ML20024D902
| ML20024D902 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Shoreham File:Long Island Lighting Company icon.png |
| Issue date: | 08/03/1983 |
| From: | James Smith LONG ISLAND LIGHTING CO. |
| To: | Harold Denton Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| SNRC-945, NUDOCS 8308080390 | |
| Download: ML20024D902 (17) | |
Text
-
^*
e-g
- swww--
=
LONG !CLAND LIGHTING COMPANY SHOREHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION b m=r P.O. BOX 618, NORTH COUNTRY ROAD e WADING R VER, N.Y.11792 Dbut Dhl Numkr August 3, 1983 SNRC-945 Mr. Harold R. Denton, Director Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.
20555 Equipment Environmental Qualification SER Outstanding Issue No. 9 Shoreham Nuclear Power Station - Unit 1 Docket No. 50-322
Dear Mr. Denton:
At a meeting in Bethesda on July 29, 1983, your staff inquired whether the Shoreham electrical equipment environmental quali-fication program, which addresses harsh environments generated by LOCA and Pipe Break Outside Containment (PPOC), envelopes the other design basis events.
This letter confirms the response we gave verbally in that meeting.
The set of design basis events is considered to be the 38 events addressed in Chapter 15 of the Shoreham FSAR.
Our evaluation of these events indicates the following:
1)
For 30 events, the environment remains mild in accordance with 10CFR50.49 (c) (FSAR Sections 15.1.1 through 27, 29, 33 and 36).
2)
For 2 events, no detection or mitigation equipment is located in or can be adversely affected by the poten-tially harsh environment (FSAR Sections 15.1.31 (Main Condenser Gas Treatment System Failure) and 32 (Liquid Radwaste Tank Rupture)).
g)I 3)
One event is not credible for Shoreham and therefore is not required to be evaluated either in Chapter 15
}p\\
or for the environmental qualification program (FSAR am Q@Q Section 15.1.28 (Cask Drop Accident)).
mo 4)
For three events, the previously defined environmental quali-ug fication_ program includes an enveloping equipment scope and enveloping environmental conditions (FSAR Sections 15.1.30 o$
(Instrument Line Failure), 34 (LOCA) and 35 (PBOC)).
The Instru-
@oc ment Line Failure environmerital conditions are expected to be no more severe than the PBOC conditions based on performance of tem-
@g perature calculations in those zones that 1) are in the vicinity MQ of the instrument line containment penetrations and 2) appear to FC-8935.lbe most limiting (i.e., a relatively low P30C temperature).
(
August 3, 1983 SNRC-945 Page 2 5)
For two Turbine Building events, FSAR Sections 15.1.37 (Feedwater System Piping Break) and 38 (Failure of Air Ejector Lines) a small amount of equipment connected to Class lE circuits or required to implement LILCO's commitment to Regulatory Guide 1.97 could be exposed to a harsh environment, namely, elevated temperature, pressure and humidity.
This potentially exposed equip-ment which was not previously included in the environ-mental qualification program is listed in Attachment 2.
It is not required to detect or mitigate these events.
However, this equipment will be added to the Shoreham equipment qualification program as Operability Code B for these two events, as defined in Section 4.2 of the Environmental Qualification Report for Class lE Equipment, whose Revision 5 was submitted by LILCO letter SNRC-917 dated June 27, 1983.
In accordance with 10CFR50.49(i),
justifications for interim operation pending completion of the qualification program are provided in Attachment 3 for the equipment listed in Attachment 2.
It is our understanding that this information satisfies all out-standing staff requests for information needed to resolve SER Outstanding Issue No.
9.
Should there be any questions, please contact this office.
Very truly yours, J.
L.
Smith Manager, Special Projects Shoreham Nuclear Power Station JFE:mp Attachments cc:
J. Higgins All parties listed in Attachment 1
+
s :
fh
/
l ATTACHMENT 1 i
Lawrence Brenner, Esq.
Herbert H. Brown, Esq.
Admi;aistrative Judge Lawrence Coe Lanpher,-Esq.
Atonic Safety and Licensing Karla J.
Letsche, Esq.
Board Pane]
Kirkpa. rick, Lockhart, Hill t
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Christoper & Phillips Washington, D.C.
20555 8th Floor 1900 M Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C.
20036 Dr. Peter A. Morris Administrative Judge Atomic Safety and Licensing Mr. Marc W.
Goldsmith Board Panel Energy Research Group U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 4001 Totten Pond Road Washington, D.C.
20555 Waltham, Massachusetts 02154 Dr. George A.
Fergus6n MHB Technical Associates School of Engineering 1723 Hamilton Avenue Howard University Suite K 2300 Fifth Street San Jose, California 95125 Washington, D.
C.
20059 Stephen B.
Latham, Esq.
Twomey, Latham & Shea Daniel F.
Brown, Esq.
33 West Second Street Attorney P.O.
Box 398 Atomic Safety and Licensing Riverhead, New York 11901 Board Panel U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.
20555 Ralph Shapiro, Esq.
Cammer and Shapiro, P.C.
9 East 40th Street Bernard M. Bordenick, Esq.
David A.
Repka, Esq.
l U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.
20555 Matthew J.
Kelly, Esq.
State of New York Department of Public Service -
James Dougherty Three Empire State-Plaza 3045 Porter Street Albany, New York 12223 Washington, D.C.
'20008 o
ATTACHMENT 2 1
- 1) - lDll*PNLO66 2) 1Dll*PNLO68 1Dll*RTS066 1Dll*RTS068 1Dll*RE066 1Dll*RE068 1Dll*FT066 1Dll*FT068 a
I 3) 1Dll*PNLO67 4) 1Dll*PNLO69 1Dll*RTS067 1Dll*RTS069 1Dll*RE067-1Dll*RE069
'lDll*FT066 1Dll*FT069 1Dll*FT070 1Dll*FT071 1Dll*FT072 6) 1Dll*PNL134
- 5) 1Dll*PNL126 equipment and_ associated equipment i
4 1
.i
--7w--
p.
9 p,.-.-
p y
,7ggy3
,--em---p-mr-p 9
g y
99. -, -g.-4 e
-9
- 9.,
'J.
sp m
y-e.
p
-s,-
wv
--,s,-y.-.e,a 9-w
ATTACHMENT 3 Justifications for Interim Operation
Page 1 of 2 EQUIPMENT JUSTIFICATION Mark Nos.
Equipment Type 1Dil*PNL966 Radwaste Building Exhaust Monitor 1Dil*PNL966 Radwaste Building Exhaust Radiation Detector 1Dil*RE966 Radwaste Building Exhaust Microprocessor 1Dil*RTS$66 Radwaste Building Exhaust Flow Transmitter System Name Radiation Monitoring Manufacturer Various Location Turbine Building Model No.
Various Emergency Condition Air Ejector Line Break (AELB)
Feedwater Line Break (FWLB)
Operability Code B
Operability Time 180 Days Accident Dose (180 Day)
Less than 40 yr. normal dose QUALIFICATION
SUMMARY
Environmental qualification data for this equipment are not available. Therefore, at present this equipment does not meet the requirements of NUREG-9588, Category II.
PARAMETERS REQUIRING JUSTIFICATION:
Pressure, Temperature, Humidity DESCRIPTION OF COMPONENT FUNCTION:
The above radiation monitor is used to measure activity in a plant ventilation branch stream which enters the station vent. A monitor consists of a gamma sensitive detector, located in the building exhaust duct, a microprocessor used to process the signal from the detector and flow device and for communication to plant control room radiation monitoring indicating equipment and with the RMS computer system.
JUSTIFICATION STATEMENT:
The monitor and its associated components are not required for effluent monitoring, but rather provide supplemental information.
This monitor is not required to implement LILCO's commitment to Regulatory Guide 1.97.
-.,,n.
, ~
,-e-,.
Page 2 of 2 FAILURE CONSEQUENCES ANALYSIS:
This radiation monitor is not required to perform any safety function during a FWLB or an AELB in the turbine building.
The short circuit failure of this radiation monitoring equipment (PNL, RE, RTS) due to a feed line break or air ejector line break would be identified by the microprocessor self-diagnostic as an equipment failure, and annunciated in the control room.
An open circuit failure of this radiation monitoring equipment would cause an abnormally low activity indication which would trigger an equipment failure alarm annunciator locally and in the control room.
The operator will not be misled because there will be alarms to indicate equipment failure for the PNL, RE, and RTS.
A failure of the flow transmitter. may cause an inaccurate local indication of flow.
However, since the indication is local in the Turbice Building, the operator will not be misled.
In the event of an electrical failure of this equipment, the Class lE circuit is protected by breakers located in a mild environment for the FWLB and AELB events.
JUSTIFICATION
SUMMARY
This equipment has no safety function during a FWLB or AELB.
Failure of these components would not mislead the control room operator or degrade the safety function of other Class 1E equipment. Therefore, interim plant operation is justified, i
s
.. _,,.,,. ~
~
1 W
4 Page 1 of -2 EQU1PMENT JUSTIFICATION Mark Nos.
Equipment Type ID11*PNL968 Reactor Building Exhaust Radiation Monitor 1D11*RE968 Reactor Building Exhaust Radiation Detector
' ~
IDll*RTS968 Reactor Building Exhaust Radiation Microprocessor IDll*FT968 Reactor Building Exhaust Flow Transmitt.r System Name Radiation Monitoring Manufacturer Various Location Turbine Building Model No.
Various Emergency Condition Air Ejector Line Break (AELB)
Feedwater Line Break (FWLB)
Operability Code-B
. Operability Time.
180 Days Accident Dose.(180 Day)
Less than 40 yr. normal dose QUALlFICATION
SUMMARY
' Environmental qualification data for this equipment are not available. Therefore, at l-present this equipment does not meet the requirements of NUREG-9588, Category II.
PARAMETERS REQUIRING JUSTIFICATION:
1 Pressure Temperature, Humidity DESCRIPTION OF COMPONENT FUNCTION:
The above radiation monitor is used to measure activity in a plant ventilation branch stream which enters the station vent. A monitor consists of.a gamma sensitive
. detector, located in the building exhaust duct, a microprocessor used to process the signal from the detector and flow device and for communication to plant control room-radiation monitoring indicating equipment and with the RMS computer system.
t JUSTIFICATION STATEMENT:
The monitor and its assocLated components are not required for effluent monitoring, but rather provide supplemental information.~ This monitor is not required to implement LILCO's commitment to Regulatory Culde 1.97.
4 t
w --v-w-n r,v
,w,,,
~
.e.-
,,-es-e,.,m-,
,.p,--+
,,n m-,,.
,--g--<mn-.y--g,1
-we--p-g
,,m,,m,ww r tm w--
'v3'~M's~'
Page 2 of 2 FAILURE CONSEQUENCES ANALYSIS:
-This radiation monitor is not required to perform any safety function during a FWLB or an AELB in the turbine building.
I The short circuit failure of.this radiation monitoring equipment (PNL, RE, RTS) due to a feed line break or air ejector line break. would be identified by the microprocessor self-diagnostic as an equipment failure, and annunciated in the control room.
An open circuit failure of this radiation monitoring equipment would cause an abnormally low activity indication which would trigger an equipment failure alarm annunciator locally and in the control room.
The operator will not be misled because there will be alarms to indicate equipment failure for the PNL, RE, and RTS.
A failure of the flow transmitter may cause an inaccurate local indication of flow, llowever, since the indication is local in the Turbine Building, the operator will not be misled.
In the event of an electrical failure of this equipment, the Class 1E circuit is protected by breakers located in a mild environment for the FWLB and AELB events.
JUSTIFICATION
SUMMARY
This equipment has no safety function during a FWLB or AELB.
Failure of these components would not mislead the control room operator or degrade the safety function l
of other. Class 1E equipment. Therefore, interim plant operation is justified.
i
Page 1 of 2 EQUIPMENT JUSTIFICATION Mark Nos.
Equipment Type 1D11*FT967 Turbine Building Exhaust Radiation Monitor 1D11*lNL967 Turbine Building Exhaust Radiation Detector 1D11*RE367 Turbine Building Exhaust Radiation Microprocessor 1D11*RTS967 Turbine Building Exhaust Flow Transmitter 1Dll*FT979 Turbine Building Exhaust Flow Transmitter 1D11*FT971 Turbine Building Exhaust Flow Transmitter 1D11*FT972 Turbine Building Exhaust Flow Transmitter
. System Name Radiation Monitoring Manufacturer Various Location Turbine Building Model No.
Various Emergency Condition Air Ejector Line Break (AELB)
Feedwater Line Break (FWLB)
Operability Code B
Operability Time 180 Days Accident Dose (180. Day)
Lesc than 40 yr. normal dose QUALIFICATION
SUMMARY
Environmental qualification data for this equipment are not available.
Therefore, at present this equipment doos not meet the requirements of NURFC-9588, Category II.
PARAMETERS REQUIRING JUSTIFICATION:
Pressure, Temperature, Humidity DESCRIPTION OF COMPONENT FUNCTION:
The above radiation monitor is used to measure activity in a plant ventilation branch stream which enters the station vent. A monitor consists of a gamma sensitive detector, located in the building exhaust duct, a microprocessor used te process the signal from the detector and flow device and for communication to plant control room radiation monitoring indicating equipment and with the RMS computer system.
JUSTIFICATION STATEMENT:
The monitor and its associated components are not required for effluent monitoring, but rather provide supplemental information. This monitor is not required to implement LILCO's commitment to Regulatory Guide 1.97.
Page 2 of 2 FAILURE CONSEQUENCES ANALYSIS:
This radiation monitor is not required to perform any safety function during a FWLB or an AELB in the turbine building.
The short circuit failure of this radiation monitoring equipment (PNL, RE, RTS) due to a feed line break or air ejector line break would be identified by the microprocessor self-diagnostic as an equipment failure, and annunciated in the control room.
An open circuit failure of this radiation monitoring equipment would cause an abnormally low activity indication which would trigger an equipment failure alarm annunciator locally and in the control room.
The operator will not be misled because there will be alarms to indicate equipment failure for the PNL, RE, and RTS.
A failure of the flow transmitters may cause an inaccurate local indication of flow.
However, since the indication is local in the Turbine Building, the operator will not be misled.
In the event of an electrical failure of this equipment the Class IE circuit is protected by breakers located in a mild environment for the FWLB and AELB events.
JUSTIFICATION
SUMMARY
This equipment has no safety function during a FWLB or AELB. Failure of these components would not mislead the control room operator or degrade the safety function of other Class lE equipment.
Therefore, interim plant operation is justified.
v
~
.-w--
,.e
Page 1 of 2 EQUIPMENT JUSTIFICATION 1D11*PNL969 1D11*RTS969 1D11*RE969 Radiation Mark No.
1D11*FT969 Equip. Type Monitor Equipment System Name Radiation Monitoring Manufacturer Various Environment Zone Turbine Building Model No.
Various EQSS No.
None Emergency Condition Air Ejector Line Break (AELB)/Feedwater Line Break (FWLB)
Operability Code B
Operability Time 180 Days Accident Dose (180 Day)
Within 40 year normal dose QUALIFICATION
SUMMARY
Environmental qualification data for this equipment are not available. Therefore, at
- present this equipment does not meet the requirements of NUREG-9588, Category II.
PARAMETERS REQUIRING JUSTIFICATION:
Pressure,. Temperature, Humidity DESCRIPTION OF COMPONENT FUNCTION:
1D11*PNL969 is used to measure activity in the station vent. The detector (RE) is located in the station vent and is sensitive to gamma radiation. The RTS is a microprocessor uced to process signals from the detector and FT969 and for communication to plant control room radiation monitoring indicating equipment as well as communication with the RMS computer. Flow measuring device 1D11*FT969 is required to measure statien vent exhaust flow rate for post-accident monitoring as per LILCO commitment to implement Regulatory Guide 1.97.
However, it is not required in the case of FWLB and AELB events.
Page 2 of 2 JUSTIFICATION STATEMENT:
The station vent radiation monitor (lD11*PNL969, IDll*FI969,1Dil*RTS969, and 1Dll*RE969) is not required for effluent monitoring, but rather provides supplen.,ttal information. 'This equipment performs no safety function in the FWLB and AELB ever.ts.
The maximum activity levals seen in the station vent as a result of a turbine building FWLB or AELB are within the range of 1Dil-PNL941.
FAILURE CONSEQUENCE ANALYSIS:
1Dll*PNL969, ID11*FT969,1Dil*RE969, and IDil*RTS969 are not required to perform a safety function during a feedline break or air ejector line break.
A short circuit in 1Dil*PNL969, ID11*RE969, and IDil*RE969 will also cause an equipment failure alarm locally and in the control room.
Therefore, the operator will not be i
misled.
A failure of 1Dil*FT969 may cause local indication of flow to be inaccurate, aither high or low.
As the indicator is local in the turbine building this failure will not j
mislead the operator.
In the event of an electrical failure of this portion of the radiatica monitoring system, the Class lE circuit is protected by breakers located in a mild environment for the FWLB and AFLB events.
JUSTIFICATION
SUMMARY
1D11*PNL969,1Dil*RTS969,1Dil*RE969, and 1Dll*FT969 have no safety function during an FWLB or AELB, Failure of these components would not mislead the control room operator or degrade the safety function of other Class lE equipment. Therefore, interim' plant operation is justified.
l 4
i t
o
,~
,-n e-n,_
m e-w-,
, - -w----v.,
,m,w-
.,-.-m.m n,an-.,
.,n,- - - - ---,--e,
,.,.-,,y-m - --
Page 1 of 2 EQUIPMENT JUSTIFICATION High-Range i
Equip. Type Radiation Monitor Mark No.
1D11*PNL126 and associated Manufacturer Kaman
. equipment System Name Radiation Monitoring Model No.
KMG-HRH 4
Location Ti.rbine Building EQSS No.
None Emergency Condition Air Ejector Lipe Break /Feedwater Line Break I
Operability' Code B
Operability Time 180 Days Accident Dose (180 Day) within 40-year normal dose QUALIFICATION SUMIiARY:
One Model KMG-HFH High Range Gaseous Effluent Monitor - accident skid, manuisutured by KamanInstrumentationofColoradoSprings, Colorado,wassuccessfullyenvironmentalgy tested under Act on Test Report No. 16436. Testing included a radiation dose of 10 rads gamma, thermal and mechanical aging, seismic testing and design basis accident
'high temperature and humidity testing. Components tested included a Reliance 3-Phase Motor, an ASCO HT 8211-A36 Solendid Valve, motor starters, pressure relief valve and other electrical and mechanical components.- When the environmental conditions for this equipment are finalized this report will be evaluated to determine the qualification status.
PARAMETERS REQUIRING JUSTIFICATION:
Pressure, Temperature, Humidity 4
L s
e
-,-.,s-,v a
<e-we
,,,..,e gem,---,-rru-
,~-r,-,--,,+--.-,
,.~,,--o---,
,.,.~~v-r
-mn,---
.~,
f Page 2_ of. 2 DESCRIPTION OF COMPONENT FUNCTION:
The post-accident high-range station ventilation monitor, 1Dil*PNL126, is required to implement LILCO's commitment to Reg. Guide 1.97.
It is used to monitor high-range effluents which may be released from the station vent during and after an accident.
The monitoring equipment consists of the following electrical components:
Blower Regulator Assembly IDil*BL9913 Flow Switch ID11*FS126 Motor Starter 1Dil*MST913 Auxiliary Pump Skid Motor Starter 1D11*MST126 Auxiliary _ Pump Skid Pump IFil*P126 Mid-range Detector 1Dil*RE126A High-range Detector IDll*RE126B Particulate and Iodine Detectors IDll*RE126C, D, E Radiation Transmitter Switch IDil*RTS126
' A signal from the detectors is transmitted to the control room where it is recorded to provide historical information. The signal is also supplied to sof tware which projects the offsite dose consequences.
JUSTIFICATION STATEMENT:
Tne high range station vent monitor is not required during a Turbine Building feedwater break or air ejector line break because the activity level expected to be present during these accidents will be measured by lD11-PNL941, which is located in the Reactor Building Secondary Containment and therefore in a mild environment for these events.
FAILURE CONSEQUENCES ANALYSIS:
D This equipment is not required during-a feedwater break or er air ejector line break occurring in the Turbine Building.
The expected activity concentrations in the station vent will be in the range of and be measured by 1Dil-PNL941, which is located in a mild environment.
The operator will not be misled by the failure of IDll*PNL126 because loss of power to the monitor will be annunciated in the control room.
Electrical failure of the panel equipment will.not lead to failure of the power supply because.the equipment is separated from other equipment by Class IE breakers located in a mild environment.
JUSTIFICATION
SUMMARY
The 1Dil*PNL126 equipment has no safety function during these events.
Failure of this 4
equipment would.not mislead the operator or degrade the safety function of any other Class IE equipment. Therefore, interim plant operation is justified.
1 r
...... ~..,
y
~._,-.,.....,,a_.,_,,,,-
_..._,_,,_,.,..,,,,,_,,.,,,m
Page 1 of 2 EQUIPMENT JUSTIFICATION High Range Radiation Equip. Type Monitor Mark No.
1Dll*PNL134 and associated Manufacturer Kaman equipment System Name Radiation Monitoring Model No.
KMG-HRH Location Turbine Building EQSS No.
None Emergency Condition Air Ejector Line Break /
Feedwater Line Break Operability Code B
Operability Time 180 Days Accident Dose (180 Day) within 40 year normal dose QUALIFICATION
SUMMARY
One Model KMG-HRH high range gaseous effluent monitor-accident skid, manufactured by Kaman Instrumentation of Colorado Springs, Colorado, was successfully environrentagly tested under Acton test Report No. 16435. Testing included a radiation dose of 10 rads. gamma, thermal and mechanical aging, seismic testing and design basis accident high temperature and humidity testing. Components tested included c Reliance 3-phase motor, an ASCO UT 8211-A36 solenoid valve, motor starters, pressure relief valve and other electrical and mechanical components. When the environmental conditions for this equipment are finalized, this report will be evaluated to determine the qualification status.
PAPAMETERS REQUIRING JUSTIFICATION:
Pressure, Temperature, Humidity c
-,...,, -. ~
,me-,,e w.-.
=
Page 2 of 2 DESCRIPTION OF COMPONENT FUNCTION:
The Post-Accident High Range Reactor Building Standby Ventilation monitor, 1Dil*PNL134, is required to implement LILCO's commitment to Reg. Guide 1.97.
It is used to monitor high-range effluents which may be released from the reactor building standby vent during and after an accident. The monitoring equipment consists of the following electrical components:
Slower Regulator Assembly IDll*BL9916 Flow Switch ID11*FS134 Motor Starter 1Dil*MST916 Auxiliary Pump Skid Motor Starter 1Dil*MST134 Auxiliary Pump Skid Pump IDll*P134 Mid-range Detector IDll*RE134A High-range Detector 1Dll*RE134B Particulate and Iodine Detectors ID11*RE1340, D, E Radiation Transmitter Switch IDll*RTS134 A signal from the detectors is transmitted to the control room where it is recorded to provide historical information.
The sigval is also supplied to software which projects the offsite dose consequences.
JUSTIFICATION STATEMENT:
The high-range reactor building standby vent monitor is unnecessary during a turbine building feedwater break and turbine building air-ejector line break because the activity that is expected to be released during these accidents will not be released i
into secondary containment, and thus through the RBSVS duct.
FAILUKE CONSEQUEUCES ANALYSIS:
l l
This panel is not necessary during a feedwater break or an air ejector line break occurring in the Turbine Building.
The radiocctivity expected to be present will not be released into secondary containment and thus through the RBSVS duct. Electrical failure of any of the panel equipment will not lead to failure of the lE power system because the panel is separated from other equipment by individual fuses and breakers located in a mild environment for these events.
l The operator will not be misled by the failure of IDll*PNL134 equipment since the loss l
of power to or a failure of the monitor will be annunciated in the control room.
JUSTIFICATION
SUMMARY
l The 1Dll*PNL134 equipment has no safety function during these events. Failure of this equipment would not mislead the operator or degrade the safety function of any other l
Class lE equipment. Therefore, interim plant operation is justified.
l
[
l
_, _