ML17059B463
| ML17059B463 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Nine Mile Point  |
| Issue date: | 03/11/1997 |
| From: | Hood D NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned) |
| To: | Sylvia B NIAGARA MOHAWK POWER CORP. |
| References | |
| TAC-M69461, NUDOCS 9703130293 | |
| Download: ML17059B463 (10) | |
Text
Hr. B. Ralph Sylvia Executive Vice Presic~
Generation Business Group and Chief Nuclear Officer Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation Nuclear Learning Center 450 Lake Road
- Oswego, NY 13126 March 11, 1997 SUBJECT'E(VEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION REGARDING VERIFICATION OF SEISMIC ADE(UACY OF MECHANICAL AND ELECTRICAL E(UIPHENT, NINE MILE POINT NUCLEAR STATION UNIT NO.
1 (TAC NO. M69461)
Dear Hr. Sylvia:
The NRC staff is reviewing your submittal of March 11, 1996, regarding the verification of seismic adequacy of mechanical and electrical equipment in operating reactors.
Me find that additional i'nformation regarding operator
- actions, as identified in the enclosure, is needed to complete this review.
Your response to the enclosure is requested within 45 days of receipt of this letter.
If you have questions regarding the enclosure or are unable to meet the requested response
- date, please call me at (301) 415-3049, or e-mail me at dsh8nrc.gov.
Sincerely, ORIGINAL SIGNEO BY:
Darl S.
Hood, Senior Project Manager Project Directorate I-1 Division of Reactor Projects I/II Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Docket No. 50-220
Enclosure:
Request for Additional Information cc w/encl:
See next page DISTRIBUTION:
~.Docket F.il e PUBLIC PDI-1 Reading SVarga JZwolinski SBajwa SLittle DHood CThomas GGalletti OGC ACRS CCowgill, RI RPelton DOCUMENT NAME:
G: IiNHPliNM169461. RAI To receive a copy of this document, indicate in the box: "C" = Copy without enclosures "E" ~ Copy with enciosures "N" ~ No copy OFFICE PM: PDI-1 NAME DHood/rsl 5
DATE,y/Io /97 LA:PDI-SLittl oj97 D: PD I-1 SBawja
/v /97 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY NR;DRCH
/i 97 97031302'tr3 970311 PDR ADQCK 05000220 P
(
0 j~ Q(~>>'(
<pS Rfay C
~o I'y A.0 C
O IlA O~
Y/
~O
++*++
UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.c. 2055.'WN01 March 11, 1997 Mr. B. Ralph Sylvia Executive Vice President Generation Business Group and Chief Nuclear Officer Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation Nuclear Learning Center
. 450 Lake Road
- Oswego, NY 13126
SUBJECT:
REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION REGARDING VERIFICATION OF SEISMIC ADEQUACY OF MECHANICAL AND ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT, NINE MILE POINT NUCLEAR STATION UNIT NO.
1 (TAC NO. M69461)
Dear Mr. Sylvia:
The NRC staff is reviewing your submittal of March ll, 1996, regarding the verification of seismic adequacy of mechanical and electrical equipment in operating reactors.
We find that additional information regarding operator actions,'s identified in the enclosure, is'eeded to complete this review.
Your response to the enclosure is requested within 45 days of receipt of this letter.
If you have questions regarding the enclosure or are unable to meet the requested response
- date, please call me at (301) 415-3049, or e-mail me at dsh8nrc.go'v.
Sincerely, g+gl~
Darl S.
Hood, Senior Project Manager Project Directorate I-1 Division of Reactor Projects - I/II Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Docket No. 50-220
Enclosure:
Request for Additional Information cc w/encl:
See next page
I
B. Ralph Sylvia Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation Nine Mile Point Nuclear Station Unit No.
1 CC:
Mr. Richard B. Abbott Vice President and General Manager-Nuclear Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation Nine Mile Point Nuclear Station P.O.
Box 63
- Lycoming, NY 13093 Mr. Hartin J.
McCormick, Jr.
Vice President Nuclear Safety Assessment and Support Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation Nine Mile Point Nuclear Station P.O.
Box 63
- Lycoming, NY 13093 Ms. Denise J. Wolniak Manager Licensing Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation Nine Mile Point Nuclear Station P.O.
Box 63
- Lycoming, NY 13093 Hr. Kim A. Dahlbe} g General Manager Projects Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation Nine Hile Point Nuclear Station P.O.
Box 63
- Lycoming, NY 13093 Hr. Norman L. Rademacher Plant Manager, Unit 1
Nine Mile Point Nuclear Station P.O.
Box 63
- Lycoming, NY 13093
~ Regional Administrator, Region I U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 475 Allendale Road King of Prussia, PA 19406 Resident Inspector U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission P.O.
Box 126
- Lycoming, NY 13093 Charles Donaldson, Esquire Assistant Attorney General New York Department of Law 120 Broadway New York, NY 10271 Mr. Paul D.
Eddy State of New York Department of Public Service Power Division, System Operations 3 Empire State Plaza
- Albany, NY 12223
- Hr. F. William Valentino, President New York State
- Energy, Research, and Development Authority Corporate Plaza West 286 Washington Avenue Extension
- Albany, NY 12203-6399 Mark J. Wetterhahn, Esquire Winston 5 Strawn 1400 L Street, NW Washington, DC 20005-3502 Gary D. Wilson, Esquire Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation 300 Erie Boulevard West
- Syracuse, NY 13202 Supervisor Town of Scriba Route 8, Box 382
- Oswego, NY 13126
0 J
P;
~
~
Re uest or Additional Information Re ardin Verif'cation of Seismic Ade uac of Mechanical and lectr'cal E ui ment in 0 eratin Reacto s
'ne Mile Point Nuclear Station Unit No.
1 ocket
- o. 50-220 Provide the following additional information regarding your letter of March ll, 1996, forwarding summary reports associated with the Unresolved Safety Issue (USI) A-46 program for Nine Mile Point Nuclear Station Unit No. 1:
a ~
b.
Section 4.2, "Operations Department Review of SSEL," of the Seismic Evaluation Report states that:
NMP-1 Operations Department has reviewed the Safe Shutdown Equipment List (SSEL) necessary to meet USI A-46 requirements.
Comments made during the review process on shutdown systems and operating procedures credited with coping with a seismic event have been resolved and incorporated.
Operations agrees that the four.basic functions of reactivity control, pressure
- control, inventory control, and decay heat removal can be accomplished as described in this report.
Describe the process used by the Operations Department to review the SSEL and verify it was consistent with the A-46 requirements.
Discuss changes made (if any) to your normal,
- abnormal, and emergency operating procedures as a result of your review effort.
What, if any, simulator scenarios or walkdowns of local operator actions were performed to ensure that operators are able to place the plant in a safe shutdown condition following the postulated seismic event2 Describe the reviews that were performed to determine if any local operator actions required to safely shutdown the reactor could be affected by potentially adverse environmental conditions (such as loss of lighting, excessive heat or humidity, or in-plant barriers) resulting from the design basis earthquake (DBE).
Describe the reviews that were conducted to ensure that operators have adequate time and resources to 'respond to such events.
Section 10, "Third Party Audit Summary," of the Seismic Evaluation Report notes that a problem report was written to address the "tieing
'down of the control room ceiling tiles."
Has this problem been resolved2 If not, what is your current schedule for resolution?
Section 10 also indicated that the Control Room and Auxiliary Control Room panels are outliers.
It appears from Table 5-3, "Equipment Outlier Description and Resolution Summary," that these panels will be modified to provide more substantial anchorage.
Have these issues been resolved?
If not, what is your current schedule for resolution2 Enclosure
N 'o
c.
Section 2, "Summary of Results," of the Relay Evaluation Report for NHP-l, states in part:
22 contact or contact groups were screened on the basis that operator action could correct the adverse effects postulated due to seismic chatter.
The operator action disposition for these devices affects eight SSEL equipment items.
The operator actions and the timing for each were evaluated.
The actions required are considered reasonable because the operators are provided with indications of the status of the affected components, the controls necessary to reset operator actions is available.
Operator actions are noted to involve the control room chillers, the
, pilot control valves for the control room chillers, and the 24VDC battery chargers.
For each of these, describe the evaluations conducted to ensure that operator actions and timing of those actions are adequate to ensure safe shutdown of the plant.
Also for each, describe the status indications and controls necessary to reset the equipment and the approximate time available for the operators to reset the equipment following the postulated seismic event.
What training and exercises
, have been provided or planned to ensure that operators are capable of taking the required actions to reset this equipment within the available time7 d.
Describe the review conducted to ensure that adverse environmental conditions (such as loss of lighting, excessive heat or humidity) or in-plant barriers postulated to exist following the DBE would prevent the local operator actions required to reset the 24VDC battery chargers.
Are the -operator actions associated with resetting the SSEL equipment affected by the postulated contact chatter considered to be routine and consistent with the skill of the craft? If not,- what operator training and operational aids were developed to ensure the operators will perform the actions required to reset the affected equipment7 Discuss specific changes to current practices affecting safe operator performance to include training, simulator scenarios and equipment restrictions such as resetting equipment switches, as necessary.
~L