ML20206J631
| ML20206J631 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 11/17/1988 |
| From: | Long W Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Kintner E GENERAL PUBLIC UTILITIES CORP. |
| References | |
| PROJECT-669A NUDOCS 8811290058 | |
| Download: ML20206J631 (2) | |
Text
r-November 17, 1988 o
Project No. 669 DISTRIBUTIONL CYCheng Central T11es 7 JCraig Mr. E. E. Kintner, Chairman NRC FDR EJordan ALWR Steu,ing Comittee PDSNP R/F OGC-Rockville GPU Nuclear Corporation EHylton BGrimes 100 Interpace Parkway WLong ACRS(10)
Parsippany, N.J.
07054 RWoods JTsao
Dear Mr. Kintner:
DShum
SUBJECT:
EPRI-ALWR REQUIREHENTS DOCUMENT CHAP 1ER ) OPEN ITEM SUPPRES$10N FOOL LOADS On Page 4-11 of our February 5,1988 DSER of Chapter 1 of the Advanced Light Water Reactor Utility Requirements Document, we stato:
"The staff is reviewing the in-plant hazards requirements addressed in Section 3.0.0.2 relative to BWR suppression pol loads that remain af ter leak-before-break has been demonstrated.
The results of the staff evaluation will be reported later."
The staff needs further clarification of 3.0.0.2 to address this open item.
Specifically, it is not clear whether the proposed application of leak-before-break (L3B) as described in Appenoix 3.0.D.2 of Chapter 1 of the Requirements Document, is consistent with the revised GDC 4.
It is cur interpretation of 3.0.D.2, that EPRI proposes to eliminate all hydrodynamic loads, other than those on the containment boundary structures, that result from pipe rupture of LBB-qualified piping.
It is also stated that "mechanistic" calculational methods would be applied to the remaining loads with elimination of unnecessary conservatisms and artificial anplifications.
It is the staff's position that LBB-qualification does not permit elimination of consideration of hydrodynamic load effects on containment internal structures and ccrponents whose integrity is required in order for the containment to function properly.
(The application of Lb8 technology should not decrease the capability of containments to perform their function of isolating the outside environment from potential leaks, breaks, or ralfunctions within the containment).
It is also the :,taff's position that analytical methods and load combinations be consistent with current SRP practice. Appendix 3.0.0.2 should be clarified in accordance with these positions whereupon the open iten may be considered resolved.
The staff is available to meet and discuss this issue.
Sincerely,
/s/
s o
- f William O. Long, Sr. Prcject Manager Standardization and Non-Power
~
Reactor Project Directorate Division of Reactor Projects - III, IV,
/d 3%
V and Special Projects t'i
' f(p,)(
SS Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation W
}
- e cc
J. DeVine, EPRI (A
g Ld $$NP PM:PDSNP t'B D:PDSN N b
)
s E
dn WLong:cw C h f
i JCrai CMiller 4
f,8 11/iO/88 11// E8 11/[- f,C 11//1/8d J
r
- u.
.. y
~\\
UNITED STATES 8
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION c
WASHINGTON. O. C. 20006 November 17, 1988 Project No. 669 Mr. E. E. Kintner, Chairman ALWR Steering Committee t
GPU Nuclear Corroration 100 Interpace Parkway Parsippany, N.J.
07054
Dear Mr. Kintner:
SUBJECT:
EPRI-ALWR REQUIREMENTS DOCUMENT CHAPTER 1 OPEN ITEM SUPPRESSION POOL LOADS On Page 4-11 of our February 5, 1988 DSER of Chapter 1 of the Advarced Light Water Reactor Utility Requirements Document, we state:
i "The staff is reviewing the in-plant hazards requirements addressed in Section 3.0.D.2 relative to BWR suppression pool i
loads that remain after leak-before-break has been demonstrated.
The results of the staff evaluation will be reported later."
t The staff needs further clarification of 3.0.D.2 to address this open item.
Specifically, it is not clear whether the proposed application of leak-before-break (LBB) as described in Ap>endix 3.0.D.2 of Chapter 1 of the Requirements l
Document, is consistent with tie revised GDC 4.
It is our interpretation of 3.0.D.2, that EPRI proposes to eliminate all hydrodynamic loads, other than those on the containment boundary structures, that result from pipe rupture of LBB-qualified piping.
It is also stated that "mechanistic" calculational methods would be applied to the remaining loads with elimination of unnecessary conservatisms and artificial amplifications.
j It is the staff's position that LBB-qualification does not permit elimination of consideration of hydrodynamic load effects on containment internal structures and components whose integrity is required in order for the containment to function properly.
(The application of LBB technology should not decrease the capability l
of containments to perform their function of isolating the outside environment from potential leaks, breaks, or malfunctions within the containment).
It is also the staff's position that analytical methods and load combinations be consistent with current SRP practice. Appendix 3.0.0.2 should be clarified in accordance with these positions whereupon the open item may be considered resolved.
l The staff is available to meet and discuss this issue.
Sincerely.
l n& o.
William O. Long, Sr. Project anager i
Standardization and Non-Power Reactor Project Ofrectorate i
Division of Reactor Projects - !!!, IV, Y and Special Projects Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation cc:
J. DeVine, EPRI i