ML20214G651
| ML20214G651 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Columbia  |
| Issue date: | 01/18/1972 |
| From: | Case E US ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION (AEC) |
| To: | Morris P US ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION (AEC) |
| References | |
| CON-WNP-0139, CON-WNP-139 NUDOCS 8605220363 | |
| Download: ML20214G651 (5) | |
Text
- _ _ _ _ _ _.
0 S'l
- O G72 6
Peter A. Morris, Director, Division of Reacter T 4===ing i
MANFORD NUCLEAR STATION, UNIT 2 DOCEET No. 50-397 i
Adequate reopeases to the enclosed request for additional information are required before we can complate our review of the embject application.
This request, prepared by the DRS Hochanical Engineering Bresch, concerns the System Quality Croup Classifications and AEC Croup A Systems (Reactor l
Coolant Pressure Boundary) and supplements our request for information dated November 23, 1971.
The commsents of our consultant Dr. N. A. Newmark which were < ontained in his letter of November 30, 1971 are already incorporated in our request for information dated November 23, 1971.
l gf fso-M7 gwm Edson G. Case, Director i
Division of Reactor Standards I
I i
l l
4 i
1 l
l a
_t
((, n A oma NZC SM Q4.
sunnaw > h. Bramme r da.D... ' =ae.
R.
er = ey._
E Case.....
..lf h 2.,
.. } /[f_/ yg,.________ g j j
..1/{. /22
/
DaTE >
Form AEC-Sit (Rev. 9-S3) AECM 0240 e u s aovtawe=v en.- tie.a oarste iswoo7 rse 8605220363 720118 PDR ADOCK 05000397 A
I I
t i
ec w/encle S. Hanauer DR R. DeYoung, DRL R. Boyd, DRL i
D. Skovbolt, DEL R. Maccary, DRS V. Stallo, DEL D. Lange, DRS i
S. Minar, DEL l
E. Wishman, DRS J. Knight, DES i
N. Davison, DRS l
R. Kirkwood, DRS l
H. Braunar, DRS i
I I
I t
l l
I i
l i
i I
omcs >
SURNARet >
payg y Form AEC-Ste (Rev. 9-53) AECM 0240 oo ac.ovt=we=Yraw *o0FFCE 18 % * ? 758
8 HANFORD NUCLEAR STATION - UNIT 2 DOCKET NO. 50-397 REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORhATION G.
SYSTEM QUALITY GROUP CLASSIFICATIONS The System Quality Group Classifications identified in Appendix C.0 of the PSAR differs in some areas from the system classification scheme developed by the General Electric Company for boiling water 1/
reactors.-
The G. E. system classification echeme has been reviewed by the regulatory staff and provides a generally acceptable quality level for each pressure-containing component of those applicable fluid systems relied upon to prevent or mitigate the consequences of accidents and malfunctions originating within the reactor coolant pressure boundary or to permit shutdown of the reactor and maintenance in the safe shutdown conditic and other associated safety related systems.
1.
Unless you intend to apply all the G. E. system quality group classi-fications to your Hanford 2 Plant, identify the differences and include a discussion which specifies the measures that will be applied to pro-vide equivalency in quality level, as well as the quality assurance programs that will be implemented by the applicant for such measures.
~1/
G. E. Memorandum " Code Classification of BWR Components and Systems", from A. P. Bray to E. G. Case, dated September 22, 1971
2.
Delineate on the Piping and Instrumentation Diagrams submitted in j
the PSAR the system quality group classification boundaries of each system specified in Table C.6-1.
The classifications should be noted at all valve locations in each fluid system where the respective classification changes in terms of the AEC Croup Classification letters, for example, from A to B, B to C, C to D as well as other combinations, or in terms of your corresponding classification notations.
l i
o
S H.
AEC GROUP A SYSTEMS (REACTOR COOLANT PRESSURE BOUNDARY) i 1.
Revise Section 4.0 of the PSAR which specifies the proposed code requirements for vessels, piping, pumps, and valves within the reactor coolant pressure boundary to indicate your compliance with the rules of 10 CTR 50, Section 50.55a, " Codes and Standards".
In the event there are cases wherein conformance to the rules of Section 50.55a would result in hardships or unusual difficulties without a compensating increase in the level of safety and quality, provide a complete description of the circumstances resulting in such cases and the basis for proposed alternative requirements.
Demonstrate that an acceptable level of safety and quality will be provided by the proposed alternatives.
2.
Provide a list of the ASME and ANSI code case interpretations which will be applied to each class 1 component within the reactor coolant pressure boundary.
. _... _ -