ML20217J927
| ML20217J927 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Farley  |
| Issue date: | 04/03/1998 |
| From: | Jacob Zimmerman NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned) |
| To: | Dennis Morey SOUTHERN NUCLEAR OPERATING CO. |
| References | |
| GL-96-06, GL-96-6, TAC-M96809, TAC-M96810, NUDOCS 9804070073 | |
| Download: ML20217J927 (5) | |
Text
_
April 3, 1998 Mr. D. N. Mor:y Distribution:
JTatum Vice Preside.it - Ferley Project Docket Fii)
BW;tz:1 Southem Nucxr Operating PUBLIC OGC Company, Inc.
JZwolinski ACRS Post Office Box 1295 HBerkow LPlisco, Ril Birmingham, Alabama 35201-1295 LBerry PSkinner, Rll JZimmerman AKugler
SUBJECT:
REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION RELATED TO GENERIC LETTER 96-06, " ASSURANCE OF EQUIPMENT OPERABILITY AND CONTAINMENT INTEGRITY DURING DESIGN-BASIS ACCIDENT CONDITIONS," RESPONSE FOR JOSEPH M. FARLEY NUCLEAR PLANT (FNP), UNITS 1 AND 2 (TAC NOS. M96809 AND M96810)
Dear Mr. Morey:
Generic Letter (GL) 96-06, " Assurance of Equipment Operability and Containment Integrity During Design-Basis Accident Conditions," dated September 30,1996, included a request for licensees to evaluate cooling water systems that serve containment air coolers to assure that they are not vulnerable to waterhammer and two-phase flow conditions. By letters dated January 27 and May 23,1997 you provided your assessment for FNP Units 1 and 2.
The staff has reviewed your submittals and determined that additional information is required.
The enclosure identifies the requested additional information needed.
In order to maintain a timely review, it is requested that the information be provided by June 30, 1998. If you require any clarification regarding this request, please call me at (301) 415-2426.
Sincerely,
{
ORIGINAL SIGNED BY:
Jacob 1. Zimmerman, Project Manager Project Directorate 11-2 i'
Division of Reactor Projects - 1/ll l
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
)
J Docket Nos. 50-348 and 50-364 h
l
Enclosure:
As stated V
cc w/ encl See next page To receive a copy of this document, Indicate in the box: "C" = Copy without attachment / enclosure "E" = Copy with cttachment/ enclosure "N" = No copy n
OFFICE PM:P[)P2 l6 LA:PDilA sl P D#QlJ21 MDRPE y l
NAME JfiDftf4rman:cn LBerry \\)(10 HBerkhV JZwoliM DATE
//9198 h/J4/98
\\
y /1/b8 M98 N
/ /98
/ /97 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY DOCUMENT NAME: G:/FARLEYIM96809.RAI
^
fh g%
9804070073 980403 gDR ADOCK 0500 8
J
p k
UNITED STATES g
j NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. 30e0H001 April 3, 1998 Mr. D. N. Morey Vice President - Farley Project Southem Nuclear Operating Company, Inc.
Post Office Box 1295 Birmingham, Alabama 35201-1295
SUBJECT:
REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION RELATED TO GENERIC
. LETTER 96-06, " ASSURANCE OF EQUIPMENT OPERABILITY AND CONTAINMENT INTEGRITY DURING DESIGN-BASIS ACCIDENT CONDITIONS," RESPONSE FOR JOSEPH M. FARLEY NUCLEAR PLANT (FNP), UNITS 1 AND 2 (TAC NOS. M96809 AND M96810)
Dear Mr. Morey:
Generic Letter (GL) 96-06, " Assurance of Equipment Operability and Containment integrity During Design-Basis Accident Conditions," dated September 30,1996, included a request for licensees to evaluate cooling water systems that serve containment air coolers to assure that they are not vulnerable to waterhammer and two-phase flow conditions. By letters dated January 27 and May 23,1997, you provided your assessment for FNP, Units 1 and 2.
The staff has reviewed your submittals and determined that additional information is required.
The enclosure identifies the requested additional information needed.
In order to maintain a timely review, it is requested that the information be provided by June 30, 1998. If you require any clarification regarding this request, please call me at (301) 415-2426.
Sincerely, o
=- - r -
acobl. mmerman, Project Manager Project Directorate 11-2 Division of Reactor Projects -1/ll Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Docket Nos. 50-348 and 50-364
Enclosure:
As stated cc w/ encl: See next page
Joseph M. Farley Nuclear Plant cc:
Mr. R. D. Hill, Jr.
General Manager-Southem Nuclear Operating Company Post Omce Box 470 Ashford, Alabama 36312 Mr. Mark Ajiuni, Licensing Manager Southem Nuclear Operating Company Post Omco Box 1295'
~ ~~~
~
-~
Birmingham,' Alabama 35201-1295 i
Mr. M. Stanford Blanton Balch and Bingham Law Firm Post Office Box 306 1710 Sixth Avenue North Birmingham, Alabama 35201 Mr. J. D. Woodard i
. Executive Vice President Southem Nuclear Operating Company Post Office Box 1295 Birmingham, Alabama 35201 State Health Officer Alabama Department of Public Health 434 Monroe Street Montgomery, Alabama 36130-1701 Chairman
. Houston County Commission l
Post Office Box 6406 Dothan, Alabama 36302 Regional Administrator, Region 11 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Atlanta Federal Center 61 Forsyth Street, S.W., Suite 23T85 Atlanta, Georgia 30303 Resident inspector U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 7388 N. State Highway 95 Columbia, Alabama 36319
REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION FOR RESOLUTION OF GL 96-06 ISSUES AT FARI FY NUCI FAR PLANT 1.
If a methodology other than that discussed in NUREG/CR-5220, " Diagnosis of Condensation-induced Waterhammer," was used in evaluating the effects of waterhammer, describe this attemate methodology in detail. Also, explain why this methodology is applicable and gives conservative results for the Farley units (typically accomplished through rigorous plant-specific modeling, testing, and analysis).
2.
For both the waterhammer and two-phase flow analyses, provide the following information:
- a. Identify any computer codes that were used in the waterhammer and two-phase flow analyses and describe the methods used to bench mark the codes for the specific loading conditions involved (see Standard Review Plan Section 3.g.1).
- b. Describe and justify all assumptions and input parameters (including those used in any computer codes) such as amplifications due to fluid structure interaction, cushioning, speed of sound, force reductions, and mesh sizes, and explain why the values selected give conservative results. Also, provide justification for omitting any effects that may be relevant to the analysis (e.g., fluid structure interaction, flow induced vibration, erosion).
- c. Provide a detailed description of the " worst case" scenarios for waterhammer and two-phase flow, taking into consideration the complete range of event possibilities, system configurations, and parameters. For example, all waterhammer types and water slug scenarios should be considered, as well as temperatures, pressures, flow rates, load combinations, and potential component failures. Additional examples include:
the effects of void fraction on flow balance and heat transfer; o
the consequences of steam formation, transport, and accumulation; a
cavitation, resonance, and fatigue effects; and -
erosion considerations.
NUREG/CR-6031, " Cavitation Guide for Control Valves," may be helpful in addressing some aspects of the two-phase flow analyses.
- d. Confirm that the analyses include a complete failure modes and effects analysis (FMEA) for all components (including electrical and pneumatic failures) that could impact performance of the cooling water system and confirm that the FMEA is documented and available for review, or explain why a complete and fully docurr ented FMEA was not performed.
- e. Explain and justify all uses of ' engineering judgement."
Enclosure
2-3.
Determine the uncertaintyin the waterhammer and two-phase flow analyses, explain how the uncertainty was determined, and how it was accounted for in the analyses to assure conservative results for the Farley units.
4.
Confirm that the waterhammer and two-phase flow loading conditions do not exceed any design specifications or recommended service conditions for the piping system and components, including those stated by equipment vendors; and confirm that the system will continue to perform its design-basis functions as assumed in the safety analysis report for the facility.
~
5.
Provide a simplified diagram of the system, showing major components, active components, relative elevations, lengths of piping runs, and the location of any orifices and flow restrictions.
l I
e
.-