 about the conceptional design, that is what goes into the 24 PRA,-but other conceptual designs may work as long as they' 25 meet the interface requirement. O ANN- RlLEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. _ _ Coud Reponers - 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D. C. 20006 (202) 293 3950.
13 () 1 MR. MICHELSON: That's right. 2 MR. CHAMBERS: So there are two parta. There is 3 the interface itself which there is a conceptuel design for, 4 and then there is the interface requirements that it or any 5 of several other conceptual designs could possibly meet. 6 MR. MICHELSON: That's right. The PRA just picks 7 the one you proposed for the conceptual design and shows 8 that that one is safe. If I elect to do something else, 9 then I do a new PRA later and then show that that's perhaps 10 aqually safe. There has never been an agreement whether it 11 has to be equally safe or not, but it's sort of an implied 12 agreement that you are going to propose something equal or 13 better. s_)' 14 I hadn't proposed that you do an ITAAC on the 15 other side of the interface, but the ITAAC has to go up 16 through the interface. 17 MR. CHAMBERS: Right. The ITAAC covers the 18 interface requirements, not the interface design. 19 MR. MICHELSON: Yes. That's correct. But the PRA . 20 includes one proposed design. 21 Do we have aay other questions at this time on the 22 COL? I think you will want to look at these comments and 23 then we will have to discuss this in our next meeting, which 24 we will talk about at the end of this one, to pick up any 25 loose ends on this point. OV ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. COud Reponers 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D. C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
. .-- - . .- - -_- - =_--. . -. -- .- , -.- -
a 1
-19 4
l 1 Any other questions on it? 2 _ (No response.)
- j. 3 MR. MICHELSON:- Let's proceed with GE's j 4 Antroduction to these items for the meeting today. There is
) 5 a'GE presentation on the schedule. I wasn't quite sure what 6 that included. Presumably it's to pick up the items from i ! 7 the August meeting. i i 8 MR. FOX: Mr. Micholson, I would like to get some p- 9 clarification. I got here this morning and found that t . i 10 Chapter 7 had been canceled. ' ! 11- MR. MICHELSON: Yes. I thought you had been told i i 12 tiaat. f I
- 13 MR. FOX
- Then just about five minutes ago I found 14 out Chapter 18 had been.
l 15 MR. MICHELSON: Yes, and-I thought you had been i 16 told that too. We told the Staff to inform-you. i i 17 MR. FOX: I.just wanted to put it on the record. j 18 MR. MICHELSON: I'm sorry. That was purpose of 19 telling them as soon as we realized it. W3 talked about ) i 20 those two before and it hadn't. changed enough to make it 21 worthwhile. I certainly apologize, a 22 MR. EL-ZEFTAWY: We told the Staff and the Staff 23 said they were going to:tell GE. 24 MR. MICHELSON: What happened? 25 MR. POSLUSNY: That's not the communication I got,- LO ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Court Reporters . 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite - 300 j . Washington, D. C. 20006 ; (202) 293-3950 I i
20 (} 1 2 but that's all right. MR. MICHELSON: I will accept the responsibility. 3 As soon as we realized that we weren't going to be able to 4 do anything new on those two chapters we wanted to head you 5 off, because we didn't want you waste money to bring 6 somebody that would just sit here and listen. 7 Normally we like to communicate through the Staff, 8 but maybe we will have to call GE directly if this isn't 9 working. They are last minute affairs, n+ doubt. Right at 10 the last minute, if there is something we realize you don't 11 need to be here for, we certainly want to make sure you are 12 informed. 13 MR. POWER: Good morning. I am John Power. Over 14 the period of the last three months I have been specifically 15 assigned to address the items that were identified at the 16 August 19 ACRS meeting. 17 [ Slide.] 18 MR. POWER: In order to go through this in a 19 relatively short time, I have put together a grouping of the 20 items in such a manner that maybe we could group them 21 according to the issues they are. That way we can save a 22 great deal of time interfacing between answers. 23 (Slide.) 24 MR. POWER: As you recall, there were some 17 25 items specifically and an attached item that were_ identified O ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Coud Repoders 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 - Washington, D. .C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
21 1 from the last meeting. These were the subject matter that 2 we were to look into. 3 LSlide.] 4 MR. POWER: In so doing, I took the transcript of 5 the meeting and looked at each one of_the items and the-6 outstanding questions, which in many cases went beyond the 7 identification that you see here. These are basically 8 titles of areas of interest and discussion, j 9 In the pass-out you have received what I have l 10 tried to do is broaden those issues out to cover broader l 11 areas and broader entities in each one of those. So what 12 you will see is a wider prospectus of examining one of these 13 issues than just indicated by the title up here. 14 (Slide.) 15 MR. POWER: The first area is associated with the 16 reactor service water system and the reactor building closed i 17 cooling water system. A concern was expressed relative to i 18 the possible_use of expansion joints or bellows inside the i 19 basement of the reactor building where'they might be 20 potential leakage paths for significant amounts of water. 21 We have examinad the design and indicate here that 22 the subject piping is fabricated and will be installed with 23- all welded piping. If you look at the diagram, you will 24 find a couple of places in there where-the heat exchangers 25 are attached to-the piping systems through bolted ANN RILEY '& ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Court Reporters 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 - Washington, D.' C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
22 () 1 2 connections and that there are no expansion joints or bellows assemblies. utilized in the piping system. 3 The important item out of all these, in addition 4 to the inquiry and the response, the thing that 7. am quite 5 sure you are interested in.is that we will document a 6 specific statement or commitment relative to this in the 7 SAR. Each one of them follows this same kind of format. 8 MR. MICHELSON: We can expect in the next 9 amendment or future amendment for you to pick these up and 10 then make a description? 11 MR. POWER: Right. A specific statement to that 12 effect. 13 MR. MICHELSON: The reason for pursuing that item 14 was the size of the break. Bellows breaks are a whole lot 15 different story than pipe breaks. 16 MR. POWER: Yes. Not only that, but we looked at i 17 things like the reactor building closed cooling water 18 pathways inside the building at IR levels to see if they-19 also contained bellows or seals or temporary connections. 20 That is part of this evaluation. We looked at that also. 21 (Slide.] 22 MR. POWER: The second area was relative to main 23 steam line tunnel flooding controls. There was in the 24 dialogue quite a bit of confusion re. 'ive to the 25 configuration of the steam lines in the tunnel, the tunnel o ANN R LEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Coud Reponers 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D. C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
23 () 1 itself, tF 9 blowout panels in the tunnel, and the steam line 2 performance aspects that we were expecting out of that 3 tunnel. 4 Let me cover quickly what the attached sheets will 5 tell you. I hav, attached in each one of these 6 documentation that exists in the FSAR. I have attempted to 7 use in most casos that documentation to, let's say, justify 8 or to indicate where you can find this information. So a 9 lot of this you will. find in there with a single line drawn 10 '~ound it, noting that that is the area where you want to 11 . ok. 12 A couple of items come up relative to the 13 configuration. 14 (Slide.] 15 MR. POWER: The series of slides that you will 16 find, the confusion which probably led to this more than 17 anything else was over.here there was a design that showed 18 the two. -The steam lines come out and-the feedwater-lina.s 19 come out of the primary containment above one another, ,. 20 separate. 21 When they go through the first compartment, which 22 is called the reactor building-main steam-line tunnel 23 compartment, when they leave-; hat tunnel and go into the 24 control building, they do-so in a different configuration. 25 They are side-by side. The tunnel is smaller;-it's 15 feet O ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Coud Reponers 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D. C. 20006 (Z)2); 293-3950 1
24 () 1 2 smaller. So you see a configuration chance. drawing was incorrect and it will be changed. So this That led to 3 some confusion on the part of that run. 4 (Slide.) 5 MR. POWER: As you see here, this is the tunnel 6 itself as you go through. You can see the configuration. > 7 (Slide.] 8 MR. POWER: The rest of the drawings in here also 9 indicate some other unique changes in the flow. As you go 10 through the tunnel, that's the configuration looking down. .s 11 (Slide.) 12 MR. POWER: When you enter into the turbine 13 building area you will find a couple of items. 14 You will find a vent tunnel, which we will get 15 into when have our blowout panel discussion. You will find 16 that the lines go up in the building. They jog to the i 17 right, enter the building, and then go over into the turbine 18 generator areas. 19 The only confusing iten,in that original 20 discussion was that one drawing there which showed them to 21 be not in line with one another as they go through the 22 control building tunnel. 23 MR. MICHELSON: Are-those actually 45 degree 24 elbows that that main steam is going through? 25 MR. POWER: Yes, they_are. There is quite a jog. s ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Coud Reponers 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D. C. 2000G (202) 293-3950 i
25 1 MR. MICHELSON: I won't' argue, but your other ( 2 drawing is incorrect;_they show them all at 901 degree elbows 3 when they are turning up. This drawing is wrong. It shows 4 all 90 degrees. 5 MR. POWER: They are 90 when they come up. 6 MR. M70HELSON: They are e5 when'they come up as I 7 look at that first cross section. That's why I asked. i ! ! 8 MR. POWER: Should I bring it back up? j I i .
- 9 MR. MICHELSON
- Yes. You'd better' clarify that.
4 i 10 (Slide.) 11 MR. POWL. , This is a side rSot. , l l l 12 MR. MICHELSON: The main steaa, is shown to be 45 l 13 degree and then horizontal. 14 MR. POWER: Right.. If you look at the diagram, it l- 15' comes out to here and then goes up,-and it doesn't start'up 1 } 16 like that, i 17 MR. MICHELSON: The steam line goes throagh 18 another 90 as well as the 45? l ! 19 MR. POWER: Yes. l l 20 MR.-MICHELSON: It all comes up to the high 1 ; 21 elevation then. 22 MR. POWER: They both go through at the high 23- elevation together. 24 -MR. MICHELSON :- That elevation-checks-against your 25' other-drawings? () ANN RILS 4 ASSOCIATES, Ltd.-
- j. Caud Repoders
- - 1612 K.. Street, N.W., Suite 300
[. Washington, D. C. 20006 l (202) 293-3950.
26 () 1 2 MR. POWER: Yes. It is a little difficult to see in the pass-out I just gave you, but this is a drawing I 3 picked up just as I was leaving the other night. You can 4 see the configuration where they go across together, take a 5 quick left-hand turn, upward and left-hand turn, and then 6 towards the turbine. 7 MR. MICHELSON: One other question. On your last 8 dr " sing you showed us you show that vent over in the turbine i building as being a vertical shaft and yet it appears that 10 everything is open. Why was that vertical shaft even 11 useful? 12 MR. POWER: There are two reasons. Let me pull 13 the diagram on that. 14 (Slide.) 15 MR. POWER: There is a series of blowout panels in 16 the area between the reactor building, steam line tunnel and ) 17 the control building steam line tunnel. Then there is a set 18 of blowout panels here and a series in here. These blowout 19 panels are mainly to provided containment for purposes of 20 providing ventilation and such in those areas. So you bsve 21 a major vent up this way and then you have a continuation of 22 vent into this area. 23 MR. MICHELSON: But as soon as those blow open, 24 you are not going to get much vertical flow.- 25 4 MR. POWER: _ You mean up this one? O ANN RlLEY & ASSC0lATES, Ltd. Coud Repoders 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D. C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
- ~
27 1 MR. MICllELSOll: That's right. Unless that'u un 2 awfully big shaft. 3 MR. POWER: It's a fairly large shaft. 4 MR. MICllELSOll: Do you need that shaft to prevent 5 the pressure? 6 MR. POWER: On previous reactor designs those 7 tunnels vented totally into the turbine building. The 8 tunnels were larger. This is a smaller tunnel. 9 MR. MICllELSON : The pinch poincs are going to be 10 back where the break is, which might even be over in the 11 reactor building. This isn't going to help you any. 12 MR. POWER: A lot of the blowout panel and 13 compartmentalization is for purposes of providing 14 ventilation and other things in addition to relieving 15 pressures? 16 MR. MICllELSON: I don't find discussed anywhere in 17 the SSAR the pressure bt.ildup in the tunnel and how you did 18 your calculation and why you think you need this vertical 19 shaft. If you don't need it, you ought to erase it. Why is 20 it on the drawing unless it's needed? I assume it was 21 needed. 22 (Slide.) 23 MR. POWER: Let me pull a blowout panel discussion 24 here for ycu. 25 [ Slide.) O V ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. . Court Reponers l 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 l Washington, D. C. 20006 (202) 293 3950
28 1 MR. POWER: This is a diagram right out of the SAR ( 2 which shows the directional venting, the blowout panel 3 positioning, and also in that section 13, in another 4 section, in item number 7, there is a description of the 5 sizing of those blowout panels. 6 (Slide.] 7 MR. POWERt In this diagram you will find sizing 8 and vent sizing. 9 MR. MICHElsON: All those were in the SSAR and I 10 read those. What amendment are you looking at? l 11 MR. POWERt I think it's 20 or 22. l 12 MR. MICHELSON: The other drawing you showed me, t 13 was that 22 also?
) 14 MR. POWER: This drawing was_22 also. }
i 15 MR. MICHELSON: The other drawings were wrong. 16 That's why I wondered. I haven't had time yet to study-the i 17 new one. ; j 18 MR. POWER: You will see the tunnel is on a 10.9 { 19 break. It is capable in a structural sense of 21 psi. It f 20 is capable of withstanding breaks in either one of the
- 21 tunnel sections and venting.- A little bit later on I will j 22 talk about flooding in the room. You will see some 23 variation on why there is a larger room in the_ reactor i
i 24 building side and a smaller volume on the' control building
- 25 side, and then it gets large again over in the-turbine
- O ANN RlLEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd.
i Court Reporters
- 1612 K. Street,- N.W., Suite - 300 ,
i Washington,3 D.~ C. 20006 l (202) 293 3950
i 29 building side. ( 1 2 MR. MICHELSON: When the tunnel reaches pressures ; 3 like 11 pounds, which is approximately what the worst case 1 4 is here, that pressure is reflected back into the heating ! 5 and ventilating system for that, and that goes up into a 6 couple of elevations higher over in the reactor building. 7 MR. POWER: It is a completely enclosed room. 8 MR. MICHELSON: Have you calculated its pressure? 9 MR. POWER: The design of that room structurally 10 is to take that pressure and the penetrations. 11 MR. MICHELSON: You mean 11 pounds? 12 MR. POWER; Yes, and the penetrations. 13 MR. MICHELSON: So the doors and all of its 14 penetrations will be designed for 11 pounds? 15 MR. POWER: Yes. That's in a pressure structural 16 sense. 17 MR. MICHELSON: I didn't find that commitment. Is 18 it in the SSAR? 19 MR. POWER: No. 20 MR. MICHELSON: It will be later? 21 MR. POWER: That's part of our discussion that 22 will be added to it in addressing these particular concerns. 23 MR. MICHELSON : The doors for that room are going 24 to be pretty big doors. 25 MR. POWER: There are is one very small door into l VO ANN RlLEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Coud RepOders 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D. C. 20006 (202) 293 3950
30 (} 1 2 that room and there is one ventilation room connection into that room. There is a whole series of penetrations that are into that room, like the drain systems. You will see 4 blowout panels coming in from the cleanup system and from 5 the RCIC. 6 MR. MICHELSON: That's in the steam tunnel itself. 7 MR. POWERt Right. 8 MR. MICHELSON: This room I am talking about is 9 the room housing the heating and ventilation equipment and 10 it's in the reactor building. 11 MR. POWER: Right, and it's closed. 12 MR. MICHELSON: It will be designed for peak 13 pressures? () 14 MR. POWER: Right. 15 MR. MICHELSON: It doesn't have to be 11 pounds 16 because you probably won't see a lot of them up there.
-17 MR. POWER: No,-but there is smaller pressure.
18 MR. MICHELSON: I would expect the SER to discuss 19 this and indicate the need. 20 MR. POWER: Yes. 21 MR. CATTON: What does pressure structural sense 22 mean? Why that caveat? 23 MR. POWER: The tunnel itself is vented to the 24 atmosphere once you have the blowdown. 25 MR. MICHELSON: But not locally. O ANN RlLEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Coun Reporters 1612' K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D. C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
31 l 1 MR. POWER: You want it leaktight. You don't want 2 tt tenking to the reactor building, the secondary 3 contai4Js.c or into the control building, but you are not 4 Mogluding 'aakage spilling over into the turbine building. t 4 3r.pl itself on all designs is not subject tu standby ! r en treatment syster s. It's not a leaktight membrane or a
! , boundary around the primary coolant system. So it's a j 8 vented opening.
f l 9 That's why I'm saying structural aspect. That i j 10 will come into play again when we talk about pressurization 11 of the individual cubicles in the secondary containment for 12 breaks inside there also. The boundary around the secondary , 13 containment has got to be leaktight or have in-leakage 14 accommodated by the standby gas treatment system. But it l 15 doesn't mean necessary when you blow o't a blowout panel and i i 16 it stays open that you are able to maintain that integrity ! l 17 for that particular break. 18 MR. MICHELSoN: The pressure of 11 pounds yc.u show l j 19 there, thet's a static pressure? What kind of' dynamic peak 20 pressures do you expect at the time of the break? Since you ! 21 are not taking leak before break, that means you have to 22 take dynamic forces as well. 4 r 23 MR. SAXENA: That's the force from the pressure l 24 loading. 25 MR. MICHELSON: That will be found in the SSARJ ANN RlLEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Court Reporters 1612 K, Street, N.W., Suite 300 i Washington, D. C. 20006 L (202) 293-3950
= - . -
32 that's the design process you used; and that you did it to ( 1 2 take care of the dynamic forces and not just the static. 3 MR. SAXENA: That's right. 4 MR. MICHELSON: We look forward to reading it. 5 Relative to the steam tunnel and your talking 6 about the water running out the other end, we raised the 7 question last time about the ' unction between those two
; 8 buildings. You are going to tell us about that?
I 9 MR. POWER: Yes, the second item you had between 10 the configuration of the piping and the tunnel itself, the 11 concern you had was relative to flooding, the volumes and 12 where things were going to go. 13 (Slide.) ( 14 MR. POWER: We are on the reactor building side at 15 the penetration. We go out here 30 some feet or so and then 16 we rise up and go down through the control building and then 17 into the turbine building. At the present time there is an 18 open drain pathway; there is the vent pathway up; and there 19 are the blowout panels, and then again into the major 4 20 building itself. 21 MR. MICHELSON: Where does the drain pathway go 22 to? 23 MR. POWER: It just shows into the building. 24 MR. MICHELSON: Into the turbine building? 25 MR. POWER: Yes. i O) ANN RlLEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Coud Repoders 1612 K. Street, N.W.. Suite 330 Washington, D. C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
33 ( 1 When you look at the diagrams for the building and 2 the configurations that I have given you, you can see these 3 things laid out. Is there collection basis down here? We 4 don't identify that now in the turbine building development. 5 MR. MICHELSON: But when it does flood down there, 6 if it were to happen, that will be at grade elevation. 7 MR. POWERt Right here is grado. 8 MR. MICHELSON: Isn't the basement of the turbine 9 building at grade, or is it below grado? 10 MR. POWERt It's below grade. 11 MR. MICHELSON: I thought only the condenser < sump 12 was below grade. 13 MR. POWER: There is a section below grade. 14 MR. MICHELSON: Yes, but the first floor of the i 15 turbine is grade, and depending on where this is, you may 16 have a lot of water getting near the doors between the 4 17 turbine building and the control building. 18 MR. POWER: That was one other consideration we 19 looked at: What happens if you have a feedwater line break 20 and you don't get a pump trip and you have a flow in here 21 that fills this up, then fills this up, and overflows back 22 down? 23 I have some rough calculations that looked at how 24 long a time and such. I don't have those specific numbers 25 with me, but there is a potential for putting water over O 1 ANN RlLEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Coud Repoders 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 l Washington, D. C. 20006 (202) 293-3950 t
34 1 there. If the break is classic, with the pump trip-outs and 2 such, then the water will remain in this section. If it 3 doesn't, it will flow this way. By_the way, there is a 4 slight tilt on this thing to drain this way. 5 MR. MICHELSON: There is one thing you didn't show 6 here that we brought up last time, and that is that between 7 the reactor building and the control building there is a few 8 meters of building space, but the tunnel appears on the 9 drawings to be somewhat closed. I asked, well, what's the 10 junction of that tunnel _as it interfaces between the control 11 and the reactor building. I was led to believe there is a 12 few inches gap there and that gap was not closed. Is there 13 a gap there? 14 I think there has to be for the buildings to move 15 under the seismic. How is that gap filled and will it hold 16 this water? Or maybe the water comes out there instead. 4 17 MR. POWER; The words we have in here is this 18 tunnel is to have a watertight integrity regardless of a 19 discontinuity that exists at this corner. 20 MR. MICHELSON: So you_put a flexible joint 21 between the two buildings at that point? 22 MR. POWER: We don't have that information 23 identified. 24 MR. MICHELSON: We are talking about 11 pounds 25 pressure on that joint as well. O ANN RlLEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Court Reporters 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D. C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
j i l 3 35 i i 1 MR. POWER: Right.
- 2 MR. MICHELSON: The reason I am going to raise 3 this is really is not so much that I was worried whether the
} 4 water ends up on the ground around the turbine building, i 5 because I think you can handle it either way. The concern I l have is there are some air inlets right near there. The 6 7 steam was my concern. If that's a gap that blows out, then , ] ' a 8 all that steam is pouring over to where the inlet is for the 9 control room. } 10 MR. POWER: Yes. , i 11 MR. MICHELSON: Therefore it was important to know 12 what the nature of that gap is, how it is held tight at 11 , l l 13 pounds pressure. I thought I had gotten that across last 14 time, but maybe I didn't do a very good job of it. { 15 MR. POWER: We will make sure you get that l 16 addressed this time. 17 MR. MICHELSON: That gap is also important to some ] 18 of your arguments that you are presenting here, because that ! 19 determines which way the water-flows. t
- 20 MR. POWER: That's absolutely right. -The key item 1
21 is we have got to maintain the integrity in that tunnel. j 22 MR. MICHELSON: Is the tunnel going to be aligned at all? . There are absolutely no penetrations on the floor 4 23 24 of the control building, are there? The control building is 25 my first concern. 1
-1
- O ANN RlLEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd.
. Court Reporters 1 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 l i Washington, D. C. 20006 l (202): 293 3950 i
36 fv ') 1 MR. POWER: That's correct. No penetrations in 2 the control building at all. 3 The room you are talking about is up here. 4 MR. MICHELSON: That's really higher. It's two 5 floors above that. 6 MR. POWER: Yes. It's right in this area here. 7 The doorway entry was in here -- wait a minute. I 8 MR. MICHELSON: I think it was down below. 9 MR. POWER It wasn't at the bottom. It was 10 somewhere in here. There a number of piping penetrations in l 11 this room. The feedwater line has a number of lines coming 12 into it from the RHR system, the cleanup system, from the 13 CRD system. There is a series of valving on the floor here. O (_/ 14 There are penetrations into that room from the secondary 15 containment coming from different compartments, from 16 different sides. So the penetration may come in here and ( 17 one might be coming in the other side. There are a number 18 of penetrations. There is a drain system that will go from 19 here down to the rad waste system, but it goes to a sump 20 first. 21 MR. MICHELSON: Yes, but that may be worse. 22 MR. POWER: We looked at the aspect of whether or 23 not that sump is going to see 10 psi and blow out. The 24 concept is it goes to a sump. 25 MR. MICHELSON: Yes, but the sump is going to get g t ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. COud RepOdors 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D. C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
37 1 filled rapidly with water and then it is going to see 2 whatever pressure exists from that large rydrostatic head 3 all the way back up to the water elevation. 4 MR. POWER: Are you saying water before the break 5 or after the break? 6 MR. MICHELSON: After the break. 7 That depends on the design of the sump. I assume 8 it is not necessarily a sealed sump, but I don't know. I 9 don't know if it's an open sump. 10 MR. POWER: It's an open sump. 11 MR. MICHELSON: So it overflows onto wherever that i 12 area is. 13 MR. POWER: Right. 14 MR. MICHELSON: If you drain all this water up 15 here, which is maybe hundreds of thousands of gallons up 16 there, it is going to end up somewhere if you haven't got a
- 17 way of isolating it.
18 I just couldn't find any of the detail, so all I 19 can do is ask the questions. Somehow you have got to l 20 account for where this water is goir.g. I think there is a 21 floor drain system, as you pointed out, and it does have to j 22 go to a sump, 23 MR. POWER: Yes. I didn't look at the possibility 24 of the integrity of the sump system maybe needing to be a 25 closed system because you have this water up above. . O ANN RlLEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Court Reporters 1612 .K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D. C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
38 1 MR. MICHELSON: It could be a closed system 2 designed to the hydrostatic heads and so forth. Then the 3 water will be forced right through the pump and on out to I 4 where it was hopefully pumping to. Then you have to look at ; 5 that. I tr *nk you have got to get it out of the building in 6 a sealed way if you are going to use floor drains in an area 7 like that. 8 Again, it's detailed, but I think it's an 9 important part of the safety evaluation'of this plant to 10 look at that level of detui.. i l 11 MR. POWER: No doubt about it. The integrity into i 1 j 12 this building is a very important aspect. The venting out 13 this way, off course, is probably the least important. l 14 MR. MICHELSON: Once it_ tops the tunnel, then you l 15 should be home free. It's either going-tc run out on the 16 ground if those joints won't hold it or it's going to run , 17 out into the turbine building if they do hold it. -There you i 18 just have to show it doesn't back into the control building. f i
- 19 MR. POWER
- Yes. We looked at'the pump on the
, 20 line that breaks _ going to a header and having flow-from } 21 another pump into the header and having continuation of 22 flow, but we haven't put a number.on this of how many i j 23 minutes it would take for full flow or three quarter or two-24 thirds flow, to continue to fill this and go out here. l 25 MR. MICHELSON: The blowout panel. blows at about p LO l ANN RILEY & ASSO_CIATES, Ltd. ! Court Reporters l 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 - l Washington, D. C. 20006 : (202) 293-3950: o_ . _ . _ _
39 1 half a pound. 2 MR. POWER: Yes. Half a pound in 2/10 of a 3 second. That's a whole series of those. 4 MR. MICHELSON: The first one is right at the 5 reactor building.
- 6 MR. POWER
- Yes. This is a swing type. Tnis is 7 mainly in here for the aspects of environmental control in 8 this building. There are a lot of safety-related measuring 9 devices in here, radiation, temperature, flow devices in 10 here relative to over here. There is little or no equipment 11 in this area.
12 MR. MICHELSON: That must be a very large blowout 13 panel. You are trying to keep it down to a pound or less 14 differentials and you are opening it at a half pound, so I l 15 assume you are trying to keep it down to low poundage 16 differentials. 1 17 MR. POWER: Do you remember the size of that one? 18 MR. MICHELSON: Is it going to be designed for 11 19 pounds to just kind of bleed the pressure off slows? If it 20 is, then you have got to do the calculation on that basis. 21 How was the calculation done? Was that done with 22 a big open hole or with a certain cross section of blowout 23 panel? For that relief area, what delta P did you get 24 across the relief device? That area is only a part of that 25 total wall. ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Court Reporters 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D. C 20006 (202) 293 3950
1
)
40 () 1 MR. SAXENA: That's trus. 2 MR. MICHELSON: Do you blow the whole wall out or 3 do you design the wall for 11 pounds? - ] 4 MR. SAXENA: That's right. I 1 . ) 5 MR. MICHELSON: That blowout panel wall is also an ! 1 6 11 pound wall? F
- 7 MR. SAXENA
- That's right.
l 8 MR. MICHELSON: You have done the dynamic 9 calculation for that confined compartment and now it's very , i 10 confined. ] 11 MR. SAXENA: We did the calculations according to i 12 the structural analysis. { j 13 MR. MICHELSON: The two blowout panels out in the 14 turL_..e building, those are also half pound panels? j 15 MR. POWER: Yes. Then there are roof panels in I 16 the turbine building itself, i ) 17 MR. MICHELSON: In reality, you have got to get 4 7 18 the buildup of enough pressure. This drain is really where I I 19 all the-steam wants to go initially until you build up , i j 20 enough pressure in that area to blow the panels. 21 MR. POWER: I don't know what the sizing of that 22 drain is.- I can't tell off the drawing. 2 l 23 MR. MICHELSON: - Somebody did the calculations and 24 they must know all about the sizing of that. What-happens 25 as you blow this-first panel and the steam proceeds to flow l () ANN RlLEY &J ASSOCIATES, Ltd.- Coud Repoders 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite - 300 ' 4 Washington, D. C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
-_. . . - - - . - . . . - - - . - - . - . - . - . ~ . - . - - . . _
1 l l A l l l 41 1 down through the chase over the control building? Where l 2 does the flow go from there? Does it go down the drain i 3 chase until the pressure builds up enough to blow the other , 4 panels? What happens? There is no panel shown on the - 5 drain. Maybe there is a panel there. I don't know. 6 MR. POWER: There is simply a compartment drain. 7 MR MICHELSON: That was a relief of the steam 8 until the pressured built up enough to blow the other 9 panels. 10 MR. SAXENA: That's right.
- 11 MR. MICHELSON
- How big a relief path was that?
12 MR. CATTON: You have dimensions on everything 13 else. 14 MR. SAXENA: I don't have the specific dimensions. 15 MR. MICHELSON: But you did do the calculations? 16 MR. SAXENA: Yes. 17 MR. POWER: This drain over here is off a drawing. 18 This drain may be a very, very small item. 19 MR. MICHELSON: It is shown kind of big here, as 20 big as the tunnel. + 21 MR. POWER: For illustrative purposes, let me say 22 that I probably am the error maker here. It's a very small 23 drain area. 24 MR. MICHELSON: Then it would not affect the end 25 too much. O ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Court Reporters - 1612 - K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D._ C. 20006 (202) 293-3950-
i 42 { () 1 2 going to find out. MR. POWER: Right. I think that's what we are I took the liberty of showing on the i i 3 drawing that there is a pathway of water.
]
4 MR. MICHELSON: Your calculations showed that you l i 5 had to have both the vent directly into the turbine building 6 and this vertical vent in order to adequately keep the 7 pressure down; is that right? You need them both? : 8 MR. SAXENA: Yes. . 9 MR. CATTON: Are those blowout panels actually ten 10 feet high? How wide are they? 11 MR. POWER: The numbers are from this chart here. 12 (Slide.) 13 MR. POWER: These charts tell you the cross 14 sectional area. They tell you the specific blowout panel. 15 They are all in here. 16 MR. MICHELSON: Thera is no detail on it. There 17 is just a little mark that says here's a blowout panel. 18 MR. V0WER: Yes, but when you see a wall 19 placement, you know the width and such. 20 MR. MICHELSON: The earlier ones, by_the way, were 21 very flawed. I don't know if you went back and checked. 22 They showed a lot of blowout panels between rooms and great 23 big doorways between-the rooms on the drawings. 24 MR. POWER: Lyes. That's one item I was going to 25 relate to at the end. , l ANN RlLEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Coud Repoders 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D.- C. 20006 , (202) 293 3950
43 1 (Slide.] 2 MR. POWER: These diagrams that you see here on 3 pressurization that you are going to talk about are being 4 adjusted. 5 MR. MICHELSON: That was Amendment 22. 6 MR. POWER: These were made on the basis that this 7 would be a conservative way of looking at it. 8 MR. MICHELSON: The first error is obviously down 9 at the pump rooms for the reactor water cleanup, the very 10 lowest level. Those are wrong, because those are connected 11 rooms through a very large corridor, and there are no doors , 12 on it as near as we can tell. 13 (Slido.] 14 MR. POWER You're right. Remetaber this nice 15 little diagram that we provided here. You're right. This 16 chart will be adjusted to take these into account. Many of t 17 these were put in here as confined, constricted areas until 18 the layouts were looked at in detal.1 19 MR. MICHEISON That's a very fine drawing. It 20 begins to illustrate the concern that we have over this 21 whole chemical processing system and its potential safety 22 hazard. That really beings to exemplify it when you start 23 look-at that one closely, which I assume the Staff will-do. 24 It is not reflected yet in their SER, but hopefully 25 eventually they will look at the safety of this system. O ANN RILEY & - ASSOCIAT:IS, Ltd. Court Reporters 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 - Washington,' D. C. 20006 (202) 293 3950
i i i 1 44 i 1 MR. POWER: I would hope also that the positive l 2 aspects of the disclosure may be taken a look at. 1 l 3 MR. MICHELSON: We are looking at the safety only. 4 The positive aspect is it's a good cleanup system. That's 1 5 the only positive aspect. I l j 6 MR. POWER: A lot of access for inspection and ' 7 look-see; a lot of shielding. particularly accessibility. 4 8 MR. MICHELSON: Yes, but I think the real concern ; } 9 is only if you have break a pipe.in this enormous chemical 10 processing plant, what happens and how-far does it spread j 11 before you get it under control. 12 MR. POWER: Right. 4 13 MR. MICHELSON: It's a very interesting system. 14 MR. CATTON: That schematic that you showed us a 15 few moments ago is the schematic of the one that you just i 16 took off? i
- 17 MR. POWER
- Yes.
l 18 MR. CATTON: When we read about the calculations i i 19 o* pressures and so forth due to a break somewhere, this is i 20 essentially the diagram that-you used? 21 MR. POWER: -Right. i 22 MR.~ CATTON: Those rectangles represent the l 23 volumes of the various rooms and so forth? 24 MR. POWER: Right. And pathways. When you look 25 in some of them,_you will find that maybe where there was 'O ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Court Reporters 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D. C. 20006
- (202) 293 3950
- 2. . - _ _ _ . . - , - . . _ _ . . . . - - - . - - - . . . - . a. . --
_ . - . - ~ . - _ . - - - . . . . - _ . - . . - - - . . - - . - - . - - - - - - - 1 t 4 45 - 1 this before, this pathway now is a grating, it's not a 2 blowout panel, but it's volume in fact will decrease the 3 effect of pressurization in the rooms. . 4 MR. CATTON: Say that again. 5 MR. POWER: You open some of the rooms. The 6 pressure we are talking about is 4.9 psi in the rooms it 7 m.4.'ht be a lot lower nuinber. 8 MR. MICHEL. SON! Wasn't your calculatiot based on 9 i.he actual geometry, though? 10 MR. ShYENA: The answer is yes. We looked at each 11 and every room. We took the dimensions afid calculated the - 12 ructs, 1 13 MR. MICHELSON! If there is a doorway that is 14 open, if there is a corridor that is open to the room, you 15 took credit for that in your calculation, I assume. 16 MR. SAXENA: That's correct. In some cases we 17 combined those two rooms and called it one compartment 18 volume. 19 MR. MICHELSON: Hopefully you didn't use this 20 drawing. This drawing is downright wrong. 21 MR. SAXENA: It is being revised. 22 Mk. MICHELSON: It will catch.up with what you 23 actually did?- 24- -MR. POWER: Right. 25 MR. MICHELSON: There are blowout panels shown l O ANN RlLEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Court Reporters
- 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300
-. Washington, D. C. 20006 (202) 293 3950'
i 4 46 1 there to connect the rooms but the rooms are already 2 connected. So you don't need them, and I hope the ; l
; 3 calculation I see is the one with the rooms already 4 connected. j 5 MR. SAXENA: That's correct. ;
6 MR. CATTON: This is where you used that code 7 called SCAM or something? i 8 MR. SAXENA: l'e s . 9 MR. CATTON: How ct'itical are the room to room 10 pressures? < 11 MR. POWER: In a structural sense? 12 MR. CATTONt Yes. 13 riR . ICWER: Those rooms are designed "or 14 shielding. 15 MR. MICHELSON: That's not' going to be the 16 problem. The problem is you have connected all these with a - 17 common ventilation system. You are talking about 5 pounds 18 on the common ventilation system froin these local pipe 19 chases. 20 MR. POWER: Yes. We chat about. that on No. 12. 21 MR. CATTONt- I was just curioua, because you can't l 22 calculate the room to room pressures very well. You can 23 calculate peak pressure; but-you can't get the timing right. 24 MR. MICHELSON: I think what they probably did is 25 just looked at all this open volume even if it was a O i ANN RlLEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Court Reporters 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300
- Washington, D. C.- 20006
-(202) 293-3950
; 47 1 corridor and added it toge*her and said here's the volume at
! 2 which I'm going to break and not try to differentiate what I j 3 part of the room the break was in necessarily. I suspect 4 that's what they did. That gives you a pretty good . number, l 5 but it doesn't tell you the differentiaa.. I 6 MR. CATTON: It doesn't give you differential 7 pressures very well. 8 MR. MICHELSON: That's right. Not at all, I would l 9 think. It's not that sophisticated. Tnat's where you usn 1 j 10 design conservatism to take care of less sophistication in 11 the calculation. 4 i 12 [ Slide.) i l 13 MR. POWER: Let me try and jump back to 3 again. 14 I really should have skipped 2. I 15 MR. MICHELSoN: You're doing fine. . 16 MR. POWER: There was concern about the redundancy ! 17 of the isolation valves relative to service water system. i i- 18 It initially started off with water breaks and then later on ' i 19 the air break developed because of the potential difference , 20 of the elevation between a full building anr1 some kind of l 21 intake structure, j 1 22 Let me make a couple of observations end then j 23 there are a couple of further observations I want to make 24 beyond the charts here. 25 We looked at all the configurations _of the service O ANN RlLEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Court Reporters 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D - C. 20006 i (202) 293-3950
i j i i 1 l j 48 1 water. We looked at the break spectrum. We looked at air, i 4 2 whether it would be in the tunnel or in the building itself 3 if there was an intako building. We looked at the 1 j 4 isolation. We looked at flooding within the buildings, 1 j 5 within the pump house outsidt the building, and the chases, j 6 and all the way down below. There are a number of 7 enhancements that are potentially available to you to )4 8 enhance the system's capabilities. One of those will be the
- 9 second valve in the discharge line.
, 10 MR. MICHELSON: This is the capability to } 11 accommodate the break? l } 12 MR. POWER: Right. You could design an intake 13 structure so that the discharge line was always above the ; j 14 water level and you won't have an air break on the discharge i 15 side. ! 16 MR. MICHELSON: Let me caution you on that a i 17 little bit. In reading other parts of the document, I find l 18 that you may return to the spray headers. You may-return f 19 above the water line or you may return below the water line. i I 20 MR. POWER: Right. ! 21 MR. MICHELSON: Furthermore, all the sprays are
- 22 going to be connected together. So two of the pump systems
- 23 - that you still need when the third one broke are going to
! 24 pump the water over and back down that lino anyway. - So all 25 that is taken care of? ! 0; !
- ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd.
! Court Reporters 1612 K.- Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D. C, 20006
--(202) 293 39S0
+
49 I ] () 1 MR. POWER: Yes. We thought about that. We , i 2 thought about the other one and about putting anti-siphon ( i 3 devices in the pump house. Then you have the potantial if ! 4 it stays open it floods out a pump house. You have the j 5 possibility of adding second or third valves. We looked at 1 , 6 those. ; l i 7 MR. MICHELSON: In the discharge as well as in the ] 8 supply? j 9 MR. POWER: Yes. I will talk about those in a l 10 minute. I wanted to go through what we currently have in i 11 the book.
- 12 The supply line is redundant valving.
i 13 (slide.) l 14 MR. POWER: The picture here clearly shows that.
- 15 There are the valves on the way in. There are two i
i 16 maintenance valves back out here also. Theso valves are not 17 only electrically powered, but they can be hand cranked. So l 18 for supply purposes there is redundancy. In fact, more s d 19 redundancy back in this end, including the pump trip, and if 20 you were to have anti-siphon devices installed in these
- 21 locations.
i 2 22 (slide.) 23 MR. POWER: On the return side, as I indicated on 24 this diagram, there is a single line. 25 [ By the way, the current way is for the building to O AMN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd.
- Coud Repoders 2
1812 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 1- Washington, D. O, 20006 (202)-293 3950
( 50 1 () 1 be flooded over a 30 minute period after the break, and that ) 2 would result in only half of the basement in a particular 1
! 3 cubicle being filled. If you went all the way up, it would 1
j 4 be another 30 minutes or so, and it would be a waterproof 1 i 5 room, supposedly. i 6 MR. MICHELSON: The room won't continue to accept j 7 the water delivery without relieving to somewhere. I a 8 MR. POWER: Right. i i 9 MR. MICHELSON: Unless you have a true submarine 10 type construction. 11 MR. POWER: Or backing out penetrations and such-12 in the room. But there is a window of at least maybe an 13 hour. 14 MR. MICHELSON: Yes. 15 MR. POWER: The divisional power supplies ; 16 obviously could fail, and therefore you have no ability to -
^
17 close those things electrically,uso you have to go out and 18 manually crank them. This is why I want to bring out the 19 manual _ action aspect. 20 For the wet breaks we put a requirement of single 21 failure. We had'a. statement in the book that we would not i 22 lose more than one division with-a single failure in a ' 23- break, but if you have a break in~one division and a single 24- failure in the other division, you could lose two-divisions !i 25 .but still-have one division'left. . We'still accept _that () ANN RlLEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. l Coud Repoders: 1612 K.' Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D.' O. 20006 , (202) 293-3950: -!
51 1 there will be a change on that wording. 2 (Slide.) 3 MR. POWER: The concern comes in on the air break. 4 There are a number of alternative ways of approaching that. l 5 3R. MICHELSON: What is that funny little symbol 6 that you have got there to the right-hand side? 7 MR. POWER: That's the answer to 4. That'a known 8 as lined pipe, which will be taken out. [ 4 9 MR. MICHELSON: What was a lined pipe? e 10 MR. POWER: Lined pipe is putting a pipe inside a 11 pipe. ' 12 MR. MICHELSON: That's what you meant? 13 MR. POWER: Yes. I think the word was " gum." 14 Nobody knew what gum was. 15 MR. MICHELSON: I thought maybe it was a Japanese 16 translation or something. 17 MR. POWER: It may have been. 18 MR. MILLER: Sir, that is Japanese. The standard 19 practice in Japan is to put a hard rubber lined section l 20 downstream of restrictive orifices to reduce damage from 21 erosion / corrosion. That is standard Japanese practice. r 22 MR. MICHELSON: That was just a short section of 23 pipe prepared that way. 24 MR. MILLER: That's another issue. We will 25 discuss that later. O ANN RlLEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Court Reporters 1612 K. Street, N.W.,' Suite 300 , Washington, D. C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
52 1 MR. POWER: Before I isttroduce the orientation of 2 the pipe in the air break, wo are talking about this valve 3 up here. If you look at the standard criteria about being 4 able to shut off the flow with a break and a single active 5 pump failure, we could crank this valve closed. Someone 6 might bring up the issue of pansively it fails. 7 M't . MICIIELSON: The valve can actively fail such 8 that you can c.*ank it closed too. 9 MR. POWER: Yes. That's another consideration. 10 But that's pretty far out now from the failure criteria and 11 such. 12 MR. MICHELSON: It's the first thing that has 13 happened as you went to crank it closed. 14 MR. POWER: Right. 15 currently this is the design and the justification 16 of the design based on that there are lots of things that i 17 occur back in this end of the piping system that are site la unique. 19 MR. MICHELSON: I looked at this. This actually < 20 was nice design information. . I had no problems with it. 21 One thing that it leads me to believe, though, is that those 22 discharges back to the ultimate heat sink are never 13 connected. ~You showed one down there and one up thero and 24 no conr.ection between them. 25 MR. . POWER: The pipe chase arrangement, to keep ~ ANN RlLEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd.
- Court Reporters 1612 K. Street, N W., Suite 300 Washington, D. C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
. _ . . _ = . . _ _ _ _ _ _ . . _ _ _ _ _ . _ . _ . _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ . _ _ _ _ . . _ _ _ _ . . _ _
53 1 the division separated, they would be separate lines. 1 { 2 MR. MICHELSON: I couldn't find any requirement.
- L j 3 The problem is that I read all about this common header j 4 system for all three service water systems where you are i ,
i 5 spraying the water back on the pump, so it's got to be l 6 connected. , 7 MR. MILLER: In the ultimate heat sink. k 3 8 MR. MICHELSON: Yes.- In your drawing you should 1 , ! 9 have pointed out to.the reader that.we're not going to - i 10 separate discharges; we're going to go to a common 11 discharge; it's going.to be a header-in the one case. l 12 MR. MILLER: It says-discharge interface.- - 4 13 MR. MICHELSON: Yes, but why didn't you tie-the 1 14 two together and make the person reading it realize that ill i j 15 they have to do is take the next set of pumps on B or C and l 16 pump the water all the way back to the break on A? That was-17 the problem I had. You've really tied-them all together in 18 the description of the ultimate heat sink that you have *
- 19 provide as typical. [
4 20 MR. POWER: Right. j 21 (Slide.) j 22 MR. POWER: Which brings up the item.which Was , j 23 part of the issue we talked about before. Sii,0-specific and 24 unique arrangements relative to service water' systems could - 4 j 2 5_. preclude'the need for another valve simply because of the i rO
- - ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd.
i -Court Reporters-1612 K. -Street, N.W., Suite 300
-Washington,. D. C. 20006
[ _. . __ __ _ _ _ _ _ . . (202) 293-3950
h - - - - - 54 1 configuration of the discharge line, having it above water. 2 I just drew a conceptual arrtagement. It was probably the 3 worst case one. 4 MR MICHELSON: For the purposes of certification, 5 you are going to have to describe the interfar'a 6 requirements, snd I couldn't find them. One of the 7 requirements is you can't tie these discharges together 8 unless you take account of the fact that the other pumping 9 systems are providing a very high pressure against the: valve 10 you are trying to close and i:. the reverse direction on the 11 butterfly. I don't find any of that in there. It's very s 12 important, because you won't get your valves c1c,aed if you 13 tie those things all together. O 14 MR. POWER: You will in the answers because there 15 is a page or a development on here that says added 16 requirements, changes necessary, that divisional one I 17 talked about; flooding analysis. 18 MR. MICHELSON: .You appreciate my concern. Unless 19 you say that the discharges all go back independently and 20 are never connected, your air break doesn't do you any good, 21 because the other two pumping-. systems are pumping their 22 water into that common discharge header to the spray system 23 and-forcing probably 100 pounds or more of pressure 4 24 backwards ~into the system. It'a'just going to_ keep pumping
- 25. all the water into the basement.
o ANN RILEY &- ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Court Reporters 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 __ Washington, D. C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
55 () 1 So an air break is not an answer at all unless you 2 also require that they be independent discharges. An air 3 break on an ladependent discharge would work, but you can't 4 connect the discharges to the other operating service water 5 systems. It won't work. 4 6 I think you can fix up interface requirements that 7 will do, but they aren't quite there yet. 8 MR. MILLER: Yes, but if there is a second valve 9 in the ultimate heat sink. 10 MR. MICHELSON: That would be another way of 11 taking care of it. I didn't find this, but it's got to be 12 an interface. Those valves have to be designed fo- the 13 reverse flow from the other two pumping systems, u uding
.O \s / 14 their pressures. It gets kind of tough on a butterfly valve 4 15 to reverse flow, but you are going to close that valve 16 against that condition. .Then you are okay. We will assume 17 that you don't experience a two-valve failure. You might 18 have to test these valves to make sure they really can do 19 what you say, because these are big valves. I suspect they 20 are 24 or 2, inches.
11 MR. POWER: They aro very big. There wks 22 consideration that the first valve could have a catastrophic 23 failure and putting its parts into the second valve. There 24 are some items you can build on. 25 MR. MICHELSON:. That's a= valve design requirement. O ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Coud Reponers 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D. C. 20006 l (202) 293-3950 i
. . ~. - .-. -. .. _ . - . - . .. . . . - . -
e m l } , 56-j () 2 1 I expect to find that as part of the interface requirement when you write it. The alternative to this is don't connect 3 3 the discharges together, which creates other kinds of 4 problems, such as operational, but that's the only way a J 5 you'l) avoid it. 6 [ Slide.] f 7 MR. POWER: Item No. 4, which is the lined pipe i 8 one. 9 MR. MICHELSON: Before we go to that, you showed-10 that buried chase. That is going to be truly a pipe chase? i i 11 MR. POWER: I conceptually laid it out. This ! 12 gentleman over here is.the expert on it. .I am quite sure i i 13 there are umpteen n"mber of ways you could lay out 14 configurations. l 15 MR. MICHELSON: I was only going-to point out that 16 elsewhere in the document you told me that pipe was totally 17 inspectable during operation, and I wasn't quite sure how t i 18 you did that unless you put in the chase. Putting it in a 19 chase big enough to get into would be one way of making it 20 inspectable. But if it's buried pipe, not in a chase, then f 21- you have got to go back and look at how you are going to ]_ 22 inspect it. It is inspectable as buried pipe too. You just l 23 have to define how you are going to do it. 24 .The'other question that can be raised then is,'how ] 25 -rcout the penetrations into the basement? l l lh i ANN- RILEY & . ASSOCIATES, Ltd.
- Coud _Pepoders 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D. C. 20006
- (202) 293-3950
i - l 57 1 MR. POWER: We talk about that in No. 5 or 6< 2 Then you have the concern about breaks in this tunnel, 3 whether or not those influences will go-either way, 4 influence the floodability of these buildings through 5 penetrations or what. 6 MR. CATTON: How big is that chase? 7 MR. POWER: We don't have a design. That's beyond 8 GE's scope. 9 MR. MICHELSON: I don't read it that way. That's 10 part of the service water system. That's in your scope. 11 The ultimate heat sink is not in your scope, if I read the 12 scope correctly. Service water is not in your scope either? 13 MR. CHAMBERS: I think we adjusted there a little 14 bit where part of the service water can't be in our scope 15 just for these reasons. 16 MR. MICHELSON: The intake structure is not going 17 to be in your scope? 18 MR. CHAMBERS: Right. 19 MR. MICHELSON: And the buried pipe won't be. You 20 will pick up at the control-building? 21 MR. POWER: We pick up right at the control 22 building. We don't have the pipe chase or the intake 23 building, q 24 MR. MICHELSON: That's perfectly acceptable except
.25 when I read the interface requirements I'm going to expect O ANN RlLEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd.
Court _ Reporters 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 l Washington, D. C. 20006 (202) 293-3950 l
c 58 () I to see all that in the interface requirements. 2 MR. POWER: Yes. That's why I wrote this kind of 3 discussion right here. This is simply a conceptual-4 arrangement. 5 MR. MICHELSON: In the interface are you going to 6 require that the intake structure have three separate 7 compartments so they can stand the flooding of each and it 8 won't interact with the other compartments? That will be a 9 part of it? 10 MR. POWER: Yes. There is a divisional separation 11 criteria. 12 MR. MILLER: Mechanical / electrical separations 13 requirement. 14 (Slide.] 15 MR. POWER:- Lined pipe. There are-a number of 16 elements relevant to lined pipe that I think one might want 17 to consider in addition to just excluding it because it mai 18 cause blockage. 19 This is our standard versus the COL requirement. 20 The current requirements in the book on t le interfaces call 21 for these items. rney do not explicitly or implicitly ' 22 exclude or include lined piping, protective paint, those 23 kind of items. 24 Your concern was the operating experience that-25 came out of.NUREG-1275 about blockages in service water ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. _ _ COud RepOners 1612 K. Street, N.W., . Suite 300 Washington, D. C. 20006
-(202) 293-3950
y4 - -.m4 A 4 u-J-. a.m. A e. (*+,uvk miniv>-m6u4 .e+4 d iu --n.+--.J-af.. .1 M 4mhah_aa S 4- i,s e++p.# 4 ,JA-4 e -ah3t'.44---L6___ _,4-.-..wh+
-4i- i--@ 44 4 4 4 J.J., 4 - _7s-.u.a.#-i.44mm-m-m 4
j 59. 1 pipes, biofouling and all those other things. They are j 2 pretty known across the board as problem areas, but there j 3 are also industry actionn relative to them of ways in which l 4 they can effectively circumvent those by using protective i j 5 piping configurations, coatings and such. There probably-6 will be on any plant some type of remedial action needed out 7 in the piping end. t 8 MR. MICHELSON: This is going to be a section 3 9 pipe? j 10 MR. POWER: Yes. j 11 MR. MICHELSON: My understanding is this all j 12 section 3, class 3 piping. It's all safety system. What j 13 does the code say about lining of section 3 piping? Do they j 14 address that at all, what kind of liners are acceptable? j
- 15 There is a corrosion problem, and if it's buried pipe, it is
- 16 going to be particularly tough to inspect to de'. ermine
!- 17 whether the steel part has corroded away and all you have i 18 got left is some plastic or whatever the liner might be. So ) 19 that got back into the inspectability question.- If you j 20 inspect the outside, that helps some, because now you can 21 begin to determine if you have lost the metal or not. 22 Paul is not-here. I don't know what the code says 23 about lining with glass or plastic or whatever.
~
- 24 MR. BRAMMER:- I think there are some words in
- _ 25 there.
LO
- ANN RlLEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd.
i _ Court Reporters 1612 K. _ Street, N.W., Suite 300 , Washington, - D. C. 20006 (202) 293-3950 ~
I i i f 60 1 MR. MICHELSON: It is acceptable to no that fut I 2 certain precautions have to be taken? l 3 MR. BRAMMER: I'd have to look it up. I'm not
- 4 sure.
i i 5 MR. MICHELSON: I'm not at all familiar with it I j 6 either. That would have to be addressed. The question i 7 originally came from all this gum business. Are you 2 i 8 planning on lining the pipe? I l 9 MR. MILLER: Our experience in Japan with lining 1 j 10 all of the service water piping has been very successful. ) 11 The advanced BWR reactors being constructed in Japan today i l 12 all of the piping and the service water system is lined 1 i 13 piping. 14 MR. MICHELSON: What type of lining? 15 MR. MILLER: Plastic. So we must consider that 16 not all plastic lined piping are the same. j 17 MR. MICHELSON: I don't have any quarrel with it
- 18 either way. It originally came from the gum. Now I
- 19 understand what that is, but now it's just a question if you 20 can do it per the code. I see no particular difficulty.
21 MR. MILLER: No, and it's our intention that the 22 SAR say that the service water piping will be a site-
- 23 specific thing, because there are many different j
24 considerations that you have to take into account before you 25 pick a material for a system like those.
- O ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd.
Court Reporters
- 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite - 300 i Washington,- D. C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
h l 4 [ 61 I \ 1 MR. MICHELSON: The interface requirement need not
\ss/
j 2 even address the nature of the piping. Then it's all an j 3 'open item for the Staff to determine when the-COL applicant 4 comes along. But it doesn't mean there is any finality to 5 it then either. 6 MR. MILLER: As I say, in the advanced boiling
- 7 water reactors in Japan all of the piping is plastic lined 8 and then a short section-downstream of those orifices is
! 9 lined with rubber. 10 MR. CATTON: And that makes sense. Why did you-l 11 decide not to do it? l 12 MR. MILLER: We get all this mail you feed back. i l 13 MR. CATTON: I would hope you wouldn't let-Carl's 14 questions push into a lesser design. I think that's a ! 15 sensible thing to do. 1 { 16 MR. MICHELSON: If they go to plastic lined pipe, 17 they may have to do tisat. l 18 MR. CATTON: If it works in corrosion, I don't l 19 understand why you would take it out just because he said i
- 20 something.
j 21 MR. MICHELSON: I only asked what it was. I 22 didn't tell them to take it out. 23 MR.-POWER: There are a lot of other items for 24 biofouling, keeping a certain velocity flow in-the pipes and 25 those kind of things, that the COL guy will look at. L ANN RlLEY & - ASSOCIATES, Ltd. COud - Repoders 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 l Washington, D. C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
. - ~ . - - . . . - - - _ . . _ . -- - -. - . . . . - . ,_. - - - .~ _
62 e 1 MR. MICHELSON: Biofouling out not to be a big 2 problem with a confined lake to work out of. 3 MR. CATTON: You've got to be careful, Carl, on 4 the question you ask. ' 5 MR. MICHELSON: I was just asking what it was. 6 MR. CATTON: You ask the question and they take it 7 out, and it's a good idea to put it in. 8 MR. MICHELSON: . It may be if you are going to use 9 plastic lining. 10 MR. CATTON: Erosion / corrosion is a problem. 11 (Slide.) 12 MR. POWER: The question came up relative to some 13 specifics,, relative to the pump house and the pipe chase. 14 Again, we are noting that they are not in our scope per se, 15 but we have an interface requirement. I wrote'down some 16 general requirements that we have stated in the book, and 17 then there are some anticiputed ones and that there is going 18 to be a need for a design basis for each one of those. 19 MR. M7CHELSON: That all appears in another 20 amendment; is thtt right? 21 MR. POWEht Right. One could develop a brief 22 discussion of those structures or you could leave it just 23 plain mute. 24 MR. MICHELSON: _You have to develop enough of a 25 discussion to do a - PT.A. You are committed to pick a typical-O ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Court Reporters 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite. 300 Washington, D. C. 20006 (202)-293-3950:
-. - . ~.. -. - . . - - . - . ... . .- .-
1 63 () 1 2 pesign and do the PRA on it, so you can't remain mute. Like three compartments in a pump
- MR. . POWER
3 house and penetrations and seals and those items. 4 MR. MICHELSON: That's a part of PRA. That all j 5 has to be in a PRA. j 6 MR. POWER: Right.
- 7 MR. MICHELSON
- I thought you said you didn't have l 8 to do anything.
i 9 MR. POWER: No. I said you had a choice of being i 10 mute on the thing or putting a write-up in. 11 MR. MICHELSON: I think you don't have that l 1 j 12 choice. You have to define the system and write a PRA on 13 it.
\ 14 MR. POWER: Okay.
j- 15 MR. MICHELSON: You can't remain mute.
- 16 [ Slide.]
e l 17 MR. POWER: I want to return to 13 on the-blowout ) 18 panels just briefly before I move on to the next segment. I ^ 19 did mark on the drawings and the pictures where those j 20 various blowout panels are. Sometime in the very near. 21 future we.are going to be amending these particular inner l 22 compartment pressure analyses which indicate blowout panels 23 at the sub-compartment level. 24 (Slide.)
- 25 MR. POWER: Moving into the third group, which is 4-
.O ANN . RlLEY - & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Court Reporters 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D. C. 20006 j (202) 293-3950
1 4 64 () 1 the HVAC, No. 12. 2 MR. MICHELSON: You are not doing these in order, s 3 I assume, f 4 MR. POWER: I am trying to. I got out of step. 5 MR. MICHELSON: That control building penetration, j 6 you are not going to tell us anything except an interface on f 7 that; is that right? l j 8 MR. POWER: You're right. I bypassed that one. 3 9 I'm getting lost in my slides up here. 10 (slide.)
- 11 MR. POWER
- The concern exhibited here is that the 12 penetration into the building might be as important as the 13 continuity of the piping. First of-all, this is kind of an 14 interface between the COL and the standard where both of 15 them have a responsibility. Obviously part of the 4
j 16 penetration is in the building and part of the penetration l 17 is sitting out on the piping chase. 1 18 In the standard document we already have a set of i l 19 interface commitments. Such as here,'watertightness on
- 20 piping penetrations. There could be' expected to be added a l 21 few additional items relative to those piping penetrations, 4
22 such as these items down here. { 23 MR. MICHELSON: The first requirement before you 24 ever ever worry about pipe break is that that penetration 25 has to take the hydrostatic loading of water up to one foot !() ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. f Coud Reponers 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D. C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
4 65'
- ( ) 1 -below grade, because that le where you are postulating your l 2 floods to be, i
l 3 MR. POWER: Right, j 4 MR. MICHELSON: So it's a pretty good penetration ! 5 to begin with.
- 6 MR. POWER
- Right.
l 7 MR. MICHELSON: Beyond that, the question is-if I 8 break the pipe on the ground side of the penetration, what i
- 9 additional loads doec-it put on the watertightness of-the l 10 penetration.
11 MR. POWER: Right. i > l 12 MR. MICHELSON: That's what I would expect to. find i
- 13 addressed.
'14 MR. POWER: I think I talk about some of that.
1- ! 15 Maintaining _ piping-penetration design, maintaining for i ! 16 external flooding protection would o= covered under that. l 17 Similar requirements relative to seismic and internal i ~ j 18 flooding, and some relative to precluding leakage effects 19 back out on the piping penetration or back~out on the chase l i j 20 tunnel from floods'inside. i 21 MR. MICHELSON: That chase tunnel that you were i .. . l 22 speculating about, is that going to be three individual 23 tunnels, one for each division, or is it a common tunnel? j 24 If it's a common tunnel, then it becomes very important. 1 25- MR. POWER: What;would expect, a common tunnel? 4 LO ' j ANN RlLEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. [ ._ Court Reporters - .- 1612 K, Street, N.W., Suite : 300 l _ Washington, D. C. 20006
- (202) 293-3950-
66 ! 1 MR. MILLER: It's a COL problem. 2 MR. MICHELSON: You have no interface requirement 3 that it be separated? 4 (Slide.) 5 MR. POWER: There is down here. 6 MR. MICHELSON:- There are no components in the ! tunnel other than pipes, as I see it. i 8 MR. POWER: That's right. But the entry into the 9 building has got three different entry areas. This could be j 10 precluded that there are three separate chases side-by side i 11 3 or the pipes are all in the same chase but configured side 4 12 by side. I
- 13 MR. MICHELSON
- But it's important then if they 14 are a chase that the other end be well protected against I 15 water filling that chase and getting into the other two 16 divisions and that sort of thing.
{ 17 MR. POWER: That's correct. That is the i 18 penetration on the other end. 19 MR. MICHELSON: We will see all this on your 20 interface document for this? 21 MR. POWER: Yes. l 22- MR. MICHELSON: Then there will be a safety 1 23 evaluation of that required as well and a justification-for i 24 how the ITAAC will work and that sort of thing. That will i- 25 all have to be done.
- O ANN RlLEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd.
Court Reporters - 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D. C. 20006 l (202) 293-3950
-.- - - ~ _ - .. . - - - - - -- - . _ _ .. .- - . . -.
i 67 () 1 2 MR. POWER: Therefore, a paragraph in the requirements on the subject of piping penetrat.on will be i
- 3 added to the SAR.
l l 4 MR. MICHELSON: I don't think anyone has ever 5 suggested this sort of thing was impossible. It was only a 6 question that it didn't show up and it clearly has to be 7 done and we expect to see it before the end of the game. 1 8 [ Slide.] ! 9 MR. POWER: I will finally got back to 12 now. l 10 Concern has been raised about the common ventilation system t
- 11 and the reactor building ventilation system connecting to a l 12 secondary containment distribution system which under normal 13 operation operates with this nice integrated connection.
14 Then there appears to be from the write-ups and such some 15 confusion _ relative to what happens under accident conditions l 16 or breaks inside the secondary containment. 17 What I tried to do on this series of slides is j 18 kind of make some observations relative to where I saw some i 19 of these discontinuities were and maybe try to shed some new l 20 light relative to design of the ventilation system. 21 [ Slide.] 22 MR. POWER: Probably the easiest-way to do this is 23 to simply take and show you this complicated figure, which 24 is ultimately replaced by a relatively' simple one. [ 25 The idea of showing you:the complicated one is to (]I ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Court Repoders ! 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D. C. 20006 i (202) 293-3950 !
l i 68 () 1 show that there is in this area a large distribution inside 2 the secondary containment that goes to the various quadrants 2 3 and compartments. l 4 MR. MICHELSoN: And all three divisions are in 1 5 that common distribution? 6 MR. POWER: Right there. They connect off there i 7 and then they return to this area. 8 _The key item is that this area into the reactor 9 building, inte the secondary containment and out of it is, [ 10 first of all, the intake is external to the building. This l 11 portion happens to be still inside the building and goes 12 outside. Again, it's an open vented system. i 13 (Slide.) { 14 MR. POWER: To show that a little more simply, 15 here are those two valves we were talking about here, the l j 16 air operated isolation valves; there are the exhaust valves 17 down here; and here is this distribution system. j 18 A couple of things were maybe overlooked relative 4 i 19 to what happens. The integrity of secondary containment is 20 required for design basis loss of coolant accidents inside +- 1 21 containment but not for pipe breaks inside secondary 22 containment in the cubicles. So the whole concept of this , 23 original system was an accident occurs; you close these i 24 valves and you take care of the environment on the inside 25 for any leakage from the primary containment. e () ANN ' RlLEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Court Reporters l l 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 ' Washington, D. C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
4 1 j 69 ( 1 In the case of a failure inside this area, where 2 pressurization occurs and relief-out the steam tunnel and i j 3 venting,.that integrity may be lost temporarily or it may be i j 4 lost continually for a-long period of time. But under both 5 those conditions standby gas is not required. Therefore, i
- 6 the isolation function is not' required.
I ! 7 MR. MICHELSON: That has never been the question. 4 l 8 MR. POWER: Right. 9 LThe concern is relative to the health and safety l i 10 of the equipment that is going to participate in safe i
- 11 shutdowr.. As you see, there are three divisions. Each one 12 of those divisions has a local ventilation control system.
t 13 It has nothing to do at all with anything up here. 14 MR. MICHELSON: We won't see any of that then, 15 because that's not in the SSAR. 16 MR. POWER: Right. ! 17 MR. MICHELSON: I'm looking at the total drawings i la in the SSAR. j 19 MR. POWER: Maybe we have assumed too much in_our i 20 words and maybe we have got to add some more selective words: l ~ . 21 to describe how this process' works. 22 Once you are in this-arrangement, each one of
- 23 these pieces of equipment is controlled by its local
- 24 ventilation system.
l 25 -MR. MICHELSON: I beg to differ. It-isn't all. A LO ! ANN RILEY & . ASSOCIATES, Ltd. l _ COud RepOders. . .1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 l Washington, D. C. 20006 ( (202) 293-3950
t i 70 1 fair number of it is covered by local ventilation, not all 2 of it. 3 MR. POWER: I was going to talk about the other i ! 4 essential equipment area. They are not connected to this j 5 system but have ventilation from the outside directly into l 6 the rooms. The diesel generator rooms have a separate set 7 divisionally. The ones for the essential electric equipment 8 have a central set of rooms. In fact, they are not even i 9 affected by what happens in the room,-in the-individual i j 10 compartment, the-quadrant that has the break, because they 9 l 11 are not connected to the system. I j 12 The concern that I see that you were exhibiting 13 was a blowdown occurs in this area, and can that blowdown be 14 transmitted back not only into this system here, but can it i i 15 be transmitted over to the other quadrants that are going to j . 16 perform, say, for an orderly shutdown. 17 MR. MICHELSON: Becausa they'are connected 18 together. l 19 MR. POWER: Right. 20 Two things the diagram shows. Vertically this is , 21 the way it's lined. Most of this equipment is in the I 22 basement, in the compartments next door, being cooled by the 2 23 local cooling systems and connected downward by the 24 _ ventilation systems by small piping.- 25 MR. MICHELSON: We don't know how small. There is v(3 ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd.
- Court Reporters-1612 K. Street, N.W., _ Suite 300 -
Washington, D. C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
l 1 1 71 1 none of that detail. ! 2 MR. POWER: Right. Your concern is having more 3 details and explanation in the book relative to this i 4 process.
- 5 MR. MICHELSON
- One knows that this is providing 1
6 the normal cooling for the unit, not the emergency. This is 7 all normalt this is not used as emergency. l 8 MR. POWER: Normal cooling. 9 MR. MICHELSON: You don't do it with a little-pipe 10 like that. You do it with ductwork. It takes big ducts to 11 move air. 12 MR. POWER: Those are all in local rooms. 13 MR. MICHELSON: Take reactor-water cleanup. It's 14 a very good example and it's on ycur drawing there t 15 somewhere. I don't know where it is. I can't see it that 16 well. 17 MR. POWER: It has its own ventilation over in the 18 cubicles. 19 MR. MICHELSON: No, it does not. Reactor water 20 cleanup gets its ventilation from.this system and it's 21 returned from this system. It's not a safety-related system 22 at all, so it doesn't need any emergency cooling. 23 MR. POWER: I think it takes it directly. It's in 24 the control building. 25 MR. MICHELSON: No, no. Reactor water cleanup is ANN RILEY_ & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Court Reporters-1612 K -Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D. C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
l 1 q 72 s () 1 2 in the reactor building. MR. POWER: Oh, cleanup system. I'm sorry. Yes. l 3 Cleanup is one of these divisions. 4 MR. MICHELSON: I-think it's probably on B. l 5 MR. POWER: On C over here there is another line 6 connection, i 7 MR. MICHELSON: You've got a wall.there. You've i j 8 got A, B and C there.
- l. 9 MR. CATTON: He's saying there is an unlettered
- 10 one?
l 11 MR. MICHELSON: No. 12 MR. POWER: There are three safety divisions but 13 there are four quadrants. 14 MR. . MICHELSON: That has-just got a couple little 15 things in it. That was to take care of that fourth division 16 of the instrumentation and so torth. You've got it all i 17 right there, I believe. j 18 MR. POWER: Yes. It takes care of the reactor i 19 cleanup, 20 MR. MICHELSON: That system takes care of it?. f 21 MR. POWER: Yes.- This third division over here, C l 22 division, takes care of two quadrants. This is A quadrant, i 23 B, C and D. The cleanup system is la one of these 24 quadrants.
- i 25 MR. MICHELSON
- -It's not on your P4 ids then.
()h . .
. ANN RlLEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. .i Coud - Reponers
- 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D. C. 20006 (202)'293-3950
73 rx I (') 1 MR. POWER: You are absolutely correct. , l 2 MR. MICHELSON: Presumably that was drawn from ! l 3 this. 4 MR. POWER: You are absolutely correct. In the l 5 last presentation there was a picture that was developed and 6 shown where the cooling for the essential equipment area was 7 being made off of tw6 divisions. 8 MR. MICHELSON: This 10 not the essential 9 equipment area. This is inside of secondary containment and 10 it's a part of the same three train arrangement. I think 11 it's in train B of division 2 of those three divisions. My 12 eyes are not all that good anymore and I can't read it from 13 here. But it's in there. I think it was in division 2. / s- 14 MR. POWER: Somehow it sticks out as C in my mind 15 but it could be B. Out if it is B, there are two of them in 16 B. So lose that division plus reactor cleanup, but you 17 don't lose the other two divisions. 18 MR. MICHELSON: The whole concern is when you 19 develop that 5 pounds pressure that you are calculating in 20 the reactor cooling compartment, how do you isolate that 21 compartment so that the steam and the effluents do not back 22 up through this ventilation system into the other divisions? , 23 There are no reverse flow dampers shown on those systems and 24 there is only a manual valve. That has to be closed by 25 somebody'.3 action and this all happens in seconds. U ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Coud Reponers 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D. C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
i 74 () 1 MR. POWER: Yes. 1 2 MR. MICHELSON: The steam simply backs up into i j 3 these other compartments because it's driven by 5 pounds 4 pressure and this stuff is operating in inches-of water. 5 MR. POWER: But again, it goes out to very large i i 6 header. These two are very large headers. I 7 MR. MICHEISON: But it's backing out in every 8 direction. The fact is, in the worst case I might have the 9 ideal size break that doesn't blow the half pound panel out i 10 there at the end of the tunnel but it sits there and
;l percolates out through all these other divisions without l
12 ever getting a half pound pressure out at the steam tunnel, i 13 That's possible too because of the dynamics of this thing. v 14 MR. CATTON: These are relatively simple l-15 calculations. Why don't you just demonstrate it? 16 MR. MICHELSON: That's what they have to do. 17 First of all, they have to decide what kind of ventilation 18 system they've got, how big the holes are, what kind of 19 valves they are using, whether it's got reverse flow 20- dampers, a whole lot of things. You can't do a safety 21 evaluation until you know it. When you do, you'll be able 22 to do it, and I think it has to be done.. 23 You've got to account for probably the aost-24 important break outside of containment, which is reactor 25 water cleanup. Ycu've got-to show what happens when it-ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd.- Coud Repoders
- 1612 K. Street,' N.W., Suite 300 Washington,- D. C. 20006 l
(202) 293 3950 l
4 2 75 j () 1 2-breaks and make sure the divisions for safe shutdown are not affected. The obvious and most common connection is this 3 common ventilation. There are some subtle ones like floor 4 drains and stuff, but I think that's trivial. This is the 5 big one. 6 MR. POWER: When we did the pressurization ' } i 7 analysis in the cleanup system cubicle, and when you looked i ! 8 at the ventilation duct vent path, isn't that a relatively 9 smt411 area relative to the other blowdown areas that are in l 10 those cubicles? ] 11 MR. MICHELSON: Carl is asking a question thaf J 12 goes a little beyond that. What if you don't quite reach 13 the blowdown pressure? 14 MR. POWER: Small break; it sits there and 1 l 15 simmers; it heats up, t 16 MR. CATTON: You raise half way to your blowdown 17 release pressure. i 18 MR. POWER: Right. i 19 MR. CATTON: So it feeds back into the other 20 rooms. i 21 MR. POWER: Right. 22 MR. MICHELSON: It will anyway. 23 MR. CATTON: That's the question. 24 MR. POWER: Are you saying this system.is on or , 25 off? , () ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Coud RepOders 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D. C. 20006 (202) 293-3950 )
76 1 MR. CATTON: You're the one that_is saying. 2 MR. POWER: What we are saying is in a ventil&:-ion 3 sense this would be on. 4 MR. MICHELSON: Oh, yes. 5 MR. POWER: It's venting off the. exhaust and 6 feeding air in. Actually, the connections on these are all 7 vertical. 8 MR. MICHELSON: If thers is 5 ~ounds p on the 9 compartment and these things produce 10 inches of-water 10 head, or 20 inches, whatever your fan pressures are, you are 11 not going to be flowing anything into those compartments; 12 it's all coming out of those compartments back through the 13 ventilation ducts. 14 MR. POWER: The pressure in.the compartment is how 15 long in time? 16 MR. SAXENA: About 20 or 30 seconds. I 17 MR. MICHELSON: The peak will go that long. One 2 18 pounds pressures go for a long, long time. 19 MR. SAXENA: That's right. 20 MR. MICHELSON: That's what keeps feeding the 21 system. But you are talking about fan pressures of inches 22 of water versus compartment pressures of pounds. 23 MR. CATTON: You're going to get steam-backflow 24 through your duct system to one of those T's and'around and 25 back into all'the other rooms. O ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Court Reporters-1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D. C, 20006 (202) 293-3950:
j 77 1 NR. POWER: I guass the system guys are saying 4 2 that that steam-pathway down the ducting, both ducts -- j 3 MR. MICHELSON: Until you design this I don't know l 4 where the inlet is relative to this room. Maybe it's way , 5 over on the other side of the building or something. I 6 don't know. You can't calculate this. 7 MR. CATTON: Your code SCAM could easily deal with 8 this. It's just fore inter-volume connections, i 9 MR. POWER: Is there somo reason why we cannot
- 10 calculate the ductwork pressurization in two cubicles? We 11 only have two cubicles that have high energy lines.
12 MR. MICHELSON: Reactor water cleanup is the one 13 that we are talking about.
- d 14 MR. POWER
- To do a calculation to show the effect 15 into_the other compartments with the ventilation flowing or l 16 stopped.
17 MR. SAXENA: We can model that. We can calculate i j 18 it. . 19 MR. CATTON: The concern is that the pressure is 20 going to rise enough in the room to feed back through the 21 line to some of those T's, and then it's going to be 22 everywhere that ycar system goes. You are going to be
- 23 bumping the steam that is being released in this one room
$- 24 through your ducting. 25 MR. POWER: I understand your concern. I think ANN RlLEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Court Reporters j 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D. C. 20006 l (202) 293-3950
4 ) _78 I 1 when we get the calculation done for you, we will show you j 2 the very large discharge header and the very large supply ) 3 header where that pressure effect will not get transmitted 4 down that piping into those other rooms. It's up to'us to j 5 provides those analyses. 6 MR. MICHELSON: I hadn't even taken credit for 1
- 7 that aspect, because the first thing you did was put on some 8 radiation detectors, and we're going to have radiation all
- 9 over the building from this one, and it's going to isolate 10 those. I can't credit for the supply and the discharge, i 11 because those are going to isolate.
12 MR. POWER: I have no doubt that ultimately, . 13 somewhere at 30 or 40 seconds. In fact, when you hit low j 14 water level, if you ever do, it will close this off. 15 MR. MICHELSON: You've got radiation monitors on 16 all that stuff. l l 17 MR. POWER: I agree.
- 18 MR. MICHELSON
- The radiation in the building is 19 going-to be horrendous when you break this pipe. It's going 20 to get real interesting in a hurry.
l 21 MR. CATTON: It seems to me the best thing to do 22 is just have somebody do some calculations. 23 MR. MICHELSON: I expect the Staff to do the 24 safety evaluation, and they can get whatever they need from
- - 25 whomever, but the Staff has got to do it. It's not in the
.o 3 ANN RlLEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. i: Court Reporters 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300
- Washington, D. C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
i 4 ^ 79 1 draft FSER right now. ' 2 MR. DAVIS: Let me ask a question. This scenario j 3 requires that the pipe breaks and the isolation valves fail? 1 l 4 MR. POWER: No. It turns out the isolation valve i, l 5 may not close immediately, first of all, or it may close 6 later, j 7 MR. MIC;'ELSON: It's not told to close anytime. (j 8 MR. POWER: The question becomes, is it required 9 to close? {i i 10 MR. MICHELSON: If you had a fast acting isolation } 11 valve, that would help. Ii. you have got some backflow a j 12 dampers on the supply side, that would help. i 13 MR. CATTON: It depends where they are too. 4 14 MR. MICHELSON: You have got to design for these { 15 kinds of dynamic conditions that are being created in the 16 room. This is nothing new today. We've talked about this { 17 for three years already. This is not a new scenario. This i
- 18 is a very old one we are trying to get finally nailed down.
- 19 MR. POWER
- Wouldn't you benefit better by' i 20 continuing ventilatin- flow through not only the area that 21 was affected but the other areas of least adding air that
! 22 you don't even need air, but at the same time taking that 23 air out to'the stack than having that same air go out } 24 through the steam tunnel at ground level? 25 MR. MICHELSON: You have to decide whether you are O ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. , Court Reporters
- - 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D. C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
. _ . - - . . _ . - _ - _ . - - .-. .. - . . - ~ .- - - - ._--.
i i j 80 1 going to isolation on radiation or not, for instance, and j 2 the whole concept of secondary containment-was anytime there 3 is a problem bottle it up and go out through standby gas 4 treatment. 5 MR. POWER: But for breaks inside there is no a 6 requirement for standby gas treatu at, although it may be 7 available later. 8 MR. MICHELSON: I wouldn't want to tell you how to-9 do it. I would only point out the concerns of commonly tied 10 ventilation systems, and'the best'way to take care of it is 11 to do a safety evaluation, which I expect the Staff to do-12 sooner or later. 13 MR. CATTON: The concern is the backflow through 14 your ducting. You keep saying' forward flow. 15 MR. MICHELSON: You can get forward also. 16 MR. CATTON: If you had it going forward, it would 17 come down through here. 18 MR. MICHELSON: That's only excess. 19 MR. CATTON: Is that isolated?. 20 Mr. MICHELSON: Yes. That's all on radiation 21 monitors.
-22 MR. CATTON: So it would just recirculate inside.-
23 MR. MICHELSON: It would just.be bottled.up.; 24 MR. CATTON: So unless those valves called MO get 25 closed, you've coupled your whole system together. ANN RlLEY &- ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Court Reporters
.1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300
- Washington, D. C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
1 81 1 MR. MICHEL09 Now you're getting there. 2 MR. CATTON: I understood before. I'm trying to 3 make sure he understands. The answerc sound like you don't 4 understand. 5 MR. POWER: No. I do understand. I'm trying to 6 say that conditions are that the radiation effect is an 7 example. We were talking about whether or not this system 8 should isolate immediately. We're saying we don't find a 9 value in immediate isolation. 10 MR. MICHELSON: I think you just have to analyze 11 it and decide what an acceptable pathway is and what the 12 Staff agrees to, and that's it. Then you have to document 13 it and take care of it. If there are some fast closing duct d 14 valves, then you have to talk about their qualification. If 15 they are reverse flow dampers, you have to talk about their 16 qualifications under these 5 pound dynamic conditions. 17 That's a tough one on ventilation systems. And the ductwork 18 has to be designed for these pressures. 19 It has got to be addressed. One way to address lit 20 is don't tie all your divisions together with a common duct. 21 That's the pathway that the ACRS suggested to you in 1989. 22 Don't have common venti]ation systems. You've insisted upon 23 doing it this way. 24 We talked about it at one of our very first-25 meetings, the presence of this common ventilation. Okay, O ANN RILEY &- ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Court Repoiters 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D. C. EiTJ06 (202) 293-3950-
I ] 82 i iO 3 you can go tie them together. It's just going to got 2 tough. l j 3 : think we are obligated to make sure you do it j 4 rhjht, and if yoa can figure out how to do it, fine. So far 1 5 I don't think you've got a documented answer. 6 MR. CATTON: They haven't done the calculations 7 yet. i l 8 MR. MICHELSON: There are a lot of things they ace j i j 9 going to have to do if they are going to take the route of a Y 10 common ventilation system for all the divisions. 11 (Slide.* 12 MR. POWER: RMU locations inside secondary e
- 13 containment. I think this will go vory quickly. ;
14 MR. MICHELSON: What happened tc 13, the blowout
- . 15 panels on these compartments?
4 ! 16 MR. POWERt We talked about those, i 17 MR. MICHELSON: That slipped by fast. Let me ask i 18 you a couple of questions on them. The blowout panel for i i 19 reactor water cleanup that you are depending upon is out I l 20 kind of at the end of the train of rocas that you might have 21 to go through to get from where the break is out to y%nre , s
- 22 the tunnel is. It's kind of a long, tortuous path. Out 23 there is a half pound blowout panel, as I recall. It dumps
[ 24 directly in through the main steam chase. 25 Your calculations have taken account of that whole !O j ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd.
- Court Reporters 1612. K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 i
Washington, D. C. 20006 i (?';2) 293 3950 '
83 O1 tr i er tsi e 11 ** v:~ were the "re x 1 . aica 2 is very likely down in one of those heat exchanger rooms, 3 all the way through all the other rooms it goes through to 4 get finally to that chase? 5 MR. SAXENA: The answer is yeo. 6 MR. MICHELSON: You've included that in your 7 calculation? 8 MR SAXENA: Yes. 9 MR. CATTON: In the SER is mentions the use of FL 10 over D's and so forth. You go through doorways and all this 11 kind of stuff. When you get a break, this is an 12 accelerating flow. Did you crank up the values you used-to 13 account for the fact that the drag is going to be greater in 14 an accoltrating pump, or did you just use steady-state 15 lines? And is it important? 16 MR. SAXENA: Are you talking about the design of 17 the dampers? 18 MR. CATTON: No. I'm talking about the 19 calculations you did for interconnecting rooms. It would be 20 the same thing for ths steam venting. If you have an 21 accelerating flow, you really should be using larger drag. 22 That would mean that the source pressure would.get a little 23 bit higher. I couldn't tell from the SER whether you-felt . 24 it was important. 25 Maybe the Staff could answer that. O ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Court Reporters 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D. C, 20006 (202) 293 3950
_ m_ l 1 No comment. 2 MR. MICHELSON: I didn't find a whole lot in the 3 SSAR in how they did the calculation at all. . 4 MR. CATTON: I didn't find anything. 5 MR. MICHELSON: That's what I mean by a whole lot. 6 MR. CATTON: But the Staff did comment on their
- 7 use of appropriate coefficients. If the use of coefficients 8 is important, then it should have accounted for accelerating 9 flows. I'm just asking if it did.
10 MR. GAXFNA: The code does consider the 11 accelerated flow. 12 MR. CATTON: GE has done a whole lot of work on 13 this. At least they did for supprossion pool, Mark 1, 2, 3, 14 back when were were looking at those, the fact that the drag 15 coefficient has to be increased for acceleration flows. You 16 could argue that the acceleration is small enough that it 17 doesn't matter, but I would like to see that if it's 18 important. 19 When you pick a drag coefficient out of the Crane 20 manual or something, that la not the same thing you would 21 use in an accelerating flow. It has to be increased. 22 MR. SAXENA: The answer is we do consider the 23 acceleration effects. 24 MR. MICHELSON: You use dynamic drag coefficients? 25 MR. SAXENA: That's right. O ANN _ RILEY _ & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. : Court Reporters
-1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D. C. 20006 (202)-293-3950
l; 85 i 1 MR. CATTON: In there anywhere I can get a 2 reference to this? 3 MR. SAXENA: This one is specifically to this 4 aspect of these calculations. 5 MR. CATTON: I have a great deal of difficulty ! 6 dealing with your answer because I have had nothing to look 7 at, and all I know is what's in the SER, which says that you 8 used them. You have to help me. 9 MR. MICHELSON: Ivan, sometime this spring we will 10 take a trip to San Jose. That might be something you would 11 like to look at, the calculation of this. 12 MR. CATTON: I have never looked at something 13 that's so loose. 14 MR. MICHELSON: This drawing here is the thing 15 that blows my mind. All kinds of blowout panels shown. 16 That's what those vertical lines are, if I understand it. 17 To my knowledge there is only one blowout panel in this 18 whole thing, and that's up there where you go into the steam-19 tunnel. There aren't blowout panels all tne way along that ; 20' path. There's only one. 21 MR. FOX: That's Amendment 22. 22 MR. MICHELSON: This drawing is all wrong. 23 There's only one blowout panel. You're right, though.
'24 They've got to go from that bottom room through a bunch of 25 other rooms.
O ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Court Reporters 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D. C. 20006 (202) 293 3950
) 86 l 1 MR. CNTTON: Not only do I not get any j 2 information; when I do get it, it's wrong. l
\ :
l 3 MR. POWER: If you study the layout drawings and ! i 4 you look at all the interconnections, this only starts to 5 shadow them in. On some of these there are dramatic 6 elevation changes. l 1 7 MR. MICHELSON: But there are no tiowout panels } j 8 execpt in the steam tunnel? i 9 MR. POWER: Right. j 10 MR. MICHELSON: That's where the drawing misleads i ! 11 you. 12 MR. POWER: There may well be in the metallized j 13 compartment a blowout panel. There are some hatches above 14 the heat exchangers that could be claimed for blowout panel. 15 MR. MICHELSON: I hope not. They becore missiles l 16 besides if you start claiming hatches blow off. 17 MR. POWER: They are designed with a spring-loaded 18 hinge. 19 MR. MICHELSON: That should all be discussed as a 20 part of the design requirement. 21 MR. POWER: Right. ' i ' 22 MR. MICHELSON:- This is essentjally a complete l 23 demign on this system. This is nothing exotic, new or 24 anything else. This should be essentially complete. l i 25 I am reminded that perhaps 10:30_ie a good __ time __to l O ANN RILEY -& ASSOCIATES, Ltd. , Court Reporters i 1612 K.- Street, N.W., Suite 300
- Washington, D. C. 20006 (202)_293 3950
4 87 ~ 1 take a break. Let's como back at 10:45. 2 [ Recess.) 3 MR. MICHEUON: Let's get started again. ] 1 4 Before we get to your next item, let me raise t 5 something which I am sure I have discussed with you several ) 6 times before, and that is the stack block walls that are 7 being used in the reactor water cleanup system at a couple 8 of elevations. Did you look into those to see how they 9 would be designed and built? The SSAR is going to have some 10 words about them. 11 MR. POWER: They do. 12 MR. MICHELSON: It's in item 13; is that it? 13 MR. POWER: Right. Wait. I'm sorry. I pulled 14 the wrong folder again. I've got it here. ; 15 [ Slide.) 16 MR. MICHELSON: Which item is that? 17 MR. POWER: No. 8. 18 Most the structures in that compartment are 19 permancnt. There are some semis, but I named off the semis 20 that we are talking about. The particular ones you were
- 21 interested in werts the brick ones, the blocks. j 22 MR. MICHELSON: Yes.
23 MR. POWER: I identified five different areas. 24 The sheets you have in that area identify the five areas. 25 MR. MICHELSON:. Which sheet is that? O ANN RlLEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. I Court Reporters 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D. C. 20006
-(202) 293-3950-
88 1 MR. POWER: These pictures that will follow this. 2 (Slide.) 3 MR. ItWER: They will identify with a circle the 4 five different areas. There are two areas in the cleanup 5 system under non-regenerative and regenerative heat 6 exchanger. There are two set of block walls up at the 7 penetration room for instrumentation, and there is one over 8 at the tip system, and there is one up at the fuel pool 9 cleanup. 10 If you take into account missile effects, looking 11 at what would happen, there is only one of those that 12 appears to be sensitive in the sense that it does face 13 something. That is this particular one here where it faces 14 a divisional wall between a division. 15 MR. MICHEI/JON: I wasn't so concerned about that,- 16 although that is an important consideration. My first 17 concern is if I blow that panel out, I'm never going to dump la any of the steam into the steam tunnel; I'm going to dump it 19 all into the secondary containment. That's a big vent 20 compared with that little blowout panel you'se got several 21 rooms away. That fills all of the secondary containment 22 with steam, and that's not so good, _if you recognize all the 23 equipment for safe shutdown is in that same environment. 24 MR. POWER: The last item is those temporary walls 25 will have steel plates put either_on the inside or the O ANN RlLEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Court Reporters 1612 K.- Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D. C. 20006 (202) 293 3950
l i i 89 1 outside, or both, and tacy will honor the 7 psi i 2 pressurization aspect. 1 l 3 MR. MICHELSON: Or whatever the peak pressures ! i 4 are. i I j 5 MR. POWER: That's for the two cleanup rooms. For j 6 the other rooms, there are no high energy sources in the j 7 instrumentation room. No one is attempting to keep those ! 8 walls intact. If a penetration blows out from primary l 9 containment, as an example. The room is fairly large. The i
- )
} 10 impact of those is not into a high energy compartment. , j 11 MR. MICHELSON: The point is I' don't worry about f 12 the missiles. There aren't going to be any missiles because l 13 the wall is not going to blow down. 14 MR. POWER: That's right. ; j 15 MR. MICHELSON: That's a good answer. It just had i 16 to be made into a design requirement. 17 MR. POWER: Yes. The two that you were concerned ) 18 about were the first two. l 19 MR. MICHELSON: Yes. 20 MR. POWERt The one blows into a room which is i j 21 already inside the ventable area. The other one blows
- 22 towards a divisional wall. It's a no-no to have that wall 23 impacted or affected. .
24- MR. MICHELSON: The real concern is that it 25 inactivates the venting of all this event into the steam j LO ANN RlLEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Court Reporters 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 . Washington, D. C.- 20006 (202)_ 293-3950 _ - _ . . . _ . - - . _ - _ _ _ - _- __. -~ _ -_. .
i' 90 () I 2 tunnel and instead dumps every bit of it in the secondary containment. 3 MR. POWER: Right. 4 MR. MICHElsoN: I think that is not a good design 5 basis. So you're goit.g to make it a tight wall? 6 MR. POWER: Right. Those Were put in there 7 obviously for equipment replacement, inspection and those 8 other little nice things, but again, they have to take into 9 account pressurization. 10 MR. MICHELSON: Let me go back to the calculation 11 of the reactor water cleanup pressures. I'm sure they were 12 done with certain assumptions about how fast the isolation 13 valve closes. There is a model. I looked at that model 14 once and I had some problem about how fast you thought flow 15 stopped. You've got to look at the valve flow 16 characteristics and you don't just go through a fully 1 17 opened / fully closed conditions. You go through the whole 18 intermediate. 19 The flow characteristics are quite interesting. 20 You don't cut off much' flow until you get very near the end 21 of va)ve travel. 22 MR. SAXENA: What we do with valve calculations, 23 we start with the time it would take a person in a given 24 compartment and hov fast in a single division the valves 25 start closing. O ANN RlLEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. i Coud Repoders . 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D. C. 20006 . I ' (202) 293 3950
1 i a l 91 1 MR. MICHELSON: Do you include the instrument time
- 2 delay, including the built-in time delays?
1
- 3 MR. SAXENA
- Yes.
1 4 MR. MICHELSON: Right now there are 45 seconds of 5 time delay. In the present day plants it's 45 seconds. I 6 don't know what it will be for this plant. 7 MR. SAXENA: In this design, we have extended this i 8 based on your earlier comments to 10 seconds. 9 MR. MICHELSON You are going to use a 10-second i 10 time delay? I
- 11 MR. SAXENA
- That's right.
i 12 MR. MICHELSON: The-problem with that reactor l 13 water cleanup is all that instability you get when you first 14 try to open the valves and run the system. People have had 15 so much trouble that they have been putting time delay for
- 16 45 seconds. I saw an application where they asked the Staff 17 to go to 10 minutes. I said, well, somebody doesn't
- l 18 understand the problem or why the valves are even in there, i
j 19 But 45 seconds is standard now on boiling water i i 20 reactors, and you've got to include that unless you are i 21 proposing only a 10-second time delay.
- 22 MR. S AXEH..
- There are other sensors also.
j 23 -MR. MICHELSON: They are not that fast. This is 24 built in on the logic. - It doesn't have anything to do with 25 the detection; it has to do with the time after detecting a LO ANN 'RlLEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. _ Court Reporters l 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D. C. 20006 [ (202) 293 3950
i 92 1 break before you decide to close the valve. It's there 2 because of this flow instability during normal startup of 4 3 that system, and 45 seconds is what some licensing people 2 4 have agreed to. I've asked repeatedly, have you gone back 5 and done the calculations in those compartments for today's 6 plants at 45 seconds, and I can't find a positive answer to 7 that yet either. 8 MR. POWER: Some of that is influenced also by the 9 question about the valve closing against a delta P. 10 MR. MICHELSON: That's another consideration. 11 MR. POWER: I understood that's why some of them 12 were elongating the timeout; they don't want the valve to 13 trip out. 14 MR. MICHELSON: They like to elongate the time 15 because they have these flow instabilities that give you the 16 differential flow instrument trip when you try to open the 17 valves to get the system started. It's a high pressure and 18 a low pressure in a high pressure system. It goes through 19 the low pressure stages. There is a lot of flow instability 20 when you first turn it on. It gives you these rpurious 21 answers unless you wait 45 seconds for it to settle down. 22 So they put in a permanent delay of 45 in all DWRs, to my 23 knowledge. 24 Presumably the Staff has seen calculations that 25 ~ show you-can stand that 45 seconds. I've haven't questioned O ANN RlLEY & _ ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Court Reporters 1612 - K. Street,_ N.W., Suite 300 - Washington, .D. ' C. 20006 (202) 293 3950
93 1 that yet. 2 on this plant you have to either include what you 3 know has been the practice or you have to specify something I 4 else. It wasn't clear to me in reading all this whether you 5 were using 10 seconds or 45 seconds or 5 minutes or none. 6 MR. POWER: We will make that clearer. 7 MR. SAXENA: We will make that clear in our 8 calculation that we are using a 10-second time delay. Then, 9 as the valve starts closing, we will give you the actual 10 closing time. 11 MR. MICHELSON: How fast a valve are you 12 specifying? 13 MR. SAXENA: The closing time is specified at 14 about 30 seconds for the valve to go from fully opened to 15 fully closed. 16 MR. MICHELSON: You check with your people on the 17 whole problem of flow instability in reactor water cleanup. 18 That's why the 45 seconds is in there on today's plants. 19 What I was really to was not this at all. This is 20 really a side. issue. The real issue is in the unlikely 21 event that indeed you don't get closure of the valves, your 22 calculations are not valid any longer necessarily. Have you 23 done any severe accident calculations on which you have 24 assumed you didn't get valve closure, and were you able to 25 keep the event from flying to.the reactor water cleanup O ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Court Reporters 1612 K.' Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D. C. 20006 (202) 293
- _ . _ ._ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _3950 _- - . _ _ _ _ _ _ . . _ . . _
94 () I train out through the steam tunnel or was it building up the 2 pressure? 3 MR. SAXENA: We are looking into that in the PRA, 4 the possibility the valve won't close'and remains open. We 5 are look at that in the PRA. 6 MR. MICHELSON: When you do'it, though, you have 7 got to recalculate the pressures, because it's going to be a 8 lot higher than 5 pounds if you keep flowing. I thiria. 9 MR. SAXENA: Yes. 10 MR. MICHELSON: Alternatively, maybe the vent path 11 is so big that even after the initial blowdown you don't get 12 above this initial peak even though you never shut the 13 valves. There is always a remote chance that that is the 14 case. 15 MR. SAXENA: For PRA we are doing the 16 calculations. 17 MR. MICHELSON: So this question should be 18 answered under a severe accjdent chapter. 19 MR. SAXENA:- That's right. 20 MR. MICHELSON: That's what we will ar.k. 21 Thank you. 22 (Slide.) 23 MR. POWER: Use of remote RMU units throughout the 24 plant. The specific question that you had relative to this 25 was that on some of_the plant _ layout diagrams there were O ANN RlLEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Coud Repoders 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington,' D. C. 20006 (202) 293-3950:
l l 95 1 places where RMUs were shown inside the secondary l 2 containment. The question became, was that an anomaly in i 3 and of itself or was that a problem? l 4 There were a couple other diagrams that have shown 5 up at various places also where there is maybe some 6 confusion relative to the containment boundaries where these 7 things are situated. I 8 (Slide.] , 9 MR. POWER: Like here. This boundary was supposed 10 to be the reactor building. If you were to draw another 11 iine above it, you would see the words " secondary 12 containment." 13 There are a number of drawings that we will modify 14 to be very precise and clear about where RMUs are. 15 MR. MICHELSON: But are there any inside a 16 secondary containment? 17 MR. POWER: That's what I wanted to now show you 18 and go through. 19 MR. MICHELSON: All the essential ones are 20 outside, I guess is what you are telling me so far. 21' MR. POWER: Right. 22 (Slide.] 23 MR. POWER: In fact, here is a rundown of a little 14 oroader use of the multiplex system. The ones that we were 25 talking about with the words " essential safety" was relative O ANN RlLEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. I Court Reporters 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 l Washington, D. C. 20006 _(202) 293-3950
~ . _ _ _ _ ._ _ _. . _ _ _ , _ _ _ . . _ . _. _ _ . .
96 () I to RPS, ECCS and the leak detection. 2 There are other essential systems that are 3 associated with either inside the reactor building or inside 4 the secondary containment. We've noted those. Or inside 5 the control building. Then we noted some down here. 6 There are some nonessential system uses of 7 multiplexing, and some of those in fact turn out to be in 8 the turbine building and other environments which were 9 probably a little more hostile maybe than reactor building, 30 but again, they are nonessential use. An example would be 11 feedwater control system. 12 MR. MICHELSON: I'm not sure I understand these 13 bullets. The first bullet at the top, the big "O" versus rO "o". V 14 the little 15 MR. POWER: It could really read this way. Inside 16 secondary containment hard wire. When it gets into the 17 reactor building, it goes multiplexing. When it goes from 18 the reactor building over to the CB it is multiplexing. 19 When it returns back and goes back into the primary 20 containment as an actuating device it becomes hardwired 21 again. So there is a process of taking a signal out and a 22 process of bringing signals or actuations back in. 23 MR. MICHELSON: If I understand this correctly, 24 everything inside a secondary containment is hardwired out 25 through the wall to outside of secondary containment. Is O(_- ANN RlLEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Coud Repoders 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D. C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
97 '() 1 that right? 2 MR. SIMEN Barry Simen from GE. Yes, that is 3 correct. 4 MR. MICHELSON: So there would be no reason or 5 expectation of seeing any multiplexing units inside of 6 secondary containment? 7 MR. SIMEN: No essential multiplexing units. 8 MR. MICHELSON: I got down to the third bullet and 9 that talks about the nonessential. I thought I read it the 10 same way. It says hardwired. 11 MR. SIMEN: Hardwired inside. 12 MR. MICHELSON: We have two different answers. Is 13 it hardwired inside of secondary containment on 14 nonessential? 15 MR. SIMEN: It's still hardwired. 16 MR. MICHELSON: My point was there is no 17 multiplexing inside of secondary containment, essential or 18 nonessential. 19 MR. POWER: When you get out-into some of these 20 other nonessentials and_get out here into other 21 environments, you can find that use happening. 22 MR. MICHELSON: That I understood. I just wasn't 23 sure about the inside of secondary containment. 24 MR. POWER: I'm not sure where all the locations 25 would.be. The-only reason we would have any nonessential-O ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Coud Repoders 1612 K. Street, N.W., . Suite 300 Washington, D. C. 20006 (202)-293 3950
98 () 1 2 multiplexer inside would be to gather alarm signals. There would be no control multiplexing, only to gather status 3 data. 4 MR. MICHELSON: But statue data then is used by 5 logic. 6 MR. POWER: No, it wouldn't bo. This is only data 7 to be displayed. 8 MR. MICHELSON! On enunciators only or something? 9 MR. POWER: Right. 10 MR. MICHELSON: And that we might' expect to see, 11 but none of our alarra are essential anyway; is that right? 12 1 01. POWER _ That's right. This would be from 13 nonessential equipment. 14 MR. MICHELSON: The new drawings will reflect 15 this? 16 MR. POWER: Yes. Inside secondary containment we 17 want the non-involved division. We expect the environment 18 in there to be rather wholesome. 19 MR. MICHELSON: It isn't going to be very 20 wholesome if that common ventilation system doesn't isolate 21 it right. 22 MR. POWER: We will convince you otherwise. 23 MR. MICHELSON: I should point out, of course, 24 that that same common ventilation system we are worried-25 about is also seeding all of these instrument rooms around O ANN RlLEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Coud- Repoders 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite . 300
\Nashing$on, D. C. 20006 (202) 293 3950
99 1 the periphery of the primary containment, and that's all 2 tied into this common ductwork. 3 As near as I can figure out, that's how it's 4 getting ventilated. So if you back the steam into that, you 5 back it into all the instruments as well. Those 6 instruments, I believe, are very likely going to be rather 7 temperature sensitive instruments. These are going to be 8 solid-state based equipment. These are not mechanical 9 instruments. These are electronic instruments. The 10 transducers and so forth, those are also solid-state based 11 equipment. You are not putting in any mechanical switches. 12 Many of those aro quite sensitive to all the environmental 13 conditions and they have to be qualified-with steam backing 14 in from the ventilation system, unless you make sure it 15 never happens. 16 [ Slide.) 17 MR. MICHELSoN: What happened to 15? Are you 18 going to do it later? 19 MR. POWER - Yes. 20- There was concern expressed relative to accident 21 temperature conditions in the various plant areas. In the-
?. 2 SAR there is, you might say, in many, many locations a great 23 deal of information relative to environmental potential 24 effects, like identifying which equipment inside and outside 25 .the containment-is esse'ntial,-the break dynamics that O
ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Court Reporters 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D. C. 20006 (202) 293 3950-
100 affects all these things down through here. ( ) 1 2 MR. MICHELSON: I found all that good commitment. 3 Then I went to the details and I find, for instance, the 4 reactor water cleanup is a half a pound. That's as high as 5 you have to qualify the equipment for, and things of that 6 sort. when we are talking 5 pounds. 7 MR. POWER: One of the reasons for that is, I 8 think you are going to find when you identify the essential 9 component areas, such as the ones on here, you will find out 10 the cleanup system ic not in that area. 11 MR. MICHELSON: The isolation is. 12 MR. POWER: The isolation valves are, yes. 13 MR. MICHELSON: That's what I was looking at. b Am ,/ 14 Half a pound pressure on the outside is all you qualify them 15 for. When we get to that detail I will show the exact page. 16 MR. POWER: I have a couple of those right here. 17 MR. FOX: We admitted we had a little problem a 18 couple of months ago. We had a presentation. 19 MR. MICHELSON: But you're goit.g to go back and 20 change all that? 21 MR. FOX: Yes. 22 MR. POWER: Yes. In fact, all those items that 23 you had, 13 or 15 items on set points, variation in response l 24 times and everything, those are going to be included in the 25 amendment. They are separate from this. q(_/ ANN RlLEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. l Coud Repoders 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D. C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
I 1 l 101 1 MR. MICl!ELSON: Okay. t j 2 MR. POWER: Anyhow, the distribution to the ! 3 various places in the plant for the differing conditions are 4 cited in these tables. I will just 1. Lash a table up. ( 5 (Slide.) 6 MR. POWER: This is typical of inside the 7 containment. Obviously we don't need to spend very much 8 time. I have just used one example here of conditions that 9 existed inside the secondary containment, inside the reactor 10 building. 11 (Slide.) 12 MR. POWER: As you can see on most of these, the 13 assumption is that there is a break in that containment. 14 Even though secondary containment is not required under 15 those conditions, most of the temperature condition is 16 inside there. 17 MR. MICHELSON: How about the pressure conditions? 18 You've got me at a real disadvantage. I don't work very 19 well in kilograms and centimeters. 20 MR. POWER: I think that's 5 to 7 psi. 21 MR. SAXENA: I remember seeing that identified 22 earlier as 5 psi. You multiply this number by 14. 23 MR. MICHELSON: I don't multiply very well. I 24 What's the answer? 25 MR. SAXENA: It's a half pound, .5. HO ANN RlLEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Court Reporters 1812 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D. C. 20006 (202) 293 3950
_ _ - . - _ . _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ . . _ _ . _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ . _ _ . _ . _ _ _ . - _ _ . ~ . _ 102 1 MR. MICilELSON: That's a half pound. Clearly the l 2 steam chase is going to be at 11 pounds during the peak that l 3 you need to isolate the valves in. 4 MR. POWER: You mean the steam tunnel itself? , O MR. MICHELSON: Yes. Those isolation valves have 6 got to close when you get the break, and they have to be 7 qualified for that peak pressure in that steam chase. l 8 You're going to fix all this later. All right. 9 MR. POWER: You're talking these specific ones in 10 the tunnel? 11 MR. MICHELSON: As an example. 12 MR. POWER: What I was going to say, in some of 13 the other quadrants down below you are not going to see that 14 5 to 7 psi down there. l 15 MR. MICllELSON: I think you'll probably see more l 16 than a half pound down there, on the RCIC compartment, for 17 instance. 18 (Slide.) 19 MR. POWER: You also expressed in No. 17 a desire 20 to talk about loss of all heating and ventilating. We 21 gravitated through a number of sequences here, taking normal 22 operating condition and taking the heating and ventilating 23 off, like the closure of the reactor building ventilation 24 system valves. Let's say an air operated _ valve-closes 25 automatically. What does that affect on the plant? l O ANN RlLEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. l Court Reporters 1612 K.- Street, N.W., Suite 300 l- Washington, D. C. 20006 (202) 293 3950
, - .-- - ... - - _ - - . . - . . - _ - . .- - _~..- _.-. -.__.-. - . - -.
1
'f l4 1 103 1 What we found examining the safety shutdown-2 related equipment is that they all have their internal 3 ventilation systems, so they don't rely upon that external I
4 system to keep them alive and operating. 5 The second thing we did is we went to the . 6 individual rooms and looked at some of those rooms under 7 conditions where you would lose individual rooms. We found 8 the same thing. Again, the other divisions would be 9 unaffected by the loss of heating and ventilating and one 10 cubicle would not affect the other cubicle and they were 11 separated. 12 The third area we went down to was traditional-13 concerns or design basis effecta where you have a loss of 14 coolant accident inside primary containment. You close the 15 valves. Again, you revert back to the local cooling to take i 16 care of the safe and orderly shutdown equipment. That does 17 not take care of normal operation equipment,-but the safe 18 and orderly shutdown stuff. 19 MR. MICHELSON: Do all the electrical areas have 20 both normal and emergency cooling as two separate systems? 21 MR. POWER: Yes. 22 MR. MICHEL9ON: You're sure of that? 23 MR. POWER: Yes. 24 MR. MICHELSON: Or_they will have that? 25 MR. POWER: Right.
$ ANN RlLEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd.
Court Reporters 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D. O, 20006 (202) 293 3950J
i j , 104 1 () 1 The last one is the concern that I thought you l 2 were gravitating towardst What happens if we lose all a 3 heating and ventilating as a result of a station blackout or i j 4 a prolonged pressurization of the secondary containment : l 5 where we create an environment in all the cubicles? 1 j 6 Under those conditions, we did some look-see. We 7 haven't done specific calculations here. Our intention is l < 8 to do that. 9 Based on past experienced, for safe and orderly - l
- 10 shutdown on a station blackout we are talking about RCIC
! 11 running for four hours. We looked at the RCIC cubicle 4 12 relative to the current configuration versus some of the i 13 previous ones, like Hatch and others, our gut feeling is ; { 14 that the temperatures are going to go to levels like 180 or 15 more in that 4-hour period. 16 MR. MICHELSON Can the governor take that kind of l 17 temperature? 18 MR. POWER: The governors generally were designed 19 on other machines than this one. They were designed for 20 around 165 or so. 21 MR. MICHELSON: This is electronic governors? 22 MR. POWER: Right. Some people placed those 23 governors in different locations, like the next cubicle 24 over, tried to get some extended length of time. We are in 25 the same cubicle and same area. O ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Coud Repoders 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D. C. 2J 06
105 1 MR. MICllELSON: There will be a design requiremont 2 that that device be qualified for that temperature? 3 MR. POWER: One observation we would like to make 4 is those plant had two diesels, three diesels. We have 5 employed in this plant the gas turbine, thernfore dropping 6 down the no-called blackout possibility a little bit. I 7 guess the question becomes, are we still looking for the 8 four-hour shutdown with RCIC in the RCIC oom aspect even 9 though we have additional power sources? 10 MR. MICHELSON: So you are still thinking how you 11 are going to handle that? 12 MR. POWER: We're are going to do the analysis, 13 obviously, and we are going to look at the equipment. I was 14 just using that as an example. 15 MR. MICHELSON: If you decide you have to have 16 RCIC for X number of hours, four, eight, whatever, then you 17 will qualify the RCIC equipment for whatever ambience exists 18 in the room during that period of time? 19 MR. POWER: Right. If you look at-the layout 20 diagram, you will find a big chimney above the RCIC room 41 which goes up to the ceiling. You see many of the same 22 attributes that could remove some of the heat. We have used 23 some numbers about insulating walls and equipment and such. 24 'Some of those are already in the FSAR; how much the concrete 25 can take. -It's-really an air problem, as I understand it. O ANN RlLEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Court Reporters 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D. C. 20006 (202) 293 3950
l 106 1 Air heating. 2 MR. MICHELSoN: Yes. The real problem is whatever 3 is the most temperature-sensitive piece of equipment and 4 what is the ambient around that piece of equipment. It may 5 be in a trap or it doesn't get good circulation and it may 6 not see typical ambient. You've got a lot of hot radiating 7 pipes when you are trying to run steam in the room at the 8 same time. 1 9 MR. POWER: If our concern is a pressurization and ! 10 a temperature because of overpressurization of all the i 11 cubicles, then placing that RCIC in another location isn't 12 going to do anything for you. 13 MR. DAVIS: I have a question on the RCIC. Is the i 14 trip reset in the control room, or do you have to do that l 15 locally? i 16 MR. POWER: It's in the control room. It was 17 originally on the turbine. It was local. It was a saft,y l 18 entity. You could go down there and reset it physically and 19 pull the handle. 20 MR. CHAMBERS: There are typically two trips, one 21 manual and one that you can reset remotely. I think the 22 mechanical overspeed is the only one you end up having~to l 23 reset. The actual trip of the steam supply you can reset l 24 from the control room by basically running the trip 25 mechanism back down-and relatching it, but you can do it ANN RlLEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Court Reporters l 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 l Washington, D. C. 20006 I (202) 293 3950
107 1 remot.,1y. 2 MR. DAVIS: The concern is you don't want to have 3 to send anybody in that room. They do trip occasionally. 4 LaSalle had a trip that had to be reset. 5 MR. POWER: But if I had a loss of heating and 6 ventilating, we are talking plenty of time to send somebody 7 down there to mechanically reset. That's why I said the 8 safety reset, which is a mechanical overspeed, goes down 9 there and always been, by code, I think. 10 MR. MI HELSON: You can put a latch on a 11 mechanical overs): 4ed. The code doesn't prevent that. It 12 just requires than it not interfere with the ability of that 13 mechanical overspeed to work. 14 MR. COSTNER: The HPSI you could reset from the 15 control but the RCIC you had to go down there. 16 MR. MICHELSON: Because RCIC was non-safety. In 4 17 most plants in this country it is non-safety. That's why 18 you have got to watch when you decide to make it safety 19 again. You've got to rethink these - You don't go by what 20 you used to do.- You go back and rethink the safety issues 21 on it. . That is why I am not entirely convinced from reading 22 the discussion that they are thinking of it as a safety 23 system yet. 24 MR. MUNSON: Mr. Chairman, could'I--go back to the 25_ -_ statement about the HVAC safety? Q ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd.. Court - Reporters 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite- 300 Washington, D. C. 20006
- (202) 293 3950 J
l l i 1 108 1 MR. MICHELSON: Yoo. f 2 MR. MUNSON: We have non-safety systems where they 3 are ventilating electrical equipment. We have that backed 4 up by a separate cooler. ) 5 MR. MICHELSON: I think in reality what you have 6 is a normal ventilation system, which is air circulation on 1
- 7 a common luct system, and then you have it backed up with j 8 some fan units in the room coming off of chilled water, the j 9 essential chilled water system. That's fine and good. I
! 10 was only questioning whether that was provided in every case 1 11 that there was a safety-related electrical component in a l 12 room; was every room covered that way? I know some areas 13 are, but I couldn't tell in other areas whether you had a 14 fan cooled unit in that area or not. j 15 MR. MUNSON: There are some cubicles with some 1 i 16 safety components that are not backed up but they are i 1 17 components qualified for the environment that has seen i 18 identified. 19 MR. POWER: I have some additional drawings I can . 20 show at the break time relative to the things you were 21 talking about, f 22 MR. MILLER: I would like to clariry one-point. I j 23 In some of these backup fan cesling units in the essential i i 24 rooms, it's not chilled water that is being used; it's RCW 25 water.-- LO - ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. ! Court Reporters < 1612 K. Street, N.W.,. Suite 300 - . Washington, D. C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
s 1 3 109 1 MR. MICHELSON: In the alectrical area I tr.enn it 5 2 is chilled water. In the pump areas it's RCW. I think alt 1 3 the electrical areas have HECW. As near as I can read 4 4 drawings, that's what it seemed to be, t J 5 MR. MILLER: You'll have to m.ow me which rooms 6 you are discussing. l 7 MR. MICHELSON: The rooms that have only RCW, 4 8 regular water coollug, are the HPSI, the high pressure 9 injection, rooms of that sort where there are big pump loads I 10 that can stand-elevated temperature. It appeared to me that
- 11 every room where you couldn't stand elevated temperature you 12 used chilled water so you could keep the lower steady state.
i
- 13 But I couldn't tell in some rooms whether there was a fan i
l' 14 cooling unit in that room or not. That's why I wondered. l 15 Am I assured there is one? l 16 MR. MILLER: We should identify these rooms so we 17 can clear it up. ! 18 MR. MICHELSON: We will probably hit on some of l 19 them today as we go through. t 20 MR. MUNSON: There was a previous request that on 23 the ITAAC diagrams we indicate the separate rooms for each 22 division. We had attempted to have one diagram with one set 3 23 of rooms and made some exceptions under the title block. We 24 are going to present the separate rooms as you requested.
- 25 MR. MICHELSON
- I guess I am thinking a little
- O ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd.
Court Reporters 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 l Washington, D. C. 20006 l (202). 293 3950
} I 110 4 1 slowly. What problem are you trying to address with thi6? l 2 MR. MUNSON:. What rooms were actually cooleo ./
- 3 these safety coolers.
i 4 MR. MICHELSON: Presently there is no drawing that 5 shows the.se fan cooled units. I can find them on some I 6 drawings. I 7 MR. MUNSON: It's on a table for ID only. Then in r the ITAAC diagrams, you saw one that showed the little box' f a labeled " fan coil unit, FCU or HVH." l 10 MR. MICHELSON: The fan cooled units eventually j 11 should be on the layout drawings overywhere in the bui' ding. i 12 If there is a fan cooled unit in t.he room, it should a 13 little square with it. lr e j 14 MR. MUNSON: They are on therc but they are not ! 15 identified too well. I agree it needs to be clarified. I i 16 MR. MICHELSON: In some cases I didn't find them l 17 and there was essential equipment in the room and it wasn't i 18 clear that it was being cooled by a fan coil unit. That's f ; 19 why I raised the question. l
- But you assured me that it will .
r 20 be. l [ 21 [ Slide.] l 22 MR. POhTh: Moving to the last box on the second [ 23 page, which is No. 7- ! 24 MR. NICHELSOR; Ar6 you going to skip 18? i l 25 'IR . POWER: I can quickly hit 18 for you, t p ANN RlLEY & ASSOCIATES 'd, l Court Reporters l- 1612 K. 'veet, N.W., Suite 300 I Washe :iton, D. C. 20006
J 111 1 MR. MICHELSON: That's the reactor water cleanup. 2 We hit a little bit of it in the proces of discussing some a other things. 4 MR. POWER: There were a number of areas that you 6 expressed some additional information on. A little bit 6 about the drawings that you got. They were done by 7 computer. You got the five drawings. We dotted in some 8 compartments and such. 9 MR. MICHELSON: They were very helpful, by the 10 way. 11 MR. POWER: Yes.- 12 MR. MICHELSON: You have a.better appreciation for 13 the problem when you look at those drawings. 14 MR. POWER: I hope _they are right. 15 MR. MICHELSON: I assumed they were right. 16 MR. POWER: Yes. I worked.from the layout. 17 MR. MICHELSON: .Was that done off a CAD system of 18 *e - . ,rt. 19 MR POWER: Yes. 20 MR. MICHELSON: What was the source of the 21 infc. ,ation? Did you come off a model to make those, or did 22 you come off of isometric drawings? 23 MR. FOX: They came off conventional input. 24 MR. MICHELSON: You used all the coordinates for 25 all:the piping and you fed them in and it came out with an 3 (G ANN RlLEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Court Reporters 1612 K. St eet, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D. C, 20006 (202) 293-3950
I l 112 1 isometric. 2 MR. FOX: Yes.
- 3 [ Slide.)
) 4 MR. POWER: Some of the aspects about the modular i 5 packaging and some of the other elements about the diagrams, 6 which you are probably drawing some conclusions yourself on, i 7 about the interconnections and all those things. . 8 MR. MICHELSON: You can't get a full appreciation
- 9 for how long some of those big pipe runs are until you look i
10 at that drawir;g. It's not like they are just a few feet; on 11 a P&ID it looks like there are hundreds of feet in some 12 canes. 13 MR. POWER: There are two significant items en { i 14 there. The isolation valves in the primary containment were 15 fairly well separated from any of the energy sources. Also, < 16 the pumps were fairly well separated from.the heat 17 exchangers and the demineralizers started out to be 18 relatively high in the system. l- 19 MR. MICHELSON: But there is a lot of piping and i 20 there was much bigger piping around there than I realized. 21 There's a lot of and 8-inch piping in this system. 4 22 MR. POWER: A couple items of specific interest.. e
'23 Your question about the isolation valving between the 24 reactor cleanup system and-the feedwater system. There was 25 a lot of confusion on a number of dir,arams. What-I have ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd.
< . Court Reporters 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D. C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
1 1 i I i 113 1 j () 1 tried to do is take a number of diagrams and modify them. 4 2 We will make official submittals of these. 3 (Slide.) I 4 MR. POWER: One of our concerns was that there was 5 a check valve, a motor-operated valve in the system itself, j 6 but there was also in the tunnel a splitter, and a splitter 4 l 7 from a diagram which is a'relatively obscure-diagram that 8 was in the boiler system where you have the feedwater lines ! 9 coming through and you have inside the tunnel, where the i 10 RHR, the cleanup system, the CRD come together and feed into l 11- the lines. J 12 The concern about feedwater lines was either one 73 of two things: feedwater check valves allowing pathways back (" 14
\ out to the cleanup system or the cleanup system having a 4
15 break and allowing pathways for the feedwater to continue to 16 bring energy into the cubicles. l 17 If fou look at these diagrams, you suddenly 18 conclude that a lot of this goes away. There is in the feed 19 system a check valves. There is a check and a motor in this j 20 direction. But once you get into this so-called branching, ! 21 you will find a series of motor checks inside the tunnel. 4 l 22 This is the cleanup system. 23 MR. MICHELSON: What's a motor check in your case? 24 MR. POWER: MOV and a check. 25 [ Slide.] O ANN RlLEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. i Coud Repoders l 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D. C. 20006 ; i (202) 293-3950 j
..-..m.. . - _ . . . _ . _ _ . - _ _ . . _ _ ~. . ._ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ . _ _ _ _ .
1 3 114 i () 1 MR. POWER: You are coming in the cleanup system 2 from the already existing system valves. l 3 MR. MICHELSON: Those are all in the cleanup i j 4 compartment? e 5 MR. POWER: Right. l l 6 Then you go into the tunnel. Now you pick up the 7 branch lining. One other concern could be, can the 1 8 feedwater line cross feed over into the cleanup system. ; j 9 Those kind of things are all taken care of by these serlec , 10 of checks and motors. l
- 11 MR. MICHELSON: How many? At least three check j 12 valves to get into the compartment?
l l 13 MR. POWER: Yes. i 14 These are the ones in the compartment. Then you 15 make the transition. Then you've got a check and a motor. , 16 That motor is not an isolated-fed signal, nor is the motor i 17 on the feedwater.
- 18 What 1 am saying is there is a lot more valving in l 19 this configuration, i 20 - MR. MICHELSON
- The check valves are the only l 21 thing that really count, because in all the confusior of 22 rupturing a reactor water cleanup pipe he doesn't realize j 23 all this extra water is coming in.
24 MR. POWER: That. environment would be rather-
- 25 hostile if_yvu are blowing down into the compartment.
- r3
' \,) ANN _RILEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Coud Reponers 1612 K. -Street, N.W., Suite 300 l Washington, D. C. 200M (202) 293-3950
j j
, 115 j( ) 1 MR. MICHELSON: Are any of these check valves 2 under normal ISI?
i 3 MR. POWER: No. They will be outside. I 4 MR. MICHELSON: You misunderstood. In-service ! 5 inspection. ! 6 MR. POWER: I was going to first of all start out i 7 with isolation valving. They are not listed. When the I ! 8 leave the system here they lose that, i j 9 MR. MICHELSON: That system is non-safety. They l 10 don't have it to begin with. 11 MR.-POWER: Right. i i 12 MR. MICHELSON: They don't have it unless you i 13 provide it.
%/ 14 MR. POWER: I don't know. I'd have to ask 15 specifically.
l 16 MR. MICHELSON: Clearly you can set it up so that i 17 a couple of them are verifiable from time to time that they ! 18 really would check if they had to. i [ 19 MR. POWER: Right. 20 MR. MICHELSON: Because you may not ever know it l -21 during normal operation. You may never see those things i 22 checking during normal operation. They could be stuck wide I 23 open and you would never know it. 24 MR. POWER: That's correct, f l 25 MR. MICHELSON: But with proper surveillance on l lO F ANN RlLEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Coud Reponers
- - 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300
, Washington, D. C. 20006 (202) 293-3950 l 1
l-116 1 them, two checks is an acceptable answer. I didn't find the 2 surveillance and we.sn't sure I even'found the checks. 3 You have a question. - 4 MR. STELLO: Mark Stello, ACRS Staff. 5 Let's compare those two drawings, the motor-6 operated valve and the check valve splitter that you show up 7 on the drawing that came out of our report, the two that you 8 have drawn in there. 9 (Slide.] 10 MR. POWER: Here? 11 MR. STELLO: Yes, the branch. 12 Are those the same as the ones that have got in 13 the cloud now? 14 MR. POWER: They are back here on the clock. They 15 are on this side of it, right here. 16 MP. MICHELSON: They'are not shown; is that what 17 you are saying? 18 MR. POWER: No. They're there. These two right 19 here are these two. When you go the splitter is where we go 20 this way and this way. 21 MR. STELLO: I just wanted to point out that on 22 that lower drawing the motor-operated valvns themselves are 23 not required to be installed by a note on that drawing. Not 24 that they have any impact on the backflow isolation. 25 MR. MICHELSON: They're optional. O ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Court Reporters
- 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite : 300 Washington, D. C. 20006 (202) 293-3950-
117 1 MR. POWER: I think it's Note 13. That would be 2 corrected. ] i
- 3 MR. MICHELSON
- You'll make them mandatory then?
4 MR. POWER: Yes. I circled that for change. , 5 MR. FOX: Was that two months ago when we talked . 6 about it? I 7 MR. POWER: It was. That will be subject to the 8 change. 9 MR. MICHELSON: It appears to me th'at there are at i 10 least two check valves but they would have to be brought i l 11 under-some kind of a periodic surveillance program to assure
- 12 that they would be operable.
13 MR. STELLO: I think the issue is whare is that 14 single check valve right before the flow element in the RWCS l 15 line located? Is that located in the secondary containment 16 per se? 17 MR. POWER: This is ir r:3condary containment., 18 15; N.!CitBLSON: It's inside the cubicle. l 19 MR. POWER: I drew a barrier-here. l 20 MR. MICHELSON: So one is inside the barrier and i 21 the other ones will be outside. ] 4 1 22 MR. STELLO: What .ics the run of pipe between the
- 23 containment area and that check valve?
24 MR. MICHELSON: A long one. 25 [ Slide.] "o i ANN RlLEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. ) , Court Reporters ;
- 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 l Washington, D. C. 20006
- (202)_ 293-3950
.._, _ _. .. . _ _ ._.~ . _ . __- __ _ _ _ _.. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
1 J a j 118 !( ) 1 MR. POWER:' When I looked at'these diagrams, I 2 thought I found that line is pretty far out. g 3 MR. MICHELSON: It's way off to the right.
- 4 MR. POWER
- It's way out there ready to go into 4
5 the tunnel. 6 MR. MICHELSON: I think he is asking where is the
/ check valve relative to that, i
8 MR. POWER: The check is right with it, underneath . 9 it, I think. I think you can see it underneath it. l 10 MR. MICHELSON: It will put the break just i i 11 downstream of that check but it's still within the 12 compartment. Then the only checks that count are those out 13 in the main steam tunnel. 14 MR. POWER: Yes. No doubt about that. i 15 MR. MICHELSON: And there should be two of them j 16 out there.
- 17 MR. POWER
- But that's no different than an MSIV i
18 on the inside and.outside of the containment. I 19 MR. MICHELSON: But just make-sure they are known 20 to work and you're all right. l 21 MR.-DAVIS: I have a trivial question. What is j 22 the official acronym for reactor water cleanup system? i i 23 MR. POWER: CUW. , 24 EMR. MICHELSON: It varies. 25 MR. DAVIS: I notice you aro using both, RWCU and > (2) .
. ANN RlLEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd.
Coud Reponers , 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D. C. 20006 (202)'293-3950
119 1 CUW. I like RWCU better. 2 MR. POWER: I have a hard time retraining myself I 3 here. ! 4 MR. DAVIS: Why was it changed? i j- 5 MR. FOX: A customer. 6 MR. POWER: You will see come old acronyms on some 7 of my charts. ] 8 MR. POSLUSNY: The Staff is also going to have to 9 clean it up, because we call by different names as well. l j 10 MR. POWER: This brings us back to Nos. 7, 8, 9, j 11 10 and 11. 12 MR. MICHELSON: The Staff may want-to look at the 1 13 check valve situation on reactor water cleanup. A number of 1
- 14 present day plants don't have adequate check valving. Some 15 of them only have one that we could find. GE might want to
- 16 think about that too. It slipped in a crack somewhere, but l
17 it is a legitimate consideration. Some people, at least one 18 of which I know, went back and added the checks later, 19 [ Slide.] 20 MR. POWER: I think we have kicked around quite a 21 bit of this. This talks about the delta P. 22 I guess in struggling with the overview of the 23 thing, the structural components of those quadrants and the 24 divisional separaticn between-the quadrants in divisions, , 25 there is quite a bit-of steel and concrete.. Basically those O ANN FilLEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Court Reporters 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D. C. 20006 (202) 293-39S0 '
e i i 120 () I 2 wall thicknesses are for shielding and structural code reasons, supporting heavy load above, et cetera. 3 It turns out that when you examine those, l 4 forgetting the penetrations, assuming that the penetrations 5 are all walls, and you were now to examine those individual
- 6 zones, two of those zones, by the way, for high energy pipe a 7 breaks to find out what weald be the pressure in there that i
4 8 you have got to accommodate and you have got to process or i j 9 vent out is where we ended up with these 7 and 5 psi. I j 10 MR. MICHELSON: That's not the only structural ) 11 challenge. There is also the pipe whip challenge to the { 12 structure. i 13 MR. POWER: Yes. There were a number of pipe 14 whips. Some of that was discussed in there. Again, the ! 15 sub-compartmentalization was helpful in taking care of pipe i i 16 whip aspects. i 17 MR. MICHELSON: How was it helpful? 1
- 18 MR. POWER: You see a great deal of I
19 compartmentalization from where the pipes comes out of the 1 20 primary containment. l l 21 MR. MICHELSON: If the pipe whips and breaks down ] 22 the barrier, the presence of the barrier doesn't help any, s i 23 MR. POWER: Okay. I was saying that you spread l 24 things out and you put them in boxes and cubicles and you ! 1 25 try and do some isolation. 1 ANN RlLEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. . COud Repoders 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 l Washington, D. C. 20006 l (202) 293-3950 i
i 121
, 1 MR. MICHELSON: But you want to make sure the 2 boxes can't be broken down by either pressure, jet 3 impingements, pipe whips.
4 MR. POWER: There is a set of design criteria in 5 section 3 relative to pipe breaks, missiles, whip, et
- 6 cetera. They would also be the basis of maintaining l 7 structural integrity of those compartments relative to one i
j 8 another as well as the secondary containment boundary is 4 i 9 probably the primary item you want address. 10 MR. MICHELSON: Here is what bothers me. I find 11 the right words in Chapter 3, which says you have got to 12 take care of all these break breaks, including whip, jet ! 13 impingement. and so forth. 14 Then I go and look at drawings and see things like i 15 stacked block walls. That same stacked block has to take-16 pipe whips, if there are any, and jet impingements, if there ) 17 are any, and these maximum static heads. I don't find any i i 18 of the words, but somehow I have to assume that because that i f 19 magic sentence appeared back up in Chapter 3 that it 20 pertains everywhere else. I think-you could argue it does. 21 You kind of wonder if the designer reads the whole 22 book before he starts designing a stacked block wall, or 2 23 does he just sit down as a designer and design that' wall? t 24 Which is probably the way he'll do.it. He'll-go to'your 25 documents, and here are the requirements on the wall. That
- Q i ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd.
Court Reporters 1612 K. Street, N.W.,- Suite 300 Washington, D. C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
l 122 () 1 requirement may not be on that document, maybe because it's 2 back in Chapter 3. Are you going to carry every one of 3 these requirements to each specification, like on the 4 stacked block wall? 5 MR. FOX: I think what you are saying makes a lot 6 of sense, but also you end up with a 3-inch wall. That's an 7 exaggeration. 8 MR. MICHELSON: Let me give you one further 9 example that bothers me even more. I go to the electrical 10 section and I find all I have to do to build a wall is to 11 put up some steel studs and some gypsum board and I've got a 12 wall. That wall won't take any hydrostatic pressure; it 13 won't take any kind of jet impingements or whatever. None 14 of that is even said. It just says all you need to do to 15 separate these two divisions of electrical equipment is put 16 in a wall made out of gypsum and some steel studs. 17 There is a whole lot more to that. Depending on 18 what else might be in that vicinity, there may be a lot more 19 requirment on that wall than just some gypsum, but I don't 20 find it. Yes, I can take comfort that back in Chapter 3 you 21 said you always take care of pipe breaks. 22 I hope the designers, if they ever get to that, 23 read all the document before they start, not_just the part 24 that seems to pertain to them, which is the electrical 25 chapter, for instance. O ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Coun Repoders 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D. C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
i i i 123 () 1 1 MR. CATTON: Do you think a designer is going to
- 2 read all that?
4 3 MR. MICHELSON: I don't think so, no, and that's 4 what happened in a lot of cases in my past experience. They
- 5 didn't read the whole book before they started; they read 6 the part they thought pertained to them; and they found out 7 there was a whole lot more that they didn't know about. But j 8 it's too late then.
t
- 9 I don't know how you cure that problem except to 10 write a good document that controls every aspect of pipe 11 breaks. The designer, if he has got any compartment that 12 has any high energy pipes, 1 think it is mandatory to read
- 13 this piece of paper before he starts designing.
lO i
\m/ 14 Then in there you will talk about pipe break and ; 15 jet impingement and all the other good stuff, but I don't
- 16 find that connection. I can say, yes, you do have it in 17 Chapter 3. The right words are there. I checked them. It j 18 seemed to have all the right things in it. Then I go to 19 these other chapters and it doesn't seem to connect.
20 MR. POWER: I think we agree with your observation 1 21 and what you are trying to pursue. What we are trying to do 22 is maybe trying to define that that secondary containment we 23 want to protect; we want to protect the primary containment; l . 24 and we have in between the divisional separation as the next-25 area we want to protect. () ANN RiLEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. 4 Coud Repoders l 1612. K. Street, N.W., Suite 300
;- Washington, D. C, 20006 ; (202). 293-3950
. - . - - . . ~ , . - -. . _ . - - -
1 i 124'
- 1 Then we have certain components or areas within 2 those divisional aspects that we want to separate from 3 othera, like the electrical, rooms from the equipment rooms.
1 4 The concern here was the delta P aspect, I guess. 5 MR. MICHELSON: And the pipe break. Pipe break, i 4 6 jet impingement, delta P, the works. It's a barrier now 7 against an event and all aspects of the event. j 8 MR. POWER: After we do those divisional 9 arrangements, we separate out the rooms; we identify the f 10 rooms. We have two divisions that have high energy lines. 11 We have four quadrants that have high temperature could be 12 in the rooms, and we have a series of penetrations in them, 13 ventilation at the top, some small water coming in the i i 14 bottom, electrical penetrations higher up, penetrations back l 15 in and out to the primary containment, and blowout panels. l 16 Putting that all together, I guess the question i 17 becomes how do we determine what pressure delta P to build 18 these cubicles to or how to consider it. 4 19 (Slide.] i 20 MR. POWER: I come back to my famous diagram 21 again. 22 MR. CATTON: The one that we are going to review. 23 MR. POWER: Which you are going to review'and you 24 are going to go through. 2 25 MR. MICHELSON: This is not quite the one we saw ANN RlLEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Court Reporters 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 4 Washington, D. C. 20006 (202) 293-3950-
125 1 earlier. 2 MR. POWER: That takes only into account the 3 pressure,' structural integrity of those cubicles, rooms, 4 boundaries, and separations. You have a whole series of 5 other items which examine the doors, the electrical 6 penetrations and such, and those are the next items we are 7 going to talk about. 8 MD. . MICHELSON: One of the requirements on a 9 boundary Wall besides pressurization, sdy, from a high 10 energy line break is flooding from a low energy pipe that 11 produces a large amount of hydrostatic pressure. 12 MR. POWER: Yes. 13 MR. MICHELSON: That can also tumble a wall down I 14 or open doors or destroy things. 15 MR. POWER: That's correct. 16 MR. MICHELSON: _ That's in every compartment. 17 MR. POWER: There is also the fire aspect, having 1r fire inside those cubicles and having separation between 19 floors and cubicles. r 20 MR. MICHELSON: Yes. 21 MR. POWER: -Then there is the final one, the 22 environmental one, which is the_one that you have been 23 mentioning with the ventilation. Steam _ conditions in one
~24 quadrant passing over and processing over the other 25 compartments.
ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd.- Court Reporters 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 __ Washington,- D. C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
126 1 So there is a series of boundaries, lots of 2 boundaries, lots of initiators, and pressurt is only one of 3 them. 4 MR. MICHELSON: In doing this kind of a . study, one 5 of the things that one would need to know, which you can't 6 get from the SAR yet, is where is the return air ducting, 7 for instance. Is it also at the ceiling or is at the floor? 8 If it's at the floor, it becomes a conduit for water on the 9 floor or low level floods and whatever. 10 Without knowing that level of detail, you can't do 11 a safety evaluation. Yet I find no mention of how you are 12 going to put your return ducting in, or your supply 13 ducting, for that matter. I assumed it was up at the 14 ceiling, but I don't know- Maybe it's at the floor too. 15 Generally you bring one-at high and the other at 16 low, depending on what the condition is. 17 MR. CATTON: Is that ducting the kind that is sort 18 of suspended from the ceiling? 19 MR. POWER: This is actually piping, not really 20 ducting. 21 MR. MICHELSON:- That's not entirely clear either. 22 MR. POWER: It talks about wire-wound and pipe 23 ducting.- Maybe what we need to give you is a clear diagram 24 of that ducting. 25 MR. MICHELSON: All I could find is that it is O ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Court . Reporters 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D. C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
L 127 () 1 2 made out of steel. It didn't say what gauge. I didn't know whether it was regular spiral wound pipe or whether it was 3 just ducting built out of steel, which can be all the way 4 from very thin gauge on up. It's just not in there. 5 MR. CATTON: Is it exposed to the room? 6 MR. MICHELSON: It may or may not he. It depends. 7 It may just come in the corner like some ventilation systems 4 G do, or it may be exposed and running across with a bunch of 9 drops on it. But the return is often at the floor, a big 10 open duct return. Now it becomes a water conduit if you 11 flood that room. 12 (Slide.) 13 MR. POWER: That's what I was going to say on 14 this. Remember now, we have quadrants. No connection 15 between a quadrant. If I flood a quadrant, it's 16 ' sacrificial. 17 MR. MICHELSON: There are connections between the 18 quadrants. 19 MR. POWER: Few. Very few. The only ones in 20 there are corners between at lower level where the reactor 21 building and the secondary containment are one in the same. 22 There are passageways or entries from the corridors around 23 it. Doors are a very integral part of maintaining-24 separation. 25 MR. MICHELSON: Inside of secondary containment O ANN - RILEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Coud Repoders 1612 K. Street. N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D. C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
4 J 128 1 there are connections between all the quadrants, and the f l 2 connection is this common ventilation system if no other. ! 3 MR. CATTON: And the return ducts could be the 4 pipe and flood the other compartments. 5 MR. MICHELSON: That's right. 6 MR. POWER: -Which ones were you talking about? l 4 , 7 MR. MICHELSON: Return air ducts. 8 MR. POWER: All ducts go up. ! 9 .a.
- MICHELSON: We're talking about the individual 10 compartment, the entrances and exits. We don't find those 11 on these drawings very often.
12 MR. POWER: One of the key items is that only at i 13 the lower level do you have an area where you go around that 14 you have direct entry into the quadrants from a corridor. 1
- 15 You have it at one or two other levels but much higher up, i
j 16 That's why those doors are down there, and we'll talk about i i 17 the doors in a few minutes. l 18 MR. CATTON: Are those common return ducts in the 19 different rooms? 20 MR. POWER: No. They come from a zone back up. l 21 Only up here do they go common. 4 22 MR. CATTON: That would taxe care of that. 1
- 23 MR. MICHELSON
- I'm not sure he understood your 24 question. We're talking about'inside a secondary t
25 containment. 3 ANN RILEY &- ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Court Reporters 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D. C. 20006
- _(202) 293-3950
129 1 MR. POWER: Yes. 2 MR. MICHELSON: We're talking about the secondary 3 containment HVAC. 4 MR. POWER: Yes. 5 MR. MICHELSON: You are saying that for the 6 individual divisions that common duct comes all the way to 7 the roof or very high up before it ever makes the 8 connections? 9 MR. POWER: Yes. 10 MR. MICHELSON: This makes a difference. You've 11 got to know all these arrangements. 12 MR. POWER: That diagram where we had the block 13 diagrams on the ventilation system was really a physical 14 representation almost. The supply duct and the exhaust duct 15 go three and four stories high before they go to a common 16 header. 17 MR. MUNSON: John, this was that diagram. 18 [ Diagram handed to ACRS menbers.) 19 MR. CATTON: This one is in color. 20 MR. MICHELSON: What are we looking at? 21 -MR. MUNSON: The different colors are the zones. 22 You can see the ductwork rising up. 23 MR. MICHELSON: Is that a true vertical 24 representation? 25 MR. MUNSON: Yes. Q ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Court Reporters 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D. C. 20006
.(202) 293-3950
i i 3 130 () 1 2 MR. POWER: Yes. Here are four or five floors in a quadrant with various amounts of equipment on it. Most of l i j 3 this is at the bottom end. In each one of the quadrants the a j 4 ventilation connection is up. That steam rises. It goes to 4 5 a very large header assembly that is open to the environs. f 6 MR. MICHELSON: No, it's not open to the anvirons. k 7 It's isolated. i l 8 MR. POWER: If you close the two isolation valves, l
- 9 you're right.
9 j 10 MR. MICHELSON: And they're closed because of the i j 11 radiation release from the break in one of these
- 12 compartments.
! 13 MR. POWER: I understand. i 14 MR. MICHELSON: For steam purposes we are still ] 15 connected, but for water purposes, if you break a line in a . 9 16 lower part of the building, there won't be any backup into i 17 the ventilation systera.
- f. 18 MR. POWER: Right, i
19 MR. MICHELSON: That's good. 1
- 20 MR. CATTON
- The flooding is probably not a
} 21 problem. 22 MR. MICHELSON: The flooding is probably not a 23 problem. 24 MR. POWER: The only connections at the lower end 25 of water that isn't from above ic from the reactor closed-G V
- ANN- RILEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd.
Coud RepOners 4 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300-I Washington, D. C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
i 1 131
- ( ) 1 cooling water system.
2 MR. MICHELSON: Yes, but you have got bulkhead 3 doors between all the quadrants. 4 MR. POWER: Right. i - 5 MR. DAVIS: What about floor drains? Do you have 6 interconnections? i 7 MR. POWER: I have a special presentation on that, i j 8 The floor drain system would be designed the exact same way. 9 The sumps are down here individually in all three quadrant 10 areas. They are both_ floor and they are both floor and j 11 equipment. They are pumped out of this building over to the a ! 12 rad waste. 13 The individual floors in there have intentional j k'~s%_/14 connections to the basement because of the pipe chases. 4 15 There is no attempt to secure a lot of water upsta 33. You 16 drop it to the basement down the traces. In addition to the 1 17 drain system which is not an integral part of the design at l 18 this time. l ~ 19 MR. MICHELSON: In the case offthe steam tunnel, 20 which division did you drop the drains down to? ! 21 MR. POWER: The steam drains go outside. l- 22 MR. MICHELSON: _You said it dropped to a sump-23 further down. 24 MR. POWER: It does. 25 MR. MICHELSON: That's got to be in one of the i . (:)
- ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd.
Coud Reponers
- 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D, C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
- . . . _ . ~ . . - . . . .. _ - - . ._ _ _ _ - . . ._
i I J i 132 4 () 1 2 three divisions, unless you have identified a fourth area that I haven't found. There's a fourth instrument channel j 3 are, and that's it. l 4 MR. POWER: You got me on thac, but it's not in 5 the reactor building. 6 MR. MICHELSON: Those drains don't drain to the j 7 reactor building. l 8 MR. POWER: Right. i 9 MR. MICHELSON: They can't drain to the control 10 building, i 11 MR. POWER: I was told it was the rad waste l 3 12 building. I have not looked at the rad waste building. 1 ! 13 MR. MICHELSON: I think they drain to a sump 14 somewhere that pumps to the rad waste building. { 15 MR. POWER: My understanding.is the drain sump 16 goes to the rad waste building. i 17 MR. MICHELSON: But where is the drain sump ! 18 located, in which division? i 19 MR. POWER: I think it's outside the reactor l 20 building. 21 MR. MICHELSON: We'll leave that for next time, i i 22 MR. POWER: It's a good question. I'm sorry I 23 don't have that. i 24 MR. COSTNER: How does this kind of information 25 get transmitted to the COL applicant to note the details 4 () ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Coud Reponers 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 , Washington, D. C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
133 () 1 that way? f 2 MR. POWER: I guess some general information in 3 the specs, in the discussions on flooding is an example. 4 There is a flooding analysis section that talks about what i 5 happens on each one of the floors, where the water is 6 accommodated, and it talks about the sumps. Is that an ]. 7 overt discussion or kind of a subtle discussion? Right now j- 8 a fire protection and flooding analysis-was-done in two l 9 different locations. There is a great deal of that type of 1 j 10 information in there. l 11 MR. MICHELSON: The person that lays out a room i 12 had better read the fire hazards study as well, or he isn't 13 going to pick up some of the requirements. It's very true 14 of this whole document. You can find it here and there. 1 l 15 It's there, but pulling it together is not easy. That's the i . 16 COL person's worry. As long as we find it somewhere in the j 17 SSAR we're okay. 18 MR. CATTON: And don't forget it. 19 MR. MICHELSON: We won't forget it, but that's
- - 20 becauce we are working on it every day.
I f' 21 (Slide.]' 22 ER. POWER: One of the things I wanted to point l j 23 out with this diagram before we enter the next diagrams, in
- 24 a rather elongated write-up that would have_taken more time l 25 than this one I had prepared was kind of an overall.look at ANN RILEY-& _ ASSOCIATES, Ltd.
i- Coud Repoders
!- 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300
- Washington, D. C, 20006 (202) 293-2950
. . _ _ ._ _ _ _._ __ _ ._ _. ~_ - .. __ - _ _ _
134 1 item 7 through 12: What were the ground rules that would 2 have helped you? 3 Unfortunately, we didn't have that typed, so I-4 didn't bring it. But we did have a discussion that seemed
~
5 to take a layout like this and say your concern 1n this part 6 of the secondary containment cubicles is flooding. 7 Your concern at this level is environmental, 8 because you have environmental interactions with the 9 essential equipment locations. 10 When you get up into this crea here it was fire. 11 There was a lot of layering of the floors here between 12 cubicles end you had to put fire barrier analysis into 13 effect. 14 Finally, when you got to the upper area, it was 15 simply radiological from the point of view of standby gas 16 treatment system. 17 So each one of these things as you looked around 38 the containment at each level has a unique set of-things 19 that you want to concentrate on and you have to pay 20 attention to. 21 Having flood protection doors up here, you don't 22 need it. You don't have any water sources; you don't'have 1 23 any essential equipment. So you don't have a problem. You 24 have some :3111s; you have some doors and sills;--but those 25 are for local flood protection on fire-fighting.- They are O ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Court Reporters 1612 K.' Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D. C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
135 l( ) 1- not for major pipe breaks. 2 You're right. Down in hero flooding is key. Not 3 to have the flood come out this door or go over into this 4 cubicle in the other side and flood out these doors is very 5 essential. So the lower doors have got to be watertight and 6 they've got to have a set of criteria that are tougher than 7 the doors would be up above. 8 MR. MICHELSON: The penetrations are the same. 9 MR. POWER: Penetrations the same way. 10 Penetrations in here, on the secondary containment out to 11 this outer protected area for an inside break doesn't e sive 12 you a hostile environment in here. So that penetratiin 13 really doesn't see a pressurization in any way, shage or 14 form. 15 For a break in this cubicle area where you want to 16 protect that division, you can protect that division's 17 electrical equipment, but the equipment it protects was a 18 victim of the break. Even though you protect it for 5 psi 19 and the temperatures, it's really not as much a requirement 20 to that equipment as to the equipment that you would have on 21 the opposite of-the building to take care of the safe and 22 orderly shutdown equipment you are going to use. 23 When you get into this it starts.to become a 24 concern, well, what kind of. leakage allowance can I make 25 between this penetration out to the essential equipment ANN RlLEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Coud Repoders 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D. C. 20006 (202) 293-3950 l
. _ _ _ . _ . . _ _ . _ . ._. _ . _ -_ _. _.~._
1-1 i i j 136 () 1 room, und it could turn out to be none at all, no leakage i 2 rate other than what the standby gas treatment s/ stem would
- 3 need in order to pull a 1/4 vacuum over a period o,f time
? { 4 under the accident conditions. j S But for a break inside the secondary containment,
- l. 6 to try and protect that, have a leakproof penetration, i
i 7 that's not necessarily required. It may be wanted, but it's i j 8 not required per se. I j 9 When you scan around this entire building, you j 10 will find alraost each floor and each place has a little bit 11 of different twist on the requirements for the penetration 1. j 12 for the room, for the seal. i 13 MR. MICHELSON: I don't find these in any detail 14 from room to room. I find them in virtually no detail. I 1 4 15 find some general statements about the validity of the 16 secondary containment, the tightness of it, and so forth, 17 but I don't find anything beyond that. There is no room by i i 18 room consideration at all. There is a list in there of all 19 the valves and cable trays and that kind of stuff that does 20 penetrate somewhere the secondary containmer.t.- Until I know , 21 which room that cable tray is in, I don't know anything 22 about the requirements in the room. 23 MR. POWER: Let me try and see if I can answer a 24 little bit of that-with the next couple of items. We will 25 walk through the rooms.
- ANN RILEY
- & - ASSOCIATES, Ltd.
- Coud Repoders
- 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D. C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
- . - _ ~ -. - - .- . - - ~ - - - . - . - . ~ ~ .. - - . ~ - - -
4 i 137 1 (Slide.) l 2- MR. MICHElOON: I'm not disagreeing. I think-you 1 3 can write the prescription for the secondary containment and-j 4 leave it go at that. I don't think we ever_ suggested you t j 5 have to do it room by room, but you do have to do it for the 6 secondary containment. j 7 MR. POWEP.: One of the keys items was the doors. l l 8 There are a lot of doors on this secondary containment. 4 ] 9 MR. MICHELSON: One place it said thosa are going 4 l 10 to be double doors, but is that really true? Is every door i 11 going to be a. double door in the second containment? 12 MR. POWER: No. Let me try and go through the { 13 doors themselves. I have a list of all the doors I went 14 through and examined. There must be 12 different types of l 15 doors, single doors, double doors, equipment doors, closure a j 16 doors, sliding doors, motor-operated valve hatches doors, et h 17 cetera. There are a series of those. i 18 If you put them under a_ microscope, there are a i ! 19 couple of items that help you a'little bit relative-to all 20 these. There is a series of pictures that have been put in i { 21 the ITAAC document which take every single solitary door and 22 -define that door, whether-or not it's not a leakproof door. j 23 If you examine the whole spectrum, you will find 24 that flooding is covered for about the'first two or three
]
- 25 levels; then you. find the doors now making a sige i
o ANN -RILEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Court Reporters 1612 K. Street, N.W.,- Suite 300 Washington, D. C. 20006
- (202) 293-3950
138 () I transition, just being local floodir.gt finally, the doors at 2 the top don't. 3 The leaktightneso. If it's an integral part of 4 secondary containment, like down here where ti.. rwactor 5 building and secondary containment are synonymous, if they 6 are synonymous, you don't have a worry; if there is a 7 process where you are going from the secondary containment 8 over to the reactor building, there are a few of those 9 doors, then you have got to have a leaktightness to the 10 standby gas treatment aspect. 11 MR. MICllELSON: You also have to have in some car.e 12 a pressure retention capability, particularly for those 13 reactor water c194aup breaks. 14 MR. POWER: In those doors to the hallway, yes. 15 They have to be talta P as well as leakproof at the lower 16 levels. 17 MR. MICHELSON: Either that or you have to take 18 the doors at the end of the hallway and do it, but you have 19 got to do it somewhere to confine that 5 pounds, because 20 that 5 pounds is going to shove a normal door open. 21 MR. POWERt Right, but those doors do not have to
?.2 he airtight, because they're inside an integral part of the 23- standby gas treatment system.
24 MR. MICHELSON: They have got to be a reasonable 25 boundary for confining things.
.O ANN RlLEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd.
Coud Repoders 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D. C 20006 (202):293 3950
139 1 MR. POWER: Right. 2 This series of diagrams start to tell you what 3 requirements are on the doors. They don't tell you 4 pressure. You're right. 5 MR. MICHELSON: Where will I see those diagrams? 6 MR. POWER: These are in the plant layout ; 7 diagrams, but since they are so small it's hard to soe them. 8 You can see them when they have a solid line and a little 9 "a" or "b" in here and a solid line. That's a waterproof 10 door. . 11 MR. 'MICHELSON: When I get up higher and it 12 doesn't say waternroof, or even on the ones that are 13 waterproof, how do I know what the pressure rating of the 14 door has to be? 15 Mk. POWER: I attempted to walk through and write 16 down sc,tae requirements relative to the doors. 17 Watertight. This is a reactor building when you 18 are precluding the external flooding. You have some low 19 doors right at ground level. Those have got to be 20 watertight. 21 MR. MICHELSON: Internal or external? 22 MR.' POWER: External flooding. 23 MR. MICHELSON: I thought we didn't get an 24 external-flood to grade. The maximum was one foot below 25 grade. O ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Court Reporters 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D. C. 20006 (202) 293 3950
140-1 MR. POWER: I'm just trying to saf at grade level ! 2 you have a door. ! 3 MR. MICHELSoN: 7. don't object. 4 MR. DOWER: It's watertight on the diagram. 5 MR. MICHELSON: Okay.SSe 6 MR. POWER: In secondary containment you !. ave 7 watertight fire barrier and a variety of run, depending on 8 divisional separation. 9 At the lower level you have flood protection, and 10 that's watertight doors. 11 The mid, like I said, is environmentalt the top is 12 fire. and the sills at local. 13 MR. MICHELSON: Fire protection to me implies only 14 that you have a door that will pass a specified fire test. 15 It may not te.ke any pressure differential. 16 MR. POER: That's correct. 17 MR. MICHELSON: And it may not be watertight.at 18 all; it may have a 3/4 of an inch gap at the bottom of the 19 door and still pass the fire test. 20 MR. POWER: Correct. 21 MR. MICHELSC11: It just has certain kind of' fire-22 related requirements. 23 MR. POWER: That's correct. 24 MR. MICHELSON: But-it doesn't take care of the 25 other possible events. O ANN RlLEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Court Reporters 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 3% Washington, D. C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
141 1 (Slide.) 2 MR. POWER: Here is a typical example of a 3 watertight door. I would like to have had one that was for 4 fireproof. 5 MR. MICHELSON: Is this a 3-hour door? 6 MR. POWER: I don't know the fire rating on this 7 one. This was a pressure door for flooding. 8 MR. MICHELSON: That's different. It will be 9 fairly tight, I hope. 10 MR. POWER: Yes. 11 We are looking for doors that had fire rating. It 12 may be the same door. This is to-give you a definition of a 13 door that is fire rated. 14 MR. MICHELSON: This is a door that is rated for 15 certain hydrostatic pressure? 16 MR. POWER: Right. 17 MR. MICHELSON: That previous drawing, is that a 18 lugged door? Whit holds it closed against the head? To get 1 19 very much of a 91osure you have got to use a-bulkhead type 20 door with lugging. 21 MR. POWER: I don't see the lugging on that. 22 MR. MICHELSON: Is there a rating as to how r an" 23 feet of elevation the door can stand? That's also a problem 24 with the doors. They get differentially loaded. The bottom 25 gets loaded heavily from the hydrostatic head. So they rate O ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Court Reporters 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D. C. 20006 (202) 203 3950 { l
j 142 () 1 it at how many feet of water you can stand on the door or j 2 above the door. ! 3 MR. POWER: I saw a spec on this but I didn't'see l ! 4 a submergence rating. ' i ~ 5 MR. MICHELSON: That would depend upon the room.
- 6 Some rooms don't need it; some do.
7 MR. POWER: I'll write that down as an item, h f 1 8 MR. MICHELSON: All you need in an SAR is to just l 9 say this will be done, it will be taken care of. Then the ! 10 evaluator of safety says I know that a tight door for l 11 whatevor happens in the room. i 12 MR. POWER: The intention on the revision would be 8 j 13 to identify the doors at the various levels and tell you 14 What the ratings would be. 15 MR. MICHPLSON: You can do that if you wish. I i j 16 would think you would just want to put in the prescription. l- 17 MR. POWER: That's what I meant, a prescription
- 18 that says that certain doors at certain levels and such 19 would be this type of door and they will meet the following l.
20 the requirements. j 21 MR. MICHELSON: Okay. i 22 MR. POWER: Yes. I 23 MR. MICHELSON: That reactor water cleanup
- 24 compartment, for instance, is quite a bit different door 25 than you might put-in the-RHR compartment.
i () ANN RlLEY &- ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Coud Reponers . . 1612 - K. Street,- N.W., Suite 300 2 W; .shington, D. C. 20006 i _(202) 293 3950
143 () 1 MR. POWER Right. 2 MR. MICHELSON: This is where I run into another 3 problem in the whole SSAR, and that is you keep talking 4 about-a boundary separation wall. I don't know what a 5 boundary separation wall is. It can be concretet it can be 6 gypsum board. It depends on what you think you are 7 separating, for what reason. Gypsum board just isn't much 8 good against hydrostatic heads. Yet all it says is it's 9 going to be physically separated with a boundary wall. 10 You've got-to tell what kind of wall it is. Is this going 11 to be a concrete and steel rated for 5 psi? Or is it going 12 -to ha-gypsum board rated for 6 inches of water? 13 MR. POWER: I th!nh wit "angit diagrams do quite a _ 14 good job of identifying the thickwg - Os sne-concrete and 15 identify those walls as being conscete. 16 MR. MICHE/40N: The fact. is I haven't yet found 17 one of the gypsum board walls on any layout. I suspect I 18 won't. They are detailed in the SSAR like you are going to 19 use them, but I'm wondering where. Hopefully it's such a 20 few places you could flag those'and then an evaluator can 21 look at the details of that arrangement and say, yes, 22 there's no other challenge other than fire here; it's okay 23 to use a gypsum wall. 24 MR. POWER: The thinnest walls are where the doors 25 separate-two divisions on the essential electrical equipment O ANN RlLEY &- ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Coud RepOders 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D.- C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
1 144 1 rooms upstairs. It looks like a relatively thinner wall. 2 That would be because there is no pressurization in those 3 rooms. It's simply a separation aspect. 4 MR. MICllELSON: There you might expect a gypsum 5 wall. 6 MR. POWER: I indicated it was concrete. But that 7 was the thinnest wall that I've seen in there. 8 MR. MICllELSON: You might go back and ask where 9 are we are using gypsum walls, if at all. 10 MR. POWER: All right. 11 MR. MICHELSON: I hope there are such few cases 12 that they are easy to flag. Then you can say all other 13 valls are concrete. 14 [ Slide.) 15 MR. POWER: The question came up about ceilings 16 and floors. It turns out when you examine the divisional 17 separation and look at the structures, you look in on the 18 requirements for leaktightness and for fire, and you look 19 into things such as environmental separations. It turns out-20 as I said. The lower levels are flooding; the next levels 21 up are environmental; and.then_you get into the fire ones. 22 MR. MICHELSON: When you go back and_look at your 23 colored drawings of which floors have to be divisional 24 separation floors, there is a fair number of floors that are
'25 separating divisions.
O ANN RlLEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Court Reporters
- 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D. C. 20006 (202) 293 3950
0 l 145 1 MR. POWER: Right. 2 MR. MICHELSON: Partially. A piece of it is that 3 way. It's the requirement for that piece that I think was 4 of interest. 5 MR. POWER: What helps you is this little fire 6 analysis. These diagrams do a pretty good job of ceilings 7 and floors. 8 MR. MICHELSON: I was looking at the colored 9 versions of those, and they are very helpful. [ 10 MR. POWER: You-can see that what they start to 11 tell you is quite a story about floors and doors. But there 12 are only a couple of places that you have any--interest 13 really on the ceilings and doors between divisional things, 14 and that's in the area of the essential equipment rooms. 15 These are the key rooms. 16 MR. MICHELSON _ The diesel generator rooms is one ' 17 area where they are overlapping. 18 MR. POWER: Yes. That's on the ceiling of that 19 one. Mainly it's in that essential equipment room. 20 MR. MICHELSON: It's on the floor of the 21 compartments, looking down at the ceiling of the next 22 compartment below. There was some overlapping there. I 23 just wondered how you design that from the fire viewpoint 24 and from the flooding viewpoint.
-25 M9 POWER' In fact, that ' hould be this level O ANN RlLEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. >
Court Reporters
.1612 K.- Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington,- D. C. 20006 i
(202) 293-3950
l i j ) 146 1 here. Let's see if I can find the level. 2 (Slide.) ) 3 MR. POWER: Here's the diesel area. You can see 4 the large machines right here. All around that is the 3- ] 5 hour fire door, ceiling and bottom. 6 MR. MICHELSON: The question is, what's on the 7 ceiling of those rooms or what's on the floor of those 8 relative to what's underneath or above. You took care of ] 1 9 that by putting this crosshatching on where you had to have i 10 a fireproof floor. ! 11 MR. POWER: Right. 12 MR. MICHELSON: I can't see that from here. It ! 13 may be on that drawing. 4 O j V e 14 MR. POWER: I doubt if it's in your packet. I 15 skipped every other floor. But the next-floor above you will l i be able to find the above and below. 16 17 MR. MICHELSON: Where you have a fire barrier 18 requirement on a floor, what are the other requirements on ,7 19 that floor? ! 20 MR. POWER: This one is outside secondary i ) 21 containment. ! 22 MR. MICHELSON: How about the_ flooding, for i 23 instance? The watertightness of the floor. 24 MR. POWER: Again, it's divisionally protected
- 25 from the other divisions.
i l O ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Court Reporters-1612 - K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 l Washington, D. C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
l 147 i () 1 MR. MICHELSON: In the case if diesels, I wonder 2 if you might spill some fuel oil on the floor. I don't 3 think you want that fuel oil to run down through even in the 4 same division and spread on down through the building. 5 MR. POWER: You are absolutely right. That's what 6 the fire analysis did. 7 MR. NIK-AHD: The equipment is mounted on steel 8 cranes or raised pads. 9 MR. MICHELSON: I understand that, but what's the 10 watertightness of the floor? Fuel oil tightness might be a 11 more specific term. How tight is the floor if I spill fuel 12 011 on the floor? 13 KR. POWER: Doesn't the barrier indicate from the (^% (_) 14 fire hazard point of view there can't be a penetration for i 15 fuel oil out of that area? 16 MR. MICHELSON: There are penetrations in the
- floor all right. You just have to put some specs on those 18 penetrations. That's what I'm asking for. It just needs to 19 be discussed in the SSAR so whoever evaluates the safety of 20 that arrangement can say, yes, it doesn't look like the fuel 21 oil is going get away. This happened at South Texas. The 22 fuel oil got away. It came up on the floor and just went on 23 down to the lower compartments. It's a potential hazard.
24 MR. POWERt Our reaction would be to have a 25 paragraph to talk about the selective criteria relative to (3 ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Coud Repoders 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suita 300 Washington, D. C. 20. '; (202) 293 3950
1 J 148 1 this. , l 2 MR. MICHELSON: Another thing I couldn't find on , 3 diesol compartnients is the floor drain system, for instance, , 4 which is now going to be fuel oil drain system if I dump j 5 fuel oil on the floor. How is it handling the fuel oil if i 6 it gets dumped on the floor? Where does is go? I think ) 7 there is a floor drain system. Again, none of this is 4 discussed in the SSAR. 8 I think to the extent you evaluate 9 safety it has to be. That's pretty important when you are i
; 10 dealing with combustibles on the floor.
s 11 Didn't the Staff evaluate all of this? .I would , j 12 have thought _this was all taken care of already. ! 13 MR. BURTON: Yes. We did look at this. We had a 14 question in terms of when you look at overlapping divisions i 15 between floors, either have no penetrations or to have some i 16 sort of curving design. My last understanding was that j j 17 there was going to be no penetrations through the. floors i 18 that overlap divisions. That was my understanding. l 19 MR. MICHELSON: That's a good way to do it.- l 20 The other thing you have to-bo a little careful of 21 is how you handle the building joints,-and so forth. If ! 22 there are any floor joints, how are you going to seal the 1 23 joints? Essentially you have got to have a solid floor. ! 24 MR. BURTON: Correct. 25 MR.-MICHELSON: How did you handle the floor [ !O ANN RlLEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd.
- Court Reporters 1 - 1612 - K. Street, N.W., Suite - 300 .
I Washington, D. C. 20006 j (202)- 293-3950'
149 () 1 2 drains? MR. BURTON: In terms of the floor drainage 3 system, there is a separation between them. There are two 4 kinds of separations. For drains that have potentially 5 5 contaminated water, there is a part that's within scoper 6 there is part in COL. , 7 MR. MICHELSON: Wait a minute. COL inside the 8 reactor building? 9 MR. BURTON: For the specific equipment, from the 10 equipment to the sump is the COL's responsibility. We 11 foresee that as just being a piece of pipe tc get to the 12 sump. 13 MR. MICHELSON: You're certainly going to write 14 some interface requirement on it then. 15 MR. BURTON: We talked about exactly how that 16 should go. We've already discussed that. 17 MR. MICHELSON: I was once les to believe there j 18 weren't going to be any interfaces within the building; they i 19 were all between the building and elsewhere. Now you have- ] 20 got some inside the building. l 21 MR. BURTON: What we are saying is what is within i 22 scope for this design starts at either the floor drain sump
- 23 or the equipment sump. That's where it starts in scope. If f
! 24 you have valve leakage and things like that, all of that-25 -leakage going to the sump, that is the responsibility of the l i LO ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Coud Reponers 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 - l Washington, D. C. 20006 (202) 293 3950
] I
- i j
150 1 applicant. Basically just a piece of piping getting to the 2 sump. 3 MR. MICHEI. SON: It's a little more than th:a. ]
- 4 MR. BURTON: The other aspect is that there are 5 those drainage systems that have potentially contaminated 6 water and there will be other drainage systems that don't f
7 have potentially contaminated wa'cer. l 1 { 8 MR. MICHELSON: How you have drainage systems that 4
- 9 can potentially have combustible fluids. How are they 2
10 handled? I 11 MR. BURTON: In a situation like that,-it's my 12 understanding if you have got some oil on the floor,-it's ! 13 just going to go to the sump. That's my understanding. 14 MR. MICHELSON: This is a lot of oil on the floor l 15 we're talking about, not just some contamination. We're 16 talking about breaking a fuel oil pipe in their diesel 17 compartment and spreading it all over the floor and
- 18 hopefully not igniting it, but if you do, you want to know
- 19 where it all goes to.
20 MR. BURTON: Right, and as of now it is going to 21 go where water on the floor would go.. 22 MR. MICHELSON: Okay. It will still be within the 23 division but it will be to some lower level where there are 24 sumps. 25- MR. BURTON: Right. O ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Court Reporters 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D. C. 20006
~
(202) 293 3950
151 1 The other aspect which we have not discussed is 2 for those upper levels where you have basically draining 3 piping down to the basement of the building, the whole 4 aspect of keeping the area free of debris and things like 5 that so you don't plug the drains up. 6 MR. MICHELSON: I guess I never realized thai se 7 were interfacing within the buildings now on this design. 8 When we asked this whole interface question, I thought the 9 certified design was going to include everything within the 10 reactor building and the control building. 11 MR. BURTON: Mr. Michelson, I don't think that 12 there is a problem there. We have the problem with this 13 design that you don't know the specific equipment that is 14 going to be bought by-any given applicant, but when you buy 15 pumps and you have seal leakage and valve leakage, obviously 16 that's got to be dumped somewhere. 17 MR. MICHELSON: Yes, but I can sit down and design 18 the entire drain system for this plant not knowing what pump 19 you're going to put in the room. There are a lot of other 20 considerations that make it far bigger than seal leakage. 21 There is nothing exotic about a drain system. 22 MR. BURTON: That's-true. It's just a matter of 23 where are you going to make the cutoff between the piece of 24 equipment that has to be bought and what's part of the 25 design. O ANN RlLEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Court Reporters 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D. C. 20006 (202) 293 3950
) i i ! 152 1 MR. MICHELSON: I thought long ago that the only j 2 things that we weren't going to design are these few things 3 covered by DAC because we didn't know how to design it, but
! 4 we are designing everything else in the reactor building, at 1
5 least enough to do a safety evaluation. I thought the } 6 reactor building was final. t 7 MR. FOX The case in point is diesel generators? l 8 MR. MICHELSON: Drain systems. i' 9 MR. FOX: Which manufacturer do you want to I J { 10 specify? 11 MR. MICHELSON: That doesn't affect the drain 12 system. i i 13 MR. FOX: But it affects a lot of other things. ' 14 MR. MICHELSON: We're talking about the drain 1 15 systems. The Staff ultimately has to know enough j 16 information on this plant to make a final safety 17 determination. If there are areas where you can't do this, j , 18 then a few of these we bend over backwards and do this DAC 19 thing. The rest of them, to my knowledge, we haven't bent . 20 over backwards. I know of no reason why you can't design a 21 drain system enough to put in a P&ID for one to show how 22 it's interconnected so you can do a safety evaluation on it. ( 23 You may tie them all together. I don't know. 24 (Slide.) i 25 MR. POWER: Maybe I can relieve your mind on some i ANN RlLEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. 4 Court Reporters 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D. :G. 20006 (202) 293-3950
J 153 ; 1 of this. You can write some criteria, and that's what we 2 attempted to have here. I 3 MR. MICHELSON: That's what I looked for. I tried 4 to find the requirment for the drain system. 5 MR. POWER: What I have here is out of scope, 6 anticipated similarities to past plants, which tell you all 7 about past plant practices on doing the drain system, 8 covering anticipated design and differences. The key item 9 that you are relating, I think, is a lot of operating 10 experience anomalies have umanated from drain systems. Here 11 are some examples that could be interface requirements. 12 MR. MICHELSON: You don't tell the guy to look at 13 past experience. You tell the guy here are the requirements 14 based on our knowledge of the past experience. This is a 15 new plant. You aren't going to tell him to figure out what 16 happened in the past and design accordingly. You!re saying 17 based on experience here is how we want the drain systems in 18 futura plants to be. I can't find that in the SSAR. It's 19 just not there. 20 MR. POWER: Yes, but if you were to write some 21 clear, concise interfaces -- 22 MR. MICHELSON: That could take care of it. 23 MR. POWER: Yes. That's the attempt to be done 24 here for giving you additional documentation. 25 MR. MICHELSON: The thing that surprised me is I O ANN RlLEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Court Reporters 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D. C. 20006
-(202) 293 3950 -
154 () 1 2 didn't rea).ize we would have interface requirements inside the reactor building. 3 MR. POSLUSNY: We haven't called this an interface 4 at this point in time. 5 MR. MICHELSON: What else is it? It's certainly 6 not a COL action item, because that is clearly not to be 7 used for design purposes. I thought. This is a design. 8 We're just saying we don't have a design, but here are some 9 requirements on the design. I didn't know you were doing 10 that inside the reactor building. That's all. 11 These are the first examples. There are probably ) l 12 many others I don't know about. It just happen to be the 13 one I now know about. I thought we weren't having b \_/ 14 interfaces insida these vital areas, particularly when it's 15 important that these be done right from the viewpoint of 16 safety. So as a minimum you've got to do enough of a design 17 to say that if it's done like this, it's going to be safe. 18 I find none of that. I think you have to give that serious 19 thought. It's not advanced technology. 20 One of the things I am interested in is the inter-21 tying of the compartments. You can write the right rules 22 and so forth, and I think you can put in some simplified 23 P& ids to show what is going to be required, where the ser,ps 24 are going to be located, and what we are dealing with. You 25 don't have to know the sump pump manufacturer. I don't care O v ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Coud Reponers 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D. C, 20006 (202) 293-3950
d 155 1 who it is. I want to know the arrangement. ' 2 1 don't like to be cranky about these things, but 3 it first came up when we had this steam compartment and I 4 wondered where the heck they were draining that thing to. I 5 don't know yet for sure. I'm not sure I've heard the answer f 6 yct. But somewhere in the reactor building, maybe. Maybe 4 7 it's over in the rad waste building with all direct piping. 8 That's possible. But those things you have got to answer to 9 do a safety evaluation, a final one. You have no recourse. 10 This is it. This is all you'll ever kno.i.- Beyond that they ) 11 can do whatever the prescription allows. It blows my mind ; 12 that you can judge final safety on the basis of what's in , 13 that SSAR presently in this area. ; 14 MR. COSTNER: There was nothing in the ITAAC 15 decument on this either. i 16 MR. MICHELSON: Nothing that I could find. I { 17 haven't read every single one of these ITAACs. Perhaps it's 18 buried and you can just point out where it is, but I don't 19 think it's there. 1 20 MR. MILLER: I would like to point out again that 21 the radioactive drain transfer system is discussed in 22 Chapter-11. 23 MR. MICHELSON: The radioactive drains as a meand i 24 of making sure that the radioactivity gets back to the rad 25 -waste building? O ANN RlLEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd.
-Court Reporters 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 '
Washington, D C. 20006 (202) 293 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _-3950~ _ _ _ . _ _ _ .. _ _ , _ _ _
_________ _ -._ _ . ~ _ _ ____ _ ___. _ . _ . ___ } t i 1 156 i 1 MR. MILLER: Right. 2 MR. MICHELSON: I had no problem with that. I'm j 3 not raising that question. The question is when I have an a j 4 event occur in a particular compartment, how far does the i 4 j 5 event spread. It can spread through ventilation; it can j 4 ! 6 spread through floor drainst Jt can spread out doors, out 1 l 7 penetrations, and all those other ways. The drains are one a i 8 of them I looked at but didn't find anything. All you have i 4 9 to do is fix it. 10 People have been putting check valves-in these 11 drains and stuff. I'm not sure that's a very good idea,-but i l 12 maybe that's the way you-keep some of those from getting , 13 interconnected. Or you might just be very careful to 14 preacribe and lay out a drain system that has no 1 l 15 interconnections. That's also possible. ! i 16 Then I said, well, gee, this diesel is in the same i , 17 compartment, in the same division with a lot of other i 18 equipment. I don't like-to spread the fire. How do I do-j 19 the drains there? I can find no more information there j 20 either.
- 21 I just kind of felt that you didn.'t cover the l 22 subject. It is-a subject that I think-is important.
~ I 23 That completes your discussion of the items. 24 'Being at a slight disadvantage and looking at this quickly,-
~
25- we will reserve the right to.come back later with rore O ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd.- Court Reporters 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D. C. 20006 (202) 293 3950-
i ! l i j
- 157 1 questions after we look to see what's here. I think the 2 Committee would want to do the same thing on the other 3 material. I think you have so far hit the high points.
4 The key questions is, at what point in time can we t I t 5 start seeing this in writing? When are we going to see it i j 6 in the SSAR so we can look and say, yes, this is it, it's l 7 okay, we can forget it? When are we going to reach that 8 stage? 9 MR. FOX: I'd say it's going to be at least l-10 January 11 MR. MICHELSON: So by the end of January we might 1 12 see SSARs that reflect these things 11P9 ve have talked 1 13 about today.
; 14 MR. FOX Yes.
15 MR. POWER I already made pass on the vocabulary 16 words, but now we have to translate it into SAR section i ! 17 revisions. i 18 .MR. MICHELSON: What I was trying to avoid any i { 19 more meetings than we have to have. It's costly of your 4 20 time and ours as well. I would like not to get +o this 21 further until after we see your final words. If you get t j 22 those into us by January, then by March we can sit down and 23 close out on these items.. { j 24 I haven't found many new ones but I found a lot--of 1 25 things that just aren't getting closed out so far. I would .i .g ANN RlLEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. i Court Reporters 1G12 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D. C. 20006 (202) 293 3950 1.__ _ _ . _ . . . _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ . _ _ - _ _ . _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ - _ . _ _
l ! 158 4 () 1 like to see those finished up. Then we can kind of write j 2 them off and then at the last minute, when you have all your 3 last minute things, we can focus on them and not go back and 4 revisit all this old material yet again. 5 We will discuss these further. This handout looks 6 very fine. The nresentation was excellent. I think you did 7 a real fine job. Iou obviously understand the concerns and 8 have nearched them out. Now it's a question of seeing the 9 resolutions. 10 MR. POWER: I'm sorry we didn't have the answers 11 to all your questions. 12 MR. MICHELSON: There are always more questions 13 than there are answers. You may find during the process of 14 going into these chapters in detail that there will be more 15 of them I didn't try to raise now. I think you have 36 answered a great deal of it in this process. 17 Do any of the other members have any lingering 18 questions on the items covered in August that they would 19 like to hit now? 20 (No response.) 21 MR. MICHELSON: It's about the right time to break 22 for lunch. 23 [Whereupon at 12:20 p.m. the meeting was recessed, 24 to reconvene at 1:30 p.m..thic same 6ay.)_ 25 ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Coud Repoders 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D. C. 20006
- -. . ._ - . _. _ . _ _._ _ _ . . - .._ __ _ _ ,__ _ _ _ _ .._ _ J
i i ) l 159 ; 1 1 AFTERHo0N SESSION l 2 (1.30 p.m.) ! 3 MR. MICHELSON: I believe we are ready to start 3 j 4 again. Before we get on to the individual chapters, I 1 5 believe the Staff wanted to make their presentation on the } 6 remote shutdown heating and ventilating arrangement. 1 ! 7 MR. POSLUSNY: We understood that you had some i ! 8 questions on it. So we are prepared to answer questions. 1 l 9 MR. MICHELSON: okay. You didn't have any 10 particular presentation then? I j- 11 MR. POSLUSNY: No. 12 MR. MICHELSON: The questions I had were, first of- ] 13 all, I couldn't it on the drawings. I couldn't find which ; j 14 system it came off from for sure, whether it's-off of l 15 division 2, essential HVAC. How is it supplied? 16 MR. MUNSON: You're talking about the remote l 17 shutdown rooms? $ 18 MR. MICHELSON: Yes. 19 MR. MUNSON: They were originally a single room , 20 and then we have the redundant panels now. The rooms 21 interface with division 1 and division 2. We would extend 22 the diesel generator, essential electric, safety-7, elated, 23 HVAC system into those rooms. 24 MR. MICHELSON: You are going to bring both 25 division 1 and division 2? , O ANN RlLEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd.
. . Court Reporters 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D. C. 20006
-(202) 293 3950 ;
160 1 MR. MUNSON: We'll use that. They'll match up the 2 division at the panel power bus. 3 MR. MICHELSONt One of them will be a division 1 4 panel; the other room is a division 2 panel. They are both 5 located in that 300 degree or so portion of the building. 6 MR. MUNSON: They are in the corner. 7 MR. MICHELSONt Division 1 is a long way away. 8 MR. MUNSON: No. We have a division 1 that goes 9 across the end of the reactor building that is common with 10 the control building. ; 13 MR. MICHELSON: There is a corridor there, 12 division 1 corridor. 13 MR. MUNSON: Right. 14 The essential electrical toom extends across that. 15 I guess you would call that the zero azimuth of the 16 building. 17 MR. MICHELSON: So these two rooms are outside of 18 secondary containment, and I guess they are outside of the 19 division 1 and the division 2 atmosphere. Are they going to 20 be an atmosphere unto themselves but supplied by these two 21 divisions? 22 MR. MUNSON: I'm not quite sure what you mean by 23 an atmosphere to themselves. 24 MR. MICHELSON: That room is totally within the 25 division 2 area of the plant._ So it's going to have O ANN RiLEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Court Reporters 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D. C. 20006 (202) 293 3950
i; I i 261 ; ) 1 division 1 heating and ventilating to one of the two rooms. 2 MR. HUNSON: The cornermost room is the one that j Across the division 1 emergency 3 would be the division 1. i j 4 electrical room. j 5 MR. MICHELSON: It's really in the division-2 i j 6 area, isn't it? ' 1 j 7 MR. MUNSON: It shouldn't bo in the division 2 i
- 8 fire area. They have this fire separating wall, which I 1
9 understand has a sliding door 3-hour arrangement. ! 10 MR. MICHELSON: I was hoping that maybe one would i 'l bring a little overhead or something. The drawings are very 12 poor in this regard. i
- 13 MR. SIMEN
- I have an overhead that was shown 14 before.
- 15 (Slide.]
i { 16 MR. SIMEN Here is the remote shutdown. Division l 17 1 is next to the division 1 area here. l l 18 MR. MICHELSON: That's quite a bit different than l 19 the drawings in the SAR, but they are getting old. 2 i ! 20 MR. MUNSON: This is the division 1 area that I am i ! 21 talking about extending from the division 1 remote shutdown j 22 room. This is adjacent to division 2.
- 23 MR. MICHELSON
- Division 4 is within division 1.
24 That's just the instrumentation stuff. I l j 25 MR. MUNSON: Right. Division 4 is usually l IO ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. l Court Reporters 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 i Washington, D. C. 20006 (202) 293-3950 v . . - - . . _ _ - . - - .. . . - - - - - - . . .-
i 162 , 1 associated with division 2. There would have to be a fire ! 2 resistant ceiling here so that the division 1 could extend 3 to the division 1 remote shutdown. 4 MR. MICHELSON: I thought you said division 1 5 abutted to the division 2 there, and I didn't see it. ) 6 MR. MUNSON: I thought so too, but I haven't seen , f 7 this myself. 8 MR. SIMEN This shows the division 2 HVAC cooling 9 the division 4 area. 10 MR. MUNSON: That would be normal. 11 MR. MICHELSON: That's the way it's normally 12 arranged. l 13 You are going to use division 1 and division 2, 14 and division 1 will have to be brought up through a false 15 ceiling or something. 16 MR. MUNSON: Yes. There would be a separate i 17 division 1 fire protected duct enclosure that would go i 18 across. i
- 19 MR. MICHELSON: You have got these two divisional 1 20 panels that are your remote shutdown. That's because you l 21 decided you had to have equipment from two divisions to do 22 the remote shutdown? I thought remote shutdown was going to l- 23 be done on one division..
! 24 MR. MUNSON: We normally had it on division 1, cs i 25 I recall. I'm not familiar with what the requirements are, lO
- ANN RlLEY-& ASSOCIATES, Ltd.
i Court Reporters 1612 K. Street. N.W., Suite 300 i Washington; D. C. 2C006
- -(202) 2N-MD
i i i 163 t 1 why they had two. 2 MR. MICHELSON: Then when I saw the rc. m divider 3 with no explanation, I wondered what was going n. Now you 4 are telling me division 2 is required for remote shatdown as ! t 5 vell as division 1. At least division 2 equipment. That's 1 6 why you parceled it out. 7 MR. SIMEN: We have some control in both l j 8 divisions. 9 MR. MUNSON: You normally have on your isolation ! 10 valves division 1 outboard and division 2 inboard. So here
- 11 you would be able to have the control and have power for 12 both.
13 MR. MICHELSON: Those rooms are environmentally 14 separated. Does it take two operators to run the remote 15 shutdown arrangement, one in each e" those two rooms? 16 MR. MUNSON: The normal operation is two 17 operators, but I'm not really sure about the remote 18 shutdown. Ncrmally you have the two operators that occupy 19 the main colwrol room, so then they would come and perform ' 20 their normal function in the remote shutdown area. 21 MR. MICHELSON: I would think that something as 22 important as remote shutdown would be described in fairly i 23 great detail in an SSAR-and evaluated in fairly great detail l 24 by the Staff, and I_ don't find either. I was surprised when 25 I realized how little I could find out about the remote ANN -RlLEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Court Reporters 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite' 300 Washington, D. C. 20006 (202) 283-3950
i I 164 () 1 2 shutdown arrangement. I was just looking for the heating and ventilating part of it. I l 3 He will just v it until later for it to show up, j 4 but I think you would agree that it does have to be 5 described in sufficient detail so that you can do a final 6 safety evaluation on it. I couldn't see how people could do 7 a final safety evaluation on what I could find, but maybe I 8 didn't find the right piece. 9 MR. MUNSON: Usually section 8 covere electric 10 power. 11 MR. MICHELSON: Chapter 8. 12 MR. MUNSON: Chapter 8. There are diagrams that I 13 have seen that show the remote shutdown interface, how the
) 14 transfer is made.
15 MR. MICHELSON: I found it on the drawing. I 16 found the description of how the transfer is made, and that 17 wasn't even my concern. My conearn was the environment and 18 putting this into what the environmental arrangement would 19 be. I simply couldn't find it. Then I started saying, 20 well, what do we know about the remote shutdown? I could 21 find very little. 22 I think there has to be an explanation on how it 23 can be manned, under what circumstances it would be manned, 24 what the environment was, and could a person live in that 25 environment. I didn't find any of it. How hot does it get n U ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Coud Repoders 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D. C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
165 1 in that little room, for instance? 2 In a power blackout case I'm not going to have any , 3 heat to it at all, but I don't think I need it in a power 4 blackout case, but I do need in a case where I have a severe 5 fire in the control room that has unknown consequences, 6 including consequences on the heating and ventilating. 7 I could find no provision that says here are the 8 arrangements to make sure that the heating and ventilating I 9 need is separated from what's happening in the control room. , 10 I may burn up the control room and not be able t o run any of 11 that heating and ventilating. I don't know. And I could 12 find no provisions for separating out enough of it to make 13 it work. So I said, well, maybe it's just got a local air , 14 handling unit and its own little compressor. I couldn't 15 find what it had. 16 I just don't see how you could do a safety 17 evaluation on the basis of what I could find, at least. One 18 answer might be a self-contained air conditioning system in 19 that room powered by whatever power source you think you ) 20 still have. Or maybe two power sources. I don't know. But 3 21 I don't think the answer is to use division 1 or division 2,
~
22 because that's a huge system. Relatively huge. It supplies
- 23 all the other electrical areas,
! 24 MR. MUNSON: You are going to have to have those 25- electrical areas. If you have the remote shutdown matching i O 3.NN- RlLEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Court Reporters 1812 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300
. Washington, D. C. 20006
(. (202) 293 39501
166 () I 2 the division that it's attempting to control, it would seem to me appropriate to have the same HVAc, because that's , 3 cooling the electrical as well as the remote shutdown. 4 MR. MICHELSON: But I've only got that to one of. 5 these two boards, if I understand your drawin?. One of the 6 rooms will stay cool if I've got division 1, but the 7 .ivision i side won't remain cool. 8 MR. MUNSON: If the sliding door is open when they 3 are using this -- 10 MR. MICHELSON: Is that a sliding door between 11 there? 12 MR. MUNSON: Yes. 13 MR. MICHELSON: I thought that was a wall. 14 MR. MUNSON: If you have division 1, you are-going 15 to have cooling. Possibly not as much. 16 MR. MICHELSON: Is that sliding door identified in 17 the SSAR? 18 MR. MUNSON: That's in fire protection. 13 MR. MICHELSON: af That's why-I didn't see i'y 20 because I didn't get into the fire protection.- I'm going to 21 do that at a later date. Maybe most of my answers will come 22 " rom the fire herard analysis. -I don't know. But I wasn't 23 : thinking that was burning up; I was thinking more in terms 24 of how well I could run the equipment in there. 25 - We will leave it-for now. You can see the line,of ~()' ~ ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. COud Repoders 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite- 300 Washington, D. C. 20006 :
- (202) 293-3950 1
167 i() 1 2 questioning I think eventually has to be answered somewhere. I don't care where it is as long as we can find it. 3 MR. POSLUSNY: You also had questions on the 4 protection from flooding and fire protection for this area. 5 MR. MICHELSON: Well, I didn't know what was in 6 that area. There are no high energy pipes in that zoom, I 7 assume; is that correct? 8 MR. MUNSON: That's right. 9 MR. MICHELSON: If I get a high energy disturh400 10 in division 2, presumably it's confined to inside of 11 secondary containment. There are no high energy pipes 12 outside of secondary containment in either division 1 or 13 division 2, so I won't get any high energy breaks. Now the l 14 x_j question is, well, how about moderate energy pipes, the 15 cooling water and the other good things? I don't know 16 what's in there. Have you looked at the other flooding 17 potentials in the area that might ccme in the door or 18 whatever? 19 MR. MUNSON: We have the two-fire hose capacity as 20 a requirement. I think moderate energy is 275 psi and your 21 water systems are usually much less. They're like 100 psi. 22 MR. MICHELSON: Moderate energy is under 275 and 23 under 200 degrees Fahrenheit. 24 There are no pipes in the rooms.. Somewhere I 25 would hope to find criteria on what is allowed in that room, ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Coud RepOders 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D. C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
l 168 1 what kir.d of emergency lighting is providing, the assurance 2 that there are no pipes in there at all. - 3 The heating and ventilating I thought was going to 4 be self-contained, but if it's coming from another source, 5 then you are going to have to explain all the things that 6 could happen to that source. It might at the same time get l 7 the effluent into that room in conjunction with whatever 8 caused this, which is a fire in the control room, and then 9 vhatever losses permeate from that. I could find no 10 assurance that any of this heating and ventilating was 11 protected from the fire 'l the control room. It could all 12 shut down from burning up the controls in the control room. 13 We took care of that for certain essential systems 14 that were identified, but I didn't find this identified as 15 an essential system to be protected from fire in the contrc 16 room. I think that's what you've got to do. When you do 17 that, I think you'll end up putting a'small self-contained 18 air conditioning in that room, because you've got other 19 things too big to protect. But you've got to look at it and 20 see-what-the hazards are. 21 I think it's just a matter of providing the 22 information and evaluating it. 23 I'm glad to hear it, but you didn't intend to talk 24 about fire protection simply because of the-problem of 25 trying to wait for the Staff to have looked at it. ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Court Reporters 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D. C. 20006 (202) 293-3950-
169 1 MR. COSTNER: Is it clear that the fire in this-( 2 area can be overridden from the control room? 3 MR. MICHELSON: The divorcing words for the 4 control room seem to imply that there is no way you can work 5 back from this area into the control room. 6 MR. COSTNER: T mean can a fire in this area cause 7 faults that interfere with the controls which remain in the 8 control room? 9 MR. MICHELSON: That's a good question for the 10 Staff or GE to answer. In other words, what happens if you 11 burn up the remote shutdown panels? How do you protect the 12 equipment that they can control?- How do you divorce that 13 equipment? 14 (Slide.) 15 MR. NIK-AHD: I'm going to talk about fire 16 protection on the remote shutdown rooms. 17 The remote shutdown panels rooms are located in 18 the reactor building, in the fourth quadrant of elevation 19 4,800. There are two completely separated rooms, room 341, 20 which--is division 1, and room 383, which is the division 2. 21 There are two separate-fire areas. In division 1 22 all walls, floors and ceilings are 3-hour fire barriers. 23 Division 2 is exterior of the reactor building and 24 the wall common to-division 1 is a 3-hour barrier. The 25 ceiling and the floor are also 3-hour fire barriers. O - ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Coud Repoders 1612 - K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D. C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
I j 170 !() 1 MR. MICHELSON: Did I just misunderstand? I 2 thought I just heard that there was a sliding door between j 3 division 1 and division 2. l l l 4 MR. NIK-AHD: I am going to get to that. Yes. 1 5 What separates the two divisions is the sliding door. The 6 sliding door is normally closed except when you are 7 operating from the remote shutdown panels. That's the only i ! 8 time it is open. The rest of the time it is closed. i 9 Entrance to the room is a 3-hour fire barrier l 10 curbed door for division 1. Division 2 it's'a non-rated i } 11 curbed-door. i i 12 MR. MICHELSON: What's a non-rated curbed door? 13 MR. NIK-AHD: Just a standard door. () 14 For detection we have supervised POC in tiet roora j 15 and we have manual alarm pull stations outside of the room. 16 For suppression system we have modified class 3
- 17 seismic category 1 standpipe and hose reel in the corridors i
18 and we have ABC hand extinguishers outside in the corridors 19 as well. 1 ~ 20 Fire protection design criteria employed. The 4 21 functions are located and separated in fire resistant rooms. 22 Fire protection and suppression is all available, and fire
- 23 stops are provided for cable tray and piping penetration.-
.f 1
- 24 MR. MICHELSON
- What is the fire protection and 25 suppression capability? That's not automatic, is it?
)o j ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Coud Repoders 1612 'K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D. _ C. 20006 (202) 293-3950_
i> 171 1 MR. NIK-AHD: No. It's manual.
-2 MR. MICHELSON: That's all from outside the room?
3 MR. NIK-AHD: Exactly. They are located outside 4 the room. 5 The consequence of a fire. We assume the-- , 6 possibility of losing che function. Provision for core 7 cooling and' backup is provided. Smoke from the fire will be 8 removed by EHVAC. 9 The consequence of fire suppression. Water from 10 the' suppression system will be drained by the flow drainage 11 in the room. Equipment is protected against flooding by 12 steel framing or raised pads. 13 MR. MICHELSON: The fire is presumably restricted 14 to one room, one of the two shutdown rooms. 15 MR. NIK-AHD: Correct. 16 MR. MICHELSON: This sliding door in between has 17~ got a high curb on it; is that the idea? 18 MR. NIK-AHD: The assumption we are making is-that 19 the rooms have curbed doors.- That's correct. 20 MR. COSTNER: But not between the rooms. 21 MR.'MICHELSON: That wasn't real clear, but I 22 assume that the sliding door is also either elevated:or-- 23 curbed or something. Otherwise the-water just runs under 24 the door. Fire doars don't have to be-watertight by any 25 means, and-a sliding one would be hard to make very--tight. O ANN - RILEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Court Reporters 1612' K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 - Washington, D. C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
. _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . . _ ~_ _ __ _ _ . _ _ _
i i. 172 }() i 1 2 MR. NIK-AHD: The design criteria used for fire protection against inadvertent operation is the manual j 3 suppression system. It's external to the room. There is 4 provision for raised supports for the equipment. Also 5 provision for flow drainage in the room and seismic category 6 I standpipes and also provision of doorway curbs. 7 For fire containment and inhibiting method l i { 8 employed,'the functions are located in separate fire i j 9 resistant rooms. Fire detection and suppression is 10 available and accessible. ] l 11 MR. MICHELSON: What happens when you burn one of j 12 these panels relative to the equipment that it controls? If 1 ! 13 I were to have a severe fire on division 1 panel, what 14 happens to the division 1 equipment that is controllable by 15 that panel? 16 MR. NIK-AHD: I'm not quite sure. 17 MR. MUNSON: My understanding from these diagrams 18 I've observed is that the remote-shutdown electrical control l 19 system is a switchable control. It switches entirely to the j 20 remote shutdown for controlling it off the main control room i
! 21 panel, i
22 101. MICHELSON: You can provide switches a number 23 of different ways. That is.a way, but I'm not sure that's
! 24 the way it's being done.
25 MR. CHAMBERS: Can you help out, Barry? 1 (^) l
- ANN RlLEY & __ ASSOCIATES, Ltd._
Coud Repoders 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 - . ? Washington, D. C. 20006 -l (202) 293-3950
173 l MR. SIMEN: The transfer switches are at the ! { ) 1 2 remote shutdown system. The sensors run through the remote 3 shutdown system and to the multiplexing units and then are 4 multiplexed to the control room. 5 MR. MICHELSON: If I were to draw a line between a 6 piece of controlled equipment and the area from which it's 7 controlled, does that line go through the remote' shutdown 8 area on the way to the control room? 9 MR. SIMEN: On the way-to the control room. 10 MR. MICHELSON: So if I were to lose the control 11 room, then I would just break off the end of the line and 12 take over. If I lose the division 1 panol which is on the 13 line, the control room also loses control. Now the question - 14 is, what happens in terms of spurious operations in division 15 1 equipment that might be undesirable, maybe opening of 16 relief valves, or whatever? 17 MR. CHAMBERS: The same thing that would happen in 18 any other divisional fire. 19 MR. MICHELSON: in the case-of the control room 20 fire we took care of it. We took care of-it by saying that 21 the switches in the control room are going to be-divorced so 22 the relief valves won't open, and they are now controllable 23 from the remote panel. When you reverse the-process,and put 24 the fire at the remote panel, what prevents the relief valve 25 from opening. The control room can't-intercede. j'~) ,
\-)
ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Coud Reponers 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D. C. 20006 (202) 293-3950-
] 174
'O 1 MR. NIK-AHD: Are we making an assumption there
- ()
i 2 are two fires at the same time? 3 MR. MICHELSON: No, just one. f 4 MR. CHAMBERS: This is normal operation fire 5 occurs in the remote shutdown panel and room. What does 6 that do to the equipment that is controlled from the remote l 7 shutdown? l 8 MR. SIMEN: On the input side, the sensor side, 1 j 9 because of the four division nature, two out of four nature i 10 of the system. you could lose division 1. 11 MR. MICHELSON: I assume that this is described or s l 12 will be described in the SSAR. It sounds a little funny. i 13 In the old days when we were addressing these kind of 14 problems we had to put that switching point at a point i 15 neither at the main control room nor at the remote shutdown i 16 panel. .It was put at a third location. Sometimes just j 17 outside the main control room a little ways. If you run l 18 everything through-the remote panel and then on-to the I j 19 control room, what happens when you burn the remote panel? ! 20 MR. CHAMBERS: What you are worried about is ! 21 inadvertent actuation. 22 MR. MICHELSON: precisely. , 23 MR. CHAMBERS: I can't imagine that that is any f
- 24 different than local fires happening that might result in 25 the same thing, but, yes, we have to consider it.
l l
- ANN RlLEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd.
l Court Reporters
- 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D. C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
_ . . ~ . . _ .. . . . . _ - _.. _. _____ _._._ __ . . . . - _ . . _ _ i
)
1 175 ]
- V O 1 MR. MICHELSON
- I would expect a discussion of t 2 what we are doing in the SSAR of exactly how you handle 3 inadvertent actuations from fires at the remote panel.
j 4 MR. COSTNER: Local fires would be unlikely to get i j 5 all of the critical items in a given division in the same
- 6 spot.
7 MR. CHAMBERS: This nraa is more sensitive because l 8 it brings a bunch of stuff together. l 9 MR. MICHELSON: Whether it brings enough together 4 10 to give you a problem, I don't know. I would like to see 11 what's there and then I'd like to see the analysis of why
- 12 what's there is okay if it burns up. or provide yet another 13 switch outside of this room which allows you to normally 14 keep those relief valves or maybe other critical items 15 disengaged until the fire drill comes. Then you go close I
16 that switch and go in and operate from that panel. 17 That's what we did in older PWRs. We provided 18 that third location with a switch added just for a few 19 critical things, and the relief-valves were one of them that 20 we just couldn't tolerate-leaving them energized. l 1 21 We will pick it up later. I think we got a flavor i 22 of what you intend to do. I was-a little concerned by the
- 23 absence of any explanation at this stage of the game when we 24 are presumably well down the way and. presumably the Staff 25 has already done it's draft final safety evaluation of it..
ANN .RILEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Court Reporters 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300
. Washington, D. C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
t-176 1 I'm afraid you are little further back than the name
)
l 2 implies. l 3 Now let's go to Chapter 2.
- 4 My first comment on it was this.is just one big-1
! 5 COL action item, the whole chapter. It's just nothing but i 6 COL action items. Some of them are' design items and some of 7 them are clearly just things to be taken care of later. I j 8 I think you had some comments on Chapter 2 also,
- 9 Bob. Do you want to just start with yours?
10 MR. COSTNER: I have got 34 comments on Chapter 2. ! 11 Isn't three some way to do it off line? i 12 MR. MICHELSON: I think the things have got to be ! 13 on the record where you have fundamental issues with what's 14 in there. If it's just matter of details, that you can do i 15 off line. l 16 MR. COSTNER: There are a number of things that l , 17 are COL actions items that look like they could-be dealt ! 18 with by Staff recognizing what GE has done in Chapter 2 and 19 by recognizing that in the end of Chapter 2 GE-has provided 20 a site envelope. i 1 21 It looks like by_ recognizing the existence of that I i l 22 site envelope and by addressing what is wrong with that site i j 23 envelope or what is not wrong and what an applicant has to 24 do to show they are in conformance with that site envelope l
- 25 would drastically reduce the number of COL action items !
i- !() ANN RlLEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. i Coun Reponers r 1612 K. Street, - N.W., Suite 300 l Wasnington, D. C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
i . t I j ) 177~ () 1 2 rather tnan bring me a flood rock or bring me a missile rock, which is-the way-the COL action items.are presently 3 worded. 4 f 4 MR. MICHELSON: My view is you cannot use COL i l 5 action items to get basic information that we need for a 1
- 6 safety determination. It's inappropriate to use.them for I 7 that purpose. Are there any where we have used a COL action
- 8 item to substitute-for information that you need for a final ,
9 safety determination? If there are, we should talk about it i
- 10 and see why it is appropriate.
1 3 11 Certainly in the area of site-related parameters 5 12 we've agreed that's clearly always later, and there is a
- 13 special provision that finality has nothing to do with it.
() 14 When you come in with your site, then we'll d cide whether , 15 -it's an appropriate site. It has nothing to do with a
- 16 certificato having been granted.
17 These things are being tied into a certificate. I ! 18 don't know the legality of that-either. If the FSER is not i i } 19 a part of the certificate, and there is indications that it I I 20 won't be, all that will be in a certificate is parts of the l 21 SS'.R and the ITAAC system descriptions. I 22 What stature does all this COL stuff have? Is . 23 this all new issues to be raised at the time somebody wants 24 to build plant and has no finality control or anything of 25 that sort? How.is it viewed? l 4 LO
- U ANN - RILEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd.
Coud Reponers i 1612 K.~- Street, N.W., Suite 300 j Washington, D. C.- 20006 (202) 293-3950
-- wy w -- - p --g - y
178 1 MR. POSLUSNY: I think we have to see what we put ( 2 in the ruling. My own opinion is we need to address what ' 3 will be needed and what will the COL applicant have to looh , 4 at before it prepares its application. i 5 MR. MICHELSON: That will be rulemaking for a 6 particular application, not for a certificate. I can't do 7 any of that for a certificate. i
- 8 MR. POSLUSNY: We don't that for a certificate.
9 MR. MICHELSON: That's generic. i
- 10 MR. POSLUSNY
- There is going to be a procedure 1
l 11 for that. 12 MR. MICHELSON: What'we are saying is that you i 13 don't need any of the information ca21ed for by the COL
) 14 action items to get a certificate.
35 MR. POSLUSNY: Correct, to make our safety l 16 findings. l f 17 MR. MICHELSON: I will just proceed to forget } 18 about any of these and say do you have enough information to 3 19 make your final safety determination. 1
- 20 None of the COL action-items are enforceable, as I 4
. 21 see them. Not one of them. l' 22 MR. POSLUSNY: Right. l ! 23 MR. MICHELSON: Because the FSER is not a document l 24 to be used during the enforcement process. Only the DCD 25 will be used according to the latest SECY paper.
- /T l
- N_JI
- ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. j COud RepOders
, 1612 K, Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D. C. 20006 ; (202) 293-3950 l
179 I\ 1 MR. COSTNER: One example is COL action item b 2 2.5.4.8 '.. It says COL applicant shall establish and 3 document site-specific geological properties and demonstrate 4 their compatibility with the conditions used for the seibmic 5 design envelope in section 3.7.2 of this report. 6 Doesn't the COL applicant have to demonstrate 7 compatibility with all of the requirements? I don't 8 understand the value of having a COL action item that says 9 the applicant has to meet the certified design. I would 10 think that the Staff would require any applicant to 11 demonstrate they meet the design and not specifica).ly call 12 out certain and not all of the requirements. 13 MR. MICHELSON: You're worried about identifying O y ,/ 14 some and ignoring others. You really shouldn't sort out any 15 of them unless there are only certain ones that apply. 16 MR. COSTNER: And then why does that necessarily 17 have to appear in the certified design document? 18 MR. POSLUSNY: Because we have bounding site 19 parameters thnt are called for in the rulemaking, in Part 20 52. These are a subset of those, I would hope. 21 MR. MICHELSON: They can't be a subset, not on a 22 COL action item. 23 MR. ROTHMAN: Bob Rothman of NRR Staff. There are 24 a limited number of cases that were looked at in developing 25 the seismic design for the plant. There were certain rock A
\
ANN RILEY _ & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. COud Reponers 1S12 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D. C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
180 () 1 2 properties and certain soil and shear wave velocities. roperties, limited thicknesses The Staff felt that it was 3 important to say that that the site has to fall under that 4 umbrella. You couldn't possibly cover all possible cases, 5 so the Staff felt it was important to identify that the 6 applicant is going to have to show that their site falls 7 under that as far as rock properties, soil properties, 8 vibratory ground motion. 9 MR. MICHELSON: It's also equally important that 10 he demonstrate it falls under all the othe: mroperties that 11 might have been specified in the certificate. 12 MR. ROTHMAN: Yes, but a very limited selection 13 was done for the geology and the analysis for the ground
) 14 motion. I think there were something like 13 cases.
15 MR. MICHELSON: I don't have any real problem with 16 COL action items so long as they are not related to design 17 and so long as they do not describe further requirements 18 from the design. If there are cases where they do describe 19 further requirements, those are the ones I think we need to 20 talk about. 21 From; reading all of this, I came across a number 22 that I thought were in that category. Unfortunately, _I 23 didn't mark them carefully enough in this chapter. I did in 24 some of the other chapters. When we come to them, maybe we 25 can settle it there. r0 (._) ANN RlLEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Coud Reponers 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D. C. 20006 (202) 293-3950 1
i l, 181 1 This is just sort of a checklist, I' guess. Just ! 2 an added reminder but not an inclusive list, just a few
, 3 items of particular interest. None of these are needed to
} 4 make your final safety determination for certificate 5 purposes. i 6 MR. POSLUSNY: That was our direction. 7 MR. MICHELSON: I came across one that I wasn't 8 quite sure what the Staff was trying-to say. It's 2.4.7 and 9 it's a COL ac*.lon item. One sentence says "the COL j 10 . applicant shall provide site-specific information related to 11 flooding protection requirements." j 12 What were we asking for there? 13 I assume these are flooding-protection 14 requirements that I will find prescribed in the SSAR and the I 15 applicant is just to show how his site meets those j 16 requirements. Is that what you were trying to say? l l 17 MR. POSLUSNY: I believe so,
.t G MR. FOX: Like one foot below-the grade, i
l 19 MR. MICHELSON: -All you do'now is come in and show i l 20 that your-site doesn't get any higher than that. i ! 21 What did Jay have-on Chapter 2? I thought he had 22 a couple of comments. 4 23 MR. COSTNER: He just had one. He says it should 24 be reviewed by Bill Lindblad. 25 MR. MICHELSON: Yes. Bill is going to look at-t ANN RlLEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Court Reporters 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D. C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
1 l I
, 182 j
() 1 2 these later to see if he sees anything that puzzles him. I think that's_all we had on Chapter 2. Did you 3 have any others, Bob? 4 MR. COSTNER: There's one back in one of the other l 5 _ sections that related to flood protection which says some
- 6 applicant may come in and specify a site that doesn't meet i 7 the GE standard flood elevation and just in case somebody 1
) 8 does, we are going to lay a COL action item on for that 9 exceptional case. i j 10 MR. MICHELSON: That certainly_is inappropriate. 11 Which letter are you looking at? i 12 MR. COSTNER: I'm having trouble finding it. 13 MR. MICHELSON: We can come across that later if ( 14 it's in another chapter. 1 15 MR. COSTNER: It's 19.1.2.2.2-1. It requires the l 16 COL applicant to perform a site-specific PRA for external 17 flooding due to the potential for certain sites to have 18 external flood level.a above the design basis flood level. l 19 So every applicant has to provide a PRA because ! 20 some applicant may come along and not meet the conditions of ! 21 the design certification. Isn't it agreed that in every I
; 22 area that an applicant does not meet the design 23 certification they have to justify-it?
a. 24 MR. CHAMBERS: Yes.
- 25 MR. ROTHMAN
- I think what they are trying to l()
L ANN- RILEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Coud Reponers l 1612 K. Street, N.iN., Suhe 300 Washington, D. C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
~.-- - - - .-- -= - . - - - - - - - - _. . _ _ . - - - .
l 183 l 1 address there is the beyond design basis severe accident. 2 MR. COSTNER: But it's saying that because some 3 applicant may not meet -- 4 MR. ROTHMAN: I wasn't involved with that, but I 5 think what they are trying to say is that-there is some 6 probability no matter how small of your exceeding the design 7 basis flood and they should address that in the PRA and see 8 what the consequences are and see what the risk from that 9 is. 10 MR. MICHELSON: Why is that a COL action item? 11 MR. ROTHMAN: I don't know that it is a COL action 12 item. The PRA is a site-specific PRA. 13 MR. MICHELSON: Severe accident considerations are 14 a certificate problem. In a severe accident you assume it 15 got above one foot below grade. That's the way you would 16 approach severe accidents. 17 MR. ROTHMAN: Severe accident is a little bit out 18 of my area. 19 MR. POSLUSNY: Why don't we save this for the PRA 20 discussion? 21 MR. MICHELSON: Yes. We may revisit this a little 22 bit, .B o b , as you go through and you see some other things, 23 but I-would like to move on now to whatever the next chapter l 24 is. l 25 Chapter 3. We will just start working this l O ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Court Reporters 1812 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D. C. 20006 l (202) 293-3950 1
1 i I i 184 j () I chapter and as people have problems in the rough 2 neighborhood of pages that I'm on, maybe they can come in . 3 with their questions. 4 I had a little problem on this nil ductility 5 business. The nil ductility transition temperature of at 6 least i degree C below. Any time gr
- talk about a delta T 7 you don't do a Fahrenheit to centig ~2e conversion like 8 this. If you are talking about a delta T of 30 degrees 9 Fahrenheit, I think it's about a 16.6 degree centigrade 10 delta T, not a 1 degree. I think this is just wrong 11 technically. Tell me why I'm thinking wrong. This is a 12 delta T, not an absolute temperature. That appears twice on 13 that page. It ought to be corrected.
14 MR. MUNSON: I think the conversion is 10 degrees 15 C, not 1 degree.
'6 MR. MICHELSON: This is a delta of 30 in the
.7 Fahrenheit range. What is that a delta in the centigrade 18 range?
19 MR. DAVIS: Divide by 1.8. 20 MR. MICHELSON: It's around 16 degrees, unless I 21 did my arithmetic wrong. Maybe I did. 22 On page 3-2, in the last paragraph on the page it 23 says "the Staff position is that the main steam piping 24 beyond the second outermost isolation valve up to the 25 seismic interface restraint." l
/'h l \/ __
ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Coud Repoders 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300
; Washington, D. C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
(-.--..--- --.- - - - - - _ ~ J
- 185 1
t () 1 2 containment. I didn't know there were two valves outside of This is the second outermost._ I think you i i 3 just meant the outermost as opposed-to the inside and the 4 outside, but I don't know. The one who wrote is the one who 5 has to answer. l j 6 There are just two valves and you're talking about j 7 the outboard isolation. Okay. It's not alwr.ya obvious.
; 8 You need to change the words. Steam piping beyond i
- 9 the " outboard" isolation. " Outboard" is always a good safe 10 word to use. There's an inboard and an outboard, inside an 11 outside. kuen you talk abodt second outermost, you mean the j 12 second outboard isolation, and there isn't any. So it needs
) 13 to be straightened out. 14 Anybody holler as I go along if you have got ocher 15 pages. I'm going to be up to page 3-3. l 16 I notice in there that the tornadic l 17 depressurization pressure is now going to be about 2 pounds i j 18 per square inch. The old traditional one was a 3 pound i ! 19 drop. Is there a basis for believing 2 pounds is all we i ! 20 need now? I just don't know. It caught me only because-l' 21 it's different. i l 22 How much depressurization do you get from a f 23 tornado inside of a building? 24 KR. CHENG: Based on the published studies, 2 l 25 pounds. j t i () F ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd.-- Coud Repoders 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 . Washington, D. C.- 20006 (202) 293-39G
c__-- ..-. - - - _ _ - . _. .. . - - - - . - - - .. . . _ 1 4 186 I () 1 2 MR. MICHELSON: MR. CHENG: It used to be 3 pounds. It used to be, yes. j I 3 MR. MICHELSON: So now 2 pounds is it. I was only ' l 4 checking to be sure it really was right. , i j 5 On page 3-9, section 3.4.1 on. flood protection is i 6 talking only about tanks and valve failures. Then it 4 7 proceeds to talk about this flooding protection, which 8 appears to be only for tanks and valves, and then says d 9 safety-related components that must be protected against i ! 10 this flooc ing are identified in section 3.4-1. If you look i 11 at table 3.4-1, I think that -- I looked it up, but I don't i 12 have it in front of me and I can't remember now. It l 13 contains structures, penetrations.and access openings only. 14 It does not talk about flooding protection of tanks and so 15 forth. That was my problem. , 16 MR. COSTNER: Can we back up_one second? l 17 MR. MICHELSON: Why don't we.get.this point i 18 cleared up before we-back up. i 19 I'll-have to withdraw my comment. My. reason for i j 20- the comment escapes me at the moment, so I'll withdraw it. l 21 Bob. i ~ 22 MR. COSTNER: In the paragraph immediately before i ) 23 3.4 it says GE identified in the SSAR that the COL applicant j 24 was required to ensure the collapse of non-seismic category' 25 I structures.such as cooling' towers or stacks'outside the
- () ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd.
- Coud Reponers 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington,-- D. C. 20006 i' (202) 293-3950
. ... - . - - . . . . - . . . . . - ... .~. . -. - ... -.- _. - . - - - - .- ~
l } 187 s ()f 1 nuclear island will not endanger seismic category I j 2 structures and-thtt site-dependent effects of blast loads t 3 will be less than those of design tornado pressures. l 4 My SSAR could be out of date, I suppcse. The i 3 5 latest status sheets I've got were dated in April. The one 6 I have is still shown to be the current version. .Mine does f 7 not say anything about collapse-of non-seismic category I _ l j 8 structures or site-dependent blast loadm. l' j 9 MR. MICHELSON: In that particular section? j
- . 10 MR. COSTNER: In that particular section.
l l 11 MR. FOX: I know they're in there. I j' 12 MR. COSTNER: It may be that since my page status ! 13 change is April, and it may be that this page, which is 14 amendment 6, may have been superseded. What is in there now i 15 doesn't say anything about those things in that section. l 16 MR. POSLUSNY: .You will find some COL action items i l 17 that we included in the FSER that haven't been.put in f j 18 because'they were new things that we hadn't defined. Some j- 19 of them will be that way. I j 20 MR. MICHELSON: We realize that. 21 Towards the bottom of'page 3-10, next to the last l 22 paragraph there is'an.important consideration here which I. { 23 have no-quarrel with but will point out later that you made 24 this commitment. It says that GE considered single failure 25 of any .ctive component for compartment flooding. In doing-l 1 LO ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. l j Coud Reponers , 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300
- Washington,. D. C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
i i l 188 1 a compartiaent flooding analysis you are taking single active [) 2 component failure is the way I would read this. Later on I 3 will have a problem, because I don't think you're doing that 4 in some of these analyses. We'll have to wait until later 5 to show you. 6 This is at least one place where I found that you 7 had comr.ittea to this. I guess. I didn't go back to the 8 SSAR, but the SER says this. I assume it's true. 9 It also says you didn't take any credit for drain 10 system sump pump operation in that same paragraph. 11 Then you go on to the next sentence and it says 12 the Staff stated that high energy line breaks inside the 13 main steam tunnel were-excluded from evaluation because this
)- 14 area will be instrumented for detection of_ leaks before a 15 break has occurred.
16 Since we aren't going to take leaks before a 17 break, I guess you are going to take all this back out 18 again. Mainly it's got to get out of the FSER. I find it a 19 number-of places. 20 At the top of page 3-11 it says that GE analized 21 the worst-flooding as a result of pipe and tank failures and 22 their consequences on ."loor by-floor basis within the 23 reactor building to demonstrate the safe shutdown of the 24 reactor. 25 'Is there a GE analysis written that the Staff must O ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Coud Reponers 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D. C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
l 189 i () I 2 have looked at that covers all that? the Staff saw the analysis, but I'm not sure. This is written like I guess the 3 Staff has reviewed the GE analysis of this tank and you have {! 4 a copy of that over in your office somewhere that I could 5 get and look at. 6 MR. BURTON: What General Electric provided was an 7 analysis of the reactor building floor by floor. 8 MR. MICHELSON: But are you referring to what's in l 9 here cs the analysis? 10 MR. BURTON: Yes. i ! 11 MR. MICHELSON: That's not an analysis. 12 MR. BURTON: We're looking at the results of the ! 13 analysis. That's what we based our evaluation on, the 14 resulting flooding from tanks-in any givel, area,-pipe j 15 failures in any given area, the kind of protective features i 16 they had, whether it was raised sills, curbs, things like 17 that. 18 MR. MICHELSON: Is this all the GE analysis you j j 19 . looked at, what's in the SSAR? ! +
- 20 MR. BURTON
- Right.
i 21 MR. MICL'3LSON: That's what I suspected. I wanted ~ 22 to know where I could really see the analy;is, because that ) ] 23 SSAR is not an analysis. It's hardly a decent presentation 24 of results. 25 On that same page, 3-11, it says GE stated that ANN RlLEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. i COud Reponers 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D. C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
.. . .. .- ._ -, ..- - .. . = .. -. ---
i a 1 190 () 1 2 the greatest flood hazard in the main steam tunnel occurs as a result of the feedwater line break. The amount of water a ! 3 associated with the Sreak will be limited by closing ths 1 4 feedwater isolation valves. ! 5 Do we know that the feedwater isolation valves can ) 6 isolate these breaks under break conditions? What provision 7 is there to assure that the feedwater line can be isolated l 8 to limit the flood as you describe in here? I 9 MR. FOX: It's one of the 40 questions we have to
- 10 discuss.
j 11 MR. MICHELSON: It's the same kind of question? ! 12 MR. FOX: Yes,
MR. MICHELSO!!: When you think about it, include f
14 those feedwater isolation valves, because that pours water .
- 15 in at enormous rates in a hurry. Also, I'm not sure whether 3
16 they can be closed under the flows that you have during a , 17 pipe break condition. Maybe they can. That's what you have 18 to show by test, analysis or some comparable experience. t 19 In the case of the rad waste building, how does l 20 the piping get from the reactor building over to'the rad-21 waste building? Is that a chase or is it underground? What 22 kind of arrangement? 23 MR. MILLER: It's underground. 24 MR. FOX: It's in-a vault. 25: MR. MICHELSON: The concern I have is you claim .O . - ANN RILEY: & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. J _
-Coud RepOders 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 -
4 Washington, D. C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
191 () 1 2 that if you get floods out in the rad waste building it's a non-problem relative to the reactor building. But if you 3 have a chase between the reactor builfing and the rad waste 4 building, you want to make_sure that the water isn't coming 5 back the through chase and getting into the reactor building 6 that way. I couldn't find any description of how you even 7 get over there and therefore what that communication might 8 look like and whether it could be a backflow opportunity for i 9 water flooding the rad waste building. The conclusions here l j 10 are that you don't worry about floods in the rad waste i
, 11 building. That's probably valid providing there is no 12 umbilical cord between the two.
l 13 MR. MILLER: Back flooding is prevented by the 14 elevation. i 15 MR. MICHELSoN: That could be a possibility. 16 MR. MILLER: We will add a discussion on that. 17 MR. MICHELSON: Yes. Just enough to point out 18 that you thought about it and that there is no way for water 19 to get back. 20 MP. MILLER: Sure. No problem. We can add that. 21 MR. MICHELSoN: Also, the barrier between the 22 reactor building and this tunnel ought to be a watertight 23 barrier for whatever elevation, if any, you could get. A 24 break can be in that tunnel. You don't want the water to 25 come back into the reactor building, so you put a watertight () ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Coud Repoders 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D. C. 20006 i (202) 293-3950 !
192 () 1 2 penetration rated for several pounds. best answer, of course. That would be the That would take care of it all. 3 Page 3-15 starts to deal with missiles and the cop 4 of page 3-15 deals with missiles that might come from a fan 5 blade casing cr failure of fan blade. It states that the 6 blading cannot penetrate the casing for their rated speed. 7 Is rated speed the right speed to use? That 8 depends on wnat is driving the fan. If I've got one of 9 these nice ducting systems and a reactor water cleanup break 10 and it blows back through the fans coming in reverse 11 direction, it can accelerate those to real high speeds if 12 the pressure is sustained very long. Now you are talking 13 way over rated speed of the fan and the blade starts to come O k ,/ m 14 apart. 15 Whether that's.a problem or not depends on where 16 that fan is located. Some of these fans are in fairly 17 sensitive areas. There is a bunch of them up in the control 18 building top 'loor and places like that. 19 I think you have to do a little more than just say 20 that at rated speed if the rotor disintegrates it can't come 21 out of the casing. I think you have to show what the 22 maximum credible speed co'1d be and what happens then. It 23 may be more than rated speed. 24 MR. POSLUSNY: We met with GE on this last Monday 25 and they provided us the methodology that they have used on O) m ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Coud Repoders 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D. C. 20006 (202) 293-3950 -
l 193 ' () 1 2 operating plants, and you're look at that right now. MR. MICHELSON: This is for centrifugal type fans. 3 MR. POSLUSNY: We are still looking at that. l 4 MR. DAVIS: Jay has a similar comwand about that, 5 talking about a discharge valve sticking open. 6 MR. MICHELSON: That can also get you into the 7 same kind of situation. 8 We will expect to hear something on that later on. 9 I think there is a little bit of a slip, but at 10 about the middle of page 3-15 you say, "further, each 11 safety-related system will be contained in its own room of a 12 seismic category I building." I don't think it's all in the 13 same room. I think it's in the same area or same division (D (, s ,/ 14 or something, but not in the same room. It's a little 15 overstated. 16 The thing missing from that paragraph is 17 consideration of what happens to missiles. If there are 18 doors in the room and you generate missiles, will the doors 19 withstand the missiles? Either you design it to withstand 20 the missile or you locate the door so it's not in the 21 pathway of the missiles that could be generated in the room. , 22 But you do have to address the doors from the viewpoint of 1 23 missiles, j 24 MR. CATTON: What about ducting systems? 25 MR. MICHEISON: Same thing. Any targets in that (~'h l ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Coud Reponers l 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D. C. 20006 ' (202) 293-3950
194 1 room have to be considered. You have to show that it's a 2 non-problem. 3 MR. CATTON: Doors are special because the 4 velocities are higher through the door, and that can create 5 the missiles for the adjacent room. 6 MR. MICllELSON: You can also create a missile, 7 like toaring off a door. Is that what you are sayingy 8 MR. CATTON: No. Actually the case that I saw was ( 9 at the llDR containment. They had a concrete block in one 10 room and when the break occurred, or whatever it was that 11 they vented into the room, it picked be block up and threw 12 it into the ducting i;. the adjacent room and broke it. It's 13 because the velocitics are very high through the doorway. 14 f .) if you have anything laying around the doorway, it can 15 scope it up and hurl it halfway across the room. 16 MR. MICl!ELSON : But you are saying it was also the 17 ventway. 18 HR. CATTON: That's right. 19 . MICllELSON: That will accelerate it nicely. 20 . . CATTON: That's right. So anything that is 21 Ivose just on the downstream sido can become a missile, can 2; gct shredded, get rippeu sff. All sor*. of things. I 23 MR. MICHELSON: The doors themselves can also 24 becomo missiles if they are torn loose by the discharge of 25 the efflue m through the doorway. O O ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES. Ltd. Court Reporters 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D. C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
i 195 1 1 These are things that the document is silent on. ) 2 If you are going to claim you can handle missiles, you have 3 to explain what the design requirements are. I think what 4 the design requirements for doors are is you had better not ] 5 stick them where they are targets for the missile. If they 6 are going to be ventways, then you had better think 7 carefully as to ho** you design it with some kind of special ! 8 hinge arrangement so it can become a ventway. I just don't l 9 find that kind of consideration and I think this is a final 10 design and it ought to be in there. 11 MR. CATTON: I would have liked to have seen some 12 more detailed discussion of all of these things. It 's. not 5
- 13 that we don't know. The initial testing in HDR was in 1976, 14 and it's almost like it was never done. ,
i
- 15 MR. MICHELSON
- It was never recognized, at least.
1 l 16 MR. CATTON: That's right. ! 17 MR. MICHELSON: I t') ink the missile discussion i ' 18 here leaves a few things wanting and needs to be sharpened 4
- 19 up enough where at least it appears that you have thought 20 about the doors and that sort of thing.
21 In the middle of page 3-17 it seems to be stated 22 that the interface requirements for handling secondary
; 23 missiles and so forth uill be addressed as a part of an 24 ITAAC. Is that really-true? I haven't seen the ITAAC that 25 would address that, but you can confirm there will be an ANN- RlLEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd.
I Court Reporters 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D. C. 20006 (202) 293 3950
j l i 196 1 ITAAC to address secondary missiles, t l 2 MR. BURTON: When we were still trying to sort out { 3 interface versus COL or versus other things we thought that 4 that would be appropriate as an interface requirement, but 5 after some discussions we decided that is something that
- 6 would be within GE's scopa, and therefore whatever
- 7 provisions to deal with secondary missiles would have to be 8 verified through ITAAC. That's what we are getting at 9 there.
10 MR. MICHELSON: There will be an ITAAC that will ! 11 address secondary missile consideration. I wonder what kind 12 of an ITAAC it is, because, first of all, what are the 13 design requirements for addressing secondary missiles? I'm 14 not sure where I find those. i 15 MR. BURTON: Most of the ITAAC items that have to 16 do with things in Chapter 3, more general aspects like fire, 17 flood and missiles, we foresee as being part of the 18 individual building ITAACs. 19 MR. MICllELSON: But.ITAACs-are not supposed to be 20 design requirement documents. They are design confirmation 21 docun.onts . 22 MR. BURTON: That's correct. 23 MR. MICHELSON - So I don't expect to find the 24 design requirements for 'scondary missiles. What are the 25 requirements?' What are credible secondary missiles? O ANN ' RlLEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Court Reporters ! 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 ; Washington, D. C. 20006 (202) 293 3950
197 1 MR. BURTON: There are primary missiles and 2 secondary missiles. There are missiles that are generated I 3 from rotating equipment, pressured components and things 4 like that which if they strike concrete or something else 5 there would be secondary missiles generated frota that. How 6 do you protect from that? Are there different provisions 7 for that? i j 8 MR. Mi a W40N: What is a credible secondary
- 9 missile? Clearly some of them are going to be incredible f ;
10 and some are of them are going to be credible. Which ones , j- 11 and how do I know as a designer so-I can pick out the right
- 12 set? You don't do that with an ITAAC.
15 MR. BURTON: I can't remember the exact number, { 14 but it's a strike probability of 10 to the minus 7, I ( l 15 believu. ' k 16 MR. MICHELSON: Do I find that in the SSAR i l 17 somewhere? 18 MR. BURTON: There is a discussion about it in l 19 there. l 20 MR. MICHELSON: What chapter would that be 'n? I 21 MR. FOX: Chapter 3. 1- 22 --MR. MICHELSON: I guess I just didn't recognize it i 23 when I saw it.
' 2 4. So the ITAAC will just confirm that what you said
- 25 in Chapter 3 got carried out.
' O ANN RlLEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Court Reporters 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300
~
Washington, D.- C. 20006
-(202) 293-3950-
_ . . _ _ _ _ . _ . _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ . ~ . _ _ _ . - _ _ _ _ _ . _
198 () 1 2 MR. COSTNER: MR. MICHELSON: I have another one on that page. Go ahead. 3 MR. COSTNER: The second full paragraph on page 3-4 17 says a COL applicant shall provide procedures ensuring 5 that equipment undergoing maintenance will be removed from 6 consiinment during operation or will be seismically 7 restrained to protect it from becoming a missile. 8 My concern is not with what is stated but the fact 9 that there is a problem of risk during shutdown such that 10 there are systems which are vulnerable to damage that you 11 can't stand to lose even if you are shof down. This gives 12 the impression that we cort of ruled out those. I'm 13 thinking of decay heat removal, the connections to standby
) 14 gas or pathways to standby gas that you might need if you 15 had a fuel drop accident.
16 I think it's risky to be saying that we take care 17 of everything-provided we get it out of there during 18 operation. I think this should be a little broader. 19 MR. BURTON: Okay. I think at least part of your 20 concern is covered in Chapter 9 with load handling 21 operations. -We have certain requirements there in terms of 22- what needs to be done concerning things that might get 23 dropped. 24 MR. COSTNER: I'm concerned with things like 25 scaffolding, putting up scaffolding and not watching out for O ANN RlLEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Coud Repoders 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D. C. 20006 (202) 293-3950 {
199 () I 2 whether that seismic event can cause that scaffolding to damage decay heat removal. Also people have a tendency to 3 think they can hang temporary shielding just any old place 4 during maintenance. 5 MR. POSLUSNY: We should add shutdown conditions 6 to the consideration. 7 MR. COSTNER: They just need to be watching. 8 MR. MICHELSON: It's not just normal operation; 9 it's shutdown as well. I think it gets a little flaky how 10 you do all this, but in theory you should be worried about 11 earthquakes while you are shutdown as well as while you are 12 operating. 13 MR. COSTNER: This means that you need to be sure () 14 that your engineering forces get a look at what you are 15 planning to do. 16 MR. MICHELSON: It requires better scaffolding.- 17 MR. COSTNER: Or review. 18 MR. MICHELSON: I had another question that Jay. 19 brought up in this section 3.5.1.3 on page 3-17. The 20 statement is made that the turbine building orientation is 21 such that the turbine missiles will not strike the 22 containment. His observation is that he thinks the 23 orientation only reduces the probability but doesn't prevent 24 the striking of the containment. 25 You might want to word that slightly differently. O ANN RlLEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Coud Reponers 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington,- D. C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
200 1 It certainly does reduce the probability but it does not 2 prevent it. 3 Page 3-21 says that GE has provided an ITAAC 4 regarding protection of structures, systems and components
,5 from missiles generated by natural phenomenon. Which ITAAC 6 is that?
7 MR. BURTON: Again, those are contained in the 8 building ITAAC. 9 MR. MICHELSON: That will be in which building 10 ITAAC? 11 MR. LURTON: It would be reactor building and 12 control building. Certainly those two. 13 MR. MICHELSON: They aren't in the present version 14 of those, are they? 15 MR. BURTON: They may not be. 16 MR. MICHELSON: I mean through that stage 3 17 version. I looked it up once and I couldn't find anything 18 in there. 19 MR. BURTON: When this draft FSER was written we 20 had just received stage 3. So this open item basically was 21 assuming that these issues were addressed in that stage 3 22 submittal. What happened subsequent to that 1.s in reviewing 23 it, if we didn't find these items, we fed that information 24 back to GE. 25 MR. MICHELSONt A.1 right. O ANN RlLEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Court- Reporters 1612 K.' Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D. O, 20006 (202) 293-3950
201 () 1 2 Let's go back to page 3-18 for a minuto. question by Jay deals with the rotors for the turbines. This We 3 discussed that a few times before. I will read you his 4 statement: 5 The 1984 GE report and the recent Staff position 6 do not deal with monoblock integral LP rotors as is proposed 7 for the ABWR. This type of rotor needs to be explicitly 8 evaluated for missile generation. Much larger missiles can 9 be generated. This is not a new issue. We have also raised 10 the issue on hrw the Staff would handle the situation where 11 a COL applicant for an ABWR decided to buy a Brown Boveri 12 turbine. We discussed this during our previous meeting. 13 The Brown Boveri rotors are forned disks that are welded
/
(s,)\ 14 together and then machined. The Staff promised to get back IS to us on this item. 16 Are you ready yet to get back to us on this? 17 HR. GEORGIEV: Yes. This is George Georgiev from 18 the Staff. 19 Basically, I incorporated all the comments. They 20 were good comments. We revised the SSAR. We state in our 21 SER that the rotor has to be machined. 22 MR. MICHELSON: I think the inference here is that 23 you can get bigger missiles off of this type of rotor 24 design. Is that true? If it's true, then you have to deal 25 with those bigger missiles in terms of the casing, C\ V ANN RlLEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Coud Reponers 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D. C. 20006 ) (202) 293 3950
i i l 202 i i resilience and so forth. I think that is part of what he's ) 2 driving at heret much larger missiles can be generated.
! At a different time, though, he's 3 MR. SHEWMON:
4
- 4 had concern about the impurities that can stay at the i
1 5 center, and if it was cored it's more like to develop flaws ! 6 you can't see. This is certainly responsive to that. 7 MR. MICHELSON: That would be recponsive to that, i ] ! 8 but I'm not sure it's responsive to what he is now saying, 9 that he thought much larger missiles can be generated. 10 MR. GEORGIEV: I don't have this in front of me. 11 MR. MICHELSON: We'll give you a copy of this at 12 the next meeting. 13 MR. GEORGIEV The bottom line is who cares how 14 big the missile is? 15 MR. CATTON: I think all Jay is saying is it's 16 good design and don't preclude a good design. 17 MR. MICHELSON - But why is he raising _the much , 18 larger missile issue then?
- 19 MR. COSTNER
- I think he's raising the question
) 20 because it says GE prepared a propriety report in January 21 1984 and they are relying on that one, and he's saying that 22 '84 report does not deal with this kind of construction. So 23 the report is not a valid reference consistent-with what the 24 rest of the SSAR says. 25 MR. MICHELSON: And it may be that a larger
- O ANN RlLEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd.-
Court Reporters 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite- 300 Washington, D. C. 20006 [ (202). 293-3950
l 203 ; 1 missile makes no differenco. I guess it depends on the 2 design of t.ae casing as to whether it makes a difference or 3 not. 4 MR. FOX: Mr. Michelson, if it's contained, it 5 doesn't make any difference. 6 MR. MICHELSON: That's right. I don't know enough 7 about the missile business to know that the spectrum you 8 dealt with and its direction also dealt with which part was 9 contained and which part got out. 10 MR. SHEWMON: There's a mixed bag on the ' 11 containment. The EPRI tests years ago showed containment 12 was possible, and then within tha last six months we've 13 heard of cases where blades came out when there was an 14 overspeed event and they flew off. If blades can come 15 through, then why was it that EPRI found that bigger hunks 16 wouldn't? It makes you at least wonder a little bit about 17 keeping it in. 18 MR. CATTON: Maybe the big hunks aren_'t moving as 19 fast. Maybe it will just sort of bang against the wall and 20 stop. , 21 MR. SHEWMON: Maybe. I don't know. 22 MR. CATrON: I think they ought to look at it. 23 MR. MICHELSON: We will give you a copy _of this 24 and you can be_ prepared next timelto discuss it a little. 25 more. O ANN RlLEY & _ ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Court Reporters 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D. C. 20006 (202) _293 3950 = __ _ .~ _ _ . _ . - . - _ _ _ . _ . .
204 1 The bottom of page 3-23, the last paragraph talks 2 about the SSAR section 3.5.4 in which GE identified the 3 responsibilities of the col applicant for the design of 4 barriers and protective structures to withstand the impact 5 of postulated missiles. 6 Then it goes on and says GE has identified the 7 interface requirement and the COL applicant will meet these 8 positions. 9 This is all having to do with barriers for any 10 kind of missiles, if I understand section 3.5.3 correctly. 11 Is that your interpretation as well? Barrier design 12 procedures, 3.5.3, page 3-22. 13 If I understand.this correct, then I guess there 14 will be ecue interface requirements inside of reactor 15 building and other areas relative to missile protection. 16 MR. FOX: It does say that. It says only the 17 ultimate heat sink, which is a Part 52_ type interface. 18 MR. MICHELSON: Is 3.5.3 only__ relative to the 19 ultimate heat sink? 20 MR. FOX I was reading section 3.5.4, GE 21 identified responsibility, and so on. It specifically 22 states interface requirements for the ultimate heat sink. 23 I-guess you're right. 24 MR.-MICHELSON: I-think-it's talking about inside 25 as well as outside reactor building, control. building, or O ANN RfLEY & - ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Court Reporters 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 ; Washington, D. C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
i 205 1 wherever you might have a missile sourco. Is that the way ] 2 you read it? 3 MR. FOX: Yes. ! 4 MR. CHAMBERS: Obviously those designs are going
- 5 to depend on the procured equipment.
l 6 MR. MICHELSON: So I would expect to find, though, l l 7 in the SSAR all of the good requirements for design for } 8 missile considerations, the sources of the missiles, which l l 9 sources ycu have to take, and so forth. But the actual j ! l
- 10 missile generation capability has got to be component j i ;
i 11 specific, and that is what you are saying here. We 12 obviously have to wait until later to do the actual 13 calculations. 14 So that's an interface of sorts. It's not a COL 15 action item, I guess. I don't know. Are we tracking l 16 interface requirements? 17 MR. POSLUSNY: These requiremente are being 18 tracked as interface requirements. Each will have a number. i 19 MR. MICHELSON: Wouldn't this have gotten a i 20 number, that this will be interface requirement so and so? 21 MR. POSLUSNY: It will in the final. ! 22 MR. MICHELSON: Okay. 23 MR. POSLt,tSNY : Or it will be a portion of the 24 ultimate heat sink requirement. 25 MR. MICHELSON: This is more than ultimate heat t 'O i
- ANN- RILEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd.
Court Reporters _
- - 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300
' Washington, D. C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
i 206 I sink we are dealing with here. The first part of the 2 paragraph is all-inclusive; the last part of it talks about ! 3 this interface requirement COL applicants must meet on the i 4 ultimate heat sink. I thought the rest of paragraph 3.5.3 5 was for all missiles, unless I'm reading it wrong. 6 MR. POSLUSNY: It maps you back to 3.5.1 and 7 3.5.2. 8 MR. MICHELSON: They deal with all missiles. The 9 requirements ought to be in the document. Maybe they are. 10 I'll have to look at it again. 11 Page 3-24, about the middle of the page, the 12 paragraphs says GE evaluated the effects of postulated pipe 13 breaks, and it goes on to say, however, the Staff stated in 14 DSER so and so that GE eMcluded consideration of pipe breaks 15 and resulting dynamic effects and the postulation of piping 16 failures on main steam feedwater. You are going to take 17 that one out, because that's no longer true. 18 MR. POSLUSNY- We're going to have to leave it for 19 the ultimate document and correct it later on in the 20 paragraph. The lawyers tell us that this final SER has to 21 be the superseding document and must duplicate everything 22 we've walked through in our review. 23 MR. MICHELSON: You mean-you can't. change the 24 words that are already here in this draft? 25 MR. POSLUSNY: We can't delete concepts and O ANN RlLEY:& ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Court Reporters 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D. C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
207 1 conclusions. We can modify them. It's so that wo don't 2 litigate all three documents. , 3 MR. MICHELSON: You mean somebody is coing to go 4 back and say, well, in the previous version of that draft or 5 that final you did thus and so. 6 MR. POSLUSNY: Yes. We've got to keep cur history , l 7 with us. 8 MR. MICHELSON: But you'll erase it with more 9 words later? 10 MR. POSLUSNY: Subsequent findings, correct. 11 MR. MICHELSON: The thing that was missing from 12 this whole paragraph, though, was the single failure 13 criterion. Are you going to take these postulated pipe 14 breaks with single failure? It doesn't say so anywhere, 15 although I pointed out to you earlier today that.you had 16 committed up front to single failure criterion. I assume 17 that's true. 18 MR. FOX: Yes. 4 19 MR. MICHELSON: In the middle of page 3-27, 20 towards the middle, there are some very fine statements that 21 I fully agree with and I hope that's exactly the design L 22 basis. It says for those trains housed in divisional space, 23 that space, walls, doors and all penetrations must be able j 24 to contain the flood water, the fire, smoke, jet 25 impingement, pipe whip, radiation, high temperatures and- !O ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Court Reporters 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300
- Washington, D. C, 20006
-(20?) '"G3950
204 ; 1 pressures that would occur as result of pipe or equipment i 2 failures so that only one train is rendered inoperable at 3 any one time. 4 That says 16 all. You've got it right there. Now l 5 you just have to do it. That was a very precise statement 6 of the requirement at that point. 7 Then it goes on to say the ITAAC will assure that 8 you did all this good stuff. - 9 I'd just take this out and frame it and forget all 10 the rest. 11 This, of course, is the Staff's statement, but I 12 assume they got this on good basis. 13 There is an ITAAC that is going to deal with 14 postulated piping failures. I have never seen it yet. Is 15 GE going to have that finished pret soon? , t 16 MR. FOX: Which one is that? 17 MR. MICHELSON: It's in the latter part of that 18 paragraph I was reading from. It says GE has provided for 19 Staff review the ITAAC related to the protection of safety-20 related equipment from the effects of postulated piping 21 failures. I would like to see that ITAAC. 22 MR. FOXt Have we done that? 23 MR. POSLUSNY: We'll talk about it in two weeks. j 24 MR. MICHELSON: I don't think you've done it yet. 25 This is an overstatement. What bothers me a little bit is O ANN RlLEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Court Reporters 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D. C. 20006 (202) 293 3950
I i, j 209 1 how many of these overstatements are going to go back and l 2 get corrected one way or the other and either be verified as j j 3 true or erased out of the document. If you can't erase i 4 anything because this is a previous draft, you're in real 5 trouble on something like this. 6 MR. POSLUSh!: We would say this is what we found 7 and it's acceptable or unacceptable. Hopefully it will be ! 8 acceptable. I' 9 MR. MICHELSON: It says you've already got the 10 document and you reviewed it. l l 11 MR. POSLUSNY: Right. l I 12 MR. BURTON: Again, if you go to the reactor 13 building ITAAC, it has a number of sections, one dealing 14 with fire protection, one dealing with flooding, one dealing 1 15 with missiles,-and there is a small blurb in there where
; 16 there are some words about pipe failures. We are looking at 1
17 all that. I think I have some c'omments.with those. 18 MR. MICHELSON: This is talking about not that l 19 ITAAC. It says "the ITAAC related to protection of safety-l 20 related equipment from the effects of postulated piping l 21 failures." It's "the ITAAC" that does that. The one you , -22 are talking about.is spread around and it is not in there ! 23 very well to begin with. It's hardly mentioned, in fact. 4 24 MR. BURTON: That's one of the comments we had. 25 MR. MICHELSON: This one talks like you've got an
'!O V ANN RlLEY. & - ASSOCIATES, Ltd.
- Court Reporters I 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D. C. 20006
.(202) 293-3950
210 1 ITAAC dealing with this subject. I would be happy as hell 2 to look at it. 3 MR. POSLUSNY: We're going to clarify. . There may 4 be several ITAACs that respond to a given need. 5 MR. MICHELSON: Chet, the problem I have in 6 reading this is how can I separate out what you've really , 7 done and what you really haven't done? This is a case where 8 you'd done it and you really haven't done it, or at least 9 it says GE provided it and they haven't really provided it. 10 How do I know when I read your document whether you are 11 telling the truth or leading me on? 12 MR. POSLUSNY: The bottom line is we had-a phase 3 37 ITAAC submittal and some reviewers had looked at it and some 14 had not. 15 MR. MICHELSoN: There is no ITAAC on that phase 3 16 submittal that appears to cover this subject at all. 17 MR. POSLUSNY: Maybe not in main, but in a portion 18 of it we think that the reviewer thinks it's covered. 19 MR. CHAMBERS: The intent was that we supplied 20 ITAAC that we thought sufficiently covered everything it had 21 to. The Staff when they made this statement, my 22 understanding is a lot of time they hadn't looked at it; 23 they might not have found where exactly it.was covered; and 24 this was merely a placeholder to state that they hadn't 25 looked at that yet. So the evaluation of the ITAAC and the O ANN RlLEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Court Reporters 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite .300 Washington, D. C. 20006 (202) 293 4950.
211 1 discussions about what needed to be in there and what didn't 2 and whether what was in there was adequate, that's taking 3 place now. 4 It's my understanding these statements shouldn't 5 be read to say we found this particular ITf 4 and have 6 looked at it. It's given as ITAAC in general and this is a 7 placeholder so that we make sure we look at it from this 8 perspective. 9 MR. MICHELSON: If it had just said that GE has 10 giveri some ITAACs which contain this kind of guidance, I 11 would have had no problem. 12 MR. CHAMBERS: That's what this was meant to say 13 in a lot of cases. 14 MR. MICHELSON: What it says, of course, is "the 15 ITAAC related to the protection" and so forth. So I was 16 looking for "the ITAAC." 17 MR. pOSLUSNY: That's misleading. I agree. 18 MR. MICHELSON: It does make it less credible. 19 On page 3-29, the third from the bottom paragraph 20 it talks about the separating structure to take care of pipe 21 breaks. I think this is a good stateK9nt, but I'm not sure 22 you are doing it nor even recognize what it is saying. 23 Maybe I chould read it for the benefit of those who haven't 24 found it: 25 SRP section 3.6.2 states that if a structure O ANN RlLEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Court Reporters ' 1812 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D. C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
_.~._._ _ _ _ . ___._ _ _ } }
- 212 i
i separates a high energy line from an essential component, ! 2 that separating structure shall be designed to withstand the j 3 consequences of the pipe break in the high energy line which i j 4 could produce the greatest effect at or to the structure. 5 This is irrespective of the fact that pipe rupture criteria 1 j 6 in SRP section 3.6.2 might not require such a break location i , l 7 to be postulated. I j 8 That comes right out of the standard review plan. l l 9 That's a precise statement and it's exactly what should be 1 j 10 done. , i { 11 I find from reading later that, and we'll cite jt j- 12 as we go, that I'm not sure that whoever wrote this . I ' 13 paragraph wrote the other paragrapas, because they don't l 14 come together. l 15 This is another one you can take out anc frame and { 16 between that and the other one you've to most everything you 1 l 17 need to know about pipe breaks. I mean the requirements. l- 18 MR. CATTON: We should put that in in bold _or-19 italicize it or something. i
- 20 MR. MICHELSoN
- Yes.
i- 21 This is right out of the standard review plan.-
- 22 It's quite correct.
1 23 Then they start going into the high energy line [ 24 analysis in the_very next paragraph. That's where they blew i 1 25 it all out again. Let me show you why they got to the wrong i i O ANN RlLEY &' ASSOCIATES, Ltd. i- . Court Reporters 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 , Washington,- D. C. 20006 L ____ _ _ _ ._ _ _- (202) - 293 3950
213 1 conclusion. 2 In reading it again, I may agree that what's said 3 here is probably okay. 4 Towards the bottom of page 3-30 it says here that . 5 postulated pipe breaks are discussed in Appendix 3 of this 6 report. Is "this report" the FSER, or is "this report" 7 something else? 8 MR. POSLUSNY I think this should be Chapter 14. 9 MR. MICHELSON: But there isn't an Appendix 3 in 10 Chapter 14. 11 MR. POSLUSNY: It's not Appendix 3. Originally we 12 were going to make the ITAAC discussion for piping be an 13 appendix here. 14 MR. MICHELSON: So you think now we should just go 15 to Chapter 14? 16 MR. POSLUSNY: It's discussed in Chapter 14. 17 MR. MICHELSON: Here again is another nice ITAAC I 18 would like to see. It says GE has developed an ITAAC to 19 verify that the safety of the plant will not be adversely 20 impacted by the dynamic effects resulting from postulated 21 pipe breaks as discussed now in Chapter 14 of this report. 22 Is there really an ITAAC that does that? 23 MR. TERAO: This is David Terao. There is the 24 ceneric piping ITAAC and one of the line items in there 25 deals with high energy line break. I believe that's the LO L ANN RlLEY-& ASSOCIATES, Ltd. l Court Reporters 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suito 300
-Washington, D. C. 20006 l (202) 293 3950
.I l
l i i 214 1 ITAAC that we are referring to, the commitment to perform a l 2 high energy line break analysis per the methods in the SSAR. 3 MR. CATTON: What are those methods?
; 4 MR. TERAO: The methods prescribed in the SSAR, in i 5 section 3.6 of the SSAR.
i ! 6 MR. MICHELSON: They pretty well copied right out i j 7 of the standard review plan. I've reviewed that far. I
; 8 have no problem with your rules. The rules are right. They l
i 9 just copied the standard review plan. 1 10 MR. CATTON: I'm a little concerned about a couple j 11 of things with respect to that. i i 12 MR. MICHELSON: Go ahead. 1 l 13 MR. CATTON: They talk about jet impingement 14 loading and need for barriera if you are within 30 feet. 15 This is very geometry dependent. If I have a long hallway, l f 16 I may need a helluva lot more than 30 feet before I , 17 attenuate the effect of a line break. I don't see any l 18 discussion of those kinds of things. Momentum effects are i 19 important, and they are not a consideration that I can tell. f 20 I don't think'GE considers them either. I certainly didn't 21 see anything in section 3 on this. ; I 22 MR. MICHELSON: I agree with you on that 30 feet. 23 I haven't found anyplace yet in your design where you are 3 24 using 30 feet between divisions, 30 feet of open space. [ 25 Do you have anyplace where you are using 30 feet u. ANN RlLEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd.- 1 Court Rsporters a 1612 K. - Street, N.W., Suito 300 Washington,- D. C. 20006 (202)-293-3950 _ _ .-. - ~. . - - -_. - -- - -. - . - - . - . . .. .
- i i
! 215 l 1 in lieu of structures? 2 MR. FOX: This is the distance we feel that it's 3 attenuating sufficiently. This has to be verified by the 4 applicant. 5 MR. CATTON: To say that you have to say something l 6 about the size break, pressures, temperatures, everything 7 else, plus geometry. 8 MR. FOX: You're probably right. 9 MR. CATTON: Once you state all those things, you 10 can say, gee, in this circumstance 30 feet is enough, but 11 I'll pick another set of circumstances where it won't be 12 enough. 13 MR. FOX: I'll pick 50 feet and do the same 14 analysis. Without having the equipment, it's pretty hard to 15 do this, l 16 MR. CATTON: That's-true. I'm not suro you have 17 the analysis tools in place yet to do it properly. In the 18 past it hasn't been. Just straight jet impingement is not 19 enough. 20 MR. MICHELSON: You do not have an/ place is: your 21 design where you are using open' space as the-only separation 22 that I'm aware of.
- 23 MR. FOX
- It's cot the separation.
24 MR. MICHELSON:- It's the reason for not putting in i 25 the separation barriers, the way it's worded. If damage l O ANN RlLEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Court Reporters 1612 K. Street, N.W.,- Suite 300 Washington, D. C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
215 () 1 2 could occur to more than one division of a redundant safety- , related system within 30 feet of any high energy pipe, other 3 protection devices such as barriers, sealed enclosures, 4 deflectors or pipe whip restraints are used. 5 MR. CATTON: It could be the Staff put that in 6 there. 7 MR. FOX: No. 8 MR. CATTON: It's you guys. 9 MR. FOX: They borrowed some of our words. 10 MR. MICHELSON: I just didn't see anyplace in the 11 design where you are taking advantage of this provision. 12 Let me put it that way. 13 MR. CATTON: But who knows? They might. 14 MR. MICHELSON: But they might, and 30 feet is not 15 enough for a lot of considerations. It depends on what the 16 target is and what the source is and what the environment 17 concerns might be, and all the other good stuff. 18 MR. CATTON: I think it would be better to leave 19 it out. 20 MR. CHAMBERS: This doesn't refer to open space. 21 Every division is going to be already separated by a 22 boundary,.a wall. It's where there is stuff of a different 23 division within 30 feet even though it's already on the
?4 other side of that wall; you take extra precautions for that 25 wall.
O ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Coud Repoders 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D. C. 20006 (202) 293 3950
117 1 MR. MICHELSON: llo. Let me road you the sentence 2 one more time. Maybe the sentence isn't correct. 3 If damage could occur to more than one division of 4 a redundant safety-related system within 30 feet -- more 5 than one divisions within 30 feet -- of any high energy 6 piping, other protection devices have to be provided. 7 MR. CHAMBERS: Implicit of another division is 8 that there already has to be a divisional boundary between 9 that equipment. 10 MR. CATTON: So why is the senterice needed at all? 11 MR. MICHELSON: I don't care of it's 100 feet, 200 12 feet or 10 feet. There is going to be a separation barrier 13 because there are different divisions. 14 MR. CHAMBERS: Right, and this is just a special 15 look at areas where it's in close proximity even though it's 16 on the other side of the wall 17 MR. MICHELSON: What I think.it's for and what 18 worries me is I think you are going to use this for some 19 electrical stuff, and then I have to worry. carefully about 20 the fire barrier that you claim is good enough for 21 electrical isn't good enough for jet impingement and all 22 that other stuff. 23 MR. CHAMBERS: We'll look at this and reword it. 24 The intent there was there was already a boundary. This is-25 looking at things within close proximity across the boundary O ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Court Reporters 1612 K. Street, _ N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D. C. 20006 (202) 293 3950-
218 () 1 2 to see if you need to do anythin; else. MR. MICHELSON: I don't think you need it. 3 MR. FOX: We will clarify this. 4 MR. MICHELSON: I don't think you need it anywhere 5 that I'm aware of. You've got barriers everywhere you need 6 them. 7 I'm going to go all the way to 3-51. Does anybody 8 have something before that? 9 MR. COSTNER: 3-44. 10 MR. MICHELSON t Okay. 11 MR. COSTNER: In the paragraph immediately above 12 3.8 it says because of the continuous enhancement in the 13 state of the art of seismic instrument and the revisions to 14 Appendix A of 10 CFR 100 and to Reg Guide 112 currently in 15 progress, conformity with instrumentation guidelines in 16 existence at the time of an individual license application 17 will be required. , 18 That looks to me like it's starkly in non-i
- 19 conformance with the whole idea of design certification.
! 20 Mk. MICHELSON: It's beyond finality. That's for i j 21 sure. 22 MR. COSTNER: There are probably a lot of areas 23 that'the same statement could be applied to. 24 MR. MICHELSON: I thought-finality applied to what 25 you agreed would be the code ~of record at the time the O ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Coud Repoders 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D C. 20006 . (202).293 3950 i
I I j 219 1 certificate was issued as opposed to deciding when you got a 2 COL applicant. Maybe seismic instrumentation is something 3 unique. I don't understand it that well. l 4 MR. CHAMBERS Clearly COL action items are going 5 to take another comprehensive look. I think Jerry Wilson j 6 from the staff said that this morning. He's going to do the
- 7 same thing.
f 8 MR. MICHELSON: In there something funny about-9 seismic instrumentation that says the state of the crt is 10 such we just don't treat it like we do some of these DACs? l j 11 It's a little DAC. It's just one item, but it's the same i
- 12 principle.
i 13 MR. POSLUSNY: I would like to let this one go. j- 14 MR. MICHELSON: You're going to look at it? 15 MR. POSLUSNY: Yes. 16 MR. MICHELSON: Okay. I didn't know anything 17 about seismic instrumentation. I'm glad somebody else 18 brought it up. l i : 19 My comments start on 3-51 unless somebody has got . 20 something else.
- _ 21 Item No. 1 on page 3-51 talks about the metric and 22 English system and so on. It says GE should eithdr use dual 23 system (British system) or use the metric system alone.
.24 What have you finally decided in this document since you are ;
25 still using the mix? Which way is it going to be? O ANN RlLEY &. ASSOCIATES, Ltd.
- Court Reporters 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington,~ D. C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
220 1 MR. FOX: The SSAR is going to be metric. 2 MR. MICHELSON: All metric? 3 MR. FOX: All metric. 4 HR. MICHELSON: No inches in it? There are still 5 quite a few English units in it. But that is the decision. , 6 It will be one unit only and it will be metric. 7 MR. FOX: Yes. 8 MR. CATTON: It would be nice to see some of the j 9 units in English. i ! 10 MR. MICHELSON: It helps me. I like the dual 11 system myself. 12 Iten . on that same page, 3-51, talks about GE i 13 should explain hev they are going to handle as-built 14 construction and installation conforms with a certain i 15 configuration. Tnit assumes that's the configuration that's i 16 in the SSAR. 17 We talked about what meaning to attach to layout 18 drawings in the past and you were starting to deviate from 19 the original layout concepts a little bit. Let me put it 20 bluntly. Are the layout drawings enforceable by the l 21 inspectors as if that was a commitment and that's the way it l 22 will be laid out?- or do you think it's just for information i 23 only? l 24 MR.- FOX: If-it's in tier 1. 25 MR. MICHELSON: There is not much in tier 1 of ! ANN RlLEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. l Court Reporters 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D. C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
221 1 layout. 2 MR. FOX: I was talking about the vessel. 3 MR. MICHELSON: I am thinking now of the layout l 4 drawing in tier 2 that says on this floor you're going to 5 find this pump in this corner and you're going to find an 6 air handling unit in this corner, and it turns out that when 7 you built the plant you put the pump in a different corner 8 and air handling in a different corner. Does that have to
~
9 be covered by a 50.59 change to that drawing? 10 MR. FOX: Yes. 11 MR. MICHELSON: A change would have to be 12 identified even to change something.on that layout? 13 MR.. FOX: Yes. 14 MR. MICHELSON: I wasn't sure, because one time we 15 talked about those being kind for information only and not 16 real, and now they are becoming real. The layouts are t j 17 becoming commitments? 18 MR. FOX: Yes. f 19 MR. MICHELSON: That's'what I wasn't sure of. l 20 MR. CATTON: What page are you on? ! 21 MR. MICHELSON: The-next one will be 3-61. Have ! 22 you got anything? 23 MR. CATTON: I have something on'3-63. 24 MR. MICHEL3ON: I don't have:anything on 3-61. 25 Next is 3-63. q 'O l ANN RlLEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. l l Court Reporters-1812 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 l Washington, D. C. 20006 l -(202)-293-3950-
222 5 1 MR. CATTON: I would just like to comment on the 2 flow induced vibration analysis. As near as I can tell, 3 flow induced vibration analysis you take the forcing 4 function from the fluid and then you just look at the . 5 structure. That's only one kind of instability you have to 6 look for. You shnuld also look for what's called fluid / 7 structural interactions. The resonant frequencies and so B forth of the structure are not what's important; it's the 9 interaction between the two; and you can just use a set of 10 forcing functions ta do that. 11 I think they are leaving out a part of the problem 12 and I would like somebody to comment or do something to 13 either eliminate it or address it. v) 14 MR. CHENG: Tom Cheng with NRR ECEB. 15 MR. CC' TON: Do you understand the difference? 16 MR. CHENG: I understand what your question is. 17 It is not only a part of dynamic force, but you consider the 18 interaction between the liquid and the structure itself. 19 MR. CATTON: That's correct. Right now I don't 20 have a detailed enough picture of the internals of the 21 reactor to make a comment as to whether it's important or 22 not, but any time you have flow passages and they are 23 parallel these things can occur. 24 Fluid elastic instability in steam generators is a 25 good example. The frequency of the vibration is unrelated ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Court Reporters 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D. C. 20006 (202) 293-3950-
l 223 4 1 to the lowest mode of the tubes. l 2 MR. CHENG: Based on our audit conducted last i-3 month, we questioned the flow intake and the structure 4 interaction. Since GE had not completed their analysis and 5 design yet, we plan te have an audit done in late January 4 6 1993. ! 7 MR. CATTON: I look forward to seeing it. As you 8 probably know, this kind of analysis is very difficult, and { 9 it's difficult because the people who usually practice the l 10 trade come frou the structure side and they don't understand 11 fluid mechanics at all. 12 MR. CHENG: I understand. 4 ) 13 MR. CATTON: And that's a problem. That's why an 14 experiment of some kind maybe will be necessary. 15 MS. HERZOG: I'm Mary Ann Herzog from General l 16 Electric. I know for the Japanese ABWRs they did perform a 17 fluid /ctructure interaction analysis specifically for the i 18 steam separators and maybe other components inside the f 19 reactor. It may be possible they haven-t finished all the i- ! 20 details,-but I'know they did look at that. -They looke6 at i 21 the frequencies of the structure as well as the' fluid. i 22 MR. CATTON: What is usually done by structural 23 people is they generate forcing functiora, and that's what i 24 the SER says, which is what caught my attention. They i l 25 generate forcing functions and apply them to the structure.1 ) l ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. 2 Court Reporters ] 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D. C. 20006 i
- - (202) 293-3950
4 224 1 That won't do it. What you have to do is look at the ( 2 interaction between the fluid and the structure.
- 3 MS, HERZOG: Right, and this has been done.
4 MR. CATTON: I know the Japanese are doing that 5 for their steam generators, and they are doing a very good 6 job. 7 MS. HERZOG: GE is doing it. I know we've done 8 some work in my own group. I know the person who has been 9 doing the work. i , 10 MR. CATTON: It should be no problem to address i 11 the question. I sounds like everybody is doing a good job. j 12 <
. 9t like to see it.
l 13 R. MICHELSON: You would like to see it
- 14 that they looked at it.
15 MR. CATTON: Something I could read. That's the 16 story of my life, 17 MR. CHENG: I would like to clarify your question f 18 again. You are concerned with the inside of the reactor? 19 MR. CATTON: I'm concerned in general about J 20 fluid / structural interaction. I'm interested in seeing more , 21 than just the usual eddy shedding and lower mode oscillation 22 kinds of things done. You want to look at the cases where 23 the fluid and the structure truly interact, if there are 24 some, and how the analysis was done.. It's a difficult 25- analysis. i . (V3 ANN RlLEY & A3OCIATES, Ltd. Coud Repoders 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D. C. 20006 (202) 293-3950 j
4 225 1 MR. CHENG: I understand. My answer to you is j 2 still valid. We will locsk at this. 3 MR. MICHELSON: Is your interest just normal-4 operation or are you interested in the accident conditions 5 as well? 6 MR. CATTON: My initial interest is normal 7 operation. We've had some examples of what happens when you j- 8 don't deal with these things, like Palo Verde. Somebody 9 should be doing some experiments. I gather that the l a 10 Japanese are for the ABWR. I would kind of like to see some 11 of the results of the experimental work or'how it's going to 12 be brought into this process. But more than just the normal 13 vibration analysis. 14 MR. CHENG: I understand what you are saying. 15 MR. MICHELSON: On page 3-75 we have a section z 16 3.9.6 dealing with in-service testing of punips and valves. 17 I Lave a feu clarifications I wanted to ask on that. 18 The first question deals with the HVAC system 19 valving. Those will be section 3 in many cases, if I 20 understand it correctly. And those will come under the same 21 kind of a program as we find in here for all other safety-22 related pumps and valves. It will be a part of the same 23 thing. 1 24 MR. FOX: Right. 25 MR. MICHELSON: Then there are some bullets here
- O ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd.
Court Reporters 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D. C. 20006 j (202) 293-3950
1
-l l
$ 226 1 of the kind of things that are going to be looked at. It i
'2 says check valve testing.should incorporate the use of 1 3 advanced non-intrusive techniques and so forth.
4 It's all well and. good to verify that you expect l S the valve to continue its operability, but my concern is how 6 about the initial testing of these valves to confirm that 7 they would function under their design basis conditions?
- 8 For instance, a check valve may be your dependency i 9 to isolate a. pipe break situation. A reverse flow through 10 the check isolates the break. How do you know these check 11 valves will handle that kind of reverse flow condition?
12 What kind of testing or analysis or whatever? Or do you 13 just buy one off the shelf and figure if it's a check valve 14 it will work? 15 MR. FOX: In-shop testing will of course be 16 different from in sit u testing, because you can't simulate a 17 break in a plant too well. 18 MR. MICHELSON: And you can't simulate it in shop 1 19 too well either. 20 The Staff has yet to ever come up with a generic 21' letter on check valves like they did on motor-operated 22 valves, so'we haven't had the opportunity yet to ask the 23 Staff what they are going to do about. check-valves that have 24 to isolate breaks just like we worried about motor-operated
'25 valves that had to isolate breaks. It's the same-kind of.a j .O ANN RILEY & - ASSOCIATES, Ltd.
Court Reporters 1812 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D. C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
i 227 1 problem. If it's depended upon to isolate, it undergoes a 2 very rapid redirection of flow, very fast closure, lots of i 3 impact, and so forth. The valve has to withstand that ! 4 impact. If it can't, then it cannot be counted upon. l 5 I don't find in here anywhere that sort of 6 consideration. Since I can't ask it on the generic letter 7 that hasn't been written,-I can ask it here on the design 8 that is being proposed. 9 I would ask that the Staff go back and for the 10 next meeting come up with their position on what they are 11 going to do about check valve qualification for the advanced 12 boiling water reactor, particularly the high loading cases i 13 such as isolation of a break. 14 On the last bullet in that same series of bullets 15 it says design should incorporate provisions to test motor-1 16 operated velves under design basis differential pressure. 17 of course the problem is only partly the differential 18 pressure. The probably in really what happens when I get 19 these dynamic flows that are several times normal through l 20 the valve and the valve tries to proceed to close. Where is 21 that going to be covered? Is there going to be any 22 demonstration of your choices? 23 MR. FOX: This is in sort of discussion phasa.. 24 It's going to be different than initial testing. 25 MR. MICHELSON:- Where will the initial testing be ANN RlLEY & - ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Court Reporters 1612 K. Street, N.W., . Suite 300 g Washington, D. C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
j 1 228 ) 1 covered? l 2 MR. FOX: That will be part of the design spec. l 3 MR. MICHELSON: I mean in the SAR. The requirment-a , ! 4 will have to be in the SAR. 5 MR. FOX: It should be somewhere in 3.9.6. Well, l 6 that's in for discussion. ! 7 MR. MICHELSON: We'll leavo that for next time. i 3 8 The next time I_would like to_ hear about two thinga. One is 1 i 9 what are we going to do about the_high loading _ cases for l 10 motor-operated valves to verify their- opera' tity? There we l 11 are in better shape because we've got some test information 12 already, although this is a new design. If you can show it j 13 just like the old one, that's fine. 14 The_other one is_ check valves, which I think is a i . . ] 16 new issue for high loading operability verification. i j 16 MR. COSTNER: We skipped over a couple of Jay's . 17 comments. i 18 MR. MICHEISON: I was-going to get back to it. j 19 -What Jay is referring to is page 3-67, the first
- 20 paragraph under 3.9.3.1. His comment
- is, shouldn't that be i
4 21 a part of a piping system DAC and not a COL action item. 22- Where does it'say it's a COL action item? 23 MR..COSTNER: The top of 68. 24 MR. MICHELSON:' Do you. track the question.okay? l_
~
25 MS..HERZOG: -Right now jn our latest revision of 3 j lO ANN RlLEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Court Reporters-
; 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 1 Washington,. D C. 20006 1
-(202) 293-3950- !
1 1 229 () 1 2 the piping ITAAC this item was specifically called out. I don't really think it's still a COL action ~ item. So 3 MR MICHELSON: Yes. It doesn't look like it 4 would have to be if it's in the ITAAC. 5 MR. POSIUSHY: It will be a one-time rather than a 6 repeated test. 7 MS. HERZOG: Right. 8 MR. POSLUSNY: We will write off on that. that 9 will be fine. 10 MR. MICHELSON: On page 3-79, in paragraph 11 3.9.6.2.3, at the end of the paragraph it indicates that the 12 development of an acceptable generic ITAAC for demonstrating 13 MOV capability le an open item. s) 14 Are you developing an ITAAC dealing with MOV? 15 MR. FOX: Yes. 16 MS. HERZOG: It wouldn't be part of the piping 17 ITAAC; it would be part of the system or equipment. I 18 MR. TERAO: We discussed with GE the need for 19 another generic ITAAC specifically dealing with MOVs and GE 20 said that they would consider it, but we haven't seen 21 anything yet. 22 MR. MICHELSON: That would be the place to address 23 the testing of MOVs, what would be needed or what kind of 24 demonstration would be needed. That ought to be expanded to l-- 25 be an ITAAC covering check valves as well as MOVs when you ANN RlLEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. COud RepOdent l 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 l Washington, D. C. 20006 l (202) 293-3950
.- . . . - . . . . -. - . . - - - - - = - - . . . -.
a
'l e
230 ~ () 1 2 pick up the check valve requirements, because there should be some. These check valves will have to have prescription l j 3 on how we are going to depend them. l l 4 MR. TERAO: In fact, we intended to address not 5 only check valves but solenoid valves as well. 6 MR. MICHELSON: I think for all isolation valves 7 there ought to be another way of doing it, whether they are 8 a check valve, a solenoid valve or a butterfly or'whatever 4 9 they are; motor, pneumatic, hydraulic; it me.kes no 10 difference. They have to be addressed. 11 On page 3-83 we are dealing with seismic and i 12 dynamic qualification of mechanical and electrical a 13 equipment. The firat paragraph at the top of page 3-83, i 14 the middle of that paragraph deals with the limiting . 15 stresses on components. It gets down to a sentence that t i 16 says, specifically, the average membrane stress resulting 17 from the above faulted condition service level D loads is 18 limited to 75 percent of the material yield stress. Maximum 19 membrane plus bending is limited to 110 of the yield. 20 I thought you couldn't use any of these kinds of 21 limits on active components, only on passive components. 4 j 22 You can't go to service level D on a motor-operated valve j 23 and expect it to work. Its pressure boundary will remain 24 intact but it will not necessarily go up and down when you 1 i 25 ask it to. () ANN RlLEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Court Reporters , 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 > Washington, D. C. 20006 .. (202) 293-3950
' ) 231 () 1 MS. HERZOG: operability limits. Excuse me. We also specify 2 We'll have to test and determine those. 3 MR. MICHELSON: That probably should have been in 4 here somewhere. You're dealing here only with nonoperable 5 cases where you would allow it to go to service level D. 6 MS. HERZOG: Usually you have the two limits, 7 operability or this limit, and operability _is always 8 governing which limit it is. 9 MR. MICHELSON: In the case of operability, it 10 depends on when you need the component. Clearly if the 11 earthquake occurs first and you need the component later, 12 you had better make sure that it's in operable condition 13 when you need it, make sure the earthquake hasn't twisted it 14 out of shape. 15 MS. HERZOG: Right. 16 MR. MICHELSON: If you need it before an 17 earthquake, it won't make any difference. You always need. 18 all of these components after the earthquake. I don't think 19 we ever know when the earthquake is going to occur. If a ' 20 component is needed for safe shutdown following an 21 earthquake, you cannot go to service level D. 22 MS. HERZOG: Right. 23 MR. MICHELSON: Why don't we just say that 24 somew'nere?- Maybe you have and I haven't found that explicit 25 a statement. Thic one here kind of' dances around some of O ANN RlLEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Coud RepOders 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D. C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
l 232 1 it. I couldn't quite pull out the words that say, man, if 2 it's got to be operable, you've got to stay within the B 3 limits. I think the B limits arc the usually accepted 4 limits. 5 MR. BRAMMER: This has been a position that the 6 Staff has had for years for operability. 7 MR. MICHELSON: For operability you are allowed 8 what limits? 9 MR. BRAMMER: To stay within the yields or close 10 to the yields. 11 MR. MICHELSON: Service level B? 12 MR. BRAMMER: Yes. It's somewhat hidden in 3.9.3 13 but it's not quantified. 14 MR. MICHELSON: I'm surprised it isn't in the 15 SSAR, because that's where it belongs. This document goes 16 away one day but the SSAR stays. 17 MR. BRAMhER: It's in the SSAR. That's where I 18 got it. 19 MR. MICHELSON: Where is the statement on active 20 components in here? 21 MR. BRAMMER: Section 3.9.3.2.1. There are three 22 sections. 23 MR. MICHELSON: If I got into those three 24 sections, I will find that you can only go to service level 25 B on active components? O ANN- RlLEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Court Reporters 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D. C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
b i .I 233 1 MR. BRAMMER: It won't say that exactly. It says-2 it limits it to the 75 percent of the yield. 3 MR. MICHELSON: That's service level D, if I 4 underntand your reference down here. , 5 MR. BRAMMER: We're saying that if it's subjected ! 6 to service level D loads, you cannot exceed cervice level B 7 limits. It's load versus limit. Is-that the confusion? 8 MR. MICHELSON: I was reading the sentence that i 9 says specifically the average membrane stress resulting from 10 the above faulted conditions (service level D), load is i 11 limited to 75 percent, and so forth. I'm saying that's fine 4 12 for nonactive components only. 13 MR. TERAO: 'I think that's what.it says, though.
- 14 It says if you subject a component to service level D 15 faulted conditions, you shouldn't exceed 75 percent of 3 16 yield, which is service level B.
I ! 17 MR. MICHELSON: You may be ri;ht. 18 MR. BRAMMER: Seventy-five percent is a very low 19 stress. That's actually less than the level B. 20 MR. MICHELSON: It says it's a maximum membrane of 21 110. Does B allow 110 on the membrane? 22 MR. TERAO: I can't remember exactly, but service j 23 level D is close to ultimate. 24 MR. MICHELSON: Yes. It's just about, ready to 25 break. 4 1
- . O V ANN RlLEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd.
Court Reporters 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D. C. 20006 3 (202) 293-3950 a . .. - .. .- - -
234 ; 1 MR. TERAO: Here we are keeping it down to the (x-)\ 2 yield. 3 MR. MICHELSON: I won't quarrel with your writing, 4 but it sure is confusing. It talks about " faulted 5 conditions (service level D)". I thought that was upset 6 conditions, not faulted. That's what we are talking about. 7 You've got to stay within the upset if it's an active 8 component, and here they are talking about faulted 9 conditions. This sentence may be all the problem is. 10 MR. BRAMMER: All we are say.ng is if-that 11 component is subjected to a fault condition that the 12 designer must limit the resulting stresses to equivalent to i 13 service level B, which is somewhat like 75 percent. (')\. (_ 14 MR. MICHELSON: Is that true for passive 15 components as well as active? 16 MR. BRAMMER: It's for any component that is 17 required for safe shutdown. I think we are using " active" 18 and " passive" in a different context. 19 MR. MICHELSON: Clearly a pipe is required for 20 safe shutdown, but I would probably stretch it under this 21 condition and it would still work fine. 22 MR. BRAMMER: This doesn't relate to pipe. It's 23 anly pamps and valves. 24 MR. MICHELSON: you don't consider pipes 25 mechanical equipment then. O v ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Coud Repoders 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washnigton, D. C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
i= ! 4 k 235 , 1 MR. BRAMMER: Wo say the piping can go to level Na 2 B. 3 MR. MICHELSON: I thought you did, yes. . 4 Mechanical equipment is not piping. 1 5 MR. BRAMMER: No, it's not. j 6 MS. HERZOG: One point of-clarification. I think 7 the statement on service level D is defining the loads you i 8 use. You calculate the combir'd service level D loads and j 9 then you show that that combined load is less than, say, 75 i 10 percent. 4 11 MR. MICHELSON: That finally got through my thick l 12 skull. What halted me then was, does that rule-spply to a
- 13 pipes as well ac valves?
14 MS. HERZOG: No, it doesn't apply to pipes. 15 MR. MICHELSON: But this is written like it
- 16 applies to everything, 17 MR. BRAMMER: This whole subject is only f 18 mechanical components. 1 j 19 MR. MICHELSON: Then I got into the argument of 20 what's a mechanical component. I always thought a pipe was f 21 a mechanical component.
22 MR. HERZOG: Active is typically something that 23 moves,-an active valve versus a passive valve.
- 24 MR. MICHELSON
- That I understand.
25 MR. TERAO: For piping we have a position now.
-ANN RlLEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd.
Coud Repoders 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 V 'shington,- D. C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
236 i () 1 2 Before we used to have functional capability limits for piping which restricted the service limit. At one time it l 3 used to be B and aen we raised it to level C for a while. 4 We have just accepted for ABWR service level D, and we are S about to issue NUREG-1367, which gives the basis for using 6 service level D to assure functional capability of piping. . 7 MR. MICHELSON: You have to show that the 8 distortion you get from going to D doesn't reflect back into 9 the r.ozzles of a valve, for instance, and bind it up. 10 MR. TERAO: This is only fcr the piping. 11 MR. MICHELSON: Yes, but the pipe is attached to a < . 12 valve. 13 MR. HERZOG: That applies to valve welds. You do 14 have to meet certain operability limits. l l 15 MR. MICHELSON: You have to stay within the limits j 16 of the nozzle loading on any valve. . 17 MR. HERZOG: Right. So then you are controlled by j 18 the nozzle. 1 19 MR. MICHELEON: Then you can let the thing go into 20 a pretzel if you want. 21 Well, I won't argue it further. i 22 on page 3-85 we get into section 3.11 dealing with
! 23 environmental qualification. 1[n that- first paragraph there 24 is a part of a sentence that talks about "must be 25 demonstrated to be capable of maintaining functional O ANN RlLEY & ASSOCIATES,1.td.
-Coud Reponers
, . 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D. C. 20006 (202) 293-3950-
d 237 1 operability under all service conditions postulated to occur ( l 2 during its installed life for the time it is required it is
, 3 to operate." I assume "all" means all accidents and any !
! .j i 4 other service. 1 5 The real clarification to me is wnat do we mean by 6 all service conditions. Does that mean pipe break, any 7 other kind of accidents, loss of power? 4 8 MR. WALKER: My name is Harold Walker froc the f 9 Staff. This statement is limited to design basis accident
- 10 conditions.
1_ MR. MICHELSON: Only design basis accidents? You 12 mean the Chapter 15 accidents? , 13 MR. WALKER: Correct. 14 MR. MICHELSON: What do you do about the others? 15 MR. WALKER: Section 3.11 is written specifically 16 for environmental qualification of equipment important to l [ 17 safety for a design basis accident.
- 18 MR. MICHELSON
- Yes, but now recognizing we can 19 have oth r kinds of accidents, do we have any environmental i
E 20 qualification requirements for other kinds of-accidents? 21 .4R . WALKER:. If you are talking about beyond 22 desir the answer -- l 23 MR. MICHELSON: No. A busted pipe is not beyond 24 design basis. That is a design basis to take a low' energy l
-25 or.a high energy pipe rupture. l l
- j'~'% l
<.V ANN RlLEY- & ASSOCIATES, Ltd.
Coud Reponers - 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 , Washington, D. C; 20006 j (202)-293-3950 l i
238 MR. WALKER: Thot ( 1 conditions are bounded by 2 design basis accident. 3 MR. MICHELSON: They aren't bounded by them, no. 4 Not at all. 5 MR. WALKER: Maybe I don't understand your 6 question. 7 MR. MICHELSON: I was going to ask it a little 8 different way. A reactor water cleanup pipe break. What 9 kind of environmental qualification requirement is there to 10 meet the effects of that break? There is some equipment 11 within the compartment that has to operate. The isolation 12 valves have-to close; the sensors have to detect the event, 13 and so forth. So we do some environmental qualification on 14 that equipment. Is that covered under this section, or if 15 not, where is it covered? 16 MR. WALKER: This section covers only the 17 equipment that is required to operate during the 18 environments that result from a design basis accident. It's 19 hard for me to imagine a pipe break that does not result-20 from-an-accident. 21 MR. MICHELSON: A pipe break is an accident. 22 MR. WALKER: That's correct. 23 MR. MICHELSON: But not necessarily a Chapter 15 24 event. The only ones outside of containment in Chapter.15 25 are main steam and feedwater. All other pipe breaks are O ANN: RlLEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Coud Reponers 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D. C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
t 239 1 covered under these Giambuso letters and that sort of thing. ( 2 But they are in the standard review plan as wcll. t 3 MR. CHENG: I believe that should be covered in i 4 this section. 5 MR. MICHELSON: I think it should be. I don't 4 6 know what GE's intent was. I was just going to look to see 7 what they said. Maybe you can tell me. Is that where you 8 cover all environmental qualification requirements, section l 9 3.11. 10- MR. FOT.: That's my understanding. That is within 11 design basis limits. 12 MR. MICHELSON: That's the key. How about other 13 accidents? What is your definition of design basis D h 14 accident? 15 MR. FOX: I certainly includes pipe breaks. 16 MR. MICHELSON: Some people say the design basis 17 accidents for nuclear power plants are those defined in 18 Chapter 15. These other breaks are not defined in Chapter 19 15. 20 MR.-FOX: There's a whole spietrum of breaks. 21 MR. MICHELSON: Pipe breaks outside of containment 22 other than main steam and feedwater aren't in Chapter 15. , 23 So you've got to define what you mean, and if you mean all 24 events' involving pipe breaks is. covered by this, that's-25 fine. .Then you have to go back and just make sure that's O ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Coun Repoders 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D. C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
~ _-.. _ - - . . _ - _ - - . - - - ._ - - . . ~ _ . _ _ _ - -.
4 ) 240 1 clear. 2 MR. WALKER: I can't tell if we answered your 3 question. I ~ 4 MR. MICHELEON: I didn't see the magic words 5 either way in the GE description, but.they claim they cover ~ 6 all pipe breaks, not just design basis chapter 15 type. l 7 MR. WALKER: Maybe I threw you off when I agreed
- 8 to Chapter 15. This is designed to cover all environmental
! 9 conditions that result from any pipe break. j 10 MR. MICHELSON: That's what I was hoping you would
- 11 say. So all service ccnditions mean all service conditions 12 resulting from the kinds of events that we normally 4
6 13 postulate, and that includes Chapter 15 and it also includes 14 a lot of other things. i 15 MR. WALKER: That's correct. i 16 MR. MICHELSON: It also includes fire and all 17 kinds of external events. Is that right? To the extent 1 ) 18 that you need environmental qualification for fire, for 1 19 instance, it would be covered by 3.11? 20 MR.-WALKER: That is correct. 21 MR. MICHELSON: In the middle of page 386 you make
- 22 'a statement that says that GE's approach for~nelecting and 4
23 identifying electrical equipment required to be 4 24 -environmentally qualified for the ABWR is acceptable. 25 That GE approach is what?- What GE approach are O ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd.
; Court Reporters-1612 K. Street, N.W., suite 300 Washington, D. C. 20006
- (202).293-3950-
241 (} 1 2 you talking about here? MR. WALKER: What we expect is for tnem to 3 identify the systems required for safe shutdown and the 4 components of those systems that are required to operate. 1 5 rollowing that, we expect that they will divide the 1 6 containment into zones, and finally, we expect them to 7 define the envitonmental conditions that will result from 8 the accident that we are concerned about. 9 MR. MICHELSON: That's the key. This approach 10 dealt with selecting and identifying. What 1 was really 11 wondering about was where did they identify what the 12 onvironment was going to be that they had to qualify for. 13 MR. WALKER: That is in Appendix 3-I, I believe. i 14 MR. MICHELSON: I looked at Appendix 3-I and there 15 wasn't much of anything in it. That's where the 5/10 of a 16 psi at the end of an hour. It was in the environmental 17 requirement for reactor water cleanup. I found that a 18 little bit hard to believe. 19 Maybe GE can help me out. Where are the 20 requirements? What kind of environments do you have to 21 qualify for? 22 MR. FOX: The requirements are all given in 23 Appendix 3-I. And we agree that half a psi was a little 24 low. 25 MR. MICHELSON: Lot's of table-of contents but no o) (
~
ANN RlLEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Coud Reponers 1812 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D. C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
. . ~ . . - ~ -- - .- - -_ - -. __ -- . . .-
l
- 242 l
1 contents.- ! 2 You're going to go back and look at these numbers 3 again before we talk about them, or do you think everything-4 but the 5/10 is okay? 5 MR. FOX: My understanding is that for various 6 reasons the pressure is too low. The other parameters are 7 fine. 8 MR. MICHELSON: All these temperatures are 9 correct? I guess the Staff looked at them and agreed that i j 10 these were the right environmantal conditions with the 11 exception maybe of the pressure. 12 MR. WALKER: We looked at them and we agree that 13 the environmental conditions are what we would typically A 14 expect. I 15 MR. MICHELSON: You didn't have any problem with 16 the pressure, say, in the reactor water cleanup compartment i 17 because all you have to do is qualify there for a half a psi
- 18 for an hour?
19 MR. BURTON: We noted'the discrepancy in the 20 pressure between what was in 3.11 and what we had as a ] l 21 result of this sub-compartment pressurization analysis. i
; 22 They should have been the same. Both GE and I know about
-23 that,-
1 24 MR. MICHELSON: The temperatures have co cone from 4 25 a different analysis, although in part they_can come because o ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Court Reporters 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D. C. t'.0006 { (202)= 293-3950
4 i 243 l () 1 2 you can take saturation conditions of these pressures and assume that's the temperature. I didn't find those' kind of i 3 temperatures in here either. But it's related to the 4 pressure problem. 5 Take another look at it. There is no use talking 9 i 6 about all your equirment being goalified if you haven't-7 ~ specified carefully what the qualification conditions have 8 to be, the temperature, the pressure,:and so forth. Take a-6 9 look and see if you really believe the numbers yt 've come
- 10 up with, i
11 MR. BURTON: Mr. Michelson, the numbers that are 12 in here are not wrong. I think the problem is-that the 13 numbers in EQ presumed proper operation of blowout panels if 14 you had a pressurization in a compartment. What was 15 appropriate was to assume failure of those and what would be i 16 the resulting pressurfeation. 17 MR. MICHELSON: So you think that in the case of 18 an accident it's not what the pressure and temperature is at l 19 the beginning of the accident but rather what it is an h;ur- ? 20 later? ) 21 MR. WALKER: No. That's not correct. 1 E 22 MR. BURTON: No. J 23 MR. MICHELSON: At the beginning of the accident I l 24 we've already-agreed the pressure goes up to around 5 pounds 25 for probably 30 seconds, a minute, a couple minutes,- , l 3 () ANN R! LEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. 4
' Coud Repoders 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D. C. 20006 (202)- 293-3950
244 (} 1 2 whatever. If you destroy the instrument with that 5 pounds pressure, there is no use talking about what it is after the 3 blowout panel blows out, which might be seconds or minutes 4 thereafter, or maybe never. 5 MR. BURTON: Correct. 6 MR. MICHELSON: You ve got to qualify the 7 component for the peak conditions that you get into when a 8 pipe breaks in that compartment. 9 MR. BURTON: We agree. 10 MR. MICHELSON: And it's more than a half a pound 11 and it's more than the temperature, which was probably a 12 pretty nominal number. It's going to get much hotter in 13 there than that. It's going to be at the blowdown b( j 14 saturation from that break. It will probably be 300 degrees 15 or so. Just look inside of containment. Same answer. This 16 is a pipe break inside of containment kind of situation and 17 in a much more confining space. So you are going to get , 18 some pretty high temperatures, certainly at saturation. Not 19 too far from it. You can calculate what the blowdown 20 temperature is. 21 MR. CATTON: Yes. 22 MR. MICHELSON: The comment I had on this whole 23 section through here is the environmental conditions that 24 are being used for qualification do not seem to be 25 co responding to those conditions that are developed by the O ANN RlLEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Coud Reponers 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D. C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
245 1 pipe break, and I think they have to be if that is what you ( 2 are designing for. 3 Page 3-90. Page 3-90 is still into that same 4 problem, really looking at the conditions of the pipe bresk 5 itself. In the middle of the page it talks about the 6 environmental conditions as shown in Appendix 3-I tables are 7 upper bound envelopes used to establish the environmental 8 design and qualification basis for safety-related equipment. 9 The upper bound envelopes indicate that the zone data 10 reflects the worst case expected environment produced by the il compendium of accident conditions. 12 It's just simply not true to say the worst case 13 are these big pipe ruptures on reactor water cicanup, for Am 14 instance, and the numbers and the tables simply don't 15 reflect a pipe rupture at all in those coh.partments. Those 16 are the numbers in the table. So they certainly aren't 17 upper bounds. They are hardly acceptable lower bounds even. 18 At the bottom of page 3-91 you conclude the tables 19 in Appendix 3-I are acceptable. I don't find them 20 acceptable at all. I think that's probably enough f Chapter 3. 22 Were there any other carry-on questions here? Does anybody 23 else have any Chapter 3 questions? 24 [No response.] 25 MR, MICHELSON: Let's take a break until 4:15. l l j (~)'\
\
1 ANN RlLEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. l Coun Reponers l 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 l Washington, D. C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
.. ._.._.-m _ . _ _ .m.
k 246 1 (Recess.] . 2 MR. - MICHELSON: Gentlemen, we are ready to start 3 on Chapter 6. 4 MR. POSLUSNY: Could I make a quick request? 5 MR. MICHELSON: Yes. I
- 6 MR. POSLUSNY: There are several people that won't l 7 be here tomorrow. So if we could do sections 6.4, 6.5.1, i
8 6.5.3, and 9.4, then we would take care of their review l 1 9 areas.
- 10 MR. MICHELSON
- All right.
11 We will take 6.4. 12 ER. POS LUSNY : Page 6-54. 13 MR. MICHELSON: It starts with control room
- 14 habitability systems. This part gets into the question I i 15 raised this morning. I guess the answer was you were going 16 to tell us later.
- 17 Starting on the top of page 6-56, my question
! 18 deals with this gap between the control building and the 19 turbine building. .If we should experience a main steam line-20 rupture, where does the steam go? Is there a gap there it 21 can go out, or is it all directed out into the turbine 22 building? There has got to be a' gap of some sort between 23 those-buildings. I asked it by phone and I got an answer 24 back of 6 meters. I don't believe that answer. 25 MR. FOX: -That's the answer. O ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Coud Reponers
. 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite . 300 Washington, D. C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
't 1 l 247 1 MR. MICHELSON: That's the answer the gap between ( _, - 2 the buildings is 6 meters. 3 MR. FOX: That's the question I heard and that's 4 the question I answered. 5 MR. MICHFLSON: The questien wasn't the gap 6 between the building; the gap between the reactor building 7 and the tunnel and the control building. 8 MR. FOX: That wasn't the question that was 9 presented to me. 10 MR. MICHELSON: The reactor building and control 11 building are 6 meters apart, but the main steam tunnel joins 12 together; it's one continuous thing, except it's got a joint 13 there. It has to because the building have to move. How 14 wide is that joint and what keeps the steam pressure in 15 instead of coming out through the crack? ) 16 I suspect the crack was filled with some kind of a 17 rubber or plastic boot or something. I don't know. But 18 that decides whether the steam comes pouring out, and the 19 air intakes are not too far away for the control room. I 20 just wanted to be sure that those control air intakes are 21 not inundated by steam pouring out of this chase. 22 So I think you've got some kind of'a seal. The < 23 key is when you experience the break, do you break seal as 24 well? If you do, then the steam comes out through the 25 seal. () ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Coud - Repoders 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 l Washington, D. C. 20006 i (202) 293-3950
l 248 1 It's true of the turbine building to control i 2 building joint. There is another one there. Same story, ! 3 except the air intaken are different air intakes. In fact, 4 think those are the ones that are closest to the control 5 room air intake. Botween the reactor building and control 6 building, in that gap is where the air intakes are for the i ! 7 control ventilation system. 8 That's the whole question. If he says they blow 9 out, look a little further and see what's the argument on 10 how that steam doesn't get over into the air intakes. I 11 think that takes care of that one.
- 12 If you've got a turbine fire, then maybe the smoke 13 comes back from the turbine building misses this. Again, I 14 hope the gap is good enough for that sort of condition. It 15 should be, but I just don't know. It depends on where the 16 turbine building fire is.
17 There are two habitability questions. One is the
- 18 steam; the other is any radioactivity coming out with that 19 big steam burst also gets into the air intakes.
20 Section 6.5.1. 21 MR. POSLUSNY: Page 6-58. ~ 22 MR. MICHELSON: Does anybody have a question on } 23 6.5.17 That's the engineered safety feature atmosphere 24 cleanup system. 25 Section 6.5.3 is fission product control. O ANN RILEY &' ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Court Reporters 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300
;- Washington, D. C. 20006 ; (202) 293-3950
1 S-
, 249
() 1 2 And 9.4. All of 9.47 MR. POSLUSNY: Yes. 3- MR. MICHELSON: Section 9.4 is heating, 4 ventilating and air conditioning systens. 5 MR. CATTON: I thought we had been haumering on
- 6 that most of-the day.
- 7 MR. MICHELSON
- We had, but this is where they 8 describe the systems, and 9.4 is fairly long. Okay. We'll 9 hit 9.4 next.
10 One of the first questions in here was GE makes 11 extensive use of reverse flow dampers and they are being 12 counted upon to take care of protecting certain fans and 13 other considerations. 14 I find nothing in the SSAR as to testing of these 15 dampers, confirming operability during life since normally 16 there isn't any reverse flow, and ability to withstand the t ! 17 more adverse conditions like a pipe break in a room 18 impacting these reverse flow dampers with this big deluge of i 19 effluent. Do the dampers get wiped out? It' depends on how 20 good they are. They're going to see a few pounds delta P, i 21 which they never dreamed of in air handling systems. 22 That was the question: What are we going to do 23 about testing of_ reverse flow dampers? 24 I had already raised the question of the isolation l 25 valves on ventilation systems, how you test those and how do
- () ANN RlLEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd.
; Court Reporters 1612 K. Street, N.W., ' Suite 300 Washington, D. C. 20006 e (202) 293-3950
250 () 1 2 you qualify those. Again, the same problem. reverse flow might wipe out the isolation valves if they This big 3 areti dt designed for thau condition, but these are 4 ventilation dampers now. These are not these water valves. 5 The heating and ventilation requires extensive 6 ducting. I don't really find good words about the seismic 7 qualification of the ductitig. Is there someplace where 8 ducting has been defined well as to requirements and then 9 analyzed or eval 11ated by Staff? 10 MR. RAVAL: We looked at 3.2-1, which talks about 11 the seismic capability and the quality assurance 12 requirement. We took it literally that's what they are 13 rnying is supposed to be seismically qualified. 14 MR. MICHELSON: The assumption is that's all that. ) 15 needs to be said? 16 MR. RAVAL: Yes. 17 KR. NICHELSON: The ducting itself doesn't come 18 under normal codes. I'u sure there are manufacturing codes 19 that cover ducting. 20 MR. ,tAVAL: There is SMACMA; there are some other 21 codes. 22 MR. MICHELSON: In there a code that you can refer 23 to for ducting that if you cullow the code you will get a-24 sufficiently acceptable-component that it can withstand'the g 25 seismic category I events that we are talking about? Can O ANN RlLEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Coud Repoders 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington. D. C. 20006 (20E; W3950
251 () 1 2 you just refer to a code and get everything you neoG7 MR. RAVAL: You can refer to the SMACMA. That's 3 industry standard that they have put into the quality 4 assurance requirement designed for Bechtel, and I have 5 verified for several p.. ante is acceptable. 6 MR. MICHELSON: Are those ventilation codos? 7 MR. R* VAL: It's not ventilation codes; it's S equipment codos, red it's also for the ducting too. 9 MR. MICHELSON: Clearly we can't to sectior 3, iv because it doesn't cover any of this. So we go to something 11 else as a prescription for ducting if built to that code 12 would be seismically qualified. 13 MR. RAVAL: You have a quality assurance 14 requirement. 15 MR. MICHELSON: Quality assurance doesn't mean 16 anything. You've got to design it adequately to begin with. 17 If you want to call that QA, then I guesn it's quality 18 assurance. J '- MR. RAVAL: The only thing we have is the industry 20 standards, SMACMA. 21 MR. MICHELSON: These are the heating and 22 ventilicing standards? 23 MR. RAVAL: Yes. 1 24 MR. MICHELFON: Do those address seismic issuoc? 25 MR. RAVAL: Some are addressed, but not O ('~' > ANN RlLEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Coud RepOders . 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 l Washington, D. C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
7______._______. 1 l { 252 1 specifically like ASME-3. 2 MR. MICHELSON: How do I know they're any good 4 3 then? Have you looked at these codes and said, yai , if 4 these components are built to this code, it is seismicallj i i 5 qualified? 6 MR. RAVAL: The only way I can say that is through , j 7 the experience I have, the plant verifications. 8 MR. MICHELSON: You mean whero people have shaken 9 plants the ducting didn't come down? Is that what you mean? i' 10 MR. RAVAL: Yes. , 11 MR. MUNSON: Mr. Chairman, SMACMA, Sh6et Metal 12 Contractors Association, has developed an extensive standard i ! 13 with many volumes relating to specific issues that equipment , 14 and sheet metal must be designed to to meet their 15 requirements. They have had a lot of difficulty in the 16 contractors associatiost with lawsuits and what not because 17 they didn't have an adequate standat1. So they have gone to 18 great expense to develop very specific duct construction 4 19 details, including thickness of materials, size of rivets, 20 sheet metal cerew, hanger support. 21 MR. MICHELSON: Are these directed towards seismic 22 qualification? 23 MR. MU?'70N : They have a special volume on seismic 24 and what the duct has to do and the analysis _for it. 25 MR. MICHELSON: Such that if you carried out that O ANN RlLEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Court Reporters-1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 - Washington, D. C. 20006 (202)' 293 4950-
. - . ~ . - _ - . - . _ _ - . - - . _ - . = . - - . .
253 j k i
; 1 procedure it would result in a ducting system that would be i 2 seismically qualificed? It would cover the hanging of it and !
3 the fabrication of it, the whole thing? 4 MR. MUNSON: That's right. j 5 MR. MICIIELSON: I'm not at all familiar with this, i 6 Anything you say I'll believe. 1 !, 7 MR. CATTON: Carl, I don't believe that. , 8 MR. MUNSON: They don't use the categories that . 9 we're familiar with, so it's-just on the basis of the 10 seismic loads. i 11 MR. MICHELSON: I've often wondered why we think 12 ducting is seismically qualified, and you're saying that if i 13 you went to this code you'd get a lot of good guidance on 14 making something that will result in a seismically qualified , 15 ducting system. 16 MR. MUNSON: That's correct. 17 MR. MICHELSON: What is that again? What is that 18 acronym? 19 MR. MUNSON: SMACMA. 20 MR. MICHELSON: Do you know which volume deals 21 with the seisnic? 22 MR. MUNSON: No,.because they have so many of 23 them. 'They have a big list you can get. They are fairly. l 24 expensive. You could spend $150 or more getting the 25 volumes. They have made a big investment to come up with I O ANN RlLEY-& ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Court Reporters 1612 -K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D. C. 20006 (202) 293 3950
- 254 a
1 standards. 2 MR. MICilELSON: I'm not impressed by the cost. 3 We're talking about the protection of safety-related
- 4 cquipment, including this equipment, which is in many cases i
5 safety-related. The cost of the ntandard has nothing to do 6 with it. The goodness of the standard has got a lot to do ) 7 with it. And I'm not getting a warm feeling that you think 8 thin is really good standards necessarily either. 9 MR. MUNSON: They started out with one volume and 10 now they have about 20 volumes, and they are very. detailed. 11 MR. MICHELSON: I don't know if the Committee has 12 ever looked at seismic qualification of heating and 13 ventilation system equipment, but it would be something 14 somebody ought to look at sotnetime. I don't recall that 15 anybody has ever done that. 16 MR. SHEWON: Ask Bill Lindblad sometime. 17 MR. MICHELSON: We'll sic him on it. ' 18 Tor now I'll just take your word it's good stuff 19 and that's how it's done and we'll see what we come up with. 20 MR. SHEWMON: He said he would believe you. He 21 just didn't say how long he would believe you. 22 MR. CATTON: He's already having reservations. 23 MR. MICHELSON: I know absolutely nothing about it 24 - except I kind of have a feeling for what has to be done, and 25 how it's done, I don't know. I've been acquainted with n U ANN RlLEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. . Court Reporters 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D. C. 20006 (202) 293 3950
i i f 255 1 heating and ventilating people in the past, and it has not 2 been a good acquaintance. They oftentimes really don't know 3 what they are doing either. i
- 4 MR. COSTNER
- That was just a particular group of a
5 them that you and I knew. l 6 MR. MICHELSON: It could be, but it sure wasn't a 7 good experience. Although towards the end they got a lot 8 sharper, after they found out what the real problem was. . 9 The heating and ventilating equipment for the 10 control room and elsewhere. In so.me cases we are using 11 electrical coils for tne heating. In other cases we 12 apparently are.using the auxiliary boiler for heating. 13 5R. MUNSON: Not for safety systems. 14 MR. MICHELSON: No, but for non-safety systems. I 15 believe the one in question is the secondary containment 16 ventilation system uses a building boiler. 17 One of the accidents of concern would be a rupture 18 of the tubing in the heating coil now being fed-by the 1 19 building boiler. 20 MR. MILLER: May I interrupt, please. 21 MR. MICHELSON: Yes. 22 MR. MILLER: The diagram that was on the board 23 .this morning showed that HFH system, which is the hot water 24 heating system, is not steam. 25 MR. MICHELSON: It's hot water. O ANN RlLEY & ASSOCIATEJ, Ltd. Court Reporters 1612 K. Street,- N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D. C. 20006 (202) 293 3950
l 256 1 MR. MILLER: It's not water but not steam 2 HR. MICHELSON: I assume that's at 100 pounds 3 pressure or something like that. 4 HR. MILLER: Maybe even a little lower than that. l 5 MR. MICHELSON: When you break the tube, you're
, 6 talking about steam. It flashes. Part of the water remains 7 liquid and part of it changes to vapor as it comes out of 8 the hole because it's pressurized.
9 MR. DAVIS: It's got to be above boiling point. 10 MR. MICHELSON: Ivan can tEll you the ratio. 11 MR. MILLER: The head on that system is very low. 12 It's only 60 feet or something like that. 13 MR. MICHELSON: But what's the pressure? 14 MR. MILLER: Sixty feet. 15 MR. MICHELSON: It's got to be a little more than 16 that. 17 MR. MILLER: They share the same surge tank as the 18 turbine closed cooling water system or the HVAC normal
- 19 chilled water system.
20 MR. MICl!ELSON: And how do you heat it, pull it 21 through the auxiliary boiler? 22 MR. MILLER: It could be heated by the auxiliary 23 boiler. 24 MR. DAVIS: How hot is the water? 25 MR. MILLER: 180 Fahrenheit, or something like n ANP, RlLEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Court Reporters 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D. C. 20006 (202) 293 3950
257 1 that. 2 MR. DAVIS: So it won't boil. l 3 MR. MILLER: It's just like the hot water in your 4 own home. 5 MR. CATTON: It will steam a lot. l 6 MR. MICHELSON: Yes, it will steam a lot. 7 MR. DAVIS: You're going to get some vapor, but it 8 won't flash. 9 MR. MICHELSON: I thought it was going to be steam 10 heated coil. 1 11 MR. MILLER: No. i 12 MR. MICHELSON: Then I'll withdraw the questien. 13 I notice, and it's just a mistake, but your figure 14 9.4-3 in the SAR is still marked "preprietary." I don't 15 think you mean that, do you? Amendment 22 still has 16 " proprietary," but I think it just slipped through your 17 amendment process. This figure right here, 9.4-3, secondary 18 containment HVAC. 19 MR. FOX That will be changed. It was taken off 20 the top. , 21 MR. MICHELSON: Oh, and they forgot to take it off ( 22 the bottoir?. 23 MR. FOX: Yes. It's not proprietary. 24 MR. MICHELSON: Where can I find out how big ducts ! 25 are? All these ventilation ducts, you've got P&ID of these O ANN RlLEY & - ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Court Reporters 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D. C. 20006 l (202) 293-3950' _ . ~ . _ _ . _...-_ _ _- _ _ ._ _ - _ _ _ . _ . . . _ ._ ..-_-- -
i j i 258 1 and so forth. I can't tell whether it's a 6-inch square { 2 duct or 6 meters square. i' 3 MR. MUNSON: We don't have it in the SAR at this l 4 time. 5 MR. MICHELSON: To do a safety evaluation you are 6 gong to have to know whether you are dealing with a big hole 7 in a room or a little hole in a room when you talk about l 8 break in the pips and where all the steam and everything 9 goes to. I don't know how the other gentleman will do his 10 blovdown and pressurization analyses if he doesn't know the 11 size of the ducts. 12 Is this a Japanese design? Can you go back to it 13 and pick up the duct sizes? 14 MR.- MUNSON: We could, but their sizes are bigger 15 than ours because they didn't use as many supplementary 16 coolers as we did. 17 MR. h1CHELSON: They're moving more air along. i 18 MR. MUNSON: Yes. 19 MR. MICHELSON: At any right, without knowing some 20 '*e.Ts, it's pretty hard to knov how important the - 21 scy containment /HVAC system interconnection is. There 22 ;-no way to know. These could be extremely large ducts. I 23 just don't know. 24 MR. FOX?. We'll get you that. ._ 25 MR. MICHELSON: I think you'll need to get it O ANN RlLEY'& ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Court Reporters 1812 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D. C. 20006 > (202) 293 3950
- . . _ . ~- .. _~ -__ - - . - - . . . . - - - - - - - . - -
259 1 yourself when you do the calculation. 2 MR. fox: Yes. 3 l'R. MICHELSON: The same argument goes for the 4 valving in it too. I don't know if these butterfly valven 5 are 30-inch or 300-inch butterflies. I have no idea. 6 That also affects the safety and the likelihood of 7 them operating under these blowdown conditions and all that 8 sort of thing. Air handling valves don't like to have large 9 differential pressures. The operators aren't sized for it. 10 I find no recognition that these operators are going to have 11 to be very large to take care of the pressurization in the 12 room going back through the ventilation system. If you are 13 using them for isolation, you've got to show you've got 14 enough of an operator to get the valve closed. I find none 15 of that. I didn't find the Staff caring either. 16 MR. CATTON: They will now. 17 MR. MICHELLON: I didn't find it in tne alkalysis. 18 I will be happy to stand corrected if you can tell me where 19 it is. 20 I have some problems with this smoke removal mode, 21 but I would rather just cover that when we get to fire 22 protection later. 23 one thing you are going to have to be very careful , 24 of. If you are going to isolate certain inlets and just run 25 the exhaust, you've got to make sure the motors are big n l ANNRILEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Court Reporters 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D. C. 20006
-(202) 293 3950
260 () 1 2 enough to take that extra load, because when you try to pull a vacuum, so to speak, on a room the motor loads go way up. 3 You've got to make sure you've got plenty of air corning in, 4 and if you shut the air coming in off, you've got to also 5 shut the exhaust fans off or you everload the motors. 6 There was an LER just 3 few weeks ago in which 7 somebody did this inadvert<mtly and burned out the motors on 8 the fans. So it is a real problem. 9 MR. MUNSON: Mr. Chairman, I would like to object 10 to your conclusion. 11 MR. MICHELSON: Okay. 12 MR. MUNSON: The horsepower on a blower is il proportional to both the CFM and the static pressure. When 14 the static pressure goes up, the CFM goes down, 15 MR. MICHELSON: The static pressure on which side? 16 MR. MUNSON: That's the resistance in the duct 17 system. There's a suction pressure and there's a discharge a- 18 pressure. 19 MR. MICHELSON: These are the exhaust fans you are 20 talking about? 21 MR. MUNSON: Any k.ind of fan you want to talk 22 about. 23 MR. MICHELSON: All right. Go.abead. 24 MR. MUNSON:= When you decrease the Cn! that's 25 flowing because the pressure went up, meaning that the fan 9 ANN RlLEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Coud RepOders 1612 K. - Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D. C. 20006 (202) 293 3950
261 1 f~) s-I had to back up its curve so the CFM goes down, the i horsepower also goes down. 3 MR. MICHELSON: Not necessarily. 4 MR. MUNSON: You may be talking about a positive 5 displacement type of thing, but not for a requiar fan. You 6 take your vacuum cleaner at home and stop the inlet up and 7 the motor starts speeding up higher. It's because there is 8 less of a load on that particular type of motor. 9 MR. MICHELSON: It does sound reasoriable, but 10 tnat's not what happened in this LER. 11 MR. MUNSON: ' lou can look at the curves. I can 12 give you a curve and you can see how thi horsepower changes. 13 HR. CATTON: But Carl is talking about an actual ( 14 incident. So either you are not understanding each other cr 15 -- 16 MR. MUNSON They probably changed the density on 17 the system or something. 18 MR. CATTON: The density of the air? 19 MR. MUNSON: Yes. 20 MR. CATTON: If you close one end, it certainly is 21 going to change the density. 22 MR. MUNSON: It's going to get lighter. 23 MR. CATTON: It's going to get lighter. 24 MR. MUNSON: So then the horsepower goes down. 25 MR. C.iTTON : And the pressure drop is going to go (~ (_)) ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. COud R- .ers 1612 K. Street, itW . Suite 300 Washington, D. C. 20006 (202) 293 3950
262 1 up across the fan. 2 MR. MUNSON: Right. But the pressure drop 3 relative to the change in the CFM is very minor, so 4 therefore the impact is a much lower horsepower. 5 MR. MICHELSON: I811 go back and look at that LER 6 again, but it did burn out the motors. What they did is i 7 they isolated the inlet side and didn't trip the fans 8 exhausting the room and it overloaded the motors. 9 MR. MUNSON: It really should not have. I'm 10 surprised at that. 11 MR. MICHELSON: It does sound like it is open to 12 question. I didn't think that deeply about it, and you 13 probably are right. 14 MR. DAVIS: Maybe it didn't get cooling when the 15 flow went down. 16 MR. MICHELSON: No. These were air cooled motors, i 17 but that shouldn't have burned them out. They were still i j -18 moving some air.- They were-just trying to suck the air- ) 19 under doors and that sort of the thing. The pressure t 20 undoubtedly went-quite a ways down. 21 MR. MUNSON: I really think that when you do shut ! 22 'off a damper likei tt id the fan backs up on its pressure ! 23 curve, then you have to have the duct designed so it doesn't - i l 24 collapse. 25 MR. MICHELSON: The other issues that was raised LO
- ANN .mLEY- & ASSOCIATES, Ltu. -
l Court Reporters 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D. C. 20006
.(202) 293 3950_-
1 i )~ j 263 () 2 1 just a moment ago is a very important one, and that is if you break a pipe in the room and get a lot of steam in the l i 3 room, the load on that fan goes way up. That's something
. 4 that you have to look at as well. The density of the fluid 1
5 goes way up.
- 6 MR. CATTON
- Only if it's two phase. Steam is
- 7 lighter than air.
8 MR. MICHELSON: It's not pure steam. 9 MR. CATTON: If you get water in there, that's i } 10 different. 11 MR. MICHELSON: That's what it is, condensing l 4 . 12 vater droplets. It's a steam cloud. 13 MR. CATTON: Saturated. 14 MR. MICHELSON: Yes. It's condensing. That does l 15 load the fan. But this other I hadn't thought about. I i 16 just read the LER, and said, yes, that sounds reasonable, ! 17 but I was working too fast. I 18 MR. MONSON: I think it's a very common 19 conclusion. i
- 20 MR. MICHELSON: So there is no problem isolating a l
- 21 room and just exhausting it.
22 MP. MUNSON: Exactly.
- 23 MR. MICHELSON
- . I'll Jook into that.
f 24 MR. CATTON:. My vacuum cleaner really' grumbles , 75 when I-plug it up. i-
- (^)
L ANN HILEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Court Reporters 2
.1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 Wsshington, D. C. 20006 (202) 293 3950.
264 1 MR. MICHELSON: No, it speeds up because it gets 2 unloaded. 3 MR. CATTON: I'm not very careful about these 4 things. 5 MR. MICHELSON: You're quite right. Let me go 6 back and look at that LER again. I'll sic comebody on it to 7 find out why that happened. Maybe it's an unrelated event. 8 The LER made quito a point of it, and I thought it was an 9 interesting point, except it may be wrong. l 10 So we won't worry about isolation. 11 MR. CATTON: Not yet. You're not going to drop 12 it. 13 MR. MICHELSON: No. I'm going to go back and 14 check it out. Then the smoke removal mode would work all 15 right if you try to do that kind of maneuvering, because 16 there you're trying to create a negative pressure in thu 17 room and a positive pressure in the other rooms. 18 MR. MUl4 SON: The smoke removal basically is a 19 pressurizing system to pressurize the rooms without the 20 emoke and concentrate the release from the room with-the 21 smoke. There you have two different systems. The secondary 22 containment system is operated slightly different than the i 23 other system. 24- MR. MICHELSON: But to'do the smoke removal, I 25 understand you have to do some kind of throttling of the O ANN RlLEY .&' ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Court- Reporters 1612 K. _ Street, N.W., Suite - 300 ' Washington, D.' O. 20006 (202) 293 3950
i i l 265 1 1 individual supply valves. We'll get 4.nto that when we get I 2 to the fire protection. ! I 3 On page 9-57, its section 9.4.1.2 it talks about 4 the essential electrical and reactor building cooling water 2 5 equipment HVAC system. In there it includes the battery 6 rooms in the same system that handles a number of other 7 rooms, which includes the chiller room and some pump rooms 8 and so forth. 9 Is it a good idea to mix the air from a batter 10 room with the air from all these o:her rooms? 'I always 11 thought that battery rooms are kind of a separate 12 ventilation system and go directly to the outside and all 13 the other things concerning possible hydrogen presence. 14 Here you're combining them back into your normal ventilation 15 system. I questioned if that was okay, and I guess the l 16 Staff has looked at it and decided it is okay. 17 MR. MUNSON: We don't recirculate any air from any 18 battery room, to my knowledge. 19 MR. MICHELSON: No, but you do mix the air from' 20 the battery rooms with all the other air.- 21 MR. MUNSON: No. That would be a recirculation if 22 we did that.
-23 MR. MICHELSON: In the process of exhausting you 24 bring them back together because they've got common ducts.
25 MR. MUNSON: Yes, but the oxhaust is not coming O ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Court Reporters 1612 K. Streat, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D. C. 20006 (20.c) 293 3950
~ 266 1 back to the rooms. 2 MR. MICHELEON: That's true. The exhaust does not 3 come back to the rooms. The only question was, is it okay 4 to exhaust back into a common duct system? 5 MR. !THSON: I would think that's all right as 6 long as that system doesn't recirculate. 7 MR. MICHELSON: The battery rooms I've been used 8 to looking at HVAC systems on always had directly out to the 9 atmosphere separate duct and everything, directly through 10 the roof or wherever. 1 said maybe this is okay. 11 I just wonder if somebody has really looked at it. 12 You've looked at it and you're satisfied it's okay. I just 4 13 wondered if the Staff has drawn the same conclusion. And I 14 had no drawings to go to see how the battery rooms and what 15 all was rajoined with them. 16 MR. SHEWMON: What is the concern? 17 MR. MICHELSON: Hydrogen. 18 MR. SHEWMON: Yes, but you are pumping air and 19 hydrogen out of the battery room. You are going to dilute 20 it more. You only get into problems if you've got pure 21 hydrogen which won't combust and then come back. I don't 22 see where there is a problem.
"23 MR. MICHELSON: Then I would wonder why in other 24 people's plants in the past they have been putting in these 25 separate exhausts for the battery rooms.
(m) ANN RlLEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Court Reporters 1612 K. Street. N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D. C. 200rA (202) 293 3950
i I }
- )
i 267 1 MR. CATTore: Do you do anything special in the j 2 battery room to 1:hape the ceilings and so forth? 1
- 3 MR. MUNSON
- The thing is that you want to exhaust 1
l l 4 up at he highest part of the room but you want to have : } j 5 enough movement of air that you get the dilution of the ] i i
- 6 hydrogen during the charging process, and you want to be ;
I ] 7 sure that the room is more negative than the surrounding 1 l 8 area so you don't migrate the hydrogen to some other area. j j 9 MR. CATTONt Do you actually cove it a little bit } 10 or anything, or is it just flat ceilings? 11 MR. MUNSON: That's sort of a final design detail. I l f
- 12 MR. MICHELSON
- There is no requirement to do it.
i l 13 The only reason I raised it, Paul, W.s it didn't 34 seem to be conventional practice, at least at some plants ; 15 that I've seen. I've soen more than one in this regard. j 16 Here they are bringing it back in a common duct, and I was 17 just wondered if that was okay. I just don't know. 18 MR. CATTON: Are there any NRC requirements in the i ! 19 battery L.om? 20 MR. MICHELSON: That's a good = question. 21 MR. CATTONt If you have a big beam that goes l 1 22 across the top and you havo the exhaust duct w one side, 3
- 23 you can put hydrogen in the top on the other side. Is there 3
24 anything.that you look for to make sure that those sorts of i { 25 things don't happen? I would worry more about that than-the
- ~O ANN RlLEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd.
Court Reporters 1612 K. Street, N.W., Su4e 300 , Washington, D. C. 2WO6 (202) 203 3950
_ _ . . - - _ . - . _ - _ . - - . . - . ~ . . . - - - - - _ - . . _ - . - . - _ . - - - s 268 1 mixing of the hydrogen. 2 MR. MICHELSON: I think the mixing is the problem 3 you get into if you lose offsite power or whatever and you 4 shut you this thing down, or if you isolate it for whatever 5 reason and shut it down. Now you've got that hydrogen still 6 in this ducting system, and it does tend to separate itself 7 out. 8 MR. CATTON: What you don't want to do is to trap 9 it-in the top of the room due to something overt like the , 10 exhaust duct is over here and there is a girder in the 11 middle and you've got on this side the collection of 12 hydrogen. 13 MR. WYLIE: I suspect it's pretty small. 14 MR. MICHELSON: Don't know. I didn't want to make 15 a big issue out of it. I just wondered if the Staff had 16 looked at it. 17 MR. CATTON: The ceilings ure flat in these rooms? 18 If they are flat, there is no problem. 19 MR. DAVIS: All of them I've seen have been flat. 20 MR. WYLIE: Maybe the Staff could take a look at 21 it. 22 !!R . RAVAL: We will look into it. 23 MR. CATTOli: When I asked EPRI about chis, they 24 said somewhere they would have requirements of that type-so 25 that wherever you are, if there is any hydrogen or anything, ANN RlLEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Court Reporters 1612 K.- Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D. C. 20006
-(202) 293-3950
-~_ . _ . .
269 1 it would be directed to go where you want it to go. 2 MR. MICHELSON: When I read this I began to 3 realize how much hydrogen we are talking about. It says on 4 page 9-58 each system is designed to maintain hydrogen below 5 2 percent by volume in the battery rooms. That's a pretty 6 high percent by volume in the air that is being handled.
'/ MR. CATTON: It's well below the combustion limit.
8 MR. DAVIS: Yes. Combustion is 4. 9 MR. MICHELSON: I just wondered about the 10 propriety of taking that and mixing it back with other air 11 which could on occasion become stagnant again, i 12 MR. CATTON: Lots of strange things can happen. j 13 If you have this battery generating hydrogen and it's near a 14 all, the hydrogen will run up the wall and collect on the j 15 ceiling and won't get mixed very much. ! 16 MR. MICHELSON: Then we need to see requirements 17 on the design of battery rooms and their ventilation, i 18 MR. CATTON: I think so. 19 MR. MICHELSON: I didn't see those. I don't know { . 20 if those exist or not. ! 21 Is there any special requirement at all on battery l 22 room ventilation in the SSAR? i 23 MR. MUNSON: Not other than to maineain it at less-24 than 2 percent. 25 MR. MICHELSON: That is the requirement.
- O
- ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd.
Court Reporters 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite ~ 300 i Washington, D. C. 20006 L (202) 293 3950
} i l j 270 j 1 MR. WYLIE: I suspect there is an IEEE standard ' 1 ! 2 that says you've got to ventilate them. j ! l 3 MR. MICHELSON: I would saspect so. 4 MR. SHEWMON: This 2 percent is what people 5 measure some places? How do you check out meeting the 2 i j 6 percent? ! 7 MR. MUNSON: They have combustible gas detectors 8 that can measure it. They do that a lot in electronic 9 firms. They use a lot of hydrogen. ; 10 MR. SHEWMON: And they might well put near the 1 l j 11 ceiling when they run their check. 12 MR. MUNSON: -Yes. They bring a portable unit in. . I 13 MR. SHEWMON: Even if it does burn, (a) you'll 14 probably hear about and (b) it would be up on the ceiling, i 15 and that doesn't bother you except it gets you excited. , ,! 16 MR. CATTON: Most things are like that. You 17 eventually will hear about them. l j 18 MR. MICHELSON: There are such. things as-doing it i 19 right the first time.
- 20 MR.-SHEWMON
- Yes, but the question is_whether or i
! 21 not it's concern or a risk to the public. In my piece it- ! 22 says it's not a' risk'to the public because we haven't even [ 23 heard of the precursors in 20--yee s. 1 . 24 MR. MICHELSON_: Never heard of_ battery room 5 , 25 ignitions?- L !O
- ANN RlLEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd.
j Court Reporters - L 1612 K.- Street, N.W., . Suite 300 [ Washington,- D. C. 20006 l (202) 293-3950:
271 1 HR. SHEWMON: Not up in the ceiling, no. 2 MR. MICHELSON: You've never heard of one? 3 MR. WYLIE: I haven't. 4 MR. MICHELSON: I've seen movies on battery rooms 5 where there were not only ignitions, but they proceeded to 6 burn. 7 MR. WYLIE At a power plant? 8 MR. MICHELSON: No. It was at a military 9 installation. 10 M.R . DAVIS: That's still not a public safety 11 problem. 12 MR. CATTON: If it's military, nobody cares. 13 MR. WYLIE: You only get nobel gases when ycu . 14 overcharge these things. 15 MR. SHEWMON: And that's not good practice. < 16 MR. WYLIE: You just periodically run an 17 equalizing charge in the batteries. But they2re stil) 18 ventilated. 19 MR. MICHELSON: The main steam and feedwater 20 tunnel have this HVAC system that we talked about earlier. 21 The only question in my mind is if you have an isolation or 22 if you have a failure of that system because the power fails 23 to the system, you get a fairly rapid heating in that tunnel 24 because it's got an awful lot of hot water and steam stored 25 in it. O ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd.
, Coud Reportero 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 , Washington, D. C. 20006 !'
(202) 293 3950
t t ) 272 1 Is it so arranged now that RCIC is isolated on 2 that heating, thinking it's a RCIC pipe break? What kind of
; 3 break arrangements do you have on RCICs to decide when to !
4 4.solate RCIC?
$ MR. MUNSON: I knew that you have this high
) 1 l 6 temperature actuation, j 7 MR. MICHELSON: That's from temperatures in the l 8 steam tunnel as well as where else the pipe goes, isn't it? l 9 And if it is, how do you differentiate between a real break l 10 of the RCIC and just an isolation of loss of cooling to the l 11 tunnel, which you get when you get a loss of offaite power ) i 12 and that sort of thing? J 13 MR. MUNSON: I think they combine their radiation i O 14 monitor reading. If the radiation is normal, then they will 15 ignore it. I 16 MR. MICHELSON: Th4 s system is not a safety-17 related system that's cooling the tunnels. The PRA should [ 18 pick this up too if it's a real-problem. 19 MR. MUNSON: And the equipment in the tunnel is 20 usually the same as in the containment. 4 21 MR. MICHELSON: That wou).dn't make any.differenca.
- 22 We're talking about isolating because we thought the pipe 23 broke and it really didn't. The reason we thought it broke 24 was because the tunnel temp u ture got hot because we lost j 25 our HVAC to the tunnel. You'll lose that in case of loss of i-O ANN RlLEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd.
4 Court Reporters 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 , Washington, D. C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
273 1 offsite power and things like that, but that's the time when 2 you want RCIC. 3 So somewhere I would like to have assurance that 4 heating ap of the tunnel does not interfere with RCIC 5 operation. Maybe the Staff could look into that and add a 6 few words to the SER that say, yes, we looked into it and 7 it's a non-problem, and here are the reasons. 8 on page 9-66, towards the bottom of the page, in 9 - the last paragraphs it talks about "this system," and the 10 system being referred to as the primary containment HVAC 11 system, the purge and vent system. It says that you've got-12 radiation monitors and dampers that facilitate the 13 isolation. C 14 Are these dampers in addition to the containment 15 isolation valves on the purge line, or are these dampers 16 what you mean by containment isolation valves? 17 MR. MUNSON: I'm having a problem on 9-56. 18 MR. MICHELSON: It's 9-66. 19 MR. MUNSON: Would you repeat the question, 20 please. L - 21 MR. MICHELSON: The last paragraph on 9-66, the 22 first couple of sentences,-it points out that "the Staff 23 concludes that the radiation monitors and C.mpers that 24 facilitate the isolation of the system are designed to: 25 seismic category I." O ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Court Reporters 1812 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 - Washington, D. C. 20006 (202) 293-3950:
274 l 1 Are those dampers the so-called containment 2 isolation valves? Are they one in the same, or is this s 3 something else? Those are a little more than what I 4 normally thinx of as dampers, Those are real valves, 150 5 pound rated. 6 MR. MUNSON: That purge system has a branch to the 7 standby gas treatment system. The isolation valve is on the 8 purge system itself. 9 MR. MICHELSON: But there are isolation valves at 10 the penetration? 11 MR. MUNSON: There are, yes, sir. j 12 MR. MICHELSON: On both the supply and the 13 discharge side of the purge? 14 MR. MUNSON: That's right. f 15 MR. MICHELSON: Those are big massive _ butterflies, 16 probably. 17 MR. MUNSON: The purge system is not a huge 18 system. It's relat*d to accomplishing the purging of the
- 19 nitrogen.
20 MR. MICHELSON: In preparation for shutdown. t 21 MR. MUNSON: Yes. 4 22 MR. MICHELSON: That's still like 2-foot diameter. 23 MR. MUNSON: Yes. 24 MR. MICHELSON: That's what I meant by big. That 25 is a fairly large valve. O - ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Court Reporters 1612 K. Street, N.W., . Suite 300 Washington, D. C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
,y-- yg- syy+- -r-ges- w w &p., g--++ic y, tr-m-r--r -y---r, T--rw'*msepg i- c- T- -r v.---P*e- s--T v r-ev +
275 1 I assume this damper is really an isolation valve. 2 MR. MUNSON: It is, l 3 MR. MICI!ELSON: But I couldn't find when you would l 4 permit the opening of the purge and vent system relative to 5 when you're still operating. Two days before you shut down, 6 or any time you want to get in and you want to purge can you 7 continue to power operate, or do you have to shut down, and 8 if so, for how long? 9 MR. CHAMBERS: The requirement is on oxygen , 10 concentration in the containment. So you have to have your 11 nitrogen purged any time you are above 15 power. Actually. 12 there is a 24-hour window. 13 MR. MICHELSON: I can be fully pressurized in that 14 temperature and as long as I keep my power down below 15 15 percent I can have the purge system running, right? 16 MR. MUNSON: You're also in preparation for l 17 shutdown. 18 MR. CHAMBERS: Theoretically, yes. ! 19 MR. MUNSON: Not normal operation. 1 l 20 MR. MICHELSON: I may not be anticipating 21 shutdown. I may be wanting to get inside'of containment. 22 MR. CHAMBERS: This is a traditional tech spec 23 requirement for inerted containments. It's on oxygen 24 concentration and it's typically at 15 percent power and it 25 gives you a 24-hour window. LO ANN RlLEY & . ASSOCIATES, Ltd. l Court Reporters i 1612 K. ' Street, N.W., Suite 300 ! Washington, D. ' O. 20006 (202) 293-3950
4 i 276 () 1 MR. MICHELSON: Do we concede that we would get a l 2 LOCA during purging? 1 3 MR. CHAMBERG: _ At lower power levels, yes. l 4 MR. MICHELSON: And if we do get a LOCA, then we
! 5 are going to design these purge and vent valves for the LOCA a
j 6 conditions, the blowdown through the valve and all that sort 7 of things is that right? j 8 MR. CHAMBERS: I believe that's right, but I would i j 0 have to check that. lu MR. MICHEISON: I ct udn't find any of that in j 11 there and I expect to see it. I-would expect that it's 1 12 pointed out that we do postulate breaks during purge 1
- 13 operations and these valves will be designed for the break .
l 14 conditions. I would expect to see that. It's clearly a i i 15 fundamental requirement for the purge and vent system. I 16 didn't find it. Do you egree? j 17 MR. RAVAL: We will veriF' it. 18 MR. MICHELSON: I think that ought to be said.
- 19 Then.I wouldn't'have to ask. And when.you do that, you also
! 20 need to talk a little about trash screens on the valves and 21 that sort of thing, which I didn't find either, of course.
- 22 You're going to get trash into these valves. If you blow a 23 pipe, we know from other experiences that a lot of trash j 24 flies around. You have to protect these valves so you can 25 get the containment bottled up. I didn't find any
- O ANN RlLEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd.
. Court Reporters , 1612 K. Street, N.W.,- Suite 300 . Washington, D. C. 20006 - (202) 293-3950
i i i 277 1 requirement there either, s
] 2 That's all I have on 9.4. That was the last one i 3 you wanted to do in advance, i l
i' 4 MR. POSLUSNY: Can we go back to 6. l i j 5 MR. MICHELSON: We will go back to 6. 6 I believe this is mostly your questions on the
; 7 first part.
8 MR. CATTON: I'll start off in 6.2, unless you i 9 have anything before that. l l 10 MR. MICHELSON: That's a good place to start. l 11 MR. CATTON: I'm not sure where to start. '"h e l 12 first thing is I have a halluva time figuring out what 1 j 13 anybody has done from the SER or from the GE documents. 14 I've been told, but I've not seen anything. j 15 As near as I can tell, the containment sub-i 16 compartment analysis has been done by the Staff using a code {
- 17 called COMPARE and GE uses a code called SCAM. COMPARE is i
! 18 an old lump parameter code developed 100 years ago -- not
- 19 100 years ago, but it seems like it. I don't know what kind 4
! 20 of code SCAM is. I suspect it's lump parameter the same as i 21 COMPARE. It depends on what you are'doing with those codes I
- 22 whether they will do the job for you. And I'll come back to i
23 this. . 24 For the suppression pool analysis or the 25 hydrodynamic loads, as near as .* can tell they took a Mark 2 .: O i' ANN RlLEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Court Reporters 1612 K. Street, N.W., -Suite 300 Washington, D. C. 20006
- (202) 293 3950
~ _ _ . . . . . - _ _ _ _
278 1 model and cluged it to yield ABWR simulation. I think 2 that's spelled c-1-u-g-e-d. And there was no Staff 3 independent analysis that I could tell. 4 When I went through this, the first thing you come . 5 to in section 6.2 is d3scussion of a water slug. 6 MR. BURTON: Do you have a page number? 7 MR. CATTON: No , I don't. I didn't realize that 3 were supposed to key all our comments to page numbers.
'i MR. MICHELSON: It starts on pagst 6-3. but I don't 5 10 know what page this point might be on.
11 MR. CATTON: I'm not exactly sexe where it is. 12 But they talk about a slug thickness. I don't know where 13 that came from, how you decided whether it's right or wrcng, 14 and it't, an important element, because it tells you how much 15 water you have to accelerate ahead of the bubble. 16 You somehow have to know what it is before your 17 answers are going to be reasonable. If you take it too 18 thin, you'll penetrate it, although I don't think their 19 analysis is sophisticated enough for that. If it'a too 20 thick, it won't go as high as it should. 21 The containment analytical model, I can key you to f 22 the* a little better. That's 6.2.1.2.1. I like all those 23 numbers. It indicates that the analytical model is written 24 for prediction of Mark 3 transients were adapted for the 25 ABWR containment configuration. It was my understanding O ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Court Reporters 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D. C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
i .l i l t 1-i 279 1 that it was a Mark 2 cme. I think it says Mark 3 in here'. i 1 2 MR. MICHELSON: Yes. 1- 3 MR. CATTON: I thought it was a Mark 2. That i 4 really doesn't mattar. i . . j b What I would like to know is what were the 6 adaptations that were necessary in order to make the Mark-2 i i 7 code work. As near as_I can tell, there are a number of i
- 8 differences.. One is- the finite voluine in the wet' vell. A i .
! 9 second is the fact that the vents penetrate into the pool. i 1 10 A third is that the water surface area to vent area is very ! 11 different than either the Mark 3 or that Mark . i I 12 I don't know what that doea-to tos .nt clearing. 13 I think somebody needs to ma w some kind of a statement 1 j V 14 about that before you can buy off on the modeling. f 15 In the SER they talk about problems w.Mu the i j 16 hydrodynamic loading assumptions. I can't find anywhere i 17 what the hydrodynamic loading assumptions are. It would 18 help me a great deal if.somebody could focus me a little. f [ 19 bit, give me a page number or something.
- 20 When they get to the section on-temperatures, wet i
{ 21 wel.L pressure is at_less than 45 psig and temperature less 22 than 219 degrees F.and drywall pressure less than 4S, 23 temperature less than 340. That's not enough. -What i 24 temperature is that? In the-wet well, is-that the-l 25 temperature of the oir space?. Is that the teinperature of iO i ANN RlLEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Court Reporters 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D. C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
-. - - . ~ . - - - _ . -- -. . - - - - - _ . - . - . _ . . - - _
4 i 280 a 3 () 1 2 the water? temperature? Is it maximum temperature? What is it? Is it a steady i 3 The same for the dry well. The temperature is 4 less than 340 F. Again, there is no indication of what that i 5 temperature is. Is it a' mixed volume temperature? Is it l l 6 instantaneous temperature? What is it? -Without knowing ) 7 what is, I don't think you can really come to some sort of a
, 8 conclusion about whether or not GE is meeting their design
} 9 requirements. 4 l 10 When the suppression pool temperature is given by 11 GE in their numbers in the SER, is it an average, or what is 12 it? 13 Stratification in the new type of horizontal vents 14 needs to be addressed in some way. ! 15 A long time ago these questions came up and Zimmer 16 was to be the plant where they would make measurements in 17 the suppression pool, but Zimmer never ran. So what do we i l 18 know about this? i 19 There were a large number of very crude models-put 20 together for predicting the temperature distributions within 21 the suppression pool. As near'as I can Lell, we have never 22 really done anything to confirm or-establish a basis for 23 What it is. 24 Where that gets you is that with these vents that l 25 stick into the pool, you're creating a plume out away-from O ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Coud Reponers - 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D. C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
j- , f-i l J j 281 (k 1 the wall. That's very different than when the opening is f 2 flush with the inner surface of the pool. I don't know what 3 that is going to do to the mixing. 1 3 4 I recollect from the Mark 3 that they did some a 5 studies and showed that the steam bubbles actually created a 1 > 6 circulation back into this well outside through the whole 7 with the steam. The steam would carry through-some of the +
- 8 cooler water in the pool. And this mixing process was i 9 reasonably effective.
1 [ 10 Now you've taken and extended the vent into the: 3 l 11 pool. I don't know what that will do. I think it needs to i
- 12 be evaluated.
l 13 I think something should be said about what you
- 14 mean by these temperatures. That goes for GE as well.
I 15 'GE calculated the maximum dry well temperature to
- . 16 be 338 degrees F for a steam line-break. That's only 2 i
17 degrees below the 340 degree F limit. But not knowing how
- 18 the temperature was calculated, it really doesn't mean 19 anything. It-seems to me a steam line break is going tc 20 expose parts of the dry well to higher temperatures. I.
21 don't know how this is dealt with. i 22 MR. SHEWMON: Do we have questions, or are they l 23 supposed-to catch these on the fly? 24 MR. CATTON: We're going to meet on this. I-just-25 want to be sure they understand the: concerns so that when we t !- ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. I Court Reporters , l 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 '
- Washington, D. C. 20006 i
- (202) 293-3950
. . . - . . . .- - --. .. - .. .=. -- -- ...
s 282
- 1 do meet they can address them.
2 MR. MICHELSON: This will be in February? 3 MR. CATTON: I'm not sure when. It will be 4 February or March. 5 If you would like to respond, you cun, or I could 4 6 just work my way through all of this and then run with it. 7 How would you like to do it? 8 MR. FOX: I presume you have read the analyses we 9 provided in the SAR. Whether you like it or not, it's 10 therrt . Specific comments on what's there may be holpful. 11 MR. CATTON: If the SCAM code -- and I don't know 12 what the SCAM code is. Maybe it's a scam -- if it's a 13 lumped parameter model, what you have is an average 14 temperature. So in that room you're going to have 15 temperatures quite a bit higher and quite a bit lower. So 16 when you say the temperature is 219 degrees for the 17 suppression pool, what do you mean? 18 MR. SAXENA: This is the bulk average temperature. 19 It's a mixed temperature. 20 MR. CATTON: But do you know that the pool is not 21 going to be mixed? 22 MR. SAXENA: The pool 1:.: always at the lower 23 temperature, but in terms of the design-temperature, 24 basically controlling is the air space temperature. 25 MR. CATTON: If your bulk water temperature is I O
. ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd.
Court Reporters 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D. C. 20006 (202)- 733-3950
. - _ - . . . . - . - . - - _ _ . - - - - .. = . _ - -. - - . - - . . . --
4 l 283 1 average is at 2.' degrees, the surface of the pool is going ._ , 2 to be hotter and tk et well air space is going to be i 3 hotter than the 219 degrees. So again, what do you mean by j 4 a 219 degree limit? 5 MR. SAXENA: Our pool temperature for long-term j G maximum limit is 206 degree Fahrenheit. So the LOCA f 7 temperature will never exceed, b ased on the RHR capacity. 8 The air space temperature, which is the initial part of the f 9 I4CA, which may go high, is during the short-term LOCA i
- 10 period. So this 219 is the limit which we had specified 11 covers both the short term and long term. In the long term
{ l 12 you never exceed that number. So the limiting value is from 13 the short-term calculations. ! 14 MR. CATTON: I guess you don't understand the l 15 problem I'm having. What is the limiting temperature for 16 the air space in the wet well? j 17 MR. SAXENA: 21?. 18 MR. CATTON: If that's also the limi.ing l j 19 temperature of the water, then you're going to exceed the
- 20 219 degrees in the air space.
21 MR. SAXENA: In all of our cases our pool l 22 ter,;erature never exceeds 207. We also specify in the same i 23 document the long-term maximum pool' temperature. 24 MR. CATTON: Let me try again. I think we are
- 25 talking at 90 degrees. You will stratify in theEpool. If n
V ANN RlLEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Court Reporters 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D.' O. 20006 (202) 293-3950
i 284 t 4 () 1 2 your average temperature is 219 degrees, your pool surfe J And if your pool surface . temperature will_be higher. , l [ 3 temperature is higher, your air space in the wet well will I 4 be higher. So you will exceed your 219 degree limit if the 5 bulk pool temperature approaches it. i j 6 The 219 is the specification for the_ wet well, and l 7 for the pool it's 207. l 8 MR. CATTON: What you are arguing is that you're 9 only going to~have 12 degrees of stratification in.the pool. ! 10 MR. SAXENA: Yes. 4 11 MR. CATTON: I would like to see-the evidence for { 12 the ABWR with your extended vents that demonstrates that l 13 that's indeed the case. Or else relax some of the s-) 14 requirements. I j 15 I think once you have things cooled down and once 16 the pressure is down, the maximum you could have in there i i 17 would be 212. It rounds like that's okay. But during the l 18 chugging phase, when.you are still pumping steam through i
- 19 into the wet well, you could become highly stratified.
20 What's the maximum pressure you get in the wet l 21 well? i j 22 MR. SAXENA:. Maximum pressure is about,'according
; 23 to the SAR, is 26 psi.
24 MR. CATTON:- Twenty-six psi has a saturation-25 -temperature of a little over 220. At 26 psi you could i-LO
- ANN RlLEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd.
i Coud - Reponers - 1 1612 K. Street,. N.W., Suite 300 4 Washington, D. C. 20006 . (202) 293-3950-
-. _ _ _ ~ . - . - - . - . . .. - -- .
285 1 conceivably be over 219. 2 MR. SAXENA:- Yes, that could be. 3 MR. CATTON: I don't know if that's a problem or 4 not. It's just that if you put the limit of 219, it should 5 have some kind of meaning. I think as long as you don't 6 account for the stratification in the suppression pool you 7 don't really know what it is. You could make a conservative S estimate by assuming that you only treat the water above the 9 tep vent. 10 Anyway, we are not getting very far with further 11 argument. You just keep saying the same thing and so do I. 12 MR. MICHELSON: Why don't you try something else? 13 MR. CATTON: I thought maybe I would just move on. I 14 The stratification question has ~een o raised all 15 the way back to the Mark 1 when we were doing all those 16 studies. It was supposed to be an:5wered on Zimmer and 17 Zimmer never flew. So I don't know where the answers are 18 coming from. Most of the models to predict stratification 19 were poor. So we don't know. And now you've changed the 20 vents. So we know even less. I bet they are going to cut 21 them off. I 22 MR. MICHELSON: Just because you mention it, 23 right? 24 MR. CATTON: Anyway, I think the stratification-25 question needs to be dealt with. If may turn out that you l ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. l Court Heporters 1612 K. Street, iLW., Suite 300 Washington, D. C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
4 ? 286 2 1 don't have to worry about it. Small model experiments can l 2 deal with these things very well. It was done by somebody 3 for the Mark 3. It showed the mixing through the mote back 4 into the pool. Now when you extend the vent, I'm not sure 5 what that does to the mixing. It may not do anything. ]
- 6 MR. SAXENA
- I understand your concerns.
7 MR. CATTON: We'll address it when we meet in ! 8 February. I just want to make sure we understand each 9 other, 10 MR. SAXENA: If it's possible, we can get those
- 11 questions ahead of time.
, 12 MR. CATTON: Med is taking notes and is going to
. 13 cast these into understandable statement. I 14 MR. SAXENA: That would be very helpful. l 15 MR. MICHELSON: Or we'll send you the transcript. 16 MR. CATTON: As long as we are talking about the 17 extended vents, I would like to go to another part. Again, { i 18 I am not sure where it is in here.
- 19 You talk about chugging loads. One of the things q 20 we learned from the exercises that we went through on-the 21 Mark 1, 2 and-3 was that the geometry of the vent was very 22 important. That's why the loading on the Mark 1 structure 23 was different than the loading on the Mark 2. Now you-have-24 a horizontal pipe _that sticks out in the pool. You're going 25 to get a pretty loud rap on the-top of-that pipe when the i
Um ANN RlLEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. , Court Reporters . 1612 -K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D. C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
, , , . ~ - . .- -..---~ - ~ a - - - - . - . - .- ~ - . - - .
1 I { 287 () 1 bubble collapses in the chugging process. I 2 I didn't get the sense either in your report or , 3 the Staff's that this had been addressed. It may be small ! 4 and you may not have to worry about it, but you do have to S treat the load different in this one thals you did the other. l 6 MR. SAXENA: For ABWR chugging loads are based on 7 the test data which was done with extended vents. 4 ) 8 MR. CATTON: Do you have this data? I ! 9 MR. SAXENA: Yes. i i 19 MR. CATTON: I've not seen that. 4 1 j 11 MR. SAXENA: Our chugging load definition for ABWR 1 12 is based on the ABWR design specific test. In that test we 1 , 13 also measure the loading on the extended vent, and that has 14 been specified as separate loading conditions for-this vent i
- 15 configuration.
16 MR. CATTON: Okay. I haven't seen that anywhere. 17 The last time I asked about this I wasn't told about it. I j 18 would like to see that. ! 19 Did you measure the pressure that comes down on j 20 the top of the vent pipe? i 21 MR. SAXENA: We actually measured it at the vent 2.c . pipe. I 23 MR. CATTON: Strain-gauges? 24 MR. SAXENA: Yes, sir. I 25 MR. CATTON: That's fine. 4
- O ANN RlLEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd.
Coun Reponers 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D. ' C. 20006
- (202) 293-3950
288 1 Let's see what else I've got here. 2 MR. FOX: Mr. Michelson, we were talking January 3 or February for this confrontation or solution. Is it 4 possible we could shoot for early January? 5 MR. MICHELSON: As soon as everybody is ready we 6 can shoot for it. I have no problem with-early January. 7 The sooner the better. 8 MR. CATTON: We're going to come out and visit you 9 guys and talk about TRACG, and I thought we would combine n 10 some of this with that. 11 MR. MICHELSON: I will say this, Ivan. We want to 12 go out to San Jose sometime in January or February to get a 13 warm feeling about all this kind of work that is going on. 14 We could add that as an agenda and you can actually see the 15 calculations and talk to the calculator or whataver it 16 takes. 17 MR. CATTON: That's fine. 18 MR. MICHELSON: We do want to make a field-trip 19 out there to look at_the actual work-being done, and this is 20 some of the actual work. 21 MR. CATTON: I would like to make a couple of 22 commenta about sub-compartment pressurization.
'23 Codes like SCAM, and again I am assuming I know-24 what it is, don't do a very good job when it comes to-25 predicting compartment to compartment pressurization O
ANN RlLEY.& ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Court Reporters-1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite - 300 - Washington, D. C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
289 m L
) 1 differences. They will do a reasonably good job in
? predicting peak pressures, but you don't get the timing 3 right with these codes, so you don't get the delta P's 4 right.
5 MR. SAXENA: We do use the SCAM code. When we 6 specify 5 psi, it's based on the peak pressure in that 7 compartment. We do not take credit for the pressure in the 8 neighboring compartment. 9 MR. CATTON: You just got rid of all the problems. 10 That's fine. Sometimes I'm a little bothered by the crude 11 creatment of the thermal physical processes, but I can't 12 argue with that conservatism. 13 There is another part to this, and that is the i
\_/ 14 transient calculations using FL/D's for standard fittings.
15 If these factors are important, then you need to correct 16 ther for accelerating flow. You indicated that you did. We 17 just need to see it. 18 MR. SAXENA: I just checked at lunchtime with the 19 person in San Jose. As input data we specified our standard 20 loss coefficients. a 21 MR. CATTON: It was in the SER, so I figured it 22 deserved some comment. Peak pressure cou.18 be a little bit 23 higher if you correct these for the acceleration. The Staff 24 just referred to an ITAAC, and it seems to me that using the 25 right FL/D's is not something that should be in an ITAAC. g ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Coud Reponers 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D. C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
290 1 There is one more thing and that has to do with 2 the temperatures. There is a great deal of temperature 3 stratification. The way you treat the problem it's a mixed 4 volume. So if you have things up near the top of the room, 5 they are going to see a quite different environment than 6 things on the floor. 7 I don't kncw how you treat this when it comes to 8 environmental qualification. I think you need to consider 9 it. It's not new and it's not difficult to calculate. 10 There are codes that already do this. A number of them had 11 made comparisons with the results of the HDR containment 12 tests. I think that that sh 14 be done here. I 13 That's really all 1 .e. 14 MR. SHEWMON: I have a question. 15 MR. MICHELSON: Go ahead. l 16 MR. SHEWMON: Let me shift gears to Chapter 5, 17 something we've gone by. The Staff in their evaluatica 18 report says that you made comments about special impurities 19 and the control of these things. What's in the document 20 refers to sulfur and copper, which is good for radiation, 21 but it says nothing about sultur u ntent, which is germane 22 to toughness in corrosion rasistance. 23 I asked'this question six months or a year ago and 24 I was told that this sulfur would be in a special GE code or I 25 spec, that it would also be sent out and we would see a copy n V ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. Court Reporters 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D. C. 20006
;(202) 293-3950-
291 ( 1 of it. We never did. 2 .Could you find out what the sulfur spec would be
- 3 on the pressure vessel material?
4 MR. MILLER: What section are you talking about? l 5 MR. SHEWMON: I'm looking at 5.3.1.1. l 6 MR. MILLER: And your specifically concerned about i . 7 the pressure vessel material? 8 MR. SHEWMON: That's right. The place where we 9 had sulfur toughness problems potentially. The code has 10 drifted on this and I honestly don't know what the relative i ! 11 section of the code is, 22t if you can find anything in this 12 about sulfur, I would be delighted to have you show it to 13 me. 1 O j %/ 14 MR. FOX: I think it was in a letter. *
- 15 MR. MICHELSON
- The issue was raised.
i j 16 MR. FOX: I'll check it out. I understand your j 17 concern. i 18 MR. MICHELSON: I don't remember whether it was 19 answered or not, but I know we raised it. 1? 20 MR. FOX: I'll check on it.
-21 MR. SHEWMON: Thank you.
22 MR. MICHELSON: Was that it, Paul? 23 MR. SHEWMON: -That's it. 24 MR. MICHELSON: I'v2 got two little thing and then 25 we are all done with Chapter 6 unless somebody alce has got ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. COud RepOders 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D. C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
292 () 1 a problem. And these are almost trivial. 2 On 6-13, the very top line, it talks about the l 3 flow of the wet well spray system will be limited by design 4 t a maximum of 500 gallons a minute. Two questions. How 1
; 5 do you limit it by design, how is that going to be done?
- 6 And is that flow of 500 from one loop or two loops? I think j 7 there are two loops of wet well spray, aren't there? Is
! 8 that 500 from one loop? ! 9 MR. SAXENA: One loop. i 10 MR. MICHELSON: How do you prevent two loops from 4 11 coming on? I guess the quantity is important, because you 4 12 don't want to condense too fast or something. Why are you
- 13 limi-i.ng flow to 500 gallons?
14 MR. SAXENA: Because we took the worst possible 15 case for those calculations. 16 MR. MICHELSON: Why are you limiting by dasign to 17 500 gallons? 18 MR. SAXENA: Two loops have got better gravity 19 spray. When the pumps are on and you are using the two 20 modes the spray flowing to the wet well is 500 gpm and the 21 rest goes into the gravity spray. 22 MR. MICHELSON: Why don't you take a look at this.
-23 It sounds to me like you don't want it to be any more than 24 500,.and I wasn't sure why.
25 MR. SAXENA: We are looking into hcw much more you O ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd, Coud Repoders 1612 K. Street, N.W , Suite 300 Washington, D. C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
! I t 4 l 293 ,() 1 can have in the wet well so not to have a restriction. . 2 MR. MICHELCON: It maybe that you will put in 3 provisions so you can't run two loops at a time and you'll 4 put in provisions so even one loop can deliver just so much. l 5 And that's later. 6 MR. SAXENA: We are looking into that. 7 MR. MICHELSON: One other question. This one is 4 8 indeed trivial. On page 6-44 we have got that I degree - 9 problem again. The 30 Fahrenheit is minus 1 degree C when 10 it's a delta. Same problem we raised before. It's 16.66 Il 11 degrees. Delta C equals 30 degrees delta. i 12 MR. CATTON: How do you know which one they want? 13 MR. MICHELSON: I don't. I assumed that they '* 14 wanted the 30 degree shift. Usually these are done in 15 English. This is all new now. .I knew 30 degrees was the j 16 right shift. ! 17 MR. DAVIS: Somebody just converted it to 18 absolute.
- i. 19 MR. MICHELSON: Somebody incorrectly converted it 20 to minus 1 cent. grade, which it's not. It's a delta T, and 1
21 deltas don't have that other 32 degree thing in it. 22 MR. CATTON: And they don't have a negative i 23 either.
- 24 MR. MICHELSON
- That's all I had. Does.anybody 25 else have anything on 6?
- O ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd.
7 Court Reportere 1612 K.' Street,' N.W., Suite 300 Washington, C. C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
.. - . - . - - - ~ ~- - -.. . . - . . - . - - - . . - .
i j 294 () 1 2 MR. COSTNER: On that same page, item 4, I'm not sure that first sentence reads the way it was intended, but l 3 it says GE did not provide procedures for factoring t i_ 4 potential contributions for the hydrogen recombiners into l 5 the integrated leak rate test results. l 6 Is that saying that GE didn't provide the methods? l 7 I can understand the Staff saying that the COL holders atist i l 8 actually perform the correction, but the wording of the 9 thing seems to imply that GE didn't tell' them how to do it. j 10 and I don't think that's probably the case. i l 11 MR. POS LUSNY: Generally, we mean procedures are i 12 procedures with COL action items. I 13 MR. BURTOF; What we are trying to get at there is
- u-l 14 that there was nothing in the-SAR that specified that when l 15 the COL applicant does his procedures for the-integratvb i
16 leak rate test that they need to fact'or.the hydrogen l i 17 recombiner leakage back into the result. We just didn't see 18 that in the SAR. i l 19 MR. MICHELSON: Does that take care of it for you, , l 20 Bob? 21 MR. COSTNER: Yes. 22 MR. MICHELSON: Does anybody else have'any Chapter 23 6 questions? 4
- 24 [No response.]
l 25 MR. MICHELSON: HWe will take a break until LO
- ANN RlLEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd.
Coud . Repoders , 1612 K. Street, . N.W., Suite 300
- j. Washington, D. C. 20006 (202) 293-3950
i j. i 295 1 tomorrow morning.
- 2 (Whereupon at 5
- 30 p.m. the meeting was adjourned,-
l 3 to reconvene at 8:30 a.m., Friday, November 20, 1992.) l 1 4
- I 4
5 1 I l 6 i, ) 7 l 8 f 9 10
- 11 -
j 12 I 13 14 4 4 ,' 15 16 i i 17 i 18
- 19 i 20 1
i 21 a , 22 I I 23 1 I 24 !
- 25
? D ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd. l Court Reporters 1612 K. Street,- N.W., Suite 300 l
- Washington, D. C. 20006
{_ (202) 293-3950
1m i REPORTER'S CERTIFICATE LO f This is to certify that the attached proceedings before i the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commis11on ' i i In the Matter oft i NAME OF PROCEEDING! ACRS Advanced Boiling Water Reactors , DOCKET NUMBER: l PLACE OF PROCEEDING: Bethesda, Maryland f
- ' were held as herein appears, and that_this is the original transcript thereof for the file of the United
- States Nuclear Regulatory Commission taken by-me and thereafter reduced to typewriting by me or under the I
direction of the court reporting company, and that the {) transcript is a true and accurate record of the foregoing proceedings. I i l Y d Wh{ . ob/D ( official Reporter Ann Riley & Associates, Ltd. , i 1 I l Lo i 1 1 l
l l i lO l l GE PRESENTATION l l ACRS ABWR SUBCOMMITTEE i l ADDRESSING ACRS INQUIRIES ! EXPRESSED AT SUBCOMMITTEE MEETING lO AUGUST 19, 1992 i PRESENTATION DOCUMENTATION l l JOHN WILLIAM POWER O 11/19/92 1 1
4 IIEMS TO BE INCLUDED IN FUTURE SSAR REVISION () .IN RESPONSE TO ACRS INOVIRIES i l 1. ALL WELDED PIPE (I.E., NO EXPANSION JOINTS) FOR RSW AND RCW SYS1EM PIPING INSIDE THE CONTROL BUILDING. l 2. WATER TIGHT MAIN STEAM LINE TUNNEL IN REACTOR AND CONTROL
- BUILDING UP TO MAXIMUM INTERNAL FLOOD LINE.
! 3. PROVISION FOR REDUNDA'4T ISOLATION CAPABILITY OUTSIDE OF THE CONTROL BUILDING ON THE RSW SUPPLY AND RETURN LINES. J i 4, NO LINED PIPE FOR RSW SYSTEM.
- 5. PUMP HOUSE DESIGN AND BURIED YARD PIPING.
- 6. PENETRATION OF RSW PIPE THROUGH CONTROL BUILDING WALL.
() I 7. DIFFERENTIAL PRESSURE RETENTION CAPABILITY FOR SECONDARY , CONTAINMENT AND DIVISIONAL SEPARATION WALLS. 1
- 8. STACKED BLOCK WALLS SUBJECT To DIFFERENTIAL PRESSURE DUE TO PIPE BREAKS.
i ! 9. BARRIER PENETRATIONS (I.E., DOORS, PIPES, CABLE TRAYS, AND ! HVAC DUCTS).
- 10. DOUBLE WIC' BARRIER DOORS.
i-I-
- 11. FLOOP LEAK-TIGHTNESS PROVISIONS.
- 12. HVAC ISOLATION VALVES AND BACK-FLOW DAMPERS.
l-g-. 13. BLOW-Our PANELS. V) 0-1 L . - - -. ,- .. - , _ . - -
l
- 14. No SAFETY GRADE P.MUS INSIDE SECONDARY CONTAINMENT.
- 15. FLOOR DRAIN SYSTEM DESIGN AND ISOLATION ARRANGEMENTS.
- 16. DETERMINATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS FOLLOWING VARIOUS ACCIDENTS. <
- 17. MAXIMUM RATE OF Room HEAT-UP FOR: EACH EQUIPMENT AREA FOLLOWING TOTAL LOSS Or Room HVAC.
h O O 0-2
- i. -
_ . . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ . _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _. J
i i j #1 RSW & RCW SYSTEMS-PIPING FABRICATION & INSTALLATION - (]) i DESIGN BASIS 1 l ACRS IN0VIRY, l CONFIRM THAT ALL WELDEo PIPING (E.G. No EXPANSION JOINTS OR l_ BELLour' WILL BE USEc FoR THE REACTOR. SERVICE WATER (RSW) AND THE l REACTOR BUILDING COOLING WATER (RCW) SYSTEMS WITHIN THE CONTROL l BUILDING. GE RESPONSE
- O THE. SUBJECT PIPING IS FABRICATED AND INSTALLED AS ALL WELDED PIPING.
] 4 [) 0 MAJOR COMPONliTS WITHIN-THE SUBJECT. SYSTEMS MAY HAVE FLANGE BOLTED OR WELDED CONNECTIONS TO THE PIPING i j SYSTEM. j 0- No EXPANSION JOINTS'OR BELLOWS ASSEMBLIES WILL BE
- UTILIZED IN PIPING WITHIN THE CONTROL BUILDING.
4 i i i SSAR-REVISION ! o A STATEMENT To THE COMMITMENTS CITED ABoVELWILL BE a
- INCLUDED IN REVISED'SSAR SECTION 9.2.
i O r f 1-1
- _ _ _ __. _ . . _ . . _ __ _ ._,.u_
. - . . =- . __ . -- .- - -- - --
l, l l
- O #2 MAIN STEAM TUNNEL - FLOODING CONTROLS CAPABILITIES i
l ACRS INQUIRY l PROVIDE ADDITIONAL INFORMATION RELATIVE TO (A) THE MAIN , ! STEAM IUNNEL POTENTIAL FLOODING LEVEL AND ITS ABILITY TO ACCOMMODATE AND CONTAIN THE RESULTANT WATER; (B) WATER TIGHTNESS l ! 0F THE STRUCTURE UNDER FLOODED CONDITIONS INCLUDING THE j PRESSURIZATION EFFECTS; AND (C) DISCUSS THE POTENTIAL FLOODING EFFECTS & IMPACT ON THE REACTOR BUILDING AND THE CONTROL
- BUILDING.
1 GE RESPONSE l 1 l 0 SOME CONFUSION MAS EXISTED RELATIVE-TO THE CURRENT SSAR DOCUMENTATION l i 0 MAIN STEAM TUNNEL-CONFIGURATION O MAIN STEAM & FEEDWATER LINE CONFIGURATION ! O MAIN STEAM TUNNEL BLOWVENT PANELS I O MAIN STEAM TUNNEL PERFORMANCE CHARACTERISTICS f 0 MAIN STEAM TUNNEL CONFIGURATION
- O DESIGN BASIS
! O STRUCTURAL ASPECTS O PENETRATIONS O BLOWOUT FANEL 0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROLS 1SAR REVISION O PLANT BUILDING DRAWINGS WILL BE' CORRECTED 1 0 MSL & FWL DRAWINGS WILL BE CORRECTED O LOCATION OF BLOWOUT PANELS WILL BE SHOWN O A NEW MS IUNNEL WRITE-UP MAY BE ADDED 0 A FLOODING ANALYSIS WILL BE ADDED l 2-1
l ABWR l Standard Plant-l , 4 !. . i 1 & 1
- 1 1 l
4 O i jl
- r. m n m i
j tG RF g) qD) , c' (3) h: i ! s,,,, i i
; i 1
x-- ! o-- or: E :=:2 4:s:: c:e I rce i sesto i
, 8 ~i i
I, I i I (a! i
/ \/j l .. .sa , --
I
~~~~
med
'/b/W .
-l W
1 ld% i
, U W- ,s I
.-un r: L !
,i j-sw i
i
- i. _-- .m.m
.,&w e u
a i
, i I i rd+
i-E'F -~J :_:.5 _ _h m= i= l gm.m
,m (t 1,
. r=m = ..
3 pJ j ,A ^ l ... y~, illlTTppmm Nxr-
-- ~
sa = ~
~
b 25 ..,..J
! Ittttt1 i , i
=~ >g
= . ,.i $, : n7 3 n. 2 .I ,
lv pA - ._
$, w a
; i7 - -- 2
(? .w 5
. . . - . . ~ , _
~ -
'i
~. *1 :
G\j t r--
- - ,- . s J *.1 w
W\ 7. w r4
,e
.s m :: ( ,
C , G C ~E
..~~....-
m ; 3-G.
.-J-4 M
e & ',..y . f, g
' ~ J 1,.,,,,) ~. m em
---5 g 1..--joi gg p_
+
es a:, L, e-- ! i _g- i _ _ m i
- I I I I WT" wu a::
W '**~ '% f%sy ajp 1 ll A .Dy i.,l,'.r .N. .....- ,.... Fi
- i !
.. I ,. n. H.i, I, ,cIll. .q
-L- vC -D- c.u t 1iI wm(s.,j @ r
- g 1. w a ih mitt
-s. : s =
H Fi g(
.- s m n p;; :l
,wlt.t.;
w w 1
-c.-s. :
q , __, 7
"" =
i ... ., m vsl-- M- H _s - 1 -c- ; f y g_ -- Lt w'- "1 i I A- A SECTION I l
~
j# N s, .-
) l i
i . i .
, i .
Figure 1.2 2 Amendment 21
" 7 is t i
1 Ili ;I bi \ E I - l 0 V . __C5 i R + "E W ll " Ifm.__ il _ ll
-~ x F .
a l 3,' * .1 - b!!C' ! 4 f c l
~
- __ 7 b. lp - . '+
1 ,u - s . '
' -c C
pf
- t <=<
hr l- P.
- j p
< [3 g
.i h -
g.
-['
[;_1._
,r i- 9 H B i ~
se 6 oul
- c ~1 a
o ,
*l -
N :- - _ '_ b g ("3 al - 3g % ,e \p L _6 ir I N x s J r, - e o g 'l I, 5 n : _
" j t- 3, N
.L -
i i b b . w ._ -- _-__ , I 9 l
'd
= 1 1 1 I I { l s s s s s s g e
o l m l w l of l u l-
4, ' ABWR Standard Plant l e l s } l s l 4 l c l s l l 7 V . I _ _ _ _ . . . . . . . .........___. n m . ast'em.m % ._ i b ______. .....a i
. : . = .
' um -
- -- - -;;; ,l .n .
=h.
l 1 .f- , L 1,p T 'F l'd i i 4
-r L..J.,igi[
2 i -- -..- J,- ""
^
I ..L-- 64l ~} ~~ -
~'"
] ,, ,
,1, l
--M i r r1d l l l j
~
l ' 1 A-4 I I . [,.-.+.,i"?.... n .-n H; C :,, - -. ww i i l N ' 4 n --/ , T m% , l,
- i {
~""'"" ~
. .j ~ "
~
t__ uir __J mi u_, ._ _ . . _ _ _ _ _
@ h
_. . h
~'"_g +
H. , , I 7 " ' [9" 9" -.-
" el h'a i ss
. l-
---f -l-h - L,L~j_-tv j -
O I.P . . l _ss s.
.s= e 1 ,4> T. A
=
b3tMt ifli 88 ll hi3 EE! l I [, == l11 , - . ;=
$~- .I l l _
l w _ N ,N .- -= 1 l .,. . -_. . .- EA (
.Q i i i i I
ik ifo, sis'
= =
gg i ' i a
" I h l i
ll ll
. . J L. L.W J h. .
-- ',[
jg,.
! l 1:. p., e.n
.r:9. .
l l TMSL 12300 GROUND GRADE l l O Figure 1.2-20 d l L l l Amendment 21 i
ABWR uac Standard Plant uvc (3 i s
<j I,
-2 1 '
, t m-
!o)
_ . . '. =- J , 1-.
!@ l5 dr ! ; OPERATING LEVEL 4 im -- ' l, TMSL. 30300 l _ ); - o . . . . . g . ) , z ; ,
2 lri y4 ). 2:1 m,a i 1' 11 ' j9l
. l L _L I
We ;, u. i
!, ,; ! i' l 7
e .; , l ( - T,_ ' c_ _c : *1
.-- , ; - .- - a !, ---. - - .v_._...___._.
I -'
; ;- ::: . r- ;j i !
t iI :3 a ji u - ., __ l
.: . . * . . i .
~ ~ "
i ii.aN LEVEL 2
, ! : L O TMSL.12300 i
, ! ::'P:B i i ? ;,
h'2 I ' Il
~
i ; { Pr 'YEL1 TMSL 5300 1 l l f
.a
)
92 195 05 Figure 1.2-28 TURBINE BUILDING, GENERAL ARRANGEMENT, LONGITUDINAL SECTION A-A 1250 Amendment 21
s Mkb fan ar an 1M6100AC P.IN C g- +
--- .e-. -
..._C ____._..__-._D._._ ,
1 ~~ T,l e ;;:.7 r
. .:.c .
l al i-i p., .
.- .-s; e i i
-- p
.r. ' - COYBUSTION . : ..-t
- ...... ._,- ,- e- :.
. i 2 TURBINE / GENERATOR . . - - '. ~
- - ~ -
L.
..g._._____._....._...{..._._.._._._.___{.-.-.-
._-{_~...._..._.
..f..
4
,. _._-.].-- _..-(. _.-. ...
.g_
,._6 __ .
]. -.
';9 ; # . _.*G_ t ' , l o .
;; ;;.-4-*
"~ %j,
[ .2'---E *'a.'. **
~
,, .,_ . 4 . .M i ;; -
. , . _ e. - - .
-- -:- * .).4t ,
y -: : TMSL 22300 , , _ . _ W ? .". E . _",._.,. J_ ' o a
- . .', - _ '.n Q_'--- ,_ _
e c c. ._:: = " '. Q % , %, . ._ __ .}.. - . - .- p . _
. _ . _. ._ .; - -_._ . ._ ._.p _ . _ c_{. _ . _ . q. _ , _
,g!. g=c ,
q
, w.' * - - ,.' * " ,,,/
s;
~~.
(. ,, TM3L 18900 ;
; =
s
. r .m.
j i 7,
]
; .. . _ . _g. __ . . .
- 3. %._._
. _4._._._,._._.{._...,_.. .
G - ~ r. :. ._, e
- L...---- .......... ..
y- ,,,, ,,, _w.
.i ... . .,...... . . ,
._.c....._._m._.._._.-a.....,,
, .:-,. s ., 3, . 4
- (-
4 ,. .
. . g . _. ..m
, i
. .~. .. . m....
- a. . , .. . e. 3 .
^ -
- - l- i.3 g -U - p - y.- p h. ~ : - - - -<L:- - -: .y - -i ~ ='- -l. ~
n; . , - ,
-- w >
~ .- >
$ g.,",,
- e. ,
' . 4 4 .
g, . .
.'---, ==.==
q e-* % , i ,
.Ii
'M$L 1880,0 .+ ',.-'4,'*
i i I ,
.. . s ;...'.=.' v.J
_ 5 . _ . - . _i_ d . _ = _ 1,_ :'3 4 .. -
. _ . 1 - . _ . .g. _ _ - . 4. .
0 ! l .! _ n i U
~
C
~
f 92 195-03 Figure 1N26 TUFIB!SE BUILDING, GENER i. ARRANGEMENT AT ELEVATION 20300mm i 2 48 l Amendment 21
~ , - -- ,. .
t O O O 7~e-veer i
}
t (8tewer M IXl i
<l te I k lI
! i 3*,1ec i
l s t a J FY 4 e f RB[Ms To adCL j RWCuS vEMT Nw wu ~7 TD-</T[NS N' i ) (O w PN G) , ! I'
. 4 ), ,- > x , IS y i I
.23sao
/ / -
. 2/Es.o i
- p. b , r, -
r
^
, k T n,rn l
mm g l e / .! /', ! MsL l__._ o
- W/ / /r5 c
*~ " '- " '
/ / ,
. / /,S 9 y
cp i
- 13. 3**
CON N [ Tm B e4 e fhtN4t4 5 e = u c a a.1 c.oranens o r c a .ewwar cues.o.0 6 ause es t l
/~fpra) .$ REM YvowrL ce ssceraraw,q r,,J FeepwarcA Bf6A sc -p: 2aeoos!6,
/ RB - r~=Eu r*o*D ..*1.f. of/*
\ RB+ce-roML f***D " 75, ***/f '
(]) #3 RSW SYSTEM - ISOLATION CAPABILITIES TO PRECLUDE EXCESSIVE CB & PHB FLOODING ACRS INQUIRY PROVIDE ADDITIONAL INFORMATION RELATIVE To THE RSW SYSTEM-ISOLATION CAPABILITY To PRECLUDE EXCESSIVE CONTROL BUILDING AND/0R PUMP HOUSE FLOODING FoR A WIDE VARIETY OF RSW PIPE BREAKS, SIZES & LOCATION, GE RE:.rQHEI O A NtW SAFETY EVALUATION WAS PERFORMED o RSWS CONFIGURATIONS () o o RSWS BREAK SPECTRUM RSWS ISOLATION CAPA8ILITIES o FLOODING INSIDE CONTROL BUILDING-BASEMENT o FLOODING INSIDE PUMP house BUILDING o FLOODING OUTS 2DE BOTH BUILDING IN PIPE CHASE o ALTERNATIVE ENHANCEMENTS 0 SPECIFIC RSWS CAPACITIES o RSWS-SUPPLY LINES - RtDUNDANT ISOLATION - AIR & WET BREAKS o REQUIRES OPERATOR ACTION AT PHB UNDER SACF - MANilAL ISOLATION - HANDWHEELS o RSWS - DISCHARGE LINES - SINGLE ISOLATION - %IR & WET BREAKS o REQUIRES OPERATOR ACTION UNDER SACF o RECOMMENDING AIR BREAK MITIGATION FEATURES - ANTI-SIPHON OR AIR DISCHARGE O 3-1
i t I
=
i 3 l 1 55^" "52S145 4 0 l o AcoITIoNAL Rr.QUIREMENTs WILL BE Aooro To SSAR-RSWS i j Wr,ITE-UP ... AIR BREAx toNsloERATIoNs !
- o A CHANGE WILL La NEcEssARY RELATIVE To Loss Or Two RSWS
! DIvtstoNs VIA A BREAK PLus SACF ! o FloooING ANALYSIS WRITING WILL BE AooEo i o PHB & PIPE CHASE Discussions WILL BE Aooto i 1 t 4 t j 1 1 lO i, : f 1 l t i ) n i O i h 3 3-2 ?
, . - _ - . . . , _ _ _ _ . - _ . _ _ . . , , _ , , . ~ . . . . . - , , _ , . . . . - . . . -....,,..,...._~,;,,,,,-
ABWR Standard Plant . l e l 7 l e l s l 4 l 3 l l _,.? e ls*: Ml
/ -. )
'* X '"" // E. h. v i, @, 4m s
._ _" :.w M An 'N REAC104 5tRVO. W ATLA CChina SVLDike
, assa ase.sei W *E ME I f a
v . , x
'*2:[ n _. _- =
, . ,,, Y % -
ut:fatena
.....< _ 1._ a_ _ , , . ,
._ U ~
.N [ ) A "
- e. ,v -~ ~ . ., g, j i A - - ,
a
. Qge= ,- _. , .. : .: --..c ,:--- %
c. q, w '= . _ : .I
< ._.. e .r. m. - . - -. ,
5I _ amaa m..es , . . . . 4 FACT 04 [ e
' SC RYlCC
/
===
n Waft.M P W 9 g V A EII O#I me kf g
-y.
- a -
$P g .
nn
- -1
<- = _ .. a_ :m, r e. , ;
-- U
" = een u
. p .,,
~~
7 ** p.g, ~D /,1AA4%i _%
. wi
' "" ' " E hF .T., -
l {bb , 4,, . m lIoaobS : **
~;sw"
- [ ' -h
- 4 . u.
m
~
X: @. _""
,bF i
.a
\1 9
^
I l P I I tlLl! i j
. -Il l gg i i g a-lI I I
~
'll! WI '
I i sI
**Yt-ig,
**i), ! ' ,,
l!!. i i,i l
) I r-* a:
?4 r-Nl d x r r*l " 4 b I d .f g I
,h i -
Wii);il[ f f lbk r O l ft t ! kl Y I *
)H'3 i 8S i
}
QT-dbk# J $ On 5 i Eb i 01 [! 3 IIII lllU! g-"
- I
- !j*
j d i { ig
!g : -_ =
V, g r o ':: g 7
, n ,
'4 lY M, x, w -"4 (T@wJ x Dd *pMy%h El#
1 '4 YTEsi
'iPQ)h .
- Myph hk g' & g' k
gk g' .
@j If ^III <
@ ll I li i li lli l
@l' If
'I k i e IN II l.
h e l 1 h i g as a I
$8-qd l - '
7- , iW l $ Af. .. 8
' I I
, l
'nL/ p:, -9.7, l; k:,;.9 dby i Gr hTr:~f"*-- i [i _i I} _i i f e l- 2 I[aJ j -l - l
=
j= l f 1 -l .
-l
- j . -
o , 8!m . a O 6 J Lo
# 1 e / ).
2 '
"a N3' E l k , , , ,
; i l
i i i U a
\b V
- c 3 e
$ U
. 2 >
d I $
, I
" h5 w
3
\ g
- OO m g d 5 i e O ,
e E 5* 4 W v e 3 O 4 6$hE r<a c h k> l g 1 a i d [ f 3 m - 2 O
, 1 $
i4Y 5
. g l n 7
E h *l h a ; wi s d < l t S v s I k f l 1 a r
" W l l O i Si 3
^
't i ,
t qt )f l i [ 9 i i
a n- . . _ - - ----a41- a h l- a- -u.-A,-,,. L --,__-a _ -- s.,w I ll T'I
\ I i lll
~
N E. j i - i O, -- i,. .....
.E
- eM"= E, r.--.gre ll
. . ,, .. .~ . g
, =!^ -t _..
'==h 'i
~_~ ] p g: A
.ge _ p-- , 3 a p -$- h_ f= _ h_ l $gt': -N l i <% .-.-
~
V J lL 1[ -- g i i ._ i t l' GK i _ {'Q -- t~ n . . .
\ ~
t l e.. - -.- i , e c 3 ., m 3 3, 4 hs l N > *l -= _ _ . I O--
=_
*l @c;; L y*=
\p E'
< . _ ,,s x C E l N
= .. _ _ _ . _ . . . .
---G-, ,
N I H f 6- --- li-i, .. Is il fr y f
~
8 i.. j
-Y __[q- _ .
li" a
- D>i bc i ,~
w__ q l [ I 9 lili S.Guo O. i i i I i I i I i I i I i I
=
o l m l w l of l u l
4 ) i ! USE OF LINED PIPING IN THE REACTOR SERVICE WATER (RSW) l j (]) #4 i SYSTEM i j ACRS_ INQUIRY ' 1 i CONFIRM THAT THE RSW SYSTEM WILL Nor UTILIZE " LINED PIPING". THAT IS PIPING WITH AN INSIDE PROTECTIVE LINER. 4 GE RESPONSE l 0 ABWR STANDARD DESIGN VS. COL DESIGN REQUIREMENTS I o OUTSIDE OF GE-ABWR STANDARD DESIGN o No CURRENT SPECIFIC INCLUSION OR EXCLUSION
; o CURRENT RSWS DRAWING INDICATES LINER o REQUIRED LINER PROTECTION INDIRECTLY CITED
(]) O CURRENT ABWR STANDARD REQUIREMENTS o STANDARD SAFETY-RELATED COMPONENT DESIGN CRITERIA (SEISMIC, QUALITY, ETC.) l o OPERATIONAL. REQUIREMENTS (Low WATER, BACKFLUSH, J BroroULING PREVENTION, ETC.) o PRESENT OR ACCOMMODATE ORGA<IC FOULING o CoMPATIBIf!.fY WITH SITE CGNSIDERATIONS o MINIMIZE CORROSION /ERoSzoN 0 CPERATING EXPERIk'NCE RECOMMENDS INTERNAL PIPE I PROTECTION o CURRENT OPERATING EXPERIENCE I RSWS pro 8LEM AREAS o o INDUSTRY ACTIONS o RSWS REMEDIAL ACTRON () 4-1 1
, - . , - , . . _ , . _ _ _ . _ ,-- - , . _ , , , , , , _ , . , _ , . . . . , = , - . . . , ,< -
1 6 i i SSAR REVISION O i o CORRECT RSWS FIGURE o ADDITIONAL DISCUSSION IN COL SECTION 9.2.15.2.1 o ADDITIONAL COL REcu!REMENTS , o ACCOMMODATE LINER DEGRADATION WITH SAFETY EVALUATION i P k O O 4-2
9.
!g DA6100Al{
j REV B i , l . l . I 4 l 2 I = I
.. a
' \
! ,- . = i, .: aus: a ~~ l i .. X w.-.
' @' v.
-<m u/
?
i . re m M
- l
- IIEACfost sgJt WAtta ,
ens . . e Pw i m ,4,
=a-=- =
_ _ . = s
*M A we _. ..
= i!% v.
- i WT. - ada _
II k= ~ - IBM u
'X 4
_r=_ . . d% . - - - = X-. n-
' ~ "
a , pas-==-= :r h #
-= r 4,.A.
i l > _ . .
"AA" v,urg 2 ,.'
.T. * * * * * ,
senvce WATUt PuteP.
--- a ptSW PMI f . g e
Y
~~r y g____ ,
. _ ,-. a_
e-- _= t _ _ .
,6 . -
7 am s mae
'ses 3 '**
__r ., na - rier C ,",, as: === "w / e - r ,,
- -is, unneru '
l
--r.s*
rusar r ,,
'""4A* O "
\
-- /: ,,,: )
! e. ) . v
\d
'O l
i i l ~ O Ies RSWS PUMP HOUSE & BURIED YARD PIPING - DESIGN BASIS , i ? i
- ACRS INQUIRY i PROVIDE ADDITIONAL INFORMATION RELATIVE To THE DESIGN BASIS Or THE REACTOR SCRVICE WATER SYSTEM PUMP HOUSE & THE UURIED YARD
- PIP 1NG NETWORK BETWEEN THE PUMP HOUSE AND THE CONTROL BUILDING.
i 1
-GE RESPONSE ;
l i- 0 ABWR STANDARD DESIGN Vs COL DESIGN REQUIREMENTS ! 0 OUTsIDE ABWR STANDARD DESIGN-l o GE SCOPE IS WITHIN THE C0!! TROL' BUILDING ! o ALL PORTIONS Or RSWS OursIDE CONTROL BUILDING ARE 1 c '~S S'' ^' ' l i O o ENTER RSWS COMPONENT CONFIGURATIONS ARE IN SSAR l o PUMP house BUILDING k YARD-BURIED PIPING CHASE STRUCTURE AitE NOT COVERED IN SSAR
- O CURRENT COL INTERFACE GENERAL REQUIREMENTS - IN SSAR o 10CFR52 INTERFACE REQUIREMENTS ARE PRov!DED l
i o STANDARD SAFETY-RELATED SYSTEM DESIGN CRITERIA IS STATED l
- o SUGGESTED SYSTEM CONFIGURATION AARANGEhhNTS ARE CITED
(
- j. o No EXPLICIT DESCRIPTION OF PHYSICAL DESIGN OF PUMP j House'OR CHASE STRUCTURE ARE GIVEN f- o SOME DESIGN & FUNCTIONAL REou1REMENT5 WERE
[ IMPLICIT-0 ANTICIPATED COL SPECIFIC DESIGN BASIS
-o PUMr HOUSE BUILDINc.(PHB) i Q o BURIED PIPING' CHASE STRUCTURE-(PCS) i t i f 5-1 L l
_..-__u._..___.. _.i
1 1 i i ( i SSAR REVISION 5 A NEw BRIsr Bi>T COMPREHENSIVE SSAR SrCTION WILL BE O i DEVELOPED & ISSUED. IT WILL DESCRIBE THE COL INTERFACE i PHB & PCS REQUIREMEH'S IN MORE SPECIFIC TERMS (CITED ! ABOVE). IT WILL ADDRESS BOTH PHB & PCS PHYSICAL ASPECTS. 1 3 1 i i i 4 1 1 i d i O l 1 i t i 1 i i e b t !O 4 i 5-2
--y ,<,-+------r cyr,, -w---. , y-4~..y3 i.-*.-e e s ,v. y,e--o g. reeg,,, r.y e- y g
! . l
; ;l Ex G=
- A -
Ms C 1 y _s O s
- D
__ o
] I W.-
G y;. 0,g5s - ' f_ s PSEow c ont _w
. t sMs u m su RutHB P s' ' $u3r i n
- e ct de s T
'v. A.
- r. t s
c o o - n e t _ r 6 s s- :. c O i e, s . n. E c L m O. si A "t u G n T H O a s C M . p e
~
. E O i s0 P: o
- c. u15 e
r oAP o 3 H L
- m
_ h P c o F M i t n o a _ b s f B m - E 5 T 2 t l
-- e %t
- k s R I
- _ CC--
e _ O. m s u e . . t e i o E . s t i M_ s
. r
^i e
s e r i_ s s r o _ A ts _ B_ _ o. s _ c E _ O *' e [+ t e. o. 3 o > a g,, 5
#+E
_ s
\ ! i 1 i fQ #6 RSW SYSTEM PIPING PENETRATION INTO THE CONTROL BUILDING - DESIGN BASIS l 3 i i l ACRS INQUIRY t i i PR0vioE INE DESIGN BASIS & SAFETY EVALUATION REQUIREMENTS ! RELATIVE TO TNE RSW SYSTEM PIPING PENETRATION INTO TNE CONTROL , t . BUILDING , i 0 CURRENT STANDARD-COL INTERFACE REQUXREMENTS-IN SSAR ! O CURRENT RSWS STANDARD REQUIRES INAT IVSIDE &- i
- OUTSIDE-EQUIPMENT BE DESIGNED TO SEISMIC, ASME,.
QUALITY & SAFETY STANUARDS ) O CURRENT' CONTROL BUILDING STANDARD Is DESIGNED ACr. INST EXTERNAL FLOOD DAMAGE BY WALL THICKNESS, l
*^" S' ^' ' """c " ' '" "^" ""'
iO l DOOR & PIPING PENETRATIONS, ETc. 0 EARLIER DISCUSSED PIPING CNA$E STRUCTURE (PCS) l i ALSO REQUIRES PROTECTION FOR CB-PENETRATIONS l 0 NO EXPLICIT BUT SOME IMPLICIT DESCRIPTION Or ! P$tYSICAL DISIGH Or CB-PENETRATIONS ARE CURRENTLY i GIVEN l 0 ANTICIPATED STANDARD-COL DESIGN CRITERIA - CONTROL ! BUILDING - RSWS P1 PING PENETRATION , l 0 SUBJECT PIPE PENETRATION MUST BE DESIGNED TO } MAINTAIN CITED CB EXTERNAL FLOODING PROTECTION j 0 SUBJECT PIPE: PENETRATION MUST BE DESIGNED TO SIMILAR REQUIREMENTS As CB AND RSWS (SEISMIC, FLOODING, ETC.) l j 0 SU6JEC.T PIPE PENETRATION Musi PRECLUDE __ INTERNAL
- PCS LEAKAGE OR PIPE BREAK ErrtCTs FROM CB BREAKS-5"'3'c' ' ""^ " "" '"c'^' "
O i i
- 6-1 L
l
s SSAR REVIS10B l l J 0 A PARAGRAPH RELATIVE THE SUBJECT PIPING PENETRATION i WILL BE ADDED TO SSAR SECTION 9.2.15, i i i i 4 4 i O . i 9 ) 4
- 1 O
4 6-2
O O O l PJ I n 5 ;
- h a
ELEVATION-2150mm TMSL t i -am i iorm- tosui - uson wse . I
- = ;
I t i [ g SWIUR
, , - , , w , , , ,,
I _ _ I [ i: -- I O' _ . } -u, I 3 !- soon n !
- r_ man
" " ' " " * "=" '
- 2MXsion l 1 >
C '- y, il
- isse==r = i 1 _
4:e .) l -l I f g t l 1
; != r --
ll "l ll l l l :
; I >== -1 ll 11 ! :
3
'D /
e ! $ Notes-Columns are 1000x1000mm tyfu ! E
~ -
. Floorslabis 400mm thick i ceja:s-pac,f,e t i I, l- Figuro 2.15.12f Control Building Floor 83F - I , 4 d
i f*-
- A fy !. I -
G fa 1, l l l I I
~
-- +
y
\ t
'l: w
- E
_2 ! o I@ $ i l
'ni .
h II N -I! ! 8 i 9
. i k .... '/ g J
i l Fl l .G"W" X 4 FP in[r
-
- S
- * ~
.hl.. _j L hd 2 C
h_
. lEZ ,
f m b
& 6hid l
. g ,.3 g l: = : __ . . _ _ _ .._ _ j b U
.: f i Ic r_ ;
i
+o e _1_ I c l' , j
,8L- 71 - W N l ,
- MM I= .--d ME
= -
a e_ _.. fg 111
~
l .g _c c _g . g F.5: J i IG p lfI 8
!i lQ l
!c I
d-
\a -,
3 o ( C-c- l i n - - i h ~! _ C"" b l* 3 O !g E -
~
_4 -_ ,, WBI pl I o-
. I ! l 9 I (' l l 1 I I I I I I I
l . j . l . l .t i o j . l
([) #7 PLANT EQUIPMENT COMPARTMENT - STRUCTURAL BARRIER WALLS - AP CAPABILITIES ACRS_IN0VIRY PROVIDE ADDITIONAL INFORMATION RELATIVE TO PLANT EQUIPMENT ROOMS STRUCTURAL / BARRIER WALLS CAPABILITIES WITH SPECIFIC EMPHASIS ON THE REACTOR BUILDING, THE SECONDARY CONTAINMENT, THE CONTROL BUILDING AND THE DIV1SIONAL SEPARATION COMPARTMENTS UNDER PIPE BREAK, FLOODING & FIRE CONDITIONS. THE INFORMATION SHOULD ADDRESS cP INTEGRITY RETENTION CAPABILITIES, COMPARTMENT PRESSURIZATION FLOODING & FIRE ANALYSIS AND COMPARTMENT & QUADRANT VENTING / RELIEF TECHNIQUES. Q GE RESPON_S" 0 SC - BARRIER DIFFERENTIAL PRESSURE DESIGN BASIS - OVERVIEW 0 SC BARRIER STRUCTURAL DESIGN CAPABILITIES-SHIELDING & STRUCTURAL CODES 0 SC DIVISIONAL SEPARATION ZONE LOADS ARE CONFINED TO Two H.E. PIPE BP.EAKS O H.E. BREAK LOADS ARE MOMENTARY - STRUCTURAL CAPABLE Or GREATER LOADS O CONSERVATIVE PRESSURIZATION ANALYSIS & TECHNIQUE ARE USED 0 RELIABLE VENTING EQUIPMENT IS USED 0 BARRIER PENETRATION DESIGN BASIS RESULT FROM PRESSURIZATION ANALYSIS O BARRIER ARE EVALUATED FOR OTHER BREAK EFFECTS 0 BARRIER LEAKTIGHTNESS IS VARIABLE, SUBJECTIVE & EFFECT SPECIFIC O 7-1
~ . _ . _ _ _ . . _ _ . _ _ _ . _ - - . _ _ _ _ - _ _ . _ _ _ _ . . ~ . - _
1 5 i ! O SC o INTEGRITY IS Nor REQUIRED AFTER INTERNAL BREAKS I o BREAK, Bl.oWDoWN, VENT, ISOLATION & RECOVERY i i j 0 CONTROL BUILDING BARRIERS ARE LEAKTIGHTNESS ORIENTED 1 o RADIOLOGICAL BASIS i o MODERATE ENERGY BREAK i
- o AIR INLEAKAGE j o EXTERNAL flood PROTECTION o STEAM TUNNEL INTEGRITY 1
SSAR-REVISION 4 \ o A BRIER PARAGRAPH RELATIVE To THE STRUCTURAL BARRIEit aP l DESIGN BASIS REQUIREMENTS WILL BE ADDED To APPROPRIATE SSAR. l !O 1 I l i i ! P i 1 m
- o 7-2.
l l MkN 21A610tRD m'A j S andard Plant I I O i. l 1 r l SECONDARY
.....................,...q
- CONTAINMENT la l
i
'l BOUNDARY l I.
3 i l. DRYWELL i CONNECTING DRYWELL l. j -l VENT 1 1 a _. I HEAD i l PRIMARY t '! CONTAINMENT l $ '9 i _.. 3 1 VESSEL i g E.-- ,
,O, !
r m3
'g s ,
I r
.e s
- *g : = = DIAPHRAGM :
'6 l
! ., 3 UPPER FLOOR 3 f .l.* *C.E 3. *.?,' ..:
.g 3 DRYWELL 3 e 4 : l Ws g e U , O '
F E SUPPR ESS, j
- u. CLEAN ZONE l
l 3 3 CHAMBER j - AIRSPACE == ! - ,, . ,, a I 'e h, = ! ! - : LOWER :
- SUPPRESS, j
- $ r AYWELL
- HORIZ. POOL :
,* I E VENT
=
8 E 88E 8l $........mm.. . .... , _........);8M8 " ! 8ASE MAT ! \ PRIMARY I CONTAINMENT l BOUNDARY 87 245 28 i 1 1 Figum 6.2-26 ABWR CONTAINMENT BOUNDARY NOMENCLATUf!E O , 6.: 76 1 4
, - . . _ . . . . . , . , . , y - - ,,-.4. _ . . . . . - . - - . _ ,e_ --
- ~ - w ,, , m _ . , _A ABWR Standard Plant
"^'U O m ATMOSPHERE XX#
m4 Le-m m _' h m d' w - .- _ - .w _-
.s.
i o. I be 1and t. tem s % TURBINE BUILDING w".".'"."".'"""'*"**
+-t+ = =. w - - -
ah ST1 ak
+ ,,,s.,_
ses see ir 1r STEAM TUNNEL ,
,,,g m . ,
me ,y, l M 331 me sus spesa amou
, i r sense %asu ems
*
- db db Jb db 1r Cerenaed cc Fipse 6J.37s. am
,mg RTla
.maemeLe a seti s.ne t i me gr W g 1r ame Atet man seemsen A L aser seenssa O ' een a T J e L seat gustassWA F 44AT GEleAREEA un6eseau i i r m easaw J n ms o seau et I ,,,,, we , i r. me dk Ak Jh Ak Jk i
me ' suni iP 1P thauf RTWL
.- m a , ,
me amans fue sur a gi e i pas ans asur m Star - " resummes taan seatesmeseem a a L sent monesaum a un6e suam se6eseau , i r sees ans em ,,, 85 4b db fue . . 6 ase r piser im64 a t amou , r **
= = *.
1r 1P mas ame pgess estan64 J t k FLAP W
, i r
- tun "*
" " " " " * " " " " * " " " " ^ " " "
O Anwedment 22 62471
t ABWR = = = an c Standard Plant !O XX# m ATMOSPHERE oao
" he s - _a eSm.aus em.y ! _ % ms;. -
__.. d6 d6 d6 _g__
. m_ _ m__ m_ _
l t 5.i- u., ! e- - .sm-n ,.8 VRalNe m 1 4===$ aan.mm ens > am.
++* ~ * * * * * * * = ' - - BUILDING 44 .- ST1 l dk ab sei ew I
gr 1r t noce es, mon a sma STEAM TUNNEL
- m. . 2 . t esca m o.wv.s a . t i , f V m a ,
w w = .. sai ab m.. A i 1r
, .. .ux i
- L =.
m e== n ens l l comune en m e n s.2 m. 1 i ir 1 . .=u. .um. m ene<= ens db l = .. l r seneanemi. t w r m == and db l ~- -
- m. .
_ ir M WWIII.s A
& y a r m ams ,
=
ne m i r1 r 1r a = mae .
. 2 . t swuma ==. , . ,
W est 4 MGURE 6.247a. SECONDARY CONTANMENT SCHEMATIC FLOW DIAGMAM, O A m a meni n _ , , , _ . _ _ . _ . _ . _ _ _ _m. .. ,
-. - . . . . . . . . . . . .. -. . - , - - _ . - _ . . - - - . - - -. - . - . _ _ - - - - - . . . . - . . . - ~ - ,
l O O O l TABLE 82 SUBCOMPARMENT N00AL DESCRNmON in meet conomONS BREAK COMTEMS"' e% { unanm e eum T I 1 eman a== amsa - 4 man. ouesmas sammany ar.anos sawm as. asma ensam me nua m I wun.aam ,s, _
,i n.e
.. - . -- r.. - - g 3 ate 104 14.7 10.0 SA3 et AAes 6.190 DOUBLE 3S a sat WWE PulW S MAT 1 STEAas tees) ENDED EmGMMIGEM MOOM SAR ftCec PbEir & TM femas 3343s ted 14.7 ee SA2 e - b8S e.19e DE 3.5 ECCtMW ASW pre WACE See see t4.7 se e SAs r- tes e ito DE 4.1 l Sam SAs ECCSafW A &JF FFE WACE seen see 14.7 18 e SA4 e ass e.tes DE 2.7 !
Sese see 14.7 toe SAS e - b8S e see DE 2.3 ' Ses ECCfMP'
- StF PSE WACE 38835 104 14.7 tes SAs e*- has e.tes DE to l
! SAs WIDESIDfLOCRPUE WAE SAF ECCF48W AMW fMM28 4485 tot 14.7 see SAF e - ass e.tes DE 1s l e.tes DE i2 SM ECCSept APSE fEftSWI 7NS tes 14.7 tem SAs e"-tes , ters See 14.7 teD SRI r-fueC"J e23e DE 42 Wtt ftWOUPW fCOsts l 3ft fgt3CU PtAS'fMOt&A 1988 1e4 14.7 10 0 SRB r - MWWCU e338 DE se I fggICU PLSS'MW fE3000 asse les 14.7 10.6 SRS r-MuuCU esse DE 2D f' We e338 DE 32 Sft6 BACNumset TAfst5W000 1SESL see 14.7 10.0 Sfu r- HufCU i Sf3 squgCU fS3eHEWfEfL DEAT 730 tat 14.7 tea SnB r- fUuuCU 0338 DE as EmmenEnmWnoons ' 7ege sat 14.7 10A SRS 8"- HUUCU 0.tes DE 33 . l EfB MuuCU fdO8HEWfER. FEAT EncMAfeGER HOOes WWF MuuCU Fe VAI,W fMMMSS et79 104 14.7 tem WIF r- HuuCU e tes DE 2.7 , Sne nwCuremWnoon e = i4.7 we SR. r-nwCu e. tee De 2. esse fat 14.7 tea 3RD F- RWICU eJ38 DE 4.4 , PWW flWWCufEGEtt. FEAT , f 873. sat 14.7 tea SfHe F. fUUUCU G25e DE 4.3 l, i Snee INDICU fEGEM.9 EAT . j ENCHAfeGERROOed 5 01 i fugICU Fe RDOB84 age. 104 14.7 tee 5 411 e*- HUICU e. tee DE 4A t sees See 14.7 toe SR12 e -MupCG e.tes DE 43 i SRt2 HuuCU Fe ROOas-A Weis NWCU PPE fETiseIFAE 79t0 104 14.7 tes SRis e - RusCU esse DE 22 147We 104 14.7 te s SSI 2e -ass 4 279 DE te s . i Set STEAAd inNSEL I 5.12E.8 tee 14.7 teD SSt 20*-88S 4 270 DE IS 4 STt TtsteseE ButrN h i e 4 ! i
- A n
~'
!. MOTE: "'LedITeeG OREAK (XXED (E LOCATED es ANOT)ER SUeOOesPARTesENT. l ! I' l
.- - -.-_= - - - _ - - . - - . - - . .
i 1 ! ABWR 22A6imAn Standard Plant Rev c i
- O rosie 6.2 4 I SUBCOMPARTMENT VENT PATH DESCRIPTION i
stosuosw Pou. ftOW P10W HEAD LIES OPENip*O OPE >tNQ l met ntou to osous now e stv- vrxr cormersvr rREssCRs ttus 2 PATN VOLT.W E VOLUWE #wt OR AAEA LEN0tN (AP) (Aq ID h00E ID PsOD38 ID UM h0KED $UR$0hlC (FT') (M) FORWAAD REVERSE (PSID) (SEC) i Y FAI SA1 M2 UNCHOKED S11BSONIC 20.0 4.1 2.078 2.077 03 0.2 ! FA2 SA) SA3 2.0 2.3 15f1 1581 03 OJ , FA3 M2 SA3 40 2.3 1382 1380 03 0.2 i FA4 M2 SA4 10.0 4.1 1A57 1 639 03 0.2 l FA SA3 SA4 32.0 4.1 1.482 1.712 03 03 I FA6 SA4 SAS 32.0 46 1.664 1.6S4 03 0.2 l FA7 SAS SA6 156.1 4.0 1.271 1.020 (2) (2) J FA8 SA6 SA7 24.0 34 1486 1.717 03 0.2 $ FA9 SA7 SA8 32.0 3.4 1.800 1.821 03 0.2 i FA10 SA8 551 32.0 44 1481 (1) 03 0.2 l , FR1 SR1 SR2 16 0 1.6 2.528 2J28 03 0.2 FR2 SR2 SR3 40.0 2J 2.436 2399 03 0.2 FR3 SRI SR3 40.0 2.3 2.436 2399 03 OJ FR4 SR3 SR4 32.0 2J 2.335 2.359 03 0.2 } FRS SR3 SR5 18.0 3.4 1.688 1.678 03 0.2 q p FR6 SRJ SR6 16.0 34 1A38 1347 03 0.2
- V FR7 SR4 SR10 32.0 3.4 1121 (1) 03 0.2
! FR8 SR$ SR10 20.0 14 1AM (1) 03 0.2 i FR9 SR6 SR10 25.0 23 2.469 (1) 0.5 0.2 , I FRIO SR7 SR8 38 4 33 3 1J43 1.489 (2) (2) FR11 SR7 SR10 72.0 3.4 2.294 2.286 03 0.2 l FR12 SR8 SR9 72 0 3.4 2.316 2.202 03 0.2
- FR13 SR9 SRIO 30.0 3.4 2.249 2.241 03 0.2
! F114 SRA SR13 16.0 4.4 1A65 1A23 03 0.2 , FR13 SR9 SR13 30.0 4.4 1A64 1312 03 0.2 ! FR16 SR10 SR13 39.6 48.4 1.477 1.020 (2) (2) i FR17 SR11 SR12 32.0 2J 2J27 2327 03 0.2 I 23 03 03 FR18 5R12 SR13 32.0 2.327 2.327 i FR19 SR13 SSI 72.0 44. IJ92 (1) 03 0.2 FR20 SR9 SR10 28J 3.4 2.213 2.206 (2) (2) FS* s'il ST) 353.2 M.1 1.481 IJ36 (2) .(2)
- F32 SS1 ST1 2583 4.0 1.020 2.868 (2) (2) i FT1 ST) ATM 100.0 3.0 1319 (1) DJ 02 1 IT2 ST) ATM 100.0 3.0 1J19 (1) 03 0.2 2
FD ST) ATM 100.0 3.0 1319 (1) 03 0.2 i NOTES: (1) Indicates uni dircctional bbwout panel, reverse loss cc.cfficient not applicable. , (2) Indicates flow path without blowout panel,
- o 6.2-48 Arnendsnent 22
_ _ _ , . . _ , . _ . . _ _ . . . . . _ . _ . . _ . , _ _ _ _ _ , _ - . ~ , _ - . _ _ _ _ . . . . ~ .
J i !O #8 USE OF TEMPORARY STACKED BLOCK WALLS WITHIN THE SECONDARY ! , CONTAINMENT 'l l l ACRS INQUIRY l PROVIDE ADDITIONAL INFoRMATIoN RELATIVE To THE USE Or STACKED BLOCK WALL WITHIM THE SECONDARY CONTAINMENT STRUCTURES & l COMPARTMENTS. PROVIDE THE DESIGN BASIS & SAFETY EVALUATION Or ! THESE TEMPORARY STRUCTURES INCLUDING AFFECTS RESULTING FRoM PIPE BREAKS WITHIN THESE COMPARTMENTS ! GE RESPONSE
- O USE OF TEMPORARY BARRIERS WITHIN SECONDARY CONTAINMENT O v'av"
o MoST STRUCTURAL BARRIERS-COMPARTMENTS & EQUIPMENT Room ARE PERMANENT o SoME SEMI-PERMANENT STRUCTURES ARE USED: REMOVABLE SHIELDING WALLS, EQUIPMENT HATCHES, blowout PANELS o INTERNAL MISSILE GENERATION PROTECTION - SSAR 3.5.1 o POTENTIAL HIGH ENERGY SOURCES SSAR 3.6.1 o MISSILE PROTECTION INCLUDES: ENERGY IMPACT, MISSILE ORIENTATION, SAFETY RELATED TARGETS, PRosAsILITY o TEMPORARY BARRIERS MAY CONSIST OF A VARIETY OF DESIGNS - BRICKS & BLOCKS o SUBJECT TEMPORARY BARRIERS WILL BE DESIGNED To STAY IN PLACE UNDER PRES $URIZATIoN EVENTS O ; 8-1 l 1
~. ,, _ - -, . - . . - . . . . - . . - _ - . . ...~-.._'
SSAR REVISION i O o A PARAGRAPH REFLECTING THE AsovE WILL BE Acoro To THE APPROPRIATE SSAR SEcTIoN (E.G. COMPARTMENT ( PRESSURIZATION (6.2.3) On MISSILE POTENTIALS (3.5.1). O 4 0 8-2
eMlM i Standa j
. i e i . . .
lO @ 0 $ 8 0 i mr I mr i m-c
. i r:c ::r:
1
@ n g g @ i I e
i
\
l i 54rc ' m:F ter i ese e: : i ere i ese .m __ , m;
!& $_ 0,__
- q p .,
i s i i ; a n, ,i gi ~~i ii,i, , , t_- T' . X 11514 ! ! H ! ! IJJMUGI IJJ hu IJJ IIu i ! gntlnu Jul 14 g_. myi i
. {Lf,.jieing-'l'
_g :-- 4 "7 ,
. ; m Lng. -p ,
4-M.CE @}g$ f .- O 3 l 6S c8> $h*hf*y, b _:Q=. z- !_ - e $ 7M_i EsJf-
-p v m @c- o[m p ! -
E
-N2 p:
h @-ent= -
= W,--(": fz*- .
s
@ y , ...
g ---- q
- : 4- A R -
e i- a J. ~.r ; f;,
- r. ;g C5p e Q
9 &f?? 0 28'42L;. i O g d, WWeih .:.1 8 is I e%"a -
~ ~ ~
*:3 31:
p w'- l gp , OMMcr. . el YM w c -m . . \ 1L .% g. .
-_. L Lh3233 r 4
[ '" g EE'EB]g g _ d I g ., - e
= = - -
-+
=-- 15,e_._=
s ,j
._. ,w u _. *
~
3 _ _
" - I
=l
=
; &W*dh4 4
! 3.skf.Y]dn,; g-*~T 5x I
~
. ~ J Tasj @_*** ve ,
~~ U N5iiII g[I L I IITilTl [ Ell I I I M*LI I I I Ij-Llll'"*l I I il15 IIT~
s -,
-== ==\ {
2 l / ~j /R* *@ l v c Du .>,. c3D l entD ise. cb-g m u:: m I v j 4 l '8 i . Figure i AmtM
%~
., AB' sam
. I s ( , ,
. o a y y epr e i I2000 t2000 12^$0
- 0:0 m 9.
;@ 8 54000 e i e te
]
1300 I_ acar .at%, i acco I agge i . ac S I ****J $2*C
@ ap
!8 ;/
k jl X j. iN'D i j $ ,,=j / - ><,' I
- k u
~ N1 I I I I i I Ll11] Ll_F I 1 I u t i i i i F IEl .j i Tif I I f 1 I ll .:Ellll I if/k:_Y N/
, (t/Q f '
g.d-j "g i . ., g= ~ m . i
. s s . . . W W.
v .,
- ' - /) ec. .s hy .
$ L3 g ~ " ( I, % . ,- l '
i ,I '- q O i .:3 l hk : Nw [4 , d_
' N h
; h l ]
i , , e'"'",n. c i 4 qa ~I I ; n
=
m g k 1 - g EEi I b -"
- k. '
g-
}
; L "nQ
_'= ,,n - I C 3 -- $be'
^
MMY. d_ reVQ g. p' QWg 1 -
/ l
\ p 4 _ _
& A ? %n 1
eegrt- e a 7r _m e ,. _ s O _ g h4
# E 3! s% s .@ -
w g e i % u. .I % J 3rd . _ . . b -$ ,, ' $ &'\ .#;
. p & - (-
W e', i ,, 4 -- e - - e s, . M
.'r_ _. 4 -
_ = -- v2MM M, e--' n ~; t d, P GE M E D, , _g g s. l D ggi . ggg
$ h 9_nt my9 k" ,m . " _3, _ p'll 'T e f t
h wnmi , ., m _ A r .g s3 /, , lilIitPL11ItilIPL11IIRITI D TT . W 71 .i 1711 1 I I i lAlli i "2'
$ i @ @l@ l @l @ i @ - ;
e 180* ITNk-t70u (E28 1 anonsasute maca usf ose M maME "I E88 M22 M10 4. 88ourion Cook 8vt1' " j* n; "li::11. i. "co* '?.".o'""* %"."im'" T'."-a . l f L',",,',".,=a'.'.".,',"O'. c= co. == n;":::::: 1 ~.c, l,t*t.,4lT.'".J ~ " ' 8 ":!::::: 1. lli=ll3lll".= =t S; :!!:l'::" ' = ll= = = ll:::t h S; en :::= u . : =.,.=.au .co o.=.us.=t 6 8 l 4 i 1 3 { { Figura
ABV/R : Standard P
. i . t . i _ < ,
i O ei s 0 9 s, e, i
=- ,----
, , - me .::
O '
@ <@i i Ose @ i
;3 ' ee-- m-- i e :: ) er : I sse:
I es:3 1.,:: ; I i
$1 @1 j g
;p
_ . r.__
@ @ @ ') 8 ICN
.u--_
_l_ -l .
. p, y
- c 77. ;t M,GEdni:1_m cumLgL% g qwi.,.__3
= ' ,J ;i e* ii 1 _: g-
~E70 %
g-osK
, i _or 60 - E ]A6' [jjl.
5~~ ~e a.,, v, %.- -. - - g, m c- - ,a ,
.- - l,m, i
O f e k] MG ins k_ E
- p s i e g w ,. ....
. @ _b_ .st b sq x " _ r _' o s- ( n g
g 5 pD _ 'y'- '" ~ f,. i4. . . Lg lg , in , , ,
~
[ Ob tEO. ' 6 l] m Oi - L* f,o i .-
. m y' - t -
e r/-'-
+ w g ,,-i j' ; ,
p* o* h,! .
'KI M F Ti 'l N)
,r Q-E .
TBm% is W as*'3 ~ %g$V.. g f IaW < si e .pr.IdB' @ . , A ~
- -a
- !. ~
m@9 I, n.' / MdiD i bv (W -...
/ *%,
t - . w 3 ' NE f (%rE"L,,,-:- a
.,Obke c a t i-i _
- N~R,1
~1 :+ ( @ iiF w ,fi T"I"I _,__,~~ '*
C"-s
&. %yQ -- ,
J W i!'
, -- , ~ . - ,e--
6,
".,;-+ ',[.ilu%n . e ,v2 Rw@ '
~
- I M' -h : Q ...
~
E, f. .... . G. - I d' .j-.4eiMRI eaj ekm a ! ci,; i L u.c% 7~ i) e_ .. u .-- e ,
@n, r.m .- . s , , , + ,, i m i o i ii o _, ~ c .;:::a
+
h)bNhl h'$ 1 '"' M n AI g "adg@a cI!p
/bl eg;;p e f
r r
- u 3
g m tec.
'7.-
< m- 3 =-
\
0 i 3 6
- , .. E LL A \ 4 i . i . i .
y Figure 1. Amendment
- I , , , , t_
O I I l
- O q q c e i , en i
!- !2000 t;00a - .rww a l m-t v
3' M) v t@%,,- @)v I
! ! !:400: I g a.. a500 ' ::5:: _ er::. 9:0 '
l8 I ' I l @ da !@ I 5, ii '4::T ie f N I I I I i 1 ! 1 G (Htt%1 I. ub ll L-, "' h-M O. ~ - IIIIil'1 4 f ' % -t-s O' y itnse i e -y--3m 8 m ,g;_w;*,rs m '_t.a2p 2- M 8 {c_T t / Q Eb..:. ; .- - w EDf y_,j g
/ N .
@ we h
+r: u gey g se S '(;) L d S i1 w..
s
%esfg g' l,i-. g+
cmy ' r s= c M at-T m l% . cs Jgm M%NDI s ( 25 5 mi s:i m.s 2 Fse @?- -
~me- - i n
'EA i
\ SI I 2'** OM D i S f_ ." [I 3
@ W" & I l CL N -e 3, g.
5 D' @~- ~
. "Q _(,
e - M c..
- Q ._.s &*_am e M--
6 csc-NiiiI W
.g g 'e J
- LjLit
! E CED-"L _77,!C A :. m ..,,, .J :""'** e , < -< - W .
- GB) g!w y-.,.i .
p! i l - . d m ..
\ ' W %.1 w ,.a4, r; . ! 'hN Y\ (il C'5'k[ y ,
._ bk
- r-.
i sl y-_0-- _w m' .-
. ,,,, g . - ~ . . ,,,
- q. '-- - 1,; Aa ,,-,,.d.,
e \/ a.h- .: 3& 9 i ,,
/
@ 8'" [..
kJ _ E-r " A E MI ""' l i t i ri n i n- u i rif i i iit i l i~iii r4 1rritir1 T
. - $l Hb O l I i %""d_ Ig" 8 180' ,!
'l .)
1 3 i
\
..,-.b$A
" IA h
~
l n o s
"=*
2 I 3 I 1 l
MN nruoarc Standard Plant p1v c i . ! . 1 , - i . i O P m:0 . J q e v j nu imo / p
.r - a 5
( i R2 i RK i R4 R5 Coe i6 R/
'M'.. I'- 'L.: '
/'- e5:"K i ' c5D A =>a i +
LLLI Ir4;= =J+3 - e i!11#ILttrii1in11 Wi i i i ! Itr I i i H _Im i I i i 1.1 i- 1.n i i i i ! ! X :stnp__.3 ' - .e.. b b- .., .... # b .
.t ;-
gdg~ ,= p jy . d x(, M- -
-9 _,, 4 ma .
+ ,. ; y l g:ier hp GD n ; ~ g -
-9
.\
w 5 %q (g) c= aR sy
~ i a
PI e.p --=J n w O'a s-g t-
~
ps j sa:n - N ra , :c i o
-"9 .
--'pasto -
} i' 9 g CED\ %
~S w! g, aTJ :
w: : 6-A
% e w
g_3 . 1'--$EED: __.g [ .- __ ct > {: hli l E l; _Ag K ' 5 .3 k._j l. h (y {&t: ' nm , s =>
~B .
5 t~ r i l-3 .E_ i t-S -f a ic - I i
/ :
I l L ,nI;' se O r s _ :J -
'F M c-. H,-
m
-3 p
G-----a
--n,e,,a d .
sv y nd Nus-
=
WJ4wW T% =
,l.-4 fTITf"< =l 9 W w -- @
.gt me l
' = %.", :
- t oo - - ,'. .TJ- - *co - - r = r'" " !!a m= co = m ' _"^="m. "- ?.!, ,",o..,ll*3
- .mc.c" "~"
1 O ,.m , . . .. h " *^ ... al%- na* *"" """'"
. % n -- .ua ... '", t'."'.= m !! '#3.nc'"' - "m" " '* %^" '"'",'."c.'
L 1 .L,.c'.'"~n"" ucs " '"' u -- a "",cu, m il. ...'.E","lE!'"'"u.a'n m- o
..=""'
o c. .
.m3 i ", "3','o"= r- . ., " .'n%'*'"C5. m - - u 'l Mt. !!
.. c2.'uco
(/
c~,.a T '""" ^
-~%".'-m - '.'".o'!."'n m M,.'.,".0. - = - !! M.. .,.e.c ""cu" n,"
- n. en . Ch.ciun
-~
,L MA.P f.m Post wu.aressO 3 t. =ecue e prwy .I c must.catsten s.a.st i a cm . -
/. oc Figure 1.2-5 REACTOR BUILDING, ARRAF3EMENT PLAN AT ELEVAkON -1700mm
Stand O,l i ai i ef ^ A /~"'N ,O. , g / \
/
3 , r h ' sor ! _; ?!" a::: aa'a 'F** ?? " :r: ei : - _ . - .o___- N i i
!- 3 l l
.ys, , : M, u J ! = W pl -3 - m .\L.
,.u r ::
! 1,V ,6 "". -. g ;g ;v s'"NA /\/'\i,
,z i--
- +
' _* ** ** ~ '"" ql4- g)i ( i P; I. --- . . _ com l 4
ri ,1 1 ll % a e
.a sa we s-
*e 1aya ii gi} It Am ,
l;
" 'v c--: .
% "l lJ i 1,q...~,
l,
'rL31 ?";... C'"[ [ l i I I d !
L k k e gg y
- s;n:: ? *'"- , i_-
. ,4:
i j y i I
,;- aas I
.r e ld ~ ~ -
1: m m=E l. y on.e s
* = 1 E
1?.34,2 ) $ :O .
! f, ,
-um N'2 !
,O W
"J"'d' I U ~
k "e=j l l~C]Hr? U D W K-
~
E~$
, ex., . , ,,
. .pr A/ / n .
-fi .w .
e p-n
. w& -"wi4 lv .'
rs::m ,, y,i i il p h. 'A : t
- a lj ! g_ ., n.s-.
v us i vu :< .g.ny_- . m q. , T. 'rsi 73:0 ,,,_ m ==. .h bN~~C s .e:: cr
,. =MNk% - m #
x
%) b) ,,f %mk ' ~ _e ~<
i a h -h "A%e !. *1' i m M """" i - r"
/m I 1,.t .. n:: __
p ._23 7y _--
- 6 J
_m _ g i l er s u:e [-$3 1 3 ,,~ J
- ; 2'
.L ll Q
42 2 C3 h N ! = ~--lI- !L-iH C
. i- -
--e_
v i , e i 8-8 SECTCM t1 ,
~i . i .
, i .
Figur@ ArntnJs?
i i J !O #9 PLANT EQUIPMENT COMPARTMENT - BARRIER PENETRATIONS - l DESIGN RASIS & E'/ALUATION ,i ACRS IN0VIRY PROVIDE ADDITIONAL SPECIFIC DESIGN BASIS & EVALUATION INFORMATION RELATIVE To THE REACH R1 BUILDING, THE SECONDARY l CONTAINMENT, THE CONTROL BUILDING AND THE DIVISIONAL SEPARATION l i BARRIER PENETRATIONS. SPECIAL EMPHASIS SHOULD BE' DIRECTED'AT THE i j WIDE VARIETY OF BARRIER PENETRATION TYPES (INCLUDING PIPING, j CABLE TRAYS & HVAC DUCTS) USED IN THE ABWR STANDARD DESIGN UNDER PIPE BREAK;: PRESSURIZATION, FLOODING & FIRE CONDITIONS. ! INFORMATION SHOULD CITE INTEGRITY ASSURANCES & PRESSURE &- l T2MPERATURE-ACCOMMODATIONS. [O GE RESPONSE 1 L 0 GENERAL PLANT SYSTEMS - BARRIER' PENETRATION - DES 2GN r i CONSIDERATION OVERVIEW , j o ABWR STANDARD. DESIGN IS UNIQUE RELATIVE To.PAST
- PLANT DESIGNS O SECONDARY CONTAINMENT - DIVISIONAL SEPARATION
- QUADRANT BARRIER PENETRATION ARE OF MosT IMPORTANT
! AND OF GREATEST INTEREST DA T T N I E EC l o DIVISIONAL SEPARATION ALso. PROVIDE PROTECTIVE i HOUSING ~FoR PIPING PENETRATIONS,~ INSTRUMENTATION, ! CONTROL &_ POWER PENETRATIONS, HVAC PENETRATIONS & l AUXILIARY SERVICE PENETRATIONS (E.G. COOLING [ WATER) ! OL . L
- 9-1
. ,, - ...-2 _ - - , . , . - _ , , , . . _ , . .-..._..-._._.._,,......_.-___.u.....,_
i o PENETRATION CHARACTERISTICS ARE-Or MAJon INTEREST
- ENVIRONMENTAL QUALIFICATIONS, APRESSURE, IAPABILITIES, STEAM, AIR-on WATER LEAKAGE, ETC.
i O SECONDARY CONTAINMENT & CONTROL BUILDING i l PENETRATIONS AkE ALSo Or INTEREST i o THE NORMAL OPERATION & ACCIDENT ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS UNDER WHICH THESE PENETRATIONS MUST l OPERATE ARE IDENTIFIED IN SSAR SECTIONS 3.4.1; l ! 3.6.1;- 6.2.3: 6.2.3.3.1.1; 9.4.5;'9.5.1; 3.4.1 AND j APPENDIX 3I l 0 PENETRATION DESIGN WILL UTILIZE HARDWARE SIMILAR
.To PROVEN,-RELIABLE TYPES USED IN PAST REACTOR f
j DESIGNS NoW OPERATING ! O PRIMARY CONTAINMENT PENETRATIONS WILL BE SUBJECTED ! To CURRENT REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS (E.G. APPcNDIX ) J, ETC.) l o SECONDARY CONTAINMENT & CONTROL BUILDING PENETRATIONS WILL SIMILARLY SUBJECTED To PAST f REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS (E.G. SGTS OPERATION) 1 0 CONTROL BUILDING WILL BE INLEAKAGE LIMITED (E.G. j RADIATION EXPOSURE) ! o REACTOR BUILDING DOES Nor HAVE A LEAKAGE LIMIT 0 SPECIFIC BARRIER - DESIGN BASIS (ACCIDENT CONDITIONS) i 0 DIVISIONAL SEPARATION I -QUADRANTS: 171 C 0.035, 100% RH, 3 Hour FIRE,-SUBMERGENCE FLOODING, LIMITED LEAKAGE o CLEAN Room:- 90 C,-0,.S04 RH, 3 HOUR FIRE,. LIMITED LEAKAGE o DRYWELL: 171*C, 3.16, 100% RH, LIMITED LEAKAGE' l- o- SECONDARY CONTAINMENT: >0 C, 0, 100% RH, LIMITED-LEAKAGE LO l 9-2 1 !~
._ _ _ . _ . ~ . _ . _ . _ . _ . . _ _ _ . . _ . _ _ _ . . . _ . _ _ _ _ . . _ _ . . _ _ . . . _ _ _ . _ . _ _ _ _ _ _
i i i l l SSAR REVISION i. o A SET OF PARAGRAPHS WILL BE ADDED To THE APPROPRIATE l SSAR SECTIONS RELATIVE To THE As0vs'SC & CB SPECIFIC . PENETRATION DESIGN i i i i l i i !O i i i i, t i l' 1 ! O-4 4 i i. 9-3 k
_ . _ _ . _ _ . _ . _ _.. __ __ __ _ ._. - . _ . _ -_ _ . _ . ~ . . _ _ . _ _ _ _ . . _, 4 i i ABM 234.iooA. Standard Plant arv 4 1
- .O 4
h ' I } SECONDARY CONTAINMENT f f 5
~ 3
- A ~
i 2
- r 1 PRIMARY ' )
' CONTAINMEN( \O
= '
t j ENVIRONMENT l ! BASEMAT I t i LEAKAGE FROM: l 1. PRIMARY CONTAINMENT TO ENVIRONMENT OR CLEAN ZONE !' 2. PHIMARY CONTAINMFN r TO SECONDARY CONTAINMENT.. , 3. SECONDARY CONTA!NMENT TO CLEAN ZONE OR THE ENVIRONMENT p .
- a7 245 29 l
i ! Figurs 6.2-27 THREE BASIC TYPES OF LEAKAGE PATHS 1 1 [ I. t e 6.2-77 i 1
. - - - - - , ,o- -
- ~ .,.._,-._...-..-~.__.....-.,4-..- ., . . . .~. ~..
.w- - - - - , - - - - - - - - - . . . , - .
. _-----s.__.6 .m-._m.._-__ a._a.mm, , - __m g, _,.,_,_._ ,,. a_m u,2 ,
, & '?
, / . %' ,' ,
z ~ a s / y- , f p m '4
/
/ l .
va '
/:,
/1 / . f" $
}
I ( h
- y. ..
tlf
~
~q
%r ' <
gg 42 , . - l ,
~ .
0lj , o Q- . ay a4
,v f u</ ~-
/
l
~
1 .
// ,
[ mg ~ f,- l N ihh
8 c 5 n - 8F,i E d 8! 8!d8l d2a g! h;g h oo E e Q-ljp gl~ a! v q o 3 - Jos f 1 , C s x a. 5
* %, ;{ : 5 5 5js s; 5
<m5 i
3,l,
,uqll 56 i (
, # -j m i rv ,. , a 4; d 'gk L t= 3 6 4 J l
- (@a e j
~'
~i /~ ,4; e; l A m, s wh-it
- 4
< ll <*. E g "
~l' CE: jl l;
d j j 3 I ' e 1 I'- , 2 Q (, I'8I2:'f lc - k' <5., x ITTIII k i f;?llllll!3gg
, j Qllll illI:ll
! W
! a i E /ii $91
~
r1 1 6, _ V= I
%:r (g
UN l
=i
-_ I,+#& mr J l. i Q- 'V I-l=1 -
p
- d w.*L_ - :n 8 : 7 __.... 1. .s er l v
!. H[ '~$ [N g 3513 l 5 4_
1 i\. kg a, x
~
l l j l , \ '--M,y- - . e ke =ay l di ! > 4: -{=o
-k 1
g y= _- :p n - 1
,r \ ,) ,P ,
9 i 4 - I :n=jl
~
,lljli),l . Il l l J Ll ;LI,Illli
) b=A < V- n_A C et _ l _. .
(e\ 1qr -
~ .><~ i 5j C' 3;fis 7
- I . I is t sa :p- s I
~ s a
. -l 9 l llg' a f > t ,, p .
e : ;I I I IJ m m..
-i i 1
!! = im CICp-
%/ - L/L_J . i .
. . ~
r e, , , Cut- j,iiisihn - tGTIIItilIFT~~~~ d j 1
- 9 8 lli i [
- , 1 \ !
8 ! 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8! N 9;
; I 2 : ? N ;; ; R, ti ! ?!
x . m o n , , .! . i i l
.- l -
d a . w I e i I i < O V
-a g J l- I! I l 4 :
f -e I' O O -
- E n -
8 81 n
%p? % e 9 '
j7mm Q ' c< 0:
- d. @
~
~
m 8, 5 g= r.v :. -.
- o
.c .-
.; a inin g__ -
g ll j. ~ l S
~ ~
l1 1' N h i
;l l- 1:l. ._TF4g I ! :
i .m y>= c 'sc c. l; ;; (%s.r s:;:. , m, _qes, gl cpc ; _,, , _ , %,m 1 r- Ld,lSi llITll J-,m illi . IIIIlllll-
!jN - :.l
- g g _.
ll? ! G '. (' :Q {m - W l- WL MJ n) ( - E / h'g j_ 1 :::. # f 43 8 \ _I 9 ![ N M i ll ~~~ i 3 l"~ ~~ j~ WW g
/
I , i _. ( ' s N_IL'" e xi m[4 n 7%
-P x t ISS
?
= :lT 3 ;.q q*3i...
~
i w. x[bl'I @f lLI 9 5" l _ $
~ 7 ll ' -
'i e j J;l p W l,I I I I I
@19 c- -
Y 5- C ._ p--l au
-1 m~m-.,7 B_ilA -i2 4 l =p
, :r
. !,! _I
, I _ _2 i ip7T0 cK
,&,b: _l .i til
, r ;.: m. g o iiiiim ir:::
p
~
$_l -
I d : , _4 a
- gg E l
' 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 a i l8a,,l 8 2
- n, : 8
- s. x , n -. ,
Q;t 3_ Q d $ I~) s_ . 5 _ _ @l Q Q _ _ E. 1 @1 e i
- e i e e i e i.
] j i 110 PLANT EQUIPMENT COMPARTMENT - USE OF BARRIER f (]) DOORS - DESIGN BASIS & EVALUATION i l ACRS-INQUIRY 1 PROVIDE AaDITIoNAL SPECIFIC DESIGN BASIS & SAFETY EVALUATION INFORMATION RELATIVE To THE RFACTon BUILDIIG, THI SECONDARY CONTAINMENT, THE CONTROL 277LDING AND THE DIVISIONAL SEPARATION l BARRIER 000nS. SPECIAL EMPHASIS SHOULD BE DIRECTED AT THE WIDE F
- VARIETY OF BARRIER DOOR CLOSUPES TYPES (INCLUDING SINGLE & DOUBLE i WIDE DOORS, MOTOR-OPERATED DOORS, SLIDING Do0RS, EQUIPMENT
- HATCHES / DOORS, LARGE VEHICLE ENTRY DOOPS, ELEVATOR DOORS &
STAIRWELL DOORS) UssD IN THE ABWR STANDARD DESIGN UNDER PIPE BREAK CONDITIONS: P9ESCC4IZATIONS, FLOODING & F:RE. INFORMATION i SHOULD CITE aP CAPABILITIES, AIR & WATER LEAK-TIGHTNESS, FIRE RESISTANCE, AND CLOSURE RELIABILITY. (} ! GE RESPONSE O BARRIER DOOR USE - OVERVIEW o- ABWR STANDARD DESIGN - UNIQUE COMPARTMENTIZATION & FREELY USES BARRIER DOOR
- o doors PROVIDE READY YET CONTROLLED ACCESS TO MODULAn EQUIPMENT CUBICLES / AREAS c READY ACCESS ENHANCES PLANT SURVEILLANCE, TEST,
[ INSPECTION & Mf!NTENANCE OPERATIOhi
- o MINIMIZES PERSONNEL & EQUIPMENT DOSE;. MAXIMIZES 4
ALARA INITIATIVES. o- SSAR PLANT LAYOUT DRAWINGS IDENTIFY MoST DOORS o ABWR WILL HEAVILY UTILIZE PAST REACTOR "'OR-
- -OPERATING EXPERIENCE INSIGHTS - RELIABILA..,
OPERABILITY, ETC. ({} f 10-1
. -. _ - - . ~ _ . .. ,,
7_ 4 T 0- WIDE VARIETY OF BARRIER DOORS MAYBE UTILI2E; ONLY 1 A FEW ARE REQUIRED FOR SAFETY PURPOSES; l l i j 0 BARRIER DOOR U.E - SAFETY DESIGN BASIS - VARIABLE i
- o. REACTOR BUILDING ,
j
- WATER TICHT DOORS AT GRADE LEVEL EXTERNAL l FLOODING PROTECTION-O SECONDARY CONTAINMENT --
} - WATER.IIGHT, FIRE BARRIER, doors FoR-INTERNAL l FIRF/ flood DIVISIONAL SEPARATION'PROTEC*.*IOE o LOWER. LEVEL - FLOOD PROTECTION l i o MID LEVEL - ENVIP.ONMENTAL PROTECTION s O UPPER LEVEL - FIRE PROTECTION. O LOCAL Ft.00 DING - SIu.S AIR T1GHTNESS FoR PRIMARY CONTAINMENT LEAKAGE l l CONTROL VIA SGTS PRESSURE'TIGHTHESS FoR INTERNAL BREAK /0THER l (} o DIVISION-AVAILABILITY PROTECTION MAIN STEAM TUNNEL i WATER TIGHT FoR flood CONTROL PURPOSES [ - PRESSURE TIGHT To MAINTAIN STRUCTURAL-l INTEGRITY / PROTECT SC & CB INTEGRITIES O IURBINE BUILDING No REQUIREMENT 0 CONTROL-BULLDING. l; WATER IIGHT' BASEMENT FoR flood PROTECTION 0F.
- l. UPPER BUILDING l -
AIR TIGHT MCR Fon-OPERATOR-DOSE PROTECTION EXTERNAL. FLOODING WATER TIGHT DOORS l SSAR REVISION i ! o A TABLE WILL DE ADDED To APPROPRIATE SSAR SECTION' REFLECTING tie'ABCVE. A NEW PARAGRAPH WILL BE ADDED To (]J APPROPRIATE SSAR SECTIoN ON BARRIER DOOR DESIGN BASIS. i i 10-2
2 -
! %l- f f. >& ,,, .
mf Y1[ 'N sp i ,/! I ' Ns ^ ,
/- h s 'x g \r s '
\ i /( // 42 fs:s N
r
~ n.
sgwty,
- - uQ,
, e .c -
o X.'x k' h'] g. t
, yx % .'L ;x7y J :: -
e ; , ,, j ' ov .#. p
\ .;_
4 - j ,.-
.* . ,E e,_ '.
, x y, , g$% .
Site plan key .lc -
\:;j's
= = =
'y":t"l:'";::";
=e,^ H ..3'1t;;r, f ' s';..
~
a,
- 1"""*'Oba , - t L., $c ', A,.4 e-
* ""' L"'*7. """ '~ ,
, L,, _. .
, L N s -
_O >,
4 ABWR onsign Document o V i e - S!:0 s 'S** - 9 $ 0; s ** t*:: e ' $0 e e 5 5 0 0 --.-. 30
; i 2:* !
x- ._, '- '- -- i g y . .. 3 3
~
! j'.
j /f"-- - 9500 ' f ' ; c. f
. c' , f g, f .i
'I l l !!
g.y I ' (! '
~m gi l t j , 7 ~ '
*==8
'"'* ,{ d.a h
- 6 *- a I
, :=0 1:
l
~.
i we. f m ". I p1
.m
- hl .
i i U I 1
' )
t 1ll m l
. / ,
'p ,
~
enk 4 O ' O a i
- 8000 cwe l n 270- ,, 5 w I .
.InO ,.
b O l l*J 1I l f
/~) se00 l. ,
/ Rf .s i-- g
** . j m l l
t g ' g./ ' e, J ,
/
, , _- . / <
.= 8 k<-5
*-%.3 O" a
( : / b t0$00
= * =
m n , ~ _ m - lj ( e p_ .fz'- l m =
- \
10$00 g.J ,J w
^
Y-, , f - ll Rv .i. .c. .,i,. m . ya ,, l I I I I I l 14 0 ' isoo 1 NOTES:
. 1. " -* QENOTES DOORS wtTM RA15ED SILLS.
- 2. 'O' OENOTES w ATERTICHT 000R5 70 pmEVENT WATER E.4TERmC ROCWS FROW 00R!tCOR$,
- 3. COLuWN CiWENS CNS ARE 2.CW X 2.cW (TYPIC ALI.
- FN 4. SASEWENT THiCANE5515 S.SW.
\_)
Figure 2.15.10c Reactor Building Arrangement-Elevation -8200 mm 6/t92 2.15.10 16
- i. ABWR oe;ign occument .
O g g g g g g g
' 3 0 0 -= - 8500 -
'0 $ 0 0 S000 30C0 '0500 8500 - '3:0
'J:0 l .i fg.
l l 6 Q e a e a
- e. 1 ,
v ' 1 l s s l l T -T' { I ! l
> $:0 ; /e T ,
l
- i. c=:i '
i t! i - l c , t*7 l l g4
~
l _: l 1J a-i r--- I m:? t e I Q t*i
~
th l
" O ;--- M '--*
4.*
}
- l ll Ovw !
OW* ! f
'0500 ', ! Y I ,
,,Q t
- Ji .
.\ ( .1
- Q.y : m a .w t.,
j ! 8000 i lI' ,[ e5 883 4 l - . l g sid- j'} l 2 70
- lr gj y I j 82\000 g .
_;- - 90
- 7 :.
l. e 8000 l \ PS i
.m.00 i PS n:. #
N l (C1 (t) t-) 1700 % .3 y cy gru g ,m
\ g,,
i j
'0500 200(
/ :j ?
t'). m en _ 57 eU'M m 17 uO D i i r i i 4-4
?C500 "Q - -
" CR0 $
. uAmTENANCE WAiNTENANCE
~
[= : una una see saa > *a > *. I I 1300 l NOTES:
- 1. " " CENOTES 000RS wiTH RAISED $;LLS.
- 2. 'D" OENOTES W ATERTIOMT 000RS 70 AREVENT WATER ENTERINO ROOWS FROW CORRiOORS.
- 3. COLVWN OiMENSIONS ARE 2 CW X 2.0W (TYPICALI.
- 4. FLOOP SL AB THICKNESS IS 0.6W.
- 5. M AIN SEAM CIMENSIONS ARE 1.5W X 1.8W.
%)-
Figure 2.1S.10e Reactor Building Arrangement ~.Flevation -1700mm 1 s. m2 2.15.10
ABWR oesion Document O 4 i
- 3 8 :500
.8 -ss:: 8 so 8 50c 8 8 es:c - -'J c
- - - - ss:0
'3;;
- l l l l ll o
m .- -. l W. Y I e I
. ... 12 ;
l l 1
- 3:3 .(!
i
) ., Nl'!..'l..#. 6 , q l l A am !
n , e 7._% 4 s .-* ,a
', - }
3 '
- 6 l > >
.I i
- l. i N 1i 1 503 j
. ..n.
. [ 4.a
' N '4 o ,
i- , % ;l D j sy ,
\ a i .i s:co ,
* .7, \.7,.
, ..... . .. 1 c 270'i ,
e- .., Ny if 3 i fg I 8- { l
- 7. ,1
, ) -
V ! s: o i
. t. ..,
N- h '.', \ 9 j* o sN i .i ' i. . , , i l
\
*: oc Y V >j b,
i.
]h
%'.m
%I g gi
' JX i!
,,x ,-
.i sco
- . E'g{I[A .
3 OYlkA L
* .]
II h ' 84 . 2 -. - l i
.z I
l l i l l isoc teo
- NOTES:
"." QENOTES 000R$ wtTH RA6SCO StLLS.
- 2. 'D" OENOTES WATERTICHT 000RS 70 84 EVENT w ATER ENTERIMO ROOWS FROW 004RtOCRS.
- 3. 00wuN OtWENSIONS ARC L8W X LSW (TYPIC AL).
6 r.00R SL AB TetCKaESS is 0,6W.
$. V AIN SE AW OtWENSiCNS ARE LSW X L8W.
O i Figure 2.15.10g 9eector Building Arrangement-Elevation 4800 mm 20- 6/1/92 L15.10
ABWR oesign Documnt
- O i
0 00 @850c @ - ;;100 8000 8 8CCG 8 1C50c 8 85C0-8 -- 13;; g _ h\f 9, a a l[ ce Dgt - I n - - mas ==, _.. o Q4A _ t 5:TS 1 1 esco e ~ wam 004A1 j t, l
&e
. m_ v - -
..a
.t_
, q~
! I . l . r N 1C500 Ouw/FPC Cuw [ N CL
.gi i.< va s 7b-k i.<
i T scoo 3 "' P1(Al g270* i.. y eassoo ; ,., L d .
, i i inp [ i i.<
- esosoo
,_ , j ;
l. l
~
acco C- _ P$ls i7Oo " Sici f N r. m \
/ ms 1 ,.i i - .c -
/ ,.,
1 2m
/ . n to500 l
im n-i e n_ e , ,, ,i w -
- - ' ,a
- n. , -
3- ,a h TA
,g3g, ,
octes ociC w. i res -Q
.a t <i< - of t ' .! 1 1 d _~.?l ~~
I A , A' l ,j i i uoo w l NOTES: l 1. "." OCNOTES DOORS wifM RAJSED SILL 5.
- 2. "D" OtNOTES WAf tRTICHT DC,0RS 70 l
t PREVENT WATER ENTERING MOOWS FRou l CORRICOR5. l 3. COLUMN OtuCN110NS ARC teu 21.8W le*YPtCAL). l' 4. FLOCR SLAS TNiCNNESS l$ 0 SW.
- 5. u Am aEAu OlWCNSIONS ARE L4W X L8W.
(')\ s. Figure 2.15.101 Reector Building Arrangement--Elevation 12?00 mm 2.15.10 22 W2 I _ _ _ . ~ .
4 1 4 j . l 4 C F BRAUN & CO Page 7 R A Goel Proieet 4840-P Spacification i
- i. General Electric - 300-17-AB l WATERTIGHT DOORS May 30, 1975 San Jose TVA STRIDE J% u , /974
}
- APPENDIX B , ., ,, .
- e. p o. gig; , ,y .
N EL M M , W[CL THicNNgss =~ P,*AME WELDED 3 e, // '- g *. 1 Y o e ucri= M M E y ;
' // ;, i .* : ., .
i 1 l ,'//~ O. - o l s p-p- . s ,- o s q: .
' EMSuccso Doom -,
N L.J, SU B-PPAME SrAL, 1
- .Ju_,> cc - J- I <
- I l .
1
.l- 71 WCA g! = M - -- 7 h
l-ji c4 =
. -i = A R t j e e i 24 qmlI s Y
. ~^
- s' o2 i) g 'I n ,,
U lU{0
- . j ji Si c E u r A T E l f .- . . e .e w e -
i g W E LD ED **C hl
' 'S u s,- F F A M s t l
i .* e M ov e t.s 1 ll;: u;.=ll. m FLoo R i$:,,I l w- p-i GPATlNGi o j
.M a . . _ . . . _ _ ,
, a
' ' \g s C I g . e' , o *
+-
-1 l '
. ,, g N c CP- eNING lH : ps * 'A '
O* n , I CO N C . WA L.L. ' / - j _ l-- r f _ d ( ( 3 WCW~0I wrrH f M EW -
, - HING5 StOE N -- E.
or= poos W FT EEL h ' , 7. . 4 I PLATE o " ( . rop OF i F.W. E & J _. f PIN . P' CoS ~ MosiE t - - - - .. ._ cob j - -
- w. .I el( _.- . ,, , %- - -
t 4 l' h- #11 PLANT EQUIPMENT COMPARTMENT - FLOOR / CEILING LEAK. TIGHTNESS - DESIGN' BASIS & EVALUATION , l ) ACRS INQUIRY ! PRoV13E ADDITIONAL SPECIFIC DESIGN BASIS & EVALUATION INFoRMATIoN RELATIVE To THE REACTOR BUILDING, THE SECONDARY l j CONTAINMENT, THE CONTROL-BUILDING AND THE DIVISIONAL SEPARATION-COMPARTMENTS FLOORS & CE1 LING LEAKTIGHTNESS, SPECIAL EMPHASIS l SHouLD BE DIRECTED AT floor & CEILING BARRIER INTEGRITY UNDER I flood WATER RETENTION, FIRE CONTAINMENT- PRESSURIZATIoNs (aP), l AND ACCIDENT EFFECTS (PIPE WHIP, JET-IMPINGEMENT, ETC.), Floor EQUIPMENT AND DIVISIONAL DRAIN SYSTEM INTERCONNECTIONS SHoULD BE CONSIDERED. O GE RESPONSE l-0 PLANT BUILDING, CONTAINMENT & EQUIPMENT COMPARTMENT - l ! LEAKTIGHTNESS - 0VERVIEW-f- o ASWR~ STANDARD IS A UNIQUE DESIGN-HORIZONTAL i CoMPARTMENTIZATIoN & VERTICAL-OPEN COMMUNICATION o PRIMARY CONTAINMENT-(PC)- It A LEAKTIGHT STRUCTURE WITH INTERNAL LEAKTIGHT COMPARTMENTS o SECONDARY CONTAINMENT (SC) IS A LEAKTIGHT { STRUCTURE FoR INSIDE PC DBA BREAKS ! .o SECONDARY CONTAINMENT (SC) Is NoT A'LEAKTIGHT'
-STRUCTURE.FoR EXTERNAL DBA-BRCAKS l
li o REACTOR BUILDING (RB)--IN & OF -ITSELF-IS NoT A LEAKTIGHT STRUCTURE o RB-CLEAN rooms, MAJOR EQUIPMENT rooms, SUPPORT ! EQUIPMENT rooms ARE NoT LEAKTIGHT To ENVIRONS lO i i 11-1
-.,----~,_.._a,...,_
- . . , . . . . , . - _ _ n ..
. . , . . _ . - __.._._..,..-.-.a....;-
\
l 0 SC-DIVISIONAL SEPARATION QUADRANTS ARE l l INTER-LEAKTIGHT RELATIVI TO ONE ANOTHER O SC-DIVISIONAL SEPARATION QUADRANTS'
~
/ INTRA-COMPARTMENTS ARE NOT LEAKTIGHT O RB/SC INTERFACES ARE AIR LEAKTIGHT, FIRE BARRIER, FLOOD RESISTANT O CONTROL BUILDING (CB) PORTIONS OF THE BUILDING (MCR) ARE LEAKTIGHT UNDER ALL DBA EVENTS O CB-BASEFF.NT IS LEAKTIGHT TO UPPER FLOORS & NOT TO ENVIRONS O RB AND CB-MAIN _ STEAM TUNNEL INTERFACES LEAKTIGHT; MAIN STEAM TUWNEL IS NOT LEAKTIGHT TO ENVIRONS O UNDER FIRE & FLOOD CONDITIONS-VARIOuS FORMS OF LEAKAGE CONTROL ARE INSTITUTED 0 LEAKTIGHTNESS CITED HERE INCLUDES: AIR, WATER, STEAM ASPECTS O LEAKTIGHTNESS WILL VARY FROM BOUNDARY TO BOUNDARY, CONDITION TO CONDITION, ETC.
[]) 0 . REACTOR BUILDING / SECONDARY CONTAINMENT LEAKTIGHTNESS DESIGN BASIS - SAFETY EVALUATION o SECONDARY CONTAINMENT BOUNDARY INTEGRITY 0 CONTROL BUILDING LEAKTIGHTNESS o CB/ MAIN STEAM TUNNEL-INTERFACE BOUNDARY INTEGPITY O CB-MAIN CONTROL ROOM O CB-BASEMENT 0 SPECIFIC CEILING & FLOOR-LEAKTIGHTNESS O SECONDARY CONTAINMENT BOUNDARY - AIR LEAKTIGHTNESS O SECONDARY CONTAINMENT BOUNDARY - FIRE BARRIER - SMOKE LEAKTIGHTNESS O SECONDARY CONTAINMENT BOUNDARY - FLOODING WATERTIGHTNESS () O SC INTER-DIVISIONAL QUADRANT BOUNDARY INTEGRITY 11-2
4 ! o SC-INTRA DIVISIONAL COMPARTMENTS BOUNDARY INTEGRITY-o RB-INTER-DIVISIONAL CLEAN Room BOUNDARY INTEGRITY i o RB/SC MAIN STEAM TUNNEL INTERFACE BOUNDARY i SSAR REVISIONS l 1 o A BRICF PARAGRAPH CITING SELECTIVE CEILING & FLOOR l j LEAKTIGHTNESS REQUIREMENTS AND CONSIDERATIONS WILL BE ADDsD To APPROPRIATE SSAR SECTIONS. 4 + 1 4 ) i i e i i i i i i i (:) 11-3 4 4 , w.r.. ..v -<,.--e , e e
- vs- ~
._.m . ..
I l i I - l e e yi - ir
- i. l 1 if l! ! !!'l H 3
i !!f : 11, II li j lj t .t i '! !
.. I ! I
',i
. ti1!
d
!j!.!"
g 11 1 i 1i gd 11 ! ! " 1 I ll -
. i! !! 2 l ! .
. 11 IIIIIilllllll!!.!.!.,i.!0l1!lJl . !!I h L
!!,,l ;
! ! 'j lll
!l!ai i
I!!!!l!lI'ilgIlIill !I _g 5 11 111ii.... _,,n 7, a g g g l *;; V # 3{iil!gggngp,,,,'.'......
. ; lg 'ggg!jj
~ ~~ llg
- o.
i f
..iL .
f r,_cdV'l % I III' [,8! !l i! l I . I
!e
*Pa i
l I~ q i je 4 f(#eg i [
.;ll .....g i g llg, 2 m
v=j
=q
[y LtC 1 2,"Str! E i ,j! H ,"!!!inninh ll!!I
, ii I
- i. 111 i
.em
=r P =- & un ; gig i a i, _ intritnrrturit h gggg ggg;1,ggli ;;;,,gg ;
i ---.......: ,::,, , ........ _ o, t r l l I"TTilIlli11 (h dr (S b d i i i it fili si .e F=
- n. t, ? esL e fe ' i ,
e' @e
' b 3
G l 3 g bli 1] !, 'k h ! II) I hllilLLIlllliff h h h lf!
} Il illll1GII L Llj lI4111 L11LLillLJ l
~
Y D _h gemy o ga up h IB ih% ln
@ 4a I i v- n - g w
! n/y,4- c g,- ? -
]h kh g!
W E '
@shgbg~Em. fC 3 E se lFilNd. 3f L I 53,-@ $ c k !5CX I hs hm:!
s, yA
- @s I' )
L I 5: Ilk ('I !l ,
'GHI % L. w MNp!@hps*
p, ,ay d W. %1 % r
$pM_, j jh J 'I pATsL-
~
N, .,w !,ikliTib. . (b
. : , f
+ -,
-w g s ,=r . wg
- --s 9 7 ..
E
- _[ -lAiii TTTrnirITJ IIIIIIJ 111 f t 11tTT TI T 1(II11)llH ttit TTri I T fW h k' h j!
if$ U hhd
!, o i h !: !
dj j 6 3 ~ {s o ! ll . l i 1 [ ;.as .w .a 50 i xt, , sw _ [ e , l l .h I ; I ! l (h (h (h (h (h (h h
9, O ,
///
~
O 4 IMAGE EVALUATION 9
#4 7/
x /// ' V TEST TARGET (MT-3) 4 %
#/' p \ $$
+ e t
i
" ?
I.0 .
~TE I.I L '* I E
!! 1.8 km I.25 1.4 !! 1.6 g__
4 150mm - l4 6" > l 4/f*h
- l. kir **
$l 6 4,, sp14*4R gj! kk 7
^'" +
PHOTOGRAPHIC SCIENCES CORPORATION 6' - O 770 BASKET ROAD 1;il:'-
.y P.O. BOX 338 WEBSTER, NEW YORK 14580 Y (716) 265 1600
;+ '
;).} .. '
IMAGE EVALUATION O ,
*@,t!
o
\[// TEST TARGET -(MT-3)
/ '0
// \\ f j,Q f[ 7 Ud
- u. T " y22 u ,,, um l,l h HI l.8 n! -
l.25 1.4 l l 1.6 l ; _._.
- 150mm ->
d 6" > f%%,, N '
/
f44 'bb ,
/
.. PHOTOGRAPHIC SCIENCES CORPORATION b 4 770 BASKET ROAD - #
////7 P.O. BOX 338
,{1/- - (t -
WEBSTER, NEW YORN 14580 '6 (716) 265-1600
o 6 g IMAGE EVALUATION Q . g ,. , y
\///
TEST TARGET (MT-3) / '
%)F %
\\\ p \ ff I:
1.0 lji [if W i.i [ "- lHE J;8 1.25 1.4 lli, _1.6_
- 150mm >
d 6" > i ( 4,
/ '$' ,
PHOTOGRAPHIC SCIENCES CORPORATION e O 770 BASKET ROAD P.O. BOX 338 s(D 7 t WEBSTER, NEW YORK 14580 T , ' (716) 265 1600
+e g IMAGE EVALUATION %
Y,o/ @ g#' TEST TARGET (MT-3) / '%
\\k/// f \g 4
l,0 [:~ !8 3? p g32 l,j
$ " He IM1 1.25 1.4 !.6 ll
,l llll__
4 - 150mm > 4 - 6" -> f%y,,,,4;, m; f4
,p ///p PHOTOGRAPHIC SCIENCES CORPORATION e 4 h 770 BASKET ROAD
-{t* L;;t P.O. BOX 338 WEE;TER. NEW YORK 1458 Y (716) 265-1600 c_ _ _ _
-- v - . . . . .- . . . . . _ .... _._ _.____ _ _ _-
_. l . t . i * *
*ERm E*
. p p :s 4 y y $ Y y ?
I o- ' - 4 . , - a --- 7 g q . e
,c g l ip it '
I i i i f il f ! 4 j fc . .
- W, ga C E
! Q/:
j, %, - % G;,. 4g, , , , , , Mg, , , , g, , , ,q, , , ,2%.;3a
- ,,r -
g.4 J fi .I .
< g l_
. < TLy
.c N4 ig
/m..
[4 E - j N s f_ r ) W,f ~\ j)/;5@ i iW m l :: r@a
'e s :g-_! (__ q_.._Q / u e6 e-r 5
i
,8 3
+y.
I.
, s=i::
om dd iliLf i x '
/
d (a ~ ' Es J
- w._de e .fs 4e .
dbt .3 m 111 in rs= '
@-. 4 y:
wi,@t F g 1 j' u( M c d c "lhu! 7 ((}ll t v -l t r 3tr3 2 NJ .gl l i (q nui Ld b, %--mrg;Ei3R @ a .= - _g, y Jo gg_ _.., !!c m.a . c pj t
@$,3 3[MGM- .
CI [ Jcb ' ' ' W 0i
<w I3 r T bh 4
? T. h_hi;! h -
f Yh, _ T y= .
}- -
I i oi i , i l \ % 4-- T _mLvni - 6 8 N,
- i}, 47 i
[. 13
/I d].,jll - I q $a j l 3.-
= .
m 1 IQ lliu .
, ,1.c i ;
~
? !
y
.' o
,,, ! i j nu n,,
f f -- Q" i , a a sa""~@ .,f l N i 1 e 'l lililll! ! 3 .i 1lgt 1 s lui~ Q 1 , s!) d
!!;l'.!q!E%U 3
e ((- hh 2 $@ @,7(ihy ,lp hiJ! %) Iirjij ' II'!' !!!!!! i bei => i h~ e4 : E
' x'-
iiiiinniini; L j -k i t b . Q tiiiiiiiiiiiiii _ l -) \ Ih ~h
' i ~k b:
5555555IIIIIIII
*CW m
'i it ; 2 .
\ h ....l lifi
!,g.j t % ._ l IQ QI 1
i f nk n ..%, 35.... 3333 u ll ml
- =.
h;h [O{l hl '
$@ gg,@li@f!
V
, ,,,, n n tw o
a 1
; y ,.
e} ',, e, a e- ' sias ~ x F4 iliij!!!!ll;Il i ::::ninun; i i l e i 3
. 3 W i__ PC';q-,a'm M eh:. T@3M " stat Q. ___ Et
--- ,.nn :- H
. _ .. 3- , ,,,,,,,n ,,, , ; 3 7--_. g O
n t . ' - iiiiiiiiiiii i l Il hhh hh h h qhh h) h h q m
............. m 3
i a w j n a, a i
=
i n i . 5 i j k () @{ (h $) ) h , t O ..
a ~ 8 ii ' 9
.11 d
.!ill a O lllll, -
e rn.,,ll i g i I .8 Ik II . E E
.I 11l15111l' l1616 jallill I C.
e
'l'I
!)8 ig!!!!!! 'l E
!! _ =. a if i'lllll,I
. l>l iiii I lillt!!! ,'
- j ;
1 e illl1.1.111. ~.'1 o g e 1ii11111il liiiiiiiii 9 . w. E ~ 4@ L ~ L E
~2 nll$
d e, l 5* p --,A,33g, o?) @ilt e
=t e
=an s q
- I @/1 I!! .i g$ y i \
~
O_ '1 s 7', si, a e- a ' < e rb gn" il M
,j ,
s
,fI_ t _ _
~ ~
~
- ,h ff g ,
h ,f. N ~E ,- S ,. h3 mmmuw -@ p. _ i- p*' j .3ggr p ' q\p f-.j _ 'j i
'gE; !i a
ne, g- g. }y n 8e l , 3 h !!/i - i
&g ', i-W
'n i
W_ E 1 3
~ "m
. r -
e l % ,j u . ik"gI I Ygk j
^
'lj m
- m _
I
, _$j j'.[]
- m, mi i 4
}
g () ( ( ( () }
. l . i
. l l
. ! . i . i e i . ! .
;}
8 E h O *
- I IP c ..
W G1 h P. . I 1 . .. m y
-; - v m a , m .
. o.
T w
,h l 5 h b3mmuj - > c ti ' a
= -
g s 3 l h, h ! !$
- = J~r's KL 5
i e i: N E' s , i18.[si I:
! 111,,,
, u ==c_ f A; La
-E ' - l l a 1a
$$ : liN/ s!IIl.i
,)lflgeN..l!
unl!!!!lli i
@A,lnhh:irf N- !! ll 7 a , =.u ,. r.. .a 5$) !.5.) !a 3- jj $
si E O eg E ! T i I @ ? _ - . % !.
. !, .e f i i
? *
,'i W
. ~, 1rm
. .. . ,, . m i of,g45p77 J! ,g i.!P; ya 'a j. L r) t: jg .
i ~aig 3 0 i! I jp[.- t . i /(-y.P,lW L;% hPd Lj gwjM< m ' ;;gi! i li - - !
's ah L;% _
g; o .i 1 . g _l y bi
...: . , {. h lf ; .
I A} p l m. in t m
& 18"i. ;
e l) k bll i hl!? ! f . f.k hl[$k jN8 L
- =I!! ,i
, s J P19$iu yL~d 3 y7m E 1.Eh-* : ra -
,ww,r: ,,
~
(- %, - i w,,,,i,,,,_. .
.. .49 A _.
i 9 m _ m ,
>;m i i xcai j i i i
() (h (h (h (b ) { O - :_-______a.__..________m. . _ . _ _ _ _ i-
i ([) #12 PLANT EQUIPMENT COMPARTMENT - HVAC ISOLATION VALVES AND BACKFLOW DAMPER - DESIGN BASIS & EVALUATION _ ACRS IN0VIRY PROVIDE ADDITIONAL SPECIFIC DESIGN BASIS & EVALUATION INFORMATION RELATIVE TO THE REACTOR BUILDING, THE SECONDARY CONTAINMENT, THE CONTROL BUILDING AND THE DIVISIONAL SEPARATION COMPARTMENTS HVAC SYSTEM. SPECIAL EMPHASIS SHOULD BE DIRECTED AT HVAC ISOLATION VALVES & BACKFLOW DAMPERS UNDER A VARIETY OF PLANT DISTURBANCE CONDITIONS (INCLUDING DBAS, INTERNAL FLOODS, INTERNAL FIRES, RADIOLOGICAL RELEASES, ENVIRONMENTAL PERTURBATIONS, ETC.). GE RESPONSE O O PLANT VENTILATION SYSTEMS - DESIGN BASIS OVERVIEW O ABWR STANDARD DESIGN UTILIZES A UNIQUE NETWORK 0F HVAC SUBSYSTEMS FOR VARIOUS PLANT CONDITIONS i O REACTOR BUILDING / SECONDARY CONTAINMENT HVAC IS DIFFERENT FROM PAST PLANT DESIGNS O REVS PROVIDES NO HVAC TO SC 0 UNDER DBA CONDITIONS - RBVS IS ISOLATED & SAFETY EQUIPMENT GET INDIVIDUAL / LOCAL HVAC SUBSYSTEM SERVICE O SELECTIVE REACTOR BUILDING SAFETY RELATED ROOMS RECEIVE THEIR NOnMAL & ACCIDENT HVAC SERVICE FROM INDIVIDUAL DIVISIONAL HVAC SUBSYSTEMS O FOR BREAKS INSIDE SC, RBVS IS ISOLATED & LOCAL HVAC SUBSYSTEMS OPERATE AS IN DBAS O ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL INSIDE SC BREAK QUADRANT - LOSTED SC - IS NOT REQUIRED (]) O 12-1 i
o CONTINUED RBVS SUPPLY EXHAUST MIGHT BE HELPFUL (} o THUS, QUALIFICATION OF SUBJECT RBVS VALVING DoES Nor REQUIRE BREAK / PRESSURIZATION CONSIDERATIONS 0 BASIC DESIGN BASIS - SAFETY EVALUATION o NORMAL OPERATION RBVS & SC-HVAC WORK TOGETHER o ACCIDENT OPERATION (DBA EVENT) RBVS/SC - HVAC Auto ISOLATION ON ACCIDENT SIGNALS SC LOCAL ESSENTIAL EQUIPMENT SERVICE BY ESSENTIAL HVAC RB CLEAN Room - ESSENTIAL EQUIPMENT BY ESSENTIAL HVAC SGTS OPERATED 0 SPECIAL SPECIFIC CONCERNS - SAFETY EVALUATIONS O EFFECTS OF DIVISIONAL BREAK ON OTHER DIVISIONS VIA O HVAC INTERCONNECTIONS Two QUADRANT HIGH ENERGY BREAKS PRES $URIZATION: 5 PSID THRouGH 0.338 FT2 pon
< 1 SEC f VENTILATION PRESSURIZATION: NEGLIGIBLE POTENTIAL ISOLATION SIGNAL To-RBVS
-LOCAL EMERGENCY HVAC AT SAFETY COMPONENTS SC Nor REQUIRED CONTINUED RBVS-MIGHT BE HELPFUL o EFFECTS OF DIVISIONAL BREAK PRESSURIZATION ON RBVS
- AIR OPERATED, FAIL-SAFE CLOSED Two IN-SERIES UP-FRONT BACK-END MOV AREA-ISOLATION VALVES /MCR CONTROL LARGE-RBVSE- SC SUPPLY & EXHAUST / HEADERS HIGH ENERGY LINES VS MODERATE ENERGY LINES O
12-2
O QUALIFICATIONS OF ISOLATION VALVES & DAMPERS O - No PRESSURIZATION LATER CLOSURE-SIGNALS To ISOLATE HVAC DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM EFFECTS EPRI PROGRAM ON BUTTERFLY VALVE CLOSURE SSAR REVISION o ADDITIONAL INFORMATION WILL BE INCORPORATED IN THE CURRENT PLANT VENTILATION SYSTEM DESCRIPTIONS. O O 12-3
NM e zC p pe .: 9i ! i;s s : 4- '$_/ I j 1 .9 x. v l;l IljlsilliiiiIj,ii
.!!li.lijl>! lb, ww m-m1, -
a, - I: i e
$p #$$_ '!(!;l;;g"1;E I
I J,!l$
~ "
g gb@%gi$e w :4 '
- @ ia, a? .u,i m e+
i ; ni i
,_ A d r e p g h ! 'r E El , ,.
1 p~ ;
,.a e g! D 6M4Ib!.d $ $
$,}
i leil' se 440 ypy 6@gi-! !i 3 1 &a-~i ~
% -31 g .!;jg-2
&OEq ,,
0 i X h,X blB"" g ir,# k . ..2e, ; s- .. w r n y sy- i
'O ! i 'Y g- 3 m:!^h. i;n l ,2 -
i ; i lli [' i 1 gg _ _
.; i i e3,3 og. l S 970 p- hE4 -
.. W sh"*fkI i h1 9
E= a................ l e
!@ - .i l il:
**.sses.sene.see.ms ** * * . m ,ep v3 .i :
- 1 x** t***
4 l DN@N h h t id
- DL x . _ <_ __, _ , ,
._. -f i q
E ',5$ . i $h...!$ iid. i. . pg%er-- llll1j@' c FA p=flMl ! g ang
~
$ l o' .
E8 l j.
'l j .
j . j. l dw!!!flhlflIlil
.j . j.
a j . .
A O ' 12 + + i. l I E $! I5 2 8- fl I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I __ gg , , g I I 5 I 8 '$ E $
- I I I I i I I I I g
I I I I I I I i F gy I I gg, , i II IE VEIE EE EE EE 'E l!EllEI 85 !
.5 B
- =
I i i l i I I I I 3 2: g
- g. . ..
p bn
! gg h T' nn h S\
I
- 1!
G V 9 *i' 2\ 1 !!,' l! ,* + 8' 8*
- T l y
5 E 5 1 525GS 5V S5V525SS5W ai
; 2\ T T T 5 '5 1 -
- v. . V ,. . s t j,
! E ,. . 5 W I! D 3e i , $... $... $... I
= $
ti 1 l ..L' ' Tl,... ., l 1 j DDD
... ... ... ca E
lg,ijiin!il !
" 5
!*. 1 q
llillillilif; ieteessur c ig d \*k n O 21 &1 92 2.15 5
4 0 e a s r s !.g ni ug ~ sll l .ili l
-a d!un le!gsesi
. , 1 8 . 8 . i 8- - o Z 4 S\W g+ +
- g.4 g
' E 8 .9-a ! ' a 2 111 ill .i ! slls >ll!ls * .1 o i i i i m
=
@ i m
i s I E E
- 8- - 8+ - g g g
- @3 I, [ I g- + g*+g g d @
- r sI s W
4 a\9" e g e
/ n i h
- g ~ ~ gg c
- sa
! 5 G $
- -lglje--
y Se n 1 ais./ [/ o 24 6/1/92 2.15.5 i:
([) #13 USE OF BLOWOUT PANELS IN SAFETY RELATED STRUCTURES / i COMPARTMENTS ACRS INQUIRY PROVIDE ADDITIONAL INFORMATION RELATIVE TO THE USE Or, THE LOCATION Or, THE DESIGN Or & THE PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS Or BLOWOur PANELS CITED THROUGHOUT THE SSAR IN SAFETY RELATED STRUCTURES / COMPARTMENTS. GE RESPONSE O ABWR STANDARD DESIGN BLOWOUT PANELS - GENERAL OVERVIEW O CONSIDERABLE AMOUNT OF CONFUSION EXIST RELATIVE TO SSAR BLOWOUT PANELS (]) O BLOWOUT PANELS ARE BEING USED IN A NUMBER OF SAFETY-RELATED STRUCTURE / COMPARTMENT PRESSURE RELIEF FUNCTIONS O BASIC OPERATING PRINCIPLES OF PRF,SSURE BLOWOUT PANELS IS RATHER SIMPLE O CURRENT ANALYSIS MODELS ARE FAIRLY STRAIGHT FORWARD AND ACCURATE O A VARIETY OF PHYSICAL BLOWOUT PANEL HARDWARES IS AVAILABLE 0- ABWR STANDARD DESIGN BLOWOUT PANEL - SAFETY USES O PRESSURE VENTING OF MS. TUNNEL To TURBINE BUILDING OR ENVIRONS (MSL OR FWL H.E. BREAKS) O PRESSURE VENTING OF RWCUS COMPARTMENTS TO MS TUNNEL (RWCUS H.E. BREAK) 0- PRESSURE VENTING Or RCICS/RHRS COMPARTMENTS TO MS TUNNEL (RCICS H.E. BREAK) (]) 13-1
i; i i o PRES $URE VENTING Or RWCUS COMPONENT [ SuB-COMPARTMENTS To MS TUNNEL (RWCU COMPACT H.E.- i BREAKS) ! o PRESSURE VENTING OF TURBINE BUILDING (MS TUNNEL ! VENTING & TG RELIEF) i 0 ABWR STANDARD Blowout PANEL - DESIGN-BASIS l MAIN STEAM (MS) TUNNEL PANELS - 2 HINGED, SPRING
~
o [ LOADED, STEEL PANELS. CAPABLE OF 11 PSID FORWARD, i PRESSURE; 355 FT2 + 258 FT2 VENT AREAS; 0.5 PSID & f 0.2 SEC OPENING PRESSURE & TIME. o RWCUS PANEL - HINGED, SPRING LOADED, STEEL PANEL. j i CAPABLE Or 11 PSID-BACKPRESSURE; 5 PSID-FORWARD ! PRES $URt; 72 FT2 VENT AREA; 0.5 PSID AND 0.2 SEC ! OPENING PRESSURE & TIME. o RCICS/RMRS PANEL - HINGED, SPRING LOADED, STEEL / j PANEL. CAPABLE Or 11 PSID-BACKPRES$URE; 5 PSID-FORWARD PRES $URE; 32 FT2 VENT AREA; 0.5 PSID- [g ! AND 0.2 SEC OPENING PRESSURE & TIME. { o RWCUS'SuB-COMPONENT - COMPARTMENT PANELS - HINGED SWING STEEL PANELS'. 5 PSID BACK OR FORWARD; 16 To f 72 FT2; 0.5 PSID & 0.2 Sec OPENING PRESSURE & i TIME. i' o TURBINE BUILDING PANELS - THREE HINGED, Roor MOUNTED, SPRING LOADED,-STEEL PANELS. CAPABLE OF- { 1.5 PSID-FORWARD PRESSURE; 3 x 100 FT2 VENT AREA; - 0.5 PSID & 0.2 SEC OPENING: PRESSURE & TIME. I SSAR REVISION I ! o PLANT LAYOUT DRAWINGS WILL BE ADauSTED FoR DESIGN REFINEMENTS l' l- o PRESSURIZATION TABLES'& FIGURE'WILL ADausT FoR DESIGN
- REFINEMENTS o ADD A NE'W PARAGRAPH-ON MS TUNNEL BLOWDOWN PANELS ASPECTS I
13-2
O O O Te-veur (6Le4Ctf WW c h l'il
- l c
te k 3., s..
.sre<*
Re/ss rouocL. RwcuS vEar w,, on TB- cit /Hs%c. (gee,aeur pma) SwswMa
- 4 le - ,-x 7S" w 29seo
/ / =w-s-o 1 b ,
o - w r
' P'
'I 7 I s i,res W
p MGL ' - / / / / ', r3 N n ( ,/
,/ .
s- #f0 IAo3co y
%(H4t4 COM N ~TarR B en3 C Secewone.1 Coorniunser g g ,gggar .Euss.eso 6 go. co, aj g, jL laie .5rsAM ru* wet- ceepsa a wg7,,J ,
FeepovareA Spenx-p moois16 RB - Tween- r ~ a ~ 1f,nwf/' I RB + ce -room freen ~ 75,** Jf'
M '2 " & k ' _". ,
- ,-. ,.:. L ^ ~
~ " ' " ^ ~
ABWR . Standard Plant s_ l a l 7 l 8 } l s ] 4 j 3 w 7 l q
- =-
6 i RB-HSTwdL stewovr , _ _ p u c.s *" # i
/ - -N y Blew uT i ! i C ~'
SF l Podetr
/
r- Ill
' M I
.. g l 4
J ( l , . !. > g -
- i ! == ii. tj .
e 7;; n m o;-
; o! '
, ni.
l; ..
'g -l'
[ [ E l "a "ma l ~~~ Ls i ,_, 7 _. . m_ ! !. - 7 y --
/_
i-L _ 9 '
@ f? 9--]
=
7 'a I li f gg _ __ L j d .. g mew y g E3iit - l Pax I "m** mm Pax 9 y Figure 1.2-14 COf4.'F , ARRANGEMENT E.
ABWR Standard Plant _
. t i i i . i .
g e l eeu! I s,er i i i 4-,-, o I i ..,-
<4 I
i ,,--
,,,- ...-- ,-e,- i see ii
!i l l l
t1
'm I
'rL 49' ' -
e a.~
- " A 1 }I Il l an IIn-k- _
c an tr12 ? ? 0 ' f- *-' ' ' i Qc ec s/'gg g : 4', 0 Jsuout l m l { \ \ l(
' 'ri 21' 0 d' !
J L
._ _ hQ t c ', L :d,4, ~~ -
*rL l'?: gy. ~~
,- i y
i ( .1 noca
,e
- i. e .
- s c - -
'r&.'it:a h
. . , < n m. -- I t ..it n,e i M[ 1 h IMMN'l , l i l I!ll[I NI I I I I I ld 9,f j' '
'ri.:eia-
-- 4e l l
. / mm A___e f ~by -r - :~. ~
. ~rYS+- '
3G r\ fl ll a ci __J A
'rL: :S _*
==
Mp \C Wi ' - s a-a l i s i m
. . i i. , . 49 Q w ..n p.e._:;?:-
,. =
s u 0 . *rL', L' : /~. 6- ,s Q ,y m [ Q m nan b /H .
-* w
=~ l M Nr
- j
) =
'ri.4?'" E J l - 3I . )l #
I I M- - ~
'nt 4a :
g; ' Ts I % ~ g gi _7 i i i i t QT --{ "* M i w-fi ,H i I . nwp
.! (I - wt 's::
1 !_ , illl! alill; f , ',7.ine Q- _3_,N*rt. :?:: g dol' C'
-q n I *f I " r.L-:er:
~~~ g I 'rL-1'oc Z,
pr- , al h_
-\
I. 'i *C w, - u i x rs- ':: ih 1 j - GL .- / " ~ O 3 l ./ i
@ u ..
A-.
- ~
L -e::: -.
/\
g-- -- 5 El
. t .c.--
i 1p..3
., -]
-1_
E A- A SECTION m i . i .
, i , i .
Figure 1.2-2 F Amendmefnt 21 {
ABWR aumac Standard Plant PM
,\
( a
<J
%w %ca g
- c-il g_
i ;!
'l i
i, .m
,g ._ ;
! ! . . . ' !lj !
s,,
', ,. L'
, , I,' m i
. _ ,- . ,_ :l>_ ,
)
V . l' i ; i j'il- li
, I'd i - ,
l
'l l '
i i< , l [ ' 1 a ,' ;:~ , Lo ;4 - 7' j * ;" N ,., .!
> 1 i OPERATING LEVEL 4 i a
_; .i q ,;i ; ,l _, i TMSL. 30300 3 , 1 i 1 _ j_' -o , i -.g.; I ll j '[J yf: e. .tsi 1
'I'i S, UL*N eve we*2L
~
.M- l h ._k' . !1 c: r a k=% !'
J at u
+
43 ., i I. e. - 1, .,. ;- e, ii v . _. i , j -- . 1 ! 'I
, arc j. g it o 1 to ccN, i 13 i i
; ; I i j' '
o
/\! LEVEL 2
' ' O TMSL.12300 l
1-HPCP!S i ,
;}_ :' ,
a
.l l i , PIT LEVEL 1 t -
! TMSL. 5300
\.- .,
/
92-t95 05 Figure 1.2-28 TURBINE BUILDING, GENERAL ARRANGEMENT, LONGITUDINAL SECTION A-A
1 i ABWR u^6i=^m Ra c t
. Standard Plant - - '
t ! Efn1 l XX# ATMOSPHERE
- osu6 i - m . s, e
- - .m,a -- _ _ _ . . . d6 d6 46 l
eu m . em Pfi Ptg - - pg. . , 64C44 an n A Mt.eneu.,e mm j 64as.m iens T Teams W
. m.a n TURBINE
! w .. i +++~~~-""~ BUILDING l
+ . . - -
d6 ST1 46 sei ae 1r 1P I d ' ** STEAM TUNNEL t " mis'*anos a e L '"e*s s *a"r*ru"m"
- i L i N r mes i r 888 " Pete OSI
- db A
i k NE i amarre maa.s
- GBEks9 SLEBR J 8940 1
85's#45 N
" w .an,- u.m.
l i 1P GES entesen a 4- 9884 WuhseSLoom I ses mass
, ens f db l =. .
i 4P ! M eusemia l L y ' r fogspass 8"'
- 4k l *~ ~
j 1P j M e m A. . k y J } F WWEpam N i W i ie r r f MW emWWar 4
=
f ' l l *' "ll"""'
=
i .. 1 4 i 9 6 47 Amendment 22 J. 5~ _. . . _ _ _ . ~ . .
i !, ABWR 2mma a Standard Plant ,,, c - . i I ~~
!. EEY, ATMOSPHERE XX#
o 3
- dk dk dk ui
=.
m m m - 4 M.s. 04 Oms 1a.us sa1.tes h em these, e um. esame f . TURBINE ,m . i BUILDING + t+ = =.-.=i,+ = - - ST1 Jk
+ ,,. ,,.
- ak
' su
- sei
- 1r gr f STE.AM TUNNEL , ,
,,,, L . ,
** gy, j
M 881
, i 88H.
ses race asas 88
, i r sensa m m aa
*8 u ,,
== ab dh Ak ab
. N i
s 9r awe,
- Cerenued on Mgwe SJ.3?a. ==
i
.mmmmmm., rum me
) . . i -. 1 - 1P 4 a g
' .= = amen 1P
== - , r ganggm nasagn a- uma a a e L oggt musanaammen mtsages , a r ung .ses a e 88'*8 L 81088 W W , I r M i pg,g i db db db Jb db 1F 1r l
, = =
l e- .. a.
- ==
' en
,i l .-
ess SM N #= N l s sent eunessman a e e.nemmee.s tasse == ame.ns.m.an east m , i r === mn. . s - ,,,
=
! Jk dk
- an .
l =. . , , . u an r W 40446 2 ! m === - 4 , - .,,, == MP gr
- , ==
i . 2 . 6 ans= =mma
, a r a m =
i FIGURE 6.2-37b. SECONDARY CONTAMMENT SCHEMATIC FLOW MRAM. i 6.2471 [ hatedment 22 t E
--,--..,---.v,..rm-,. .e--. -
() #14 USE OF REMOTE MULTIPLEXING UNITS (RMUS) THROUGHOUT . THE PLANT
&CRS INQUIRY
. DESCRIBE IN GENERAL WHERE RMUS ARE UTILIZED AND LOCATED THROUGHOUT THE PLANT AND SPECIFICALLY DETERMINE WHETHER SAFETY ESSENTIAL RMUS ARE LOCATED WITHIN THE SECONDARY CONTAINMENT STRUCTURE. l GE RESPONSI 0 ABWR STANDARD - SOLID STATE & MULTIPLEXING I&C DESIGN BASIS - OVERVIEW () O MAKES EXTENSIVE USE OF PROVEN & RELIABLE DIGITAL COMPONENTS O RECOGNIZES THAT SIMILAR COMPONENTS 'N PAST HAVE BEEN ENVIRONMENTALLY SENSITIVE O WILL CONTINUE To USE CONVENTIONAL QUALIFIED HARDWIRED ELECTRONICS IN HARSH ENVIRONMENTAL AREAS O DESIGN WILL CAUTIOUSLY LOCATE SAFETY-RELATED SYSTEM RMUS IN ENVIRONMENTALLY PROTECTED OR 0 WILL USE EQUIPMENT FOR DATA TRANSMISSION, & ACTIVATING TRIP SIGNALS INSENSITIVE AREAS o ALSO CAN USE RMUS WITH NON-SAFETY RELATED SYSTEMS (E.G. FEEDWATER CONTROL) O CURRENT SSAR MULTIPLEX SYSTEM WRITEUP IDENTITY CRITICAL SIGNAL & CONTROL EQUIPMENT L0carIONS 0 SAFETY-RELATED RMUS ARE LOCATED OUTSIDE THE PRIMARY & SECONDARY CONTAINMENT BOUNDARIES O 14-1
l 0 ABWR ESSENTIAL SAFETY SYSTEM I&C USES -- RPS, ECCS & ( LDS o INSIDE RS/SC I&C DESIGN BASIS (HARDWIRED) o OuTSIDE RB/SC--INSIDE RB (RMU, EMS, LD, CHU) o INSIDE CB (EMS, SSLC, DTM, TLU, SLU, CMD, OLU, LD, ANN) o INSIDE TB (HARDWIRED) 0 OTHER ABWR-ESSENTIAL SAFETY SYSTEM I&C USES - DG, HVAC, RSWS, RCW, FCS, SPCS o INSIDE RB/SC (HARDWIRED) o OUTSIDE RB/SC-INSIDE RB (RMU, EMS, LD, CMU) 4 o INSIDE CB (EMS, SSLC, DTH, TLU, SLU, CMU, OLU, ANN) o INSIDE TB (HARDWIRED) 0 ADWR - NoN ESSENTIAL SYSTEM I&C USES -- HVAC, IAS, SAS, RIP, FMCRD
'- o INSIDE RB/SC (HARDWIRED) o OUTSIDE RB/SC -- INSIDE RB (NEMS) o INSIDE CB (NEMS) o INSIDE TB (NEMS) l
! SS/? REVISIOR o RMUS WILL NoT BE IDENTIFIED INSIDE PC OR SC ON PLANT LAYOUT DRAWINGS ! o STATEMENT TO THE EFFECT THAT No ESSENTIAL RMUS ARE LOCATED WITHIN THE PC OR SC BOUNDARIES c PLANT LAYOUT DRAWINGS WILL REFLECT ESSENTIAL & NoN-ESSENTIAL RMU LOCATIONS o A NEW WRITE-UP WlLL BE PRoVIDED RELAYIVE To ESSENTIAL & NoN-ESSENTIAL RMUS () l 14-2
a na.m+ ,,..naa a, 1- a m a e,b-,
"h N I b . ; il . I a m-d.:- --- n- , L a t a 3
I:} ! h 31 l' e y
; i d l 3
g L, .
' , (,_ k -
- 't " . . . hr gd 1 N- y ag p' gg- g l
a)_.' p- E
;-lugbGf l i; i ra 2 E hl\ g, gj# N'^i$:{y[f\/,2 '\$ /
f\,, j i y' g) ,, ,/ a
/
~
- j !!
~
- . *77
_hd e 33 8
!!) %, ', ,)gh a
;!! .la J s == s1 , y'_
m: 23R J- . f,m$. if y A ~cj <rer g; q ~C @ s
-8 e
i 2 1
\g3b e i i
+ 1" i lhh hif h i h ih e .l n.ve
. 1 t gg (y'fi m i.ww .:
n9 i l
%; sx e <> ! Mi /t m lykr i i e h
s
*' ' i N_ r q-4-gigiirn+4$3@,_tX
- 21 :
w; l y.. ' J , g ' e g ; vpct n.w a a _ : . a - I
=
, _s Mia i a
~
, , ,i 3,1 il Ui ' 'NE P 3 i g ,
- %- 'ka% .
@i f'4d{'lh 8 ':::::!!!!!!!!!!
.I...
I rite.I.m a., tertrett - Q g\l, b ': n dr'itg i l 3~ g3 4 ' - ; Ii -- C 11111111111111i s ;c M- @8 i m m >> m m
#g Q[ Y
[ 't h [ $ i JI $ ,,,iiii iiil j tW 3:W Ijjjjj'
; #y %e WhsaA#@f{j,k W ,'
, e w b e::s pp e ___ , w n A t,i a . m I 3 n - i !m!i!!!.!.!.!!!.n n .. a id1 , 7f 3J02lE$/dadnN U h- U
,,, u, I
m j _ 1
. 44 m - , - - . . .- m, e~
i j mi i
@ s Ow @ @ @ @
O-4
- I e I
, g e j w l
-m - _ _ _ _ _ _ .
. }
m. 2 O "' 3 "C e O "e Cn s Sea P r C C "L
" J 6
j
. =
9 a T'w .. " . .
*=
's ., - .EL -
8
. o. '.
. 8
*a a-
- e. --
'C n e
8 = r,
.*"- i. ..sf
-.L a i-A'- ,,
m8
.8 8
s t. s*
. c
- i s. s. 8 t e.--N w. r.t.
s*i. .
,.,.., = * " .' .{ w.
.m m' R.
m . - t . .
,I.
. t.
r ^-
. v ' s' .. . .
.e "se .a
- ** * * = ..
. s t-a -
=.".- sa.es m
u . ., -
, '- ~-
Cn t.a re-C
- e... . . .
- o=
c,u ,8 tu u . 8 s t
- l.i ec : :
'i
= - m. A 7 r ;
"" r : --
Cse -- :
' f( g v,** -
M g 4 Cn IE '
" .t M S w *= c )
. s e
" .p. <
. C
- - I
.t
.e L S
1 . m = .. , S s . ,
"n * ,
e .. ; , , (
"sio -:, { - ,, , l w
e ,
. o r
a s i " J o ,, g 1
. a c
p- l t n g '. t L
,et.
e
. G
. o C
, . t
..se
.~ ~,- .
.s m.
s. D-y 'u
. - ; . i t
. < ,, - n d
.a _
.~P- ~."
. .P.
n -
.. ,.y_~,c. n h,**- -
"- *E. . , r. se
~,'"m. .=o*.
..* . . . o-
..T -
. e. a e.
- . .p
,e t
,.e-
. , .=e -
t e. M- D p *-
.y ' . ~- ',,"" . .=
c . o
- T
,D m ., c
.s O '- "-
e . .f
.s
,'"*3 .
- = .ov.t< .
r.a.
.nt .- PSt i
g
.P ".
C.- s. n o.- u .
' .=
.=
. e c.~m..
. w-m.C- m.d. -
. p Am.
e- . o O e
; . ...e. " .
8 . m**. ** *. c . -
.O- . .
. ,g u. ,4 S.y R '- a e m . . , . L
~."5 m,
~
t ' e s
."e(.
- a+ w w ,O<*r J, ,'
, .r .* . .a. .
- s. r ; p. G ^ - i L' "" ..
^ p- t a..~s [ .* .'
.~,"$.r.'rmc.c.=.p g c..** .. -
O P. mO O 'a- es M, , . .
,- b.
e
.SsC .
c.
.a..i.. .:e- F-R '< s R .m .
~ . ..
t t 1 _, s
...=.a s.E p
T- 5
**"* ' DRP ,.
.=='e.
S c
. r ,, . f.
. cc " es .
. s S. .
y N* Cm. ' e eao9*Fs3CC. . e . . s e Oda S ,
's m m u. a. c n t9 .
.. ,,, er<CcD e U. y S
C +"' w. ,. =,= . '" s.
.., i C *-
, . e
~ 'e ese p n T. . t a.
t G. T.t
. y N
, A32 ,
e ' . . t
- F
= , e r .. t F
. e Y i..,. 8 . C.
I . , A' 9. .
- : : : = ,, a . C' c.
e O f a M- 5< .
. 8 .r.s*
- 5SeC m ' "
c g c.GB, g C ,M. ,,, I ,M S
~ '
"e
- sS ** a
*m rP . 4 cH
'gl
' se.h*=='s . 3
- - 6i
.. - e
_. 3 .. r EMS
..e.
7 H J .y . e. .
,, u p
.=
t. g g
- r. ,
_- -- -- _- _- : _- : : . P . .. i _ L . 8. -
. 0
.. F
= 9. c .
8
*: . m.
P' . .. h_
. p 4
- i. . t=-- _
^ -
s' 2 1,>)Jlj1;1.j]j . j
'r : ;
8 e, .
.a i
s .* o ** . 8".. : _ -
'.c.--
. 8e* : ^ _ ^
_ S * * . . e. f.. . $
- s s
.cr AR
- k
_ EO ' a ,. : ." a.~ *1 " r
~ l t -
se e . p. E..
- 8EP*
E.c *" ..a .T.
.F w"8
- e.
RS ' .
'.l AN
=e w.%
s. e-v? - *
=
s '. r- ,
.'.. c r
w~
.= c"..
. .,
- s. c I .
E .
- e. . r.s ,
,7*
, . y e "" n. ~,
~
e . . . LS w:*= (S , .
==
w ~= 4 .
. 9 9
v. A I . . ,.S .a'
. *'e. . o. c ,- w -
C N m.Mw .= .
. t ,
t - .e a s. 4.. M+o. O e
.=.* r .*w y- P
- a o
h P, , g .I " , L A _M,a L *,,-'s i
*=t. ,.
.
- s a
s 12t 52t 91 m ,.
, . s.
t e
- P * .a .
1s'8 a n. a" . " w EEE C T 1., , _.m, ..
- u sC e.. ;.-
F - - sw s 0 3 - 2o F 0 P, _ iS 9S 1S CICH sa t sn s na 1 g0 s pu M .. ,, .,.,^p . _4 2 R .
. g.
_ s D. 7P 8e CPH CC i . m _.
. .e...
S., et CR - 8
< r RHR <' ( ( ,
h _ c.i7. .. .
. e.
.a u
_ s.
.g.D.... .
g O ..M...,.=l .W... 1 E. l
. p . o ll.c ....e.
*. .? s n Gm
<a a '
_.ma.s.. E..h.. 4. ,,mL a ;a - .._iv.*2 4 J 4s..,u.__ A ,.2 7 L O --' - I , , . pi i 4 i
' eim m!u
\ dilihiilitiiii . _ .
I s dll - i a j
~
E!= H TJ, Ief51,l{iesgjj E j!! i ; IE a!=17 ie " . aa- ,4 is!
-f Hy r i j 3c r , !" + g
~
g i 1 / /
- i. 3) }
- I / I I w I s i
a e q.. v' / : j j g l l $U l
,h-
\ \
"" "" 5 ,1, -
j}. {a e g, _ _ g
- i !!E 'g-i]!!
i 1*!, ! s i3 i ""
+
4 i!!
.g -f 5
4 w +l}ikl ,l 1s @
=
i
~
i ' i g} 3
- l 1
/
f , i t i / ,s I \,
' Nill l 8 i
tr- m .. m. . ,. .. - g ,t e'~ f!
- gl, j3
- ,, _ ._,, p
^
[
, I +I !h b fll i
i i 83 iO l 1 i ! 6/1/92 3.4 15
,--i w- -. e r
4 s v .
! . , I
$ ,,- fi -! JJi
!!r? p,g
.. ~, ! g si
=3 r i;f fin PJ= ~
E 5 y h af i 1 e M ,ht $i 3 s
= , " "
"t 6 s..l.,ull I *f' u) .Q; 5$1 y !! 11 Tr~ !
j ! ! l 1i .i ;
.filiglilg.gi g
\ ! -
m e m ut
- s s
t- ,1, ,
" o 5 o e
e 6I ; b- $ 3 a5 , i am in$5 - =,
.I a i s "
,3i se ,1 aL,
$ *i}
- Q U- d, i i h.11 -
k }MV. 3h 9 c i
- 11 k sw" y
3o ; ; 0 f < G _, . o,
* ..f;:r o, g 5
's i 1 .g a
l{ 2o t h li,d i
,L- s lo v " o s t; -
@c_e @d,i 5 5 i a L
i 11
== C Mi g*
ln, _h i a
~
t m ( g= l s i t; - t* y ha "g ~
),
5
} 11 h 11 .
tu ze i 1g - I 1 15 . wCD-N - 5
\ t i. -.i
\ at 5, o 9
- i ) !k$ f :,-
is M y. . . _? IPifII e2 p$
- ro f q~-$$
' ~'
3 ~
,, ,i le l iL._ il 5 13 i }{ W d'>
3 ii i i i (J1
~
1 gg - fn m es h ( 14- 6/v92 j 3.4
l 4 () #15 PLANT FLOOR DRAIN SYSTEMS - DESIGN & EVALUATION ! ACRS INQUIRY l PROVIDE ADDITIONAL'INFORMATION RELATIVE TO THE PLANT FLOOR DRAIN SYSTEMS WITH SPECIFIC ATTENTION TO THE REACTOR BUILDING, l THE SECONDARY CONTAINMENT, THE CONTROL BUILDING, AND THE DIVISIONAL SEPARATION AREAS UNDER NORMAL CONDIYIONS (EQUIPMENT & ] PIPING LEAKAGE) & UNDER ACCIDENT - PIPE BREAK CONDITION ! (COMPARTMENT FLOODING, PRESSURIZATION AND FIRE) GE RESPONSE O PLANT EQUIPMENT & FLOOR-DRAIN SYSTEMS - OVERVIEW . O NOT PART OF ABWR STANDARD 0 INTERFACE REQUIREMENTS HAVE BEEN PROVIDED 0 REACTOR BUILDJ'^ SUMP COLLECTION IS SHOWN ON PLANT l ({) LAYOUT DRAWINfn i 0 RADWASTE SYSTEM TRANSFER INTERCONNECTIONS ARE l j NOTED 09 VARIOUS P& IDS l 0 INTERNAL FLOODING ANALYSIS IGNORES SUCCESSFUL ! SYSTEM OPERATION i ! O ANTICIPATED SIMILARITIES TO PAST PLANY DESIGNS O VARIOUS PLANT BUILDING-HAVE DRAIN SYSTEMS
- O SYSTEM INDIVIDUALLY COLLECTSfBOTH EQUIPMENT &
! FLOOR DRAIN LEAKAGES, SPILLS O LEAKAGE IS TRANSFERRED TO LOWER LEVELS SUMPS OR l -COLLECTION TANKAGE O EQUIPMENT DRAINS : HCW; FLOOR DRAINS =LCW-0 COLLECTION TANKAGE On SUMPS ARE MONITORED I&C DEVICES ADVISE THE MCR-OPERATOR OF SYSTEM
-O
- STATUS, LEAKAGE, AMOUNT
([): 0 TANKAGE & SUMP' INVENTORIES ARE MANUALLY j TRANSFERRED TO RADWASTE 1 15-1
. _ . _ _ . _ _ . . _. ~. - . __ _ . _ _ ~ _ . _ _ _ _ .. _. _
d 4 O SYSTEM.IS NON-SAFETY; ISOLATION VALVE & PENETRATION THROUGHOUT CONTAINMENT ltRE i SAFETY-RELATED O SOME PROVISIONS ARE MADE TO MONITOR INDIVIDUAL
! AREAS & SPECIFIC EQUIPMENT j 0 REMOTE LEAKAGE MONITORING 0F INACCESSIBLE CONTAINMENT AREA IS VERY IMPORTANT !
l l 0 DRAIN SYSTEM LEAKAGE MONITORING IS COMPLEMENTED BY ! OTHER LEAKAGE DETECTION MEANS ]
- 0 ANTICIPATED DIFFERENCES TO PAST PLANT DESIGNS
- 0 ABWR DRAIN SYSTEM WILL BE SEGREGATED BY DIVISIONAL 0 A DRAIN SYSTEMS WILL BE COMPLIMENTARY TO OTHER DIVISION SERVICE SYSTEMS (VERTICAL COMMUNICATIONS) 0 ABWR DRAIN SYSTEMS WILL MAINTAIN DIVISIONAL SEPARATION O ABWR DIVISIONAL PRESSURIZATION (H.E. LINE BREAKS)
WILL NOT BE AFFECTED BY DRAIN SYSTEM 0 ABWR LOCAL FIRE FIGHTING VS. TOTAL PLANT-l SPRINKLERS ACTUATOR LIMITED FLOODING EFFECTS.
- 0 PAST OPERATING EXPERIENCE EVENTS INVOLVING DRAIN SYSTEMS - TO BE ADDRESSED BY THE ANTICIPATED DESIGN
. O SYSTEM PROCESS INTERACTIONS WITH OTHER SYSTEMS VIA DRAIN SYSTEM-l I O INTER-SYSTEM FLOODING VIA DRAIN SYSTEM 0 TOTAL RELIANCE ON-A SINGLE SUMP MONITORING SYSTEM i 0 ENVIRONMENTAL INTERACTICNS VIA DRAIN SYSTEMS O TOTAL' RELIANCE ON EQUIPMENT ROOM FLOODING CONTROL SSAR REVISIOR O O SOME ADDITIONAL COL INTERFACE.INFORMATION WILL BE Q INCLUDED IN PEVISED SECTION 9.3.12. 15-2 ~
, .,. -, . - . - ~ - , . , - , , --- - - . . .n.. , . -
1 i i (]) #1f -PLANT EQUIPMENT COMPARTMENTS - POST ACCIDENT ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS THR0 EFFECTS: i ACRS INQUIRY i PROVIDE ADDITIONAL SPECIFIC INFORMATION RELATIVE TO POST I ACCIDENT-(DBA) ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS WITHIN THE REACTOR ! BUILDING, THE SECONDARY CONTAINMENT,'IHE CONTROL BUILDING AND i WITHIN VARIouS DIVISIONAL-SEPARATION' COMPARTMENTS WITH SPECIAL EMPHASIS ON THEIR-EFFECTS ON SAFETY-RELATED EQUIPMENT IN THE 3-
'"TCTED AREAS 4
i
- j. GE RESPONSE i
0 PLANT ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL - GENERAL DESIGN BASIS [ (])
- OvzRVIEW 4 0 SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF GENERAL INFORMATION IS L AVAILABLE THROUGHOUT THE SSAR o ADDITIONALLY RATHER COMPREHENSIVE / SPECIFIC DISCUSSIONS ARE ALSo pre ^!IDen
-- DESIGN BASIS & PROTECTIVE MEASURES FeR SSCS UNDER DBA'S
-WORSE ENVIRONS Fon SSCS.AT--THEIR LOCATIONS BREAK EFFECTS BOTH INSIDE/0UTSIDE CONTAINMENT INCLUDING SYSTEM INTERACTIONS o _ INTERNAL EVENT EVALUATION'- BREAKS, FLOODS, FIRE, ADVERSE. ENVIRONS o -KEY ASSUMPTIONS: BREAK TERMINATIONS OUTSIDE CONTAINMENT,-DIVISIONAL SEPARATION, & SAFE.
SHUTDOWN CAPA8ILITIES & REQUIREMENTS-o SAFETv RELATED EQUIPMENT PERFORMANCES UNDER ()- . POST-DBA 16-1 I
r~x 0 PLANT ENVIRONMENTAL - DESIGN BASIS - INFORMATION
~
SOURCES 0 SUBSECTION 3.6.1 - BREAK INSIDE/0UTSIDE CONTAINMENT 0 SUBbECTION 3.6.2 - BREAK LOCATIONS & DYNAMIC EFFECTS 0 APPENDIX 3I - EQUIPMENT QUALIFICATIONS 0 SUBSECTION 3.4.1, 9.5.1 - FIRE & FLOOD CONDITION O SUBSECTION 6.2.2, 6.2.3 - PC & SC CONDITIONS l 0 SUBSECTION 94.1. - PLANT VENTILATION SYSTEMS 0 SUBSECTION 3.5.1 - MISSILE & BARRIER DESIGN O SUBSECTION 14.0 - ACCIDENT ANALYSIS I 0 ?LANT ENVIRONMENTAL - SiiFETY ANALYSIS 0 ESSENTIAL SSCS SUBJECT TO DBAS (TABLES 3.6-1 THRU 3.6-6) 0 ALL BREAKS--LOCATIONS, EFFECTS & EQUIPMENT
/~N (TABLE 3I.3-A G 0 OUTSIDE BREAKS -- PRESSURIZATION (TABLES 6.2-3 &
-4 & FIGURES 6.2-37A & B) 0 INSIDE BREAKS (SECTIONS 6.2 & 14.0)
O BREAKS IN MS TUNNEL, CB-BASEMENT, IB 0 HIGH, MODERATE & LOW ENERGY BREAKS O FIRE, FLOOD HVAC LOSS, ETC. EVENTS SSAR REVISIO3 0 SOME ADDITIONAL UPDATED THFORMATION WILL BE ADDED TO APPROPRIATE SECTIONS REFLECTING NEw INSIGHTS & INQUIRY RESPONSES. t s
/
16-2
~
23A6100AE w, Standard Plant O Table 31.3 A Plant Environment Data and Location - Cro.a Reference Table of Figure Numbers Location Clean Zone ' Outside (I) Secondary Secondary Control Turbine Primary Containment Containment Conta!nment Building Building (2) Condition _. Normal 1 31.3 1 31.3 2 31.3 3 31.3-4 31.3 5 (a) Thermo-dynamic 31.3 10 31.3 1. 31.3 12 31.3 13 j (b) Radiadon 31.3 9 ! Accidents 31.3 15 31.3 16 31.3-18 A (a) Thermo- 31.3 14
- V dynamic 31.340 31.3 0 . 31.3 22 (b) Radiation 31.3 19 l _
(1) Specific zones are located on arrangement drawings and typical equipment is identified on P&ID and ED design drawings referenced by Figure numbers on each page. i- (2) Test and abnormal environments are included with normal conditions. i ? i
- O -,
Amendment 22 9
_ - . - . - - . _..--. . . . - . _ . _ _ . . ~ _ - _ _ _ --.-.-.- . . . . . _ . . . - - _ . . . - Generol Derw Company tMN PROPRIETARY INFORMATION c.u m 23AmeAg ua < Standard Plant O Tsble 31.314 Thermodynamic E:wironment Conditions Inside Primary Containment Vessel Plant Accident Conditions (a) Prenure, temperature and relathe humidity Number Plant Zone \Typiest Equipment Drpell aten [ Figs. Temperaturc("C) 171 160 !?! 93 la1& a2 1.2 3,1.2 3a.1.2 3b/ , 5.13,11.22) Preuure (kg/cm*g) -0.14 0.14 0 0
- 3.16 - 3.16 - 1.76 - 1.4i Steam Steam 100 100 Humidity (ct)
Time II) 3(b) 6(h) 1(day) 190(day) a3 Wetwell atea (Fig. Temperatuse( C) 122 122 122. 100 1.2 3c/6.2 39, ,, Preuure (kg/cm*g) -0.14 0.14 0 0 7.6 11] -1.41
- 3.16 -3.16 - 1.76 Humidity 100 100 100 100 Time (I) 3(h) 6(h) 1(day) 100(day)
Notes: (1) ' Time' defines the period after LOC 4. For e. sample, ~3(h)* means 3 hours efter the occurrence of Loc 4, and *1(tsy)' means time period betwen 6 hours aber LOC 4 and 24 hcurs after LOC 4. ! -.- - u f
. ~ _ . . _ . . _ _ _ _ . . . _ _ . . . , _ - . _ _ - _ . _ . , . . . _ . - , . _ . ,, . . _ _ _ _ . _ _ . . . . , - - .
1 i oeneral taecme cavipeny ABWR PaoPaioTrav mronmTios msim. wn
. Standard Plant o.u m O rabie ai 3 is j '!hermodynamic Environment Conditions inside Reactor Building ! (Secondary Containment) i.
Plant Accident Conditions ; i j (a) Pressure, temperature and relative humidity 1 < 1 4 Plant Zese/ Typical Equipment 1 Controt rod drive hydraulic 100 100 66 66 , j system (scram etc. of hydrau. Temperamie Pressure (Kg/cm (g C)0.035 ) 0.035 0.035 0 ? lic contrel unit)[ Fig's.1.2 4 Humidity (%) Steam Steam 100 90 max ! Time (2) 1(b) 6(h) 12(h) .100(day) ! j /4.68 171 100 66 66 i MS isolation valve (1) MS drain isolation valve Temperature Pressure (Kg/cm g( C)0.03 ) 0.035 0.035 0 Nittogen line isolation valve Humidity (%) Steam Steam 100 90 mu i (li,(4) T'ane(2) 1(b) 6(h) 12(b) 100(day) i j Process water line ) isolation valve (1),(4) i [ Fig's,1.2 2,1.2 3,1.2 3a,
! 5.13) i 171 100 66 66
- Feedwater isolation valve (1)
[ Fig's.1.2 2,1.2 3,1.2 3a/ Temperature Pressure (Kg/cm g( C) ). 0.035 0.035 0.035 0 l Humidity (%) Steam Steam 100 90 Max. l 5.13) Time (2) 1(h) 6(h) 12(b) 100(day) f RCIC injection valve (1), check 171 100 66 66 valve (inside MS tunnel), steam Temperature Pressure (Kg/cm ( C)g) 0.035 0.035 0.035 0 line isolation valve [ Fig's. Humidity (%) Steam Steam 100 90 Max. 1.2 2,1.2 3,1.2 3a/5.4 8) Time (2) 1(h) 6(h) 12(b) 100(day) RCIC (valve except isolation 100(3) 66 66 l valve, assemblies, cable, Temperature Pressure (Kg/cm g( C)) 0.035 0.035 0 . l turbine) (Fig's.1.2-4/ Humidity (%) Steam 100 90 Man. 5,4-8] Tune (2) 6(h) 12(h) 103(day) i RCIC turbine s'ectric control 100 66 . 66 l system (3),(6)[ Fig's.1.2 5/ Temperature Pressure (Kg/cm g ('C) 0.035 ) 0.035 '0 i 5.4-8) Humidity (%) Steam 100 90 Max. Time (2) 6(h) 12(h) 100(d44) RHR (LPFL cooling synta a at 100 66 66 S/D, contr.inment cuoling. Ser. Temparature Pressure (Kg/cm g (*C) 0.035 ) 0.035 0 vice water sprem) valve, pump Humidity (%) Steam 100 90 Max. (motor, seal cooler) instrument Time (2) 6(h) 12(h) 100(day) l control electric equipment (in-l !- cluding cable and sources of electricity) (Fig's.1.2-4/ l t 5.4 10] r 31116-Amendment 21 l i --
. .__ _ . - . . . . = . _ - _ _ .- - - - . . . - _ - . - - . - . . ~ . - - - .
) Generet Dutne Compny ABM rnornicTAny istonurrios 234sioo4c nev e
; Standard Plant ci iii i O rasie31.3.i.
Thermodynamic Enviro: ment Conditions inside Reactor Building (Outside Secondary Containment) 1 Plant Accident Conditions i (a) Pressure. temperature and relative humidity ] Plant Zone / Typical PmshII Temprature Relative Equipment lis/ctn g C Humidity j i Clean zone outside +0 M n 40 Max. 90 secondary containment Min.10 Min.10 (not otherwise noted) l [ Fig's.6.2 26/6.71] Diesel generator room +0 Max 45 Max 90 l Fig's.1.2 8/9.5 6] Min 10 Min 10 l Monitor room [ Fig's. 4 Max. 40 Max. 90 1.2 8/6.51l Min.10 Min.10 3 4 Notes: .I (1) The indicatedpositive or negatsve pnssun msil be maintained. Pressun duffemce will not be controlled l 4 i i O Anwndment 21 31119
1 1 : l (]) #17 PLANT EQUIPMENT COMPARTMENT - MAXIMUM HEAT RATE UPON LOSS OF HVAC ! ACRS INQUIRY i 3 l PROVIDE AcoITIONAL SPECIFIC INFORMATION RELATIVE TO THE INDIVIDUAL EQUIPMENT Ro0M HEAT UP RATES UPON_ Loss OF Ro0M HVAC l i FOR REACTOR BUILDING, SECONDARY CONTAINMENT, CONTROL BUILDING & l D' VISIONAL SEPARATION COMFARTMENTs WITH SPECIAL EMPHASIS ON 1 i EQUIPMENT TEMPERATURE ErrECTs, TEMPERATURE DETECTION & MONITORING, STRUCTURAL IMPLICATIONS, MCR OPERATOR INFORMATION AND [ { j SYSTEM INTERACTIONS i l GE RESPONSE i i () 0 PLANT HVAC SYSTEMS-GENERAL DESIGN basis - OVERVIEW i 0 BASIC QEsIGN PHIL0 SOPHY 0 UNIQUE APPLICATION--- RB/SC/ DIVISIONAL SEPARATION; l j CB/MCR/ Eau!P Ro0Ms/ BASEMENT ! o CURRENT AvAILAsLE INFORMATION SOURCES - EXTENSIVE SSAR SECTIONS , O TRAoITIONAL CONCERNS - DBA ErrECTs l o SPECIAL I&C/ Loss Or HVAC CONCERNS i 4 , O PLANT HVAC SYSTEMS -SPECIFIC DESIGN basis ! REACTOR Bu!LoING/ SECONDARY CONTAINMENT-(RB/SC) o RBVS f
- o- SC - HVAC SussYsTEMs d
o SC/-EE-HVAC
- o OTHER SC/EE-HVAC o OTHER RB/EE-HVAC
- - ([)-
0 SGTS 17-1. i l _...____,__.._.,_~.,.._..._,._...___..___.;...__._______.,.._-.-
0 PLANT HVAC SYSTEMS - SPECIFIC DESIGN BASIS - CONTROL 0 BUILDING (CB) o CBSVS o CB-MCR-HVAC o CB-EEE-HVAC o CB-BASEMENT o RB-CB-MS TUNNEL HVAC 0 SAFETY EVALUATION - UNIQUE EVENTS - LOSS Or HVAC o NORMAL OPERATION (NO) o DBAS o TOTA LOSS Or HVAC EVENT (5B0) o I&C EQUIPMENT IMPLICATIONS (MINOR) o SAFE SHUTDOWN EQUIPMENT CONCERNS (PAST EVALUATIONS
> 180 F SSAR REVISION
[) o No MAJOR CHANGES To THE CURRENT SSAR SECTIONS ARE CONTEMPLATED FOR THE PLANT VENTILATION SYSTEMS DOCUMENTATION (SECTION 9.4) NoR Fon THE PLANT SAFETY ANALYSIS (SECTION 14.0). l 0 17-2
7_____._ k , 4 l
#18 RWCU SYSTEM - DETAILED PIPING LAYOUT DIAGRAMS
!, O , e etP3.Jh0A!1M i i
#e; VIDE A SET OF RWCUS PIPING / COMPONENT LAYOUT DRAWINGS GE RESPONSI l
O A PRELIMINARY SET OF DETAILED RWCUS PIPING AND COMPONENT DRAWINGS HAVE BEEN FORWARD. l i : 1 i O GENERAL OssERVATIoNs Asour SusJECT LAYOUT DRAWINGS o THE SusJECT DRAWINGS ARE COMPUTER GENERATED BY AN l UNIQUE DESIGN Tool process. j
"'"'""' "'"' '"""'" - '""'" (')
lO ' '5' ISOMETRICS & TWo (2) PLAN VIEWS. 2 o ONE Or THE ISOMETRIC' VIEW IRAWINGs HAs BEEN 3 l MODIFIED To ILLUSTRATE THE APPROXIMATE l CONFIGURATION & LOCATION Or THE INDIVIDUAL l EQUIPMENT CusICLEs. i o ALL MAJOR SYSTEM COMPONENTS ARE SHoWN EXCf.PT A- FEW l MINOR EQUIPMENT (E.G. BACKWASH RECEIVING TANK) j o THE DRAWINGS ARE SIMILAR To THE RWCUS
- CONFIGURATION FoR THE JAPANEst UNITS K6 & K7.
I 4 0 SPECIFIC COMMENTS Amour THE RWCUS AS PORTRAYED IN ! DRAWINGS y-o INDIVIDUAL Sus-SYSTEMS ARE MoDULARLY PACKAGED & LOCATED: IN SEPARATE CUsICLEs [ o CusICLE PRoVIDF.s'SoME DEGREE OF PROTECTION BETWEEN
.' CusICLEs-
[Q o CONTAINMENT Is0LATIoN VALVING Is CONFIGURED & LOCATED IN A HIGHLY PROTECTED AREA 4 18-1 l-1 ~ _ _ . . . _ . - . . . - . _ - , ~ . _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ . _ . . _ _ . _ . . . _ . _ . . _ _ . _ . _ - - .. _
(} O SUBSTANTIAL VENTING & INTERCONNECTION ExzST BETWEEN CUBICLES 0 LAYOUT Arr0RDS SIGNIFICANT ACCESS FOR INSPECTION, MAINTENANCE & REPLACEMENT OPERATIONS 0 CUBICLES ARE BOTH HORIZONTALLY & VERTICALLY STAGGERED 0 MAJOR CONTROL, INSTRUMENTATION & COMPONENT ISOLATION EQUIPMENT IS LOCATED IN ADJACENT CusICLES O RWCUS DESIGN, LAYOUT & CONFIGURATION USED IS , SIMILAR TO BWRS (CURRENT OPERATING PLANTS) O DRAWINGS REFLECT SSAR PLANT LAYOUT DRAWING (FIGURE 1.2-2 THRU -13) 0 DRAWINGS REFLECT REVISED COMPARTMENT PRESSURIZATION ANALYSIS 0 SPECIFIC COMMENTS As0ur PREVIOUS RWCUS CRITIQUE () O O ISOLATION VALVTNG BETWEEN RWCUS & FEEDWATER SYSTEM ISOLATION SIGNALS O SENSOR RESPONFE TIMES O EOUIPMENT QUALIFICATIONS (INCLUDING ISOLATION VALVING)
- O PRES $URIZATION ANALYSIS UPDATING i
l
- SSAR REVISION i
l 0 APPROPRIATE RWCUS SSAR SECTIONS WILL BE AMENDED TO-I PROVIDE PREVIOUS COMMENT RESPONSES. i 0 THE FORWARDED DRAWINGS WILL NOT BE ADDED AS STANDARD SSAR ENCLOSURE DOCUMENTS. THEY HAVE BEEN SUBMITTED AS SPECIAL INFORMATION.. i i 18-2 i
--a,-w- . - - . , . . . - - . -..
y - -- n,,--m. nn..,--r ., -
4
'l ASME ASME
' CODE CLASS 1 CODE CLASS 3
> t -
7 m wp? hb pen C
) ~
Jo b I 75 7 I
-" ::Am ggDWATER ,
2 3 p
,,es
l/*
RHR Loop B - RPV g- - - - J g 7 [ F M M
- + RCW N1 U___ _._ . __ RHX f
- 4
._% 1 3 JL yl 3
jg - RCW
- + "C" 3 9 NI CONTAINMENT (PCPS) NRHX TO RADWASTE
$$ g nueR DEhANERALIZER E
< >I 3INC 3 4
FILTER TO SUPPRESSION POOL DEMtNERALIZER 7 3 NC 3 n hM _ Figure 2.6.1 Reactor Water Cleanup (CUW) System P&lD O O O
l 0 i.i . i t . ! ! . .
. i . i.i.
8.] ' jr li--! I
,_.._..._...__.._.__..L._..__._.,
_g- . 2_h l
.- ;,.1' af1 - ,
i~ Y- "7" ;i - Gd GMIf i j$ 7._
~,
r?._ r_.,_/_
/
ni CP""M ! 1
@r4-9)--=~~=lm
__s .. i- i$ ~. A.i .u _,t
.s h.i ..i gi$ v d
4r l{t- gu g F1-3
!H '
'g i-m mi lit-[\[Pll L g 3 .
ies 3 4 I o,J.f - s u L,ryD]
~
!- g ,,q
_.i r q-i$119,g, : yel _..l. _., a ~ vn ? 00 O et u ,/ y ir v h, , h
.c d)p \
u
'w$ gh'% g h
1, M
?--"
_h! E; w
-d,4".." Utg " j .3.fi @' @1 'i -
, Q .a ,, .f G s
~l n
8 'd .9 l o [ -. 'i.' k*l s. , i .. f i... .. ;
%. ) .
1(-s* " it' M(Cidt' h<G f s
'+14( %; hA '
i i I gE w p. ; s a, r
- et l _I
,. . . . .g a.
N .r.. .. . p
= g_ il it-a c' u',' f l i:-m=h;!!f,
'w y
'M.d 1
il u i m
$@r- ,
,a s. /s -2 s
4
- g
-__ . ,+ ___
q, . e x t 8' ' = i ss .l V8 \,q l q
%.s 1 5 I
O k y * * " h f
, E ..
" se g
'< 's H c s N
aw c v s .rst-ew.c. s' "x/%.i
~ N.. 4 b!AGg.g~99[f6 s ,,
,i
;s 9 NzM Me,;,
Evowurm t m ur ,
's 0-i iN N, s ; m' A ~
. isy \
I
- ); ,e p;dlMme q ;l /
/ N 's ~,
I g t 4, t%j
'l .lI, './ /y'%
,! s ,x u a
/ '
f
/ ,,/ \ . [_
/ ,4 ,
, l . ,,
/ og I pli
\/ \ y./ l hl$".
%q;)} % g & '
x- l 'e ( .] hs-,,- u s .. c s - c, . <
-4
.toa,y,_ y.
's " -ta "
F k (g . Fiusa o sumumn. % - N f ,I nsac.4a
.I s;-. f, / , ,
s g ,}4 "
's s ~.A ll o / $1 n '
Lj 'N 4 [ .(. ' 6Y>'h!h
/ a Iq[Q h[' %;3W
'q ^
- s. /*
_ ~ (t .r ,g y I o.u ,, .
, gg .
m...... m ,- , I -
, .- l n?r- ,9 _i,% -
n4 g ei
~
l ,
,h/.hQ,x }
- s&
- k: $ [
- %'!-A, <
s s,
,S N JV o
's'p / ,/
,\
/ w t mu~ :=p
,N
. / .I
,, c ..,
om. u v'"< a.- L
;f t ,
s av Ae _m . __ ,-
, ,,, ,}}