Text

Transcript of Hearing on 781213 in the Matter of Portland Gen Elec at Salem,Or.Pp 2739-2882
	ML20147J230
Person / Time
Site:	Trojan File:Portland General Electric icon.png
Issue date:	12/13/1978
From:	Mccollom K, Mark Miller, Paxton H; Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel
To:	;
References
	NUDOCS 7812280003
	Download: ML20147J230 (143)
	v • d • e

{{#Wiki_filter:,

k.h',

[ '.., = *,.. %f', + ( 8, .I,' [ 'I w k. g

h

.:,, fy, a ,g.rb.x.g',N., '%. a. p ',e =" s s.* i r y *

,,2

%, ?d.,j.%.j h { } f,..(sa ,e~ .e.,,9 , :h, 'I , ~: l j'.,,'... _(',]l l4l } l % g $Q W M @g.% T3f ga p 'g % a=.4 N W M a e2 %y &"p ;:w.. yMesM a %w 9,g yh ip$n % W M $ L. ++ m '4, G.y 7 w o n"%: G, ;' ;m n4 .m 4,m ma m 2 ww -w. sm o g% g ;r q %.w w w wCNNA MSAM w D M. W # p &, h, +~ W,% %"s ~ WM 4W W W ' t $g y n n y@p p k q W %, ' W @- & wf ~ a" w ,d QWd M O W $ g i g h's %. S W.Mv7%YN n /'j wn. %r r,wg m .o .w@ Q u r ~ MmM ", -h e. u QVm w Hy V. c4 mp%' y;pw;.mg&:3 %,.. ; &J p+# gpd W@9.@p.,2 :p.: t +

A ur

\\q ~v% w.a + , w y mb u, %. + .,.1 g y - w& y m :m '3 : n >= p% m .w twl V; % ; 07 ' a "E..f. q& N$g ' 'RJj, PULW 2.R,f.a. A g, k <. -a e w)a,: g<

m. t P

k f.pf.19 y p ~.19.. e+ - a m i <.m, +v.w4 3 f ~%. n%iph ao i ..,j 2 &. t o v ~g ~m % q ::y; M Q-g"4 mf{.v x s'n9% m&, ;y%:w.~ p%g%+g' c ; yv f7 x. p 4, , J~y' u fe.+w w, hy,,(, p.a ' s;, f:p: ' ' ~ sy. +.6, n x.p.M"<.. L.g ?g m,s,,c h v' !, : :: e N: qe ,,a 1 p. 1 y t.g a

, t y, p.y.

.D'a k ,2 h '- n .4 3* w: p 4 ; ') >^:,j::W:, J g ' y'? A.. w-v? n%. m m wn : .a i c,& - M. w n . i ;, a r < r ., d. u M;,l.:,Mg W'f s m. -. Y If {.. 4 h. nf 3 - I "1l 0 t 0' ~ hM+m-' "l e+ 1 "o 4 M'N' U C' L-'L E,e.A', R' 0_.9, R'EGULAToltN COMMIS,SIO N ) 4 N U,[ c. $ NQ j $ iyW V. " 5. W, .rw n u 4, a4, e os s u MM:.,4 ,Q. / W [.l,a'kdf, n Wh ~'WlJ b MM.W ',. W W ' '., ~V6' .v e m w ww!censw gc spbA rm,m n.. q' c. pt 'v' ' .^ no

c w'

a .g ' q +;f? g[r r - c y;

< l.1 lm Qij.,Q-Q m,/w
hi (! N i

r G j ...%,g;l.& 7.js q, 6/ 1, %P.. W. 4 W9:r 4 3b s 4 i. .10. . y W ( g p# ; 'l,' v i'a l ' ; ?q":>'. ,,, W e i. Q Q V'M(-) ,:y'3, p: h,(,* XO ^'., 4 L . $Q 5 h.lyl rm.: s'- l' a' wn 'q .L .A n x - v nm & 4mG$y' 43 % W tw w' ' y? F ', i v ' a .d n vph.,,$x ';- "w. c h.,, ' ,\\ t 3 s s g - .,q,u sq y !,,

A s,,

1 3 x, . A.[? t O m;. u; o,m3:q - v.

w

. q#u, 'w>

N.

%... 'd., j a: 6, z 4 e v. wg ;< -y +,3 gr. ,n .Q;. t Oq.. me + ,,b 's> < v l, W,, ! Wpf ' W.a i c. 4 3-

y;;m;,Kg %.,

m w,n, W (' W n 9,%: t , :g n. w n, n ld gl +5 lf I's'.' k 'f 5s h, S 4 'l' 3'?.n,[.[

,,,4 L-{

Q'a:.y{3f 4.'[([ ) d.o.( p/ 4 h,,d y >Q, I ' Y p PV 1 1 i 2 s$yjp 1 i y J lb { ' b Y4 4 }, %' e'p. /.. Qm) e" e, y 4 }y'. ;jp ;, Q '.jg }, __1 ._glggg"{y,0 ' *_ ? _ : .,L, i e ,7 p g

by

.t'i ,, ; p. h E.,.,. %.n.yMM. (: d;f'.i, 'p IN T.HE,?M, As.TTER.L.O, vF w X ad c yM^ m v + t ig } M Q./ p' f gg 'g,ig,j v Q""*]g ' ]Q-Q]s r y '[>, -~en ,p %.. s q,.. t tf J s.: v s, mo, a s 1 lptp e l'.p,y g; , h;' g i ' ', - > < p,, N g Mi %W & .;,;, y. .. 't5* Q V]M ;g\\ #, 3, l s ',. /. F. h' ?, {, Q,. s m ..g a. <h j$ g ' ' < ) ; 'I \\ g 3 .,s,l V.,., y.'; Rah -i. i Qw,.~.,,_,, > &,^ W,, L. P,,, :L's. ;; ,m + 3.. i 3 e , g,,) N s tg i., / N,, 2 f 4 4,;,x.4g.t i ".. ". -. ;y t fs. 4 l - ; t 1 ..p i, -m.,3 ,y g gp. ,3 w v...n, t- + op i; ~ ' se t

4. yr,s f c

a 3-c.p., n i i, e . :M + - 'i ; 1;. ,m r S 1. p-4,. o i t o, a, 3 f N 6.: .g 4., D,1 \\ 1 s 6. m y. '_t L f.; }, Q; y. W. hq. 4 -;;Q.3,M ' *,, }L,'..' }t, j & v i Y. Op: i ,,, ;j ~ 4 1 hQQ_.f &f-, t.#g. % j f. ?. t msy w U 3 "hh4bf ) i i ...&.;:Q)& ' M ' :, f 4-C sp wy '; p r t R V,y ~ m r i N.p, r t y i;., "f p v

y a n,;. -

e', ~., ) 5, ,A t s >p , n s u s r y t h, e p' l@e.;q., p i a -. t i - Q, y .t 4 -s 3 y y,, s* r ,;.-., i' '... Q

y

4::h O..

W> '.m.* 4 s.+ 1, , g, ;.5 .f/- ( a. s V 4.. 4.u y. qn 34. :,i. '.N, ;*. n...a ,.M i h ' .) L,- f 4 y~, u 3 u i r L. ) a r' \\p b o ((., ? I' ^

7.,.

3,.. 1 r ,at .,4 a w' n =, i. f 's ! e l,a yll p f 3- ~ + 9t! . sm y

s. )

"+( .. w'; f g % , ',w fis 9 n. 9m w.n g,.py, s~ m y ,v wn s sa s 'v'. x. ' d' W. g LPle.. $u%g c 3V" s ; e "1 .p % ", M( w' " r ' m ppMis,:q %u yl ' '. g~p>ge~4+ ",~ q eq' m n' _. m. v. i .D ~ $, Y - " ~ ~. '~ ~duk ,~ ,.,1 ' M.'N. ' D at, e E

W M &a ylg'n' i

Pages ./s;m w"' % ~ s of y,q. c s, %, 24 (

, ; i

'.w m.g ' Tp @W..., A,; ,,.,r. r 3 ~\\v y ".F + gf ,y ) 'J\\ ,m. W.. ' e M,, - ~, s n%en 4 o 3M ' s \\ - kc: sp. n~. ; v sh ,,w,> av ;ys. v + m s., A ~ W g. ~ r. 2 4 3 f A &e ; y'M h c,. n g s k'5 NI. hb-h$s ?k N i hIhk,nu wm s x s ~. m m, c qn u;> 1 e yy pa. a i,,, pgq-s '.M; p a- , w; .aagg uy( ~ ~ yam pg.qg, nb4m y, r% .,, ;. f.. r m ,~,,y,.'. n. s s v p ~ v i' n. 'p s g

g., n y n.,' '

a 7 j.g. p,.. 9 4. a. cyraW ...,/ s" y* g:Q,- ?g N; 3 >w. _ ; v.r u,g e m m id '( . g a.,4; : e v ,m

e

% p'y. y um't ,4 s. s c&L mM,a;; V' \\o~ 4, y t n e t y pp L q n. k A. w e 4..... r x.g;.7

o.,4.h

c. A.;.. m q i,n,.

w~ Ac q~ vwa pw. Mapwm wp. womm e ,im es .y > 4 ,q a. 4 ;. w w t-3 w 1 ,s ,m w %.. m%*mm -.mmy+ m%. w%, W % m%m v ..Yf n+ ly' ; xn. v j h.h 4 'i n.G c k o ' ([]& ' - ? \\ c 'n n8

.4;,.

1 i a 'v ..- j '. 1M %[ @ W 4' r{ %' c 4 m' ", J ~ . Telephone: MQN Qb@tM! t go2)3G3700 lw2 36 d.t w h, N; J W,' % m% ~: % m@ nim \\ fC N[, ^ O; h f c o M M Mg$ k. k r. h.c..# d w 'wa .ws .w n y..,A ' MCgg Q;2 1Bg )n p p h CE AFEDEkk11$REPORTEktSlINCJ ' &j -Qfjk ngp w sp., m y jWQ$%y y WMe wW W.f N ) >', W R W~OfflicialReporters2 Qf i s. 7 a.. - Sr ahiiSthee W+ % h. %e$ y s s %p y M 4 t up a e n i @M, pMOy Washington, DC 2000W > r $h@dWp%n%V@y@nW@e u n g%hf&Why? @N (W 7 gd dC@jd .#@ s "El? 1 $D J i O bWWS9 W &fm@wm%MQsMN 1 1 % gun S JONWIDE.COVERADE, DAILYL s m

2f &&%%MhMMR dM b

%4 F: y$1@@$y4, ' N ~ unm ' + ^ o @'M M ... ~,...... '. 4 < ~ ~,.;.. .4 .....:...,.,.c v..: a.;,,, ww. p,....,,. ... s m

L-R 2739 R1301 i.. LANDON I i 4 FELTZER ' UNITED STATES.0F Ab! ERICA i i I~ ' M.13 LOOM f 2 1 jl NUCLEAR P2GULATORY COFJ4ISSION

E e

-l n 0 i h 4 In the Matter of: j. a-e> PORTLhMD GENERAL ELECTRIC CO!PANY, : Docket No. 50-344SP a. .~ ct al. G-i I (Trojan Muclear Plant) )~ 7 i i 8 [ j IIcarincT Room A D State Capitol i Salem, Oregon j 10 L Hedncaday, 13 December 1978 11 l. 12 The hearing in the above -entitled mattor was g 13 -raconvened,. purcuant to adjournrait, at 9:00 a.m. E b SEFOPS: 1 i 15 FAESHALL E. MILLER, Esq., Chairman, i Atonic Safety and Licensing Board. I 10 }- i o DR. KENNETH A. MC COLLON, Membar. !? Y d i l l DR. HOGH C. PAXTON, Manbar, i 18 " iI I APPEARAMCES: l mm j i j On behalf of Licencea: 20 MAURICE AXELPAD, Eng., Lowenctoin, Newmun, Rain, 'l Axelrad & Toll, 1025 Connecticut Ave., N.W. l 3 Suite 1214, Washington, D.C. 20036. l 7J1 ROLAND F. DANKS, Jr., Esq., Southor Spaulding, l ;.h Kinney, Uillinmacn & Schwabo,1100 S.W. 23 6 th Avenua, Portland, Oregon 92704. RONALD JOHNSON, Esq., 121 Southwect Salmon St., 29 Dortland, Oregon. { ,h. l' i zu

(

i- ) f L =

t 2740 'i jl 2 i 1. APPEARANCES: (Continuad) 'I 2 On bchr.lf of Donn;3ville Power Aininistration: e 3 m u m m ans m s,., P.o. um. m, sorueue, Oregon 97203.] \\ ouusau ve w seau a omam t~e i JOHXT SOCOLOPSKY, Eng. V,- hl 3 i' i On bahalf of the URC Regulatory Staff: e-- j JG'SSPH GRM~, E! g, end Nhi'.70RIE UL'.1;N, Esq., 0- I U.S. Nuclear Itcgulatory Cenicuion, Washington e i d D.C. 9 o It f - lj on behalf of Ceulitiou Jor snfe Poe;ar and pro oe: t 10 ell A b J, ab.,- f s - .h $r')0 s$y Dr ?,.0L q l 11h Ona gon. I~ 'f On UOhT11f Of CC!!CClid.iltOd IntbrVenOr3 DD6 nrO SO;

1. 9 l

+ d 8 9j e t% ul e' SA

- ry 4 es s g

. af m y s v,9 m-); g. t/ 0 2 v.= .t O Cd ;> CrCO l$ . G r4J llyllC OfQgCD. { er ' j g a' !..L U ; f f u on senau or C a u w Envi m.m neu Ccm m m 4 )

- 4*
- t
t*f

%EJ A as? '"kbp :, rew'- (N e% 73, a 5 i,1 c.,34 Xi,, e .t 1w I ,3O l 17 j i c 10 19 4.n v ') 4

4. l 23.

24 sJ I i .,1

_,.._--..-.---..y..--_...-.-.... 4 -2741-J 2 l. mm1 1{ _C O__ - H _'i' E_ N_. T S.- CROSS ~ j yt 2 il WITNESSQS: DIRECT CROSS P2DIR7:CT PICROSS DOARD_BDARD1 3 ! Richard C. Itndercon) 4 d William H. White ) 4 j tj John I. Freuing ) 2754 2798 ii Ted Bushnell ) .g.,6 i -~ s., o a n c. j a q K. M. Cooko ) l R. E. Shipley ) 6 lt,. i II ' li ./ y John L. Prowing ) I' j! K. R Ccoko ) 2858 i CP 2060 l Dart D Withers 2870 227G 2375 1. k; p 10 E,, l ij EXHIBITS: _ IDENTIFICATION i.VICENCE i I,n l Licencea Ex. No. 23 I l' 12 h (Confirmation Scismic j l} Qualification of Equip., .g 11 Coraponents & Piping in Troje.n) 2760 2764 e la f Staff Ex. No. 10 g (Mech. Engineering Branch Report 13 d Seismic Audit, Mastinghauso Elcc. equipment, 7/76) 2 7(.10 i 4 SS - ; ij r/ l l. D i-l il 1 10 '! l l 1 l C.O ,k l 0 I, 4 W i I'i j l .a. i I;.h Il 1 i ' j 'h Z..u . I p-a k/

t 4 i 'k d. CR1331 P R o'c E =: D .t iJ C 9 ca.,ui o L., /m ?- r.,,.... R CH!dlCMM ?! ILLER: She mident;iary hearing will 9 . l a, l j resume. ,; i i, The Board has revicued the limite0 appearance L .t)" y statement, tha discucsion we had with counc.el end parties. d 6l There are certain questionc or raabters that che Board would t

h like to have addrenaca both by counsel and in terTan of evi3ench O'

I that may be a.pplicable thereto. I o-a Dr. IIcCollara will indicate to you the nature and i 10 3 scope of acmo of the quencionr., tnat we have in mind, l II Dr. McCollow? N[ DR. MC COLLOM: T. think probably the firnt thing g M' we would like to have in to have Staff addrena cone of the t i a 8 "f d 2 [ general background of i:he bcaos and ctatus or tlm approval o 4.l nethods as they are appliczble to the electrical and 0 l 10 h mechanical equipment at Trojan. 1 i 17l ?h;;tt nbandardn are appropriato and were used to 1 ,, f assure the seinmic capability of the Llectrical and tho N i 11 i 19, q mecnan.taa; aqu gment. A i 20 Mhat. ngecific clec trical equiputnt

a. t Trojan, L

,41 } that has not been tasted according to th guidea.ines that 1

1 ? I you operatcu, under.

9- .u, z mou>d may eme 1 amm tha me metd wine f H j.chio decua m uat you handed us last nwnt in w ev m n r k 25 very quietly, ao that thin vill be a reference for that kind ~i s i 1'.. l J... - ' - - - - * * * ' ~ * " ' " " ' ' ' * " ' ' ~ ' * ~ ~ " - - ~ ~ " " ~

n..-. i 2743 run2 I' of discuosion. 2 .There is an wrea oi 2.mric a nalin-.c u t a. an o f, 3 the engiucered safeguard - m -- engineered anfcguard O 4 features of the switch gear an shown, i beueve, in the i i 'U Safety I valuation Report,Section 3.3.2. And in that statccent 0 it does say that there will be a cupplement to that Eufety l 7 Evaluation responding to thc;t, ,bd we would like *o know how 0 1 that uaa T.nolved, o l 9 And ao a final noint that I presume vauld have l 10 include:I thatcae, in that any enresolv d safat7 :i s s uas i 11

clated tothe ceismic capability within the building cornplex l

12 of safe ty-related equipment to shut doan the rcuctor in care 13 Of a Geismic event. . 9 1 l 14 I think it vould prohtbly bt appropriate at this 15 timo to make two other cocaenbo with recract to a qualified 16 revi w of the fire protection enoability, j i 17 I think that the 6.re contro.1 c.q u.i pw n t that might J I j 18 be included in the linn of equipiaent a.lready 1:. the nasty-10 rd ated equipnent should be identified, nr.d if there happent 6 I 20 l' not to be any in chere, I thinF: 2. t woul.d be helpful to 21 id.entify any Ilre pro tection syr tem atu.i equi p.End in bhe l 3 building COruplE.X C.nd de tern',ine if any evalu.r.icu h;.ic been yande ' h .{oftheposcibilityofafirebeinginity. 23 teu W.tny teismic 24 g CVCnt. 2 s l I. n. 4 kb 43 b ld [j C3 d, h N{ [t$ d [([(, QkhQ g, l k r A i I i. 1i ',--l,-

2 1 P 2744 mm3 1 previous ones is onc c ther re fe rence

ba t ',a s b mmcht to 2

our mind that I third, pcaoably E ncald Lu c.ndracued ',ue111cally i. e it 31 And that is the control systen cap eility under the various 4 maintenance conditions that can be placedinto operatiotn i-1. 5 auch ac the so-called dwemy s:;gnals that were being used at 0 Zion ' uhen tha cont:rol aignala did nob renalt in a reaction a" i 7 appropriate when a control action v2a en3.'ec for. A 1 O Ha.vDe in no:ce u s.w.;.a t erin s, ic chere an". reuson i 9 to think that acq proceduroa tnat the Licenssa :1:m for i to maintenance during the operat;on of th : pinn t, would Jrevent. j jj plant shutdown in case it was ca.'. lad f or. I i 12 I think af ter that vc woulci rx. randy to adt;rena t.ne Gpecirac request 3 tn.at were mwt 100 n1 gat to 33 j4 the Licensee. .I i l [1 1., ARe there any com ertn from cous _..dore we 16 pracced with this inquiry? g (No respenne) 33 I se p 30 n i n c e 1.io a t f thi; a t, aG lre ;ua to tha 10 d St Ef, the..> aff would o f:,.J a t on t.ho m nattera, and then t.he 20 ] acansema 21 3 Gr, do you have som otLcr arraigwent 2.n n..i nG '. j 22 i. 4 MR. GRAY: 15.r. Chairman, the Stuff hau b:en in 23 1 COD Lilc h With Our liebdqU.arte:.?S, ,7 t: ~. dre ..it_t! J ti t)( to Out A.7 \\ 1 90rSOn3 Who Cu!) CddrOGG quuUtionS, Onny Of bh103 d r'.3 1.0C10d0d G .1 __--.r._, .,m w

2745 s. l mE4 1 in what tr. McCollora -just licted, l 4j' - 2 At thic tiraa they are rMt e t .: routc, out i h ey c ]. S will be. Tha informa tion I have.i c timt they will not be {g 2 4 here before thin evening, - so that we vill. no t he prepared i i l 5 to address there during today, f 6 ClM.f T&iAN MILLEn: Do you have any witnesses today I i 7 who could get started on come of these matters. or must you 1 l g await the arrival of t' r eop:le that you had contacted, l ,9 [ rir. Gray? TO MR. C1%Y: i?al l, now tha t we %/c n ruore sp :cific [ $7 lirt here, I think ve.sould wcnt porciuly a f.'au hours to I j 92 evaluate and see. There is a possibil:ty that Mr. 'Tri.umull can g 13 l

4 addreas some of the fire prote ction quarc ons, f o r e n up1.a.: B u t, I would have to chech.

15 g Cl!AIIUIAU MILLI:R. Let's chect with blm coun.sel 4 I for the Licenaces. It may be that there 1. some in f ormat. ton, g l i witne.3ses or whatnot, that -(ou q-.:atluan art creparau to 8 j 6 start wi th, at any rato. Ma undarstaur, the q tuntica with j 19 regtrd to the Staff. e0 Y liow arc the Lice.nsee.s :witu ted? g IIR. TWELPAD: t h.'. Chairmun, we spent rach of last night and this tr.orning uremtring for tne aucceionu that i 23 ~ vore addrecced to us yesterday. ~ 25 't

... ~.. 1 2746 i mm5 1 technical people.that we have to see whether un would ha 2 prepared'to address any of these, ? -3 But, it might be more efficient in turan of time 4 eince ue have prepared on yeaterday's questions, if we 5, proceeded with those, and then le e the - 3 DR, MC COLLOM: I think that is aopropriate. 7 I.et me just say thnt we felt that it would be -- if 1 j 3 possible -- to set the stage with the SF.aff'a addressing i I g these questions, it wculd thcu.bc more ':ogic.11 and appropriate 10 to hear how the Licensce reflecta on thoce requironents. 7.j MR. AX3LRAD: I understand that. g 1 wac uondering, could we rewns for, perhaps, a half an hour, and let me talk to the people. I t rwu be 13 e l that some of these matters alre4.dy addrer, sod - - - it may be g thaC VO Would prefer to go ahoaa even without em note I appropriate framesvork that Dr. McCollom 4 u n c 3 rd.a, just for .I g 4 the purpose of going ahead, g CHAIRMAM MILLER: It nay well.Mic doa ' t know how g long it woul.d take, until afternoon, poonibly. And cc, gg \\ neeing the framework que?.tions, it was utr belief -- perhapa erroneously - that much of the inf armation we had discuccod g lact evening when we firsh reflected upon t:his, would be g contained in what you were prepared to ao forward uith, But, in other words, we are t r:ying to be the uost ,9,a4 afficient, as well as halpful to the witneases und all parties. u.- l - + ..e, --~~-~a-

___-----r t L '2747' Ula b I 'because we rea2iac that you c:o brvi Sc u srN mn that you 4 o 1 L worked late.. We appaciatu t.m t. S.; w W.- to ' least 9 -o t accommodate you as far as we en :. p A half..nour rcce m u ulo, ce rt mi:;1y 1x appropre.nte f L.j,to enable you - l~ Gf Mr.. Isn:LR?lDi C2:n I ack.jrr" duo q m hiant nc a 1 I } ? matter of clarification? t ) i ,~ i

h..[

0 CI!hlINTd MTLLER: Let'q cc J u unutcvor you 'tish no i 4 D i have covered.tefore che receas. r i i 10j MR. A" ELE;D: The lh i t q u c. n':iun " ' va re se c t to 1 If u 1 il [ control n"n te.n capability, wan mt re l c & O ir. m fuohion t i J 4 l 12 to ceicuic? , e '3 L conto": o"<3==> a e 14 MR. ArsLRAD: Na, ccmi.7:al cysh. capability, che 15 71riou.c nutirotenanca cm dit.i one, it duna3 a als a t Zion, I I [ 10 1 was ' hat juct at any himu &tri ac traint s w: 3 17 9l' i i DR. MC CULLCM: I cninh arry - ti:aa w an ctuae { nay kind of perturbaticn, .c f ro u wi n n. 18 6 0 m oc ntrol nyatom ( l i 10 !.. as it uc:' intenN d to ac, : y inw d iat e r. > va .: that the 2 i, d e 70

only. tima that r eally happeiw a 2.n we kin of ruiatenance 4

I L h 21 i. format vharu 2or.m piecc ol squip.' mt m d ' to <tinharnua - 1 22-j. it; my be a redundant chmm -- and it 2. p-mib1, '+ht te !' 9 i E3. appropriate bypasc to pull that, :- t he richt renc:.:or een j

i I'.

M fj continuo to' operato. i J Iind thC QUO $ tiQd iC, IM D thGCC h C:' 2 ap1RO7,FlatC i 4 J ( L !{ 4 1 6; fi t l woe,y_.=-.mi,m .mor.r-*t.w a -

,,er

.- w.e -u.,-w- .,>e, --.e-w- ---w-~.:w-,e.. ,we m - we + e e e r- --m +*e,..--=rs ..>.-..-ee--+-*. - + - - - - = - - - - - -.. - - - - -. = = - - - = - - - -

T 2740 nur7 1 analysis auch that nonc of thona cowlitions.fould pavent 2l the reactor from' shutting dcran d a ucic: tic evant occurred O 3 during those occasions. .g l 4 CHAIMn11 MILLEh: So in that soare it in related 4 s O to'tha scismic events as the occ.2rrence, I believe. 6 DR. MC COLLCM: Frota that V Lrwpoint, yac. 7 CHMRMN MILLER:

think c.aat o n your qu?ntion?

O MR AXELRAD: Yes. I (/ CilhllO.QN Mll LER: li nl? ;r Orc quen: (m H7 r J 10 M R.. AX5LFLD: No i a t this r.m nera. l 11 CIU\\IPlW1 MILLER: Mr. C :c la rii' r 4 12 Intervenors? a sb .bIl d b.I N.$$ 1 b b !.d h) O3+ NbN 3O h 3. b No 4 14 take um hair-heur'rea cc to.m e lo uu a re n to p t theculve r 15 into position to go forward /i d the e s..d e n tim - arin eg? 4 l' i i 16 MR. SOCOLT XY: No, .! don't if.hi n :: t h d re, is 1 1 4 j' 17 anyt.hing I hrte to cc.d. 10 MR. GRAY: Mr. Chairn. n, o nc. f.r..cth-g m a tion in 19 lin's sith ilhat Mr. Axelrad just acka:1 witi

293 r d n; 2.i cn-

0 type concerns t

f gj ATO you COP.C2rned With 390riOCS Tig' a' c ""-G by 8 t', lO 3ClUnlo CV9nt ltCO.1. icr OMi!.ple* Or dZC 'jou laare COLC2rO6 5 l 20, with Inisintsoa.nce activitier whica rould disi?le c;crne c y 2 tt?.; i.

s.

l 1 24 such that i t sihile maintenarme - goiag cu and ann e :m tr c 1 23 s*fntem cr cignallin? system ware disah.ed becaur' o1. the i 1 1, 4 4 -u-... .ov...+, -,,- - .r. w- ..wn,,e.,-.-v ,,%.....r, ---.-w.--,,-..n ..-mm., ,-.-,.-v-.---.-.. .m- - - - .e._.,-,.,.

r 2749 mm8'- I' maintenance, and'then'n scinmia event occurrod, that you'usuld 2 .be unable to chut doun? 3 ! g.. DR. MC COLLOM:

i. am intereated in both of them 4

The first one, I asuum;, in covered by the sciamic 5 capability of equipment., That is, I preaume, for inctance, j, 6 a relay' control panel won't chatter cuch, or have to be reset i i 7 or something like that oncc the o "cmic event hea happened, i l 8 .But rather uill continm to be ir :;perable rmdas such as to i 9 allow shutdown reactor. 10 Nc.i t,ae otner a. u e mora genara.'. que:_,.a on ralen 1 8 ) 11 woula like for somebody to a&lrena, because it app.are to na 12 that thin is a fecet, and that u that indeed you t'ight be l 13' able to shut doun enough if the uoismic cape.bilitcj of the g 14 remaining equip. ment is nob appropriate, it miobt nob chut 15 down the reactor. 16 I don't c:qv2ct th.i c, fan ur@ratana, out I thinh i T } ' 17 we chould addresc thnt. 4 N-h la MR. GRAY: Thank you, a l j 19 CHIsIRMa! M. ILLER: Ju;y other.;ur t..ienn? 20 (No responce) 9 l 41 VEr.v. wc]l< ue will rece u. Is a half hou: 69 cufficient tima? Ue are no t i.:rvisi te taah v.au. Ma know you s a.g-anva a prolu, era, assentbl1.ng. m 2 s. 1 o Ii j MR. ICELETtD: Where will tbc BMrd ' ; so sie can n L i - i q; repbr;t to the Board if more time is neaeapary? i. l -- :: = - - -..... ~. --/.-----..-------- --- ---- -- - - ~ ~ - -- - - - - - -"

I: I. 2750 4 l 4 l. mn9 I CH?tI)U1N7 MILI. R : We will b<: in our cha10ers. I a. 2 - think it is Room S. 1 3 ( (Recess.) nd Tl 4 i wel fis 5 O i 6 7 f* i i 1 j' 10 11 . 12 t ! ~ ,a i 1 1 i 15 a l-16 17 i j 18 l - 19 20 y: 21 22 i - 23. a I. 24 1 1 a- + n, i~.-.~,..---- ,,--,.n.,-,..--. ,..,---n..-- .., _,. ~.. - - -. - -,. _ _ _.. -. - - -. _ - - - _.. -,., - - - -,,,, - - - - - -..,,, - -.. - -. - -..

'i 2tEL wel 1 2751 ~1 ClihIRMAN MILLER: Are ve ready to proceed? '2 ? !P.. AXELRhD: Yec, Mr." Chairman. 9' 3 Me've reviewed the questions proposed by Dr. '4 ficcollom. prior to the recess, and we would propose that we 5 go ahead at this timo with the information that ue have 6 developed-in response to the questions that the Beard 7 addroccod to us yesterda". i j 8 In the course of that, ue will cover one of the 4 ]- D questions which Dr. McCollom rained, and that is the 10 question with respect to the noismic qualifications of tho ) 11 switchgear referred in SER 8,3.,2. He'll be able to l 12 describe the information that the Licenceu providc6 in 13 response-to that concern in the SEn. i 14 With respect to all of the other questions, we I' 13 would nuggnot that if we had niore opporcanity -" perl:aps over 1 i. [ te lunchtime -~ uc could review whether ue could present infor-- l 17 mution as to those mattera after lunal,, or ubether it_ might 73 be beat to wait until after the Staff pm:sentation is unde. jg But we do think that would be unc-Jul from both 20 the standpoint of the Board and the rect of the pnrhiec to El proceed with the information which va do have w/ajlable at 23 this point. 23 CllAIRIGN MILLER: Very well, you n_ay proceed. 2_f MR. AZELRAD: Yesterdiy Dr. McCallota and Dr. Pa:: ten 9. 3 expreseed a desire to hear more information fran tbe Licensee 1 u.

i:, 1 1. I wel 2' 2752 l 1-and the Staff regarding the seinmic equip.nent qualification i.. 2 based on the revised floor responco spectra. 1 1 3 Specifically, the Doard memberk requested at 1 l W 4 transcript 2724 and 27 that a list of the safety-related 4 j. 5 equipment which was ovaluated be provided for the record, I 6 that we describe the function of this equipment; that we s. j. 7 [; provide more detailed information on the methods used to l 0 evaluate the various clances of equipaant to the revised q a response spectra, and that we provide the opinions of experta o / 10 that on the bacis of the evaluations the cefaty-related 4 j 11 equipment will function in the event of an a?.rthquate up to 12 and including a 0.25g SSE. 1-In response to that requent we ondeavored last l J p; night to nuctor more of the individual expsrto frcn Bechtel I tb and PGE who have been involved in ovaluating the adequacy s b 1G of cafety-related equipment in the Cuatrol/Auxi:tiary/ Fuel i i l g Building complex. I j. ja We are prepared thic morning to present a panel i I 19 of exports to address these questions, 'lirst by providing 20 additional information for the Dourd, and then providing the .) i 21 vitnecces for any additional questicus on these matters which i ) 22 the Board may have, particularl7 with respect to the scismic i& w. qualification of the existing equipmant in the complex in .m w 24 light of its as-built condition and the floor response Opoetra baCGd on finita Clement analySOS. l-u..a _ -.., _,.._ _,_-_. _... _. - ~. _.. _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _.. _ -.... _ -,

-wel.3 2753 i-1 For.these purposes, I would now like to recall 2 three witnesses, and call three coditional witnesses as a 3 panel of:six. ) o 4 We will need I;ix seats, so'parhaps if the Board i 5 could move down.. 6 (Pause.) 7 CHAIRMAt! MILLER: All right, Mr. Axelrad, cs11 O your witncsses. 9 MR. AXELRAD: I would like at this time to re<,:all 1 10 Mr. Anderson, Dr. White and fir, Frewing., who have previously 11 heen sworn, and to additionally call Mr. Eushnell., Mr. a 12 shipley and Mr. Cook, who have net testified before in thin i 13 proceeding. g 14 Whereupon, 4 15 RICI!ARD C. A1TDERE' i 10 WILLITsM H. WHITE 17 JOHN L. F1CNIliG 4 18 TED BUSIINELL 4 i 19 K. M. C00KD i 20 R. E. SHIPLEY 21 were called as Witnesses on behalf of tire Licenese and, 22 having been first duly sworn, were examined and tettified O 23 further as follows: L 24. DIRECT EXM11 NATION O. on BY MR. AXELRAD: t Q For the benefit of tbc court reporter, I will Just 4 .h. .+ -..,,,,,...._,.....,.y,._, n,-.- ...,_-._,,---m,._.,_m.-_,.,.__m..,w,,.-w..-.--

wel 4' 2754- 'f ask the witnesses,'from left to right, to identify themselves 2 'by name. l h 3 A (Hitness Anderson) Richard C.

Anderson, 4

A (Witnesa White) Willian II. Uhite. l' l 5 A (Nitness Frewing) John L. Frawing. j G A (Hitness Bushnell) Tad Duchnell, 4 l 7 A (Witness Cooke) L M. Cooke. i i I G A (Mitness Shipley) R. E.

Shipley, i

9 0 Mr. Shipley, will you p]ence state your addreas? 10 A (Witncan Shiplay) 37 Spindrift Paasuge, Port I li of Madera, California. c 12 O Will you please state for us your present i, i I 13 . employraant? 14 A Bechtel Power Corporation, San Francisco. ? 15 0 And your pocition? a 16 A I'm the Supervisor of the Piping Stress Analysis l 17 Group. 18 0 Mill you plenne describe for us your educational 4 l 19 background? 4 20 A Yes. I graduated in 1965 with a DSME frora the 21 United States'flerchant rinrine Academy at nings Point. l 22 For two yonra after graduation I served as Engine 23 Room.Operationc Officer aboard various ships in the Marchant { 24 N"EiU** d-): 25 I j ined Bechtel in 1967, with the piping strono ro r ,..i....i.

U s 2755 wel S 1, group, where I've been ever since. I i 2 -I've been involved in the design of nuclear power l; 3 ff.; plants, specifically with regard to piping analysis in some i 5 l nine now operating reactors. As I caid, I'm currently the nuperv2scr of the D o j 6 is piping stress analycin group, and.am a member of tha ASME i i[ 7 ji Ccrimittee to define requiramento for piping vibration, as i-9 )' F D '[ well as a member.on an ANS co:rraittea currently investigating 4 i I 9 jj piping concerna. LL 'O O Aro you a regintered nrofessional cnuineer? l 1 i i j l i. i. A Yes, I an. I 12 0 .In what State? i, l ':, l. .A State of California. l

/

Q Any apecialty? i l 10 A. Mechanical enginocr. 3 ] Eh Q Thank you, Mr. Shiplc'/. a H Mr. Cooke,uill yoit please stato your addrecs for tj h. q 16 i the record? j ] 10 A (Uitneno Cooke)l729 Terraco Roadr 17alnut Creak, I l I California. l E; O And your current eraployment?

!)

SL lj A I ata a cenior electrical engineer with Bechtel i Fe f ~

6. Power Corporation.

i h p; G And in that capacity could you tell us ',' hat your l-f U3ctionD arO7 l ,4, m L p,. I W: ?. ?

i 'wal 6 2756 d 1 A I am responsible for the technical electrical 2 donign and electrical systema en the Pechtel Trojan project t j ' ~3' team. 4 O And can you describe for us your previano back-i l S ground and e:cperience? i j. G A I received a nuchelor cf Science degree in i i 7 electrical engineering at Long Beach State University in l 0 1972. 9 I am a member of IEEE. I have c.orked since 1972 10 on the Trojan design, electrical design. I was in the early 1 11 ctages of the electrical deeign on the Trojan plant. I was j 12 in the phaces of construction, startup and the recent , g 13 design changes on the plant, 14 O And can you describe for us in mero detail your 1E relationship to the Trojan project over the pcot few years? 4 j' 10 A For two years I was an electrical c.osign engineer. 1 17 For four yeare I was a senior electrical design engineer, and ? 1 18 for the past year I've been serving ac Deputy Group Supervisor 19 to the Electrical Group on the project teau, i i 20 0 Thank you. d-j.- 21 14r. Bushnell, would you state your ful;. name and a l 22 addreno for the record? i e 23 A (Witncna Duchnell) Yes Theodore A. Buchnell.

1. -

24 My business address is 121 GW Mmne Street, Portlande Oregon. ' h Mill you'please stata for us your present 2$ O 4 l \\ -e w+--+,.rt,.'.ev,.+e v r -e .r.* =. -sen.,, - r--.-sv+-=ww--<*w-: .-v-i4e --m, -,-wr-

==------~----<=--.------u-.--...---,+-er ..-.+-.-----r- - = * - - -

l wol 7 2757 I occupation? 2 A: Yec. I'm employed with Portland General Electric 3;

-.e 3

Company in Generation Engineering. MV poGition is Supervising 9 4 Civil Engineer. S Q Can you state for us your educational background? h l-6 A Yes. I received a Dachelor of Science degree from l l 7 California State University, Dan Jose, and n Manter's degree i D from Stanford University. D Q And can you giva ua your previous background and 10 experience? 11 A Yes, sir. Portland Genorcl Electric Company, 12 approximately five years. 1 13 - Prior to joining PGE I was employed uith D.R.S. 14 Eloom Associates, a connulting firm in Ean Francisco. 15 My primary duties tnero were project engineer and j 10 project manager en projecto including nuclear power plants i 17 and other such projecta, whero my emphacic was ir the seisn;ic i 10 or dynamic analycis area, analysis decign, and evaluetion 1 l j. If! of equipment. ) j 20 0 Mr. Fre'. ring, since, unlike Dr. White and Mr. j 21 Anderson, you did not testify yertordny, bu'c you last appeared ) -22 in previous hearing sessions, it might be uneful for you to O . ~ - 23 indicate again for the record what your employment is, t I 24 A (Witness Preving). I'm employed at Portland General 25 Electric Company as Menwer of the Generation, I,1 censing and 4 r 4 em - - = = em***-------rar-------+*'--wvrore-- m e-*,e-me w w-v. .-~*geve-m--er*w==ew-e-w==w*w**%=-w-

* * ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ * * ^
r

{L i wel 8 2758 4 1l-Analysis Grouo. a ) 3I Q Can you daccribe for us briefly what your functiono I e v 3 h entail? 4, j A It involvec supervinion of a number of analyses D ! for PGE'c nuclonr projects and coordination of :much of the licansing docuraentation which :a passed autwan PGC and e o bb 'l regulatory bodica, g i E i Iin. AXELRhD: Hr. Chaircan, I'd liho to orplain .l D briefly how we plan to procecd. i 10jy Obviously, we did not 'uve an opr.ortunity to l 2 j, il 11 4 preparc anything in written forra. N t wo would like to do j li o k ML is, first of all, to have I'r. Anderson describe triefly what d j F El this panel vill Gc. 24,, There will ba one e.nditional document that we will I i TE ! be'introducinrj into evidence as c :natte of convenience. The 15 doctunent io an internal docunant that was prepared by Bechtel, ] 9 1T 4 and not for purpocca of intreduction or an e::hibit. He are I w 50 j: going to use it solely becauco it containa e convanient d iL h list of the equipment involved.

~-

An earlier vorcion of this accument has been in t lli-the diccovery rocra cinco nonatir.to in November. As a matter 21 ?2 i' of fact, Ms. Bell received a copy of that when nhe visited

i ; g

.j

f the discovery room a few dr.ys

'cre tha haaring. I' M. i j. Dut.we would just like. i:o Inake sure th2t the Board jg understands, we will introduce this shibit rolely as a matter r, {-. il l t' if I y

-. _ _. _ _ _ ~. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _. _ _ - - _. - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _. .. wo1 ~ 9 2759 e t I of convenience, and not because we wish to gat into a lot i i n of details as to what the textual naterh.1 involves. O 3 At this point, for purpouco of nimplicity, I would O like Mr. Anderson to decuribe what the panel will do when S they proceed with the rout of the proconta tion. 6 CHhIRMAN MILLEn: Very well,, 7 ITITNESS ANDERSON: Au you can see, WM ve accomblod 8 n larger group of qualified engincorr, to talk acre specificall3 9 to the sainnic requiremento and qualification for equipment, I i j l 10 piping and electrical cable trays,. I i 11 In the course of offering these more 6.ctsiled 12 dcocriptions and comments we vill be referring to naccral 1 !. g 13 listce 14 Maybe I should take <30n0 time to describe theco l 15 listo, and uhore they are, and how they will be uced, I. 16 Firct of all, va will be referring to the quantion l 17 and antracr known as 3 D to the Septors)ar 20 responce to thu j 18 MRC Staff's quantionc. I believe thic in Exhibit 9.D. i i l 19 This question covers only couipannt located in i- 'I 20 bhe control building, and it wan utated furthe.r in Exhibit I j 11 19, paragraph F, on page 7, that the equip:nen'. listed in i l-22 the answer to question 3.D uns utill qualified to the O 23 broadened rcoponno spectra that una icientified in that t I .24-exhibit. 25 But again I want to amphacico that th:t list in

1 1#el 10 - 2760 1 only for equipment in the contro] room. 1 2 Then we will be referring to this docurnent that

9 D

we prepared in the course of developing our work on review O 4 of equipment, piping and electrical cable trays. 5 CHAIRMAN MILLER: What is the title of that l l j. 6 document? I j. 7 W.CTNESS ANDERSON: The title in, "Confirmntion ) 0 of Seismic Qualification of Equipment, Components and Piping j fi in the TJoian Nuclear Plant." i j 10 CHAIRMAN MILLER: That document may be markad a 1 l 11 for identification as Licensoc Erhibit 23. 17. (The document referred to was g 13 raarhed for identification an 4 l 14 Licanoaa' c E);hibit L.) 15 Mn. AYELRAC: Just as an item of identification, 10 the document is dated Novett. bur 29, 1978, and in rarked ac 17 Revision Numbcr 2, 1978. 3 10 (Documents distributad.) 4 j. 19 WITNESS ANDERSOM: Now thic ciocument, ac Mr., 20 ?xclrad has cuid, vac first incued Movember 29, and these i . 21 subsequent two revisions vare nr2a to update the numbers, l j 22 the specific numbers of the piping cyctems that were O 23 involved, the additional restraints and modifications to i-24 existing scismic cupports. 1 25 Now, this document supplements the licting in P-p .__ wge wwwwerte -. _. _. _. _ __- _, rs-9 m e ge W www f f w r+-er- --mi-+,.n-w+---e.,.*ms,1-*-r- <-,----,ew e m. yv ,<,n+.se--mm.m,+ww-, v,-,m---wwmwrey -_ _ny-ws,

m. wel 11 2761 l 1 question ~3.D to include equipment, piping and electrical ~ l' . 2 cable trays in the' remainder of the complex. That is, the e!e l 3 Fuel and Auxiliary Duildings. e i 4 And it includen equipment above elevation 45 and i~ i j 5 in the cystems that are required for safe shutdown, for s 6 omergency core cooling and for mitigating the consequencen i 7 of accidents of offsite relences to the requirementa of l i D 10 CFR Part 100. 9 Now, there is some duplication in thin documant 10 in the electrical equipment area with tha list given in 3.D, s. 11 and this was done because we wanted to chou More information B i i 12 than was shown in question 3.B. _g 13 So you will see some equipmant in this document l 14 that was originally listed in 3.B in the control building, i 15 and this is in the area of electrical equipment. 10 lbw, the engineers on our panel will each address 17 specific areas involving the reavaluation or reanalysis work. i 1 l 10 There will bo, I think, some repetition of parts of our 19 testimony and parts of the croso-examinntion, but ue want to \\, l 20 do that to provido in one place a more complete surrasry of the 21 soiamic equipment qualifications. t 22

1. low, if I could just briefly outline who will talk i 9 2s

.about each specific area, Mr. Frowing will first ntsrt by 4 3 f-24 briefly describing the systems.and their location and their 25 function. i e. w w-N rih wy-vew*w&emww en 7 meww m1 = wkwwmusimew www-w WWW1G'r w N

F 2762 wel 12 I And then we'll cak Dr. White to describe again l: 2-the offect on equipment below grade elevation 45 cnd lowerr

h.

4 3 and why.the effect was just on equipacnt a:;ove grade, the l-h 'dffect of the STARDYNE analynis and reovnluation. 4 4 .] 5 Then we vill ask Dr. White to cpo@ specifically G to the kind of information that is provided by the civil 4 7 structural ceismic analynt to the people chat do the evaluatior i i B on the equipment. 9 Then 5/a'll ask Mr. Shipley to speak nore specific-i to ally to how piping was reevaluated and reanalyzed. 11 And we'll call on Dr. White agnin to cpes further l 12 .on the seit:mic qualification of cable traya, cad we'll ask I 13 g Idr. Bushnell to address reismic qualification of rachanical l. 14 and electrical equipment. maScion 15 fis 16 3 17 J i 10 1 1 }9 ,o l l l 20 21 l-RE 23 24 25 r .4....., ..m.. ....,., _..... -. _... -. _...... _ _,, ~,. _,.. _.. _,.......,, -..

2763 MADELON/ 1 And we'll ask Mrs Cook I:.o Mrther danctibe the mpbl 2I seismic' qualification of electrical.cquiunnt fror, the point 3% of view of an olectrical enginecr. 11a wiu deal with tho ' g l i 4 functionality of such equipnent. I U Gith that brief outline, then, I think w will l 0 begin with Mr. Frewing, who will discuss: the ayatuna and i l.

/

thc.ir location and their functicn. i, 1 0 0 Before we got to Mr. Frewinth 1 think uo need i i l 9 to ash Mr. Andernon acveral quuctions in order to have the l to exhibit introduced into avidence. 1 1 i 1; Mr. Anderson, do 'fou have bafore you the docu~ i e ]

g }

ment entitled " Confirmation of thu Seiana.c Qualifica.uion of i l n. Equipment Componanto and Pipin<J of the Trojan Hucle.ar Plant", gl dated November 29, 1978, Revision 2 dated Decembar 11, 1978, c ) 33 unich has.been marked for identific1 tion 2n Licencaos E::hibit

g number 23?

i 3 j j< A Yes. g Q Uero you involved in the preparatf.on and did i gg you superviso tha preparation of this docu. rent? ? m0 A .Yes, t O Did you briefly deccribe for ua previously 21 what the document contains? ,a, A Yes. 3 J.Le .i-4 MR.'AXULRAD: Mr,, Chairman, I tok tha.t t.h e .y p. u, i :

1. 9 c..

I docenant identified as I;icenceeu' b;hibit number 23 be j, V n p ..) i 1 [ }' 1-t-. [ 1

L.,. l-I- 2764 l l-mpb2 1 accepted into evidence., l l 2 CHAI1EM4 MILLER: 1c there any ob::cchic;0 L9 l 3 (t40 responsm) 9-- 4 CHAInt4M1 MILLCla I. ican u ocs ' R:hibit 23 will bo ! ) u 5 admitted into caidenen, G (thererpon, the documant i i y prc.viously inarked as i l 9 Y,icen c e rs ' Exhibit 23 was I I p admit cd f.nto evidenco. ) 10 HR., AYELimD: I might poiat out !!ro Chaiz:mun, l j jj we also have addiv.icnal copica cf Table 3D1 ene 'J.'able 3B2, 12 which are the portions of the answer to Cunction 3B previous-i n 13 ly contionad by Mr. Anderson for thcan individuale who mdy 14 not have copics readily a.vailabic e.nd night. want to use 1; gg thic for refe.rctacc duri.og thin testimony. i g, CIIAIRMAll MILLaR: Docs anybr,dy md a copy? o MS BELL: Yes.

7 gg (Document hc.nded no Mc. Dall )

C11 AIRMAN MILLER: Can ve have ene, pleabc? 1D (Document handed r.o tne Boarci,) uG e DR. MC COLLOM: Nould you give tne Bo?.rd tao 3c.1 ccpien, pleace? en. u I i. w, BY MR. J2ELRAD: 1 h Q eA ;. Mr., Frcwing, cro you f amiliar with Table 3B1 nnd l I i a j 352 from LicenDces' Exhibit 9D, previoucly elleded, to 1.n c.a i i i .i I il

1..

i ii ...., - ~.... -m

....m-

-.- _-_-.__-..-~_-._ -.___. i 2765 npb3;1" Mr.. Anderson's testimony? 2 A' (hituer;g prewing)

yes, 9:

3 -0 And are you fauiliar with Lica.nseca' D:hibit 1 '4 number 23?. { 5 'Zsa. 6 Q Can you tell us where in Exhibit rumoor 23 there

/

is identified the safety-ralated systeus within the S.'rojan O control auxiliary fuel building comple.x uhich are recpaired 9 for safe shutdown, for the ECC3, and for mitigation of acci-i 10 dent consequences within the limits of 10 CFR Part 100? 11 A

Yes, i

j 12 That lint of systnua is provided on tha third 13 sheet of Exhibit 23, which in headed 1., The list appears in 14 the conter of the page. 15 0 Is that Tabla l? 10 A No, it's not Table 1. It's on the third s.heut of the document. That is in Section L 2 17 l I is Q That. Ic the list of cystams, i gg A Correct. l 20 Q Would you ploaco describc for uc tbc function of i 21 those nystems? 2 - L 22 A YEL* l : We're interacted in the mocncaical, the electri-23 i (' cal, and the structural suppurts of these systems that are 74 L.-- importa.nt to safety. These systans have parts of them in' the 25 I

_.,-,---...w.. n ,_.n a m.- -..-.m-.. - ~... _........ - - s 2766 I mpb4 1 control, auxiliary and fuel buildinn comple. A.nd I'll j ust 2 go down the. list and indicate the significance af tnn system j h i 3 to safety and what parta of the system are in the complex. ~ 9 4 The service water cyatera provides river water 5 to cool the cafety-related equiprieut, he.at exenangers, pumpa, -S. and things'of that sort, and alao cool room coolera which 7 provide habitability to enable an operator to chut tlown the 8 ' pltutt and enable proper environmental protectio 1 for cafety-9 related electrical equipment,, 4 l 10 In the complex the serviec water itemn of 11 interest are largely small piping, that is, les'3 than six 12 inch piping, uhich serves room coolega. J j 13 The component cooling water system is an inter-14 mediate system for relaoving heat from u.:.foty-related compo-

g nents which are important to safety.

The componem.; cooling jg ) unter system takes heat from the reacior sysmanc and given 77 it.up in_a heat exchanger to the ucrvica water syctem. The component cooling water system is provided as an intermediate. gg ! i

g,

system so that there are multiple barriers agaiunt the re-a j 20 t lease of any radioactive wat2 rial that might be in the reactor .i coolant syatena itcelf. l 21 y t i 22", In the comolox, the component cooling watar j 9-y y[ items of interont include a surge v.ank for toa nycteu, that 24 is a storage tank' to make sure that tha syateu is alwayc g, full, and'aloo a number of pipeu which n, to specific I t Y q

- f

'i_ a s -...

i + 2767 e r l impb5 I compononts. Most of these components, I would add, are 2 -below:grado level, or elevanica 45 %e t, and so are not of 1. 3 primary-interest. And the me.torial the.t is above grade 4 level is, again, genarally small piping. 9 l 5 The safety injection system in a standby system { 6 which is provided to inject water into the core in the event [ 7' of a major loss of coolant o.ccident in the core., Recall that i 8 the coro, of course, is not in the complex, but is in the a' 9 containment. i-10 The cafety injecticn equipnent which is in the i 11 complex is piping from the pumps which are in the below grado j 12 portion.of the auxiliary building to the reactor coolant s 13 system which is in the containment. Thero arc also of G c i 14 course, instruments and controls which control tne operation 13 of the pumps which are in the control building and run from i 16 the pumps up to the control room, c -p The residual heat removnl systuu is a cystem 18 which provides low pressure safety injection water to the i 19

reactor, i

20 Perhaps I should have raentioned that the safety 1 21 injection system operates with high prescura, in too rango pp of 1500 psi. The residual heat' removal system takes over and 23 provides large volumes of water ~ to the ccre in ovent of a

c j.-

pf, loss of coolant accident at low prcestres, in the range of [h 25 a couple hundred pai. 4 p .g d- ...J... .6,...-.--... -.~ l m...--~.1,....-,-..-.m._-.., -. -. -...., ~. _ - - -.i-~~._.____.----..---.---~--,m_~~-.~.-.~

2768 mpbG 1 The rcsidual heat renova.L syntem is important i l' U, i 2 au its name suggests, to re.acw. decay heat frou the reactor O. t 4, . following ncrmal ahntdown, and therefore in important to l 6 " safety for that reacon. 5 In the complex the :eoidut1 heat removal'compo- { f i-i 6jl nento that were necescary te look at for the soicmic quali-j 4-Ii a i 7 fication'again wero principally electrien1 instrumentation 2, 3 6 - control componento. There is como piping unich traversec O the building aa it goes from the residual haat removal pumps, i i 10 which arc in the below grada nart of the auxiliary building, ce they go into the containuent. So there's only a small i 11 4 4 a bit of piping, but & good bit of the inctrumentation c.nd 1 1 13 controls involved. g v< ~ !, In the auxiliary fc dwater cyctc:: -- wall Int i n 2 i gl me say the auxiliary fecducter cysten providos water to cool i 1 gg{ the secondary side of the Gtea:a Jancratorr. Recall that the s O

g. !

core hent is in the primary coolant cyct is normally i l 78 i transferred to c secondary system in etni oro. The t 9. gp ( aux 111ary Icedwater nyctem pron..uca at - to the p i e-4 i 20 q ntcam generators to remove decay hett if ca. ( h} It is a diverso syston from tM c-20 i. p[ tion system which essista in core accling tc 1 ypo-

- 9.

e i () theticcl loss of' coolant accident. ~ca g y e 'j< .{ TDC EICk11 dry f 5CdWat{f r 0fSti,,2[i, ,C in . u., j. the control auxilihry fuel building complC) dmantatibn F t 4 L f fi U- .n

2769 I mpb7 and control;and power for the auxil:ary feadwater cystem I g. 2 . runc through the complex. 3 - The contair.mant spray system is an engineered i h-I 4 safety feature which provides chemically treated water to S the top of the containment to apray down through the contain-O ment to remove heat from the conto.infaent so es to keep the 7 . containment pressure below allowable limits. The equipment i O itself ic in the below grade portion of the auxiliary i l D building, but as with the residual heat removal system, some 1 j 10 of the containment spray piping traverses the lowar levels 11 of tha auxiliary building as ib goen into thu ctutainment. f 12 And, of cource, the instrumentation and controls j. d g- ~ 13 of that system are in the complex. 14 The containment isolation cyctem is a group of i 15 censing and signaling inetrumentation which tella contuinment 16 isolation valves to close when an advente situation is detec-4 17 tEd. The containment isolation valven themselves are on l TC-I>iping connected to the contnimnent, cud is not in the complex 1 i l

9

- of intercot. l 20 dowever, the instrumentation end controls are 1 L 21 in the complex of interest. i 22-The centrifugal charging system is -~ excuse me e

~

23 performs a function much like the safety injem: ion system. 4 a [ 24 ~I should note that part of the centrifugal charging systen 25 is in oporation during normal power operation to control t ~ -pr yr-e + es. ,,.,,,new

4,_.-m

-,,,,e en w, w h as me---*,-e~n--ee'+m*-*+3*-*-n-'-wkwe'-w=m= = - - - - -- -ww-- =ad==-**w=-w====+==**Je-*=re

L 2770 i i L mpb3 I-aclant chemistry and volume; but its safety fnneclon ic to r l 2 ' inject waher into the core following a loss of coale t acci-l 9 l 3-den t. 4 As with the safety injection, residual heat, and 5 containmant spray system, the me.jor couponents, that is i i C plunpa, are in the balow-grade portion of thn auxiliary i 7 building, but tha pipe does traverso - doeu ccma up above I l-8 grade level as it goes into the containmat. I a 9 The items of interaat in the complex ara the l. I 10 instrumentation and controle asacciated with that syctam, 1 F 11 The chemical and volume control systect in a 12 system of tanks and cheanical control eleme.nts, principally l 13 boria acid, which control the reactivity o2 Lac recator g 14 dUring normal oparationa. In an rxnargency this systaa hae j 15 a safety function of providing concentrated baric acid a 1 to the reactor coolant ho assure its safe. shutdown. n 17 The componenta of uno cheunical sad volume control i 33-system that are in the conglex are largely instrinaantation i 19 and control, but as with several of the other cystens men-i 20 -.tioned previously, some of the pipa doas traverse the buildinc, i - t i:

21 itself.

i l 22 Perhaps I should note hbai:; several of thesa !9 [ 23 - systams are redundant, that in thers are two traina in each l 3 ayateln, and the syntoma themselves in reveral casea ars 25 n d ndant with regard to providing ability to remove decay l. t l: t=1

2771 mpb9 1 heat so as to allow cafa nhubdown, .2 The final systen of importance is the waste 3 gas decay system, and it simply holds up ra.dioactive gas A which has been extracted from the primary coolant until it 5 haa-decayed to acceptabic levels to discilarge to the environ-G- mant..The componento of intercat in thic system which wa 7 reevaluated were the waste gas tanks themselves and instru-1 g montation and control, 9 These systems are detailed in the Trojan rinal to Safety Analyclo ' Report, where considerable discussion is

i provided of their function and their safety analysis.

These 12 systems worn selected because they are important in perform-13 ing safety-related functions which copc with accidents which 14 are hypothesized according to NRC regulations and are jg described in FSAR Chapter 15. 16 I believe that is a stuamary of one level of' the j7 systems, their functien, and their locaLion in th*3 couplex

g which wo examined to ensure their scisms.c qualification under jg the revisad floor respones epcotra.

J 0 Mr. Frew2.ng, anu these are tlm syntens which are g I . required for safe shutdown,ECCS or to mitigate or prevent j consequence of accidents bsyond.100 guidelines? u. A Yac. _g. t Q Mr., Anderson, with recspect to the system which 24 have been daccribed by Mr Frzuing, cocid you just identify g i s.. .u. ______._.__._,_...__._._.______....-_.__.2__.._._.___

.[ 2772 mpbl01 for us the cables within Lic6nnu ' B:dlibit ?3 which identif) 5 2 tha, piping, cable trays, ar.d equipurnt tint um 2:cvieuud in O 34 the,reovaluation? A A (Witness Anderson) 'los. 1 ) 5 b( Table 1 identifiou tha coismic qualification of flIl 6} equipment in the compler. And you'll notice in Table 1 thorc 7q are many piccen of equips.2nt listed that did not rsquire 4 8]h reevaluation because they are located at or belou elevation i 9 [I l 45 a 10 [j And Tabic 2 given e furthar brenhdcen of tin h V d

g. q cauipment, the nochanical a.yuip: cent in-the complex chat 10 bi 12 )h above clovation 45.

These cro all tanka. \\ i, g g Then caveral pages 1 1ttr, on pago 3, we identi-3 o pt i fiad the piping cystems by icotteuric number that uare rc-t \\; glll ovaluated, and a dcacription of tha requircrents for accep-4 i I. i m tanco. 6 o

I

] 1 h In table 4 wa idur,tified cable trav nuncorts i r 1 j y gj in the aren thtt would be affented by a char.ge in the reaponse. 1 y- ( opnctra. i n, 8 20 And,. finally, in Yable 5, wa identified tho J g j clectrical equipsont, And as I mentioned before, moat of aS lj thic. oquipment la located in tha control building. One of v, h 3 ys t' .the other reasons for including this particular table was a., that the qualification method here hac been described in p_ the came way as the qualification cethod in the FDAR for and 3' f consistency purpocos. A I f 1 ,1_.-_-__,_..__-._.,_._._,,,._.J. J..._..._.,___..-,-_,.....,,.,m,

c 2773 .. MCLTZBR jl-1 a to 1 -G Thank you, Mr. Anderaon. 2 Dr. TEnito, you ha.ve pre'ricu' ly testified in this s 3 proceeding as to the reason why the reevaluation involved ! O 4 equipment and components above clavation 45 feet. l 5 Could you curruariec for as reur previone tectimony 6 in that recpcot? 1 1 i y 3. (Witnear White) Yes; as we have diccasEcd on ether 1 g occasions, the floor responce opoatra given a maastu'c or J 9_ indication of the amplification of the ground motion within the structure. 10 A piece of equipment that in not supported.on the

j 12 ctructure, where it is free to vibrate, will not sco any i

amplification. Part of the meclliary buil<linc 10 in a rock g g cavity doun belou olevation 45,s.and therefore moves with the y,,. 1.c:, ground. And thern there vill be no angliffice. tion 02 that motion. g Any.cquipment that is supportert -di.rectly off the floor slab at elevation 45 la, ag tin, bied in directly with g-1 the ground and we'll see no amplification in motion. It will 39 I see the ground motion. a .e..n, - a tha t 4.e h<.ve looked at j So the pieces of equ_ ' r: cat c 2 y i .y. - have been the ones that will ' :parieneus0m' mplified notj on I 1 O 4 due to ' the structure being botuen the grcund z.nd the location g -1 of - that equipment. u4 En Anything tied to elevation 45 or balo.7 docan't see w.: a m,.,;-.,_-....-..--.,.--.---. -.~-...---.,_,m_~.___,,._.-.---___-~__.,-..-,.--- 4 ,,,-..r,...

j j,1~ 2 - r

2774, i

r i any' increased amplification. .l - g so, therefore, the -pl aviout qualification wac e

q unchanged.

I$ 4 0-TXank-you. 3 Dr. White, you par ticipated in the reavr.luation y[ that was performad of thena sys tems, as tactified to in your i ) )f previous teatimony? i i i E Yes. ,o i 0 Could you describe for ua what ::ype of informnion i c.. f you provided to thoco individualc Uho.perft rmd tha actual g l1 f analyses of piping 'ccble traya and equipment? y) j 1 A Yes. The. civil g:: cop in tha ano that d'nu the g t ctructural analyais. Uc are thu ones that davo2 aped the 3 E l-STARDYNE model, performed the analycia, and developc.:d the s, i } I' 17 lj floor ranponse Upectra. l 2 i Upw, the floor racponna spr.ctra provided other ,4 i I disciolinec to do their crualification 2nalysis, or the t . l., 1a e 4 ,a,ll.braodened responce spachra that have been discuaned and I p I co'l documented in Exhibits 19 throcgh 22. _IU i.j Thenc are tho ones that the civil group '",' R. n i j genera ted. ' This information was supplied to the o ther y.1 ] d.icciplines to perform their evaluation. 1 u,. s ,m ~[ 0 Thank you, Dr. 17hite. s. k l J -l! Mr. Shipley, could you nuncarine for us your I u; ; .prCViOUS and currcnt 'involi7GE.On t in COnnOct. ion With thO TrojCu .a e .' b s 1 ) b b-n A

e i ( jl. 3 F 2775-t i i 1 . plant? 1 4 j- '2 A' (Witncna Shipley) I an the Piping Str:ma Group 3 Supervisor at Bechtel, San Francisco; <mu sore of uy people i 4 work ok the Trojan project, and I had daily contact with them l 5 recently, diracted their ucrh in technical areas and have follewod this ucrk quite closeiy. d 4 IL 0 Are you familier with the Trojnn plant? Do you j 7 { visit it on occacion? 3 .A Yes, I hava. a 10 l

0. -

Can you dencribe for us briefly over what period of I time that has extended? 11 1 A Oh, appro;;inntely 1975 to 19 75,.I would guess, j g l perhaps four to fivo times, bor during construction and after h.. I3 3, -,_ ons truc ticn. 14 MR. BMKS : Can everybcdy boar lir. Shiplsy all I b, rlght? I wondor if you might b>3 able to get the other l' microphone? 18 4 BY MR. AXELRAD: 1 19 0 And did you aupervice the analysis of piping bv. ,, g g m f -Bechtel? 4 '21 4 1 A. (Witness Shipley) Yes, I did. L. 22 -0 Can you tell un where the piping syste:na that vere g nntlycod, or identified, in Licensee Exhibit No. 23 - is that in Table 3? i" . 25 i I i

4 4 r jl 4 2'770 .1 ' A. Oh, yes, it is. 2 0 And can you doccribe for tsa how the analyces were ,. g 3 performed and the recults of thet e.nnlytecT' l t. A. Yec. Section 2 of thic rcport givos a brief sturanary I U of the-techniques we used for suicmic analysin of r'iping \\ l G cyctema. J 7 Ua banically ucca the responso apoctr'a technique. a 'If you recall, the ranponse spectra technique was described by 9 Dr. White provicuoly ao the s aa type of tachnique they uced 1 10 for building analycia. 11 It bacically calculaton -- computational techniqua u ic to calculate frequencies and r.rde chaps and then using g ficer response spactra to calcolato the acceleccatican and loadu g j. y on the piping nyc tem, l i 33 p.1 ping Ic n t3n'oe .u:unsioncy type or connguratyon, and it must be modeled to such to proparly represen t the 16 I i ] a j 37 ! dynamic characteristica ci the ayatea. g Included in thin threc~dimnncional model of the 19 system are such piping fitting as albows, Ts, branch connectionn, reducerc. In addition, valvoc arc modaled into the piping 2-9 s nystsu. 21 i 1 1 G- - 22 The model of the valvo includea the mato: cpera tor, - 23 which extends ebove the. valve itrelf. Equirmant anchorn are f 96 g4 ,liheWiEG cDbSid0 rod and, thcy CO;WiSt prinarily '.Of pumps, tanhD, f h03t C% Chang 0r3., .,., n sa i r i .l -...... -., ~,, -,.... ~, -..... .m...- ... - -.. -.. ~.

_.___,\\._._.________. _ _ ~ _. _ _. _. _ _ _ _ _.. _ _ l

jl 5

.1 i

2.....

/// l Once'the syntsm har been mo6clau.- a comuuter analv-- a j cia in made, using a recponce <- Tcru echnique. J ud the e 4 , resulta obtdined are comparc with -- both ' '.::h the indnotry J .i S codon - that would~ ba primarils for screr lovela - as voll 1 3 ~j an to manufacturora allowables for fo':ca and i < monta on <.. quip-I s 6j munt,valven, accelerations on n;1N o. D l 7h There in a aummary of i-he results -of the analYaic qo I 3, and.preciaaly what needed to be donc to qualify tha piping. I 9 l in Table 3, an wo indicated, tI E 10 lj Griefly though, the edi.tze:ml ca.oports for' the h 1p largo piping that were require d warc 20. 11 Tho u are 19 of thcce i i U ll c supports' indicated in the tab.1. There i: c.n additional one i h il g in that is not in the sciamic Categori 1 oiping syn ten, 2.n d 14 N therefora vann't indiented here, ilv p Ei Thera woro 43, additional cuall pi.c. an - Ouunorta - 1 H n 10 q required, and thoro were 52 nodifications cc minting cunports il n ji and rastraints required. 4, 10 l I think that briefly aw6ar5 zes whn.t uo did. I 1 E [a 0 There lact tuo ntnberu, with respcct to umall pipes, 20 43 additional.

clerps, for ' mall piper and 52 modificatiod oli 21 h of existing SupportD; a r'd th Q U ^^

oflE l d in thO 34 4tiDU On i

20, 1 Table.37 d A. Yes. The number 43 -- thcre are 37 of those new ce w g4.] Dupporte licted in the tab 3e. la d, again, oix of them are not O eI,wsnnfety-relatedsystemaanathereforawaronotsneluacd. l

4 1

5; a -b ) i .I

. - -. -. -. ~.. _ _. i j 1.' 6 [ 2778 The nodificationc ~~ 51 were included in t hc table L L cad to 3 and one was on nonsafety-rele.ted nyatera,. i.,, lO a I l 5. l-i ~ i i k l-7 l~r c%a.r 4 G 10 1 1 I. 11 i l i 1.9 I 13 f 14 i 15 i iG s 17 d 1 I iG j-- 19 i I - 20 t-21 i h i~. 77 t I-q,y 1 h at . i ,k I F i ~ .f '

l I 2779 i T5/MI'LTZER r.ual ly O Mr. Shipley, in your cpinion, in light of the n 'O h; results of the analyces that won perfori:t :, ic eich J d Jj piping system capable of witia t mf.ing au ccuc chqu;@ up 6il J ij io and including the.25G SSD? p! 5( Ic. h I A Yes, It. t' h 6, DR, PAXION: 1:ny I auk a grastlan of I:r. Shipley l n 1 ' ij I q now, pleace? hd ij MIt. AXELRAD: Certainly, it 1 I ?h DR. PAXTON: Ycu rui r to larae p5 7.w and emcIl i tL 10,]a pipa, Mr. Shipley. 2, i u li Would you give un .:ange of O n. curs for thoso t i '.1 { two categories, please? a MITNESS CHIPLEY: Wi, sir. 21o m ; The large pipt I nu -.rred ta i r., 1/2 inche 9 j and larger, and the mal] pipu ace.i d ba J:- inch and _ wile:. t r i

j i

,o 1 DR. PIG Tori: How rm. tg dooo thc largn pipo go? 1 I think 10-inch p! a was -' ntione> r.<::ct a t l "4 I m4 L,. I nf L,c -,oo aaIPin a : ,, a. But it u o u.3. o_ ga suostan- ,, r. -.. s mq tially above that. Up in the goaera.1 m ' of 26-inch. j & ], ile could check, if you could be interoottd, for enact c:;.z u. t 1!, Dn. PAXTon: I j a:m '..ntou 2n apioroxir e number. I t, l ,2 Thank you. DY MR. nXELiaD: 1 o .l 8 I o1 O Mr. Shipley, I 'soulii 12ne tc tre ad<litional s

question, j

^ \\ .I i

l f

.e .,, ~, _ _, _ _, _,

7 _ _ '2780 .mm2 1 There hac been reference to systenc and components 1-1 [O of systems at 45 feet and chovo. Mith respect to piping i 3 cyctems, has there been any anulycis of anything below 45 0 4 4 ' feet? j 5 A Yes, there vas. When I mention the modaling of }I 6 the system, I mention To and branch connections as part of the i i 7 things that were modeled into the analysia. O Uhere we have a safety-related cyatem above 9 45, if a branch connection from that system goes down belou 10 45, it would have to be included in the dynamic model, 11 and therefore in come cases you find the there are systems l 12 below 45 that are also included in our calculation. L g 13' O And you raention the standarda to tinich the piping 1 14 wao to be reevaluated. l-15 Could 0u identify the standards that were used 3 1 i 10 in that reavaluation? 1 j 17 A ANSI 1131.7. 10 Q Does that have a dato? 19 A Yes, 1969. l-5 { 20 DR. MC COLLOM: What, may I ask - when you said l 21 that in the standard, what is that standard for? i l l 2p All of the piping? Does it include all of the piping O' -p3 that you have been referring to? ( i .g '17ITNESS SIIIPLEY: Yes, sir, it does, p i r h 25 MR. AEELEAD: May I have one minute? e o

_ _. ~ __ l - 5 j. 2781 mm3 I CIIAIRMAN MILLER: Surely. 2 BY MR. AZELRAD': O -Q Dr. White, are you familiar with the analyses of 3-O 4 cable' trays that were performed by Bechtel? 5 A (Witnoss White) Yes. G, Q. Are the cable trays that were analyzed, identified', 7 in Table 4'of Licensee's Exhibit 237. U A Yes. I, D Q Will you please decariba for us how the analyces d 10 'o'f cable trays were performed nad the results of those 1-11 analysos? !2 A Yes. g 13 I think along uith that c descriptionof the structural configuration will help indicate why this kind of 14 i ?S analycia is appropriate. t 16 Cable trays end up being an O-to 10-foot span, 17 and the connection at the end of these spans is a bolted fa connection, and normally there is a vertical support at those ID locations. So the trays are analyzed as individual trays. 20-Of cource you have a'. a support a number of tnese supported 21 ~ on the same support. So the support is designed for a 1 i - combination ~of the loads coming from all trays, j 22 23 So first.you start off with looking at an 24 individual tray. The frequency of that ic determined. The 25 g '. loads are obtained from the responce spectra. And this I <r .r.. .-,-..ww----.--.----,'--nn,- ., ~ ~ ~.~.- - ~ ~..,,,-+.,. .._..-r.-.-..--,-~~~--.~.~..,-..;

_=- -2782 mm4 0 indi'.ates-the kind of load that the tray sees. [ 2 Once the tray loads have been determined, now we j g-l r 3 4 - are able to determine the loads on the supports from all the 1 l 4 trays coming to that support. I l S Now that we know the loads that exist on the l G, support, now we are able to go to the connection of the support i 7-to the structure. 4 8 Those are basically the, elements that fit within the 9 cable tray system. 10 I might indicate that the Tabic 4 indicates a 11 Isupport number, and that doesn't maan that the only thing 12 that was. looked at was the support. This is just a short-hand ., g 13 way of describing everything at that support. t 14 In other words, at a given location, for instance ] 15 the. first item there, Support S-7, that would mean all the i 16 trays supported at S-7, the support itself, as well as the t i 17 connections at that point. So it is just a short-hand i 18 notation for everything within the cable tray system. 10 So basically you go through a dynamic analysis of 20 the trays tied in with the supports die flexibility of the L i ~ support 7 are included in determining the frequency of-the 21 22 system. And then going back to the connection. 23 In terms of the criteria used to judge the 24 j adequacy or base of the design, the tray itself-is based on-4 2$ Nahufacturer'S recommOndation in terms of the load capacity of 1 - I .........__.~.~...,.....,...w....~_.,, -_..a,...__.._______.___.

t 2783 '~5 I the tray itself. And thin varica from manufacturcr to mm j. 2 manufacturer and.from tray. type to tray type. ve 3 j Moct ofJthe trays are the ladder-type traya.

e 4

There are a fow pen kind of trayc where you don't have holes I 5 in the bottom. Those are the two basic kind of traya that G ue have. ) ~ 7 The supporto themselves, this is a pipe, circular a L I 8 . pipe, and are designed to the AISC standards, just as any 1 D other Utructural element would bo. 10 The connections themselves, if it is a cinch j 11 bolt kind of connection, then thic is again deaigned relative l 12 to the manufacturer's specifications, and thic is bacically i g the way the analysis ie done and then the baais for the 13 J4 l aubsequent decign once the loada have been datormined. i. l 15 0 And, Dr. White, the result of the analyais was F 16 that no cdditional modification was requiredV l 17 A Yes. 1* 18 CRAIRMAN MILLER: Wac that "no additional 1 19 modification"? I didn't catch the word. 20 MR. AXULRAD: No modification was requirod. 21 WITNESS WHlTE: The recul.ts of the analycin e ) 22 . indicated that the cable trayo, an originally inctalled, E.ie 23, required:no modificctions due to the now reciponso opectra. if 1 l 24 ' h BY'MR. AXELPAD: 1 h 25 0 And, therefore, Dr. White, in your~ opinion, and by s i [

~ 2784 i mm6 the'results of the analyses that were performed, is each 2 cable; tray capable of withstadding an earthquake up to and e 3 including a.25G SSE? 4 A-(Witness Whiid Yes. 5-0 Mr. Bushnell, could you dencribe for us briefly 6 your association and involvement with the Trojan Nuclear 7 Plant over the past few years? O A (Witness Bushnell) Yes. 9 My duties as a supervicor, civil engineer, are 10 primarily directed towards the analysis, review, and so 11 forth, regarding nuclear power projects. 12 My primary effort over the last few years has i - g been with the Trojan Plant and the Pebble Springs Plant. 13 14 The specific areas where my responsibilities 15 extend to include the civil structural aspects of the major 10 structures themselves, the seismic area both from the 17 setandpoint of the structures and equipment qualification 18 requirements. And basically represent - the objective of J 19 our group is to represent the conpany technically in the 20 area of' civil engineering for generation engineering. 21 0; 'Were you responcible for the Licensee for the j

e..

22 -evaluation'of the mechanical.and electrical equipment within 23 the compler., which are listed in Table 3-B1 and 3-B2 of 4 j.- ) 24-Licensee Exhibit 9-D, and for the review of the results of i I ; h.' 25 the evaluation performed by Dechtel for any of the-additional 4 5 i' _--,,.. _ m..,_. .a-.-,, ~ .--,,,,,,-....~_-4._._._;._.-.__.._

s 2785 mm7f 1 equipment listed in Tables ~1, 2 and 5 of Licensee Exhibit 2 No. 237 O 3 n

yes, h.

4 I would like to clarify further, if I may, that I 1 5 was.directly involved along with four engineers under my 6 nupervision, with the independent review of material that is 1 7 listed in Tables 3-D1 and 3-B2 of Exhibit 9-D, as w il as 6 review of Bechtel prepared responses in Exhibit 23. 9 0 Would you please describe for us how the evaluations .10 of electrical and utochanical equipment uere perfonned, and 11 what the results of those evaluations were? 12 A Yes.

g 13 I uould like to refer you to page 3-B-25, which 14 is the last page of Table 3-B2.

Thre is a list there of .i I 15' the qualification method used in preparation of this response j 16 to NRC Question 3-B. 17 And as Mr. Anderson pointed out earlier, the 18 qualification method described in Exhibit 23 is different 19 -only in the format of the FSAR. This particular qualification 20 method table here is a little more detailed. I would like to 2! just go through briefly this list. -22 Qualification Method 1 is a method of qualifying h 23; by generic. testing. Generic meaning a test that io not 24 ' site-specific. It is typically the large manufacturers of 29 equipment that sell-their equipment to many, many areas of .O .________,__.,.._..,.#,--r -.w., ...c .m.., ,,%..m,,.#. .-.. m .we g*-W-

2786 l } l' the country and qualify to levels exceeding the requiremente mm8 I as best as they can anticipate th'em, so that they don't havo 2 I.O 3. to requalify on a case-by-case basis. O 4 Method 2, qualification by testing to specific (. I 5 floor response spectra. l l' 6 There are many diffrent types of tests that one l i 7 .might' perform that would be suitable to demonstrate that the 0 equipment will withstand specific demands of floor response l 9 spectra such as -- well, differant wave forms and so forth. l 10 . Method 3 is an analytical method which, if it can i 11 be shown by. methods of analynis that the system is rigid, i i 12 meaning that its response is not amplified in comparison wi et i i 13 the information from the. floor response spectra, then the l [ }[ J. j_ 14 demand on 12na system is only that that is associated with I 4 - 15 the response of the floor itself. 16 Method 4 is a method of qualification by just 17 using the highest value of the floor renponse spectra as 10 input to. develop inertial load,and then qualify it by further 19 analysis to assure that the strasses and so forth remain on l-20 acceptable levels. 21 Method 5 is similar to' Method 4, but Method 5 goes -22: one step further. It analytically -- it is a method to FO 4 23 analytically determine the natural frequencies of the sy dem. 1 F 24. In most cases the types of things that we are i i (k 25 concerned with are fairly simple things.that have the n i l lL l Lu._.a....-,_.__a,___..__.._.-_._

n l 2787 4 i L mm9 1-predominant fundamental frequency. Then with that' frequency i 1 2 'known, one can go directly to the floor response spectra and 3 again pick off the spectral acceloration which can then he h I 4 used to determine the stresses and acsure that they remain 5 j within allowable. limits. i G Method 6 is sinilar to Method 5 as described, 7 I but the difference is that the qualification 10 done by i U testing. Mothod 6 is probably the predominant method used 0-by many' manufacturers. It is essentially what is recontmended ) l j. 10 by the IEEE-344 standard, or one of the methods recommended. i il The particular piece of equipment might be put j [ 12 on-a test table and a low frequency sido uwcop applied as I g 13 input motion with recording devices in order to be able to j-14 determine where the equipment respondo. That would be j i j 1S ; indicated as an amplified responsa nomewhere in the frequency 16 [-' range. t-17 Then the qualification test part of it, once i i j ic.i those frequencies are known would be to put in a different i L 19, kind of a cignal, perhaps at levels where the amplification d 1. 1 i 20 that the equipment would see would be equal to or a 21 greater than that required from the floor response spectra. i d i. 2E O Method 7 in merely a combination of Methods 4 and l I L ' 23} 5. And the reason it in in=there that way is that this 24 ' really relates to more cable trays than anything ein,e, h l Cabic trays were analycod for -- one method for part of tha 25 spectra, and another method for the other part. [ f n . =.

!t6: L MELTEER-2788 j ' ;jl.1~ 1 I might go through an example of, the specific, l 1 l, h, -2 say, detail of how one of these itema here in Table 3 -2, for 3 j. 3 example, was qualified. 4 I guess we can do it generally. It would bc just 'S ac well. The list itself-was developed based on information '6-from the FSAR from PNIDs and f2:om other sources. 1 7 And when the equinment was identified with an j 1 i S equipment number, then the ._les for that piee? of equipment i 9 were obtained. Those files included the ceismic responso -- .i 10 ! excuce mo, sciamic qualification mathod that was used original-t I 1; ly. With that information, if I may take the exmyle of 12 g a gencric ~ tect, the information that one wated obtain from the 9 y, qualification report of a generic best would be - usually was,

~c; 1 should say -- the input data that wac used at the base of tha 16 Shaker Table. in come way normally, at a sino beat.

l With this inforlaation then, with additional e 1,; a 1 information concerning damping and other things, i gg n 1 j 19 one can construct' a qualification responce-spectra, i 20 which means-the spectra to wh'ich that piece of equipment waa, in fiict,' qualified. i <.. I 4 i g Then, by comparing the floor response spa'ctra asa iated l 23 with that piece of.oquipmont'c location!in the i 24 plant, it is norely then'a matter of comparison of two curves .h_ .:to annure that the qualification enceado the demand for that g i, I ii 11 - '_e b i ._...___:-___,_..,.._,.._....__n_

ijl 2? (' 2789 i { l' particular picco. 2 0 And ' the qualification acthods licted in Tabie 3B-2, e' v 3 or the equivalent qualification ethods in Licenneo Exhibit 23 l. 4 were then used to evaluate all of :he equipnent licted in those 5 tables? I 6 4 Yes. l 7, O And the results of the enalysen, with respect to i 0 all the equipmant - tell us what the results wore. l i 1 92 3. Yes. Uo found, as reported in 3D and elucuhore, t i i 10 t the equipment remained qualified for soicmic motion - excuco 11 ir.e, the responso spectra resulting from aeismic motion, up to 4 j in and including the SSE. ] g 13 I would like to make ano further clari.fication in ll i g-the broadened responce spectra. l 3 DR. PAXTON: I would like to ank Mr. 3achnell - . i. ig { concerning your reference to IEEE 344 - l I i ld WITNESS DUSHNELL:

Yes, e

s. 3i l .[ DR. PAXTON: - are you referring to the 1971 .g i Vorsion or the 1975 version? 4 g g. l WIT. BUSHMELL: In that conte::t, I mc referring to I 3 !p 21 - !..it in general, as the reference document.that ioald lict 4 e,! suitable manc of testinct. " ~ ' ~ You might be awaro that the 1975 2f version' does have a number of acceptable methodc that can be 4 24 [1 used to. qualify equipment. 3 Tho 1971 version is not as broad, being of ea: lier i r g }., 'li p If l .it e ~,.,,,r ..,-#~,,.. ,m.

t [ i c-Jjl.3 }- 2790 l a 1- . vin tago. - I was referring generally to that standard. i 1-2 DR. PAXTON: I sec. 1O l 3 Are you acquainted v ith thi:; decutamt that van i'g 4 handed to us by the Staff? It han not baea : introduced yot, [ 1 t i i 5 but Mechanical Engineering Branch report on acimnic au:iit c Westinghouse Electric equipnent, CTuly 1976? n. l 7' WIT.BUSHUELL: I have reen the doctweat, yen. 4 CHAIREGN MILi,E7: Pardon ca. 'c. l e Would the Staf f lika to put an ichatification nuriber g 10 - n that docuraant? MR. GRAY: Yoc. I believe that would be Staff 7; ,i Exhibit 10 for identification. g ',

i..

CHAIP11AN MILLER: Thank you. g3 (The docurcent referred to was j g Larked Staff E;:hibit no. 10 for 35 1 o n t...,a. nc a t.t on. I v,. i I DR. PAF: TOM: Well, thi=3 docwren t re ff.:r3 n' method of g -nort of updating the -testing of equiptr4nt, or analysic' of tha zg 39 equipacnt, that c,atisfiec the IEEE 34 4, 1971 version, but not i the 1975 varnion. 23 2'l An3 I guess my qc;ation is whether -~ if you are l' 22 ' aware of the content of the document -- of thin do.cument -- whethor you can then. cay.,. in effect, whbther i_ho requirementG 23 ~ hero.are antisfied for the equipment, the Westinghouce equipment - 24, - l I 4h n AC 07-Of'OdC doctE3nto m h

~7.. jl c4 2791 i. 1 .UIT. UUS.IINELL : I - am not - sura of the quec; tion. i !? DR. PAXTON: You are not carc about the question? Le 3 WIT.DUSIINELL: Yes. 1 4 DR. PAXTON: 11cybe I. can aimplify that. r; - If I underctand this docuvent dorrectly, the Staff 0 had ceriain objections 'to the Wantinghouco equipmant that trac 7 qualified under the 1971 etandard, which, I judge, hcd to do g with application of individual test fraquenciec, rathc2. than a combination of frequencies such as called for in.hte 1975 i 9 g vernion. I 1 WIT.BUSHMELL: YOU. jj DR. PAXTON: And sena of the Wastinghouca equipment g was reexcmined, Westinghov.ce equipnent in cartain plants, g reexcmined by tho Staff, if I undaratand correctly, to decida y i whether, although it was tacted according to the 1971 version of the ntandard, uhother it would satisfy the 'l975 version. g And I. guess my question ia whether your analysis g a wac really updated in n. cimilar ftchion? g WIT. BUSHIIELL: Ec uced the data that was contained g in cur quality ausurance files for the original qualification. o. In s.oma cases, I.would sav that the qualificatione nn. hod -- 21 1 i excoco me, qualificatica m::thods esed were ci such a severn 7 9 nature and auch a anvere input nation, and dar.mnd on the 2J. j equi;;nanty. that they would, in fact - I chould qualify thab ,,A g one at.op further to cay' that in nany casca olornnts involved a l 4 .I ___.__'._.___m______________________.,E________m ,~.,,,_,,__,,,.,.,_,.,,,y,y..m.,..m%,,m,,_,,_% ,.p...,y.,.y.,,o,_,,.,,.,,., _,.,.,..

jl' 5 2792 1 1 -aro single frequency consitive and single duration sensitive-l 2

anyway, such ac relay - is quite a good examplo, so that j

i ~3 thera would be little differenco if any, betuaan the 1971 and r i ' 1 l-4 1975 versions of IEEE 344. i. 5-DR. PA% TON: Righb. This is one of the criteria G that Staff actually used in its genarally reevaluation, if I i-7 'underatand correctly, according to this doeuraent. g-WITNESS. FREYlIMG: Lc't me clarify what the requirementa g that were igpoced on Treajan were - in the beginning, at our ja FSAR ngbmittal to the NRC, we indicated, that we wouldquali'.[y c g -cur equipment 'according to IEEE 344, 1971. 1.?? In the cource of quastienn and anituars between PGE 9 g- ]g and the Staff, they developed acta poisitone that we should do ,,7 }j ' i more than that. They asked un that in a narticular question, f. .i p".jwhich they trancaitted to us on June 29, 1973. That question ) was known ac Quantion 3.33. .. b. t ( i 'L'hnt question said that PGE should do some things 1/ 4 beyond IEEE 344, 1971; and they outlinod them, $nd they specified jthose to us. 19 I No did thoro things in the original case at Torjan,-and Mr. Buchnell cnd Mr. Cooke have lookcd at thoae things again in the reevaluation. i ,Thoue things which they required beyond InEE 344, d,., 1971, are the same things that the Guaff has lookcd for for '23-those plants which uore licenced in that intarim period, and we _ g . meet the fivo, points on page 12 o.f the NRC's audit report. l.. U. = ...4 -..m . _ _ ~....,..... _...,.

..~..__ s ' jl6 i. 2793 DR. PN;; TON-Finc. TXank you. That annuers my a r question. o. a DY MR. AXELRAD: Q. Just one last iten ac en itera clarification, Mr. Bushnell ~~ in the work that was done, as reflected in the tables, the method of qualification that van used was one of x -.c the seven methodo identified. It vann't a matter'of uaing all i of the nothods for the equipment; it was 'hichever method was pertinent to the particular equipment involved; is that correct? g And that is listed in the tablan? A (Witnenc Duchnell) Yea,'cir. Q-Mr. Cooko whab has bun your involvemant with the c Trojan nuclear plant over the laat few yeam? .h.- 13 + A (Uitnocs Cooke) I hvre been involved in the M I electrical docign of Trojaa from tho early ntagou to precent i 16:l day. That includos also the review of th acismLc qualifica-i i tion, as reAnted to function of the electrien1 conpanents 17 - ' involved. 13 G So you are deeply familiar with the electrical 19 1 corsponento ~of the plant? 20 A Yes. 21 0, And what tms your responaibility in connection with recent evalnation by-Eechtal of the electrical equipment you 23 -havo'been discucaing here? .24 ~A My responsibility una ' to roevaluato the clocurical 9 25 . f J 1 ( m,. m +.. ..-..1 v s-..i, .4,.m_.--., ..e ~...,w--w,,,,,,-..w.4 ....r..m.v.,e ,%.,-,..,.r-m s. e i,.,-*,ee..--,e,,-

=jl 7 h I 2794 t l p q I

t i

11 equipraent, seisutic qualificatien an'conpared to the STARDYNE i j 2j 'recponco spectra and to determine whether the electrien1 j h: !~ 3 componen ts vill function properly in the sa fety-ralcted ie 4; circuita that they are utilized in. 3 l. 0 G h.Um equiptent which you retvaluntcu 11atea in 5 [t i Tchle 5 of Licenroe Er.hibit 2M e a a ( ,f .h.. Yes. t ,l l l. G And trould you pleace doccriba for uce the,evalua-d<

! tion that.you perfrar& d from an clectrical ensTineering stand-a.

i 3.. i !} noint and Aho rcculty of that evaluation? ,O i i ij ' Eachcloctribalirenanditsceianicgaalification i 11 p: .n. i I 2: aport wac raviewod fro.m the stanapoint of th. various g, av .1 churectorintica of the electrien1 cersonena as to lua function 1 i 13 .} } in m during-and after the naicraic test thac ma perEorrud on tho 1 com.o. onent- .-w I loched at cach ccmponcat on how it wac utilimd, I t. 1 and acfoty~rolated circuit, and deterrined whether timt j 17 l I component, under a saiamic condition,s;ould cerfort.: its 1 10 function. 19 1- '1 hat briefly sturnrime wha.t 'mh Gono. <.,D L l 0 And as a recult of the ovv.lunticn that yon .,l psrformac in your opinion, as srca atmu ot equa.patant capnble 1 /,2 7 of bithstanding an carthquake up to and incluCing e.25g SSD? t -P3 ' 1 . ii. Yes. PA MR. AD3 LEAD: Mr. Chaiman., vc were not certain as 4 -l n 4 4'b h l' ._._..-2,_

4 4 l1 31._ a ' 27.95 .I. i i 1 to the detail of informa don the Eonrd decirad ao to all thoso 4 I i 2' ntatters. We ' tried. to cinaarize t/nat was parformd, to bring

O 3

the a:fports here uho were involved in the parformance of that ..O

I ll Work.

l l-5 l C1fAIP12t.M HILLER: Yent ue apprecial:e that, and we t i .Q t, Wiah you to continue with your sunJnry, or at leact until you / reach the end of your presentnP an. Than thera cill bo i l 3 perhaps come quantions, bt2 v: n'ould - pr : D3 r., I think, for you 9 h to complete it, to you havc. i I i l 1C MR. AKELRAD: Yea, ~ uidrrntnnd. I i p 11 [ CHAIPMN MILLER: An you.:endy? f' i

l 12.

1 int. LEELMD: Thia canaltW s our psnaral procenta-t i i{g 13 tion, but uc do vant to ark Mr. Frauing, uith reapact tc the i o 14 jl specific quantion Dr. McCollem E k3d this acruiag. i do 10 T'I BY MR A:0LPAD: I i 10 'O. Mr. Frewingr coul? i W. <b ,a riba for us ' hat PGE F jy g he.n done in connection with t.he caismic qualification of the D'i

n,Ij-cuitch.gaar that can referred to in GBR C. 3.2, as inquired i

1 o H sp by Dr. McCollem thin reorning? ?a N L. (Uitnocc Frewing) Tc;n, Dr.1:ecollca snked the a b a[ quartion about cnn sect iw a.a.? I ban.cva, d, w a en me t 1 I-< ] [* bRf0174IlfitkCil 1D G iltt!'ChEICUN LI ID. 'Ulli/d'3 ll Mk hCd fi[jpCU.r" t c,nce statenant-of.'caterdn.r. .9 j w~, ! Tnat attachttent ca,narcutiv uan Mr. Pollard'o 9 ~ 2,nput to thO Staff'O ::afety evaluation rcpart. It is not the p4r It .t ( ' i;, .' n 18 e e, ' "c 4 k.. h i 4 .....J

-. -. -. ~.... ji 9. 2796 l 1 cafety evaluation report itself you enderstand. 1 i 2-Mr. Pollard reviewed the seismic testing of come !. 'h i.- ,3 ESF switchgear and protective relcya, and b indicated that the 4 ntaff inforned the Applicent of the Staff's position. And then r; he indicated severcl ueys in which the Applicant was responding,, I but it aupccred that como itols mra left open O-Specit!.ccily ho no ted that tim Anplicant stated / i that con.o tvpac of rclays that Aid not mot VM f;ti.ff's level o~ i l of neceptabilty will be rep 1nced. And than he also stated that g I a, j g we understand that the 3.pplictm c ia considariag nutcIntically i blocking cartain other relays. 11 I g .hnd then he wanh cn to cay thah udditiumil informa-tien een be found in Section 3.10 cf tha anfety ovaluation; O 13 I i and he concluded, saying tha t bh r. ' rasa.li-a of our oval.uation will i,s . bc reported in a cupplcKant to the ca."ety evalunnion. 4 1 1 Mr. Pollard ^nrovidad that to the. M:ojecc Dranch on 10 1 t I j. l,l ljcomo date -- I am not cure. TR hojaut 1rcnah, in turn can-i l ferred with tha Appliccut and oaid, .7011,.mu, this is uhat the l e,, tiRC in lining up to say in ';he cafety evaluation report, and do 19 1 P 4 [ Uc, die Applicante have any rc accica to thst? ) c0 t a g ) l Au? our ronction vas to mf;c furtbr cc:r.itmants i 21 d i which resolvad the concarca tha; 'ir. i'clinrd notm So tant n., Sva re 1 L-tbo. safety evaluation report,. an publishede repeata verbatim ?.a, i nost of Mr. Pcilard's input, Lu' andi h n it slightly to noto ) .u.c z, that thO 3pplicant Vill rQplCOo' Cartuin Talayc., m l t .b J' S. .h ____l,....,.N-.--.---.-e- -sm-- --m A-v " " ~ = - ~ * = ~ * ~ * * * ' -~~"*'*~"*""# " ~ "

2797 i? 10 1-L 1 That coincides with Mr. ~ Pollard

a atatement.

The 2 -SER gocc on to say that certain relays will be automatically . h disconnected or blocked... t 3 ,4 Now, that is a commitment from tho, Applicant, and 1 J J 3 ve have done that, l 3 And then the safety evaluation report goes on to cay that other ralays which utight misoptrate, in the cent.:o that i g the NRC sau theso relays, at Ucrat could only cauco c visucl t [ or audible f.d.crn. That is, &cy reald not affect the cource 3 i l gi rlha performance of the safety equipment during or following l l an SSE. i t: I l 1 <..I Am I clear that I ao distincuiching botveen comething I o. 4 i that lights up and scucthing that provents a pump fron. starting? g 13 I CHAIRimN MIT43R: Yes. WITNESS FRTf4INC: The SER, nr issusd by the HEC, 2-t l concluded with the follouing paragraph: l .) 4 1 l "We find that the modificationa proposed by the g.i ; ) Applicent will provide roccenable nacuranco that the i p. ), occurrence of an SSE will not recult in a locn of i d2 ; 4 3 I capability to perform the safety functicas provided b,y. ,0 i. i a

t. :;y-related el;ctric systema.

Theredoro, we conclude i l' .J i that the ceicmio qualification of the engineered safety g i i featurec switch gear meatn +he accquiremonta of tho i ,,,J. )! [l.. c.a, Conuniccion's regulations and is acceptchle. lg I so, in su m ury, I' would tell you that Mr. Po11 arc's 3 i r f i l~ f'. A 4, 4. w -wv-w w ww emm~,- ~,- er--rm are.- ,ms,.www--m,--,--,-wa v r =- U r-~hrw=~e=== -o-,me. ~. - - ~ ~ -~ - -

l7,- - _. - -.... - 2798 l ji ll? 1 material in. his limited appearanco ctateuent was preliminary 2 and was not the final safety evaluation report published by ' e .3 the Commiccion. l O i 4 4 EXAMINRTION BY THE BOARD I 3 BY DR. MC COLLOM: i i G; B Would you describo that you neun by " blocked 7, relays?" I i 8l A. (Witness Frewing) Lut my friendr 127. Cooko, g rocpond to that. 10 A, (Witness Cooke) This relay partaina to tho, l. !J energency dicael generator - s 12 CHRIRMAN MILLER: C.>ald you get close to the micro- '13 phono, plence. g.. 1 j 14 MITNESS.COOKE:- Surc. 13 This particular ::elay the.t we are diccitacing is 16' datling with the amargency diesel ganciator. The relay lr

7 performs the function of proiecting the emergency diesel 1G generator from cn ovor-current cituation that could occur in jg the genornti; itself.

l l 20 l Cince the relay did encounter some chattering I \\ 21 l during its saismic test, in order not for the emergoney diesel I 22 generator to be affected during the auto-start nignale this r p.: particular relay is automatically taken out of the starts,. or 24, the tripping circuit, of the emergency diceel generater, so M. that when an auro-start signal comes no tell the diesel to 3 i.I l: l i t p l u i

l )> 2799 \\ l 4'1 12 l. start during an emergency. condition, it also tells this relay, 2 " Don' t trip the diesel generator. It in not part of th-l, 3 circuit to trip the diesel generator." 4 BY DR. MC COLLOM: S O And that relay was the one that -- what was its i 6 . function?- 7 A (Witneas Cocko) Its function was to protect the i ) j e emergency diesel generator from an over-current situation. 2 1; 9 G What happens now with ranpoct to an overcurrent j 10 situation? I 33 A It is bypazced.'during an auto-ctart cignal. m G Is thoro any condition that would cause you to have

3 overcurrent during this peIiod when it is blocked?

14 A Hot unless there was an extrano malfunction of the gg dienol generator. 16 G Dosa that nean that thero is no load on the diesel 37 generator at that point? l A nat in correct. It haa not boon put on the 18 j' jg emargency bus. It is just starting. i 20 G And that over-current relay, is it added back on i I [ gj before the diesel generator is put on to the bus? i A No, it is blocked completely. P2 G Por how long? Is it an if it no longer enicts? 23 i A That is correct. Jo, 1; gg S. DosG that provida any hn%ard. that you can conjurc ~ .-_....;_.~__i._...,__.....~,...,..,_.-_ -w---.

1- ~ 2800 )n: 1 i j1 13 l 'I up with respect to cafety-related equipment? 9 i l. 2-A. Uc11, if tho'over-current was exceceive, then there O I O .t:ould be other things that would trip the diesel. -W 4 0 Give me an 'czample. 1-l 5 n. Iligh temperature vinding in the generator -- that i i 6 would trip the diecel, because the generator has an excorsivo I l 7 heat. l a 0 okay. lend t G g (Board conferrL:g.} l 10 11 12 l-pg 13 u 15 )' 4 $b i 11 \\ l '18 m i 20 .j 21-1 22 l 23 j.. j-24 i

)}.

I l. l-p i;

... -..... ~.. 2801' ? MM/mobl I Q That is the only ralny that we're talking about 'E that was te bn blooned? ce ~_ oi A

Yea,

) 4 Q I gucas thin might go hcek to Mr. Freuing, a f' S although I don't know, and that in: 6 Woro all of those relaya in the'Cafety Evalue. tion i i 7 ;4 Report that uarc identified an problea ralays that chabtered, ). i L L 0' were they all replaced? ) a 1 0 A (Witness Frewing) There tare two clasces. Ono 1 j' 10 class involved replacement; the other class involved analysis 1 11 I to show that the only cause of a - the only result of a 4 n relay malfunction vould be an alarm, if you recall. s I 1 \\ ni But those Uhich were to bu replaced vero replcced., g-t te i That u.ac a condition of the licance., i l t 4' } Q I.nd ucre the1r rc.o. laced with rela.v.s that had Le. 4 1, gy qualifications that vculd not chatter uude thc design bacia ] J. y, earthquake? hfi jo ll A Yes. That was the purpcat of replacewnt. 3 F l 39 O .t realize h.aat rac the purpose of..rc, out c..,u It i i l p l 20 li happen? U)

1 g h (Laughter )

n P o..c f, i I guess I would ask the qualificationn of thch ~ h 3 relay, and I believe wo must be back to Mr. Cocka. F r~a ] A (Witness Cooke) Yaa. ~ ,O' ~O Can..you give us soir.e idn of why that relay was . o.n o - o 4 '1j-a, o j I. k. I i l. v +e y

2802 all right and what its qualificetion.m wrn? I am nou getting mob 2 1 2, back to nort of n generic unc,eratanu.tng or cno qualm.... cations '. h aq of relhyc for seicnic load. ) 0 . li ~ Could you repeat that, ple2sc? ) i 4 j' A ) 5 !j Q We have nubstitdr.d one relay for another. l t a i i 61 -Wasn't it because thic one didn't rhnt e.ud that one did? b 3 i 7 A Corroch o i. ~ e 3' 0 'I'd lilm to knor hou ue kncr Ehnh this one does l. I ra not shatter? O l p 10q n Bocwsc it wen placed on a chahnr tablo and 1 I,; 1 - l ', h.; ,.wtLd to the accelere.tions tha.t it would nec in dic switch h n4 genr, and it was electricallV mon 3.torod 'co nee if the contenta; I i b i would chatter or not. . 9 - l fu j I j

ah G

UE a tha.c n raanunc.cturur 's tcut.- a generic taat? t i fi i l! A Yes. n: o g D g !! O I believe, nc. Caok.cy I woub. still like to talk o He L

e. bout the electrical equipm.utr culd loc's loch at Tabla S.

n.; J snd'7 ll ~ r a' 4EL flou li m 1; i i l-a e,r ix i'I p bb i i s t.S. s -,[ f, k' ., f 0; i ( g ' 2.5 ? m

~. - -.. -2803 gg ,wel 1 1 'O -Is this all electrien1 equipment in Table 5? Did. 2 I understand that correctly? i 3 A In the Control Building cenpler? i ' - h 4 ..Q Yes, the total building complcr what ue've been e l S referring to es the building complex, which includes Control, 0 Auxiliary and Fuel. L 3 7 A' Right. 4 6 'O I notice that in the qualification nothodo it's o i D predominantly Nuntber 1 as the method. Now, that is the i IP .l manufacturer, is that not corrcet, that han done thic testing? 11 A Either it'c the manufacturer or PGis did their own. 12 test in a private tacting lab. l g 13 ~Q How do ue know which ana? Can uG tell that from .l 14 this tablev as to whether it una tho'r:anufacturer's tent or i 15 whether it was a PGE test? i-l 16 h No, you can't tell from the table. I 17 Q What doec the notorisk mean there, can you tell mc E that*, ncnt to the l? Does that mean uhat you juct said, 19 that it's either the manufacturer'c test or PGE*c? 2D A Yes, that's correct. t 1 i 2i Q Are uc atill referring to the table in the back, 22 table'3.B-1 or 3.B-2 an our qualification nothod? Would you ~ e i 23 refer me to the place where A could find the table that h 24 corresponds;to this table? 2r, A Yes. The page precoding the table at the bottom l I' c_,___,- x.-- .-..J J... _ ~.,, _.. _. _.. _, _ _.. _. _ _. _ _ _ _ _....

f

sol 2-2#

1 l of the page. The item with the asterisk indicaten it was done on a generic basic. .7. O Would you describe to ma what a generic basis ,a j neans for this test? 4 il 'A Basically we're talking about pieces of equipment

e. -

a that wera supplied by Wastinghouse that could be supplied to 6 l many other citos, other than just Trojan. ,j Q If you have just the 1, without the asterisk, then g j. that is a dynamic analysis perfor:!wd by PGE? 9 i A Yes, that's corrac t. l O All right, that in thca v7 air that 3rcu t e.U. the I i difference. All right, i. 12 i CHAIRMAU MILLER: Let.mo be sure 7 understand h i - thin: la The number 1, followed by an'astorisk, does that if mean it wac done on a gonaric bacis by Nentinghoune in all M 1 p cases? 17 I MR. h22LPAO: If I may make a cug?cstion, Mr. i 16 Chairman, on the tablo itself in a reference to the cualifica-l 19, t-l tion document that ima uced. Perhaps be glancing through the qualification document referencen you could distinguich l-21 between WChP numbers and the lab re~nort. There might be y gg r h come bacio for diotinguishing which work w~n done by whom. ,c3 CHAIRMIW T4 ILLER: I unScratood the previouc 4 - answorc,to be that the 1, followed by.cn asterick, mount t 25 i li .-,.-we,--mww.=-w.,ne w .er-w +e - dw w ar =Pe+- r e s * =-e maa -*

w i erwe = wemw wm *-

C N'" W "I "* N U

J I 2005 L wol 3 i 1 testing ~had been dono on a Coneric basis by* either the l 1 2 manufacturer or by Wootinghouac. I unsn't sura in that 1 0 3 i respect whether there were other manufacturera besidec g' a 4 i Doctinghouse involved, or ifcatinghouen on2y. [ 1 5 WI'1W2SG COOKE: It'a Uectinghouca only. C ll CIMIlamII MILLER: Then thc Game asterisP denotes i l 4 I

~

7 that the tecto wero done only bv h atingbouse, and not by } i B i either any other oorson, manufacturer, PGE, or anyone alco, l O t in that correct? i 10 I WITHESS COOKE: What'c ccPcat. 1 I i 11 ; CIIAIRMr.N MILLER: I sco. Thank you. I 12 BY DR. MC COLLCM: I g D 0 In there no other electrical equipment that are Mh in the cafety-related electrical equipmni. group c:capt that ?S manufactured by Hootinthoucu? 1G A (Uitness Cooke) 'I acn't underreand. l .e l ,i o 17 > A (Witnacc Frawing) '2hc ansb tr is no. There'c a 10 l number of electrical ecui.nraents that are qualified by other f I Wy people. For exaraple the AUIi2T Lab report. L U 2.u !! O I see. 4 t m 1 MR. AXELTAD: Can I -iust mho sure-that the I n t ' H. 9h quantion and the answer arc clear? h h 23 [ CUATRMAN 'IIILLER : Yen let's cea that they natch t i - ac; i up. MR. AXELRAD: night. The que : tion uea, if I 5 it i l l'l

2806 wel 4-i' -1 understand it corroctly: 1 j. 2 Did Westinghouse-aupply all the niectrical o:9 i.. 3 equipment that's listed in thin table? '.g F 4 And I believe the anouer una no. U' WITNESS PRENING:

Correct, t

i

l 6

CHAIPJ1EN MILLER: That ': my understanding of the I a' i; record. Do we'all agroo? 0 (%itnocces Frewing and Cooke ' nodding nffiruativ31y.) 9 BY OR UC COLLOil: J a to 0 I believe than I'd like to tt.1k to tir. abipley l al' 11l l-now, about tha piping, 4 1 1 i 12 You said that the atandards that you used were i i g 13 ANSI-E? j te A (Uitncss Shiplcy) B ac in Doy. i, 15 0 Has there bacn - ' hot would fon us:e today if you ] 10 were going to une tho Stnadard? l r/ A You would use ASME Section 3. i 10 0 Can you identify th? dif ferences that chat inight 19 be between 59 and the modal that you're talkir.g about? 20 A The bacia concepta of the tvo codec are the same i. gi-for tha piping thr.t we're dice n sing. They arc car.antially L l 2e the came. Le~ n There have bcen some minor modifics.tions, com i: <v refinentants, but they're basically the arma. r 4 fi l k 23 0. Do you viaa that if you worc. re.dasigning Trojan o i s l .-4,---- .._...._... _.- -. _....._.-...,..i_..,..- _.'._ .m

1 l ~ 2807'- -wel'5 l' 1 i . today that thc' design that you would put'out would result in the name qualifications for the scismic effects as the onen

- h

' j. -that you used-then? 4 i Another way of put+.mp.it vuuld he, the cama JS requicomonts to design to. j 6 A Ho. In fact, usre you to design to today's codes, i 7 the allouable atrecs that.you would ur,o for these piping 8 c,istems is substantially higher than the one that va used l 4i' D for Trojan. ) i l 10 0 So it would be within the smm utandanu then? r i I 11 A That;'s correct. [ l 12e' 0 Your ecmment there teJls me that it actually ic ! g 13 - better able to withatund the ceinmic nvent than if you 14 literally went by the standards of today t i;- 15 A Yes. i-i { 16 '1here were some other refinements, but I believe i, 17 overall the single largest mest difference in the increase 18 in allouable otrecc in today's codes. f 19. Q Now, that's on the piping. 20 Now, what about tho other equipment that's 21 connected to the piping? Khat standarda did ycu use there? 22 'Is that' included in thic came standard? Like valven, et h 23., ceterc. [ t [- ?.4 A Okay. Valves are not. They have a ceparate l 4 A N b '6 O 9 53

b f

i. 1 8 I-t, i a--,r,-,,.e . nm .---~,e .mm,v,,v,,,,,,-,-c,c-nw.,---w--w.,nn.,,,-,- _ _ _, ~ _ _,, -,, - ~,.,,. _ me

l 2508 I wel 6-I elbowa, test,.reducern, branching actionc, that type of thing, 2 are included and described in tl,te standard.

9 l

3 0 What about other raechanical equipment that would ! h.~ 4 be involved in your area of jurisdiction hera? Uhnt else 5 would be there? I prestnte valves is one Are there other 1 0 thingc? a 7 A No. Merely vnlves, because a valve iu an in-line I O component, in that a valve is not normally anchored in the 9 sense that a pump or a vessel vould be anchored to the floor. i 10 0 Am I supposed to talk to Mr. Bushnell, then, when 11 uc 're talking about mechamical equipment? 4 j 12 In other words, I ' at looking for ubo to talk with ! g 13 whsm I say I vant to knou uhatner the valvo in going to work. j. 14 A I believa I can addrecG the val'Ics. 15 0 All right. Ara there other rechanical equipn.ents 1 16 then, that are connected to the zyaten called piping, besides 5 17 the valves? 10 A No, sir. 19 0 ~~ that would be susceptible to seismic activity? a j: EO A No. [ El. 0 .No? 'Did I understand you right? 1 1 E2 A. Yes, I believe so,, Let ma try to clarifv it. {.!O ~ 23 By.in-line componento, I niaan in a pipino cystem t i 24 between two anchor points, such that it coes an emplified h-25 accoloration. And valves are the only one. 6 e hi. .,. ~. - -... -. _.. _---,m ... +

1 r 2009~ welL7 o 1 Q Tfhnt about the capability of the valves as 2 specified?_ Can you give me scme standard, or what do you e-3 r : unc'to determine the ceismic capability af theno vnlveo? 4 A The valvan are bought to an inductry atttr0ard. U They=are purchased to an induct::y st:tndard which specifien e o 6 baaic configuration, wall thicknera 'requircrants, hydrostatic [ 7 test proceduroc, and so forth. i 6 In the scinnic analycis of: the nyaten, we concider i i 9 the valve as a concentrated masa in the p.iping nysten. 10. ) In addition, va mode.1 the top works of the valves, h 1' I unich would include the op'erator for the valva itnelf. That's I t 12 modeled ac an extended maca, and that's a.11 included in the l l 6 i g } dynanic analysis of the cyaten. E d [ MU O If that's true, then the standarda to uhich it ( a 4-gi l 3 j 1C l can decigned are included in thu.TM I cr.andarda you refer i s j l} R ] to? If'it's part of a nas, that puts scret.acs on the syntea. D A Yea, cir, that's correct. t I i 1" l 0 And that's all creept the enu Jast thino: What t j F happens to the valve on top of it? l i h i l 20 p A Yes, sir, that's correct. t 1 P. i O And that 10 in an anpliii d citunt. ion, and I'd c .nf' a L P':!!.like.toknouhowyouknouthatthevalveisgoin'gtobehave ih

.0 y properly during a coiamic ovent?'

c Ua 24 A We have apccified to the valve manufacturers that the valves chauld be capable of accepting a 3g ccceleration m U Ei ,~y c.m',, I. -.---.m $_..,~,,-w,, u.. ,,.r. m. ...,....,..U..-..m. - -,.., - -,,, -., - =,... -.. -. - - -... - + -..., -

(, 2810' i .wol 8 t t a i i level at' the center of cJeavity of thia extended top works of l '2 the valvo, and then in our piping systo:a model ue deterraina - ce lh 3 . vall, the valva -is modeled into tha piping synteta model, then i 4 the results of the model tell un what the acceleration level i 5 at that center of gravity is. 4 6 l Ua than compare thtb to t.he 3; allowable in our i t. cr.tteria. Na munt b2 below the 3p allouabic. ) / 8 Q That 3g allowable is independent of frequency? i 9 A No, it's nat. There's n furth2r atipulction that )~ 10 tbc extended too worhn that connects tha valve and the n l operator shall be in the rigid rcngo l 11 1 4 i 12 0 Now, tell na what that maann? i f g_ 13 A (Witnoca h11ite) Maybe 7 can add a litM.c comment lI 14 hero. .15 The accaleratica that the vnivo naos does de.prud l I. 15 cn tha naturcl frequency of the piping system. In other i 17 words, if t.ha piping cyotom happcnnd to have a freauancy right i B ,t on tha peak of the respance apocbra, it vculd faal come nort l i 1-I i 19 i of acceleration. 4 i 20 If it hcd a fraquency cuch Ebat it did not match i f d 21 i : up with the peak of the responce spaatra, it would nae a h I 22 h smaller frequency. O u 22 !! So that the acceleration of the valva cycten, or t-ti 24jj the valve, donc depend on the frequency of the piping sychem. .2$f But,tha valvo'itself, if you utro to isolute that, fir it no i... .\\ ' k. )

i-l{ 2011 wel 9 I e I l' that it'wan independe t of the piping system, it uould bc l 2 rigid. 1 O 3 l So it'c moving as a rigid body, so to speak, on .gW 4 the piping system, but it responds to the movement of the S piping, which la a function of the frequency. l. 6 0 All right. But how doec the vc1ve know what the 4 i-7 nctural' frequency is of the piping that it's going to be 0 installod in, when it'c evaluated for 3g acceleration by L 9 the manufacturcrc? i 10 A It docen't, but that'a uhy the stipulation io that 11 it'c rigid., l 12 You see, there icn't any further amplification of ) 1 J. i

g the acceleration of the pipe by the valvo itself.

The actual ) 13 14 ncceleration on the pipo right there is -- uall, of the top 5 15 worka -- 3g's. Mc think it can amplify due to rotation, but 1G that's in the model already. 1 j 17 Q Uut now I can put that into a piping eyeten that f 18 has n natural frequency of the piping syatem of quite a i l 19 broad range? j> ] 20 A Yes. 1 21 0 Does the manufacturer have a range of these s 22 frequencies over which he says that it can accept a 39 h 23 acce'lcration?' 4 24 A (Witncan Shipley) No, the manufacturer stipulates h 25 tuo things:- One, that the top vorkn of the valve ic rigid, s u.. _u_a,_..;._.___..a._..__:_.____._ _ _ _ ; __-....n

J p 2812 we1--10'- I. cuch that any' acceleration that'i> input from the pipe will E' not ba' amplified between the. valve and the operator. There .h. 3 L will'be no amplification there. !h 4 And, further, that it should meet a 3g level at 5 th'e oper_ tor. 4 6 And when we analyza the - now, the' valve p 1 7 manufacturer gives u0 a valve that will do thoue tuo things. 0 We then analyze the piping system, concidering those tuo 3 i 9 acpcots of the valve, and derarmine what the acceleration is. l l-10 ~ If it'n over 3g, we restrain the piping stich that the i 1 11 accelerationc at the valve operator will come down to the i l 12 3g level. I 13 I Therefore, what the manufacturi.): does is actually g 14 independent of uhat syatem it uill be inctalled in, cince 15 we design the system to those requimments. j 16 A (Witnese White) If the valve

flexible, then I

i 17 the manufacturer has to know what's the frequency of the i 10 piping that'I'm going to cut my valve in. But being's it'c i 19 rigid, no deesn't care. I ) 20 (The Board conferring.) 3 i 21 CHAllumN MILLER: Tsll right. We'll recess for ) i i: 22 lunch until 1:00 o' clock. ! 9: 3 23 (Whereupon, at 11:50 a.m., the hearing was receased, 24 to reconveno at 1:00 p.m., this name day. i 25 I 'l-g .,-.~--..._,.e.iJ-.-s_C.,_',-. .s

j 2813 ) fMADELoth:1 AFTERNOON SESSION l mpbl i 2 (1:00 p;m.) 1.' 3 CHAIRMAN MILLER: All right., 4 Wharcupon, j 5 RICHARD C ANDEllSON, s 6 UILLIAM L WHITE, 7 JOHN L. FREWING, 8 TED DUSITNELL, I j Dl K. M. COOKE, j 10 and V 4 R. E. SHIPL3Y l 11 <I i 12 resumed the stand as witnesses on behalf of the Licensces, 1 a 13 cad, having been previously duly cuorn, were e::amined and j g ) g tcctified further as felices: 1 ) r; CHAIRMAN MILLER: Everybody all sct? I gg[ EXAMINATION BF! T23 BOARD (Continued) ) f BY DR. MC COLLOM: 4 i 1/ ? [ gg Q 'l believe, Dr. White, you commented about the l

gf cc.ble trays.

i j 20 A (Witness White) Yau. l +e O Have the ate _ndards for the design 1:achniauec m J t. l gy [ cither ona chawJed in how support atructures and their ] ,g [ ni capabilitica to withstand tLe saismic activity since the ( 4 ~4 ;l,' i original design of Trojan? o l i A MO, it'S the CMT20 Criteria. UO uCC thG SAMuc py < 11 1 t i 4 h [l - L 1: x q 0 ___._;_.._..___J....,.,_.,__._ ._,,.....__,_,._,,..._..,_..,.............4-,......,,,_,...

.7-._.-.,- 2814L t f~ mpb2 1 criteria now as was used for clevelopment of the original i l 2 configuration.

9 3

~ 0 What about the qualificationa that the manufactur- 'h 4 .ers use-for. the cable. trays themoclves, the part that you S rely upon from them? i O A That may be changing within the industry. 4 j 7 Wa're using for Trojan-specific tac cama information that i 1 B was developed for the original design. So as far an our D reevaluation, that h s not changed. Within the industry 10 that may be changing, I'm act really sure about that. l' 11 Q Would you have eq insight as to how the chang-4 j 12 ing might occur, what's happening there? Or do you have 4 g 13 that information? 14 A I think the changns that would be taking placa 1-within the cabic trcy domain, eo to speak, is not coming j 15 [ 16 from the manufacturers. Dechtel, ourselves, are doing some i r; testing on the cablo tray syates. But the manufacturers t i ta normally deal with the tray itself and does not extend { 19 ' beyond that point. l-20 And this is why a person or en organization 4 at that is danling with the overall system in in many cases 1 l 22 .forcad to do the testing themselves. So tha manufacturers 'c e' I don't think are changing thinge very much, 23 j 24 Again, ateel is a fairly well-defined material. e 9 4, to ey tw e de i e

I 2815 L mpb3 1' . ongoing is showing that the designs based on criteria 2 cimilar.to what was used on Trojan is.a very conservativo S 3 dacir,;a, The prircary difference is in the area of damping; i - e 4 damping that shows up in field installation is much higher [ 5 than the five percent that's used in Trojan. 1 I 6' Q Now I wanted to ask a few questions on the f 7 mechanical equipment, which as I understand is in Table 1. i [ G Now is this Mr. Bushnell? 9 A (Witness Bushnell)

Yes, j

10 0 I believe that the qualification methods are i 11 at the end of the table here, right, the dynamic analysis I. 12 mathed is nimber ono? I 13 A Yes, cir. i p} Q One star is dono on a generic basis. Two is a j g; pecudo-dynamic analysis method, i l 10 An we don't be.ve PSAR Section 3.7.3.4 here, i - 37 would you deceribe to na what is meant by pseudo-dynamio j gg analyaic method? 19 A' Yes. l go It'n canentially an equivalent static approcch. 2f Tha qualification studios of tna method, no ctated in the j~ e 22 FSAR, are that the system be dominated by a single frequency. r l; p; That is cuaentially a cingle degree of freedom system. Or 4 l p4 that it be rigid. Or further that it be a ninglo degree of rj-h frcodom cyctem in its fundamental node and rigid in ite 25 i J =.

.2816 1 mpb4 1 . higher moden. t 2 The method uses the peak, the' highest point on O j 3 i the floor response spectrum as the acceleration input to l 4. i determine the inertial load on whatever the element is. l i S L . Q Uhen you say a single degree of freedom that ] 5 means it's mounted in such a way that it only has. one degree 1 l 7 of freedom, is that ~~ or designed in such a way that a piece l 8 of' mechanical equipment has only one degree of freedom? l 9 A Uell, I guess y'ou could probably characterine i-10 it to be more than that, to be dominated by a single mode. l 11 O Do We have any set of standards to be used at 1 12 this point for mechanical equipment as to how we should . I 13 design those for saismic behavior? j g 14 A YeGr there are standards. You might refer back i 15 to Tablo 3B1 and some of the qualification methods chown in 1 g; the right-hand column. Many of the mechanical cyctems, cuch j 17 as these vontilating systems here, 3B1, ~7, and ~8, are 3 jg auch that their support system is similar to - not really 4 19 like, but similar to - comowhat like the piping systems. j 20 That is, you have long runs of duct work and you would have 21 hangora perhaps supporting duct work. 22 We'll restrict for the moment just to the duct h-23 work. g,; - The qualification of auch duct work would really 'g be a matter of qualifying the supports. The codes used for g i rs- +gm y, ,e.-r e -x.y ee-4 .v e r,, we ,wy',--m .,m -e.- r.>-,m e .w w e e s.-y=-.-m-+,--+.e-.m-wwe.ww,,-e-e-,we.----wed,e-, .%,s-.-,wcwee_ . iwe

2817 mpbS 1 such qualification would normally be the AISC code, and 2 those codes are eccentially the name today as they were back Dd 3 in 1971, as far an allowablo stress criteria ic concerned. Ok) 4 I chould point out one more aspect, though. 5 Current Standard Review Plan, Section 384 does require the G combination of spatial responses by an RMS method. That is 7 to aay, you do your analysis for - I'll use northsouth, Oi eastwest, and vertical, and combine the streuses at come point l 9' by a route menn equaro combination, and compare that against 10, the criteria.

1 The Trojan approach generally used was two 1g components, one vertical and oaa horizontal, for example, a 13 north-south plus a vertical by direct aum and an eart-west 14 and a vertical by direct sum.

15 The differances between the two methods by 16 comparicon we might make on the duct work here, the response 97 and the stress conditions and a support design is almost 73 entirely dominated by one direction. It's a long run with

g cupports, and you just don't get much motion normal to along 20 the alignment of the duct.

And I doubt that there would be g significant differences at all between the two critoria. O Now that'c on that model. That in the log model. ,e u. /} A YU3* 23 O Can you go through and take some of the other a,; O clacces of mechanical equipment and make some general (J ,e n

1 ~ 2818.- - i P mpb6 - I statements about'how they have been decigned'against any 2 particular standard,.or the like?

re

~3 l[ on page 3B6 another important safety-related A 4 item in the plant would be the battery - the main batteries. i l S These are the backup batterica., of course. S The batterica themselves arc, of cource, rigid l -7 and don't cause any concern. Thoir supports for Trojan are 8 braced steel framing. Again, I guacs that's not all that p e much different from the e:: ample we juct talksd about. It 10 l would be an AISE codo., It would be used for the nupport-l 1; ing system and the appropriatn code for the cnchorages c I i l 12 Changes to those codes are :act significant ! g ', 3 betwcon 1971 and today. 14 Let's coe. Thero may ba in examplo. L Q;j-Q I know there ic at least one other that I sea q . h g l} in here, and' that in the process, D;C rack production, thesc u gQ hinda of categories. 1 0 73 !j MR. AXELRAD: Uhcro is that found, Dr. McCollom, bI what nage? gg a go DR. MC COLLOH: That's on page 3B21. Ohc that's a [ over in thn cicotrical, isn't it. g p 22 - MR. AXELPAD: Yes. i@ 0 g{ DR. MC COLLOM: I'd just as soon not get into i .- h y alactrical yet. .h DY DR, MC COLLCH: y m it iln I\\ r-e er b.w-- ,m-o -r-.u..+-.,-,-eer-ws- .er,*

w-- -, -

m w - i- >+s.- e w m w n,...-a m ---ee-m-w e,-rrm. .. - - < =..- - ----- .-r,we-- w a%-==%e,nre vow,

w-a o.-=

w n -wr r-:* - +t=v4

, _ _..... ~. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . 2819-r c-p mpb7 ~I Qi . Would it help to be back on Table'1'of Exnibit 2 23 nou to find other categories? For instanca, tanks; just . h l. -3 talk about tanks. )_ ! h 4 'MR., AXELRAD: On Table 2 perhaps. i 1 U WITt3ESS FREWING: Yes. i G BY DR.- MC COLLOM-p 7-0 And pumpo io another category, i j 8 JA (Witnoac Duchnell) The analysis of such things t 9 au tanks and pumpo I think, as Dr. White pointed out a day J j 10' or so ago, is vary cimilar just to a straightforward struc-11 tural analysis. 12 Again, the code for steel supported tenks would l 13 be back to the AISC, and perhaps for anchorages cither a g h 14 federal spac or acme manufacturer'c connervative cpecifica-t' 15 tions in reference to the federal spec. i 16 The analysis that we did in revice of the ones 37 that we did revis.w in parallel with Ecchtal was ecson'.ially 1, ja a hand-calculation to determine first the frequencies given 39 a model of the tank, anc than in nany cases thcoe can be 20 modeled essentially as single degreo of freedom systema, a a 4 large tank with cupports. 21 1 22 After.the frequencica are determined then it ag. 23 cither in.just a matter of going to the rcoponno spectrum and d-picking the' acceleration. value, end then completing the 24 , p analysis for streso levoln in tha support cystems and 33 d ih 4.'. C. .O-. a... -. _. -,.. ~ _ _ _.. ...,J. ..,_s,.,,m.-_

4... '2820 l. e mpb8 1 anchorages, j- - - j... 2-g- How about' pumps? Is that any different from - I le ' 4 A Pumps in one degreh The ones that I can think 3 tanks? L j i7 5 of'only now are essentially rigid within themceives, such F e j 6 that tho anchorages ara the things to be reviewed in most t 7 cases. i a [ 0 The pump itualf is qualified by me.nufacturers i' 0 and floor responses are not normally amplified. I just can't 1 4 9 10 think of an exemple where one would.be. There may bo some. 11 A (Witness White) Normally a pump menna it ia a e 12 moving piece of' equipment. The sciamic loads normally would g 13 not: control the sine of the components. Its own' function is / 14 a much more cevere kind of condition than a seismic load .4 i-15 would impose on it. 10 So the only thing that is governed by the pump 17 ~~ or by saismic as far e.n the pump is concerned is the i 2 n 10 method of. support, and this gets back to anchor bolts, or i 19 stresses on the pipe, or something like that. 20 0 I noticed heat excha.ngers on this list now., j 21 Would you 1Ake to address that as any epocial category differ-F i 2g ent from tanks? Le i 23 MR, AXELRAD: May I just ask one question for .i 24 clarification, Dr. McCollen? I 4 L 2'J DR..MC COLLOH:

Yes,
tl 0%$

--n. ~ ~,.. -,,. ~,..... .w .a w,,~,-,_.,,__.A.,_n.a.,-...,.,--,,_,.w,,-,,,. _ n e d-,v,,,w w,,www.,,,,

2821 4 mpb9'I MR. AXELRAD: Thane items like the heat cocchang-2- ers you're referring to row, aren't those at 45 feet above, '..O 3 - or. ara I~ reading Tabic 1 incorrectly? O \\ 4-WITNESS FREWING:- 'les, Mr. Axelrad. 5-MR. AXELRAD1 And.those were not involved in 6 any reavaluations, is.that correct? end 9 7 WITNESS BUSHNELL: Yes. 8 9 .to 11 i I P, s 13 i4 1B ) 16 i 17 L 10 19 i 4 20 7.1 23 1 24-25

1gggg 2822 . wel~ 1 II CHAI1U4AN MILLER: What does Table 1 cover? Is 1 2 that the original tonfirmation, is that a reevaluation, or 9 3 lboth? ' O 'I 3 WITNESS ANDERSON: Table 1 was primarily prepared F U just'to get a total list of equipment, where it was, and to 6 6:mw, to demonstrate clearly that some of this equipment - i e i aa of it, in fact, is down in the lower part of the j ) i 1 l 0 >ailding. i i 9 So it is what geta you into Table 2, that then i 4 10 cays what has been done to these tanks that are at the 1 11 upper level.. i 12 BY DR. t1C COLLOM: 1 g 13 0 I see. Me already have covered tanks, and that ) 14 looks like that's all that's done, is that right? 15-A (Witness Anderson) Thatts correct. l 16-0 Okay. I guess the other question I would ask is: 1 l IT In your knowledge has there been any significant L 18 change in design requirements based on seismic capability of i 19 equipment, mechanical equipment, since the original design l 20 .of the equipment in Trojan? j. 21' A (Witnecs Bushnell) The change I mentioned - yes, l: l,O - 22 there is a change. One that comen to mind immediately is l 23 the one we just discussed, which is the change in the Standard i. 14 Review Plan that'may require consideration of special 20 components, different from what wetre considering at Trojan. l; l' , = N, _ _ ' L. .-.a

2823 wel 2 1 My judgment would be on that, after having worked 2 somewhat with both methods, is that the differences would i 20: 3 not result in any significant change to the supports. In 1 ) 4-fact, in some cases the Trojan criterla governs, or is no 5 different. 6 0 Do you know of any other case? i 7 WITNESS FREWING: Could we consult for a moment? I a (The panel conferring.) 9 WITNESS BUSIINELL: Dr. McCollom, therc's'one i to qualification I'd like to add: l j fi The current Standard Review Plan also has other 12 requirements in it. There is one that I probably should 13 mention in connection with these special components, and it n 14 would be in the area of damping, wherein higher structural 15 damping is permitted by use of the Standard Review Plan, 16 and also higher damping in mechanical equipment, ~ piping, i 17 this sort of thing - higher damping ratios. u 53 BY DR. MC COLLOM: I 19 0 Thats a for the current Standard Review Plan? 20 A (Witness Bushnell) Yes, sir. l-21 O .That is in a safe direction, compared to the-22 design of the components to withstand scismic events? In 'O 23 other words, if you~ design to a higher damping ratio, that's 24 the safo direction, versus - no, wait a minuto - I didn't - h

25 cay'it right.

Would you say it for me? i l

j a i 2824 1 t-wel 3.. h. i I' A '(Witness 1Bushnell) I think what you -~ 2 0~ Is the. design strorger nou under those standards, I h 3 or is the design less ctrong for a gjven situation? -l -4 A Uith regard to Trojan, specifically, in the area 5 ) of damping Trojan is !aoro conservative in that the requirement I! 6" was half a porcent. damping in most equipment and piping. I 'I O Okay. I think that'n all on mechanical. I'd t &I like to go to electrical now. I

ll In Licensee Exhibit 23 where you start off with 4

4 p ,q 10 the page of electrical equipment, and we find out the various h 11 coismic qualifications that we have, you've listed four l C ;U) there. And the third one, numbered three, is calle~ .ing i . g G . method." i Mj Would you describa what testing methc-as? i-1; IE { h (Uitness Frewing) Could you indicata again the j 20 '.\\ page you're on? 1 l F, O It's just before Table 5. G-23 is the number I e i 18 1 'see in the lower left-hand corner, i t p 19 -- A (Witnens Bushnell) Yes, we have the page. .1, e 20 - 0 I'd like to know, under paragraph'C there, where L 21-h. you' have the original qualification taethods licted, what l I;l; 2? number 3 is that is described as tacting method? I-23J I guess it vould help if I'd go through, and find !in E1 out if it was used. Yes, it var, On the DC control centers, t

5. t F.5 on the 4.16 kv switchgear, and the 480 volt-load center and n

li i .....w.._..a2.._._,..._n_..__..

I l 2825 -i i' \\ j wel 4-I the 480 volt motor control center are the four examples of 2 uhere the co-called testing method was used. j? g 3 A Yes. The testing method referred to here as 4 opposed to the one with the asterisk, generic basis, is a + 5 test method that meets the equipment specification attachment G for Trojan, which was the specificacion for seismic qualifica-7 tion. 4 O That specification gave the vendor the option of 1 9 several different methods of qualification. I'1 this event i 10 he chose testing. l 11 This is as opposed, though, to the generic WCAP l 12 type tosting, and.in most casas -- and I believe in this case-- g 13 the 400-volt lead center, the test was parformea to the l f i 14 specific iloor response spectra requirement, an opposed to l 15 any large generic envelope. 1 h 16 I don't recall offhand what the actual methods F 17 - used. I might decaribe briefly some of the methods that were 1 la used. i 19-The sine sweep and eine beat method wo talked 20 about this morning was used quite commonly, wheroin you would s I 21 get your piece of equipment on a test table and do a low L 22 amplitude frequency search to identify the resonances the 1 23 equipment may have, and test at thoce resonancoc uith a cine t M

beat, i

. 25 Normally a 10-cycle nine, a seried of 10-cycle l ? i '~ 4 = - ..~

7-3 2026 wel.5 l 1 sine beats, five or si:c, spaced by a short time interval, i 2 would be used as input motion to the test. And for a piece ih 3 of equipment with half a p ant dcmping the responce or the i.g 4 acceleration seen.by the equipment at a half a parcent 3 damping, would be on the order of 18 times the input motion. j- ) 6 Other test methods wara used, such as steady-state l ) 7 sine motion as input, wherein, at again a half a percent l g damping, the amplifying motion that the equipment would see ] 9 would be approximately 20 times what was put into the table. ) j 10 Other test methods included - corao of them j j j; included more of a random type motion, wherein the amplifica-( 12 tion is a square root function, and would 50 on the order of 13 5 tims the input motion. g g In each case the vendor, in order to qualify his equipment, would have,to demonstrate that the resulting g 1 g spectra from the response of the equipment at these frequencies ) g exceeded, in every case, exaceded the demand an shown on the l t gg floor response spectra. 79 Q So that really io the criteria that was used? It s. -uas to say that you have to make it fit so that tha response g spectra of the floor was always onclosed within the resulting 22 . tested responso spectra? ' g.' A Yes. In some cases you could qualify that further p3-I [ p. by saying that at the frequency there the equipment may have a h 125 had resonances, that in to say that it wouldn't be necessary {o ..m,__._ .-..-.m~.-,,,4_- .-.i--,-~..L.,__m--_,.,.~,...., E m-,,n-w.. -w

i 2827 c f..' wel 6 'I to test'at a very low frequency,if the equipment had only l ? i high frequency resonances. 1 4 0 3 CIIAIRMAN MILLER: On page 2 of 9, do you see on !'h 4 Table 5, Shutdown on DBA Sequencers? What type of testing + 3 was done with that equipment? G WITNESS BUSHNELL: That L:est was performed by 7 a vendor.. O CHAIRMAN MILLER: 0Thich vendor? 9 WITNESS BUSHMELL: If you give me a moment, I'll 10 try to find that. 11 (Pause.) 12 My recollection is that a company named Dalmo g 13 Victor in California under subcontract to Animot Labs 1.1 actually did the test. .l 15 The test, again as I recall, was a sino dwell type 10 input motion. They were given a requirement spectra to moet, b j 17 and used a nine input motion thrcughout the freque.ncy range i [ 18 to prove that their equipment could withstand levels greater i 19 than the requirement given to them. 20 There is one other limit on the input used, and 21 that is table limiting type motion which governs only the 22. -low frequency end of things, with the table displacements 23 called control which you can get into the thing. 24 Dut that qualificaticu, again, required that they exccod the requirement given to them. 25 ~ Si ' i ..a.. .,,, _..... _. ~........ -. -. _ _.,,. _ ~., _, _,. _..,,,

..m.o_m.__.... j [ .;828 l wel 7 4 i i; - 110w, in these tests I think it's probably' worth f: 2 mentioning.. . well, maybe it isn't worth mentioning. 3 t !j 3 (Laughter.) O j. 4q BY DR. MC COLLOM: i . 1 l 5 O Lot me ask a queation here, juct out of personal 0l intorost, as to how Bechtel and PGE vorked on this kind of j 7 }l thing. II i 0 i Here is a piece of equipment, I presume that wan 1: O cpecified by Bechtel, and it needed to be testod, 10 How do we go about the relationship between Bechtel l 11 and PGE in terma of the selection of equipment, and then in terms of evaluating it for ceicmic capability? !2 h 13 -{ A (Witnocs Bushnell) During construction phase, the 14 architect-ongineer, Bechtel Corporation, prepared spccifica-m tions, including the attachment spacificatienc, for seismic i. 1 j 10 qualification of equipment to be purchased. i W

7,,

Portland General Electric Company does retain the i p-i a l fG purchasing responsibility. That'c more or lecs a paper l 10h . responsibility. l l 20 }h The documents and records and so forth that are l. Ej ! required as part of the qualification are submitted to the 22 ; architect-engineer for review, Ecchtol Corporation in most l P,3 I' caScC. Mk Sinco the plant has gonc operational, PGE has I o 3: -been purchasing come equipment directly, in which case PGE }. 'Y .Il+ _.__.___-.,__:_a_.__ ,,,;..___.__._, _~

. ~. l 2829 -wel 0 i l I would retain the responsibility for reviewing _ the ' qualifica-- 2-tions. l . -Ih 3 I believe we I don't know of any exceptions 4 where we do not ach for, though, any comments that the AE F 5 may have, whatever. it may be, whether it's an AE or USSS and 10 6 requirement. i HEL 11 3 wel 7 Q Originally, when the plant uns first designed, l 8 Bechtel specified all the original equipment design, and 9 npocified "- 10 A To the bact of my knowledge, ync., l ) 11 Q Wan it the joint responcibility to have these l 12 cvaluations such'au we've been talking about here, or who !h 13 was responsible to anpure the initial sainmic qualification? i 1J Who took the respcasibility for that? ( 1 19 A The revious. it's hind of a difficult question i-j 16 to answer. 1 1 ~ 17 O Would it help if we got cpecific on sorrething, 18 raayba, like, for inctance, the Animet toct reportr? Who I 10 were the ones that specified what was to be donc, and how p. l I r.0 it was to be carried out? F 21 A To the best of my knowledge, during the design- - l 1 l 22 construct phase, Dechtel Corporation, or in some casos the i 23 'USSG supplier, provided the specifications review. i-i-i 24 Q-Now, I'd like to get to the question which is } Es nou beconing rather f aniliar: According to the standards i i m .m- _ _ _ _. _ ~. -. _ _ _ _, ,.-__-or_ -e m.,% M,%,-.,,,,,,,,-.,_m. ..,,,.aw,, e_.--.,,,..w,,,,y,_mw.,

F 2830 1 nel 9 L I today, are there significant changes in any place, if you 2 were building the plant today, in the design of mechanical. 3 equipment that are.significantly different than they vero

O L

4 -back when Trojan was originally. I'm on electrical now, i S Did I say mechanical? j 6 I'm norry. Electrical equipment ic what I'u -7 referring to. Just as an example I knou that the IEEE-344-- r 6 p 1975 has been mentioned vernus 1971, where there might be 9 significant changes that might have been done if you would ) 10 design Trojan today. r 11-A Thero would be differences. It would be a matter 12 of looking in soma detail at the particular elements h 13 involved. 14 In general, my observations have been that those i 15 . differences aren't very significant for most categories of 10 electrical equipment. ) j [ 17 In other wordc, they are single access only i i i j 10 sansitive, and normally single frequency only sensitive, such i i 19 as relays and things of that nature, 20 .There tre not, to my knowledge, any major [ 21' - categories where the difference' uld ba significant. [ 22 .O Let me lead you to one.aestion that occurred to ,r 23 ma'when you vere' talking about the sine wave sweeping through i. '24 4 ' and shaking the shake. table. What about the more random kinds 25 of more equivalent carthquake motion, I guess is what I ^ ,h,

-l 2831 .) -wel 10-I .would call it, that ue've heard about? Is4 that in the 2 . standard ucw? 1 A As far as the IEEE standard, yes, it is. O 4 j The standard itself is essentially a number of acceptable test methods, one of which is the uso of random 0 motion. 7 Going to the significance, I did want to come back U to my comment earlier this morning. One of the bases for 9 that conclusion is the very conservative test amplitudes 10 that result from theso tests, such as the Dalmo Victor and 11 others. l 12 That is to say the vendors like to sell their 'g 13 equipment without having to roqualify it at every plant and, 14 hence, they try to qualify it to a very high level to begin 15 with, so that they don't have to go through-this process i 16 each timo. 17 Normally, the responsa spectra that one can draw 18 frcm test data show large margins in just about'all frequency 19 ranges'above a specific plant's requirement. 20 Q I think I'd lika to address this question now to 21 the panel as a whole: 1 22 You heard my comment this morning about fire 23 protection equipment. Can you tell me whether any of the 24 fire protection equipment is listed in any of these tables in 25 this Exhibit 23 that we've been reviewing? i 4 { i I. E . 2 2...___._.,.,_____._.___...._.,.._.___;.__, .,___.._____,.,._J

F 2032 I wel 11-i A (Uitness_Frewing) The answer is no, there is no j. 2 fire protection equipment listed in these tables we've been I - 3 discussing. 4 0 Is thero fire protection equipment in the-buildings? 5 A YOS* i 6 Q Are you auare if an evaluation has been made 7 specifically taking into consideration the possibility of a l g seismic cvent resulting in a fire? g MR. AXELRhD: Excuse me. Dr. McCollom, we were 10 going to be prepared to answer firo protection questions at 4 i a later time, unless you specifically want to address those 99 12 witnesses. CHAIRMAN MILLER: No. That's right. I recall. 13 DR. MC COLLOM: I thought th't' shy we said-we j 94 J l gy were going to have a long noon hour, s.

you could do l

that? jg MR. AXELRAD: Oh, but wo're not quite there yet, 77 DR. MC COLLOM: It wasn't a long noon hour, either. j 73 gg, HR.. AXELRAD: The long noon hour was going to be ,) So that we could come back and tell you what we could do. r gj CHAIRMAN MILLER: All right. I believo that's yy; a;I the questions that the Board has of this panol at this 9 time. ,.3 Is there any cross-examination,Mr.Socolofchy? c 29

. g

'MR. SOCOLOFSKY: I have none. 4 i i.

j..

1.1 u. __._.2...-.u___.__u._c.,._.._.___..,..,-.__,-..___-._.._;._,_.,_..,,-_._.,,.,,_..

. _. - _ _... ~ _. _ _.. - _.. ~ _ _ _ _ _ _.. _ l 2833 l Wel 12 i' I CHAIRMAN MILLER: Intervencrs? 2 MR, ROSOLIIs: Well, I'll defer to Mc. Doll. 3 MS. DELL: The way I ceo it right now is if I 'sO could have the opportunity to cross-examine after I heard 5 the Staff that I might have, that ic.ight be easier for me, .t l that it might be clearer, for the reasons that Dr. McCollom 6 7 brought up carlier, j 8 CllAIRMAN MILLER-Jibout how much timo do you 9 anticipate for cross? M MS. BELL: Well, I don't think that much. It's 11 mostly a matter of wanting to make sure that the questions 12 that.I do ask are set in my head. I mean this has obviously I$ 13 just come up, and if I could have more time to prepara I'd i y1 14 appreciate it. 1 ' 15 Also, hearing what the Staff would cor 'ider r.., 4 ,6 requirements and things would he3p me understand what Bechtel 4-e 17 and PGE chould bo providing. And in that way, I would just IG be. B CHAIRMAN MILLER: Well, let me see if I understand N you. You prefer-to follow the Staff's examination, assuming 4' 21 there may be-Staff examination of thin panel? j 22 MS. BELL: No, what I meant was -- O-23 CHAIRMAN MILLER: Well, if we can do something 24-to accommodate you, to help you prepare - 25 MS,' BELL: Well, I suppose if I want after the 3' ~[g,.

~.. -. 2834 1 1-Staff it would'give.me a few more minutec. 2 CIIAIRMAN MILLER: Well, would you like more time? e i 3. MS. BELL: -Yes, I would. e 4 CIIAIRMAN MILLER: Well, if you can cut doun the 4 5' extent;of your cross'cnd focus it, then wa'd be glad to 6 cooperate in giving you como time. 4 7 MS. BELL: Yes, I would go with that. 8 CIIAIRMAN MILLER: Ten minutes? 9 MS. DELL: Okay. 10 (Recess.) t end 11-11 12 g 13 14 15 9 16 3 17 ~ 1 4 1 18- ).. 19 i . 20 ~21 -22 23 25 =~

c 2035 T12 mm1 i MELTZER I CHAIRMAtr MILLER: Are we ready? 2 'MS. DELL; h3 ready tw I am going to be. 3 l _ CHAIRMAN MILLER: Oh, yes. Mr. Axelrad, perhaps o - '4 .you can tell us what additional witnessen you have, and 5 what am your ' timing uchedulo plana. 6 MR. AXELRAD: Okay. A l 7 What we had planned to do after this panel is O complete in to bring back Mr. Frewing and Mr. Cooke to handle 9 the fire protection question and then we will have j 10 Mr. Withers with rospect to tha Zion incident and the l 11 operating procadure, i 17. And that would conclude what we have for today. 1.g 13 The other matters, ac far as we can see were 14 principally addressed to the Staff. It may be after the 15 Staff testifica on that nubjecty that we may want to bring 10-back some additional testimony. 17 DR. MC COLLOM: Will you be ready with the next la panel as coon as we get through with th.is one? 19 Mh. AXELRAD: Yea. 20 DR. MC COLLOM: Any other preparation will not El te necessary? EE \\ MR. AXELRAD: That's right. The lengthened A lunchebn recess by the last ten minutes has enabled us to E3 - l 21 complete preparations. ) l -23 O!! AIRMAN MILLER: VEry well. 'l i =

y 'I L -2836 mm2 1 .CROSC-EXAMINATION 1 1 EE B'l MS. BELL:

4. O 3h"h. Q I'm not sure if you answerod some of these

' O A

questions before, and I want clarification. So you may S decide among you who is going to answer. 1 1 i 6 j. I would like to know what electrical equipment is I 7; in the complex that requires multi-frequency multi-axis O testing? 9 A (Witness Buchnell) As far as the Trojan require-10 I ments are concerned, none that I can think of that was 11 originally tested. l il U{ There are come thinga that would be in that i 12 I i ! g 13 { category which uero qualified by analysis and do not, there- ] i i i ) l 14 for:c, require multi-axic testing por ue, i I! 15 H, 0 Ilou ucula a cabinet in which relays were placed, i i d L 10 1 affect the relaya themselves or their capability to keep on a i l l 17 functioning in a standard earthquake? j i i i i! 1 q 1a " A In a great many casca the cabinet with the relay 1 i 10 g or the serica of relays installed in it vu/ tested. o f i i; 20(( In other cases -- co that the effect is included. l k In other caces the cabinet was tasted with data channels, 21 j 22 1 accelerometer' channels at the location of the equipment that l.j. - 1 .O,l was to 'bc installed in i he cabinet-t b 24 i Subsequent testa using that input motion,for the l O wl! element'thatgoesinthecabinet, tents were provided to uy l. b u a -,d, -. i n n .~.-..,,....- + -.----. ~.-.....~. - + .... - - ~ -. - - -... _.,..,. -. - -,... -

1-b p 2837 ram 3 1 qualify in that fashion. i '2 I guess I didn't ansuor your question directly. 3 The cabinet itself would, in some cases, amplify 'O 4 the motion of'the floor upon uhich it sitn to the location e [ 5 of'the relay. In come canos it wouldn't. 'I ]- G Q ~ So, let me clarify. i l { 7 You coomed to come up with two pointa,and I am O not sure what the difference was. D one case you uould put accoloroneters where -- let's i 10 see -~ the consitive instrumantation would be. And then you l 11 would~ apply shaking to the base of the cabinet? 12 A Yes. l l g 13 0 And what was the other one? 4 14 You said was testad, I think -- I I t' .A Herely tha entire dssembly cog lote.

Namely, 10 the instrument, whatever it might be,'already in the cabinet 17_

when we tout the cabinet.

i. -

[ 10 Q. In other words, you would test the instrwnentation 10 aside from the cabinet.uithout the cabinet? 20-A No. 21 Q I'm not clear en the difference, then, i 22 A (Witnesc' White) The inatrument is put in the 23 cabinet. You put the cabinet on the table and you shake 2t, overything. 25 E. MC COLLOM: As built. t l

t 2838 4 i l. 1mn4 I BY MS. BELL: 2 Q' Okay. . k. { 3 So, one you are '.alking about in the Trojan 4 plant, and the other you'are talking about putting on the 5 table'and shahing it? I 6 No? I'la missing again? }. l 7-A (Witness Bushnell)- These type of tes'cs would j~ l 0 not normally be done in plant. 9 In fact, I don't believe I know of any that were j 10 done in plant. 11 Q

Okay, i

j 12 Go as far as you know, no tests of relays in cabinetu g 13 were done at the Trojan plant itself? l 14 A The facility is not suitable. One has to go to a 15 test lab to do this sort of thing, i i 10 Q What would be the range of, let's say, the ~ 17 effect or the change in damping that a cabinet could cause on 18 the acceleration? 10 A Un change :In datr. ping wouldbo expected to occur due 20 tic' the' cabinet. i' o.. 21 A (Witness White) I inight add, if the damping were i 22 to do anything,'it would increase due to the bolted connection 23 between tho floor and the cabinet. 24 Q I believe .I m'not sure. exactly where in the i 25 transcript, but.o.n the last day o'f the.last hearing, November . ~.

t b 2839 ) i l l mm5 -3rd, you said, and I may be wrong again, that Westinghouse i!'- 2 gave you I guess meaning Bechtel -- floor spectra input 9. [;h. '3

for equipment.

l ' 4 Is that true? h" A 'Could you say that again? i f G Q I believe you said that Westinghouse gave Bechtel L 7 floor spectra input for the equipment, or soma sort of -- O' A They have within their generic testing program, a l 9 set of floor response spectra that they uso for the testing i 10 'of their equipment. i 11 Q Okay. ll l 12 Could you tell me what the qualification method of I g 13 dynamic analysis means? I'm not sure if Dr. ficcollom asked l-14 thic or not, but I don't remcmber, i d j 15 Uho does it? I 10 What does dynamic analysin tonting or qualifica-j 17 tion mean? ~ 10 A (Witnesa Bushnell) Are you referring to the i 4 19 . footnote? i 4 [ 20 - Q Right.. P.1 I' guess it is on ~~ this would be Exhbit 23, - 22 page G-23, Section C-1, original qualification nothod O, - 23 identified in FSAR as dynamic analysis.

f_.

-24 It is right before Tablo 5. 25 A The most commonly used method of dynamic w% .-eei.--r=-,. n e.73,ns-. r-a w w mem--'. - m e w e. .n --.--- -. -r- -+.r.rair. -r--w.-ewenube-.= ewe e m + <-w e

2840 mm6 I analysis, very similar to what Dr. White has described for 2 the structures. 7, k_ 3 One again would determine analytically frequencies O 4 for whatever gadget it was, and using those frequencies 5 obtain the spectral accelerations from the floor response l 0 spectra. And continue the analysis to find loads and 7 stresses, then check those against the applicable codes. 0 0 When equipmont was qualified through analysis by 9 the vendor, if you got a picco of equipment,and I can't -- 10 let's just say it uas a piccc of equipment and it was 11 considered qualified by the vendor -- had that same, 12 actual came design with the same materialc, had that bcen (} 13 tested by the vendor? 14 Do you know what I'm caying? 15 I can givo you an example. Let's say we were 16 talking about a motor and you said, well, this motor has 17 been qualified by the vendor. Could the vendor, let'c say, 18 test a smaller motor or a motor of scmewhat different -- a 19 different type of motor and still be qualifying the kind 20 that your purchased? 21 A (Witness White) I think if the item he tested 22 was not identical with the picce of equipment bought for the b,_. 23 Trojan plant, it would be hic responsibility to show the 24 simihrity betueen diat he tested and what he delivered, (m_) ES Q And where would ono find that data?' }

L 2841 \\ e mm7 1' A. . L3 this example. relevant, were things'like that i .0 ! O h [l done?- i -3' A (Witnesu Bunhnell) I can't think of any particulaar O .c . item like that. But the vendor would be required to submit ) - g-documentation for any cafety--related piece of equipment that i I 6 he was required to qualify..And that doctunentation would be ) y reviewec against the requirementa. .g If he didn't make it,.i t would be rejected. g Q Are you familiar with the status of the MCAP i go Mports in term:3 of, not the NRC Mechanical Engiicering j' i Branch's Review, but the Electrical Dranch's Review? 11 l g A (Witnosc Frewing) Hot in detail. I don't think tre can cite those to you. Vary 13 obviously, the perple most directly aware are Westinghouse j g j ( 15 l P* E1** j i 4 g li Q Okay. That brings me to one of my major questions. g, g - I gueca I really wasn't going to ask you, but I was curious, I il 1 It cecms to mo :-t this point yoa are talking about all g 1 equipment both produced by Westinghoune and others, and I g i

l am -- thic may not be a question for the Applicant, but I

.,c;- g don't underntand why wo don't havo Westinghouse people to y., 3 ancuer some of those questionc. I don't know who to approach. y I CUAIRMAN MILLER: In that a rhetorical question? a i e f.: n MS. EELL: Maybe it is rhetorical. Maybe that is i a . j! d 4 a =..--. mm..e,-w ...~.-.u-m. ,,_u ~..,_m- +. _. _.,,~.m-.m,m,.w,e.w+-ey_,

i 2 842' l1 t i I mm8 tall it is. l I I$ A BY MS. BELL: 3 ~ If you don't havo the answer to my question, 0 h !i ' 4 that'ia fine. l 5 Was.there any difference in the qualification i i 6 methoda used between the original design base accident r 7 . sequence and the ones that were -- I believe they were 1 O replaced at a particular time? F 9' A' (Witness Buchnell) Your question was, was there 10 a diffprence~in the tent methode? 1 11 Q Yes. 12 A The method was the same, as I recall. It was the llh ~ 13

one, as described earlier, done by Dalmo Victor.

j..

Q skcuse me? 14 15 A The one described earlier thic afternoon, that i 16 was done by Dalmo Victor as a subcontractor to Anamet. i 17 Q In your opinion, would the way that the DBA i 18 sequencers were mounted in the Trojan plant affect their 19 seismic qualification? 20 A

Yes,

,e l 21 Q Was-there a difference in the way they are l 22 mounted between the first time and the second time? That

"ih.

j 23 is.the now ones and the replacemento? I' 24 A-1(Witness Cooke). Yes, there was. 25 A (Witness Bushnell) Yes, I believe that is correct. i i j 1-li I

d 2843 ) 4mn9 1 1 -Q Do you know what.the reason for that was? r-2 A I don't recall the reason. .h 3 'A (Witness Cooke) Because we enclosed them in a l box.to protect them from any dust particles, anything like 4 i g that..And it was more convenient to mount them differently c in the: box. c y Q And the change in reounting, would that have anything a to do with the actual performance of the DBA sequencers, aside from the fact that it was a convenience? .g A You mean functionally? 10 Q Yoc. j gg A No. 93 They were tested with different mountings. 13 1 In other worda, they were tested in three directions, g,g i y rtically, horizontally and I believe originally they were 15 mounted vertically. And now they are-I'm fairly sure that 16 they are mounted horizontally, and the seismic tects that were g performed on them were perfomed in those positions. gg 1 Q Again, thin was just a clarification. 10 A piece of equipment that had been -- in listed 20 t 21 - as having a qualification document, ,ac an Anacet Lab report, I w old that equipment could that equipment be Westinghouse 22 .O 4 manufcetured? A (Witness Bushnell) It certainly could be, 3 i 25 .l i y sm.-,mi-.,..d-,,..~,.. ...,....... y m E U w.__,..ww _, m .-,..,,+m.,,. ,yy,,w ,,,,w.g, ,m-w.mw www., w,~,.e

2844 l mml0 1 .s'bcontractors as test labs to do some of their work for'them. u l.- 2 Regarding Anamet, I have no knowledge of any k 3 direct relationship. 4 Q So given any piece of Westinghouse equipment, it 5 could have been sent to subcontracting lab and tested or it O could be -- okay, that's true. 7 If the reference document is a NCAP report, doesn't j 0 that just say basically how it should be qualified?.What i 9 thc tosting methods should be? 3 l -10 A What the testing method was. In other uords, it is i 11 a report of the test itself, i 12 A (Witness White). But it gives the method as well as 13 the results. [ ggg I j 14 A (Witnces Bushnell) Yes, it does. i 15 A (Witness White) It does include the results. J 1-16 MS. DELL: I have no further questions. 17 CHAIRMAN MILLER: Thank you. 10 Anyone else? e 19 MR. ROSOLIE: I have a feu questions. r-20 CHAIRMAN MILLER: All right. i 21 BY MR. ROSOLIE: ] g: 22 Q I got a little confused during questioning by the l. 23 Boaad, and I guess I 'just want to clear it up in my own . mind. 24 Lg cuArman MILLER: ouestion the soard. We may 23 c l i . - -.. -.:...--..-.--....-....=..-

2845 mmll I have caused the confusion, is what I'm saying, Mr. Rosolie. 2 But I will be happy to have you inquire. 3 BY MR. ROSOLIE: 3 (V 4 0 Okay. l 5 Check me on my understanding now. Dechtel designed 1 6 the plant and that includec -- pu designed all the safety 7 equipment that was required for the plant? 8 A (Witness Anderson) No, we did not design the 9 safety equipment. We specified some of the safety equipment. 10 We wrote a specification, the specification 11 was reviewed and approved by Portland General Electric. It 12 was sent out to bid, this kind of thing. ,] 13 Now much of the safety equipment was purchaced as 14 a package with the reactor,'from Westinghouse. 15 Q Okay. 1S Well, I guess en example would he, since we 17 talked about DBA sequencern, you specify that thoce would be 18 needed. And then Portland General Electric put out a bid for 10 them? 4 20 In that how that worked? 21 A (Witnces Cooke) They wore spacified on another 22 spacification along with a group of other equipment. ' V 23 In other words - 24 DR. MC COLLOM: Let me ask you to explain something. OO 25 When you say specified, what does that mean in

2846 mm12 -I

terms of'the procedures you go through?

2 WITNESS COOKE: In other vords, we wrote a 3 detailed specification on what this equipment is to be 9 4, performed to, to.be built to, et cotera. -U DR.-MC COLLOM: It did not include specifying a G typical manufacturer, or did it include that? j 7 WITNESS COOKE: Uo, it did not. 8-DR. MC COLLOM: So it is a specification of the 9 function that is.to be accomplished, into great detail? 10 WITNESS COOKE: 'That's correct. 11 DR. MC COLLOM: And then that's uhat goes out for bid ? s 12 UITNESS COOKE: That's right. hadT12 13 v 15 16 1 *i 18 t

g....

2D 21 22 O i n a 24 1 25 '., 4,

_y_ 2847-i BY MR. ROSTJLIE: - .t713 i L. MULTZER 2 G .I 99000,.cince I already mentioned the DBA 1,1 3: sequencers, I believe you said that they are now enc 1'osed in o the box? Were they tested with that box enclosure - the 4 5 coismic capability? A (Witneca Buchnell) I don' t believe so. g a I y G And testing the seismic capability of electric 1 1 equipnant, are the offects of sging taken into account? l g 4 A In testing? \\ 9 + ,j G El ctrical equipment.- the effects of. aging taken 10 into account. 39 L There were no requiromants that I recall for a 12 combination of aging concidorations and seisnic.tosting. for g Trojan. g 15!- A (Witness Frowing) That's accurate. 16 f 4 G Arc there any requirements now? A The industry and the NRC are adopting ctandards t,i j which suggcet additional conbinations of environen'ts for the 16: y qualification of equipment. The ancwer to your quection is yes. They are not applicable to Trojan; and,'in particu-W 1ar, the aging is not particularly cignificant for interim

g

'~~ a j . operation inasmuch as the plent is only one year old. I 3 DR. MO COLLOM Does that mean that the aging ' factors being concidered are much longer than ono your? 4 m C.,. /_.....,A-2.-.. ,,.. _ ~.

2848 , 1.jl' 2 : 1 WITNESS'FREWING: Yes. -l 2. DR. MC COLLOM: What periods of time? 3 WITNESS FREWING: 40-year lifetime,we are looking O o ae. 3 DR. MC COLLOM: When.do they expect aging effects 6-to be occurring in that 40 years of life? Or in it specified 7 that they are not to affect operntions within the 40 years of life? g UITNESS FREWING: The decign specifications that 9 wero dsscribed covertl moments ago talk about provide equipment i 10 3y that is good for 40 years in a given environment, temperature, humidity, radiation,.uhat have you. 12 O '3 6 You said that Trojan is only a one-year-old plant? g "Y 15 about one year, Mr. Rosolie. G Oh, okay. So then, in counting on aging, you only take into effect the time the plant haa operatod 'in,that? A I guess I maant that in a pretty general'.senso. Aging can occur simply as a matter of time, and it can also occur as a matter of being in service, obviously. G Is the possibility of battery plate aging "~~ is 2a. there a possibility that that would occur cooner than the 40 23 years?. A I givass I am not familiar' with battery plates. I I j

A 2849 1 know I replaco it in my car moro often than 40 years. I guess j jl'3 i .2 we are not familiar with that detail. O 4 3 DR.'MC COLLCM: Are there compenents in the electri-i 4-cal system . say, as an example, that you expect to repect to-3 replace periodically, in a maintenanco procedure? a i 6 WITNESS COOKE: Yes. l DR. MC COLLOM: Give us some.examolos. 7 g WITNESS FHCWINGt Light bulbs. 9 (Laughter. ) WITNESS COOKS:. There is a possibility of relays 10 a that are extensively uced, from normal daily oporation, that 93 [ 12 could wear out over a 40-year life. L n DR. MC COLLOM: What kind of batterios are the 93, t ' batteries that arn in the cafo battery supply? Do you know 34 what they are lead-acid or what? 15 WITNESS COOKE: They are load-acid batteries. 16 DR. MC COLLOM: Do you knbw what a typical life of g 1 l a lead-acid battery is? 18 1 4 MITNESS/COOKE: We opccified 40-yaar life. g DR. MC COLLOM: You have specified 40-yoar lifo? 20 WI'31BSS COOKE: Yes. _g DR. MC COLLOM: I'd like to know where to buy one. 22 O. - - (Laughtar. ) g WITNESS COOKE: They are maintained -- they are { t (] teated and maintained.to manufacturer's specificationa. g a. ,_....._.,,_.a...._.. .. ~... _.,. _ _...... _ _ .,__,-m.

. -. -... - -. -... _ ~ - - - _ - I ) j '2850 j i 314-1 BY MR. ROSOLIB: I

}l

.D. Maybe you can tell ne,rhat IEEE 323, 1975, says j h ] e 3 1 about aging f, - A.. (Witnesa Frowing) ~ I guaGs I can't rocall any words 1 5 'i;.directly out of that tect utandard. Obviouslys - they oxist in 2 4 p! the ntandard I don't know if that vac something in our l g j.. 3 i f 7 .doctntent, 'or not. l 3 G That's okay. ( Now, when you did the reevaluation you didn't e g 1 ( take any of the equipmont and rochaho or do any new dynamic .g 1 } 1 { analycis, you just took what wc.c originally given to you from 3; l i i i the vendorc and put that against the new floor response g .{ i spectra? g 1: g j L (Witness Bushnell) Comparicana waro ganarally made i I g h with tha original C.toor responce cpectra qualification, yes. } l. You mantionod calculations. Calculations, of g cource, ao Dr ito mentioned earlier cable trays were r i redone and - s ., u s y i the electrical equipment? O t i. 1 L 1% on -

a..

l 1 .j g MR. ATRLRAD: Well, n:ny wo have the quention restated,. pleano? 22 <w. CUAIRMAN MILLER: I am chcee quan tionn back. I am having trouble follcuing them, c.nd I know him reporter is m, e hnVing difficulty. WO nrG going to haVe h littl3 DOttGr fa

i ,1 5~ l -. 2851 l E l 1 system here. Let's keep our voicec up or ~ work out soma. syctem. l 2 .Now, what in the pending question, Mr. Rocolic? i i.,

l. g-j 3

DY MR. ROSOLIE: 0 Okay. The question is that you -- for electrical 4 i, l 3 equipment, you just took the original qualifications and 6 compared them againct the now floor response spectra? A (Witness Bushnell) Where appropriate to do so, yes. 7 Floor spectra was involved. That was'what was dono.in general, g I-l 9 yOS. ] (t Uhat canipmont did you not do that on? j gg. l-l 3; For thona items of equipment where~ spactra vere not A ll ll available, such as thoco that were qualified by calculation. 12 I end tl3 New calculations were performed. - g fin-13 o i 15 16 17 k i 18 I a j '19-i 20 i i. 21 a i i 22 !9 2n b E4 '25- ) T,, b 4 nw w- ~ r,e we, ,,e.r e-wr,..w-ogg-

2852 4 MADNLON/1 Q Can you tell me cpccifically which ones? 14 mpbl j 2 A

Yes,
O l

3 The piping's been mentioned, the cable trays 4 have been mentioned here in 3B1, the battery rackc is an L 5 example. 6 I believe you could find that information by 1 7 looking at the qualification method number, and locking at 3 8 the table you can find which ones wero quclified by whichever 9-methed. 10 Q Thic in backtracking a little bit. But for l l 11 all electrical cables in the plant, do they have a lifo l.. q 12 crpcotency of 40 yearc? ll -!g 13 .A (liitnans Cooke) Ye.s. 14 liR. ROSOLIE: I believe that's all the ques-5 i 15 tions I have at thic time. 16 ' CHAIRMAN MILLER: Thank you. ] i 17 Staff? 10 DY MR. GRAY: gg. Q Just one or tuo questiona on the DBA acquencers i. 20 that were raised. ] [ 21 Those acquencers which wora replaced were mounted 22 - differently then they were mounted befora. Are they qualified sexsmically now ac mountod? ._a I 24 A-(Witness Euchnell) Yes. 1 25 - Q And was that qualification' based on the original 1 -..;,_,..--.....,...-~,u.O_

2853 i> tapb2 1 qualification tests? 1 2 A No. There were contacts changed between what 'e c 3 was purchased originally and what we have now, and perhaps '4 more than one time. l p 5 0 You say thero are contacts changed? I don't ) 6 quite understand what you mean, b 7 I'n talking about the mounting pooition. 0 A ch. i c p Q So originally they wora qualified for being 1 l 10 mounted one way and now they're mounted somewhat differently. 11 They are nou qualified for a now mounting. 1 j 12 A Yes, cir.

1 l

13 0-This morning there was some questioning on 14 qualification of valves, and discussion of tha fact that 15 valves are qualified to a certain acccleration. And timn 10 there ucre somo questions with regard to frequency. 37 Is it true that the valve qualification is j ] gg ensantially fregunncy indepandent? gg A' (Witness Shipley) That would depend on what 20 type of testing you did. 21 The type of qualification method that we chose l'2 required the vondor to supply a valve that had essentially ig 23 . rigid topworks, and that being the case if it is in the rigid 24-rang, than it is frequency independent,. O What wa'ro worried about is for valves, what 25 l l. lL . ~.

~. -.... - .... ~. -... '2854 mpb 3'. 1. acceleration a valve sees, period, regardleau of frequency? 2 .O 1,.. A That's correct. .3., Q Are all the nafety-related valves we are ) '&.073 I 4f concerned with hora now in the rigid responso range as i 5f originally called for? a j, 6 ~ A Yes. e { l 7 O There was aloc co;ac testimony, I believe, as t 0 to comparing an.ne standarda when Trojan wta licenced versus 9' standards today and scrae discuccion of Standard Review Plan t I 10 standards or guidelines., And I think there was an indication 11 that Standard Revicu Plan, an it currently exists, allows 1 higher damping valucs on auch things, I thirJ., as piping, is ja !I h 13 that correct? ~ r

4 A

(Wi'rncos Buchnell) Yec. 4 1 73 A (Uitnocc Enito) When we mention Standard Revicu 1 16 Plan should it be Reg Guide? $7 Q Pardon? gg I'm just trying to rccall uhat the discussion i { was previously,

g l

a A Okay. go p O Mr. Frewing, do you understand? 3 ;4 1 b A (Witness Frewing) Yes. a .g ~p~ h .e,3 j!g I think maybe what Dr. White wac referring to n y j uns that the Standard EcView Plans today nay reference i 0 nog Guiden that hava the actual war.dz about camping values. j.3 pl. 1

2855 mpb4 i 'O Isn't it also true that those' Standard Revire.I I ~ 2 Plans also reference Reg Guides that - in combination with . O 3 the higher damping also requiring a higher ground response O 4 spectrum or higher ground accolerations to be applied? 5 .A (Witness Bushnoll) Yes. I C Q Finally, in Section 1.3h of PGE Exhibit-23, 7 thero's a brief discussion -- let's see. This is under the 8 heading Design Basis Earthquake, which I believe w?'ve been 9 also calling the s&fe shutdown, Design basis earthquake and 10 safs shutdown earthquake being equivalent. I i 11 That waa an unnumbarcmd page. Th a section number l 12 is 1.3, more specifically 1.,3A.2. g 13 I think.it's indicated there that the original 1 14 qualification of mechanical equipmerit was donc by taking OBE 5 13 forces and multiplying them by a factor of 1.67 to get SSE is forces. 17 Where did the 1.67 como from? In A (Witness Whito) Tha SSE, or DDE, is that.259 r a 10 Tha CBE is.15g. And the ratio of.25 divided by.15 is the 1 20 'l.67. This is an extremely conservative critorion. The i' 21 actual force.s do not incroise by this ratio, but nsvertholoss 22 that was the ratio that was used. e g3-Q- Okay. i 54 Now furthar roanalysis that was done for the ' h jy new ronponsa spectra, I believe that actual SSE forcos wero I l.

2856 l mpb5 1 used directly rather than taking thic method used originally, t 2 is that correct? I 3 A Yes. j 1 j.: 4-Q And how does that relate to the method that was 5 used originally? O A The method that we have used in the reevaluation l 7 is a conservativo approach, but is not as conservative as the i 0 approach used in the original decign. i I' D-O hiso back to demping, isn't it true that damping i i 10 has really no cignificant effcot on equipment that ic rigid? 11. A (Flitness Dushnell) Thct'c correct. ) i 12.I MR. GRAY: The Staff han no further questions. I 11[ j g-CIIAIRW21 MILLER: Thank you. 14 Any redirect? g MR. AXSLRAD: No, Mr. Chairnen. 1 n CHAIRMAN MILLER: Thank you. I 17 l You are excused. 10 Some of you n y return, I realice, but this l 1p panel is excused. I I 20 i (The panel excused.) I I 21 MR. AXELEAD: Mr. Cooke and Mr., Frewing will 22 {- return under a diffcrent heeding. e s g3 j - CiEIRMAN MILLER: Call your ne.xt uitnessoc. 1 ^ f tiR. AXELRAD: Yes. -gg 4 gg, We DOV?. call Mr. Frewing and Mr. Cook. r k 'i J. 3

i 2857-4 mpb6 1 Whereupon, 2 JOHN L. FREWING 3 and j 1 - l 4 K. M. COOKE-i 5 resumed the stand as witnesses on behalf of the Licensees, l 6 and, having been previously duly sworn, were examined and 7-testified further as followo: 8 CHAIRMAN 11 ILLER: You gentlemen know you have i 9 been sworn and you remain undc.r oath, i 10 MR, AXELRAD: Mr. Chairman, I may point out i 11 that we are putting these two witnesses on to enswer the i i 12 questions that were raisod this morning by Dr. McCollom with i 33 respect to firo protection. I would like to point out, as ja I'm sure the lloard understands the comments we mada yester-15 day, that the Licensan does not agree that that subject is - j 16 within the proper boundo of this particular proceeding. i i i 17 But in view of the Board's interest, wo arc i i [ 73 plenced to put these witnessca on to ancwer these questions. l 19 CHAIRMAU MILLER: We understand, i j 20 HR. AXELRAD: And I might additionally point out j t 21 that cinco our notes are not too clear on the precise ques-l 22 tion that was asked by Dr. McCollom this morning, that we

0 23 would simply ma.ko the witnesses available for Dr. McCollom l

24 .to repeat the questions of thin morning on this particular h subject. 25 F

2858 mpb7 1 CHAIRMAN MILLER: Very well. 2-The Board will recognizo Dr. McCollom for the 3 purpose of questioning these witnesses. 1 4 (Laughter.) a i 5 EXAMINATIOS BY THE BOARD i. 6 BY DR. MC COLLOM: 7 0 Would you just revime soms of the f3 re protection e equipment that is in the -- I think if we just settle for the 9 control building, that would be adequate, unless there are .{ ] 10 some unique characteristics of the other two buildings. r 11 A (Witness.Frewing) The firo protection facilit-1p ics include detection equipment, they include some extinguish-i 13 ment equipment, which is in the form of some sprinitler l 14 systems and other systems. Anti it includes some barrier 15 systems that would segregato different safoty trains and i ) 16 also segregato safety-related areas from non-cafety-rolated areas. 37 1 TO And then it also includes certain utility i 39 services that facilitate fighting a fire, like communications 3 and the like. 20 O Y u indicated, of course, that in ordor to have 21 3 a aprinkler system you have to have the pipos. Ara 2cce dsaigimd well to withstand tha coicmic 23 1 SSE avent? g,, Q A They are not Category 1 equipment in the same g

l 2859 I mpb0 conce that the cafety injection system is a Category 1 e c. g. equin 2nt. .) i M A] However, when they run near or over safety-l. 4fI i related Category 1 equipment they are analyzed to encuro U [ U that they don't fall down on that equipment or damage it. i 6 Q Wac thare any evaluation made of the potential 7 l of firo being caused by a seismic event of the SSE aize,1.259 ? i a O. A There wau no direct analyaic done for that. ] s' The philosophy in tilat the plant was decigned to suffer a 10 l fire from whatever csuso, be it ceicnic or cigarettes being i f l 11 '! dropped, or what-havo-you. And so a fire caused by a scis-i l-17 mic event is not a cpocific item that la designed against. g 131 (The Daard conferring.) 4 14 9 0 What is your beat judgment as to the ability l h 15 !! of the fire protection equipmant within thea control building j. I wl to withstand a.259' cart'. quake and continue to operate to 17 protect for fire? i. m A Can we consult on that for juct a minuto? i i isj Q Yes. d o L 70 L (Paune.) 21 A Dr. McCollom, our judgment in that the firo [ au protection ability would remain followdng en SSE of.259, Lh g, h4 and our ' judgment is based on thingo cuch as the fact that Il i-2.; g the detectora themsolvoc are ncit large mascos but would h move around very much. The barricra are pnssivo elements g s I i l h .i !'{4' ,M.,--.L..,~., ..,..,.i,, .E _, i-m.,-.4..,,,...mE.,,-,,,...-,, le. -. .,...m-_,,- ,,-.,__.r--.,.,,._,~.,____...-_ -m,_,

e 2860. i 4 i 4'f mpb9~I that would remain. in' place. 4 2 There is considerable administrative control on 1 3 the prohibition of combustible material that :ould be'the Ih t l 4 acurce of a fire, things of that sort. And of c';,1rse there ] 5 is considerable. flexibility in piping.- We don't have i 6 special technical skills in all the areas required, maybe, 7 to do a detailed review, but the.t's our judgment. 8 CHAIRMAN MILLER: Mr. Socolofsky? 9 MR. SOCOLOFSKY: No questionc. 10 CHAIRMAN MILLER: Ms Bell, Mr. Rosolie - oh, 1 1 11 I guean I didn't ask the Licensees. { l 12.- I acsume cince you produced the witnescer, 13 comewhat reluctantly, but acnetheless you would be entitled ) 14 to intorrogate if you wish. i. i 15 (Laughter.) b 10 MR. AXELRAD: We'll wait for redirect. 4 j l ~17 CROSS-ELuiIMATION i 18 BY MR. ROSOLIE: d 19 0 What is tho URC now requiring you to do at the 20 Trojan Plant regarding fire protection? 21 A (Witness Frewing) They require us to have a 1 22 physical system, fire protecti.cn system, which is described Le 'in'tho-FSAR. You may recall that as a result of the 23 24 Browna Ferry fire in 1975, the NRC conducted a rather e a w C, ..m,m4..?m....-,,,, u,,,,,-.., ..,L...,,l=,=__.., __i,.

. -.-.. -..~.. -... -. - !c 2861 l 'mpbl0 I what. additional conservatiems they desire. They called for 2 'the submittal of a good bit of information. We hava provided 'e 3 that information to the NRC. We have gone through seve.a1 4 rounds of questions with them. And we are in a schedule to D implemant' ceveral. additional conservatisms at Trojan. 6 The NRC has issund.a Safety Evaluation Report 7 dated March 9, 1978, and conclude.d that we're do.3ng the ~6 proper thing on.the proper achedule. 9) Q Ara those additional systera considered back-10 fitting?' 11

A We'ra not talking about additional cystems.

{' j 12. We're talking about additional barr.2rc or administrative ' g. 13 controls or detectors, by and large. In a le.y-sense, one ja could. view them ao backfitting. In a regulatory sense, 15-that is from the NRC's standpoint, I don't think they con- [ g; sider that it comes under 50,109. But that would really be p jy a question for them, 33 Q So you don't k2cw, in other words? gg A We're just doing the work. l (Laughter.) 20 i 21 HR. ROSOLIE: I have no more qucctiono 22 CHAIRMAN MILLER: 'g . Thank you, 23 The Staff -- I'm sorry, pg DY.MS. BELL: f 25 . Q Now you referrod to coveral additional

2862 t l-mphll conservatioms when you were talking about barriers, vertical '2 'and horizontal barriers, and cable apreading and. things like- ~ L Oz L 3 that. Ic it that sort of thing? (I I l 4' A (Witness Frowing) I'm not familiar with all 5 thoso' details, but it is that cort of thing. i 6 Q In that'phrace "several additional conservatisms" 7 do you include the alternate or dedicated chetdown system 0 .that has been proposed will bo in in the summer of 19797 l l' 9 A The answer is yes. But let me clarify the 10 answer. i 11 0 Okay. i 12 A Our commitment to the NRC following their request l1((} 13 is to provido for certain decouple switches in safe chutdown I 14 systema cuch that one can chutdown outside of the control 15 and cablo spread rooms mora easily were the fire supposedly 16 or hypothetically in those areas. ( 17 The NRC had a criteria that said for plants i 10 of our status those decouple cwitches chould be installed l 19 during the cocond refuoling. We coramitted to that. 20 As you rocall, we are now in our first rofuol-21 ing. We believe that tho material provided by Mr. Pollard L 22 was dated and was based on an NRC opinion that we would () t j g3 start up in May of '78 and shutdown for our second refueling [ 24 in May of '79, and, hence, it would be installed by -- was . h 25 it June of '797 1,

2863 l L Q~ June or July. i mpbl2l' b 2 A

Right, o

3 Because of this control building proceeding s" ' ~ 4 our schedule for startup has been delayed. And we likely 5 will not complete all the work-by June of '79. We will iL quirement which was laid on us, that is to j 6 meet the NR( 7 complete the stk by the end of the second refueling, I B Q Is that requirement -- you're familiar with g the document that is Enclosure 7 to Mr. Pollard's limited i 10 appearance? I j j' A Let us look at that one moment. 12 O All right. V, O i la A The answer to your question as to whether or gg not we're familiar with it is not generally. I mean, it's 16 not addressed to us, i' l 37 Q Instead of that, then, what document would you i 9g base the information you just told me, that the timing on gg the alternate or dedicated shutdown system is based on the 20 second refueling? l j. gj I would tell you it'n based on the Safety. A i valuation Report. But crcept for a couple of minutes to l 22 find it, I'can't tell you the page. g Maybe Mr. Cooke known, 24

O.

(Pause. ) U a_ i 1

.~. V~ 2864 4 i 5 mphl31 Yes, page.3-1 of the SER, which beginc with 2 . Section.3.0, entitled ' Sunnary of Modifications and Incomplete 3 Items cays:- !h j 4 "The Licenceo plans to mako certain plant i 5l modifications to improve the firo protection pro-I j 1- ) 6 gram as a result of both his and the Staff's y evaluation. Such proposed modifications are a 1 I j e summarized below. These modifications will be 9 completed prior to the return to power for 10 cycle throo operation in the Spring of 1979." i ) 11 Q Okay. i t i 12 l And when is that datad? I 33{ A (Witness Cocho) That's dated March 9, 1978. 4 i, g j Q Thank you, i 3 d g In your own mind do you boliava that the concept l L 3 j 16 of the second refueling haa anything to do with at what point a g the fire protection should be conplately installed in Trojan? n (Witness Frewing) I'm not sure I understand tho g jg question. i i 20 O All right, Well, wa'll just drop it, then. L i What sorto of things night cause a fire in a ul. 3 j l 22 qf cable? e h 23 Os e) ome failure within the cablo, g,, L matarial-wice, or an overload in the cablo, a short, ground, i g .comething of that' sort, g o l.

l. -'

.j. .l L l 3 F.. l

2865' I I upbl41-0 Under what conditionc do you think it would be e 1 i-2 most likely that comething like an over-or any of those G things'might occur? 3-4 A If a piece of equipment failed. 5 Q Would there be any other hypothesized cituations 6 that you can think of uhare an overload might occur on a { 7 cable? 4 l 3 -A Not other than tha one I just mantionod, where, 4 9 for exampic, a circuit breaker does not function correctly i 10 and it does not clear the fault in the cable. As a result { 4 9g the cabic will het:.t up. 1 J;- j p, O You can tell me if you think you can answer 1 i g3 this question, and if so, go chand, and if not, just say so. l Uhen do you think that the highest current would g 53 be in a cablo that naa, lot's cay, related to the cmergancy J. i c ro cooling cystem? 16 ),. l A That dependa on many, many facters. It depends k i gg on what the cable is feeding, what the cablo is running in, j l tray or conduit, what sizo of the cable - it depends on many gg i 5.0 i, ""#i"D1** 1 d Q Might it be trua that a cab 1c, let's cay connect- ~1 o 4 4 ed to the emergency core cooling system, an emergency coro !g cooling syctem ptmp would be carrying itc highast curront ,,3 ddring -- well,_in the caso of an accidant, when that pump 9-M H

~, _ _ _ _ -. _. _ _ _. _.. -_ _ _. r 2S66' 1 mpbl51 . A only when it's' starting. I l6 Q When it's starting.

Okay,

, end 14 3 i 4 'i I- ~ i -6 7 1 J ~ i 10 i - i jj j 12 4 10' 14 i i i 15 T 16 4 i 10 1 4 to i 1 20 21 i- $ O-22 - 23 d i 24 s . 25 r 4 I i r-C*.--vw i-e-,,,.r...ew, --..,,~m* -%s ...+-e-.er-,. - -<--ee,.re,-- -_..--_w,- - -. - - _ __-. --. - -_ -- _..-, ~., - - - - + < -

2067 j t.15- 't

G Now, my last qucation is~ simply:

Under tho NRC -i I M. BLOOM jl-1 l! regulationa, is 'it true that you ecoume. fire damagos even if

j.

you don't believe that' they would actually happen? O-ul 4 3. That is correct. g ]- .B And could you giva no your interpretation of what 1 0 . single failuro critoria meanc? i Perhaps Mr. Frewing should answar the question. j 4 ? 4 f P. (Witness FrcWing) We are cruaulting on, ' honectly, o l which reference to cito to you, Tliat term is used in regula-i 9 i 39 ; tions in'various standards, and it is applied to electrical 33 cystema and fluid systcms reinted to the safety of nuclear

g, power plants.

4 g G What if uc. were talking about - now, yo.u may not h y4 know thic roforance right off hand, but general design i 4 3g g criteria, 17 and 34, of Appendix A of 10 CFR, Partis 0. c-I h. N 6} Would. that refresh anything in your nti.nd? 4 l l l

I

~' n ,l f a No. l m h. I i Lot'c say the questien cgain. g ' (, O Single failure criterion is mentioned in general. y l . danign critarin, both 17 and 3d, and in Appendin A of 10 CFR. e 5 L, y,h Part' 50, and that ic my ' reference r.4 ght there. I A. Right. In thoce:. cacun, I believe the intent of ,, g I c.s :: t' aur designora has to uno the ' definition in the IEEE documents, as t which 'are uced to implomont those general design cri.toria. yl llL n l

2868 4 ji 2 1 Am I right on that? 1 2 L (Uitness Cooke)' That's right. l

f 3

G And when considering cingle failuro criteria, do you f g'

/! j auaums' that a fire will or will not occur given any other c. 1 [ g 7 - cocident that,in happening at. the came tisz, or -- I could-H 1 clarify the quection if ijou don't understand.. i 6 j e y :.!. A Yoc, go choed clarif3/ it. l s (Laughter. ) BY bis.-DELL: q. 1 10 G When you consider en accident at u nuclear power j plant -- and we are talking about the Trojan Plant ~~ do you i accums that a fire will occur et the tina of an n'ocident when t r. J you are conoidering simplo failure criteria, the single g i 1 l cnd 15 failure critoria? g l 4 i' 36 i~ i f kb L $9 20 }0 n\\ l 4' d4 i y i . { 2?> l i. 24. 4 [ -j

s i

,,4......-,..,, .-.m--

_ _ _ _ _ -. - _. - - _ _ _ _ - _ - _ - _ _ _. _ - _ - _ _ -. _ _ _ _ ~ - _ _ _ _. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - 2869 '16WEL ' wel 1 I A (Witness Frewing) I.believe not. Let me rend for 2 you the definition from IEEE-279-1971, single failure criteria,

9 3 1 "Any single failure within the protection cystem O

4 shall'not provent proper protective action at the S -ystem level when required. 6 Note: Single failuro includes such evento as the 'T chorting or open circuiting of interconnecting cignal E or pouer cables. It also includes singic credible 9 malfunctions or events that cause a number of 10 conocquential componont modulo channel failures, 11 For examplo, the ovarheating of an amplifier 10 module is a ' single failure' even though several g

3 transistor failurcs renult.

Mcchanical damage to a 14 mode switch *.>uld be a 'cingle failure' although iS several channola might become involved." Doc 3 that help? 17 Q No. It doesn't help mo figure out what you think 18! about it. 19 I have no more questions at thic time, 20 CIIAIRMhli MILLER: Staff? j l' 21 MR. GRAY: No questions. I i 22 CIIAIRMAN MILLER: Rcdirect? i 3 MR. AEELRAD: No redirect. I:4 i CilAIRMAN HILLER: All right, gentlemen, you're - f Iexcused.-

s -

l } 1 = - - -... =

g,._---_---.-- 2870 t wel 2 'l (Uitnesses excuced.) i 2 MR. AXELPLD: The Licensee will now call Mr. O 3 Withers, who has previously been nuorn. h. l -4 CHAIRImN MILLER: You have been sworn, and you 5 remain under oath, sir. 6 Whereupon,. 7 DART D. WITilERS L O was recalled ca a witncus on behalf of the Licencoe, and, D having been previously duly cworn, was examined and testified 3-10 further au follows: 11 DIRECT EXAMINhTION 4 j 12 BY MR. AXELPAD: l g 13 Q Sinco you havo not previously appeared at this 14 particular secsion, would you please state your nano and 15 address for the record? 1 10 A Dart D. Withers. My working addroca is Trojan j c 1 II Nuclear Plant. 10 0 And what is your position at the plant? 10, A I'm the plant superintendant, i 20 MR. AXELRAD: 14r. Chairman, Mr. Withers is being i l 21 called at this time to respond to the question that Dr. 22 McCollom had with respect to the Zion incident. .O 23 As I mentioned before, uc do not necessarily - 24 agree that the matters an to which he was called to testify 25 aro within the umbit of this proceeding and we're not v

- ='

+----w am ---a *a ns--. -.-, -,, - - -. ~- gy-q,r e vyear g rgogwye wgN M

2871 -wel 3- -l 1 waiving any rights in that respect, but we are willing to 2: make Mr. Withers available. 3 I uill ask Mr. Withers juct a couple of questions O 4 which I think' focus upon the matters that I think Dr. .S McCollom has in mind. h l. 6 BY MR. AXELRAD: l j. 7 0 Mr. Withern, are you familiar with the incident 8 at tho Zion Nuclear Plant which ic referred to in the limited 9 appenrnnco statement of Mr. Follard that was introduced here L 10 yesterday? ) 11 A Yes, I am. I'm familiar uith that occurrence in I 12 a general sense. I have no firct-hand knowledge of the events 13 and circurastancos currounding that, only from what I've read 14 about it. l 15 0 From your knowledge of that event, would you 10 explain to uc whether your operating procedures are such at i 17' the Trojan Nuclear Plant which would prevent the occurrence ~ 10 of that type of incidont at the plant? l 19 A We took a look at that cituat. ion. The Nuclear 20 Regulatory Commission issues what they call circulars and [ 21. bulletins to alert the various nuclear power plants concerning l F2-problems'or situations which occur around the country. [O - 23 Some of thoce require a responca by the licenseo, I j. 21 and others are juct for information. But in either cace, the h 25j I&E incpector accigned to a particular facility always follows l t I X

.wel 4 1" 't up with the plant management to verify that they have i i 2 reviewed that document to determine its applicability to i . h 4 3.l their particular operation. 1 4 Go ve did take a look at our procedures ac n i S-recult of the incident at Zion, and really concluded that we l 6 would not got into that particular cituation. I 7 There are no physical ctops ~~ t I B 0 Excuse me, Mr. Withers. Ecfore you go on, could ) l 9 you just describe briefly what your understanding is of what 1 ) 10', happened at Zion, before you describe why you do not think ) i ti it could occur at your plant? ) 12 n The incident referred to in Mr. Pollard's limited a 13 appearance tectimony identified the situation where all of g 14 the parameters which uould indicate proscuriner pressure, 15' pressurizer level synton flow had been taken out of service Ic to facilitate testing or calibration of the facility. i ty-The plant uns shut down at that particular time. i ) to Our proceduron at Trojen would only n'llow us to a 1 i 19-take one particular channel of'any given paramoter out of f ] pi), nervice at a given time, unlosc the plant was in Mode S, \\ j 3 which means cooled'doun to loss than 200 degrees. 1

..g Now,.

therc's one particular type of testing g I o l which requires you to have all channels in test,;and that's 73_ i - i p.t ] the responce time. tost where you need to have ammy signals 4 l g inCO all the Channels in OrdOr t0 do that particular kind Of g I i y-P 4 4 9'9--i N^*W-_-afg**1 T-we -sy+ pi e-gr

+9ev + pewe gr e c iwmi-tu nes CL--wv sy ew rP w em tr n-st-e-w e wVNm eNwarr -wat e

wa-m-ww+wa+#www-w--w-stg*- --er-ne-tw-m --v er m 2res-.-

m++--

rm mesa-MP t

L wel '5 ' 2873 l 1 testing. L. 2 .Our procedures for performing that response time 3 testing would require the plant to be in Mode 5, or coolod fe l 4 down to loca than 200 degrees. j= L S We also carefully monitor and coordinate activities I l G between inctrument and control technicians and plant operators [ 7 so that both parties are involved and' aware of what's taking i-l- O place when channels of instrumentation are taken out of s service. j 10 The technician has to got the approval of the il control operator. He then logs that information in the i 12 control operator log, when it'a taken out and when it's put 4 .I 'g 13 back. 1 i 14 We have indication in the control room thnt n l 15 I given channel has-been taken out of service for testing. i i. t l, 16 j Uhen we take a certain channel of inatrumentation out of n I I 17 l nervice, we have to put it in the trip modo, ao that the s E protective logic circuit would cce that as a protective I~ 1P signal from that channel. And that is shown to the operator 1 26 i by the otatus panel. l l 21 So he's very much involved and aware of what is ) r. i a l 2r being done. l' j- ,5 In the case of the Zion incident, 1 don't have a 4 N. lot of details, but there were a number of people involved 5 g,; 'in thiSp itnd DoNO conDiderution given'to Lpparently deviating 4 s q' a l 1 L } .m.. m. .. 1

2874 uel' ' '6 1 from their procedures. And whenever that kind of a situation 2 arises, that is done with much deliberation and caution, and

(. l 3

involves a number of people. I O 4 0 'You mentioned that the Zion incident was brought j. l 5 to the attention of.Licenaces throughout the country through 6 an I&E circular or bulletin. When you received that informa-7 tion did you check your procedures at that time? O A We felt at that time that our procedures adequately 9 covered our cituation to preclude timt kind of occurrence. f 10 0 And they continue to? I d 11 A Yes, they do. j 12 j O You mentioned in your~ testimony that there are l 13 times when a channel is removed for test or maintenance 14 purposes. Would that croate a problem at Trojan if a seismic 4 i 15 ovent were to taka place while this channel in removed? 1 l l 16' A-No, I don't believe it would., As the previous 1 17-panel tastified,this equipment is all seicmicly qualified, 2 i j 10 and we really put ourselves in a more conservative situation 10 from a safety ctandpoint when we take a channel out of j. 20 service'and_put tha by stable in the trip condition. I l 1 Normally we have a logic where, for e:: ample, we l 22 might ncnitor a certain parameter with four different O. ' 23' ' detectorn or inctrumento, tind.1: hon have our chutdown logic 14 such that'uhonever we reach the set point of 2 or 4, we would L401 a; eee e ehutdo n e1one1, er wheeever mee convoecd to come from s * ,k.Aw.-.. ..--m. -......-.------.w_'.-.-------..,.--.<-.,--.-.,.-.-,-.....,+.-.-.-e-4

= 7 wel 7' '2875-1 that. 2 Now', in the event that we took one of those ^ 1. 3 channele out of service, we would trip the by stable, which ' O would'look to the logic, the cano as if we had a shutdown S aignal on that. O' So, really, from that point on, any one signal l 7 would give you a shutdown or a protective action. 1-C So you're almost in a safer modo from a conserva-l 0l tive standpoint, a lose reliable modo from a standpoint of to the potential for one spurious signal of some kind to shut 1 i 11 down the plant. 12 O So it's less reliable front the standpoint that -g 13 the plant would not continue to operate? 14 A That'c correct. j IE MR. AKELnAD: We have no further questions on l 10 I the nubject. 4 17 EXAMINATION BY THE BOARD 4 3 TD BY DR MC COLLOM: J l 19 0 When you say trip condition, that means that one r 4 j 20 channel has a signal coming through that nays the condition i 21 is such that the reactor should be shut down, is that correct? 22 A

You, If we're talking about a paramotor that

. 'O 1 M9' would give. you a reacher ehutd=n cignal, then that channel .i 23L that you'd'taken out of cervice would have the camo offect 'h' 25 on the logic train ao if it were sending a signal through 4 L

k 2876 . el 0 w I greater than the cet point. { 2 0 And in your test conditions you really only have 3 one channel out,or can you have more than one channel out if g 4 you're testing? 5j A. The technical specifications cover that, and it 6 varios a lithic bit-for different channels of instrumentation. 7 There's a table that covers several pages in the 8 technical specifications, and it might -- say, there's four 9 i channels monitoring some parr2 meter, and it would allow you o } 10 to operate with three. Then there's an asterisk that would 11: say in the event you need to test one of the other three, 17 you could tako one of those others out for a very limited g 13 period. 14-That provision is provided for in the technical 15 cpacifications, and our plant procedures normally refer back V 16. to the technical specifications for thoce kinds of limitations, 17( rather than try to duplicate that within the plant procedures. ID[ We feel it's important that that be corrected, so that i 19 ! normally appears only in one place, which is the toch specs. f-20 And our procedures refer back to that point. 21-0 Then: would you describe - I'm not sure how you 22a described it -~ where you'd take more than that number of 9 23 channola out to check the response in your so-called level 1 24 1 5' condition. 1 . 123 ' A .In that particular case, the plant would be in f 1

l r 2877 wel 9 l-I I what I said van Mode S, or less than 200 degrees, whero the 2 T technical' specifications would not require any of that . 9-3 inrhtrumentation'to be in service. i l: 4 i So you would be outside the requirements of the 5 technical specificationa.- You would still be concerned, I 6 however, with what you might neod in the way of instrumenta-L 7 tion from an operational standpoint. 8 Whenever you are depending on a bubble in the G I pressurizer to maintain plant prescure, the operator would 10 certainly fool that pressurizer pressure and pressurizer i. I 11 level wero probably the two most important parameters that { 12 he hcd. And to get him to givo you all of those would be j' g 13 a very demanding job. l l'f 0 Is it necessary for any tect to have all of them? 15 A Only this one response tima test, and I'm really j I j 16 not familiar with all of the details of how and why, but i 17 that does require you to have dummy signals in, say, the i. l. 16 three you're not testing. So that those would not be giving 4 i 19 you a trip' signal. You'd have it in a rango where you would 20 not have a trip, and then you would dummy through a trip 21 signal on.the fourth, so that you knew exactly that you were l 22 timing a given signal from the sensor all the way through O 23 to the actuating action. j 24 Q' Can you do that in,more than one functional 25 'c'hannel.at one' time? lL 1 =- . =

2878 wel 10 1 A No. i "2 Q LIke'if you had four redundant channals, if you 9

wish, for one channel of instrumentation, and you have 3

b 4 . another one over hora maybe with three, do you do thoso at l, S ll thu name timo, or do you do this one at one time and thic Y GI one at another? 'i' 7' lti A I would say we would normally be working with all U d nll-of the channalu at one particular parameter at onco, and 9" when we finish that than go on to the next. la There's a limitation to how much activity the 11 plant operators can really follow at any one given time. 17W@ 12 DR. MC COLLCM: Thank you. 13 CIIAIRMAM MILLER: Mr. Socolofsky? 14h MR. SOCOLOPSKY: I have no questions. Il 15 ll CIIAIPJ5AN HILLER: I!r. Rosolie? r ': le h) .1 MR. ROSOLIE: I have none, i: n CHAIPJIAN MILLER: Miss Ball? l is - ; MS. DELL: I have none, i 10 b: CHAIRMAN MILLER: Staff? 20 CROSS-EXAMINATION i 2; i-BY mrv GRAY: !? 27 Q Mr. Withers,'how often 10 that test done that h q! r f requires all these channels to be taken off line? . {- 24( A That's done on, I think, uhat the technical' 1 h cpecificationa refer to an a refueling frequency, uhich would 2g o Y. I'

r I 2879 ~ h wel.11 l. I be annually or overy eighteen months sort of a range. 2 l O When would that be donc next? O 3 (Laughter.) O l 4 Let me back off a little bit. You don't have to 5 give me a date, but what' hind of event? l 6 A' Pardori me? i i l 7 Q. I'm not looking for a dato, but what kind of event 8 uould that -- C' A' It would be duco during a chut6cun period,with 10 the pimit chut down for maintenance. 1 j' 11 0 Did you say it was tied in to refueling? 12 A Normally those kinds of things that are on a 1 h 13 refueling or cighteen month interval are done concurrent with 1 1 \\ 14 the refueling coquence, because they do require considerable j i 1S perbds of shutdown time. And that's really the only time 4 16 when you find that kind of time available. 17 MR. GRAY: Staff has no further questions. i 18 CDlF2iAN MILLER: Redirect? 19-MR. AXELRAD: No redirect;, Mr. Chairman, i-j 20 CilAIRMAM MILLER: Thank you. You're excused, Mr. a 1 21 Withers. 22 (Witness cxcused.) Le I 23 CHAIRMAN MILLER: Any further witnesnos by the c j 24. Licensees? 25' HR. AXELFAD: No further witnesses today,.Mr. s is l' +,E=N -4N gO vy w-v rbevv-O w er-r = *ee t ev= y-r** - r - - sa - * + w w-+*-*- ~ ~w -e e*-**=m4*w-*-e--~"--**=*-~~*--'**' --#+

'2880 [' i Chairman. 'wel 12 2 CHILIRMAN MILLER: IG Staff going to be ready to l 3 put on one?- 4 MR. GRAY: Tomorrow ue would be ready to put on 5-all. 6 CHAIRMAN MILLER: Well, none today? 7 MR. GRAY: No, sir. 8 CHAIRMAN MILLER: Well, then I guess ve're through 9 for the day, aren't we? noes anybody have any matters? 10 He would like to finish tomorrow. 11 How many are flying out here, Mr. & 12 MR. GRAY: Three, Mr. Chairman. i 'g 13 CHAIRMAN MILLER: Shall uo start at 8:30? 14 MR. GRAY: Mr. Chairman, they will be getting in 15 somewhat late. I guess I was thinking of providing the 16 oxtra half hour for them to rest up, but if the Board desires j 17 to go on earlier, we could. 18 CHAIRMAN MILLER: No, we'll go at 9:00 This i 19 morning ~you naid they were in the air, and now I'm -- are 20 they still in the air? 21J (Laughter.) 22 - MR. GRAY: I thought I said arrangements were

g' 23 being made'to.get them in the air.

They are now in the air, j, ~ '24 CHAIRMAN MILLER: All right. We'll make it 25 9:00 o' clock. Could you give us an idea -- we're not asking skmm-- .,em.,,..,.y..,ww. - N N #4 **W PM

1 j

2881

{ wel 13 1 you to divulge your strategy,-but some ccope er approximate 2 time so that the parties can know'how to adiust their own () 3 schedules? lL0 l 4-MR. GRAY: Mr. Chairman, we are going to attempt 5 to address each of the ' questions raised by the Board in 4 6 the morning. I suppose it always depends on the extent of 7 the questioning. It could take half of tomorrow, or all of O tomorrow. 9 CHAIRMAN MILLER: Are there any other matters that i 10 anyone wishes to bring up, anything that would save time j 11 tomorrow, for example? Wo would like to have the Staff's i l 12' evidence taken and concluded, so if there's anything that i -( } 13 could be done now rather than tomorrow, this is your 4 j 14 opportunity. i 15 MR. AXELRAD: It is cicar, Mr. Chairman, that 16 the Board has no further questions of us? The only matters [ 17 as to which the Licensee might testify is is, as a result of I 18 the questions addressed to the NRC Staff tomorrow there i j are any additional matters that you'would want to bring 19 I- [ 20-forth. But otherwise there's nothing that we should be 21 preparing for? ( 2a CRAIRMldi MILLER: That's correct.- Tonight you ~ ) 23 sleep. 24 (Langhter.) "( ) 25 And we do appreciate counsel and witnesses working r r-

i-2882 'wel 14 1 on'short notice. We know it took a good deal of tirae, and 2 we.do appreciate it. 3 Very well. Anything further? !fg W 4 Mr. Rosolie? 5 MR. ROSOLIE: (Shaking head negatively.) i l: 6 CHAIRMAN MILLER: Miss Doll? , 4 \\ L 7 MS. BELL: I don't think so, 8 CHAIRMAN MILLER: Columbia Environmental Council? 9 MS. SCOTT: No. )' to CHAIRMAN MILLER: We will recess until 9:00 in 4

y the morning.

) 12 (Whereupon, at 3:20 p.m., the hearing was recessed, 13 to reconvene at 9:00 a.m., Thursday, 14 December 1978.) g i4 ~ 15 i 16 i 17 l'i 18 a i F 19 i [ 20 1 2 l-21 ) l~ i 22 i, g-I. l 23 i l 24 k as 4 4 4 m,..,-,,,}}

ML20147J230

Text

Navigation menu

Search