ML20235C301
| ML20235C301 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Davis Besse  |
| Issue date: | 09/18/1987 |
| From: | Shelton D TOLEDO EDISON CO. |
| To: | NRC OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATION & RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (ARM) |
| References | |
| 1-754, IEB-85-003, IEB-85-3, NUDOCS 8709240411 | |
| Download: ML20235C301 (5) | |
Text
.. - -
rw
.o o
1 l
5 TOLEOO l
EDISON j
l DONALO C. SHELTON j
Vce Presdem-Nurher i
14191249 2399
{
Docket.No. 50-346 i
J License No. NFF-3 Serial No. 1-754 l
September 18, 1987 United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission Document Control Desk
)'
Washington,.D. C.
20555
)
Subject:
IE Bulletin 85-03, Request for Additional Information Centlemen:
Attached is the additional information requested by NRC letter dated August 11,'1987 (Log No. 1-1646) concerning Toledo Edison's response to Action Item e of IE Bulletin 85-03.
Toledo Edison provided an initial response to IE Bulletin 85-03 by letter dated May 15, 1986 (Serial No. 1-637) and a final response by letter dated February 25, 1987 (Serial No. 1-705).
Very tru
- ours, BS: pig cc: DB-1 NRC Resident Inspector A. B. Davis, Regional Administrator (2 copies)
R. J. Kiessel, NRC/NRR A. W. DeAgazio, NRC/NRR C. E. Norelius, Director, Division of Reactor Projects 1
8709240411 970919 gDR ADOCK 05000346
[hIh PDR
'Iu THE TOLEOO EDISON COMPANY EDISON PLAZA 300 MAOISON AVENUE TOLEOO, OHIO 43652 i
s
E f
f, E.
~+.5 t
p Fj L.jg ' 2;/ -
~' -
.t + 3,,' #
e Dockat No.50-346
' License =No. NPF-3.
- Serial No. 1-754
" Attachment-
.._ r -
ATOMIC ENERGY ACT OF 1954-SECTION 182a
. SUBMITTAL IN RESPONSE FOR THE DAVIS-BESSE NUCLEAR POWER STATION
.i l
UNIT NO. 1 FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. NPF-3
.]'t i
This 2etter is' submitted in conformance with the Atomic Energy Act of
. i
.1954 Section 182a in response te IE Bulletin 85-03 request for additional information'_(Log No. 1-1646) dated August-11, 1987. This deals with motor-operated valve common mode failures during plant transients due to improper switch settings.
By
.~
D.'C. Shelton Vice President, Nuclear Sworn to and subscribed before me this 18th day of September, 1987.
J[YhNA t111b X No'tary Pub' i.c., S_t_ ate of Ai g
My Commission Expires,[/f/'/
i L
i l-1
o 1
t
~
.- o.
' Docket.No. 50-346
[
License No. NPF-3 i
Serial No. 1-754 Attachment Page 1 REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION CONCERNING
~
' TOLEDO EDISON'S RESPONSE TO ACTION ITEM E OF IE BULLETIN 85-03' The information requested by the subject Request for Additional Informa-tion (RAI) letter is provided below. The RAI questions are rei'terated followed by Toledo Edison's (TED's) response.
'NRC Question 1:
Unlisted MOVs CF-1A and CF-1B in discharge lines of the core flooding tank safety. injection system are shown normally open on FSAR Figure 6.3-1, Revision 4,. July 1986. The possible. problem that the system would be inoperable if the MOVs were left closed inadvertently should be addressed.
Based on the assumption of inadvertent equipment operations as required by Action Item a of the bulletin, revise the table of results of Action Item
-a in the response of May 15, 1986 to include these valves.
Response to Question 1:
Actions for All of Holders Operating Licenses Or Construction Permits of IE Bulletin 85-03 indicates that.it applies to motor operated valves in the high pressure coolant injection / core spray and emergency feedwater systems.
At Davis-Besse, CF-1A and CF-1B are in the core flood system and as such were not included in Toledo Edison's response to IE Bulletin 85-03.
Toledo Edison's response addressed high pressure coolant injection and auxiliary feedwater systems.
As these valves do not fall within the criteria for selection under IE Bulletin 85-03, Action Item a does not apply. However, these valves were not ignored.
CF-1A and CF-1B, and all other valves important to safety at Davis-Besse, are included in our motor operated valve relia-bility improvement program. This program envelopes all IE Bulletin 85-03 requirements including design differential pressure review with considera-tion given to the possibility of inadvertent operator actions.
NRC-Question 2:
Differential pressures for safety injection valves HP2A through HP2D
-have been compared with those listed for equivalent MOVs at three other B&W facilities. This comparison indicates that the delta-Ps for Davis-Besse should be;about 1.60 greater for closing, and about 1.23 times greater for opening. Please justify or correct this apparent discrepancy.
1
(..
.l 4
Docket No.'50-346 License,No. NPF-3
- 1 Serial No.'1-754-I Attachment I
Page 2 f
g
-i 4
Response to Question 2:
The apparent discrepancy stems from'the differences in installed equipment.
and. plant; design between nuclear steam supply systems supplied by B&W.
j Davis-Besse has.high pressure injection pumps whose. shutoff head, by
.l design, is 3900 feet.,0ther B&W plants have HPI pumps with a' shutoff head i
of 6700 feet. ~(This information was supplied by B&W from acceptance test results.)
The' apparent discrepancy is actually the difference in plant. design being accurately reflected in the differential pressure calculations.for the motor-operated valves encompassed by IE~ Bulletin 85-03.
NRC Question 3:
Has water hammer due to valve closure been considered in determination of pressure differentials?.If not, please explain.
Response to Question 3:
Water hammer has been considered in differential pressure calculations for motor-operated valves at Davis-Besse using calculational methods from Lyon's Valve Designers Handbook. MOVs most likely to have differential pressure calculations affected by water hammer were examined. Using the most conservative assumptions (i.e. no damping effect due to bends, etc.),
Toledo Edison's fastest operating (worst-cace) valves exhibited no sig-nificant increase in differential pressures due to water hammer effects.
If(t f gi !
s l
\\
l I
\\
\\
l f
l 01 O V r12 d3S L8bl S0-08NSA