ML20115C594
| ML20115C594 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Clinton  |
| Issue date: | 04/04/1985 |
| From: | Hall D ILLINOIS POWER CO. |
| To: | James Keppler NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III) |
| References | |
| REF-PT21-85-220-000 55-84-23, PT21-85-220, PT21-85-220-000, U-10265, NUDOCS 8504180471 | |
| Download: ML20115C594 (3) | |
Text
-
b or k k ILLINDIS POWER COMPANY 1A 120 CLINTON POWER STATION. P.O.
Ox 6 8 L NTON. ILLINOIS 61727 April 4, 1985 Docket No.-50-461 Mr. James G. Keppler Regional Administrator Region III U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
.799 Roosevelt Road Glen Ellyn, IL 60137
Subject:
Potentially Reportable 10CFR50.55(e) Deficiency 55-84-23: Ruskin Interlocking Blade Fire Dampers
Dear Mr. Keppler:
On December 3, 1984, Illinois Power Company notified Mr. F.
Jablonski, NRC Region III, (Ref:
IP memorandum Y-25989, dated August 28, 1984) of a potentially reportable deficiency concerning the failure of certain models of Ruskin Fire Dampers to close under installed air flow conditions.
This initial '
notification was followed by interim report (ref:
IP Letter U-10237, D. P. Hall to J. G. Keppler dated January 4, 1985). Our-investigation of this issue is progressing and this letter is submitted as an interim report in accordance with the requirements of 10CFR50.55(e).
Attachment A provides the details of our investigation to date.
~We trust that this: interim report provides you sufficient background information to perform a general assessment of this potentially reportable deficiency and adequately describes'our overall approach to resolve the issue.
Sincerely yours, 8504190471 850404E PDR ADOCK 05000461 D. P. Ha 1, S
PDRA Vice President
.JZ/lr (NRCl)'
Attachment ApR 11 cc:
NRC Resident Office,'V-690 Director-,0ffice of'I&E, US NRC, Washington, DC 20555 Illinois 1 Department of Nuclear Safety INPO Records Center-T/??7 glg
4 ATTACHMENT A Illinois Power Company Clinton Power Station Docket No. 50-461 Potentially Reportable 10CFR50.55(e) Deficiency 55-84-23 Ruskin Interlocking Blade Fire Dampers Interim Report Statement of Potentially Reportable Deficiency / Background On November 6, 1984, Ruskin, Division of Philips Industries, Inc, notified the NRC of a reportable 10CFR21 condition involving Ruskin Interlocking Blade Fire Damper, Model numbers IBD-21, 23,
& NIBD-23 supplied with closure springs.
Ruskin has determined that their test methods utilized for closure under air flow may not accurately depict actual field installed conditions.
Ruskin recommends that fire dampers supplied to CPS, with closure springs, which require closure under air flow conditions, be tested to verify proper operation.
Investigation Results Illinois Power has prepared and is implementing an investigation plan to determine the extent of this problem at the Clinton Power Station (CPS).
The investigation plan includes the following actions:
1)
A review to identify the applicable damper model number utilized in safety related systems was performed.
The fire dampers (Model number IBD-23) were identified by equipment and drawing number.
2)
A review was performed to identify the system configuration, air flow condition, and rating of fire dampers.
3)
An evaluation of the recommended design modification will be performed, when issued by Ruskin.
4)
An evaluation will be performed to determine the testing requirements for verification of proper damper operation.
5)
An evaluation will be performed to determine the impact of similar problems associated with non-safety applications on safety-related areas, f
6)
The modification, repair or replacement of fire dampers
/
depends on the above results.
f Page 1 of 2 j/
/
/
- ix '.
Attachment A (continued)
Complete corrective. action:ne'eded to correct th'e specific problems:an~d to eliminate the' root causes to preclude recurrence
- willEbe addressed'after background information is evaluated.
j.
Safety Implications / Significance Illinois Power's investigation of this.potentially
'; reportable'. deficiency-is continuing.
The safety implications and significance will be assessed after all background information is evaluated.
It isianticipated that approximately ninety (90) days i"
iwill'be necessary to complete..our investigation, determine reportability and submit a final report on the issue.
l l'
i-i
/
i i
k t
t i-
' t
~
Page 2 of-2.
i w
w w.
9 r-y y -
9