ML20093H626

Supplemental Testimony of RW Prunty,Rm Bucci,Ej Pagan & Kv Hate Re Eddleman Contention 9G Concerning Type Test Reporting.Certificate of Svc Encl.Related Correspondence

ML20093H626
Person / Time
Site:	Harris
Issue date:	10/11/1984
From:	Bucci R, Hate K, Pagan E, Prunty R CAROLINA POWER & LIGHT CO.
To:
Shared Package
ML20093H602	List: ML20093H601 ML20093H615 ML20093H626
References
OL, NUDOCS 8410160332
Download: ML20093H626 (9)

Text

, .- -

I .

, _ e # M' D

bYc 0

October Il[D$$4 N0 Q C; r_- -.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA IL 7[; , ..li_ 'r3 it.,

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION idf;["i Before the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board In the Matter of )

)

CAROLINA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY ) Docket No. 50-400 OL and NORTH CAROLINA EASTERN )

M'JNICIPAL POWER AGENCY ) *

)

(Shearon Harris Nuclear Power )

Plant) )

APPLICANTS' SUPPLEMENTAL TESTIMONY OF ROBERT W. PRUNTY, RICHARD M. BUCCI, EDWIN J. PAGAN AND KUMAR V. HATE IN RESPONSE TO EDDLEMAN CONTENTION 9G ,

(TYPE TEST REPORTING) 4 8410160332 841011 PDR T ADOCK 05000400 PDR

I .

Q.1 What is the purpose of your Supplemental Testimony?

A.1 (RWP, RMB, EJP, KVH) This testimony supplements our pre-filed statement of August 31, 1984 to reflect a change in the method by which Applicants will demonstrate the environ-mental. qualification of Class lE coaxial and triaxial Rockbestos cable to be installed in the Shearon Harris Euclear Power Plant ("SHNPP"). We also identify two additional types of Class lE Rockbestos cable used at the SHNPP, and describe how Applicants will demonstrate environmental qualification of these cables.

Q.2 Why are Applicants changing the method by which they will demonstrate environmental qualification of coaxial and triaxial Rockbestos cable?

A.2 (RMB, EJP) In our August 31, 1984 pre-filed testimo- '

ny, we discussed Rockbestos environmental qualification test report QR 2806, which documents successful testing of RSS-6-104/LD cable. We concluded that the RSS-6-105/LD and RSS-6-108/LD cables, the other types of Rockbestos coaxial and triaxial cable used at the SHNPP, also could be environmentally qualified by similarity to the RSS-6-104/LD cable based on QR 2806.

However, we stated that, in light of the deficiencies which have been identified in Rockbestos' environmental quali-fication testing program, Applicants would inspect the documen-tation relied on by Rockbestos to support QR 2806 and would

vo ,

P determine independently whether the testing data adequately supports the environmental qualification report. Applicants have now visited the Rockbestos facility, but were not pres-ented with sufficient documentation of data to support the use of QR 2806 to qualify the coaxial or triaxial Rockbestos cables for the SHNPP.

Q.3 How will Applicants demonstrate the environmental qualification of the coaxial and triaxial cable to be installed in the SHNPP?

A.3 (RMB, EJP) One of the possible courses of corrective action specified in IE Information Notice No. 84-44 to be ac-ceptable to assure qualification of Rockbestos cable is to ob-tain documentation from qualification tests performed on Rockbestos cable by vendors or test laboratories other than Rockbestos. Applicants have obtained two test reports, IPS-1053 and IPS-1054, from Conax Corporation ("Conax") which describe environmental qualification testing of electrical pen-etration module assemblies, including Rockbestos RSS-6-105/LD coaxial cables. Applicants have reviewed these reports and have determined that the qualification test parameters envelope applicable SHNPP parameters for the worst case location through which Rockbestos coaxial and triaxial cables are routed. As we stated in our August 31, 1984 pre-filed testimony, the minor differences among the RSS-6-105/LD, RSS-6-104/LD and RSS-6-108/LD cable types do not affect qualification. Thus, the qualification testing of RSS-6-105/LD cables is applicable j

r to the other Rockbestos coaxial and triaxial cable used at the SHNPP.

Q.4 Has Conax's QA program been reviewed by CP&L?

A.4 (RMB, EJP, KVH) Yes. Conax, as a supplier of Class lE conduit seals, is a direct vendor at the SHNPP. Conax's QA program has been reviewed by CP&L and has been found accept-able. Ebasco has also reviewed Conax's QA program and found it acceptable.

Q.5 In A.10 of your August 31, 1984 pre-filed, testimony, i you identify three types of Rockbestos cable to be installed in the SHNPP, namely, the RSS-6-104/LD, RSS-6-105/LD and RSS-6-108/LD cables discussed above. Do you wish to clarify this answer?

A.5 (RWP, RMB, EJP) There are two additional types of safety-related Rockbestos cable used at the SHNPP Firewall III insulated thermocouple cable, and Firewall III insulated control cable. The thermocouple cable is used as pigtails, which are approximately three feet long, in electrical contain-ment penetrations. The control cable is used as jumper wire in the limit switch compartments of Limitorque valve operators.

These jumper wires are each only a few inches in length.

These two types of cable were not identified in our August 31, 1984 pre-filed testimony because Item 2, p. 5 of the Sandia Annual Report referenced in Eddleman Contention 9G questions QR l 2806, which only addressos coaxial and triaxial Rockbestos cable. As a result of Applicants' visit to the Rockbestos

_4 e ____ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ - - _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ - - _ _ - _ _ - - _ - - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - _ - - _ _ _ _ _ - - - - _ _

facility, Applicants have concluded that, as in the case of the Rockbestos coaxial and triaxial cable, it is necessary to qual-ify the Rockbestos thermocouple and control cable used at the SHNPP independently of Rockbestos.

Q.6 How will Applicants demonstrate the environmental qualification of the Rockbestos thermocouple cable and control cable?

A.6 (RMB, EJP) Applicants have obtained two test reports which describe environmental qualification research tests by Sandia National Laboratories on Rockbestos Firewall III insu-lated control cable. The Rockbestos control cable used at the SHNPP was one of the cable types tested. Those test reports are: NUREG/CR-2932, 1 of 2, " Equipment Qualification Research Test of Electric rable with Factory Splices and Insulation Re-work Test No. l' (September 1982); and NUREG/CR-3588, "The Ef- -

fect of LOCA Simulation Procedures on Cross-Linked Polyolefin Cable's Performance" (April 1984). Applicants have reviewed these reports and have determined that the qualification test parameters, in each test, envelope applicable SHNPP parameters for the worst case location for both the control cable and thermocouple cable. Further, the control cable is representa-tive of the thermocouple cable for qualification purposes, since the insulation materials and all other construction fea-tures significant to environmental qualification are the same.

The thickness of the insulation material on the thermocouple cable is 25 mils compared to 30 mils on the control cable.

l l

l i

s .

~

However, the thermocouple cable wires are covered by a metallic shield and Hypalon overall jacket which more than compensate for this minor difference in thickness.

l Q.7 In conclusion, is the SHNPP environmental qualifica- i tion program able to demonstrate qualification of all types of safety-related Rockbestos cable used at the SHNPP?

A.7 (RWP, RMB, EJP, KVH) Yes. Applicants have qualifi-cation test data independent of Rockbestos which demonstrate the environmental qualification of the Rockbestos cables to be used in the SHNPP.

• 9 0

1

i a

~ :. t. ,

l

, ~ . . _ . ,

October 11, 1984 DOCMETED USNRC UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION *g g  :

Before the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board L!T!CE ;F u c;g 3 .

00CMEipvj 4 sggy;b-,

dRallCH

~

In the Matter of )

)

CAROLINA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY ) Docket No. 50-400 OL and NORTH CAROLINA EASTERN )

MUNICIPAL POWER AGENCY )

)

(Shearon Harris Nuclear Power )

Plant) )

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE This is to certify that copies of the foregoing "Appli-cants' Motion to File Supplemental Testimony in Response to

.Eddleman Contentions 9G (Type Test Reporting) and 116 (Fire Protection)," " Applicants' Supplemental Testimony of Robert W. .,

'Prunty, Richard M. Bucci, Edwin J. Pagan and Kumar V. Hate in j Response to Eddleman Contention 9G (Type Test Reporting)" and

" Applicants' Supplemental Testimony of Margareta A. Serbanescu

in Response to Eddleman Contention 116 (Fire Protection)" were

, served this lith day of October, 1984, by Federal Express to Mr. Wells Eddleman and by deposit in the United States Mail,

First Class, postage prepaid, to all others on the attached Service List.

pnad G. Dlw Michael A. Swiger DATED: October 11, 1984

e- .

i UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD In the Matter of )

)

CAROLINA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY ) Docket No. 50-400 OL cnd NOTTH CAROLINA EASTERN )

MUNICIPAL POWER AGENCY )

)

Shearon Harris Nuclear Power )

Plant) )

SERVICE LIST

• James L. Kelley, Esquire John D. Runkle, Esquire Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Conservation Council of U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission North Carolina Washington, D.C. 20555 307 Granville Road Chapel Hill, North Carolina 27514 Mr. Glenn O. Bright M. Travis Payne, Esquire Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Edelstein and Payne ,

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission P.O. Box 12607 Washington, D.C. 20555 Raleigh, North Carolina 27605 Mr. James H. Carpenter Dr. Richard D. Wilson Atomic Safety and Licensing Board 729 Hunter Street 1

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Apex, North Carolina 27502 Washington, D.C. 20555 Charles A. Barth, Esquire Mr. Wells Eddleman Janice E. Moore, Esquire 718-A Iredell Street Office of Executive Legal Director Durham, North Carolina 27705 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 Docketing and Service Section Richard E. Jones, Esquire Office of the Secretary Vice President and Senior Counsel U.S.~ Nuclear Regulatory Commission Carolina Power & Light Company Washington, D.C. 20555 P.O. Box 1551 Raleigh, North Carolina 27602 Mr. Daniel F. Reed, President Dr. Linda W. Little CHANGE Governor's Waste Management Board P.O. Box 2151 513 Albemarle Building Raleigh, North Carolina 27602 325 North Salisbury Street

, Raleigh, North Carolina 27611

J

^

Bradley W. Jones, Esquire U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Region II 101 Marrietta Street Atlanta, Georgia 30303 Steven F. Crockett, Esquire Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission

-Washington, D.C. 20555 Mr. Robert P. Gruber Executive Director Public Staff - NCUC P.O. Box 991 Raleigh, North Carolina 27602 Administrative Judge Harry Foreman Box 395 Mayo University of Minnesota Minneapolis, Minnesota 55455 O