ML20197G143
| ML20197G143 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Columbia  |
| Issue date: | 11/30/1983 |
| From: | Houston R, Houston W Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Novak T Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| CON-WNP-0688, CON-WNP-688, CON-WNP-69, CON-WNP-696 NUDOCS 8312190289 | |
| Download: ML20197G143 (8) | |
Text
.
j NOV 3 01983 Docket flo.: 50-397
!!EfiORAflDUf1 FOR: Thomas flovak, Assistant Director for Licensing Division of Licensing FR0ft:
R. t#vna Houstnn, Assistant Director for Reactor Safety Division of Systems Integration
SUBJECT:
SUPPLE!'EtlTAL SAFETY EVALUATI0fl REPORT (UtlP-2)
Plant flace:
WPPSS fluclear Project ?!c. 2 Docket flumber:
50-397 Licensing Stage:
OL Responsible Brarich:
Licensing Branch #2 Project ilanager:
R. Auluck DSI Branch Involved:
Reactor Systems Branch Enclosed is the Reactor Systems Branch SSER with regard to the W!!P-2 design reverification report. We have reviewed the system level reverification studies of the HPCS and RHR Systems, and find them acceptable.
.. 7 q-y-
~N 8312190289 831130
)
R. Wayne Houston, Assistant Director
=eF-ADOCK 05000397
/
for Reactor Safety
~m
- /
Division of Systems Integration s
Enclosure:
As stated cc:
R. flattson D. Eisenhut A. Schwencer R. Auluck Section B 11 embers, RSB C0flTACT:
T. Collins, X24478 BSheron RSB R/F ilHodges RSB P/F: WtlP-2 TCollins TCollins R/F AD/RS_Rdg._
'i _. k_.. a. _M,),_
- c
,,c W DSI:RSB; i
DSI:RSB DSI:RSB DSI:
L.e: TCollins :gd-.WHodges-
-BSheron-RHou tbnd-a - Ajc
{:
oar =L 11/21/83 [ 11/ s /83 ll/h/83' 11Q0./83
..(.
..n 4 C 2 0 U.! 313 (10 4 0 ) N R C M 0 2 4 a CFFICIAL RECORD COPY
SAFETY EVALUATION REPORT WNP-2 DESIGN REVERIFICATION
1.0 INTRODUCTION
By letter dated September 27,1983,from G.C. Sorensen to H. R.
Denton, the Washington Public Power Supply (WPPSS) forwarded a design verification program report for Washington Nuclear Project Number Two (WNP-2).
Two of the systems examined in the report are:
the high pressure core spray (HPCS) system, and the residual heat removal (RHR) system.
The HPCS design review included evaluation of ten system design areas, detailed component design reviews, as-built field inspections of each of the components reviewed, and a detailed review of the final as-built pipe and hanger stress analysis on selected items. The RHR system review included evaluation of eight system design areas, detailed component reviews, as built field inspections of each of the components reviewed, a detailed review of the RHR heat exchanger lateral restraints and anchor bolts, and a reverification of several final as-built RHR pipe and hanger stress analyses.
This safety evaluation report addresses the HPCS system level verification in the following areas: 1) functional requirements (flow requirements and hydraulic transients); 2) mechanical separation and redundancy; and 3) pump NPSH.
The following RHR
system level reverification areas are also evaluated: 1) thermal / hydraulic functional requirements; 2) system redundancy and separation; and 3) system layout and arrangement.
In addition, for both the HPCS and RHR reviews, the adequacy of the selection of mechanical components for review at the component level was reviewed.
2.0 HPCS SYSTEM R'EVERIFICATION 2.1 FUNCTIONAL REQUIREMENTS The reverification of the HPCS system functional requirements included system flow requirements and pump start and valve closure hydraulic transients.
Flow requirements specified by the NSSS vendor to ensure adequate core cooling for small break loss-of-coolant accidents were reverified.
An independent analytical model of the HPCS system piping and components was then used to predict system flows versus pressures.
The applicant reports that the system flow evaluation confirmed the adequacy of the HPCS system to deliver required flows.
Predicted flow rates under steady conditions were also compared to measured flows obtained during system testing for additional assurance of system adequacy.
This is acceptable to us.
Valve closure and pump startup transients were also reevaluated using an independent analytical model.
For valve closure transients, the HPCS motor operated injection valve (F004) was l
l SER: WNP-2 SER..
modeled to close rapidly at full runout flow to deternine whether the resultant water hammer would overstress the piping.
The applicant reported that calculated pressurds and forces were within the design tolerances of the piping. HPCS pump startup transients were also modeled using vendor-supplied pump characteristics.
No significant concerns were reported.
This is acceptable to us.
2.2 HPCS MECHANICAL SEPARATION Mechanical separation is required of engineered safety systems so that no single design basis event is capable of disabling sufficient equipment to prevent safe reactor shutdown.
The applicant reported that requirements for mechanical separation were evaluated in a review of design drawings supplemented by field inspections.
No mechanical components required to be separated from the HPCS system (i.e., other ECCS equipment or RCIC) were found to be located in the HPCS pump room.
No other mechanical component targets along the routing of the HPCS piping were identified which violated the separation requirements.
This is ecceptable to us.
2.3 REDUNDANCY The HPCS system of itself is not required to be redundant.
Mechanical redundancy covers only specific areas such as water supplies for the system.
For the HPCS system,an inportant feature in this regard is the auto-switchover from condensate storage tank SER: WNP-2 SER.
,.-,--.p
~ - -. -
suction to suppression pool suction.
A re-evaluation was cerformed of the adequacy of the water volume in the HPCS suction line to assure automatic switchover from the condensate storage tank to the suppression pool in the event of a break in the line from the CST.
The reevaluation found that the suction line volume was adequate for normal operation.
The HPCS test mode had not been addressed in the original calculations, however.
In their corrective plan associated with the reverification program, the applicant committed to completion of I
plant tests and calculations necessary to show an adequate water volume in the supply line during HPCS testing.
This is acceptable to us, i
2.3 HPCS PUMP NPSH As part of the reverification program, independent calculations of net positive suction head (NPSH) for the main HPCS pump were performed.
Architect-engineer calculations were reviewed to ccnfirm that the system layout and arrangement provide adequate NPSH.
The applicant reported that the alternate calculations showed adequate NPSH is provided by the as-built configurations of the system.
This is acceptable to us.
2.4 HPCS MECHANICAL COMPONENTS SELECTED FOR COMPONENT LEVEL REVIEW For the component level review, the applicant selected 33 SER: WNP-2 SER +
components.
Among these were the motor operated injection valve (F004) the air-operated testable check. valve (F005), the motor operatedminimumflowvalve(F012),relidf'valveF035,themain HPCS pump, the keep fill pump, a suppression pool suction' strainer, and a restricting orifice. This selection is representative of the major mechanical components in the HPCS flow path and is acceptable.
3.0 RHR SYSTEM REVERIFICATION 3.1 THERMAL / HYDRAULIC RE0VIREMENTS The RHR systen reverification was based upon the suppression pool cooling mode.
This mode is the most frequent mode identified for the RHR system i.n response to containment isolation events. The thermal / hydraulic requirements examined include flow capability, thermal capacity, cavitation from pump runout, testing capability at full flow, minimum pump flow and potential for water hammer.
The applicant reported that eleven design documents were examined for reverification.
These included architect-engineer calculations, test data sheets, ven' dor containment analyses and suppression pool heatup calculations for various abnormal plant conditions, and a separate suppression pool temperature analysis.
The applicant concluded that the design documents reflect the design requirements and that the functional requirements for the l
six aforementioned areas are satisfied.
This is acceptable to us.
SER: WNP-2 SER !
i f
,n
32 RHR SYSTEM MECHANICAL SEPARATION, REDUNDANCY AND LAYOUT The reverification program confirmed that the RHR mechanical separation is adequate. The three RHR pumps are housed in individual watertight pump rooms.
The two heat exchangers are in individual rooms with radiation attenuating doors.
Piping for the three loops A, B and C is routed in three segmented areas around the primary containment, and the suction lines are in separate areas of the suppression pool. Mechanical redundancy is not intended for an individual RHR loop. Loops S&P together satisfy the requirement for system redundancy. This is acceptable to us.
3.3 MECHANICAL COMPONENTS SELECTED FOR RHR COMPONENT LEVEL REVIEW The reverification team selected 30 components from the RHR system for component level review. Of these, the major mechanical components include the 18-inch teat exchanger outlet gate valve (F003), the test mode or suppression pool cooling mode throttling valve (F024), the minimum flow line flow control valve (F064), the main RHR pump, the RHR heat exchanger, and 3 restricting orifices.
This selection is representative of the major mechanical components in the RHR system flow path and is acceptable to us.
SER: WNP-2 SER.,
4',. 0 C0flCLUSIONS We have reviewed the system level evaluations of the HPCS and RHR systems provided in the WNP-2 reverification report.
Based upon
'the information provided which indicates no significant discrepancies with FSAR commitments, we find the HPCS and RHR system reverification to be acceptable.
i i
1 l
i SER: WNP-2 SER :
i l
j.
' ~
DEC 2 1983 Docket No. 50-397 MEMORANDUM FOR:
A. Schwencer, Chief Licensing Branch No. 2 Division of Licensing FROM:
R. Auluck, Project Manager Licensing Branch No. 2, DL
SUBJECT:
FORTHCOMING MEETING WITH WASHINGTON PUBLIC POWER SUPPLY SYSTEM (WPPSS) (Agenda attached)
DATE & TIME:
Tuesday, December 6, 1983 8:30 AM LOCATION:
WPPSS Headquarters 3000 George Washington Way Richland, Washington PURPOSE:
NRC Management Site Visit PARTICIPANTS *:
NRC WPPSS T. M. Novak D. W. Mazur &
F. H. Rowsome Support Staff W. V. Johnston E. L. Jordan D. Ziemann R. T. Dodds A. D. Toth R. Auluck 9b3i.%! Qncd by R. Auluck, Project Manager Licensing Branch No. 2 Division of Licensing l
Attachment:
Agenda cc w/ attachment:
See next page i
- Meetings between NRC technical staff and applicants for licenses are open for interested members of the public, petitioners, intervenors, or other parties to attend as observers pursuant to "Open Meeting and Statement of NRC Staff Policy", 43 Rederal Reoister 28058, 6/28/78.
D B' 'PM DL:
/BC A
- w ASchwencer 12/,/83 12/ )S3 l
7 7
l l
931202 l
PDR ADOCK 05000397 A
rw t
AGENDA 3
December 6, 1983 Site Tour: 8:30 AM - 11:30 AM Afternoon Meeting:
1:00 PM 1.
Status of Plant Construction / Construction History Status of Pre-op tests 2.
WPPSS Organization and Plant Staffing i
Staff experience Training program / simulator usage 3.
Quality Verification Program (following work stoppage) 4.
Design Verification Program 5.
CAT Inspection 6.
Emergency Preparedness including coordination with DOE (Hanford area) facilities emergency plans and postulated emergencies 7.
Demonstration of randomly selected shift including STA ard BWR experienced person (may be licensed operator) for ability to perform and recover from selected emergency events.
8.
Operational QA program 9.
Implementation of TMI requirements 10.
System Reliability Studies 11.
Electrical (cables, etc.) Separation
WNP-2 Mr. G. C. Sorensen, Manager Regulatory Programs Washington Public Power Supply System P. O. Box 968 3000 George Washington WAy Richland, Washington 99352 cc:
Nicholas Reynolds, Esquire Debevoise & Liberman 1200 Seventeenth Street, N. W.
Washington, D. C.
20036 Mr. G. E. Doupe, Esquire Washington Public Power Supply System P. O. Box 968 3000 George Washington Way Richland, Washington 99352 Nicholas Lewis, Chairman Energy Facility Site Evaluation Council Mail Stop PY-ll Olympia, Washington 98504 P. L. Powell, Licensing Manager Washington Public Power Supply System P. O. Box 968 Richland, Washington 99352 Mr. W. G. Conn. Sr. N/M Group Supervisor Burns and Roe, Incorporated 601 Williams Boulevard Richland, Washington 99352 Mr. Richard Feil U.S. NRC Resident Inspector WPPSS-2 NPS P. O. Box 69 Richland, Washington 99352 Dr. G. D. Bouchey, Manager Nuclear Safety & Regulatory Programs Washington Public Power Supply System P. O. Box 968 MD 650 Richland, Washington 99352 Mr. J. D. Martin WNP-2 Plant Manager Washington Public Power Supply System P. O. Box 968 Richland, Washington 99352
k MEETING NOTICE DISTRIBUTION:
Date:
NRC PDR s
L PDR NSIC PRC LBf2 Readir.g HRC PARTICIPANTS:
E. Hyl ton Project Manager R. Auluck T. M. Novak H. Derton/E, Case R. J. Mattson D. Eisenhut/R. Purple F. H. Rowsome T. M. Novak*
W. V. Johnston B. Youngblood J. M. Taylor A. Schwencer D. Ziemann G. Knighton R. T. Dodds E. Adensam A. D. Toth G. Lainas R. Auluck F. Miraglia J. P. Knight W. Johnston D. Muller H. Houston L. Rubenstein F. Schroeder M. Ernst D. Ziemann NRR Division Directors
- OELD Attorney W. Paton E. L. Jordan, DEQA:IE J. M. Taylor, DRP:IE Phillips Building Receptionist **
i ACRS (16)
Region V l
Resident Inspector cc: Service List F. Ingram, PA
- 0nly if participant in meeting l
- 0nly if meeting held in Bethesda l
1 l
.,