ML20155E550

Forwards Request for Addl Info Re Listed Items Concerning Util Application for CP

ML20155E550
Person / Time
Site:	Grand Gulf, 05000000
Issue date:	07/13/1973
From:	Tedesco R US ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION (AEC)
To:	Moore V US ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION (AEC)
Shared Package
ML20155E140	List: ML20155E133 ML20155E182 ML20155E227 ML20155E338 ML20155E354 ML20155E367 ML20155E405 ML20155E430 ML20155E447 ML20155E473 ML20155E503 ML20155E550 ML20155E557 ML20155E565 ML20155E578 ML20155E600 ML20155E714 ML20155E728 ML20155E753 ML20155E770 ML20155E794 ML20155E948 ML20155E967 ML20155E986 ML20155F001 ML20155F053 ML20155F176 ML20155F191 ML20155F203 ML20155F217 ML20155F228 ML20155F252 ML20155F279 ML20155F302 ML20155F332 ML20155F378 ML20155F477 ML20155F485 ML20155F516 ML20155F534 ML20155F545 ML20155F560 ML20155F589 ML20155G308
References
FOIA-88-91 NUDOCS 8806160140
Download: ML20155E550 (3)

Text

g UNITED STATES K%dL- '

D5 ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION

• ' ..'I.i.h.,' '

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20545 July 13, 1973 Docket Nos. 50-416/417 Voss A. Moore, Assistant Director for Boiling Water Reactors, L REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION FOR GRAND GULF NUCLEAR STATION,

, UNITS 1 & 2 Plant Name: Grand Gulf, Units 1 & 2 Licensing Stage: CP Docket Nurlers: 50-416/417 NSSS: General Electric Architect Engineer: Bechtel Responsible Branch & Project Manager: BWR #1: G. Owsley Requested Completion Date: None Applicant's Response Date: ASAP Review Status: Incomplete The enclosed question list requesting additional information for the construction permit review for Grand Gulf 1 & 2 has been prepared by the Containment Systems Branch as a result of a ceeting with Mississippi Power and T.iohe. Canaral F19errie, and Rachtal in Can inc a nn .Tiin t. 7A s

and 27, 1973. In the course of the meeting the following issues were identified which require additional analyses by the applicant:

1. The capability of the plant to start the hydrogen recirculation system at about 10 minutes following a LOCA.

2. The capability of the plant to tolerate bypass leakage areas 2

greater than that currently documented in the PSAR (i.e., 0.043 ft ).

During the meeting the applicant requested that our concerns and specific questions in these areas be formally requested. The attached question list is consistent with that request.

i M 2'di-4cc Robert' L. Tedesco, Assistant Director for Containment Safety Pirectorate of Licensing.

Enclosure:

As stated cc: w/o encl. w/ encl.

A. Giambusso J. M. Hendrie W. Butler W. Mcdonald S. H. Hanauer G. Owsley G.Glynn J. Lainas [ R. Cudlin 8806160140 880606 PDR FOIA PDR CONNDRBO-91 B/5f ..

6 REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL 1NFORMATION

GRAND GULF NUCLEAR STATION, UNITS 1 & 2 l DOCKET NOS. 50-416/417 I 6

1. Provide the results of an analysis of_the plant's capability to allow initiation of the hydrogen recirculation system at 10 minutes following a loss-of-coolant accident. Define the spectrum of pri-mary system break sizes for which this capability may exist and discuss the specific limitations which determine the unacceptable break ranges. As a minimum, the following possible limitations should be addressed:

a. containment spray heat capacity .

b. RHR system interlocks

c. capability of the recirculation system to effectively mix the drywell and containment atmospheres considering the evolution rate of hydrogen due to metal-water reaction

d. interlocks on the recirculation system valves

e. requirements for operator action Discuss the acceptability of not having early recirculation cap-ability for certain primary system break sizes.

2. Discuss the process parameters which are monitored and available to the operator and the general operating procedures which he will 1

follow in making the decision to initiate the hydrogen recirculation system. Describe the manual actions which must be performed by l the operator to start recirculation.  !

y ,..T ,~,w .

e y * , ~,, . -- -- -

---.m.

). - -

2-

-)

1 Provide anaaalysis of the containment spray systems heat removal 3.

. capability. Discuss the assumptions and justifications for the assumptions used in the analysis.

4. Provide sensitivity analyses which relate the containment's bypass capability, for small primary system breaks, to the following means of mitigating or terminating bypass leakage:

a. containment sprays i

b. plant shutdown times

c. containment heat sinks (specify the sources of heat sinks and the manner by which heat sink effectiveness was determined)

d. any other means for mitigating the effects of bypassing Considering the above analyses, summarize the containment capability to withstand the effects of direct bypass of the suppression pool.

j I

l l

i I

a y4i,-- w T ri v- --em<g---- egw m- y*+ew y e ~ arat- yv'-y-*-- y---v- 7 9 t- r-e 7 - v~

• w e e