ML20217K892

Forwards RAI Re GL 87-02 on Resolution of Unresolved Safety Issue A-45, Seismic Qualification of Equipment in Operating Plants, Program.Info Requested within 90 of Ltr Receipt

ML20217K892
Person / Time
Site:	Quad Cities
Issue date:	04/29/1998
From:	Pulsifer R NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned)
To:	Kingsley O COMMONWEALTH EDISON CO.
References
REF-GTECI-A-46, REF-GTECI-SC, TASK-A-46, TASK-OR TAC-M69476, TAC-M69477, NUDOCS 9805040190
Download: ML20217K892 (6)

Text

• - Mr. Oliver D. Kingsley, President April 29,1998 Nuclear Generation Group Commonwealth Edison Comp:ny Executive Towers West lil 1400 Opus Place, Suite 500 i Downers Grove, IL 60515

SUBJECT:

REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION (RAl) REGARDING THE QUAD CITIES NUCLEAR POWER STATION, UNITS 1 AND 2 (TAC NOS. M69476 l

AND M69477) l

Dear Mr. Kingsley:

l In a lottar dated June 28,1996, Commonwealth Edison Company (Comed) provided a plant-specific summary report in accordance with its commitment relating to Generic Letter 87 :

~

on the resolution of the Unresolved Safety issue A-46, " Seismic Qualification of Equipment in Operating Plants," program at Quad Cities, Units 1 and 2. On August 19,1997, the NRC staff issued an RAI regarding this summary report which was replied to by Comed on October 24, 1997, and supplemented on November 25,1997. Additional questions developed during our human factors assessment of the report were issued on March 24,1998. The staff has reviewed the October 24,1997, and November 25,1997, supplement and has the need for additional information to complete the review. Please provide your response within 90 days of receipt of this letter.

Sincerely, l ORIG. SIGNED BY: }

l Robert M. Pulsifer, Project Manager Project Directorate ill-2 l Division of Reactor Projects - Ill/IV Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation {-)fO l Docket Nos. 50-254, 50-265 cc w/ encl: See next page g?jg g pgyn nopp DISTRIBUTION:

Docket File PUBLIC PDill-2 r/f E. Adensam, EGA1 S. Richards C. Moore R. Pulsifer OGC,015B18 ACRS, T2E26 M. Ring, Rill H. Ashar DOCUMENT NAME: G:\CMNTSPtQUAD4QC69477.RAI T3 RECENE A COPY oF THis DOCUMENT. INDICATE W THE box:"C" = COPY WITHouT ENCLOSURES "E" = copy WITH ENCLOSURES "N" OFFICE PM:PD32 g L%")$! UD:PD32 y-NAME RPULSIFERk C@bd5 SRICHARDS6h l

DATE 4/ 10 /98 4/ N /98 4/ 2 9 /98 occ'e'a' "5 CORD COPY  :

l 9805040190 90042924 ADOCK O l gDR i

pn ath p S UNITED STATES g j 2

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION o WASHINGTON, D.C. SomeHoot s*****/ April 29,1998 Mr. Oliver D. Kingsley, President Nuclear Generation Group I Commonwealth Edison Company Executive Towers West lil

)

1 1400 Opus Place, Suite 500 Downers Grove,IL 60515 l

SUBJECT:

REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION (RAI) REGARDING THE QUAD CITIES NUCLEAR POWER STATION, UNITS 1 AND 2 (TAC NOS. M69476 AND M69477)

Dear Mr. Kingsley:

In a letter dated June 28,1996, Commonwealth Edison Company (Comed) provided a plant-specific summary report in accordance with its commitment relating to Generic Letter 87-02 on the resolution of the Unresolved Safety issue A-46,

• Seismic Qualification of Equipment in Operating Plants," program at Quad Cities, Units 1 and 2. On August 19,1997, the NRC staff issued an RAI regarding this summary report which was replied to by Comed on October 24,  !

1997, and supplemented on November 25,1997. Additional questions developed during our human factors assessment of the report were issued on March 24,1998. The staff has reviewed the October 24,1997, and November 25,1997, supplement and has the need for l additional information to complete the review. Please provide your response within 90 days of receipt of this letter.

Sincerely,

.drW' Robert M. Pulsifer, P ject Manager Project Directorate ill-2 Division of Reactor Projects - lil/lV Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Docket Nos. 50-254, 50-265 cc w/ encl: See next page

l' O. Kingsley Quad Cities Nuclear Power Station .

Commonwealth Edison Company Units 1 and 2 cc:.

Michael I. Miller, Esquire Commonwealth Edison Company Sidley and Austin Site Vice President - Quad Cities l Ono First National Plaza 22710 206th Avenue N.

Chicago, Illinois 60603 Cordova, Illinois 61242-9740 l

Commonwealth Edison Company Document Control Desk-Licensing Quad Cities Station Manager Commonwealth Edison Company 22710 206th Avenue N. 1400 Opus Place, Suite 400 l Cordova, Illinois 61242-9740 Downers Grove, Illinois 60515 i U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Mr. David Helwig Quad Cities Resident inspectors Office Senior Vice President 22712 206th Avenue N. Commonwealth Edison Company Cordova, Illinois 61242 Executive Towers West lli 1400 Opus Place, Suite 900 Chairman Downers Grove,IL 60515 Rock Island County Board of Supervisors Mr. Gene H. Stanley 1504 3rd Avenue PWR's Vice President Rock Island County Office Bldg. Commonwealth Edison Company RockIsland, Illinois 61201 Executive Towers West lli 1400 Opus Place, Suite 900 lilinois Department of Nuclear Safety Downerr Grove,IL 60515  !

Office of Nuclear Facility Safety  ;

1035 Outer Park Drive Mr. Steve Pony ,

Springfield, Illinois 62704 BWR's Vice President  !

Commonwealth Edison Company Regional Administrator Executive Towers West lli l U.S. NRC, Region 111 1400 Opus Place, Suite 900 l 801 Warrenville Road Downers Grove,IL 60515 l Lisle, Illinois 60532-4351 l Mr. Dennis Farrar {

William D. Leach Regulatory Services Manager Manager- Nuclear Commonwealth Edison Company MidAmerican Energy Company Executive Towers West lif 907 Walnut Street 1400 Opus Place, Suite 500 P.O. Box 657 Downers Grove,IL 60515 Des Moines, Iowa 50303 Ms. Irene Johnson, Licensing Director Vice President- Law and Nuclear Regulatory Services Regulatory Affairs Commonwealth Edison Company MidAmerican Energy Company Executive Towers West til One River Center Place 1400 Opus Place, Suite 500 106 E. Second Street Downers Grove,IL 60515 P.O. Box 4350 Davenport, Iowa 52808 i

l l

l l

l l O. Kingsley Quad Cities Nuclear Power Plant .

Commonwealth Edison Company Units 1 and 2 Commonwealth Edison Company Reg. Assurance Supervisor- Quad Cities 22710 206th Avenue N. l Cordova, Illinois 61242-9740 Mr. Michael J. Wallace Senior Vice President l Commonwealth Edison Company l Executive Towers West til l 1400 Opus Place, Suite 900 Downers Grove,IL 60515 l

J l

l l

l l

l i

i i

l i

l l

l l

l I

l l

1 a

REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFC>RMATION RESOLUTION OF USl A-46 QUAD CITIES NUCLEAR STATION. UNITS 1 AND 2

References:

1. Letter from E. S. Kraft (Comed) to NRC, " Summary Report for Resolution of USl A-46," dated June 28,1996.

2. Letter from L W. Pierce (Comed) to NRC,

• Response to Request for Additional Information," dated October 24,1997.

3. Letter from L. W. Pierce (Comed) to NRC, " Response to Request for Additional Information," dated November 25,1997.

1. Section 4.1.1 (Reference 1): In response 5 (Reference 2) you state: "in its Reference B g letter (Approval ofprocedure forDeveloping In-Structure Response Spectra, dated June 6, 1993), the USNRC responded that the floor spectra were acceptable for use as

" conservative, design" spectra. No restrictions were noted in that letter with regard to the use of GlP Method A vs. Method B for the purposes of capacity screening."

The sole purpose of Reference B was to approve the approach you plan to use for developing in-structure response spectra (IRS). The restriction on the use of Method A comes from the discussion of " Advantage and Limitations"in Section 4.2.3 of GlP-2, where it is noted that " Seismic Capability Engineers should be alert for unusual, plant specsfic -

situations which could cause the amplification factor to be greater than that of typical nuclear plant structures." A review of the IRS provided in Appendix B (Reference 1) shows that at several elevations in the East-West direction, the IRS in the Reactor building and Turbine Building have double peaks (broadened): (1) between 4 and 8 Hz, and (2) between 12 and 20 Hz. This indicates a plant specific situation. Also, Section 3.7. 2.1.1.4 of the Quad Cities Updated Final Safety Analysis Report states that " random rock voids of up to 20 ft across were assumed under the Reactor Building." If properly modeled, this would be equivalent to stiff shallow soil over the sound bed rock. In light of this discussion, provide the justification for using Method A.

2. Attachment A (Reference 2)is a table showing the identification of outliers and their resolution (or intended resolution). To resolve a number of outliers in this table, you plan to develop realistic, median centered floor response spectra. This is different from the approach approved by the staff in Reference B cited in Reference 2. Although the staff has not restricted the use of an attemative approach, please provide the details of the development of these spectra, so that it can be reviewed for use in resolution of USl A-46 at Quad Cities.

3. Table 1 of Reference 3 indicates that the raceway support samples for the limited analytical review (LAR) were selected from the lower elevation area (El. 595 ft) in the Reactor Buildings. No samples were taken from the higher elevation areas of the Reactor Buildings, the comer rooms, the drywells, or the tori. Provide justification for not selecting the LAR samples from these areas.

4. A review of the calculations performed (Reference 3) to resolve the eight cable-tray support outliers indicates that five of these outliers needed some type of hardware modification.

l included in these five outliers is LAR 008 which was noted to have no safety margin beyond the SSE demand. A review of the limit analyses performed for the three resolved outliers (LARs 001, 007, and 010) indicates your acceptance of excessive structural deformations of ,

cable tray supports. These deformations were shown to be a result of complete plasticization l

of the rod and the associated welds at the anchor points of supports, and are beyond what the staff would consider reasonable in order to maintain the functionality and integrity of the cables and conduits. The staff recognizes that the limit analysis procedure is allowed by GIP-2, provided that certain limitations discussed in Section 8.4.8 are incorporated. Hence, frequent use of this procedure may necessitate additional considerations, such as: (1) thorough scrutiny of the support members and their connections (e.g., the fillet welds need to be ultrasonically examined to ensure that they will be able to withstand the plasticization without premature breakage), (2) consideration of the longitudinal modulation of the raceway runs (displacement incompatibility of the supports in the raceway runs), and (3) consideration of stretching and pull-out of the cables from the junction boxes, and contact points, etc. In addition, the staff noted that the supports evaluated in LARs 003,005, and 006 meet the GIP-2 guideline only if the affected trays are considered half full. In view of the above staff's assessment, you are requested to provide the following information:

a. Pmvide the basis for accepting the installations identified in LARs 001, 007 and 010, and

. wfdress the impact of your disposition of these installations to the cable tray supports that j have not been analyzed.

b. Confirm that the cable trays in LARs 003,005, and 006 are no more than half full and l indicate what measures will assure that they will remain acceptable,

c. Due to the potential lack of safety margin beyond the SSE demand for the cable-tray  ;

supports in LAR 008, discuss the criteria used to determine the operability of the questionable installation.

j i