ML20198G230
| ML20198G230 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Washington Public Power Supply System |
| Issue date: | 05/05/1976 |
| From: | Ross D Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Deyoung R Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| CON-WNP-1117 NUDOCS 8605290310 | |
| Download: ML20198G230 (2) | |
Text
. _
m.
u.
m.
.)
. Docket File (2)
NRR Rdg. File 1
MM 6N RSB File Docket Nos. 50-460/513 l
Richard C. DeYoung, Assistant Director for LWRs, DPM RESPONSE TO TECIETICAL ASSISTANCE REQUEST, "WNP-1, 4-REVIEW POST-CP RESPOMSES TO SAFETY REVIEW ITEMS 2 & 3 IN LETTER FROM WPPSS" (TAR-3700) l Plant Name:
WNP-1, 4 Docket Nos.: 50-460 and 50-313 Responsible Branch & Project Leader:
LWR-1, T. Cox Systems Safety Branch Involved: Reactor Systems Branch Revicw Status: Complete As requested, Reactor Systens Branch has reviewed Items 2 and 3 of the April 2,1976 letter from WPPSS which addressed outstanding safety review items. Our coments are enclosed.
Item 3 of the subject letter deals also with containment isolation requirements, an area that is not under the cognizance of the Reactor Systems Branch. The proposal discussed under Item 3 might result in a departure from General Design Criterion 55 which requires an isolation valve outside reactor containment. Whether the isolation requirements of GDC are met by this proposal should be reviewed by Containment Systems.
Original signed By D. F. Rosa Denwood F. Ross, Jr., Assistant Director for Reactor Safety Division of Systems Safety i
Enclosure:
Commenta on Safety Review Items 2 & 3 cc:
S. Hanauer R. Heineman D. Ross J. Stolz T. Cox T. Novak 8605290310 760505 W. Minners PDR ADOCK 05000460 A
R. Fluegge PDR
_ 'M
_ DSS:RSB DSS:
DSS:RSf.
D o,rie.
- RF.luegge:ci._
WMi.nnM. _.3._._ TNo
_, DMs s L
.u. N..
- 05/04/76.
. 05/34./ 76.._.
05/ /-/ 76_
05/{/76 Form ABC 318 (Rev. 9 53) ABCM 9240 W u. es eeWEANNENT PABNTING OFFfC53 99,4 588 996
ENCLOSURE
~ ~ ~
Comments on Safety Review Items 2 & 3 in WPPSS Letter Dated April 2, 1976 2.
ECCS-FAC Analysis for Partial Loop Operation We find acceptable the applicant's commitment in PSAR Amendment 20 to provide a Techn'ical Specification limitation prohibiting partial loop operation until this analysis has been approved by the staff.
3.
Justification for Manual Operation During Long-Term Cooling After reviewing the proposed modification to the system design, we would find it acceptable to manually preset the bypass valves to provide a flow of 40 gpm before startup in lieu of adjusting the valves immediately before long-term cooling f f the applicant can provide sufficient detailed information as specified below:
(1) The detailed hydraulic calculations to enable the staff to review independently the calculated flow rates through the branches of the low pressure < injection pump suction piping to determine the feasibility of the proposal, and (2) A detailed preoperational test procedure must be provided to demonstrate the adequacy of the proposed modification. The applicant must demonstrate that the proposed preoperational test provides adequate assurance that the system will perform as required during post-LOCA long-term cooling. The applicant must also provide a test procedure that permits periodic testing of the flow through the bypass line to ensure that the valve position adjustment is set to provide the required flow rate.
O l
l i
s y
Docket File (2) l NRR Rdg. F,ile MAY 5W RSB File Docket lics. 50-460/513 Richard C. DeYoung, Assistant Dircetor for IRRs, DPM RESPOMSE TO TECIEiICAL ASSISTANCE REQUEST - "WP-1, 4-REVIEW POST-CP RESPOUSE3 TO SAFETY REVIE11 ITEMS 2 & 3 IN LETTER FROM WPPSS" (TAR-3700)
Plant Hace:
WP-1, 4 Docket nos.: 50-460 and 50-513 Responsible Branch & Project Leader:
ISR-1, T. Cox Systems Safety Branch Involvad: Reactor Systems Branch Review Status: Complete i'
As reqiteeted, Reactor Systees Branch has reviewed Items 2 and 3 of the April 2,1976 letter from l'?PSS which addressed outstanding safety review ite=s.
Our coe=ents are enclosed.
Iten 3 of the subject letter deals also witu containment isolation i
requirenents, an area that is not under the copaizance of the Receror Systc== 1: ranch. The propocal discucced under Item 3 uight result in l
a departuro froct General Design Criterion 55 uhich requires an l
icolation valvo oute,ida reactor containment. !Tacther the isolation requircrants of CDC are act by this propocal should be revieued by Containment Systens.
Origin 1 tigned Sf
~
D. F.Ross Dar$toodF.Ross,Jr.,AscistantDirector for Reactor Safety Division of Systems Safety Eaclosura:
Con: ents on Safety Revicu Items 2 & 3 cc:
S. Hanauer R. Heineman D. Ross J. Stol:
T. Cox T. Novah W. Minners R. Fluen::a N
p DSS:RSBb.s
_ DSS:RS DSS:RS.Ef DSg&
rf onnes
- A.
s 1
RFluegge : cj..
.JClinncrg)
_... T:loydk.,n
_,. DRdss.
o... w 03/0A/76 05/:../76
_05/_ 4 76 05/7/76 heren ALC.At3 (ab,.[Sh5 h2102,0 Q u, sa sovgrSesent reentene cresceu e674.sas.ses C 94 / MIM Q PA
" ~ ~ -
'"'__V
'/ /.
u-T
D e
\\.
ENCLOSURE
\\
\\
Comments on Safety Review Items 2 & 3 in WPPSS Letter Dated April 2, 1976 2.
ECCS-FAC Analysis for Partial Loop Operation We find acceptable the applicant's commitment in PSAR Amendment 20 to provide a Technical Specification limitation prohibiting partial loop operation until this analysis has been approved by the staff.
3.
Justification for Manual Operation During Long-Term Cooling After reviewing the proposed modification to the system design, we would find it acceptable to manually preset the bypass valves to provide a flow of 40 gpm before startup in lieu of adjusting the valves immediately before long-term cooling ij[ the applicant can provide sufficient detailed information as specified below:
(1) The detailed hydraulic calculations to enable the staff to revieu independently the calculated flow rate.s through the branches of the low pressure injection pump suction piping to determine the feasibility of the proposal, and (2) A detailed preoperational test procedure must be provided to demonstrate the adequacy of the proposed modification. The applicant must demonstrate that the proposed preoperational test provides adequate assurance that the system will perform as required during post-LOCA long-term cooling. The applicant must also provide a test procedure that permits periodic testing of the flow through the bypass line to ensure that the valve position adjustment is set to provide the required flow rate.
~
l e
f 9
.