IR 05000277/1996006

Forwards Request for Addl Info Re Station Blackout Electrical Review.Licensee Provided NRC Responses to Listed Unresolved Insp Items Identified in Insp Repts 50-277/96-06, 50-278/96-06,50-277/96-07 & 50-278/96-07

ML20247L830
Person / Time
Site:	Peach Bottom
Issue date:	05/14/1998
From:	Thadani M NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned)
To:	Geoffrey Edwards PECO ENERGY CO., (FORMERLY PHILADELPHIA ELECTRIC
References
50-277-96-06, 50-277-96-07, 50-277-96-6, 50-277-96-7, 50-278-96-06, 50-278-96-07, 50-278-96-6, 50-278-96-7, TAC-MA0829, TAC-MA0830, TAC-MA829, TAC-MA830, NUDOCS 9805260085
Download: ML20247L830 (4)

Text

_ _ _ _ _ _ -. _ _ _ _ -

May 14, 1998

-

,.

Mr. Garrett Director - Licensing, MC 62A-1 PECO Energy Company Nuclear Group Headquarters Correspondence Control Desk P.O. Box No.195 l Wayne, PA 19085-0195 SUBJECT: REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION (RAI) FOR PEACH BOTTOM ATOMIC POWER STATION (PBAPS), UNITS 2 AND 3, STATION BLACKOUT ELECTRICAL LINE REVIEW (TAC NOS. MA0829 AND MA0830)

Dear Mr. Edwards:

In a letter dated April 25,1997, PECO Energy Company (the licensee) provided the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) responses to unresolved inspection items 96-06-02 and 96-06-01 identified in the NRC inspection reports 50-277,278/96-06 and 50-277,278/96-07, respectively.

The unresolved inspection items were related to the Station Blackout (SBO) electrical tie line that runs from the Conowingo Hydroelectric Station to the PBAPS.

The Commission's technical staff has completed its review of the responses and has concluded that the RAI, as outlined in the enclosure, is required to facilitate closing the above mentioned open inspection items.

We request that the licensee provide its response to the enclosed RAI within 45 days from the date of receipt of this letter to support a timely completion of the staff's actions on the above open items.

Sincerely,

/S/

Mohan C. Thadani, Senior Project Manager Project Directorate 12 Division of Reactor Projects - 1/11 Docket Nos. 50-277/50-278 Enclosure: RAI

[/

cc w/ encl: See next page DISTRIBUTION:

Docket File JZwolinski MThadani gWs#@ei 3*Cathyo M[

PUBLIC Rgapra OGC CAnderson, RGN-l PDI-2 Reading JO'Brien ACRS OFFICE Phk Pd-dM PDI-2/D NAME MThadani:rb M eh RCapra P DATE [ //h98 /

' '

98 5/ M/98 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY DOCUMENT NAME: A:\ peach.rai:

,,,

.

~

~

9805260085 980514 ~ '

S PDR ADOCK 05000277 P PDR

____ ___ - - -

-

p uo 7 og

'

g &

"

UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. 20066 0001 k p..... o May 14, 1998 Mr. Garrett Director- Licensing, MC 62A-1 PECO Energy Company Nuclear Group Headquarters Correspondence Control Desk P.O. Box No.195 Wayne, PA 19085-0195 SUBJECT: REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION (RAl) FOR PEACH BOTTOM ATOMIC POWER STATION (PBAPS), UNITS 2 AND 3, STATION BLACKOUT ELECTRICAL LINE REVIEW (TAC NOS. MA0829 AND MA0830)

Dear Mr. Edwards:

In a letter dated April 25,1997, PECO Energy Company (the licensee) provided the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) responses to unresolved inspection items 96-06-02 and 96-06-01 identified in the NRC inspection reports 50-277,278/96-06 and 50-277,278/96-07, respectively.

The unresolved inspection items were related to the Station B!ackout (SBO) electrical tie line that runs from the Conowingo Hydroelectric Station to the PBAPS.

The Commission's technical staff has completed its review of the responses and has concluded that the RAI, as outlined in the enclosure, is required to facilitate closing the above mentioned open inspection items.

We request that the licensee provide its response to the enclosed RAI within 45 days from the date of receipt of this letter to support a timely completion of the staff's actions on the above open items.

Sincerely,

.

ohan C. T dani, Senior Project Manager Project Directorate 1-2 Division of Reactor Projects - t/Il Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Docket Nos. 50-277/50-278 Enclosure: RAI cc w/ encl: See next page

_ _ _ _ _ _ _

___ _- _____ _ - _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ___ _ _ _ _ - _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ -

- ..

__.

j. k

.. k Mr. Garrett D. EdwaMs Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station, PECO Energy Company Units 2 and 3 cc:

J. W. Durham, Sr., Esquire Chiefavision of Nuclear Safety Sr. V.P. & General Counsel PA Dept. of l PECO Energy Company Environmental Resources 2301 Market Street,826-1 P.O. Box 8489 Philadelphia, PA 19101 Harrisburg, PA 17105-8469 PECO Energy Company.

ATTN: Mr. T. N. Mitchell, Vice President Board of Supervisors Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station Peach Bottom Township 1848 Lay Road R.D.#1 Delta, PA 17314 Delta, PA 17314 PECO Energy Company Public Service Commission of Maryland l ATTN: Regulatory Engineer, A4-5S Engineering Division Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station Chief Engineer 1848 Lay Road 6 St. Paul Centre Delta, PA 17314 Baltimore, MD 21202 6806 Resident inspector Mr. Richard McLean U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Power Plant and Environmental Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station Review Division P.O. Box 399 Department of Natural Resources Delta, PA 17314 B-3, Tawes State Office Building Annapolis, MD 21401 Regional Administrator, Region i U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Dr. Judith Johnsrud 475 Allendale Road National Energy Committee King of Prussia, PA 19406 Sierra Club 433 Orlando Avenue Mr. Roland Fletcher State College, PA 16803 Department of Environment 201 West Preston Street Manager-Financial Control & Co-Owner Baltimore, MD 21201 - Affairs Public Service Electric and Gas A. F. Kirby, lll Company Extemal Operations - Nuclear P.O. Box 236 Delmarva Power & Light Company Hancocks Bridge, NJ 08038-0236 P.O. Box 231 I

Wilmington, DE 19899 Manager-Peach Bottom Licensing PECO Energy Company PECO Energy Company Nuclear Group Headquar1ers Plant Manager Correspondence Control Desk Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station P.O. Box No.195 1848 Lay Road Wayne, PA 19087-0195 Delta, PA 17314

• s

,.

..

REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION STATION BLACKOUT ELECTRICAL LINE REVIEW FOR PEACH BOTTOM ATOMIC POWER STATION. UNITS 2 AND 3 TAC NOS. MA0829 AND MA0830

1. The staff has additional questions related to withstanding likely weather-related events.

(3) The August 6,1992, response by PECO stated all components of the station )

blackout (880) line would be capable of withstanding the effects of likely weather related events that may initiate a loss of offsite power event (reference NUMARC 87-00 item B.3). However, a wooden utility pole is used at the Susquehanna t

'

Substation where the SBO line leaves the breaker and goes underground on the south side of route 1. Address how the use of a wooden pole is consistent with

! the stated design criteria on weather related events. Also, provided justification of how wooden utility poles and exposed conductors meet the requirements of NUMARC ltem B.3.

In Peach Bottom's response dated August 6,1992, it was stated that "all of these components are capable of withstanding likely weather-related events."

In order for the NRC staff to close this item more detailed information is required that will justify the conclusions reached in your August 1992 response. It is necessary to determine the design capabilities (i.e., ice loading capability, and wind loading capability)

of the exposed structures and the most likely weather-related events expected at Peach Bottom (some licensees have used probabilistic risk assessment (PRA) to determine the most likely weather-related events.). It should be demonstrated that the design capabilities of the exposed structures can withstand the most likely weather-related events at Peach Bottom. Additionally, the most likely weather-related events should be supported by historical weather data.

2. The staff has additional questions related to hydro-unit reliability.

(2) URI 96-06-02 states that the staff " expected" at least one Conowingo hydro unit would supply the SBO line loads normally and therefore could be considered an operating line. However, with the possibility of no units operating, the system overall would be in standby and therefore, reliability should be monitored.

Address measuring reliability given there are times when SBO generating units are off-line and how the NUMARC 87-00 guidance for reliability is being met?

In your April 25,1997, response you stated that the availability is monitored ur:dar the Maintenance Rule and includes all equipment from the buses at Conowingo to the PBAPS switchgear.

Was there a PRA analysis completed for the altamate AC (AAC) power source to '

determine whether it was a low or high risk structure, system or component (SSC)? What was the result of your PRA analysis? If a PRA analysis was not done, was the AAC source determined to be a low or high risk SSC by some other method required by the maintenance rule. What was the result of that determination?

I ENCLOSURE

-