ML20132F947
| ML20132F947 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Vogtle  |
| Issue date: | 07/30/1985 |
| From: | Gonzales V, Kitchen J, Kitchens J, Mayer M BECHTEL GROUP, INC., GEORGIA POWER CO. |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20132F930 | List: |
| References | |
| OL, NUDOCS 8508020443 | |
| Download: ML20132F947 (28) | |
Text
.t U{,gE4~E0 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
~
BEFORE THE ATCMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOA CFFICE 7 SEC.ifi/
In the Matter of
)
DC';M iem & E E n.
.y-
)
GEORGIA POWER COMPANY, et al.
)
Docket Nos. 50-424
)
50-425 (Vogtle Electric Generating Plant, )
(OL)
Units 1 and 2)
)
AFFIDAVIT OF JOEL KITCHENS, VICTOR L.
GONZALES, AND MARK L.
MAYER County of Los Angeles
)
)
ss.
State of California
)
We, Joel Kitchens, Victor L. Gonzales, and Mark L. Mayer, being duly sworn according to law, depose and say as follows:
l 1.
We are employed by Bechtel Power Corporation.
Our business address is Bechtel Power Corporation, 12440 East Impe-I rial Highway, Norwalk, California 90650.
Summaries of our pro-l fessional qualifications are attached to this affidavit 4
as Exhibits A, B, and C.
)
2.
The purpose of this affidavit is to support Appli-1 cants' Motion for Summary' Disposition of Joint Intervenors'
. Contention 10.1.
The affidavit discusses the " dose-rate" phe-nomenon and its applicability to the proper environmental.
F500020443 850731 gDR ADOCK 05006424
)
PDR-j
qualification of equipment important to safety containing eth-ylene propylene rubber, cross-linked polyolefin, chloroprene, and chlorosulfonated polyethylene.
(Other polymers are dis-cussed in this affidavit only to put the dose-rate phenomenon in historical perspective.)
We have personal knowledge of the matters set forth herein and believe the. to be true and cor-rect.
In t roduc tj on 3.
To qualify equipment important to safety to withstand accident conditions, it is necessary to take into account equipment degradation that could occur before an accident.
Thus, for environmental qualification, the preconditioning (aging) of equipment to its end-of-normal life condition is considered.
4.
The normal life of equipment, however, is long; most equipment has a service life equal to that of the plant
-- ap-proximately forty years.
is therefore generally impractica-It ble to age equipment naturally.
i Recognizing this limitation, the Commission specifically permits accelerated aging I
See 10 C.F.R. 5 50.49(e)(5).
I I
l S.
Radiation from the normal operation of the plant 1
is one contributor to aging.
Accordingly, the accelerated aging used in environmental qualification tests must simulate the 1
i t
{
I
~
degradation attributable to the low dose-rate radiation envi-ronment to which equipment would be exposed over its normal life.
To simulate the effects of this environment, equipment is exposed to radiation at a high dose rate for a relatively short period of time.
The generally accepted industry practice has been to use dose rates on the order of 0.01 to 1.0 j_
megarads/hr for this purpose.
6.
When an artificially high dose-rate is used to simu-late aging attributable to radiation, the possibility of dose-l' rate effects arises.
The term dose-rate effect means that the
)
amount of degradation experienced in an irradiated material is dependent not only on the total integrated dose, but also on the application rate of the radiation.
Dose-rate effects are not a concern for the portion of environmental qualification testing that simulates accident conditions, since the dose rates used in testing are comparable to the actual dose rate that would be experienced during the most severe design basis accident.
Therefore, the only issue is whether the use of a high dose rate to precondition equipment simulates normal aging.
7.
The possibility of radiation dose-rate effects has been recognized in nuclear industry research'and testing for at least the last 15 years (13, 14).
Nuclear industry qualifica-tion testing standards account for such possible effects.
For example, IEEE 323-1974 (15) states as follows:
8.. _
I In determining the total required test ra-diation. equivalent to that of service life, consideration shall.be given to oxidation gas-diffusion Ithe dose-rate effect mecha-nism discussed below] effects
- Thus, to' allow for these effects, a greater total dose than the service lifetime dose should be applied.
4 l-8.
A number of studies in the last several years have
]
addressed the possibility of' dose-rate effects in certain-4 polymers.
These studies were prompted by the discovery of greater than anticipated degradation in polyethylene insulation at the non-commercial, Savannah River Plant K-reactor.
The a
particular study which formed the basis for contention 10.1 was conducted in 1981 by K. T. Gillen and R.
L. Clough of Sandia National Laboratories.
This study is entitled NUREG/CR-2157,
" Occurrence and Implications.of Radiation Dose-Rate Effects for Material Aging Studies" (June 1981), and it addressed dose-rate effects in ethylene propylene rubber, cross-linked polyolefin, 4
chloroprene, and chlorosulfonated polyethylene.
i I
9.
The gravamen of contention 10.1 is that equipment im-portant to safety containing any of the four polymers addressed in NUREG/CR-2157 has not been properly qualified because high dose rates customarily used in accelerated aging produce less degradation.in'these polymers than low dose rates.
As dis-
. cussed below, the dose-rate effects discussed in'NUREG/CR-2157
.are' insignificant as applied to the environmental qualification 3
\\
Lof equipment at the Vogtle Electric Generating Plant (VEGP).
t
_4_
i,v-7
,-e w---t-
.--m.,-y
Definition of Polymers 10.
Polymers are chemical compounds composed of very large molecules that are formed by the repetitious union of many small molecules.
These small molecules are called monomers.
The monomers in a particular polymer may be all the same, or there may be several different constituent monomers in a polymer.
- 11. ' Polymers are generally categorized as follows (3):
1 Thermoplastic - polymers that soften when exposed to heat'and return to their origi-nal condition ~when returned to room temper-j ature.
Typical examples are fluorocarbons, nylons and acrylics.
Thermosettina polymers that solidify or
" set" irreversibly when heated.
Typical examples are phenolics, epoxies and polyesters.
Elastomers polymers possessing the abili-ty to be stretched to at least twice their original length and the ability to rapidly retract to approximately their original length when released.
Typical examples are ethylene propylene and silicone rubbers.
12.
Many generic types of synthetic polymeric materials have been developed, and they vary widely in their physical properties.- Each has its own individual characteristics.
The four polymers within the scope of Contention 10.1, plus polyethylene, are oescribed below.
I l -
a 13.
Polyethylene (PE) is the simplest of all the polymeric materials.
PE is formed by the polymerization of ethylene gas (C H ).
It is a thermoplastic.
24 14.
Chlorosulfonated Polyethylene, also known as Hypalon, is a compound formed from a polyethylene base polymer, with chlorine and sulfur additives.
It is flexible enough to be categorized as an elastomer.
Its irradiation properties are j
more dependent on the additives than on the base polymer.
4 15.
Ethylene Propylene Rubber (EPR) is typically a copolymer of ethylene and propylene monomer units or a terpolymer of ethelene, propylene, and 1,4-hexadiene monomer j
units.
EPR is an elastomer.
- 16.. Cross-linked Polyolefin (XLPO) is a polyolefin which j
has been structurally modified
(" cross-linked") to enhance its physical properties.
Cross-linking is a bonding of polymer chains at various points.
Cross-links may be achieved by the addition of chemical cross-linking agents (e.g., peroxides),
or by exposure to radiation.
Polyolefins are aliphatic alkene 1
polymers.
Commercially useful polyolefins are polyethylene, 4
I propylene, and isobutylene.
For purposes of this affidavit, i
cross-linked polyolefin (XLPO) may be used interchangeably with cross-linked polyethylene (XLPE).
17.-
Chloroprene, also called Neoprene, is a polymer formed from the chloroprene monomer (CH CCl=CHCH2).
2
~ -
m m..
-m m
w m
+seeng
'e
2 Chloroprene is a relatively inert polymer with good resistance to oil and grease environments.
Applications of Polymers 18.
Westinghouse has conducted a review of Nuclear Steam Supply System (NSSS) equipment important to safety to determine the applications of polymers in such equipment.
Bechtel has conducted a similar review with respect to balance of plant (BOP) equipment.
Simple polyethylene was not identified in any safety-related application at VEGP.
With respect to the four polymers at issue, typical applications at VEGP are cable and wire insulation (XLPO, EPR), cable jackets (Hypalon, Neoprene),
0-rings (EPR, Neoprene), gaskets (EPR, Neoprene), and diaphrams (EPR and Neoprene).
Criteria for Service 19.
In order to assess the qualification of safety-related equipment, suitable criteria for service must be' deter-4 j
mined for the component under review.
A suitable service cri-I terion for polymers would be retention of a predetermined level
~
i of the appropriate physical and/or electrical properties re-quired for the polymer to perform its safety function.
For ex-ample, polymers used in electrical insulation applications must retain electrical insulation properties, while polymers used in-gaskets would need only to retain sufficient elasticity to 4 a
+ a r,
w-.
g-e m
m
ensure sufficient contact with the seating surfaces.
Criteria for service are met if a component can be shown to be capable of performing its safety-function after exposure to its equip-ment qualification environment.
Definition of Polymer Degradation 20.
Polymer degradation is defined as the reduction of one or more specific material properties of the polymer, such as elongation (a measure of the length to which a specimen may j
be stretched before it breaks, typically expressed as a percent 3
of the original specimen length), tensile strength, resilience, and dielectric property.
Changes in such properties, and therefore levels of polymer degradation, may be completely acceptable as discussed previously in the section Criteria for Service.
21.
When judging the significance of component or equip-l ment degradation, the properties of the polymer that are di-rectly related to the critical functions to be performed by the component or equipment are of primary importance.
Component and equipment environmental testing and analysis include aging and, therefore, degradation of subcomponent parts.
1 )
i Radiation Agina Mechanisms in Polymers i
22.
When polymers absorb radiation, the energy of their atoms is increased.
Free electrons are produced resulting in 1
ionization that ruptures the chemical bonds and fragments the j
. polymer. molecules.
The process of irradiation changes the
.1
)
chemical structure of the polymer molecules by breakup into i
,[
smaller molecules (scission) and by a reformation of molecules into a more non-linear network (cross-linking).
The molecules may also reform in their original linear network, leaving no 1
net structural change (recombination).
The competition between the rates of these chemical processes determine the changes in l
polymer properties due to irradiation.
It is of interest to note that cross-linking increases the molecular weight and im-proves the strength of the material, making it better adapted I
for many applications.
23.
The presence of oxygen has been found to be important
^
in the degradation mechanism of polymers exposed to radiation i
(4, 6, 7).
It is postulated that oxygen is required for the i
formation of radicals that fragment the polymer molecules.
This postulation appears to be confirmed by. experiments con-ducted inLan inert atmosphere that produced only slight polymer degradation.
_9_
d Dose - Rate Effects E
24.
As previously stated, questions regarding irradiating polymeric specimens at elevated dose-rates have been raised by studies conducted at Sandia National Laboratories (4, 6).
i These studies were prompted by the discovery of degraded elec-trical cable insulation at the non-commercial Savannah River Plant K-reactor (5).
On visual inspection of the cable, the
. polyvinyl chloride (PVC) jacket showed no signs of visible deg-i radation along the entire length of the cable.
However, after l
removal of the PVC jacket, it was found that the underlining j
polyethylene (PE) insulation had alternating areas of flexibil-ity and embrittlement.
T 25.
The investigators at Sandia, Gillen and Clough, pos-tulated that the degradation was due to dose-rate effect phe-1 nomena.
To test their hypothesis, they conducted irradiation tests on common polymer materials used in cable insulation and j
jacketing.
In NUREG/CR-2157 (4), they tested EPR and XLPO in-j sulation, and chloroprene and chlorosulfonated polyethylene jacketing.
These materials were stripped from the cables and irradiated in air and nitrogen at radiation dose. rates ranging from approximately 0.001 to 1.0 megarads/hr.
Material degrada-tion was measured using ultimate tensile properties (elongation and tensile strength) and swelling measurements.
Infrared spectroscopy was used to deduce the chemical reactions produced by' irradiation.
i,
-4 m,
t
a 4
I 26.
Radiation dose-rate effects were found in air envi-
.ronments for all of the materials tested.
The suggested mecha-nism for these~ effects appears to be the result of competition between cross-linking and scission.
As the dose rate is low-ered, there is more time for oxygen diffusion into the materi-als and chemical reactions to occur, and scission therefore be-5 comes more important.
Thus, the mechanism of degradation appears to be different under low dose rate. exposures from the j
mechanism occurring under high dose rate exposures normally utilized for accelerating radiation aging.
7 L
't i
27.
The dose-rate effects' observed in the four polymers.
i examined in NUREG/CR-2157, however, were much smaller than i
those that had been observed in simple polyethylene (not used j
in safety-related applications at VEGP), and thus,. evidence of low dose-rate effects in simple polyethylene cannot be extended to predict the same level of effect in other' improved polymeric compounds being used in present day nuclear power plants.
Gillen and Clough themselves have stated in other studies (7,
- 10) that dose-rate effects are minor in XLPO, chlorosulphonated i
polyethylene, and chloroprene; and the same can be'said of EPR, 4
l since the dose-rate effects in EPR are about the same as those exhibited in.chlorosulphonated polyetheylene.
Moreover, the i
differences in the rate of. degradation caused by the various dose rates decrease as the total dose decreases.
In other words, dose-rate effects are most pronounced for. higher total l'
' 1 l
2
?.
, =..., -
O doses.
At and below total doses equal to the maximum total dose equipment important to safety might incur over 40 years, dose-rate effects are insignificant.
28.
Figures 1 through 4 show the results of the Sandia investigation of XLPO, EPR, Neoprene, and Hypalon.
In the case of ethylene-propylene rubber and Hypalon, the reduction of ten-sile properties is virtually the same for all dose rates up to a total integrated dose of 20 megarads.
In the case of Neoprene, the reduction is virtually the same for all dose rates up to a total integrated dose of 10 megarads.
At VEGP, no equipment important to safety will receive a total integrat-ed dose for 40 years normal operation greater than 10 megarads; and most such equipment will receive less than one megarad.
29.
Of the four polymers addressed in NUREG/CR-2157, only XLPO exhibited dose-rate effects that were discernible at total doses below 10 megarads.
As demonstrated below, these effects do not compromise the environment qualification of equipment important to safety containing XLPO.
30.
In the Sandia tests, the properties measured to de-tect degradation were mechanical properties, i.e.,
tensile strength and elongation.
Other engineering properties of interest for cable, particularly electrical properties like re-sistivity and dielectric strength, were not measured.
Yet based on review of equipment important to safety at VEGP, the '
t.
only safety-related application of XLPO identified at VEGP is cable insulation; and nuclear industry cable qualification tests and other Sandia reports (1, 9) have den:nstrated that cable insulation which shows substantial degradation in mechan-ical properties continues to provide sufficient insulation properties to allow the cable to perform its electrical func-tion.
31.
A more recent Sandia study by Minor and Furgal (9) has demonstrated that degradation of the mechanical properties of XLPO insulation does not prevent the cable from performing its required electrical function.
In the study, cross-linked polyolefin-insulated electrical cable was exposed to a rela-l tively low dose rate (0.062 megarads/hr) for a total integrated normal operational dose of 50 megarads.
Then, after elevated i
temperature aging, the cables were exposed to an accident dose of 150 megarads at a rate of 0.77 megarads/hr.
Despite severe degradation of mechanical properties, the-cable was able to perform its electrical function at all times.
This series of tests was conducted according to industry standards (IEEE 323-1974 and IEEE 383-1974) and NRC guidelines (NUREG-0588).
Minor and Furgal concluded that the methodology employed by the r.uclear industry to qualify electrical equipment (which in-4 cludes accelerated aging), is adequate despite the dose-rate effect on mechanical properties studied by Gillen and Clough.
i It should be pointed out that Minor and Furgal's environmental.
test conditions, consistent with standard industry practice, were much more severe than the potential exposures in an oper-ating nuclear power plant.
32.
Gillen and Clough have acknowledged that the dielec-tric constant of organic insulation may change insignificant 1y at a point where the mechanical properties have changed dras-tically (11).
Gillen and Clough nevertheless chose to study mechanical properties of insulation materials because they are conveniently measured and are related to the function of the materials in a number of different applications. In the case of electrical insulation, Gillen and Clough have suggested that mechanical properties are primarily of interest for considering a catastrophic failure under the influence of some applied stress (11).
Cable qualification tests, however, currently in-clude a mechanical durability test for cable following exposure to the simulated normal and accident environmental conditions (12).
This test stresses the cable when it is in a degraded condition.
VEGP safety-related electrical cables have passed this test while energized at elevated voltage levels-(i.e., at voltages higher than the cables will see in service).
33.
Another limitation of the Sandia tests is that pieces of cable insulation were stripped from the wire for the tests.
i The insulation material was thus completely exposed to oxygen incthe ambient atmosphere.
Since oxygen diffusion into the ma-terials is pc.. lated to be a major contribution to the -
- degradation mechanism, the applicability of the test results to plant-installed cable is questionable.
In actual application, insulation is covered with a jacket material.
Although the jacket is primarily for mechanical protection (protection from abrasion, cuts, etc.), this covering significantly reduces the oxygen available for radiation-induced oxidation of the cable insulation.
34.
Finally, as stated above, the total integrated doses received by electrical cables at VEGP during qualification i
testing exceed t.he most severe doses the cables could experi-ence in actual use.
The test dose of 200 megarads used to qualify cables for VEGP is approximately 20% higher than the calculated dose for the 40 year full power normal operating dose plus a design basis accident dose.
None of the Sandia tests has shown that this margin is insufficient to compensate for dose-rate effects.
Duke Power Tests 35.
Additional information regarding dose-rate effects may.be obtained from a Duke Power-Company Study (reference 16).
Duke Power's Oconee Nuclear Generating Unit #1 became commer-cially operational in 1973.
As there was only a limited amount of information available on the effects of' aging of cable in-stalled in a nuclear power plant environment, Duke Power estab-lished an informal cable life evaluation program.
1 l
1,
- _. _--. -. ~
d 36.
Representative specimens of control, instrumentation i
and power cable were placed in selected locations within the i
reactor building so that they would b'e subjected to a normal in-containment environment.
The cables were for the most part insulated with EPR.and had Neoprene jackets.
Some samples were insulated with cross-linked polyethylene and covered with r
Neoprene jackets.
One sample of triaxial communication cable I
was insulated with low density polyethylene insulation and with a PVC overall jacket.
37.
For all cable samples, the average radiation exposure rate was 0.65 rads /hr during operation and 0.12 rads /hr when the. unit was. shut down.
The actual. exposure level that each l
sample received is considered to.have varied considerably over
~
the length lof the cable dependent upon the exact location of 1
the cable within the reactor building.
.These dose rates are r
. quite low in~ comparison to rates used in-the Sandia investiga-f tions, but are representative of the dose rates expected to
{
occursin a commercial nuclear power plant.
1
' 38.
Samples of these cables were removed after 5 years
]
and again after 10 years of exposure.
Physical and electrical i
tests were conducted to~ determine the degree of degradation of' the cable components.
In all cases, the cables were in good
).
condition with no more deterioration observed than would be ex-j pected over a-similar period:in a non-nuclear environment.
In 1
fact, in one. instance, the physical properties of the cable t
4 sample actually improved during the' ten year neriod.
4 6 -
4-p-
g
-a 9 +et, eT e
y.
- ~ - -
3
}-
9
,.-.-----g-----
-.w w w.9m w.
w9yw rh-T-e
--w,p-.,y
l 39.
These data further indicate that low dose rate radia-tion is not significantly more harmful to cross-linked polyethylene and EPR insulations than the higher rates used for environmental qualification.
Conclusion 40.
An analysis of the Sandia studies and the results of an ongoing cable life evaluation program at Duke Power Company, demonstrate that the dose-rate effects observed in NUREG/
CR-2157 are insignificant with respect to the environmental qualification of equipment important safety at VEGP.
//
T_
a
-YA l
dinp d' A
/
0 AZAd<C//kn,ar Subscribed and sworn to before me this f).z4 day of July, 1985.
My Commission expires: b c2.2 /9/S l
" ~ ~ N..,.,. g 9 NOTARY PUBUC - CAUFORNIA
,1 f OFFICIAL SEAL
{
JOANNE E HENRY
(
(
LOS ANGELES COUNTY M3 W comm. expires NOV 22, 1985
,x.
Y
. - ~
S e '. (.
3 P.
E ;h s o
~...y /
- VEGP NORMAL 40 YEAR TOTAL INTEGRATED DOSES 1.6 1.4 Y
- 1. 2 g
4 0.8 O
O O 1.2 Mrsamr O 220 WadMr 1
~
A 52-Wer e,,.
O 9.5 Wasmr 0 16 Wamr f 81 Wadmr in N2 As 0.5
'\\
0+
3 4
0 50 100 150 180 RA01 Afl0N DOSE, MR AD FIGURE 1 Aging of Crosslinked Polyolefin Insulation s
~
w a
g
-+4 e
- =
e VEGP NORMAL 40 YEAR TOTAL INTEGRATED DOSES
+
i 4
6 1
Q
-t-
_4 IOo O
- 0. 5 0
O n
3 O 1.2 mrasmr O m ter
~
,1, 6 52 waWhr O 9.5 wewhr 0 i.e ver
- 0. 5 -
t 2
N l
O t
i I
O 50 100 150 100 RADI Afl0N DOSE, MRAD 6
FIGURE 2 Aging of Ethylene-Propylene Rubber Insulation
[~
- e
_c VEGP NORMAL 40 YEAR TOTAL INTEGRATED DOSES i
i 1.2 1
- O 8
O O
In.
O h
O
~
- 0. 5 O
~
o.5
-W O
,14 wasmr I
I A
O 200 w d mr
.., v.ser
.O s.4 wasmr 0
0 2. * * ** '
3 l
0.5 o
O t
O 0
50 100 150 100 R ADI ATION 005E, MR AD l
FIGURE 3 Aging of Neoprene Jacket (Polychloroprene) j
+
VEGP NORMAL 40 YEAR TOTAL INTEGRATED DOSES 1.2 i
i i
W m
o O
3
'M h
a O
A w
0.7 O esver O
210 wer i
Q A M wer e'e, O
8.s wer 0
i.5 wer
- 0. 5 h
O i
a O
O e
f I
l
' ~ ~
0 50 100 150 200 230 RADI ATION DOSE, MRAD FIGURE 4
-Aging of Hypalon Jacket (Chlorosulfonated Polyethylene)
REFERENCES 1.
L.
D.
Bustard, "The Effect of LOCA Simulation Procedures on Ethylene-Propylene Rubber's Mcchanical and Electrical Properties," SAND 83-1256, October 1983, NUREG/CR-3538.
2.
Underwriters Laboratories, " Standard for Polymeric Materials Long Term Property Evaluation," UL 746B, Second Edition, April 24, 1981.
3.
Hawley, 66, The Condensed Chemical Dictionary, Van Nostrand Reinhold Co., New York, 1981.
4.
K.
T.
Gillen, R.
L. Clough, " Occurrence and Implication of Radition Dose-Rate Effects for Material Aging Studies,"
SAND 80-1796, June 1981, NUREG/CR-2157.
5.
K.
T. Gillen, R.
L.
Clough, L.
H.
Jones, " Investigation of Cable Deterioration in the Containment Building of the Savannah River Nuclear Reactor," SAND-81-2613, August 1982, NUREG/CR-2877.
6.
R.
L.
- Clough, K.
T.
Gillen, " Radiation-Thermal Degrada-tion of PE and PVC: Mechanism of Synergism and Dose-Rate Effects," SAND 80-2149, June 1981, NUREG/CR-2156.
7.
K.
T.
Gillen, et al, " Loss of Coolant Accident (LOCA)
Simulation Tests on Polymers: The Importance of Oxygen,"
NUREG/CR-2763, July 1982.
8.
Robert Harrington, Hanford Laboratories, " Effects of Gamma Radiation on Elastomers, Part IV," 82 Rubber Age (June 1958).
9.
E.
E. Minor and D.
T.
Furgal, Sandia National Laboratories,
" Equipment Qualification Research Test of-Electric Cable with Factory Splices and Insulation Rework Test No. 2,"
NUREG/CR-2932, 2 Vols. (September 1982).
10.
K.
T.
Gillen and E. A.
Salazar, Sandia National Laboratories,-
" Aging of Nuclear Power Plant Safety Cables," SAND-78-0344 (1978).
h
.. ~. -
W
11.
R.
L.
Clough and K.
T.
Gillen, et al.,
" Accelerated-Aging Tests for Predicting Radiation Degradation of Organic Materials," 25 Nuclear Safety (March-April 1984).
12.
Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, " Standard for Type Test of Class lE Electric Cables, Field Splices, and Connections for Nuclear Power Generating Stations,"
IEEE 383-1974 (1974).
13.
R.
B.
Blodgett and R.
G.
Fisher, " Insulations and Jackets for Control and Power Cables in Thermal Reactor Nuclear Generating Stations," PAS-88 IEEE Transactions on Power
. Apparatus and Systems (May 1969).
14.
W.
N. Parkinson and O.
Sisman, Oak Ridge National Labora-tories, "The Use of Plastics and Elastomers in Nuclear Radiation," Nuclear Encineering and Design 17 (North-Holland Publishing Company, 1971), p.247-280.
15.
Instituta of Electrical and Electronics Engineers,
" Standard for Qualifying Class lE' Equipment for Nuclear Power Generating Stations," IEEE 323-1974 (ANSI N41.5-71)
(1974).
16.
T. J. Al-Hussaini and J.
E.
Stoner Jr. (Duke Power Co.),
"On-Going Qualification of Cable in a Pressurized Water Reactor Environment," Presented at the Nuclear Science Symposium, Orlando, Florida, November 1, 1984.
4
)
.w
EXHIBIT A J0EL KITCHENS Assistant to the Chief Electrical Engineer Bechtel Power Corporation, Western Power Division PROFESSIONAL QUALIFICATIONS EDUCATION BSEE - University of California, Berkeley - 1948 Business Management Certificate Program, University of California, Berkeley - 1973 EXPERIENCE
SUMMARY
37 years design, supervisory and management positions in power engineering fields.
EMPLOYMENT HISTORY 1966 to present:
Bechtel Group - various locations 1956 to 1966:
Anaconda Company - Wire and Cable Division New York and San Francisco 1948 to 1956:
Pacific Gas and Electric Company San Francisco PROFESSIONAL AFFILIATIONS:
Fellow, Institute for the Advancement of Engineering Senior Member, Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers Member, IEEE Insulated Conductors Committee Member, Project Management Institute Registered Professional Engineer, Arizona and California SPECIFIC QUALIFICATIONS IN THE INSULATED CABLE FIELD l
Ten years with the Anaconda Company, Wire and Cable Division. These years included the following positions held and duties performed:
o 31/2 years as a Cable Engineer doing cable design, specification writing, inspection and manufacturing engineering.
o 2 years as a Regional Engineer doing application engineering and i
providing technical assistance for sale personnel and clients.
o 2 1/2 years a Chief Cable Engineer with full responsibility for design, specifications and quality for the company's insulated products in the low voltage and medium voltage field.
o 2 years as General Manager of the Cable Accessories Division in charge of
. design, manufacture and marketing of the accessories product line.
During 19 years with the Bechtel Group of Companies, have been a Cable Specialist with responsibility for insulated cable master specifications for all voltages and applications. Have been a member of the IEEE Power Engineering Society Insulated Conductors Committee and have represented Bechtel on this committee for this full time. Have actively participated on subcommittees and working groups responsible for maintaining and revising, as necessary, cable industry qualification standards such as IEEE Standard 383.
EXHIBIT B V. L. GONZALES EQUIPMENT QUALIFICATION COORDINATOR / SUPERVISOR VEGP PROJECT Bechtel Power Corporation, Western Power Division PROFESSIONAL QUALIFICATIONS 4
EDUCATION BS, Mechanical Engineer, California State University, Long Beach, California EXPERIENCE
SUMMARY
-Present:
Engineering Supervisor 15 Years:
Increasingly responsible positions as Mechanical Systems Engineer on nuclear and fossil fueled power projects EMPLOYMENT HISTORY 1970 to present:
Bechtel Power Corporation, LAPD SPECIFIC QUALIFICATIONS IN THE EQUIPMENT QUALIFICATION FIELD Five years with the VEGP equipment qualification group.
Mr. Gonzales is presently Engineering Supervisor / Coordinator to the Equipment Qualification Group for the Alvin W. Vogtle nuclear power project. His responsibilities include defining and reviewing electrical / controls / mechanical equipment qualification plans, procedures, and reports for compliance with project qualification documents based on IEEE 323-1974 and IEEE'344-1975 requirements. Since his appointment as Equipment Qualification Coordinator, his responsibilities also include the reconciliation of the overall project qualification i
program with the nuclear steam supply system (NSSS) vendor (Westinghouse) qualification program to developing NRC guidelines, for all safety-related equipment.
Prior to this, Mr. Gonzales was a Mechanical Group Leader 1
responsible for NRC Standard Review Plan and Regulatory Guide compliance on the Alvin W. Vogtle nuclear power proj ect.
In addition, Mr. Gonzales reviewed all mechanical systems to determine their degree of compliance with the then-new NRC criteria.
1
-- -.--- -L.
. ~.
EXHIBIT C MARK L. MAYER ENGINEER Bechtel Power Corporation, Western Power Division PROFESSIONAL QUALIFICATIONS EDUCATION BS, Nuclear Engineering, Massachusetts Institute of Technology-1981
' EXPERIENCE
SUMMARY
4 years as'a nuclear' engineer EMPLOYMENT HISTORY 1981 to present:
Bechtel Power Corporation, Western Power Division PROFESSIONAL AFFILIATIONS:
1 Registered Professional Engineer, California SPECIFIC QUALIFICATIONS IN THE RADIATION ANALYSIS FIELD l
Four years with the VEGP nuclehr engineering group.
Responsibilities and duties have included:
Input to, and review of, project radiation shielding o
calculations. These duties required the review and understanding of the plant layout, operation and radiation sources.
Input to, generation of, and review of, project o
equipment radiation dose calculations. These duties required a review of radiation sources and accident scenarios to identify qualification doses.
4 I
I
?
o July 31, 1985 09j[hfC E
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
, NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
'85 AM -1 All :29 BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD urha 0 SLCRciw r 00ChETmG & SERvic.
BRANCH In the Matter of
)
)
GEORGIA. POWER COMPANY, et al.
)
Docket Nos. 50-424 (OL)
-- ~~
)
50-425 (OL)
(Vogtle Electric Generating Plant, )
Units 1 and 2)
)
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that copies of (1) " Applicants' Motion for Summary Disposition of Joint Intervenors' Contention 10.1 (Dose-Rate Effects)," dated July'31, 1985, (2) " Applicants' Statement of Material Facts as to Which There is No Genuine Issue to be Heard Regarding Joint Intervenors' Contention 10.1 (Dose-Rate Effects)," dated July 31, 1985, and (3) " Affidavit of Joel Kitchens, Victor L.
Gonzales, and' Mark L.
Mayer" were served upon those persons on the attached Service List by de-posit in the United States mail, postage prepaid, or where in-dicated by an asterisk by express mail,'this 31st day of July, 1985.
i
\\
David R.
Lewis Dated: July 31, 1985 w
e
' I UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 4
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Before the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board In the Matter of
)
)
GEORGIA POWER COMPANY, et al.
)
Docket No. 50-424
)
50-425 (Vogtle Electric Generating Plant,
)
Units 1 and 2)
)
SERVICE LIST Morton B. Margulies, Chairman
- Douglas C. Teper Atomic Safety and Licensing Board 1253 Lenox Circle U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Atlanta, GA 30306 Washington, D.C.
20555 Mr. Gustave A.
Linenberger
- Laurie Fowler Atomic Safety and Licensing Board 218 Flora Avenue, N.E.
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Atlanta, GA 30307 Washington, D.C.
20555 Dr. Oscar H.
Paris
- Tim Johnson Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Campaign for a Prosperous U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Georgia Washington, D.C.
20555 175 Trinity Avenue,'S.W.
Atlanta, GA 30303 Bernard M.
Bordenick, Esq.
Office of Executive Legal Director Docketing and Service Section U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of the Secretary Washington, D.C.
20555 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Atomic Safety and Licensing Washington, D.C.
20555 Board Panel U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Bradley Jones, Esquire Washington, D.C.
20555 Regional Counsel U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Atomic Safety and Licensing Commission
' Appeal Board Panel Suite 3100 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 101 Marietta Street Washington, D.C.
20555 Atlanta, GA 30303 I
i