ML19261D583
| ML19261D583 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Zimmer |
| Issue date: | 05/07/1979 |
| From: | Barth C NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE LEGAL DIRECTOR (OELD) |
| To: | |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 7906190568 | |
| Download: ML19261D583 (5) | |
Text
,
C PUBLIC DOCmIENT ROOM UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
,;8
- NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION f
f.*
BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD s.
e In the Matter of
)
k'~;;,
., f.
)
CINCINNATI GAS AND ELECTRIC
)
Docket No. 50-358 COMPANY, et al.
)
)
(Wm. H. Zimmer Nuclear Power
)
Station, Unit No.1)
)
NRC STAFF OPPOSITION TO MIAMI VALLEY POWER PROJECT'S MOTION TO ADMIT A NEW CONTENTION RELATING TO FIVE BARRIERS ON ELECTRIC CABLE TRAYS t
The Staff opposes the motion dated April 30, 1979 of Miami Valley Power Project (MVPP) to admit a further contention relating to fire barrier material on trays carrying electric cables on the bases (1) that the l
contention is irrelevant to this proceeding in that it relates to a fire protection method which will not be employed at the Zimmer facility; and (2) that the motion fails to confonn to the requirements of 10 CFR s2.714(a)(1).
Intervenor's contention concerning fire barriers is premised on the use of a material known as "koawool." As demonstrated by the attached letter, the Staff on April 19, 1979 wrote the Applicant turning down their proposal to wrap certain trays in kaowool, see letter of John F. Stolz attached, on the basis of the very Underwriters Laboratory tests referenced by the Intervenor. The Applicant has now committed to accept the Staff position, i.e., that the cable bus will be protected by an enclosure which will 2308 135 7906190 % 8 G
_2_
provide a structural barrier to separate the cable bus from the fork-lift truck route. Thus, the alleged failure of kaowool has no bearing on the design, construction or safety of the Zirmier facility.
Further,10 CFR 92.714 requires, for late contentions, that five matters be addressed, which are:
(i) good cause (ii) availability of other means whereby petitioner's interest will be protected (iii) the extent to which petitioner's participation may reasonably be expected to assist in developing a sound record (iv) the extent to which petitioner's interest will be represented by existing parties, and (v) the extent to which the petitioner's participation will broaden the issues or delay the proceeding The regulation requires a balancing of all of the above specified factors.
MVPP addresses only (i) good cause based on alleging that the U.L.
Laboratories test of koawool was a failure in that it provided inadequate protection from fire and became known to MVPP only after March 1,1979 (two months ago) when the U.L. test results were made public, (ii) that there are no other means by which their interests will be protected and (iii) that no other party could protect their interest.
It is of importance to an orderly administ'rative process that the factors not addressed by MVPP be addressed by petitioners, i.e., hou MVPP could assist in develc;:in';
2308 136
. a sound record and whether admission of their contention would broaden the issues. Mr. Hofstandter, who conveyed the alleged failed-test infor-mation to MVPP, is a millright by profession and MVPP offers no other person who has any expertise in fire barrier protection. MVPP has failed to show how their participation could lead to development of a sound record and, of course, admission of the contention would broaden the issues.
For these reasons the motion to add a contention dealing with koawool insulation of cables should be denied.
Respectfully submitted, Charles A. Barth Counsel for NRC Staff Dated at Bethesda, Maryland this 7th day of May,1979 2308 137
_ w e
o.
ATTACHMENT D"fD "D
1 lk
,b.$
_ad o
APR 19 I979 i
Docket No. 50-358
~
I j
Mr. Earl A. Borgmann Vice President - Engineering The Cincinnati Gas and Electric Comoany P. O. Box 960 Cincinnati, Ohio 45201 l
Dear Mr. Borgmann:
SUBJECT:
FIRE PROTECTION (Wm. H. Zimmer Nuclear Pcwer Station, Unit 1)
The staff is about to conclude its fire protection review for the Wm. H. Zimcer Nuclear Power Station, Unit 1, however, we have a general concern because redundant electrical divisions are in the same fire areas and, therefore, are subject to an identical fire exoosure.
You have recognized this concern and have agreed to providing fire rated barriers for certain cable divisions.
In the case of the division l switchgear area and other similar areas the fire rating should be 1.5 hours5.787037e-5 days <br />0.00139 hours <br />8.267196e-6 weeks <br />1.9025e-6 months <br /> because of the absence of autenatic sprinkler systens. The fork lift truck rcute area requires cnly a 1 hour1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br /> rating because it has autem.atic sprinklers.
'!e have recuested that the fire rating cf any fire barriers be verified by fire tests that generally conform to the philosechy of ASTM E-il9 or meet UL/R4 listings. To date we have accepted 3 and
'.4 test data to substantiate a 1 hour1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br /> rating availability with the Kacwcol oroduct enclosing cable trays. We do not believe that any test recort to date, submitted by ycu, supports a 1.5 hour5.787037e-5 days <br />0.00139 hours <br />8.267196e-6 weeks <br />1.9025e-6 months <br /> fire rating for the Kaovicol fire barrier.
The special problem of amcacity encountered in the fork lift truck route area has created the nt:essity for the 1 hour1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br /> barrier to be rodified so that a 1 inch gao exists at the top. We cannot accept any gaos in a fire rated barrier.
2308 138
Apa 19 1979 Mr. Earl A. Borgnann In sumary, a problem exists incsr.uch as fire rated barriers are required for certain cable trays. These recuired fire ratings have not yet been verified to the satisfaction of the staff by fire tests.
This probice needs to be resolved prior to issuance of an operating license.
This matter has been discussed extensively with ycur people.
If you have questions about our position or this matter in ger,aral, please contact us.
Sincerely, prisinst sis;ned by hhn F. stolz John F. Stolz, Chief Light Water Reactors Branch No.1 l
Division of Project Management l
1 eo o
g g
g q
. J1 \\n n
cc w
e e
4 e
i 2308 139 4
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR liGULATORY COMMISSION
~BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD In the Matter of CINCINNATI GAS AND ELECTRIC
)
Docket No. 50-358 COMPANY, et al.
(Wm. H. Zimmer Nuclear Power
)
Station, Unit No.1)
)
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE l
t I hereby certify that copies of "NRC STAFF OPPOSITION TO MIAMI VALLEY POWER PROJECT'S MOTION TO ADMIT A NEW CONTENTION RELATING TO FIVE BARRIERS ON ELECTRIC CABLE TRAYS" in the above-captioned proceeding have been served on the following by deposit in the United States mail, first class, or, as indicated by an asterisk, through deposit in the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's internal mail system, this 7th day of May, 1979:
Charles Bechhoefer, Esq., Chainnan*
Leah S. Kosik, Esq.
Atomic Safety and Licensing 3454 Cornell Place Board Panel Cincinnati, Ohio 45220 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission t
Washington, D.C.
20555 W. Peter Heile, Esg.
Assistant City Solicitor Dr. Frank F. Hooper Room 214, City Hall School of Natural Resources Cincinnati, Ohio 45220 University of Michigan Ann Arbor, Michigan 48109 Timothy S. Hogan, Jr., Chairman Board of Cormissioners Mr. Glenn 0. Bright
- 50 Market Street Atomic Safety and Licensing Clermont County Board Panel Batavia, Ohio 45103 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.
20555 John D. Woliver, Esq.
Clermont County Comunity Council Troy B. Conner, Esq.
Box 181 Conner, Moore and Corber Batavia, Ohio 45103 1747 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C.
20006 2308 140 m-D '9 wh 2J
_ 7705290572-&
. William J. floran, Esq.
Atomic Safety and Licensing General Counsel Aopeal Board
- Cincinnati Gas & Electric C ripany U.S. fluclear Regulatory Comission P.O. Box 960 Washington, D. C.
20555 Cincinnati, Ohio 45201 Docketing and Service Section*
Atomic Safety and Licensing Office of the Secretary Board Panel
- U.S. t!uclear Regulatory Comission U.S. fluclear Regulatory Comission Washington, D. C.
20555 Washington, D. C.
20555
/
L$lst?tWA Charles A. Barth l
Counsel for itRC Staff 2308 141
.- _.