ML17054A696

Forwards Instrumentation & Control Sys Branch Request for Addl Info on Separation Criteria for Class IE Components & Interconnecting Circuits,Per Discussions at 840404 Meeting. Info Should Be Submitted by 840731

ML17054A696
Person / Time
Site:	Nine Mile Point
Issue date:	05/04/1984
From:	Schwencer A Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:	Rhode G NIAGARA MOHAWK POWER CORP.
References
NUDOCS 8405180007
Download: ML17054A696 (8)

Text

Docket No. 50-410 Mr. Gerald K. Rhode Senior Vice President Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation 300 Erie Boulevard West

Syracuse, New York 13202

Dear Mr. Rhode:

-'istri'boti.one.

Document Control NRC PDR Local PDR PRC NSIC LB82 Readi'ng E. Hylton M. Haughey OELD, Attorney ACRS (16)

E. Jordan N. Grace Region I

SUBJECT:

Request for Additional Information on Instrumentation and Controls at Nine flile Point 2

On April 4, 1984, members of the NRC staff met with representatives from Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation (the applicant),

General Electric and Stone and Webster Engineering to discuss review items within the Instrumentation and Control Systems Branch

( ICSB) scope.

One item discussed was the NRC Construction Appraisal Team InspectionReport transmitted to you by letter dated January 31, 1984, from R.

C.

DeYoung (NRC).

In its findings related to cable and wiring installations, the Construction Appraisal Team noted deficiencies relative to the separation criteria.

In discussing these deficiencies and the separation criteria for Class lE components and interconnecting circuits during the meeting on April 4, 1984, it became apparent that the separation criteria for the instrumentation and control systems had not been provided to the staff.

Although the Power Generation Control Complex (PGCC) supplied by GE has been reviewed on other dockets, the plant specific modifications to the PGCC and plant specific separation criteria for the balance of plant have not yet been approved by the staff.

During this meeting representatives of your staff agreed to document their separation criteria in response to a formal NRC request for additional information.

Accordingly, as Enclosure 1, we are providing a request for additional information on separation criteria.

In accordance with the present schedule for review of the application for an operating license for Nine Mile Point 2, this information should be provided as an amendment to the FSAR no later than July 31, 1984.

If you have any questions concerning the enclosed request they should be directed to the NRC licensing project manager, Mary F. Haughey, at (301) 492-7897.

Sincerely, Q~ r)e=

DL:LBg2 PM MHau hey:bdm 5/

/84

/BC chwencer 5/oY/84 Albert Schwencer, Chief Licensing Branch No.

2 Division of Licensing 8405i80007 840504 PDR ADQCK 050004i0 POR

,.<<1 ti

-"J gp,S Argy rW

+

0 Cy A

I 0O

~>>*++

Docket No. 50-410 UNITEDSTATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 MAY 4 884 Mr. Gerald.K. Rhode Senior Vice President Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation 300 Erie Boulevard West

Syracuse, New Yor'k 13202

SUBJECT:

Request for Additional Information on Instrumentation and Controls at Nine Mile Point.

2 On April 4.

1984, members of the HRC staff met with representatives from Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation (the applicant), General'lectric and Stone and Webster Engineering to discuss review items within the Instrumentation and Control Systems Branch

( ICSB) scope.

One item discussed was the NRC Construction Appraisal Team Inspection Report transmitted to you by letter

~

dated January 31, 1984, from R.

C.

DeYoung (NRC).

Ip its findings related to cable and wiring installations, the Construction Appraisal Team noted deficiencies relative to the separation criteria.

In discussing these deficiencies and the separation criteria for Class IE components and intel connecting circuits during the meeting on April 4, 1984, it became apparent that the separation criteria for the instrumentation and control systems had not been provided to the staff.,

Although the Power Generation Control Complex (PGCC) supplied by GE has been reviewed on other dockets, the plant specific modifications'to the PGCC and 'plant specific separation criteria for the. balance" of-. plant have not. yet been approved by. the.staff.

During this'eeting representatives of your staff agreed'o document their separation criteria in response to a formal NRC request for additional information.

Accordingly, as Enclosure 1,

we are providing a request for additional information on separation criteria.

In accordance with the'resent schedule for review of the application for an operating license 'for'ine Mile Point 2, this information should be'rovided as an amendment to the FSAR no later than July 31, 1984.

If you have any questions.c'oncerning the enclosed request they should be directed to the NRC licensing project manager, Mary F. Haughey, at (301) 492-7897.

Sincerely, Licensing Branch No.

2 Division of Licensing Enclosure As stated.

V

Enclosure 1

Instrumentation and Control S stems Branch Re vest for Additional Information 421.47 From its review of the Nine Mile - Unit 2 FSAR, the NRC staff has been unable to conclude that the separation of. Class 1E components and interconnecting circuits is acceptable.

Regu-latory Guide 1.75, "Physical Independence of Electrical Systems" which endorses IEEE Standard

384,

" IEEE Trial-Use Standard Cri-teria for Separation of Class lE Equipment and Circuits" pro-vides guidance with regard to separation.'o provide the level of detai 1 necessary to complete our review, we request that you submit a comoarison of the Nine Mile Point-Unit 2 design o

~

I I

the criteria contained in R.G.

1. 75 and IEEE'84.

This compar-ison should focus on the instrumentation and control systems with-r in both the Power Generation Control Complex and the'balance of I'lant.

The information provided should supplement FSAR Table

\\

l. 8-1 and FSAR Sections

7. 1..2,

7. 2. 6 and 8. 3. 1 such.that each regulatory position of R.G.

1.75 and each separation criterion of IEEE 384 is addressed.

Alternate. methods of providing separation lk to those, contained in R.G.

1.75 and IEEE 384 should be identified

'nd justified.

Where barriers (e.g., flexible conduit, sheet metal k

enclosures, fire retardant tape) ar'e used to provide "separation, the details of the testing used to qualify the barriers should be provided.

Where ana'.yses have been used to justify lesser separa-tion than that recommended in R.G.

1. 75 and IEEE 384, a detailed discussion of the analyses including the assumptions,

methods, supporting tests and concl'usions should be provided.

Yg

Nine Mile Point 2

Mr. Gerald K. Rhode Senior Vice President Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation 300 Erie Boulevard West

Syracuse, New York 13202 CC>>

Mr. Troy B. Conner, Jr.,

Esq.

Conner

& Wetterhahn Suite 1050 1747 Pennsylvania

Avenue, N.W.

Washington, D. C.

20006 Mr. Richard Goldsmith Syracuse 'Uni ver's'i ty College of Law E. I. White Hall Campus

Syracuse, New York 13210 I

l Mr. Jay Dunkleberger, Director

'Technological'Development Programs New York State Energy Office Agency Buildin'g 2 Empir'e State Plaza

.Albany, New York 12223 I

Ezra I. Bialik Assi stant Attorney General Envjironmental Protection Bureau New'ork State Department of Law 2'orl d'rade.Center New York, New York 10047 Resident Inspector Nine Mile Point Nuclear Power Station P.. 0. Box '99

Lycoming, New York 13093

~

Mr. John W. Keib, Esq.

Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation 300 Erie Boulevard West

Syracuse, New York 13202 Jay M. Gutierrez, Esq.

U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Coranission

, Region I 631 Park Avenue King of Prussia, Pennsylvania 19406

r P

I

'I N

t f

\\