ML19323C634

Forwards Environ Qualification of Electrical Equipment

ML19323C634
Person / Time
Site:	Oyster Creek
Issue date:	05/07/1980
From:	Finfrock I JERSEY CENTRAL POWER & LIGHT CO.
To:	Crutchfield D Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Shared Package
ML19323C635	List: ML19323C634 ML19323C636
References
TASK-03-12, TASK-RR NUDOCS 8005160419
Download: ML19323C634 (2)

Text

8 8005160) th \\ F Jersey Central Power & Light Company h__

j Madison Avenue at Punch Bowl Road C 3>J f-f_'...k,c b"

Momstown New Jersey 07960 L

(201)455-8200 Mr. Dennis M. Crutchfield, Chief CGerating Reactors Branch #5 Division of Operating Reactors United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission 7920 Norfolk Avenue Bethesda, Maryland 20555

Subject:

Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station Docket No. 50-219 Environmental Qualification of Electrical Equipaent During our meetings (March 10-13, 1980) with the NRC staff at Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station'concerning the above subject, the Plant Emergency Procedures were reviewed and a list of safety related systems essential to mitigate postulated accidents and safely shutting down the plant was generated.

Subsequently, JCP&L developed a list of components in these systems. The letter dated March 28, 1980 from D.L. Ziemann (Chief, Operating Reactors Branch

52) to 1.

R. Finfrock, Jr. requested a list of systems to mitigate the postulated events. Tne system / component list and and environmental profile for each piece of equignent are enclosed as attachments to this letter.

Please note that the attached component list does not includes those pieces of equipment inside containment.

i list of these components were transmitted to the NRC in our letter dated December 19, 1978.

The summary of the analysis to define environmental conditions is given in Attachment 1.

The results of the analyses are shown in Table 1 ( Attachment 2).

Integrated radiation exposure inside containment is still being evaluated. Tenperature profiles for each component are provided in Table 2 and Figure 1 through 18 (Attachment 3). Although not shown on Table 1, a conservative assumption of 100% relative humidity was used in the analysis.

The only chemice.1 spray used at Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station is sodium dichromate solution in the containment spray system. An evaluation by GPU System Laboratory concluded that this solution causes no detrimental effect as identified in Attachment 4.

We are continuing to pursue qualification documentation evidence through in-house analyses, direct vendor contact, NSSS contact and contacts with other utilities having similar equipment. To date there is no evidence to show any safety related equignent will fail under the anticipated accident environment.

gVy THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS P00R QUAUTY PAGES Jeuev Cen:ra! Power & Urt Comcany is a Memrer of the Genera' PJe Uti!: ties Sys:em

We will submit by Septe::d>er,1980 the list of electrical equipment as required by this program with either references to m-Aification reports, tecnnical justification for continued use of existing..;mponents using plant specific conditions, probabilistic considerations and more realistic ass =ptions, or a schedule of testing and/or replacing.

Parts of Table 1 in were developed using the NRC's guidance document NUPIG-0578.

Recognizing this represents generic guidelines enveloping worst case conditions which include conservative assumptions, plant specific analyses will be developed, where required, to demonstrate acceptability of components. to the aforementioned March 28, 1980 letter also requested data necessary for the staff calculation of containment temperature and pressure decay time. The data is provided in Attachment 5.

In view of redundant containment spray systems available at Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station, we believe that using 340 F for 6 hours6.944444e-5 days <br />0.00167 hours <br />9.920635e-6 weeks <br />2.283e-6 months <br /> as the basis for judging whether individual component qualifications meet the guidelines is overly conservative.

We are in the process of performing a plant specific analysis of the main steam line break to define the representative temperature profile for Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station.

It is anticipated that the results of this analysis will be available by the end of June, 1980. Therefore, the information necessary for staff review of plant specific containment analyses (Enclosure 3 to the March 28, 1980 letter) will be provided at that time.

Very truly yours, Y$M Ivan R. Finf" ck, or.

Vice President Sworn and subscribed to before me this

'.e-day of

, 1980.

Notary Public

:-. r.

Ca Q -

c..

.,;,1., Wak