ML17340A177
| ML17340A177 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Turkey Point  |
| Issue date: | 08/18/1980 |
| From: | Novak T Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Robert E. Uhrig FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT CO. |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8009150429 | |
| Download: ML17340A177 (12) | |
Text
August 18, 1'980 Docket No@MD-2503 (and"50-25T Dr. Robert E. Uhrig, Vice President Advanced Systems and Technology
'lorida Power and Light Company Post Office Box 529100 Miami, Florida 33152
Dear Dr. Uhrig:
On November 9. 1979 you responded to our requests for additional information dated July 26 and August 8, 1979 related to the adequacy of station electric distribution system-voltages for the Turkey Point Plant Vnit Nos..
3 and 4.
On March 19, 1980 we had some d"'scussion with your staff regarding that submitt57-.
Enclosed is our formal request for additional information.
Please pro'vide this information within 30 days of the.i]ate of this letter.
Sincerely,
- ,A.A E~~Q Qg "f'aaestta. ~ Efg$95 Thomas M. Novak Assistant Director for Operating Reactors Divis4on of Licensing
Enclosure:
Request for Additional Information cc: w/enclosure See next page Distribution Docket File NRC PDR Local PDR ORB Reading NRR Reading D. Eisenhut R. Purple T.
Novak R. Tedescg, G. Lainas as0 08168+
J. Olshinski OELD OI8(E (3)
S.
Varga Marshal,l Grotenhuis C. Parrish-
~ TERA J.
Hel.temes I. Ahmed OFFICE SURNAME OATF$
DL:ORB MGrotenhu s
08//P/80
'OR 1
r a 0
/80 nova'"""
08// /80 50 NRC FORM 318 (9.76).NRCM 0240 AV.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OF(ICE( 1979.289.36/'
l~%
I Slat g 'I I
I t
I
'1 I,
p
~
ci',
'I f ~
'I 1-
~ o I
~ 'Sf ~
~
I It r
rf I
ii il 1
~
tl c,
I I t'
il II F,
It i-II P
n 1
I i '1 ~
~
~
r il 0i'l I
,I I I il I
i P
r I ttl I
~
'I
~ I I I
I
>I I
II 1
II I I hler I
]*,
I' I
I r<
Ii r
I,
R i' 0Cg C
(
Aj) ~ '/Pl c
lV Wv
()w IP UivfTED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMM(SSION WASHINGTON, O. C. 20555 August 18,, 1980 Docket Nos.
50-250 and 50-251 Dr. Robert -E. Uhrig, Vice President Advanced Systems and Technology Florida Power and Light Company Post Office Box 529100 Miami., Florida 33152
Dear Dr. Uhrig:
On November 9, 1979 you responded to our requests or additional information dat d July 26 and August 8, 1979 related to the adequacy of station electric distribution system voltages for the Turkey Point Plant Unit Nos.
3 and 4.
On March 19, 1980 we had some discussion with your staff regarding that submittal.
Enclosed is our formal request for additional information.
Please provide this information within 30 days of the date
'of this letter.
Sincerely, Thomas M. Novak Assistant Director for Operating Reactors Division of Licensing E clos ur Recues i i or Addi t1 onal information cc: w/enclosure See n xt page 800gg j0 g())
Robert'.
Uhrig Florida Power and Light Company August 18, 1.980 CC:
Nr. Robert Lowenstein, Esquire Lowenstein,
- Newaian, Reis, and Axelrad 1025.Connecticut
- Avenue, N.W.
Suite 1214 Washington, D.
C.
20036 Environmental and Urban Affairs Library Florida International University Miami, Florida 33199 Yr. Norman A. Coll, Esquire
- Steel, Hector and Davis 1400 Southeast First National Sank Suilding t'ai ami,
.F 1 or i da 331.31 Nr. Henry Yaeger, Plant Hanager Turk ey P oi nt P 1 ant Florida Power and Light Company P. 0.
Sox 013100 F>iami, Florida 33101 Yir. Jack Shreve Office of the Public Counsel Room 4, Holland Building Ta1 1ahassee, Fl ori da 32304 Administrator Department of E nvi ronmenta 1
Regu 1 at i on Power Plant Siting Section S:ate of Florida 2o00 Blair Stone Road Tallahassee, Florida 32301 P,esi dent Inspector Turkey Point Nucl ar Genera.ino Station U. S. !nuclear Regulatory Ccizai ss i on Pcs'. O,fice Sox 97; 277
i>
REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION TURKEY POINT UNITS 3 and 4
1.
Florida Power and Light Company letter (Robert E. Uhrig), dated November 9, 1979, to NRC (Hr. William Garrmill), states that "'...a design modification is in progress to add an undervoltage relay protection system to the-present loss -of voltage protection scheme."
The following requests and questions are relative to this design modi.fication.
A; Submit the proposal for the design modifi,cation.
B.
Show how this modification provides coincident logic.
C.
Whai are the voltage setpoints to initiate a voltage restoration scheme to protect Class lE equipment from a degraded voltage?
How was this setpoint derived?
D.
What is the time delay to be used with the voltage setpoinis?
How was this time delay derived?
E.
Show that the time delay, including margin, does not exceed the maximum time delay that is assumed in the FSAR accident analysis.
F.
Describe how IEEE Standard 279-1971 requirements are satisfied in the design of the undervol'iage proteciion scheme.
G.
Is the load shedding feature on,the Class lE buses to be retained when powered by onsite power?
If so, whai are ihe maximum and minimum limits?
(See second paragraph under position 2, oage 5,
Enclosure 1, of the June 2,
1977 NRC letter, copy at ached.)
2.
The NRC June 2,
1'977 leiter enclosed Yiodel Technical Specificaiion tables indicating the number of channels with operatir g moces, acijon statemenis, r i p values (vol iage and time), survei 1 lance requi remenis, anc tesi reouirements.
Please submit similar tables of proposed Technical Specification chanoes to cove, these points, and ihe desion modj ca ions for undervoltaoe protecilon.
(See Pos-':tion 3,
page 5, Enclosure 1, of ihe June 2,
1977 flRC ~etter,copy atiached).
i~
2)
Position 2:
Interaction of Onsite Power Sources with Load
'hed Feature Me require that the current system designs.automatically prevent load shedding of the emergency buses once the onsite sources are supplying power to all sequenced loads on the emergency buses.
The design. shall also include the, capability of the load shedding feature to be automatically reinstated if the onsi.te source supply breakers are tripped.
The automatic bypass and reinstatement'feature shall be verified during the periodic testing identified in Position 3.
In the event an adequate basis can be, provided for.retaining the load shed feature when loads are energized by the onsite power system, we will require that the se'tpoint value in the Technical Specifications, which is currently specified as "...equal to or greater than..."
be amended to specify a value'having maximum.and minimum l,imits.
The licensees'ases for the setpoints and limits selected must be documented.
GDC 17 requires that provisions be included to minimize the probability of losing electric power from any of the remaining supplies as a.result of or coincident with the loss of power generated
.by the nuclear power unit, the loss of power from the transmission network, or the loss of power from the onsite electric power supplies.
ii II
Attachment The functional safety requirement of the "loss-of-offsite power monitors" is to detect the loss of voltage on the offsite (preferred) power system and to initiate the necessary actions required to trans-fer the safety-related buses to the onsite system.
The load shedding
- feature, which is required to function prior to connecting the onsite power sources to their respective buses can adversely interact with the onsite power sources if the load shedding feature is not bypassed after it has performed its required function.
The load shed feature shoul'd also'e reinstated to allow it'o perform its function if the onsite sources are interrupted and are subsequently required to be reconnected to their respective buses.
3)
Position 3:
Onsite Power Source Testin Me require that the Technical Specifications include a test requirement to demonstrate the full functional operability and independence of the onsite power sources at least once per 18 months during shutdown.
The Technical Specifications shall include a requirement for.tests:
(1) simulating loss of offsi.te power in conjunction with a safety injection actuation signal; and (2) simulating interruption'nd subsequent reconnection of onsite power sources.to their respective buses.
Proper operation shall
.be determined by:
a)
Verifying that on loss of offsite power the emergency buses have been de-energized and that the loads have been shed from the emergency buses in accordance with design requirements.
<Qi b)
Verifying that on loss of offsite power the diese'1 generators start from ambient condition on the autostart signal, the emergency buses are energized with permanently connected loads',
the auto-connected emergency loads are e'nergized through the load sequencer, and the system operates for five minutes while the generators are loaded with the emergency loads.
c)
Verifying that on interruption of the onsite sources the loads are shed from the emergency buses in accordance with design requirements and that subsequent loading of the onsite sources is through the load sequencer.
l GOC 17 requires that provisions be included to minimize the probability of losing electric power from any one of the remaining supplies as a
result of or coincident with the loss of power generated by the reactor power unit, the loss of power generated by the nuclear power unit, the loss of power from the transmission network, or the loss of power from the onsite electric power suppl.ies.
The testing requirements identified'n Position 3 will demonstrate
=the capability of the onsite power system to perform its required function.
The tests wi.ll also identi,y undesirable interaction between the offsite and onsite emergency power systems.