ML20009F420
| ML20009F420 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Wolf Creek, Callaway  |
| Issue date: | 07/23/1981 |
| From: | Edison G Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8107310126 | |
| Download: ML20009F420 (8) | |
Text
.
m.
y
'D '
Q n
o-4 JUL 2 31981 Docket Nos.: STN 50-482 and STN 50-483 APPLICANTS: Union Electric Company Kansas Gas and Electric Company Ft.sILITILc,: Callaway Plant Unit 1 Wolf Creek Generating Station, Unit 1
SUBJECT:
SUFilARY OF IEETING HELD ON JUNE 23, 1981 WITH THE CALLAWAY AND WOLF CREEK APPLICANTS CONCERNING CONTAllaiENT SYSTEMS A meeting was held on June 23, 1981 at the Bechtel Offices in Gaithersburg, flaryland with representatives of the Union Electric Company, Kansas Gas and Electric Company, SNUPPS Organization and Bechtel Power Corporation. The meeting was held to discuss matters related to the Containment Systems of the Callaway and Wolf Creek Plants.
The list of attendees at this meeting is attached as Enclosure 1.
The agenda for the meeting consisted of draft questions which were prepared by the Containment Systems Branch and were transmitted to the applicants previously. lists the draft questions.
Significant points discussed are sun:iarized as follows, beginning witn question 6.2.1.1A-1:
Question Status 6.2.1.lA Complete. These data are in FSAR Figure 6.2.1-83 and -84.
6.2.1.1A Couplete. An FSAR revision will be made to clarify (d) ano pr; vide (e) of the agenda item as discussed. FSAR references were provided in response to (a), (b), and (es.
6.2.1.1A-3 Tha applicant indicates only indirect measurer.ent of containment sump water temperature is available at the RHR heat exchanger inlets with nrn-safety related instrumentation. We indicate we would have to check on this item. Subsequent to this meetirg, we determined that this is contrary to the guidance of R.G.1.97 (Rev. 2), which should be conplied with by the applicant.
5.2.1.1A Complete. An FSAR revision to Tab b ).5-) will be made to '
- te an accuracy of +3.5% full scete for containment error range pressure instruEentation for post-accident monitoring.
6.2.1.1A Complete. An FSAR revision will be made to docunent the basis for concluding containment spray following MSLB will be delivered
.su secunits arter actua r.1 o n. Note w1 1: De taken o" now long
.....i.t..take s. to..f.111.. up..the. piping,..oper.. val.ves,.. star :.. the..pucu%..
- ~
g1oy31o1yb g1O723
=>
PDRADOCK05000g A
l NRC FORM 318 810'80l NRCE O240 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY
- * *8o-32'824
I
['O s
L 0
0 I
i
- 6.2.1.4 Complete. These data were provided to the Containment Systems Branen (revised) at the meeting and will be incorporated into FSAR or subsquent anendment.
6.2.1.2 Complete. An FSAR revision will be provided documenting the sensitivity analysis of selection of nodes in modeling for subcompartment differential pressure calculations.
6.2.1.2 Complete. The applicant clarified the design and analysis. The applicant indicated that feedwater line breaks were bounded by reactor coolant system breaks. Also the design is such that a feedwater line break would exhaust to the main containment i
and not subject the eteam generator subcompartment to over-i pressurization.
I 6.2.1.2 Complete. The applicant stated that sensitivity analyses of the initial relatiwe humidity from 10 to 100% had been conducted and showed less than a 1% change in resultant maximum differential 3
i pressure. NRC has no further questions.
6.2.1.2 Complete. The applicant described the water shield bag design and i
the expected burst behavior. The scale model was visited and discussed. The applicant agreed to revise the FSAR to discuss in more detail the water bag design (i.e., material, life time, tear strip tearing load, etc.), figures showing more precisely the location and number of water bags, and further detailed information on how the water bags were modeleo in the analysis and why this j
modeling is conservative.
6.2.1.2 - 586 Complete. These are answered in BN-TOP-4, Rev. 1.
4 I
6.2.1.2 Com;.!cte. The applicant sttted no heat sinks were utilized l
in subcompartment analysn.
l l
6.2.1.2-8 Complete. See 6.2.1.2-4.
i 6.2.1.3 Complete.
The applicar.c stated e t exclusion of longitudinal pipe a
splits with break area equal w ine cross section area of the pipe l
is justified in WCAP-8264 PA and WCAP-8312A.
i I
6.2.1.3 Complete. The applicant stated that WCAP-8312A provides the necessary documentation.
6.2.1.3 Complete. The applicant stated tnat 3636 tIWt was used and is conser-vative compared with actual core power level of 3411 MWt and ultimate core power level of 3565 FMt (engineerer' safety features l
rating ). All other infomation for confirmatory 2nalysis in Table 6.2.1-5 and WCAP-8312 /. are independent of which power level is used.
nac rcau ais cw soi nacu o2.o OFFICIAL RECORD v0PY 4 e es2ee2 L.
g f.
- O 6
6 O
W
. 6.2.1.3 Complete. The applicant will revise table 6.2.1-34 to show it is for adXimum safety injection.
6.2.1.4 (See 6.2.1.4-1 " revised" earlier in tnis sumary).
6.2.1.4 Complete. T.le applicant stated that stored energy in the affected steam generator metal was considered in the analysis. Feedwater piping as a source of energy was not specifically included, but auxiliary feedwater temperature was assumed to be (conservatively) the same as the initial r.u in feedwater temperature. The stored energy in steam line was also noc included since it was considered to be negligible. All assumptions and conservatisms are documented in WCAP-8822.
6.2.1.4 Complete. The applicant clarified this item.
Table 6.2.1-58 is correct and Table 6.2.1-56 will be revised as agr.eed in the meeting.
6.2.1.5-162 - Complete. Westin; Muse representatives stated that 14.7 psia and 90 F are representatively low values for the initial containment pressure and temperature at full power operation and, therefcre, are appropriately conservative for the minimum containment pressure analysis for ECCS performance. Westinghouse added that these values are assumea generically for all Westinghouse dry atr.iospheric containment plants. While a lower containaent pressure or temperature may occur during full pov:er operation, it was agreed that tne low range of values provided in FSAR Table 3.11(B)-1, " Plant Environramal Normal Condi;. ions" (r.or:1.al operating pressure
+ 2 psig,m1 temperature 120-50 F) were not pertinent since they covered periods other than ft.ll power operation. As additional justification for the use of 14.7 psia as the initial containment pressure in the ECCS analysis, Westinghouse said that sensitivity ani. lyses had been performed and showed that the peak clad tenperature increased only about 15-20 Ffor a 1.0 psi drop in initial pressure.
Westinghouse also said the sensitivity of ECCS analyses to a lower initial containment temperature is less than the.t for initial pressure. Based on the above, the CSB agreed that tt:e initial conditions used in the uinimum containment pressure dnalysis for ECCS performance evaluation is acceptable.
6.2.1.5 Complete. The applicant stated that for ECCS analysis they used a curve based on a service water temperature of 33 F.
He found this acceptable. No further questions.
6.2.2 Deleted. The question is being pursued by the Accident Evaluation Branch at NRC and was not further discussed.
6.2.2 Complete. The applicant stated and we agree that (a) Reg. Guide 1.26 is intended for pressure containing compoments and (b) by neeting Safety Class 2 requirements, they are meeting Quality Group t>. No further questions.
l
""" 4 NRC FORM 318 HO 80l NRCM O240 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY "o aesa2n2.
t
n W
Cf i,
G'
. 6.2.2 Complete. The applicant discussed the calculations and indicated a 201 margin was added. We have no further questions.
6.2.2 Complete. The applicant stated that this has already been provided as Figure 6.2.1-15.
6.2.2 Complete. The FSAR will be revised to remove this discussion of the old Reg. Guide 1.97.
It will be replaced with discussion of compliance with the new revision of Reg 1.97 now being used.
6.2.2 Complete. These will be submitted in October,1981.
6.2.2 Complete. The applicant clarified the basis for NPSil and we have no further questions.
6.2.2 Coaplete. This is covered by the response to 6.2.2-1.
6.2.2 Compl ete. See FSAR Figure 1.2-10.
6.2.2 Complete. The applicant referred us to Reference 1 of Section 6.2.2 and stated the fan coolers are being supplied by American Airfilter Company. We have no further question.
6.2.4 Complete. The applicant will revise the FSAR to include information about the spare penetrations. The FdAR revistor. will identify which penetration numbers are spares.
6.2.4 Co.aplete. We will require that GDC-57 be met for lines penetrating containment but not connected to the reactor coolant pressure boundary or directly to containment atmosphere. Our review today found the SHUPPS design acceptable. The applicants stated they don't believe GDC-57 applies to these lines. No further questions at this time.
6.2.4 Comp'etc. The applicant stated that the instrument lines and bellows are designed to withstand the LOCA transient environment and containment design teoperature. This is described further in WCAP-8587.
6.2.4 Complete. The applicant stated that separate, recundant, sumps witn class IE level instrumentation are provided and assured that a leak can be identified and isolated if necessary. FSAR Section 9.3 provides additional information and no further questions.
6.2.4 Complete. FSAR Figure 6.2.4-1 will be revised to show the valves Fail open.
6.2.4 Complete. The applicant stated these valves are norrally closed, so they don't have to be closed to isolate the containnent following an accident. Therefore. the time to close is moot. We agree.
"e feetM geestfeas-
"'C 4 NRC FORM 318110c80l NRCM O240 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY
-O mm e2.
c'y y
eg3 w
s v
o
, 6.2.5 Complete. The applicant described the reactor cavity flow paths and discussed tne absence of gas-pocketing areas. No further questions.
6.2.5 Complete. The applicant stated that the hydrogen analyzer is qualified for LOLA gas temperatures. See also FSAR page 6.2.S-13.
No further questions.
6.2.5 Coaplete. The applicant stated that hydrogen recombiners and containment mixing fans are Safety Class 2 and was discussed for question 6.2.2-10, and this is acceptable.
Other items 1.
Valve Lockout The applicants indicated that some valves on drawings and P&ID's are designated as "L. C." (locked closed) or "L. 0." (locked open). They indicated that
" locking" of a valve is defined by them to be either:
1.
Physical locking, such as with a chain or wire, 2.
Physical removal of power to the valve, such as by racking out a
- breaker, 3.
Atteching an aduinistrative tag to the valve.
The latter definition seems not to be the usual interpretation of " locking" a volve. We indicated we would discuss this matter furtner with tne power systems branch and the reactor systems and auxiliary feedwater sytems branches and advise the applicants.
2.
Containment Purge The applicant indicated they desire the flexibility to operate the 18" diameter containment purge line continuously if needed during the reactor operational modes 1, 2, 3 and 4.
The FSAR reflects this design. This is in conflict with Branch TechnicalPosition BTP CSB 6.4 which states such purge line should not exceed above 8" in diameter unless it can be justified. He additionally noted that the Sequoyah Plant was restricted in the number of hours their on line purge systems could be operated. Therefore, we will consider this matter further and advise the applicants of our position.
Original signed by,3 00rdon E. Edison G. E. Edison, Project Manager Licensing Branch No.1 Division of Licensing
Enclosure:
As stated er.
ce
.m v e. pm.
o"490I~B!126. 9Li suaaur) GEdison/l9 BJ t
U2 2m '.'.".'.'.'.
.".7b".
^ " >
.Nac roau 3'e no so'Nacu o24o OFFICIAL RECORD COPY 4 - w -32 n 2.
Mr. J. K. Bryan Mr. Glenn L. Koester Vice President - Nuclear Vice President - Nuclear Union Electric Company Kansas Gas and Electric Company P. O. Box 149 201 North Market Street St. Louis, Missouri 63166 P. O. Box 208 Wichita, Kansas 67201 cc: Gerald Charnoff, Esq.
Shaw, Pittman, Potts, Dr. Vern Starks Trowbridge & Madden Route 1. Box B63 1800 M Street,.N. W.
Ketchikan, Alaska 99901 Washington, D. C.
20036 Mr. William Hansen Kansas City Power & Light Company V. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission ATTN: Mr. D. T. McPhee Resident Inspectors Office Vice President - Production RR #1
~
1330 Baltimore Avenue Steedman, Missouri 65077 Kansas City, Missouri 64141 Ms. Treva Hearn, Assistant General Counsel Mr. Nicholas A. Petrick Missouri Public Service Commission Executive Director, SNUPPS P. O. Box 360 5 Choke Cherry Road Jer'ferson City, Missouri 65102 Rockville, Maryland 20850 Jay Silberg, Esquire Mr. J. E. Birk Shaw, Pittman, Potts & Trowbridge Assistant to the General Counsel 1800 M Street, N. W.
Union Electric Company Washington, D. C.
20036 St. Louis, Missouri 63166 Mr. D. F. Schnell Kansaas for Sensible Energy Manager - Nuclear Engineering P. O. Box 3192 Union Electric Company Wichita, Kansas 67201 P. O. Box 149 St. Louis, Missouri 63166 Ms. Mary Ellen Salava Route 1, Box 56 Mr. Tom Vandel Burlington, Kansas 66839 Resident Inspector /Wnif Creek NPS c/o USNRC Eric A. Eisen. Esq.
P. 0. Box 1407 Birch. Horton, Bittner & Monroe Emooria, Kansas 66801 1140 Connecticut Avenue, N. W.
Mr. Michael C. Keener l
Wolf Creek Project Director State Corporation Cormiission Ms. Wanda Christy State of Kansas 516 N. 1st Street Fourth Floor, State Office Building Burlington, Kansas 66839 Topeka, Kansas 66612 i
ENCLOSURE 1 NRC G. E. Edison Y. S. Huang J. W. Shapaker
_El S. M. Lainof f L. J. Kripps Bechtel
!J. P. G oel C. M. Herbst P. A. Ward A. Viera J. D. Hurd J. S. Prebula A. DiPerna KG3E
- 6. P. Rathbun S4UPPS
- d. L. Strignt F. Schwoerer A. Passwater Westinghouse W. L. Luce P. A. Linn I
t l
[
1 I
JUL 231981 MEETING
SUMMARY
D*STRiBUTION G. Lear
-Docket File' W. Johnston NRCLPDR1 i
S. Pawlicki l
Local'PDR TIC /NSIC/ Tera V. Benaroya Z. Rosztoczy l
N. Hughes W. Haass i
LB#1 Reading D. Muller H. Denton R. Ballard i
E. Case D. Eisenhut W. Regan D. Ross R. Purple P. Check B. J. Youngblood A. Schwencer F. Congel
- 0. Parr F. Miraglia F. Rosa J. Miller W. Butler G. Lainas l
R. Vollmer W. Kreger R. Houston J. P. Knight R. Bosnak
- /,Y}
L. Rubenstein F. Schauer R. E. Jackson T. Speis ig M. Srinivasan
/27 (v
kV N,
l Project Manager G. E. Edison
/C6; $(V 9.q -
J. Stolz Attorney, OELD I-4 3
S. Hanauer M. Rushbrook W. Gammill 1
OIE (3)
ACRS (16)
T. Murley d
F. Schroeder g
9P O
D R. Tedesco i
D. Skovholt l
oif M. Ernst N
l R. Baer NRC
Participants:
C. ' Berlinger I
J. Huang K. Kniel G. Knighton J. Shapaker A. Thadani W. Sutler D. Tondi J, Kramer G. Edison D. Vassallo D. ColIins D. Ziemann bcc: Applicant & Service List l
-