ML20003C424

Requests Addl Info Re Fsar.Fsar Should Be Amended to Reflect Responses

ML20003C424
Person / Time
Site:	Grand Gulf
Issue date:	02/20/1981
From:	Tedesco R Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:	Mcgaughy J MISSISSIPPI POWER & LIGHT CO.
References
NUDOCS 8103050345
Download: ML20003C424 (7)

Text

.

.4

... j p Ofc ff UNITED STATES y 1*, a *j' NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

C WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 l

t \\.., f

%.~....

t Docket Nos.: 50-416/417 Mr.- J. P. McGaughy, Jr.

Assistant Vica President - Nuclear Production Mississic,n Power and Light Company P. O. Box 1640 Jackson, Mississippi 39205

SUBJECT:

REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION - GRAllD GULF NUCLEAR STATION, UNITS 1 AND 2 As a result of our review of the information contained in the Final Safety Analysis Report for the Grand Gulf Nuclear Station, Units 1 and 2, we have developed the enclosed request for additional information.

Included are questions from the Procedures and Test Review Branch.

i We request that you amend your ;inal Safety Analysis Report to reflect your responses to the enciesed requests as soon as possible and to inform the Project Manager, Joseph A. Martore, of the date by which you intend to respond.

Sincerely, ep c

4. _._ r

_ t, s c Robert L. Tedesco Assistant Director for Licensing Division of Licensing

Enclosure:

As stated l

cc: See next page.

o g

O j

t FEB 2 0199 w.,

[DJda;t

/

f s

N i

=

r s'

.O.

l 1

I i

1 Mr. J. P. McGaughy f

r cc: Robert B. McGehee, Eso.

I t

Wise, Carter, Child, Steen, & Caraway f

4 P. O. Ecx 651 i

Jackson, Mississippi 39205 t

i

{-

Troy B. Conner, Jr., Esc.

Ccnner, Mcore 1 Corber i

1747 Pennsylvania Avenue, N. S.

l Washington, D. C.

20006 i

Mr. Adrian Zaccaria, Project Engineer Grand Gulf Nuclear Station i

Bechtel-Power Corporaticn

].

Gaithersburg, Maryland 20760 i

Mr. Alan G. Wagner, Resident Inspector 1

P. O. Box 469 Port Gibson, Mississippi 39150 i

1 Mr. N. L. Stampley, Sr. Vice President i

- Engineering, Production & Construction E

P.O. Box 1640 Jackson, Mississippi 39205 i

}

Mr. L. F. Dale i

j Nuclear Project Manager P.O. Box 1640 t

Jackson, Mississippi 39205

'e. Jchn Richardson r

P. C. Box 1640 s

f Jackson, Mississippt 39205 i

I 1

)

k I

f 1

i i-i i

4 i

i 1

i

REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION GRAND GULF NUCLEAR STATION, UNITS 1 AND 2 PROCEDURES AND TEST REVIEW BRANCH r

423.39 'The response to some sub-parts of item 423.12, regarding Regulatory Guide 1.68, are not totally acceptable.

Provide the information requested below.

1. ~i (2) Your response states that the logic time delays will be included in acceptance criteria which are currently being developed.

At present no reference to the acceptance criteria is contained in Subsection 14.2.12.1.4.d.

Include the requirement to meet the acceptance criteria for logic time delays in the test abstract.

)

423.40 The response to item 423.13 is not totally acceptable.

Item 423.13, 8f, states that the test description should be expanded to demonstrate that the overflow lines are unobstructed. The response refers to revised Subsection 14.2.12.1.26, which includes no mention of. the overflow lines.

Expand the Standby Service Water (SSW) System Preoperational Test (26) or reference another test abstract that will demonstrate that the overflow lines are unobstructed.

423.41 The response to item 423.29 is not totally acceptable.

Include

't test descriptions that fulfill requirements C.9 and C.10 of Regulatory Guide 1.80 as part of the Instrument Air System t

Preoperational Test (14.2.12.1.59), or provide technical justification for this exception to the guide.

i i

i i

4

~

423.42 The response to item 423.30 is not totally acceptable.

Modify the response to 1.i(21) to provide a starto test abstract that r

will evaluate the adequacy of cooling for those selected penetrations where fins were analyticalllt determined to be necessary.

For all other high-temperature penetration lines where analysis indicated no cooling was required, either include those penetrations in the aforementioned startup test abstract or provide

- Evaluation Methodology

- Maximum Concrete Temperature Criteria

- Assumed Heat Transfer Coefficients

- Description of Similar Applications Where, for Comparable Temperatures and Materials, No Cooling Was Used Successfully 423.43 The response to item 423.33 is not totally acceptable.

Modify Subsection 14.2.12.3.22.2.c to indicate that the simultaneous full closure of sil MSIVs will be performed at TC-6 (100 percent test plateau). Modify the response to item 423.33 to show that the test will be performed at TC-6 for GGNS Unit 2 as stated in Regulatory Guide 1.68, or provide technical justification for this exception to the guide.

423.4* The response to item 423.37 requires minor clarification.

The response states. that a turbine trip will be conducted during TC-3 at 60-80 percent power, and at greater than or equal to 95 percent core flow.

Table 14.2-3 has been changed to include the turbine trip during TC-3; however, TC-3.is.oe.ined as 50-75 percent power and

>80 percent core flow.

Include an additional footncta to Table 14.2-3 stating the power and flow conditions that will be established for STI-27.

423.45 C:-tain data that was to be provided in the F! AR Chapter 14 l

has not been made available.

Supply the missing information i

described below:

a.

p. 14. 2-138 Section 14. 2.12. 3.14. d To'arance data that was to be provided in June 1980 is not given.

b.

p. 14. 2-169, 170 Section 14.2.12.3.29.d Criteria and allowable movement information that was to be provided in June 1980 is not given.

423.45 Figure 14.2-4 (Startup Test Condition Power Flow Map) is of major importance to the understanding of FSAR Chapter 14.

There are a number of significant problems with the figure Revise Fi ure 14.2-4 to address that need to be resolved.

5 the following deficiencies:

{

a.

TC-2 The 50 percent control rod line is not labeled on the

. figure.

The remaining nomenclature (analytical iower limit of master flow control mode, bypass valve capacity) do not match the nomenclature used for points A, B, C, D, E, F labels or terms used on the figure. Clarify the area to be represented by TC-2.

b.

TC-3 The arrow points to tne Region IV area, which is 7

significantly larger than the TC-3 written definition (above 80 percent core flow, etc.).

i

a.

423.45 c.

TC-4 The + 5 percent criteria does not specify whether it (CONTO) applies to rated thermal power, or rated core flow rate, i

or both.

"LINE WITH" should be "LINE WITHIN".

d.

TC-6 The hatched area indicated for this test condition does not match the written definition.

e.

What does the hatched region IV represent? Also what does the hatched region to the immediate left of region IV represent?

Define regions I and II.

423.47 Subsections 14.2.10.2.e and 14.2.12.3.2.c state that at each major power level (25%, 60%, and 100%), the Local Power Range

[

Monitors (LPRMs) are calibrated and radiation measurements will be made at significant locations throughout the plant. Modify l

the power levels for LPRM calibration to match the test power levels, or provide technical justification for using power levels other than the power plateaus cited in ~,ubsection 14.'2. 4. 5. (10,

25%, 50%, 75%, and 100%).

i 4'3.48 Modify test abstract 14.2.12.1.5 to verify that paths fcr air-flow i

test of containment spray nozzles overlap the water-flow test paths of the pumps to demonstrate that there is no blockage in the flow a

path.

423.49 List any tests, or portions of tests, described in Section 14.2.12 which you do not intend to perform on each unit and provide technical justification for deletion of each.

i I

.. ~.

~.

m i

r 4

+

423.50 Provide assurance that all sources of power supply to vital f

buses are capable of carrying full accident loads.

If some portions of the power supplies cannot be full-load tested, '

l provide-justification.

P L

f i

I f

i t

I i

N

+

k

~

f 1

1 r

i

.. _. _. _. - _ _. _ _..,-