ML20216B713
| ML20216B713 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | McGuire, Mcguire  |
| Issue date: | 05/13/1998 |
| From: | Rinaldi F NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned) |
| To: | Barron H DUKE POWER CO. |
| References | |
| GL-96-06, GL-96-6, TAC-M96830, TAC-M96831, NUDOCS 9805180362 | |
| Download: ML20216B713 (5) | |
Text
.
May 13,1998 Mr. H. B. B rron l
Vice President, McGuire Site l
Duke Energy Corporation 12700 Hagers Ferry Road Huntersville, North Carolina 28078-8985
SUBJECT:
REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION RELATED TO GENERIC LETTER 96-06 RESPONSE FOR MCGUIRE NUCLEAR STATION, UNITS 1 AND 2 (TAC NOS. M96830 AND M96831)
Dear Mr. Barron:
By letter dated January 28,1997, you provided an assessment of the waterhammer and l
two-phase flow issues for the McGuire Nuclear Station, Units 1 and 2. Your submittal was in response to Generic Letter (GL) 96-06, " Assurance of Equipment Operability and Containment Integrity During Design-Basis Accident Conditions," dated September 30,1996. In order for the NRC staff to complete its review of these issues, additionalinformation is required, as discussed in the enclosure. We request that you provide this information by July 30,1998, in order to support our review schedule for GL 96-06.
Sincerely, ORIGINAL SIGNED BY:
Frank Rinaldi, Project Manager Project Directorate ll-2 Division of Reactor Frojects - 1/11 Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Docket Nos. 50-369 and 50-370 c Q') i}
bA
Enclosure:
As stated
\\
1 cc w/ encl: See next page Distribution:
JZwolinski JTatum ACRS Docket File HBerkow BWetzel LPlisco, Ril PUBLIC LBerry LMarsh COgle, Rll PD 11-2 Rdg.
FRinaldi OGC
...j C
.m To receive a copy of this document, indicate in the box: "C" = Copy without attachment / enclosure "E" = Copy with attachment / enclosure "N" = No cqpy OFFICE PM:PDil-2 m l LA:PDil-2)b D:PIh$)pl, l
NAME FRinaldi:ch(V LBerry V (1 ' HBdrkoS /
6/I /98 ~\\
Y DATE 67 lh98
'"/ U/98
/ /98
/ /98
/ /97 DOCUMENT NAME: G:\\MCGUIRE\\GL9606.RAI OFFICIAL RECORD COPY 9805180362 990513 m3 _
ggy g{
DR ADOCK 050 9
i yp
A tr49 g
'4 UNITED STATES s
j NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION e
WASNINGToN, D.C. 30006 0001
%,.....,/
May 13,1998 Mr. H. B. Barron Vice President, McGuire Site Duke Energy Corporation 12700 Hagers Ferry Road Huntersville, North Carolina 28078-8985
SUBJECT:
REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION RELATED TO GENERIC LETTER 96-06 RESPONSE FOR MCGUIRE NUCLEAR STATION, UNITS 1 AND 2 (TAC NOS. M96830 AND M96831)
Dear Mr. Barron:
By letter dated January 28,1997, you provided an assessment of the waterhammer and two-phase flow issues for the McGuire Nuclear Station, Units 1 and 2. Your submittal was in response to Generic Letter (GL) 96-06, " Assurance of Equipment Operability and Containment Integrity During Design-Basis Accident Conditions," dated September 30,1996. In order for the NRC staff to complete its review of these issues, additional information is required, as discussed in the enclosure. We request that you provide this information by July 30,1998, in order to support our review schedule for GL 96-06.
Sincerely,
!M/( l M
Frank Rinaldi, Project Manager Project Directorate ll-2 Division of Reactor Projects -l/ll Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Docket Nos. 50-369 and 50-370
Enclosure:
As stated I
cc w/ encl: See next page
McGuire Nuclear Station cc:
Mr. Paul R. Newton Ms. Karen E. Long Legal Department (PBO5E)
Assistant Attomey General Duke Energy Corporation North Carolina Department of 422 South Church Street Justice Charlctte, North Carolina 28242 P. O. Box 629 Raleigh, North Carolina 27602 County Manager of Mecklenburg County L. A. Keller 720 East Fourth Street Manager-Nuclear Regulatory Charlotte, North Carolina 28202 Licensing Duke Energy Corporation Michael T. Cash 526 South Church Street Regulatory Compliance Manager Charlotte, North Carolina 28242 Duke Energy Corporation McGuire Nuclear Site Regional Administrator, Region 11 12700 Hagers Ferry Road U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Huntersville, North Carolina 28078 Atlanta Federal Center 61 Forsyth Street, S.W., Suite 23T85 J. Michael McGarry, Ill, Esquire Atlanta, Georgia 30303 Winston and Strawn 1400 L Street, NW.
Elaine Wathen, Lead REP Planner Washington, DC 20005 Division of Emergency Management 116 West Jones Street Senior Resident inspector Raleigh, North Carolina 27603-1335 clo U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Mr. Richard M. Fry, Director 12700 Hagers Ferry Road Division of Radiation Protection Huntersville, North Carolina 28078 North Carolina Department of Environment, Health and Natural Mr. Peter R. Harden, IV Resources Account Sales Manager 3825 Barrett Drive Westinghouse Electric Corporation Raleigh, North Carolina 27609-7721 Power Systems Field Sales P. O. Box 7288 Mr. T. Richard Puryear Charlotte, North Carolina 28241 Owners Group (NCEMC)
Duke Energy Corporation Dr. John M. Barry 4800 Concord Road Mecklenberg County York, South Carolina 29745 Department of Environmental l
Protection 700 N. Tryon Street Charlotte, North Carolina 28202 l
4 l
l
l l
REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION FOR RESOLUTION OF j
GENERIC LETTER 96-06 ISSUES AT MCGUIRE 1 AND 2 i
(TAC NOS. M96830 AND M96831)
Generic Letter (GL) 96-06, " Assurance of Equipment Operability and Containment Integrity During Design-Basis Accident Conditions," dated September 30,1996, included a request j
for licensees to evaluate cooling water systems that serve containment air coolers to assure l
l that they are not vulnerable to waterhammer and two-phase flow conditions. Duke Energy 3
Corporation (the licensee) provided its assessment of the waterhammer and two-phase flow issues for McGuire 1 and 2 in a letter dated January 28,1997. The licensee indicated that the containment ventilation systems and their associated service water cooling systems are not relied on for accident mitigat;on and these systems would not be operated during periods when conditions are favorable for steam formation. Consequently, the licensee concluded that waterhammer and two-phase flow is not a concern. In order to assess the licensee's resolution l
of these issues, the following additional information is requested:
l Note: The following questions apply to vulnerability of the upper and lower containment ventilation systems to waterhammer and two-phase flow.
1.
Describe the worst-case bounding scenarios for defining when waterhammer and two-l phase flow could occur in the service water cooling systems associated with the l
containment ventilation systems (taking into consideration the complete range of event possibilities, system configurations, parameters, and component failures) and identify the specific time periods when steam formation could occur. As a minimum, the following information should be included in this description:
- a. Confirm that all scenarios have been considered, including those where the affected containment penetrations are not isolated (if this is a possibility).
- b. Discuss how long it will take for steam pockets to condense after they have been formed during the event scenario, such that the cooling water system is fully charged with liquid, and explain what happens to any noncondensible gases.
- c. Describe and justify all assumptions and input parameters (including those used in any computer codes),
- d. Discuss the uncertainties inherent in the analysis and explain how the meertainties were determined, and how they were accounted for in the analysis to assure concervative results.
l
- e. Confirm that a complete failure modes ar.d effects analysis (FMEA) for all components (including electrical and pneumatic failures) that could impact performance of the cooling water system was performed as a part of this assessment and confirm that the FMEA is documented and available for review, or explain why a complete and fully documented FMEA was not performed.
f.
Explain and justify all uses of " engineering judgement."
Enclosure I~
1 2.
Describe in detail any measures that exist or will be taken to assure that the service water cooling system's associated with the containment ventilation systems will not be used as an option during the time pariods when waterhammer and two-phase flow could occur (as defined in 1, above).
3.
Provide a simplified diagram of the affected cooling water systems, showing major components, active components, relative elevations, lengths of piping runs, and the location of any orifices and flow restrictions.
ase
.. - ____-