ML20212N989

Forwards Results of Westinghouse Fault Isolation Testing on Reactor Vessel Level Indication Sys Cabinet Isolators,Per 860311 & 0402 Requests for Addl Info Re Spds.Util Trusts That Resolution of Issue Will Be Reflected in Next Sser

ML20212N989
Person / Time
Site:	Seabrook
Issue date:	08/28/1986
From:	Devincentis J PUBLIC SERVICE CO. OF NEW HAMPSHIRE
To:	Noonan V Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
RTR-NUREG-0737, RTR-NUREG-737, TASK-1.D.2, TASK-TM SBN-1185, NUDOCS 8609020125
Download: ML20212N989 (12)

Text

_

• SEABROOK STATION A Enginscring Offico e ) (- t

.) Y August 28, 1986 PutWe Service of New HampeNie SBN-1185 T.F. E7.1.2 NEW HAMPSHIRE YANKEE DIVISION United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555 Attention: Mr. Vincent S. Noonan, Project Director PWR Project Directorate No. 5 References (a) Construction Permits CPPR-135 and CPPR-136, Docket Nos. 50-443 and 50-444 (b) PSNH Letter (SBN-920), dated January 6,1986, "NUREG-0737, Task I.D.2, Plant Safety Parameter Display' Console", J. DeVincentis to V. S. Noonan (c) USNRC Letter, dated March 11,1986, " Request for Additional Information Concerning the Safety Parameter Display System for Seabrook Station", ,

V. Nerses to R. J. Harrison (d) PSNH Letter (SBN-987), dated April 2,1986, "Reques t for Additional Information Concerning Safety Parameter Display System for Seabrook Station", J. DeVincentis to V. S. Noonan ,

Subject:

Request for A.lditional Information Concerning Safety Parameter Display System for Seabrook Station Dear Sir Enclosed please find as Attachment 1, the results of fault isolation testing performed by Westinghouse on the isolators from the Reactor Vessel Level Indication Systera (RVLIS) cabinet, This report completes the infor-mation requested by Reterence (c) and originally answered by Reference (d).

We trust that this information is adequate and that resolution of this concern will be reflected in the next supplement to the Seabrook SER.

Very truly yours,

. John DeVincentis Director of Engineering i

Enclosure cc: Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Service List

\

0 0609020125 060020 PDR h0 t ADOCK 05000443 i )

A PDR

- - - _ - _ _ - - - - - - - - - -Sab'*15'o'*"? nstructon Fi Id ffic . P.O. Box 700 . Seabrook NH O3874

Dicne Curren, E:quir2 Pater J. Mathewa, M3yce City Hall e Harmon & Weico 2001 S. Street, N.W. Nswburyport, MA 01950 Suite 430 washington, D.C. 20009 Judith H. Mizner Silvergate, Gertner, Baker, Sherwin E. Turk Esq. Fine, Good & Minnet Office of the Executive Legal Director 88 Broad Street U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Boston, MA 02110 Tenth Floor Washington, DC 20555 Calvin A. Cooney City Manager Robert A. Backus, Esquire City Hall 116 Lowell Street 126 Daniel Street P.O. Bom $16 Portsmouth, NH 03801 Hanchester, NH 03105 Stephen E. Merrill, Esquire Philip Ahrens, Esquiro Attorney General Assistant Attorney General George Dana Bisbee, Esquire Department of The Attorney General Assistant Attorney General Statehouse Station #6 Office of the Attorney General Augu'sta, ME 04333 25 Capitol Street Concord, NH 03301-6397 Mrs. Sandra Cavutis Chairman, Board of Selectmen Mr. J. P. Nadeau RfD 1 - Bor 1154 Selectmen's Office Kenosington, NH 03827 10 Central Road Rye, NH 03870 Carol S. Sneider, Esquire Assistant Attorney General Mr. Angie Machiros Department of the Attorney General Chairman of the Board of Selectmen One Ashburton Place, 19th Floor Town of Newbury Boston, MA 02108 Newbury, MA 01950 Senatet Cordon J. Humphrey Mr. William S. Lord l

U.S. Senate Board of Selectmen Washington, DC 20510 Town Hall - Friend Street (ATTN Tom Burack) Amesbury, MA 01913 Richard A. Hampe, Esq. Senator Cordon J. Humphrey Hampe and McNicholas 1 Pillsbury Street 35 Pleasant Street Concord, NH 03301 Concord, NH 03301 (ATTN: Herb Boyntoa)

Thomas F. Powers, III H. Joacph Flynn, Esquire Town Manager Office of General Counsel Town of Exeter Federal Emergency Management Agency 10 Front Street 500 C Street, SW l

Exeter, NH 03833 Washington, DC 20472 Brentwood Board of Selectmen Paul McEachern, Esquire RFD Dalton Road Matthew T. Brock, require Brentwood, NH 03833 Shaines & McEachern 25 Maplewood Avenue Gary W. Holmes Esq. P.O. Box 360 Holmes & Elin Portsmouth, NH 03801 47 Winnacunnet Ro'ad Hampton, NH 03842 Robert Carrigg Town Office Mr. Ed Thomas Atlantic Avenue FEMA Region I North Hanpton, NH 03862 442 John W. McCormack PO & Courthouse Boston, MA 02109

Administrative Judge H'elen Hoyt, Chairperson Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel -

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 2055, Admiaistrative Judge Sheldon J. Wolfe, Chairman Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 Dr. Emmeth A. Luebke Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission -

Washington, D.C. 20555 i Dr. Jerry Harbour t.tomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 i

=

9 I

B 4

1. SBN-1185

\o I

1 l

I r

i I

f l

l 1

ATTACHMENT 1 l

SEABROOK STATION i

l

/

e 0

5

/ Attachment 1

( SBN-1185 NAH-3163 Westinghouse Power Systems $3% sus"7 Electric Corporation Pinsbutgh Pennsytvania 15230 0355 August 27, 1986 S.O. No: NAH-312 Mr. R. J. DeLoach YNSD Project Manager Yankee Nuclear Services Division 1671 Worcester Road Framingham, Massachusetts 01701 No Response Required PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY OF NEW HAMPSHIRE SEABROOK STATION UNITS 1 AND 2 Data _ link isolator Card Testina

Dear Mr. DeLoach:

Based on the NRC Staf f's review of information submitted by YAEC in response to the request for additional information in USNRC letter dated March 11,1986, " Request for Additional Information Concerning the Safety Parameter Display System for Seabrook Station," further testing of the RVLIS-86 isolation device has been completed.

The attached document provides a summary of the qualification testing performed on this device which indicates that- the Class lE portion of the system "was not" affected by the test. The full docunentation on the scismic qualification has been submitted in the generic report that is referenced in the attachment. The documentation on the noise and fault test results of a similar RVIIS isolation device is in progress as a part of an on-going test J

program. Even though this is under another plant's scope, it will be the basis (b/ means of a docket reference) for the generic test results and will envelope the Seabrook installation. This reference can be made when the submittal to the staff is made, if you have any questions, please call.

Sincerely yours, WESTINGHOUSE ELECTRIC CORPORA 110N e .

D. R. Gregg, ger _

t Seabrook Projects S. Hyde / mmc /1416F 1

Attachment

. - - - . - - , . - - . - - , - - - - - , .- - .,---------r- ------,------,-+,._--c--- ,------------%.--w-- - %--- -

Mr. R. J. DeLoach NAH-3163 cc: L. J. DeLoach 3L, 3A B. B. Beckley 2L, 1A B. J. Huselton 2L, 2A D. E. Moody 1L,1A P. J. Stroup IL, l A G. S. Thomas IL, IA D. G. McLain 1L,1 A J. DeVincentis ll, IA W. Reed IL ,1 A e

o O

RVLIS ISOLATOR TEST

SUMMARY

RESPONSE TO REQUEST A001110NAL INFORMATION CONCERNING THE SAFETY PARAMETER DISPLAY SYSTEM FOR THE SEABROOK STATION "A. For each type of device used to accomplish electrical isolation, describe the specific testing performed to demonstrate that the device is acceptable for its application (s). This description should include elementary diagrams where necessary to indicate the test configuration and how the maximum credible faults were applied to the devices."

JtESPONSE:

The RVLIS system isolation device, which depends on an opto-coupler on the RS-472 data link PC card assembly, is representative of the isolators that isolate Class lE instrumentation from non-Class lE instrumentation in the RVLIS Monitoring System. In addition to the testing that has established seismic qualification, noise tests and fault testing been undertaken to

- demonstrate that the device is acceptable for its application. Maximum (i.e.

bounding) credible faults and noise disturbances were applied to the output of the device while at the same time the RVLIS system was observed by the remote display to obtain data on which to base the evaluation. The elementary diagram of the scope of the isolation test is shown on Figure A-1.

"8. Data to verify that the maximum credible faults applied during the test were the maximum voltage / current to which the device could be exposed, and define how the maximum voltage / current was determined."

RESPONSJ:

Equipment within the RVLIS System is powered from a motor control center whose voltage rating is 120/240V A.C. A maximum fault voltage of 264 volts A.C. Was selected on the basis of a 110% variation on the supply to the motor control center. A maximum D.C. voltage of 140V D.C. was selected based on the battery equalizing voltage of 137.5V D.C. and a regulation of ,t0,5%. FSAR Section H.3.2.1 also desc ribe", the method of obtaining 140V D.C. as the

, maximum D.C. voltage available at the Seabrook Station.

The maximum f ault current to which the RVLIS isolator could be exposed to is 20 amperes. This value is consistent with the Seabrook plant specific distribution system in the proximity of the RVI.!S system because the circuit line protectors in this portion of the distribution system do not exceed a 20 ampere rating. Therefore, this maximum fault current is a bounding value.

"C. Data to verify that the maximum credible fault was applied to the output of the device in the transverse mode (between signal and return) and other faults were considered (i.e., open and short circuits)."

s

RESPONSE

The maximum credible fault voltages were applied at the output of the isolator and monitoring was performed to evaluate the influence in the transverse mode on the system. It was observed that this did not affect the Class lE portion of the system output.

The short circuit was in a separate test applied at the output of the isolator and monitoring was performed to evaluate the influence in the transverse mode on the system. It was observed that this did not affect the Class lE portion of the system.

The maximum credible fault voltages that were applied enveloped the following values: 140V DC and 240 1 10% V AC.

The implementation of the fault application is shown schematically in Figures C-1 and C-2.

"d. Define the pass / fail acceptance criteria for each type of device."

RESPONSE

The pass /f ail acceptance criterion that was useU was as follows:

,"With the credible f ault applied, the RVI.15 system as observed by the remote display must be in a normal operation mode and must provide normal information within the execution cycle time of the microprocessor."

"E. Provide a commitment that the isolation devices comply with the environmental qualifications (10CFR50.49) and the seismic qualifications which were the basis for plant licensing."

RESPONSE

The isolation device is located in a mild environment and, therefore, is not covered by the 10CFR50.49 harsh environment program. The isolator is considered Class 1E and is covered by the Seabrook safety-related maintenance program. This program includes performance of preventative maintenance as recommended by the manufacturer, evaluation of failures, and trending of equipment history to identify potential problem areas.

The isolation device was seismically qualified along with the Plant Monitoring System because it was mounted in the equipment during the test and was determined to be functionally operable before and after the conditions described in WCAP-8587, Supplement 1, LQDP-r.SE-53 (Non-Proprietary) and WCAP-8687, Supplement 2, E53A (Proprietary).

"F. Provide a description of the measures taken to protect the safety systems f rom electrical interference (i.e., Electrostatic Coupling, EMI, Common Mode and Crosstalk) that may be generated by the SPDS."

RESPONSE

The RVLIS system was exposed to the following types of coupled noise testing  ;

without affecting the system output:  !

a) Randem noise test b) Crosstalk noise test c) Military Specification Noise Test .

d) Surge transient generator noise test in addition, the RVLIS system was evaluated under the influence of RF1 and found to be acceptable under the conditions of the application, the design, nonnal administrative controls, and the installation of field wiring interconnections.

"G. Provide information to verify that the Class IE isolation is powered from a Class IE source."

RESPONSE

It was verified that the Class IE isolator being tested in the RVLIS monitoring system is powered by a Class 1E power source. Each of the Seabrook RVLIS cabinets is povered by a Class IE power source.

L 2

i I

i Revision 8/22/86

/ mmc /1416F

--m e'

.lllll 11 "~ n

~ T-

'1 1'l I j

. I l--- gh l 8

i . _i i

lll ,_ll ll 1l1l ll-ll-l -

il

,r- -

l

' ,I I 1 I

' - I Es i ;i ," i i;g is i

a

_I_l Mg I IyI ._

- - - - ll-l.] "

8h)j ( "!"

ll 9h ,- l lrel l I!I  ! I

liLW 1l;i+;l 4l .

i.

,,i

.g i'

g i; g

,g,i .

ii ~'

9._

j.I , .

L _. , 'J ,. .

AC FAULT CONNECTIONS LINE PROTECTOR 20 A

> 0 b r 2 240V pdU<$.

O( +10 x N j '8o s O 7.5 KVA OA CONNECTED /77 FOR RESPECTIVE FAULT VOLTAGE F

DC FAULT CONNECTIONS LINE PROTECTOR 20 A (I

Q N 6 KW -o g VARIABLE 190 y VOLTAGE > _@$ tti

__ POWER SUPPLY [I) o N Q j k8 i /77 FIG. C-2 l

FAULT APPLICATION SCHEMATIC

F r  ;

3.-

9 9

(< -

HI O FAULT TB 4 i L< LO

-0 '

nr SHORT TEST INJECTION / RECORD FIG. C-1 -

, SHORT TEST TAPE RECORDER EVENT MARKER D3:kPW-FAULT.TST

,,