ML19276E830
| ML19276E830 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Crystal River  |
| Issue date: | 03/05/1979 |
| From: | Reid R Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Stewart W FLORIDA POWER CORP. |
| References | |
| TAC-08377, TAC-8377, NUDOCS 7903210366 | |
| Download: ML19276E830 (3) | |
Text
.
[pa a f h,*g UNITED STATES
{ i.(hd- ~
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 7 7 f
s, y
j WASHINGTON. D. C 20555 b
=. M& p ' _l
- - ' yl Q
-~*y March 5, 1979 v; j Docket No. 50-302 Mr. W. P. Stewart Director, Power Production Florida Power Corporation P. O. Box 14042, Mail Stop C-4 St. Petersburg, Florida 33733
Dear Mr. Stewart:
We have reviewed your submittal of September 2, 1977 regarding boron dilution and have determined that the additional information identified in the enclosure is necessary to continue our review.
Please provide this information within 30 days from the date of this letter.
Sincerely, 7
m
_ ~,
Lcce/
n Robert W. Reid, Chief Operating Reactors Branch #4 Division of Operating Reactors
Enclosure:
Request for Additional Information cc w/ enclosure:
See next page s
a 7903210366
Florida Power Corporation cc:
f tr. S. A. Brandimore Vice Presicent and General Counsel P. O. Box 14042 St. Petersburg, Florida 33733 Mr. Robert B. Borsum Babcock & Wilcox Nuclear Power Generation Division Suite 420, 7735 Old Georgetown Road Bethesda, Maryland 20014 Crystal River Public Library Crystal River, Florida 32629 Mr. Jack Shreve Office of the Public Cour.sel Room 4, Holland Building Tallahassee, Florida 32304
Enclosure Request for Additional Information CR-3 Boron Dilution 1.
(Page 11 Table 1)
In Cases I and III it is stated that the decay heat removal system flow is zero. Explain the significance of NPSH at the suction of the decay heat removal pump in these cases and why calculate it is necessary to assume a value for NPSH rather than this number.
2.
(Page 11 Table 1) Case III has a higher concentration of Na0H but a lower assumed NPSH than Case 1.
Comparing Cases III and I it appears that the different NPSH's assumed for each case in some way compensates for the different concentrations of Na0H in that the flow calculated for both cases is 350 GPM.
Explain the bases for the assumed NPSH's and their relationships to the flows caiculated for all four cases.
3.
(Page 11 Table 1) Case II states that 22 psia is approximately equal to 14 FT of H 0 and Case IV states that 25 psia is approximately equal to 14 FT of H 0.
22 psia and 25 psia when expressed in FT of H,,0 (ABSOLUTE) equa 50.8 and 57.8 respectively or 16.9 and 23.8 FT of H O (GAGE). Verify that the correct values were used in the analyses.
2 4.
Was nitrogen overpressure on the Na0H tank taken into account in your analyses.