ST-HL-AE-1411, Forwards Response to Draft SER or FSAR Items
| ML20133H753 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | South Texas  |
| Issue date: | 10/12/1985 |
| From: | Wisenburg M HOUSTON LIGHTING & POWER CO. |
| To: | Knighton G Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| ST-HL-AE-1411, NUDOCS 8510180101 | |
| Download: ML20133H753 (6) | |
Text
Y The Light NE f Ilouston Lighting & Power 110. Box 1700 llouston. Texas 77001 (713)228 'J211 October 12, 1985 ST-HL-AE-1411 File No.: G9.17 Mr. George W. Knighton, Chief Licensing Branch No. 3 Division of Licensing U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555 South Texas Project Units 1 and 2 Docket Nos. STN 50-498, STN 50-499 Responses to DSER/FSAR Items for Chapters 4, 9 and 12
Dear Mr. Knighton:
The attachments enclosed prov1de STP's response to Draft Safety Evaluation Report (DSER) or Final Safety Analysis Report (FSAR) items.
The item numbers listed below correspond to those assigned on STP's internal list of items for completion which includes open and confirmatory DSER items, STP FSAR open items and open NRC questions. This list was given to your Mr. N. Prasad Kadambi on October 8, 1985 by our Mr. M. E.
Powell.
The items which are attached to this letter are:
Attachment Item No.*
Subject 1
D 0.3-1 Outlet Temperature of UHS C 4.2-2 Moisture Levels in Fuel C 4.2-3 Cladding Collapse i
D 4.2-6 Description of CVCS Letdown Monitor C 4.2-7 Correct Reference D 12.5-6 List of Fixed Radiation - Counting Instrumentation i
- Legend D - DSER Open Item C - DSER Confirmatory Item F - FSAR Open Item Q - FSAR Question Response Item
' I L1/DSER/h l
851018o101 851012 PDR ADOCK 05000498 E
PDR l
Ilouston Lighting & Power Company ST-HL-AE-1411 File No.: G9.17 Page 2 If you should have any questions concerning this matter, please contact Mr. Powell at (713) 993-1328.
Very truly yours, n
A M. R. Wise burg
- Manager, lear L en ng HEP /eb Attachments: See above I
Ll/DSER/h
ST-HL-AE-1411 File No.: C9.17 Page 3 cc:
Hugh L. Thompson, Jr., Director Brian E. Berwick, Esquire Division of Licensing Assistant Attorney General for Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation the State of Texas U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission P.O.
Box 12548, Capitol Station Washington, DC 20555 Austin, TX 78711 Robert D. Martin Lanny A. Sinkin Regional Administrator, Region IV 3022 Porter Street, N.W. #304 Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20008 611 Ryan Plaza Drive, Suite 1000 Arlington, TX 76011 Oreste R. Pirfo, Esquire Hearing Attorney N. Prasad Kadambi, Project Manager Office of the Executive Legal Director U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 7920 Norfolk Avenue Washington, DC 20555 Bethesda, MD 20814 Charles Bechhoefer, Esquire Claude E. Johnson Chairman, Atomic Safety &
Senior Resident Inspector /STP Licensing Board c/o U.S. Nuclear Regulatory U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Co= mission Washington, DC 20555 P.O. Box 910 Bay City, TX 77414 Dr. James C.
Lamb, III 313 Woodhaven Road M.D. Schwarz, Jr., Esquire Chapel Hill, NC 27514 Baker & Botts One Shell Plaza Judge Frederick J. Shon Houston, TX 77002 Atomic Safety and Licensing Board U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission J.R. Newman, Esquire Washington, DC 20555 Newman & Holtzinger, P.C.
1615 L Street, N.W.
Mr. Ray Goldstein, Esquire Washington, DC 20036 1001 Vaughn Building 807 Brazos Director, Office of Inspection Austin, TX 78701 and Enforcement U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Citizens for Equitable Utilities, Inc.
Washington, DC 20555 c/o Ms. Peggy Buchorn Route 1, Box 1684 E.R. Brooks /R.L. Range Brazoria, TX 77422 Central Power & Light Company P.O. Box 2121 Docketing & Service Section Corpus Christi, TX 78403 Office of the Secretary U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission H.L. Peterson/G. Pokorny Washington, DC 20555 City of Austin (3 Copies)
P.O. Box 1088 Austin, TX 78767 Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission J.B. Poston/A. vonRosenberg 1717 H Street City Public Service Board Washington, DC 20555 P.O. Box 1771 San Antonio, TX 78296 Revised 9/25/85
i Attachmsnt 1 ST-HL-AE-1411 File No.: C9.17 Page 1 SER OPEN ITEM: 0.3-1 j
An inconsistency in the outlet temperature of the UHS exists. Table 9.2.2-1 states it as 115*(F) where as the UHS report states 120.5*.
Also, will a CCW temperature of 120.5'F provide adequate cooling?
i CLOSURE:
c The 115'F found in Table 9.2.2-1 represents the Component Cooling Water (CCW) inlet temperature to the CCW heat exchanger under normal opertion.
This is l
the CCW temperature after cooling all the equipment serviced by the CCW 4
system.
The 120.5* from the UHS report represents the maximum CCW supply temperature (CCW heat exchanger outlet temperature) occurring during the SSD/LOCA scenario described in Section 9.2.5 of the FSAR.
Since the numbers represent different temperatures, an inconsistency does not exist.
In addition, a 10CFR50.55(e) final report was submitted to the NRC (ST-HL-AE-914 December 9, 1982) which confirmed that the CCW provided adequate cooling.
l SER CONFIRMATORY ITEM 4.2-2 i
Confirm if the moisture levels in the uranium dioxide fuel are limited to less than or equal to 20 ppm, or if other criteria were used.
CLOSURE:
The moisture criteria previously provided for a 12-foot fuel stack is applicable to the 14-foot fuel stack as the moisture content is independent of l
fuel stack height.
i SER CONFIRMATORY ITEM 4.2-3 1
Confirmation that cladding collapse time exceeds the expected lifetime of the fuel.
l t
l CLOSURE:
l l
Clad collapse analysis performed for the South Texas Plants confirm that the calculated cladding collapse time exceeds the expected lifetime of the fuel, i
i i
i L1/DSER/h i
I
ST-HL-AE-1411 File No.: C9.17 Page 2 SER OPEN ITEM: 4.2-6 Section 4.2.5 should include a description of the CVCS letdown monitor for on-line fuel failure detection.
CLOSURE:
Section 4.2.4.7 has been added to the FSAR (Amendment 49) to provide this information.
SER CONFIRMATORY ITEM: 4.2-7 Confirmation that the incorrect reference (Reference 4.2-10) in Section 4.2.3.3.(2) of the FSAR is replaced by the correct reference (Reference 4.2-8).
j CLOSURE:
(
Reference 4.2-8, " Safety-Related Research and Development for Westinghouse Pressurized Water Reactors - Program Summaries" is the correct reference and the change will be made as part of Amendment 52. (See attached)
SER OPEN ITEM:
12.5-6 List in the FSAR the Fixed Radiation - counting instrumentation used at South Texas.
CLOSURE:
A list of the fixed area and ventilation monitors is provided in Tables 12.3.4-1 and 2.
The process and effluent monitors are listed in Table 11.5-1.
4 Ll/DSER/h
_ = - -
n ST-HL-AE-1411 File No.: C9.17 I
k j1 N
Page 3 y
fk where:
= number of diurnal cycles of mode k.
nk N
= number of allowable cycles.
fk It is recognized that a possible limitation to the satisfactory behavior of the fuel rods in a reactor which is subjected to daily load follow is the failure of the clad by low cycle strain fatigue.
During their normal resi-dence time in reactor, the fuel rods may be subjected to %1000 cycles with typical changes in power level from 50 to 100 percent of their steady-state values.
The assessment of the fatigue life of the fuel rod clad is subject to a con-siderable uncertainty due to the difficulty of evaluating the strain range which results from the cyclic interaction of the fuel pellets and clad. This difficulty arises for example from such highly unpredictable phenomena as pellet cracking, fragmentation, and relocation. Nevertheless, since early 1968, this particular phenomenon has been investigated analytically and ex-perimentally. Strain fatigue tests on irradiated and nonirradiated hydrided Zirconium-4 claddings were performed which permitted a definition of a con-servative fatigue life limit and recommendation on a methodology to treat the strain fatigue evaluation of the Westinghouse reference fuel rod designs.
It is believed that the final proof of the adequacy of a given fuel rod de-sign to meet the load follow requirements can only come from incore experi-ments performed on actual reactors.
Experience in load follow operation dates back to early 1970 with the load follow operation of the Saxton Successful load follow operation has been performed on reactor A reactor.
(400 load follow cycles) and reactor B (500 load follow cycles).
In both cases, there was no significant coolant activity increase that could be associated with the load follow mode of operation.
2.
Irradiation Experience Westinghouse fuel operational experience is presented in Reference 4.2-1.
Additional test assembly and test rod experience are given in Sections 8 and j
23 of Reference 4.2-F i
3.
Fuel and Cladding emperature The methods used for evaluation of fuel rod temperatures are presented in i
Section 4.4.2.11.
)
I Ll/DSER/h 7
l 4.2-24 Amendment 30 l
.