ML19331E241
| ML19331E241 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Peach Bottom  |
| Issue date: | 08/26/1980 |
| From: | Randy Hall BROOKHAVEN NATIONAL LABORATORY |
| To: | Ferguson R Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8009090424 | |
| Download: ML19331E241 (2) | |
Text
',
Ib)NfM#
jot)Jo vm j v
d i ;j,j j BROOKHAVEN NATIONAL LABORATORY
{
u].
..L..' uT ~.1 1 l ASSOCIATED UNIVERSITIES,INC.
Upton. New York 11973 Deportrr.ent of Nuclear Energy (516) 345-2iil J
T August 26, 1980 Mr. Rcbert L. Ferguson.
Chemical Engineering U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.
20555 RE:
Peach Bottom, Fire Protection Review
Dear Bob:
Attached is Brookhaven !!ational Laboratory's input on Peach Bottom item 3.2.8(1) and (2), Fire Barrier Penetration Seals.
Respectfully yours,
,/
/f m
) 'fJ v
Robert E. Hall, Group Leader Reactor Engineering Analysis REH:EAM:sd attachment cc.:
V. Benaroya G. Harrison W. Kato wo/att.
M. Levine E. MacDougall P. Sears
/ 004 s
/
8009090i N i.
n
I
}
PEACH BOTTOM Fire Protection Review
_ Item 3.2.8(1) and (2) - Fire Barrier Penetratio,. Seals Item 3.2.8(1) of the Peach Bottom SER states that the licensee will investi-
'l gate the practicality of sealing the open pipe penetrations separating zones 48 from 12B and 4C from 12C.
In their 3ubinittal dated February 16, 1979, Philadelphia Electric responded to this item stating that the open pipe penetrations through the floor slabs separating zones 4B and 4 from 12B and 12C will be sealed with a watertight three hour fire rated sealant.
The licensee's response to this item is acceptable.
Item 3.2.8(2) of the SER indicates that the licensee will provide a detailed description and evaluation of electrical and mechanical penetration seals.
In their submittal dated February 16, 1979 the licensee responded to this item referenced as response to staff position PF-18. This submittal contained two attachments entitled Attachment PF-18-1 and Attachment PF-18-2.
Attechtent 1 provides fire barrier penetration seal construction criteria and attachment 2 presents the results of fire exposure tests using oil soaked rags as the source of fuel. All the tests are limited to cable penetrations. The i
licensee has addressed mechanical fire barrier penetration seals previously in their submittal to SER item 3.1.7.
f The licensee's submittals on SER item 3.2.8(2) adequately describes the elec-trical and mechanical fire barrier penetration seals as called for in this item, but does not adequately address the second part of this item requiring an evaluation of the electrical and mechanical fire barrier penetration seals.
The oily rag fire exposure tests do not meet the requirements for fire bar-rier penetration seal qualification as outlined in Appendix R, and therefore is unacceptable-Based on the above reasons, it is our opinion that the licensee's submittal on SER item 3.2.8(2) is considered only partly satisfac-tory.
It is recxr. mended that the licensec evaluate the adequacy of all electrical and mechanical penetration seals ia fire barriers throughout the plant sep-arating fire areas. Criteria for determining this adequacy should be based on the fire rating of the barrier or the ability to resist a fire of a magnitude
{
equivalent to the combustible loading in the area using the standard time-temperature relationship outlined in ASTM E-119. Where fire barrier penetra-tion seals are found to be inadequate, they should be upgraded or replaced.
The upgraded or new penetration seals should successfully meet the fire bar-rier penetration seal requirements described in Section III.N of Appendix R to CFR Part 50.
e q
-