ML19294A462
| ML19294A462 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Seabrook  |
| Issue date: | 11/02/1978 |
| From: | Moon C Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 7811130236 | |
| Download: ML19294A462 (7) | |
Text
1, MEETIi1G SU"JtARY 5:0V 2 1978 Local POR TIC flRR Reading LWR #4 File E. Case R. Boyd R. DeYoung D. Vassallo J. Stolz K. Kniel
- 0. Parr S. Varga L. Crocker D. Crutchfield F. Willians R. Mattson H. Denton D. Muller Froject Manager: C. Moon Attorney, ELD M. Service IE (3)
ACRS (16)
L. Drcher
- 5. Rubenstein tiRC
Participants:
R.
Fitzpatrick F.
Rosa H. Balukj ian H.
Daniels B. Stright 7 81113 0 A3 /f
/(tb* * * %q'o UNITED S TATES
[g,i NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
, %]4 y NASH;NCTCN O. C. 20005 hi'~r%f;f
's,
~
NOV 2 1978 Docket Nos:
50-443 50-444 FACILITY:
Seabrook Station Units 1 and 2 APPLICANT: Public Service Company of New Hampshire
SUBJECT:
SUMMARY
OF MEETING HELD ON OCTOBER 17, 1978 TO DISCUSS PHYSICAL INDEPENDENCE OF ELECTRICAL SYSTEMS Representatives of Public Service Company of New Hampshire (Lead applicant) met with members of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff in Bethesda, Maryland on October 17, 1978 t
to describe the implementation of criteria for physical independence of electrical systems in the design of Seabrook Station, Units 1 and 2.
The criteria reviewed and found acceptable by the staff during the construction permit revime were included in the Prelininary Safety Analysis Report PSAR as Appendix A S.15 to Answer 8.15, Supplemental Information, page S8.28.
Appendix A 8.15 is the same as Attachment C to Question 8.15 " Physical Independence of Electric Systems," provided as criteria acceptable to the staff for implementing the separation requirenents of IEEE Std 279-1971, IEEE Std 308-1971, and General Design Criteria 17 and 21.
Attachment C corresponds to Regulatory Guide 1.75,
" Physical Independence of Electric Systems," February, 1974.
An attendance list is enclosed.
Significant points discussed during the meeting are summarized below:
1.
Station Arrangement The Seabrook Station uses the " slide along" arrangement wherein the arrangement within the second unit is identical to the arrangement within the first unit and the orientation is the same, i.e. the plan on a station drawing for Unit 2 looks like the plan for Unit 1 except for being moved to one side.
There are no electrical connections between units.
Each unit is served by four auxiliary transformers which feed two circuits to each of two safety buses.
. NOV 2 197d Each unit is provided with two diesel generators.
The capacity of each diesel generator is equal to approximately 110 percent of the sum the required engineered safety loads and additional non-safety related loads.
The diesel generators are of a new size and will be subjected to prototype start reliability testing.
Each unit will be provided with four batteries with a total capacity equal to twice the capacity required for normal operation.
The seismic Category I cooling tower structure and the seismic Category I service water intake structure are each shared by the two units.
However, pumps and fans are not shared between units and there is no electrical connection between the two units within either of these structures.
t 2.
Circuit Types and Separation Groups The applicant has identified five basic circuit types as follows:
Train A Load and Channel I Instrumentation (Class 1E)
Train B Load and Channel II Instrumentation (Class 1E)
Channel III Instrumentation (Class 1E)
Channel IV Instrumentation (Class 1E)
Non-Safety Related Loads and Instrumentation Circuits (Non Class 1E)
The five basic circuit types have been placed into the following four separation groups:
A.
Channel I, Train A, Associated Circuits, and all remaining non Class 1E circuits 3.
Channel II, Train B, and Associated Circuits C.
Channel III D.
Channel IV The applicant has classified all balance of plant non-Class 1E circuits as associated circuits and grouped them into Separation group A.
This meets the NRC cable f
.. N0y p 1379 separation requirements in a manner that allows the applicant to design the plant with one less separation group.
Other than the non-Class 1E circuits discussed above, Separation groups A and B are compri:ed of redundant load groups.
The one other difference-being that the Group B associated circuits (i.e.
those powered from the B train emergency busses) are automatically tripped upon an accident signal whereas the Group A associated circuits are not.
All circuits are designed to Class 1E standards and will be distiaguished from the Class 1E circuits in the following way.
Color striping of black cable will be used to associate cable for non-Class lE loads with cabling of the same solid color for Class 1E loads.
3.
Physical Separation The applicant showed numerous examples of physical separation.
The applicant will utilize three-hour barriers and spatial separation of five or more feet vertically and three or more feet horizontally.
Within containment a vertical barrier is provided by a floor with one train abeve and one train below.
The staff reminded the applicant that analyses of exposure fires should be provided when only spatial separation is provided.
4 Remote Shutdown Panels One remote shutdown panel will be provided for each of the A and B trains.
The staff inquired about potential communication difficulties with separated stations.
The applicant indicated that separated stations had been found acceptable by the staff and the Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards during the review of the New England Units 1 and 2 replication application.
5.
Summary The staff indicated general concurrence with the applicant's approach to implementation of its criteria for physical independence of electrical systems.
The staff indicated
I
. NCV 2 1979 some interest in whether it might be desirable to trip A train associated loads on an accident signal.
The applicant already proposes to trip B associated loads on an accident signal.
The applicant plans to submit a Final Safety Analysis Report about mid-1980.
The staff noted that areas in which sufficient information has not been provided in other FSARs tendered recently include (1) effects of degraded grid voltage, (2) electric penetrations in containment (Regulatory Guide 1.63), and (3) environ-mental qualification of equipment.
The staff noted and thanked the applicant for a presentation that was unusually well organized and effective in communicating significant information to the staff in a short time period.
Copies of illustrations used in the presentation were provided for each NRC participant.
0 cab ~Gf ')?Lw Calvin N. Moon, Project Manager Light Water Reactors Branch No. 4 Division of Proj ect Management
Enclosure:
As stated cc:
See next page
t f,0V 2 1979 Public Service Conpany of New Hampshire ccs:
Jchn A. Ritscher, Esq.
Ropes and Gray 225 Franklin Street Boston, Massachusetts 02110 Ralph H. Wood, Esq.
General Counsel
~
Public Service Company of New Hampshire 1000 Elm Street Manchester, New Hampshire 03105 Mr. John Haseltine, Project Manager Yankee Atomic Electric Company 20 Turnpike Road Westboro, Massachusetts 01581 i
Mr. Bruce B. Beckley, Project Manager Public Service Company of New Hampshire 1000 Elm Street Manchester, New Hampshire 03105 Robert A. Backus, Esq.
O'Neill, Backus, Spielman a Little 116 Lowell Street Manchester, New Hampshire 03105 Norman Ross, Esq.
30 Francis Street Brookline, Massachusetts 02146 Karin P. Sheldon, Esq.
Sheldon, Harmon and Roisman 1025 15th Street, N. W.
Washington, D. C. 20005 Laurie Burt, Esq.
Office of the Assistant Attorney General Environmental Protection Division One Ashburton Place Boston, Massachusetts 02111 Str. W. C. Tallman, President Public Service Company of New Hampshire 1000 Elm Street
>bnchester, New Hampshire 03105 I
NOV 2 1978 ATTENDANCE LIST C. Stoon NRC R. Fitzpatrick NRC F. Rosa NRC H. Balukjian NRC H. Daniels NRC D. Staidrand Yankee Atomic J. Haseltine Yankee Atomic G. Tsouderos Yankee Atomic R. SicCoy Yankee Atomic F. Baxter Yankee Atomic G. Cole United Engineers E. Rothong United Engineers W. Robinson United Engineers G. Aggarwall United Engineers I. Benks United Engineers I