ML19329B315
| ML19329B315 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Davis Besse  |
| Issue date: | 11/16/1976 |
| From: | Stolz J Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Roe L TOLEDO EDISON CO. |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8002040741 | |
| Download: ML19329B315 (11) | |
Text
)
'3,
Distributia -
O %
Docket File R. H. Vollner 0
flRC PDR M. L. Ernst wE NOV 16 1978.ocal PDR W. P. Gammill L
g-LWR 1 File ELD r
a D
D. B. Vassallo ACRS (16)
I
~ h i
4 F. J. Williams 4
J. Stolz
~
>~
L. Engle Docket fio. S0-346., _ "
E. Hylton R. Heineman D. Ross Toledo Edison Company J. Knight, SS ATTN: !!r. Lowell E. Roe R. Tedesco Vice President, Facilities H. Denton Development V. A. Moore Edison Plaza 300 Madison Avenue bcc:
J. R. Buchanan, NSIC Toledo, Ohio 43652 T. B. Abernathy, TIC Gent.1emen:
SUMMARY
OF ELECTRICAL SITE VISIT AT THE DAVIS BESSE IlUCLEAR POWER STATIG4, UNIT 1 ON OCTOBER 6, 7 AND G, 1976 This letter and the Enclosure thereto, sumarizes our site visit to Davis Besse Unit 1 (08-1). The purpose of our site visit was to assure that the installation of safety related electrical systems and equipment were implemented in accordance with the design and the criteria specified in the DB-1 FSAR. The Enclosure summarizes our ajor points of observation and identifies our concerns and resolution to taese concerns.
The first day (October 5,1976), we concentrated on the control rocn safety related equipnent which included reYinw of the plant Orotection systems and the associated cable routings in vertical control panels and the main control console.
The second (October 7,1976), we concentrated on review of systems and equipment in the general plant areas such as equipment inside containment, diesel generator rooms and the auxiliary building.
The third day (October 8,1976), we concentrated on review of the service water system and the intake structure. At the conclusion of our visit we met with you to sumarize and discuss our findings.
This site visit (October 6, 7 and 8, 1976), supplemented our initial site visit of October 15 and 16,1975, (refer to our Trip Report Sumary dated Hovember 5,1975) and completes this phase of our review process.
?,.s i
oPrica
- SURN&ffs b
..,......m..
, _.. _. < -.. ~ _ - -
oaTa>
Form MC 313 (Rev. 9 53) ECM 0240 W u. s. eowsmMusNT PmeMTime orrecs: is74.ste.ise 800204074t
r y
wt.
s
- a
' Toledo Edison Company 2-We request tnat you amend the CB-1 FSAR to conform with the resolutions as stated in the Enclosure to tnis letter.
In order to exredite our review regarding these matters, we request your response be submitted by fiovember 30, 1976.
If you cannot meet this date, please inform us within 5 days after receipt of this letter.
Please call us if you have any questions concerning these matters.
?
Sincerely.
Original signedbz John F. Stolz John F. Stolz, Chief Light Water Reactors Branch Mo.1 Division of Project f'anagement
Enclosure:
Davis Besse Unit 1 Site Visit cc: elr. Donald H. Hauser, Esq.
The cleveland Electric Illuminating Company P. O. Box 5000 Cleveland, Ohio 44101 Gerald Charnoff, Esq.
Snaw, Pittman, Potts and Trowbridge IJ00 M Street, M. W.
Washington, D. C.
20035 Leslie Henry, Esq.
Fuller, Seney, Henry and Hodge 300 Madison Avenue Toledo, Ohio 43604 D
D voE D '9~T A
S.k
-J y
( LWR 4 o,,,c.,
LE ASto...
eu 11/1976.
JJLlb/16.
..v.
- Fosen A5C.318 (Rev. 9 53) AICM 0240 W u. s. oovannusar paimTime orricas isra.sas.ise
- ~ - ' ~
h
~
.N.C'u.:
Aci r r
DAVIS w.~..,,.,
. JA.C i.L..
2 COGC U.N. 4 October 6,-7,.ind 3, 197i The Pla:.: Pro:cction Logic Syster. ca:;ine: insta11a..:ns wert.
2.
reviewed in detail.
Representati ns frc: 1:solia :ed Con:rc is Corporation and Babcock and Wilce: were av.r.:.ble te discus:: :he
~
detal,s c:. their respect:.ve sys: ens [1.e., :ne engineered c;ety Features Actuation System (ESFAS), the Ste2n and Ec3dwater '.ine Rupture Control Systems, and the Reactor Fr0: action Sysic: 725),j 2.
Selected inter-cabine cable ::uting fCable 12 R?S MD!:, 23 s.'S '.010,
- .nd 25 RPS MC5E) was checked to verify tha-they wre r:u:::
within their designated wireways. Ncn-saf:ty cabl. AI..;'?I2350 was checked to verify that it was rebted in accordance with the
. separation criteria stated in the FSAR. No apparent violati:ns to the sen.aration criteria were detected.
t,
." half-trip" status indica:icn 3.
It was cbserved that there was nc at the sain centrol panel to aler the cpera:or c f -he sta:us i
of the SFRCS. The appli: ant verified that pr: visions for "h.- 1.#.. ip" s..- *.".s wi ' ' '.'. e f. cvi.>..'d.
.#...'.. e
.--..."..4~4..
.. a*.
this conditien will be ala=ed.
4.
It was observed that =eans for tar..a1 init.ation of syste: level inoperable status er bypass indication ud not fully nee: the obj ective of Regulatory Guide 1.47,' St::: ion
.c.
S ecifically, i
f
~ manual initiation of systens level inoperable status cr b>;a.ss indicarica of the Containment Isolstica Sys.u was no; ;rev: 'ed.
m r3 9
9 QQ r
,,gg-y
.: (
s The applicant agreed to previde manual initiation of inoperable status indicati:n for this subsystem.
In additier, he was requested and agreed to review his design to assure thar manual initiatien of inoperable status or bypass indication is previded a
for safety related systers. The licensee will' amend the FSAR to include (1)~ a detailed description of their syste and (2) identify the
~
safety systems a:ccunted for in their desiJn. The present design provides indication for the following rys:c:s:
A.
Auxiliary Feedwater System, B.
Compenent Cao. ling Systen, C.
Service Water System, D.
High Pressure Injection System, E.
L w Fressure Injection Systen, F.
Containten: Spray System, G.
Core Flooding Syszen, H.
Emergency Ventila icn System, I.
Borated Water Storage Syste=,
J.
Containment Air Syste=,
K.
Containment Radiation Syster, and L.
Control Roc: System.
5.
The s:sff's concern regarding faults (i.e., grounding, shorting, applica icn of high vcltage, or electro-magnetic and radio frequency interference [ noise]) en ncn-Class IE circuits being propagated through to the safety g ade equipment was
@'.rgs 7
D 9~
Il
~'
J
.. S m
4
-m.
sn~-
s "O
i o -.
m
~
a
?
(Refer to =2=orandum for T. A. -Ippolito' frc: A. J. S:ukiewic:,
dated July 29, 1976.) The applicant agreed to sub=i: tes:
procedures and results which would de= ens :ste : hat such faults would not degrade the safety sy::ess below an acceptable level.
In lieu of actual tes: conducted en the as-installed design, :he applicant agreed to provide test precedures and tes results that were previously condu :ed by the protec:icn systen suppliers (i.e., Consolidated Control Corpcratica and 3abcock and Wil:0x).
We stated tha: this could be a viable apprcach, provided that the tests enveloped the a :ual as-installed design conditions.
The applicant c ncurred that such a response will be provided.
6.
Separa:icn between redundan: Class 1E and ncn-Class IE cir:uits within enclosures (i.e., vertical panels, rain centrol censole) was reviewed and found unacceptable. The applicant agreed tha:
ehere redundan: safety channel cables exist inside these enclosures, and bridging between safe:y channels via ncn-safe:y cables
(.e., train A and/cr S, and/or C) also exist.
.nese safe:S channels wfl1 he fully convered wi:h suitable fire barrier ma:erial
(.1.e.,
- lanastic, si..llea gel or equivalent,;.
ine appl. :an: states that these types of installatiens only exis in the centrol r:ct.
Ecwever, in the event tha: these ecndi:icns exist in enclosures outside the control rect the_ above rec,uirement is a n. licable.
The 4
applican:' agreed to document this rec,uir: criteric in the ?S.sa.
7.
Diesel genera:cr installation was reviewed and found q) nn:c$aj The applicant agreed :: provide the following:
cu cv lb n
D l u$.b-3
n 4
- T A.
The hand centrol valves on the oil supply lines to the actor and the engine en each diesel generator will be padice'.ac.
open. The padleck key will be cJr.trelled via spe ified administrative proced' ires.
B.
Covers on the hydraulic governors will be provided :
assure that the control settings wculd not be inadver:an:17 actuated.
C.
Submit drawing E643, shee: 8, revision 0 as part of the FSAR to show tha: the design as implemented dces not utilize thernal overicad relays in the cen:rol circuit cf the soak back pu p.
S.
L e felicwin; valves which are required to ecnform with EICS3 3 ranch Technical Position 13 were reviewed (i.e., DH1A, DH13, DH14A, DH143, MCV 599, and CV 603). The detailed schema:_cs describing their circuit design have been submitted in a recent amendment Oc the FSAR (i.e., drawings E523, sheet 60, revisien 0, ES23, sheet 25A, revision 4, E443, sheet 4C, revision 5, and E443, sheet 40, reivsion 3).
'de conclude tha: the design sc:isfies the Cc: mission's requirements and is acceptable. Redundant position indication was verified Oc be un in separate raceways.
The applicant was requested and agreed to revise : heir previcus response to cur position P7.1.1-1 (sta:cd in the FS.W, and include all these valves in the listing.
9.
The Borated Water Storage Tank level channels were reviewed.
The design as described provides independen: hea: tracing for each of the fcur level transmitters. Tha hea: traced circuits ara n
o' D
D
'u o 1 o
ra 9[
O
_ )]
\\a v
~
.c routed in separate and independen: raceways frca the level centrol si;nals. No haa tracing en the Outle: lines have been proviie.
since there is centinueus recirculation of the liquid in the:2
, lines. We conclude that the design is 2:ceptable.
- 10. Auxiliary Shutdown Panel Systen design was reviewed. Separate and independent, fully enclosed subse::icns provide terminaticns for the requires recuncan: equipment systems.
.-tre s:cp seat ;no; yet installed) will be previded a: the interconnection of the-two subsections where a c:::en grcunding bar is routed.
The applicant stated that the manual auxiliary feedwater iscla:ica a
valve switches and' the switches c:ntrolling the valves on the steam inlet to the auxiliarv. feed pumps will be removed because they will be controlled cutccatically by th: SFRCS sys:cs. This information has apparently been dccumented in the FSAR. Ne concluded that the design for this systen is acceptable. The applicant agreed tha: the adequacy of the isolatica devices used e
in the shutdcwn panel will be addressed in the ar.r';icant's respense a
- O.te3 s.
F 11.
Cable routing of redundant circuit. in anhole 3001 was reviewed.
Barriers between redundant circuits have not been provided. The applicant verified that barriers in these locations will be provided in accordance with the appreved separaticn criteria.
Water was observed to be standing in these manholes. The applicant verified that adequate drains are provided and 2;;heugh rm em m
D D l uJlb
^
c,
- c-)-
0 o
1 a
s t
a
.s 6
. not visually apparent, a su=p pu=p was located in these =anholes.
In response to the staff's concern regarding the effects en the cable insulation due to the wetting and drying cycles resulting f c water collecting in these manholes, the applicant stated that
'these. types of installation are cencon in large utility instalia:icas and that such effects are negligible. The applicant is requested to sub=it data to substantiate these assumptions.
- 12. All centrol :od drive pcwer suc.o.lv. breakers have not been ec c.le:ely insta}1ed. However, each cf the fcur a-c breakers are 1ccated in separate and independent rec =s.
All cables terminating at the breakers tre routed in solid =ctal conduits. Althcugh the applican: has cc :itted (verbally. and apparently in a recent amendrent to the FSAR) to previde unique identification of the T
conduits 1: intervals alcng their entire len;;h.
This desi;n feature has nc: yet been adequate'.v. implemented.
Th2 app'ieant was requested to implement.these require:ents quickly in crder to aid our inspection and enforce cn: personnel in their reriew efforts.
13.
Intertie sche e'between redundan: 430*/AC buses (i.e., F1'.A Ind 5113) was ' reviewed. The applicant agreed to sub i: a descriptica of this design in the FSAR to include thei criteria for the cable reuting and identifica:icn of this system. The cable routing interconnecting :he redundan; buses will be designa:ed Channel 1 and 2.
The applicant also verified tha: the breakers assceiated with this intertie (i.e., breakers 3F1135 and 221133) 0
<?
D
[h Wa1 nD U
S1 b m
7 i
m i
will be removed from their =otor control center cubicles during
. normal power operation and that these cubicles will be padlceked
' closed. Access to these cubicles will be under s:rie: ad=ini-strative contrci.
We conclude that this design is acceptabi..
~
\\
- 14. The applican was requested and agreed :: provide a' physical drawing of the Main Steam Isolation Valve solenoid control talve arrangement, describing channel separation and barriers. The cable reuting of selected sensers used in the Main Steam Line Isola:ica Systen was reviewed.
Separa:ica criteria between redundant trains was verified.
- 15. Separa:icn criteria for wir ways and me:21 c nduits (recently submit:cd in Amend:en: 36 cf the FSAR) was reviewed with the anplicant.
It aceeared that the critcria presented in this amendment was significantly different fren the crituria presented previously to us and to the NRC L aff in the field.
Satisfae::ry resolutica of the concerns expressed by th: staff eculd not be reached. A fortheoning sceting on Oct:ber 25, 1975, will b. held in Bethesda, Marvland, with the applicant to resolve these : ncerns.
The appli:an was recuested c subni their basis of accepta-bility for this design.
- 16. The staff expressed concern regarding the adequacy of the level indicati:n sys:c: for the servics water intak: canal.
Subscquen-to the meeting, the staff cen:1uded that redundant level instrumen:
channels of high quality are r2 quired.
E :h redundant icvel instru=ent channel should be reu:ed independently and pcwar:d off D w n
I A
O);O J ju S
b i
m 1
8 independent power supplies with level indication provided in the main control room. The applicant is therefore requested to =cdify their design and conform with the Ebove requirements and submit tne nodified design for our review.
- 17. It was agreed that F. Jablonski of ISE will follow-up the system design identified in Items 3, 5, 6, 11, 12, 14, 15, 16, and 17 to assure that the final a:-buil desi;n was impic:.en:cd in accordance with the staff's rec,uirener.:s.
4 m
e O
D D
o o.1 n
D T_T r
.S_l.311, u
i
..a..
T
-m 1
List of Attendees.During Site Review i
Davis Besse Unit 1 M. Calca=uggio TEC E. Novak TEC L. Engle NRC C. Miller NRC l
A. 5:ukiewic:
NRC
- 0. Chopra NRC F. Miller TEC L. Lesniak B5W l
G. Hurrell T5EC R. Bins TEC D. Ocuds Bechtel G. Schoenbaea Consolidatel Controls Corp.
^
D. Roosevelt Censolidated Centrel Corp.
- 3. Novich Bechtel L. Nise Bechtel F. Jablonski NRC
- 1. Howard Bechtel R. Ya:rus Bechtel V..arathe Bechtel M
F. DiVito Sechtel
- 3. Saba Bechtel S. Cantor Bechtel 1
f 4
D*
]D oss JU Ai 4
J 1
i J-..
,