ML20154C976
| ML20154C976 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Braidwood  |
| Issue date: | 02/25/1986 |
| From: | Stevens J Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Partlow J NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20154C980 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8603050380 | |
| Download: ML20154C976 (3) | |
See also: IR 05000456/1984044
Text
._.
. - -.
. - .
_
_ _ _ . .
. = . .
.=_
-
. - -
._
-.
.-
' s
put
- o,
UNITED STATES
'.
E
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
,
o
t
5
- E
WASHING TON, D. C. 20555
)
E
,
e,
,
.....*
R8 25 26
'
i
i
I
Docket Nos. 50-456/457
MEMORANDUM FOR: James G. Partlow, Director
Division of Inspection Programs
Office of Inspection and Enforcement
THRU:
Vincent S. Noonan, Director
l
PWR Project Directorate #5
,
Division of PWR licensing-A
FROM:
Janice A. Stevens, Project Manager
"
PWR Project Directorate #5
i
Division of PWR I.icensing-A
l
SUBJECT:
CAT INSPECTION FOR BRAIDWOOD STATION, UNITS 1 AND 2
In your March 15, 1985 memorandum to Hugh L. Thompson, Jr., you requested NRR
assistance in reviewing several deficiencies regarding electrical separation
that were revealed during the Braidwood Station Construction Appraisal Team
(CAT) inspection.
In response to your request, NRR has reviewed the CAT inspection report
50-456/84-44, 50-457/84-40, dated February 20, 1985, with regard to the
deficiencies related to the physical separation between safety-related cables
and nonsafety-related cables. These deficiencies derive from exceptions to
the recommendations of R.G. 1.75.
NRR reevaluated this item and has reviewed the deviations from R.G. 1.75 in a
separate SSER (Enclosed). We have summarized below the results of our
evaluation on cable separation as it relates to the separation of
safety-related cables and nonsafety-related cables.
The Byron /Braidwood raceway design is based on the standard separation
'
criteria contained in IEEE 384-1974 as endorsed by R.G. 1.75.
However, the
separation criteria between the non-Class 1E and Class 1E cables is less
than the standard separation distance recommended by R.G. 1.75.
In order to
provide justification for these lesser separation distances, the applicant
instituted a test program conducted by Wyle I.aboratories. The test program
methodology and results, submitted by the applicant by letters dated August 6
and October 22, 1985, were reviewed by the staff.
The proposed criteria for
separation of Class 1E and non-Class IE cables which the staff has evaluated
in the SSER are as follows:,
1.
Separation distances of twelve (12) inches vertical and three (3)
inches horizontal between safety-related and nonsafety-related
raceways.
8603050300 860225
l
ADOCK 05000456
o
I
l
l
RB 251NB
\\
-
i
i
.
,
!
-2-
2.
Separation of safety-related cables routed in free-air in contact
l
with a raceway containing nonsafety-related cables, and separation
!
of nonsafety_related cables routed in free-air in contact with a
raceway containing safety-related cables.
l
3.
Vertical or horizontal free-air cable in parallel with vertical or
l
horizontal free-air cable with six (6) inches horizontal and
vertical separation.
'
Based on our evaluation, as documented in the enclosed SSER, the above
separation criteria are acceptable. These criteria address the deficiencies
which the CAT identified and resolve their concerns to the satisfaction of the
staff. The applicant is required to specify these lesser cable separation
criteria in the Byron /Braidwood Stations FSAR.
Another issue identified during the CAT inspection involved the applicant's
use of the term " quasi safety-related." The applicant has stated that this
term is used to identifiy safety-related circuits qualified to Class 1E
requirements which are installed in a non-Seismic Category I building. The
applicant is required to have this term defined in the Sargent and I. undy
design criteria manual.
Janice A. Stevens, Project Manager
PWR Project Directorate #5
Division of PWR I.icensing-A
Enclosure: SSER on Cable Separation
cc:
I.. Olshan
Distribution:
S. Rhow
":Doetet FHex
S. Treby
NRC PDR
I.ocal PDR
PD#5 R/F
JStevens
M. Rushbrook
/
r
.
OFC : El.D
- DI $U#5
- PD#5 /1)
-
T L _ _ _ . . : . . . .
W.,. . . : . _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ : . . . . . . . _ _ . . . : . . . . . . . . . . . . : . . . . . . . . . . .
.....:...
......:
'onan
- JASt
NAME :ST
......:__.h.......:...... ens
.....:....
._____:............:_____.......:........... :.........__
86
- $/5786
DATE : 1/ /86
OFFICIAL. RECORD COPY
I
.
FEB 25 998
-
s.
.
-2-
2.
Separation of safety-related cables routed in free-air in contact
with a raceway containing nonsafety-related cables, and separation
of nonsafety-related cables routed in free-air in contact with a
raceway containing safety-related cables.
3.
Vertical or horizontal free-air cable in parallel with vertical or
horizontal free-air cable with six (6) inches horizontal and
vertical separation.
Based on our evaluation, as documented in the enclosed SSER, the above
separation criteria are acceptable. These criteria address the deficiencies
which the CAT identified and resolve their concerns to the satisfaction of the
staff. The applicant is required to specify these lesser cable separation
1
'
criteria in the Byron /Braidwood Stations FSAR.
Another issue identified during the CAT inspection involved the applicant's
use of the term " quasi safety-related." The applicant has stated that this
term is used to identify safety-related circuits qualified to Class IE
requirements which are installed in a non-Seismic Category I building. The
applicant is required to have this term defined in the Sargent and Lundy
design criteria manual.
=n $
Jahice A. Stevens, Project Manager
PWR Project Directorate #5
Division of PWR licensing-A
Enclosure:
SSER on Cable Separation
cc:
L. Olshan
S. Rhow
S. Treby
I
.
i
i
j
-
-
- ---
- - - -
--