ML20204D789

Lists Questions Re Separation from Public Address Sys & Radiation Monitoring Sys.W/O Stated Encl

ML20204D789
Person / Time
Site:	Comanche Peak
Issue date:	09/13/1985
From:	Burwell S NRC
To:	Chopra O NRC
Shared Package
ML20204D619	List: ML20204D614 ML20204D687 ML20204D789
References
FOIA-87-62 NUDOCS 8703250562
Download: ML20204D789 (1)

Text

_

4 is Se# T Tr b om caceRA, 93 6 s s. s._ _

508 5t e.T :

Ce m oe<cHE b N_$EFAQ.ATM FRrm Ps euc Aopa.o s sorm Itmo. eenttMc 5 f sTEe.

2S[o ?[2.T Typ -43 (i (C.E F EC2.Ec4c.E5 (D Td LT(P GTrseeQ p Tu tot ssAC4, _ TJ _uso

~

umm**

.*ae w

=

EE D t r; m D e A4 Wsta sTtoes T

~

~

~ ~ ~ ~

AAW %c ec cicTACc i Adi( At.ttATt o,4 7

~

~

a ed.4GLi ehwai M iik a h a.?

ee _ G e w.m em

,e

,.e w,-

e.e pge-e e.m.

m w.

e.

6 e

.e we>

e

.esmm.

e-w e

6 wh e

.eme-===w e

e-a e.

.N.-ey a.

,e..que-

-e e

==meem e

cc:

3. Cath e--me..

= -

e.

e

.p.

E.. N1 M U J o A._

~

e-7

......____. A-5_ -

_ graggg2 m m

---BAUMAN87-62 PDR

'N ts.

f'v~ * * :,,

o, UNITED STATES h-NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON. D. C. 20555 Docket No.:

50-445 and 50-446 Mr. W. G. Counsil Executive Vice President Texas Utilities Generating Company 400 North Olive Street, L. B. 81 Dallas, Texas 75201

SUBJECT:

NRC STAFF EVALUATION OF COMANCHE PEAK LESSER SEPARATION BETWEEN CLASS 1E AND CERTAIN NON-CLASS IE CIRCUITS FOR COMANCHE PEAK UNITS 1 AND 2 In letter dated September 25, 1984, Texas Utilities infomed the staff that lesser separation distances, than as provided in Regulatory Guide 1.75, are being used at Comanche Peak in several locations between Class IE wiring and non-Class 1E Public Address Systems speaker cables and Area Radiation Monitoring detector cables. Regulatory Guide 1.75 allows that lesser separation distances may be used if an analysis is performed and submitted to justify these lesser distances.

In the above letter, and letter dated January 7, 1985, Texas Utilities provided the required analysis. The staff has completed its review and concludes that the analysis provided by the applicant to justify lesser sep*. ration between these circuits is acceptable. The staff safety evaluation is provided as an enclosure. We intend to include this evaluation in Section 8.4.4 of a forthcoming Supplemental Safety Evaluation Report.

l.

Sincerely.

l

/

s ent an. Director PWR Pr ect f rectorate No. 5 Division of PWR Licensing-A

Enclosure:

Safety Evaluation of Lesser Separation Between Class IE and Certain Non-Class IE Circuits F

Comanche Peak Units 1 and 2

[

cc: See next page k

~

~

A/Z J

o w-V. G. Counsil Comanche Peak Steam Electric Station Texas Utilities Generating Company Units 1 and 2 cc:

Nicholas S. Reynolds, Esq.

Resident Inspector / Comanche Peak Bishop,l.iberman, Cook, Steam Electric Station Purcell & Reynolds c/o l'.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 1200 Seventeenth Street, ';W P. O. Box 38 Washington, D.C.

20036 Glen Rose, Texas 76043 Robert A. Wooldridge, Esq.

Regional Administrator, Region IV Worsham, Forsythe, Sampels &

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Wooldridge 611 Ryan Plaza Drive, Suite 1000 2001 Bryan Tower, Suite 2500 Arlington, Texas 76011 Dallas, Texas 75201 l.anny A. Sinkin Mr. Homer C. Schmidt Christic Institute Manager - Nuclear Services 1324 North Capitol Street Texas Utilicies Generating Company Washington, D.C.

20002 Skyway Tower 400 North Olive Street, l..R. 81 Ms. Billie Pirner Garde Dallas, Texas 75201 Citizens Clinic Director Government Accountability Project Mr. Robert E. Ballard, Jr.

1555 Connec.ticut Avenue, N.W.

Director of Projects Suite 202 Gibbs and Hill, Inc.

Washington, D.C.

20009 11 Pen Plaza New York, New York 10001 David R. Pigott, Esq.

Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe 600 Montgorery Street Mr..R. S. Poward San Francisco, Celffornia 94111 Westinghouse Electric Corporation P. O. Box 355 Anthony Z. Roisman, Esq.

Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15230 Trial I.awyers for Public Justice 2000 P. Street, NW Perea Hicks, Esq.

Suite 611 Assistant Attorney General Washington, D.C.

20036 Environmental Protection Division P. O. Box I?548, Capitol Station Nancy E. Wiegers

(

Aus, tin, Texas 78711 Spiegel & McDiarmed 1350 New York Avenue, NW Mrs. Juanita Ellis, President Washington, D.C.

20005-4798 Citizens Association for Sound Energy 1476 South Polk Roy P. l.essy, Jr.

Dallas, Texas 75224 Wright & Talisman, P. C.

1050 Seventeenth Street, NW Ms. Nancy H. Williams Suite 600

{

CYGNA Washington, D.C.

20036-5566 101 California Street San Francisco, California 94111

Texas Utilities Electric Company Con,anche Peak Electric Station Units 1 and 2 cc:

Resident inspector - Comanche Peak c/o U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission P. O. Bux 1029 Granbury, Texas 76048 Mr. John W. Reck Vice President Texas Utilities Generating Company Skyway Tower 400 N. Olive Street,1.8#81 Dallas, Texas 75?01 Mr. Jack Redding C/0 Oatel Service Corp.

Texas Utilities Generating Company 7910 Woodmont Avenue, Ste. 208 Bethesda, Maryland 20814 William A. Burchette, Esq.

Counsel for Tex l.a Electric Cooperative of Texas Feron, Burchette, Ruckert & Rothwell Suite 700 1025 Thomas Jefferson Street, NW Washington, D.C.

20007 GDS Associates, Inc.

2525 Cumberland Parkway Suite 450 Atlanta, Georgia 30339 Administrative Judoe Peter Bloch U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.

20555 Elizabeth B. Johnson Administrative Judge Oak Ridge National laboratory P. O. Box X, Building 3500 Dak Ridge, Tennessee 37830 Dr. Kenneth A. McCollom 1107 West Knapp Stillwater, Oklahoma 74075 Dr. Walter H. Jordan 881 Outer Drive Oak Ridge, Tennessee 37830

j ENCLOSURE LESSER SEPARATION BETWEEN CLASS 1E~AND CERTAIN NON-CLASS 1E CIR COMANCHE PEAK UNITS 1 AND 2 In letters dated September 25, 1984, and January 7,1985, the Texas Utilities Generating Company identified that non-Class IE public address system speaker cables and area radiation monitoring detector cables in the plant are not separated from the Class IE wiring as recomended by IEEE-384 as endorsed by R.G. 1.75.

For the cables identified, the applicant perfonned an analysis to demonstrate that the non-Class IE cables will not cause the failure of the adjacent Class 1E cables.

We have reviewed the analysis of the typical cases presented by the applicant-and conclude that the area radiation monitoring detectors and the public address system speaker cables are low energy level circuits which are designed to provide a maximum of 5 watts and 12 watts, respectively, under fault condition.

Therefore, with this level of power, it is highly unlikely that any. adjacent. cables would be affected under fault condition. Moreover, the Class 1E circuits are run in conduits which provide a barrier between the Class IE and the above low energy level circuits. This lesser separation is provided or.ly for short runs (18" for speaker cables and 6' for radiation

[

monitoring detector cables) when the non-1E cables come out of the conduits t

to be connected to their respective devices. Therefore, any damage in the non-Class 1E circuits will be limited to the non-Class IE and will not be propagated to nearby Class IE circuits. Based on the above, the staff finds there is reasonable assurance that electrical faults in the subject non-Class IE cables will not degrade Class IE circuits. Therefore, the staff finds this concerr, acceptably resolved.

- -. -.- - -