ML20198G013

Requests Technical Assistance in Review of post-CP Responses to Safety Review Items 2 & 3,per Encl Util

ML20198G013
Person / Time
Site:	Washington Public Power Supply System
Issue date:	04/16/1976
From:	Stolz J Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:	Heineman R Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
CON-WNP-1116 NUDOCS 8605290188
Download: ML20198G013 (1)

Text

.,, APR 16 M6

~

.c Distribution H. Smith H. Berkow

' Docket File T. Cox T. Novak LWR-1. File W. Mcdonald D. Ross J. Stolz R. DeYoung l

F. Williams S. Varga i

R. Heineman, Director, Division of Systems.%fety (DSS) t l

TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE REQUEST NO. LWR-1 (8-76) l Your assistance is requested for the following:

PLANI NAME:

WNP-1, 4 DOCKET N05:

S0-460 and 50-513 RESPONSIBLE BRANCH:

LWR-1 CONTACT:

Tom Cox, Project Manager, X27391 TECHNICAL REVIEW BRANCH: Reactor Systems Branch TARGET COMPLETION DATE:

May 15, 1976 i

DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST:

Review post-CP responses to safety review l

items 2 and 3 in a letter from WPPSS (Enclosure) dated 4/2/76. The purpose of this review with l

respect to item 3 is to develop coceents on the l

general approach proposed by WPPSS to the resolution of this issues. A detailed review, including i

questions and subsequent responses by applicant will take place after WPPSS documents this proposed resolution in detail in a PSAR amendment.

Their letter submitted is intended to obtain an early staff response so that they can more l

thoroughly prepare a PSAR amendant responsive l

}

to our concerns.

i Okinal signey y y

John V. Stolz John F. Stolz, Chief l

Light Water Reactors Branch No.1 l

Division of Project Management l

Enclosure:

Letter, D. Renberger (WPPSS) to Director, ONRR, dated 4/2/76 (G01-76-192)

I I

l LWR-l..

. LWR 8605290188 760416 l

l o,n.

-~" ~ ---".

I DR ADCCK 0500 0

TCox/m

.._JS to A

so.....

4//f,/76 4//[7/76..

. l-

.l--

L Forum AhC 318 (Rev. 9 55) ABCM 0240 W u. e. eossannesmv reinvine arricas sera sas.t.e

1

. J:,.

/J26 e,

7'O V/asl. igton Public Power Supply S.. rem gJ e s/74

• ~ ' 1 \\

A JOINT OPERATMG AGENCY fg v.W

e. o. nos ese sooo o m. w... m,. w.y nu..r.

was,m.m e 2s s a e o,.u s:

so :en Docket Nos. 50-460 April 2, 1976 50-513 G01-76-192 M

~

/x

.N f

1 Director of Nuclear Reactor Pegulation fgN;P'

~ ATTN:

Mr. John F. Stolz, Chief g

Light Water Reactors Project

~/rg d3 U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Co.Tr.ission Sj,%g'. /gj8 g f- )

Branch No. 1 a

L

%h%

Washingtcn, D. C.

20555

Subject:

WPPSS !;UCLEAR P50JECTS NOS. 1 & 4

' 'h '.. #

OUTSTA':DII;G I:RC S;JETY REV!EU ITEMS N !

References:

1)

Letter, l'0 Strar.d, WPPSS, to Angelo Giambusso, i:RC,

" Submittal of Additional ECCS Information," dated July 25, 1975.

W-2)

Letter, Kenr.eth E. Suhrke, B&W, to acha F. Stolz, NRC, dated ;' arch 53, 1976.

p 3)

Letter, ll0 Strand, '.;;PSS, to Rc;,er Boyd, NRC, f

"Additicnal-ECCS Information." d;ted September 26, 10b.

M 4)

Letter, Ker.nath E. Sunrke, 35W, to John F. Stoiz, NRC, dated January 25, 1375.

Dear Mr. Stolz:

This letter addresses outstanding safety revie.i itens for WT;?-1/4 thct were to be addressed in late 1975 and early 1976.

1.

Passive Failure Analysis for Lona-Ttrm Coolir; In Reference I we committed to prcvide an evaluction of the ootential consecuences cf passive f:itures during 1cng-term cooling.

In Reference 2 ?&W submitted this evaluation.

Reference 2 is hereby ir.ccrporated by reference into the appli-cations for constructicn permits ar.d cperatir.g licenses for WNP-1/4.

It is recognized that we tiil r.eed to address some balance of plant considerations for passive failures during long-term cooling.

We '..culd prefer to address these itens after the NRC review of the B&W submittal has been ccmpleted.

\\

Qf >

.:.n

, ?!* *.

g w cm y s. d 4 A. q,y n x! m I,-f L b I A I

~>

[%

.2 Mr. John F. Stolz'- !!RC-Page 2

(.i.5 April _2, 197-6 G01-76-!C2 2.

ECCS FAC Analvsis for Partial Locp Coeration breaks during partial loop operation by the f 1976.

ae we have found it necessary to reschedule this r of submittal to the tiRC in the second cuarter of 1977.

be before the submittal of the EiP-1/4 FSAR which This will scheduled to be submitted to the fiRC for the acceptance re rrently in September ~1978.

In_ PSAR Amendment 20 we ccmplied witn the fiRC's reque a technical specificaticn limitation prohibiting partial (PSAR Subsection 16.3.1.2). loop operation until this an 3.

Justification for f'anual Oaera'tien Durinc Lonc-Term ng line around lf!2iA ana M'!2iB (

Reference:

The Staff h y ass Amendment 20) oc rotor ocerated with control and'indicatior PSAR Ficure 3.2-4, the control rocm and that the flow in the bypass lines n

be indicated in the control rocm.

also

. w)

In Reference 3 we realied that the plant cperating staff g

would have several days 'efore they '.cuic na a

the bypass valves shculd be accep able.

provide additicnal justification for this position.se cc.mitted to Additional review of this system has shown that it should b acceptabla to canually oreset the bypass valves to provide a e

flow of 40 gpm.

Because the valves,wculd be adjusted prior to startup, there would be no need for additional adjustre t during long-term cooling and, tnerefore, no need for cont

.n and indication in the control roc or flow indication in t rol control room.

result in a departure from General Design Criterion

~

requires an isolation valve outside Containment.

have two isolation valves inside Ccntainment.as indic

However, of presetting the bypass valves before startuk'e, the y

adjusting the vaives immediately before long p in lieu of-term cooling.

I m.

i

~~

Mr. John F. Stolz - NRC April 2,1976 Page 3 G01-76-192 t".l;0 4.

Mark C R!,0 Test Results In the WNP-1/4 Safety Evaluation Report (PP l-12, 4-4, and 4-9),

it is stated that the Mark C fuel assembly R&D program will be completed in late 1975.

The current B&W schedule is to cceplete mecnanical testing by September 1977 and complete critical heat flux testing by Septe ber 1978.

BAW-10097PA, Rev. 2, transaitted to the URC on January 28, 1976, is B&W's cost recent forcal submittal for the Mark C R&D program.

This report nas been approved by the NRC. On February 13, 1976, B&W submittec the first status update for the Mark C R&D program.

5.

Acolication of Reculaterv Guide 1.75 to B&W Sucplied Safety in~d Pro:ection System Caoinets

~

in Supplement 2 to tr.e Safety Evaluation Report, P. 7-3, and in our response b NRC Quastion 7.33, ce ccamitted to penvide additional informaticn concerning the applicaticn of Regulatory Guide 1.75 to the S&W supplied safety an; pro:ection system cabinets.

In Reference 4 EiW croviced :his information directly to the I;RC.

Reference 4 is nereby ir.: r: orated by reference into the cpplications for construction permits and operating licenses.for WNP-1/4.

s (s}hl Reference 4 includes several st:teten:s concerning the need foe the balance of plant elac:rical ar.d instlunent; tion and control design to satisfy certain requirenents.

The attach =cnt to this letter' addresses each of these state: cats.

The attacnment shows that in all cases the W:;P-l/4 desi;n satisfies the B&W criteria and complies with Reguia:ory Guide 1.75.

6.

Electrical Separaticn Test Results for RTD's In Supplement 2.to the Safety Evalution Recort, P. 7-4, and.in our response to NRC Ques:icn 7.30,.we cenmitted to provide the electrical separation test results for cual element RTO's in the last quarter of 1975.

Because ef a delay in the procurement of these sensors, we have found it necessary to reschedule this submittal for Septe ber 1976.

7.

RPS-II Single Failure Analyses In our response.to NEC Questien 7.34, we ccmmitted to the sutaittal of a B&W topical report providing single failure analy,ses for RPS-II, ESFAS, the reactor trip switch and the trip p'ortion of the CRDCS by December 15, 1975.

$71

.r.

~

4 Mr. John F. Stolz - NRC April 2, 1975

- Page 4 G01-76-192

\\0' B&W has the position that these cnalyses should "r.ot be performed ur.til they have first developed a design standard for the applica-tion of Regulatory Guide 1.75 and have then discussed this standard with the NRC.

Tne C&'d standard has been defined, and the next step is to review it with the NRC.

The' current schedule for these analyses is to begin by Septem'ber 1976 with a completion date of September 1977.

8.

SubT.ittal of Parts 2 and 3 to BAW-10082 Section 7.8 of the Safety Evaluation Report indicates that the submittal of Parts 2 and 3 :o SW.i-lC052 (environmental test mothcds and general methodolocy) is scheduled for the third quarter of 1975.

Part 2 nas been submitted to the N?.C and has been rejected.

BlW believes that the report was rejected because it lacked acceptance levels and test results.

It was, and re.nains, SLU's intent to provide acceptance levels and test resul;s in a later topical report.

Part 3 was submitted to the NRC in draft form for preliminary

/'_,4 review on February 10, 1976.

U Very truly yours, c.0A AM.CV D. L. RENBERGER" Assistant Director Generation & TecHiiii~cT)

DLR: ASH:km

~~

cc: CR Bryant - BPA JR Schnieder - UE&C

~~'~1 EG Ward - B&W TH Cox - NRC e

m g

4

.s