Part 21 Report - 1996-670

ACCESSION #: 9608120142 Westinghouse Energy NUCLEAR SAFETY ADVISORY LETTER Systems Business Unit THIS IS A NOTIFICATION OF A RECENTLY IDENTIFIED POTENTIAL SAFETY ISSUE PERTAINING TO BASIC COMPONENTS SUPPLIED BY WESTINGHOUSE. THIS INFORMATION IS BEING PROVIDED TO YOU SO THAT A REVIEW OF THIS ISSUE CAN BE CONDUCTED By YOU TO DETERMINE IF ANY ACTION IS REQUIRED. P.O. Box 355, Pittsburgh, PA 15230-0355 Subject: Containment Fan Cooler Operation Number NSAL-96-003 During a Design Basis Accident Basic Component: Containment Fan Coolers Date: 6/20/96 Plants: Westinghouse and MHI NSSS Plants Substantial Safety Hazard or Failure to Comply Yes [ ] No [ ] Pursuant to 10 CFR 21.21(a) Transfer of Information Pursuant to 10 Yes [ ] CFR 21.21(b) Advisory Information Pursuant to 10 CFR Yes [x] 21.21(c)(2) Reference: SUMMARY The purpose of this letter is to provide Westinghouse NSSS Owners information regarding the potential performance of some containment fan cooler units (CFCUs) during accident conditions which may compromise the containment cooling system capability. This Westinghouse Nuclear Safety Advisory Letter deals with the potential susceptibility for the cooling water of certain CFCUs to flash to steam during a design basis Loss of Coolant Accident (LOCA) with either a concurrent Loss of Offsite Power (LOOP) or a delayed sequencing of safety-related equipment. The applicability of this issue to a given nuclear unit depends on plant specific aspects of the containment cooling system design and its heat removal system. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has been notified by an LER (Reference 1). Additional information, if required, may be obtained from the originator. Telephone 412-374-5750. Originator(s) J. T. Crane W. R. Rice, Interim Manager Regulatory & Licensing Regulatory & Licensing Initiatives 1317A:WPWIN Sheet 1 of 3 ISSUE DESCRIPTION The potential for this condition was discovered during an investigation into Component Cooling Water (CCW) system design issues by a Westinghouse NSSS Owners The CCW System provides cooling water directly to the CFCUs in that plant's design. Depending on the specific design conditions, it may be applicable to plants that utilize cooling water systems other than the CCW for their CFCUs. This issue concerns a type of containment cooling design that has a single set of CFCUs for heat removal during both normal operating conditions and accident conditions. In the Licensee's design the CFCUs are equipped with a two-speed blower that operates at about 1200 rpm for normal operation and about 600 rpm for accident conditions. Cooling water to the heat exchanger coils for both normal and accident operation is supplied by the CCW system. The Licensee's containment analysis assumes the fan coolers operate during postulated accidents, removing heat so as to maintain containment pressure within design basis limits. During a postulated LOOP coincident with a design basis LOCA, power is lost to both the CCW pumps and the CFCU blowers. The CCW pumps are calculated to coast down to 0 rpm within 1-2 seconds while the CFCU blowers are calculated to coast down from a nominal speed of 1200 rpm to 600 rpm in approximately 30 seconds and then to 0 rpm an estimated 700 seconds later. Accounting for diesel-generator start times and emergency buss loading sequence, the CFCU blowers are re-energized approximately 20 seconds after the initiation of the LOOP. This timing of events provides for hot, steam-laden containment air to be drawn over the heat exchanger coils at a relatively high velocity for 30 seconds before cooling liquid flow is reestablished to the coils. The high heat content of containment atmosphere under accident conditions being drawn over the CFCU heat exchanger coil with no pumped liquid flow ha been calculated to result in steaming of the stationary liquid inventory of the coils. When the CCW pumps an re-energized, the pumped liquid flow acts to collapse the steam void in the CFCU piping. Collapsing the stem void is predicted to result in a waterhammer with sufficient energy and force that may impact the integrity of either the heat exchanger coil or its associated piping, resulting in a loss of integrity of the CCW system. To prevent flashing of the CFCU cooling water, the Licensee has installed a nitrogen pressurization system on the CCW system. TECHNICAL EVALUATION The following discussion provides several items to consider in evaluating your CFCUs. In general, a plant that has CFCUs with a 2 speed blower motor and a diesel loading sequence that results in water flow through the cooler coil law than 15 seconds after a design basis large break LOCA, may have a similar situation. However, there are other plant specific aspects that can impact CFCU functioning. The containment cooling design in this issue has a single set of fan coolers that are used for containment cooling during both normal and accident conditions. Flashing and subsequent void collapse may not apply if a plant has separate sets of equipment where the accident CFCUs are not operating prior to a design basis accident. These accident related fan coolers would be at containment ambient conditions with no forced corrective heat transfer at the beginning of the 1317A:WFWIN Sheet 2 of 3 accident. Since their fans would not be operating at the beginning of the postulated accident (as compared to a single set of fan coolers which would be coasting down) the heat release from a design basis accident would be transferred to the coil cooling water at a much slower rate, Flashing of the CFCU cooling water may not occur in a specific plant design because of factors such as heat transfer capability, saturation pressure of the cooling system, coastdown time of the fan blower, and coastdown time of the cooling water pump(s). Also, the timing of when ECCS equipment will start in a design basis accident can determine if the CFCUs do or do not have stagnant cooling water. In summary, the issue is whether safety related CFCUs will function as intended during a design basis event, if they are postulated to experience flashing of the water in the cooling coils. If flashing can be postulated, then the issue of whether the CFCUs will maintain structural integrity during subsequent void collapse should be addressed. ASSESSMENT OF SAFETY SIGNIFICANCE Westinghouse cannot determine the potential for flashing in the CFCUs on a generic basis because of the various plant specific designs for the containment cooling system and situation specific beat transfer conditions. Thus the most effective action that can be taken is a notification to all Westinghouse plants. REPORTABILITY The NRC is aware of this issue via an LER (Reference 1). RECOMMENDED ACTIONS Licensees should review their containment cooling system to determine if their safety related containment fan coolers are susceptible to cooling water void formation and subsequent void collapse and waterhammer during a design basis accident. REFERENCE 1. Pacific Gas & Electric letter: PG&E DCL-96-097, April 26, 1996 to U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, "Licensee Event Report 1-96- 005-00 (Voluntary) Potential for Flashing in Containment Fan Cooler Units" 1317A:WFWIN Sheet 3 of 3 *** END OF DOCUMENT ***

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Wednesday, March 24, 2021