ML19259C586

Forwards Responses to NRC Request for Supplementary Info to Proposed OL Amend Re Fire Protection Program.Oversized Drawing Encl

ML19259C586
Person / Time
Site:	Pilgrim
Issue date:	07/06/1979
From:	Corry A BOSTON EDISON CO.
To:	Ippolito T Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
79-130, NUDOCS 7907160304
Download: ML19259C586 (9)

Text

BOSTON EDIGON COMPANY B00 DDYLSTON STREET BOSTON. MASSACHUSETTS O2199 ANDREW F. CoRRY

.. .. .... ......... July 6, 1979 BECo . Ltr. #79- 130 Mr. Thomas A. Ippolito, Chief Operating Reactors Branch #3 Division of Operating Reactors Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D. C. 20555 License No. DPR-35 Docket No. 50-293 Conference Call Review and Supplementary Information to Proposed Amendment to Operating License (Fire Protection)

References:

(a) Telephone conversation between NRC and BECo Staff involved in Pilgrim Station's Fire Protection Program, on May 4, 1979.

(b) BECo Letter #79-36 to NRC dated February 5, 1979, titled, " Supplementary Information to Fire Pro-tection Technical Specification Requirements."

(c) BECo Letter #79-61 to NRC dated March 30, 1979, titled, " Supplementary Information to Proposed Amendment to Operating License (Fire Protection)."

(d) BECo Letter #79-58 to NRC dated March 14, 1979, titled,

" Design Details for Three Modifications per Fire Pro-tection Amendment No. 35."

(e) BECo Letter #79-34 to NRC dated February 5,1979, titled,

" Amendment to Operating License No. DPR-35."

Dear Sir:

In Reference (a), members of your staff involved in the review of Pilgrim Station's Fire Protection Program, requested further information pertaining to our previous suomittals as referenced above. Also requested, was that the information as related in the Reference (a) telephone conversation be formally submitted in a letter as a supplement to our prior License Amendment request.

(Reference (c) and (e)).

2100 244 7907160 3 % {

BOSTON EDISON COMPANY Mr. Thomas A. Ippolito, Chief Page 2 of 2 July 6, 1979 Therefore, the iteu; relating to Reference (c) are offered as supplementary information to our February 5, (Reference e) amendment proposal and should he considered as part of that License Amendment request.

If you should have any further questions on this subject, please do not hesitate to contact us.

Very truly yours,

/

W

/

J

1sd attachments Commonwealth of Massachusetts)

County of Suffolk )

Then persr.nally appeared before me Andrew F. Corry, who, being duly sworn, did state that he is Senior Vice President of Boston Edison Company the applicant herein, and that he is duly authorized to execute and file the submittal contained herein in the name and on behalf of Boston Edison Company and that the statements in said submittal are true to the best of his know-ledge and belief. 7 . . -'; D f v//

My Commission expires: #$( n/< c g 4 e (:L t,a a . _'. , ' , ,, y

'JC Notary Public [ I'*

2100 245

1. Item 3.1.14 Exposed Steel Protection (Ref. D&C)

NRC Concern: Please provide the results to date on the types of testing and materials being tested for coating.

BECo Response: Steel beam coating at Pilgrim #1 will consist of either a cementious mixture or a mastic type coating material, with the final design for either type to meet a national testing laboratory approved design. Of the nationally recognized coating material manufacturers contacted to date, none has indicated a willingness to provide testing for steel beams with attachments such as clamps for pipe and tray supports. It is the industry belief (and ours) that the heat transfer at the area ex-posed by the attachments is insignificant when compared to the mass of the beam.

The columns are generally tested in two sizes, 14X228 and 10X49 (representative of columns used in the design of tall buildings). Tests for coating thickness have been performed by the coating manufacturer on the 14X228 column size, and accordingly, coating thickness will be ad-justed for the testing of smaller column sizes.

NRC Concern: Identify the columns on previously submitted drawings C-134 and C-300, that are intended to be coated and identify those that are not.

BECo Response: In reference to drawing C-134, we plan to coat the area bounded by P. 1/13- P.1/17.1; C.9/13-G.9/9 for the West Side. The areas separated by walls bounded by column line J/9 to 13 - G.9/9 will not be coated. The open area bounded by P.1/9 to 13-M.5/9 to 13 will be evaluated for possible coating. The beam sizes within these bounded areas are marked on drawing C-134 as previously submitted.

Also all columns within the designated areas will be coated with the exception of those columns which are im-bedded in concrete.

In reference to drawing C-300, we plan to coat the struct-ural steel bounded by column lines E/16-E/20, C/16-C/20.

Columns imbedded in concrete, exposed flanges of columns imbedded in concrete, base plates, anchor clips, stair risers and ladder supports will be excluded.

Turbine building column schedule drawing C-298 (attached) shows columns planned for coating in that area.

NRC Concern: Reasons for implementation date delay.

BECo Response: The delay from the implementation date of 3-1-80 to 7-1-80 is requested for the following reasons:

2100 246

(a) Due to the lack of physical accessibility to a number of beams and columns in areas of the plant such as the cable spreading room and switchgear room B, the vendors and manufacturers of the coating materials cannot provide a projected time-duration for coating.

(b) In certain areas, both beam and existing PVC cables require coating. To avoid repetition of preliminary work common to both, a single vendor is being sought to incorporate the two jobs into one.

(c) Pilgrim Station is currently scheduled for a refueling outage coamencing in January 1980, which will interrupt the ongoing beam coating already in process at that time.

2. Item 3.2.3 Battery Room Ventilation Air Flow Monitor (Ref. D.)

NRC Concern: Will the air flow monitor circuits be supervised in any way to assure their availability when needed.

BECo Response: Yes, the air flow monitor circuits will normally be energized. Any event that deenergizes this circuit will result in an alarm transmitted to the control room as

" Trouble Panel C-60" (the local control panel).

NRC Concern: Will there be an alarm annunciated in the control room if both fans are shut off? Also,is the power for the alarm circuit independent of power for the fan circuits?

If not, why not?

BECo Response: Manually placing the selector switch in the "Off" pos-ition shuts off both fans, and thereby blocks the trouble alarms. In turn this condition initiates a " Loss of Flow" Alarm in the control room.

If power to both fans is lost, an alarm will annunciate in the control room as " Trouble Panel C-60", while panel C-60 itself will show indication that the control switches are in the "Off" position.

Power for the alarm circuit is independent of power for the fan circuit. Also the power for the fan circuit is fed from safety related panels whereas power for the alarm circuit is not.

NRC Concern: Are both switches normally in the " Standby" position?

If a fan switch is in the "Off" position does it indicate as such?

BECO Response: Normally, one switch is in "Run", with the other in

" Standby". If a switch is placed in the "Off" position, indication is received in the control room as a " Loss of Flow Alarm".

2100 247 2.

NRC Concern: What is the smallest design ventilation rate (resulting from modification of the inlet vane to exhaust fans) which would not result in a loss of flow alarm sufficient to mainta'n the hydrogen concentration in both-battery rooms below 2% by volume?

BECo Reponse: The alarm set point for the air flow in both battery rooms is 75% of normal flow,in that a 25% reduction in flow would trigger a " Loss of Flow" alarm in the control room.

Also, any flow rate above 1 CFM is sufficient to maintain the hydrogen concentration below 2% by volume.

3. Item 3.2.6 Suppression of Charcoal Fire in Augmented Off-Gas System (Ref. b)

NRC Concern: What assumptions were used in your previously submitted dose calculation from a postulated charcoal fire and what was the corresponding thyroid dose?

BECo Response: The following inputs, assumptions and conclusions were used in our dose calculations.

Whole Body Dose Inputs Noble gas steam activity -

Four times the design activity in PNPS source term. Appendix I calculated base case.

Steam Flow Rate from - 8X106 Lb Steam /HR, with all contained reactor vessel noble gas activity directed to charcoal delay system.

Charcoal delay system -

Xenon = 240 days holdup time Krypton = 160 hours0.00185 days <br />0.0444 hours <br />2.645503e-4 weeks <br />6.088e-5 months <br /> Charcoal bed activity for - Xenon 133 = 8000 curies important isotopes Assumptions (1) All charcoal bed activity released to atmosphere instantaneously at accident start.

(2) Dose conversion technique per Regulatory Guide 1.3 (3) X/Q at the exclusion area boundary for 0 to 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br /> is 5X10-4 sec/m3 (based on site data)

Calculation Results Beta skin dose = less than 0.5 Rem Gamma whole body dose = less than 0.5 Rem 2100 248 3.

Th"roid Dose Inputs Source term basis -

PNPS Appendix I submittal iodine coolant activity base case values scaled up to yield a total iodine coolant activity of 20 micro curies / gram Liquid to steam - .02 (per PNPS Appendix I submittal) partition factor Assumptions (1) Iodine washout (decontamination factor) to charcoal delay beds = 2,000 (2) All iodine retained by charcoal beds (3) Bed activity for important isotopes (Iodine 131-9.4 curies)

(4) All activity released to atmosphere Conclusion Thyroid dose less than 3 Rem

4. Item 3.1.2 Water Suppression Systems and Equipment (P.cf. c)

NRC Concern: Please provide a status to date.

BECo Response: The specifications for sprinkler system installation (new/ additional) have been prepared and issued to the vendors for detail design cycle. Upon reevaluation of our implementation planning schediile for sprintler systems design, procurement and installation, it was determined that this entire task could be completed by March 31, 1980 (original proposed date was 6/1/80)

Interior hoses, gated hydrants (outside) and nozzles with thread compatability to that of the local Fire Department have been ordered and will be installed by 11/1/79. In the interim, four hose adapters will be in use.

All fire system valves will be secured with tamper proof seals by 11/1/79, with the exception of five valves locrted in the Condenser Bay which will be placed in the " locked open" position during our January 1980 refueling outage.

5. Item 3.1.3 Gas Fire Suppression System (Ref. c) 2100 249 NRC Concern: Please provide a status on the proposed "Halon" system.

BECo Response: A vendor has been selected for the design procurement and installation of a Halon 1301 system for the computer /

storage room. We are currently reviewing the detail design and plan to have the system installed and tested by 8/1/79.

6. Item 3.1.4 Ventilation System (Ref. c)

NRC Concern: Please provide a status to date.

BECo Response: We have completed this task as of May 31, 1979. A smoke venting access door was installed for s.noke re-moval in the existing turbine building duct system.

7. Item 3.1.7 Fire Doors (Ref. c)

NRC Concern: Please provide a status to date.

BECo Response: The following six fire door assemblies have been up-graded to 3 HR fire rating: #'s 88,93,145,147,150 and 159.

The remaining twelve door assemblies vary in their design constraints and procurement is forthcoming.

Our schedule for completion of installation remains at 11/1/79.

8. Item 3.1.18 Alternate Shutdown Capability (Ref. c)

NRC Concern: Since the majority of this task can only be performed during an outage, what are your plans for completion?

BECo Response: The major part of the conceptual design has been com-pleted and will be submitted for Commission review and approval no later than August 1, 1979. Our detailed design will commence immediately upon receipt of approval by the Commission. Since our refueling outage is scheduled for January 1980, this task will be performed at that time.

9. Item 3.1.19 Penetrations Seals (Ref. c)

NRC Concern: Please provide a description of the testing program and the schedule for test results.

BECo Response: Using penetration designs submitted by Boston Edison Company, the Franklin Institute Research Lab (Philadelphia, Penn.) is currently performing our testing at the Portland Cement Facility, located at Skokie, Illinois.

Testing to date, in accordance with Table 3.1 of the SER supporting Amendment No. 35(and BECo proposed Amended Table A. Ref. (C)) has consisted of utilizing six different penetration designs (typical of electrical penetrations installed at Pilgrim) ranging from a minimum to a maximum percent fill, and subjecting them to fire testing of 3 hour3.472222e-5 days <br />8.333333e-4 hours <br />4.960317e-6 weeks <br />1.1415e-6 months <br /> duration using IEEE 634 and ASTM E-19 time-temperature pro =

files. Thermocouples were used to monitor hot and cold temperatures.At the end of the fire test, the penetrations were subjected to a hose stream test in accordance with IEEE 2100 250 5.

All the penetrations met the following acceptance criteria.

(1) No passage of flame through any of the penetrations.

(2) No flaming or unexposed surface.

(3) No opening as a result of the hose stream testing.

Further testing (to be completed by 8/1/79) is planned on the remaining types of penetrations installed at Pil-grim, i.e.: cable trays and process piping penetrations through walls or floors. A summary of planned testing will be forwarded to the Commission for information prior to any actual testing. Our schedule for completion of modifications remains at 6/1/80.

10. Item 3.1.16 Self-Contained Breathing Apparatus (Ref. b)

NRC Concern: Please provide more information on this item relative to your letter dated February 5, 1979, with particular emphasis on the difference between the two breathing air systems.

BECo Response: Pilgrim Station has at present, two independent breathing air systems in operation.

(1) An air cascade filling system located in the Warehouse used for filling Scott Air Paks.

This cascade system has design capacity to fill sixteen air bottles from the tank reservoir without running the compressor (of the size used on the 4.5 Scott Air Paks).

When used in conjunction with the air compressor, the filling capacity is essentially unlimited. This system is also utilized to fill the bottles of system (2)below.

(2) An air manifold system stated and used in the control room.

The design details of this system were previously trans-mitted to the Commission in our February 5, 1979 letter (Reference B). This system is used exclusively by Con-trol Room personnel and can support three men for 7.91 hours0.00105 days <br />0.0253 hours <br />1.50463e-4 weeks <br />3.46255e-5 months <br />.

210. 251 6.