ML20249B829

Forwards Request for Addl Info Re Unresolved Safety Issues A-46.Licensee Requested to Provide Response within 60 Days from Date of Receipt of Ltr

ML20249B829
Person / Time
Site:	Peach Bottom
Issue date:	06/18/1998
From:	Thadani M NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned)
To:	Geoffrey Edwards PECO ENERGY CO., (FORMERLY PHILADELPHIA ELECTRIC
References
REF-GTECI-A-46, REF-GTECI-SC, TASK-A-46, TASK-OR TAC-M69469, TAC-M69470, NUDOCS 9806240279
Download: ML20249B829 (4)

Text

June - 18, 1998

o Mr. Garrett D. Edwards Director-Licensing, MC 62A ~ PECO Energy Company

+

Nuclear Group "::Meetis -

Correspondence Control Desk' P.O. Box No.195 -

Wayne, PA 19087-0195

SUBJECT:

REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION (RAl) FOR PEACH BOTTOM ATOMIC POWER STATION, UNITS 2 AND 3, REGARDING UNRESOLVED '

SAFETY lSSUE (USI) A-46; SEISMIC ADEQUACY OF MECHANICAL AND ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT-(TAC NOS. M69469 AND M69470)

Dear Mr. Edwards:

Bi: htter dated May 7,1996 PECO Energy Corapany (the licensee) provided the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) its response to NRC USl A-46, requiring that the licensees verify seismic adequacy of mechanical and electrical equipment in operatng reactors. The NRC technical staff, in reviewing the licensee's responses, has concluded that additional information as outlined in the enclosure is required to facilitate completion of human factors review of the licensee's response.

l We request that the licensee provide its response to the enclosed RAI within 60 days from the -

date of the receipt of this letter to support a timely completion of the staffs actions on the issues j

raised by USl A-46.-

Sincerely,

/S/

Mohan C. Thadani, Senior Project Manager Project Directorate 1-2 Division of Reactor Projects-t/11 1

Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Docket Nos. 50-277/50-278 -

{

Enclosure:

As stated

' cc w/ encl: See next page

. QUSTRIBUTION f

Docket File -

REckenrode PUBLIC

\\

. PCi-2 Reading

~ JZwolinski RCapra.

/h MTnadas

.. a_,a q~

E E TER C8Pr A

CAnderson, RGNA, OFFICE PQhh PDI-2/LAVt PDl-2/D NAME Mbani:st) hd RCapra 0 tt/98 g

DATE d //7/98 b//998

/

OFFICIAL RECORD COPY DOCUMENT NAME: PB69469.RAI 9806240279 990618 N,

PDR ADOCK 05000277 i

=

}

Y

p mag

\\

UNITED STATES

~

• g g

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WAsMINGToN D.C. 30006 4001 June 18, 1998 Mr. Gamett D. Edwards Director-Licensing, MC 62A-1 PECO Energy Company Nuclear Group Headquarters Correspondence Control Desk P.O. Box No.195 Wayne, PA 19067-0195

SUBJECT:

REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION (RAI) FOR PEACH BOTTOM ATOMIC POWER STATION, UNITS 2 AND 3, REGARDING UNRESOLVED SAFETY ISSUE (USI) A-46; SEISMIC ADEQUACY OF MECHANICAL AND ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT-(TAC N08. M69469 AND M69470)

Dear Mr,

Edwards:

By a letter dated Ma 7,1996, PECO Energy Company (the licensee) provided the Nuclear

/

Regulatory Commission (NRC) its response to NRC USl A-46, requiring that the licensees verify seismic adequacy of mechanical and electrical equipment in operating reactors. The NRC technical staff, in reviewing the licensee's responses, has concluded that additional information as outlined in the enclosure is required to facilitate completion of human factors review of the licensee's response.

We request that the licensee provide its response to the enclosed RAI within 60 dr/s from the date of the receipt of this letter to suppott a timely complet.on of the staffs actions on the issues raised by USl A-46.

Sincerely, O

/

C.Thadani, Son or Project Manager Project Directorate 1-2 Division of Reactor Projects - t/Il Office of Nuclear, Reactor Regulation Docket Nos. 50-277/50-276

Enclosure:

- As stated oc w/ encl: See next page l

E

~

Mr. Garrett D. Edwards Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station, PECO Energy Company Units 2 and 3 cc:

J. W. Durham, Sr., Esquire Chief-Division of Nucear Safety Sr. V.P. & General Ccunsel PA Dept. of PECO Energy Company Environmental Resc..irces 2301 Market Street,8261 P.O. Box 8469 Philadelphia, PA 19101 Harrisburg, PA 17125-846g PECO Energy Company ATTN: Mr. T. N. Mitchell, Vice President Board of Supervisors Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station Peach Bottom Township 1848 Lay Road R.D.#1 Delta, PA 17314 Delta, PA 17314 PECO Energy Company Public Service Commission of Maryland ATTN: Regulatory Engineer, A4-68 Engineering Division Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station Chief Engineer 1848 Lay Road 6 St. Paul Centre Delta, PA 17314 Baltimore, MD 21202-6806 Resident inspector Mr. Richard McLean U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Coramission Power Plant and Environmental Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station Review Division P.O. Box 399 Department of Natural Resources Delta, PA 17314 B-3, Tawes State Office Building Annapolis, MD 21401 Regional Administrator, Region i U.S. Nuclear Regtlatory Commission Dr. Judith Johnsrud 475 Allendale Road National Energy Committee King of Prussia, PA 19406 Sierra Club 433 Orlando Avenue Mr. Roland Fletcher State College, PA 16803 Department of Environment 201 West Preston Street Manager-Financial Control & Co-Owner Baltimore,MD 21201 Affairs l

Public Service Electric and Gas l

A. F. Kirby, Ill Company l

Extemal Operations - Nuclear P.O. Box 236 l

Ds!marva Power & Light Company Hancocks Bridge, NJ 08038-0236

)

t i

P.O. Box 231 l

i Wilmington, DE 1989g Manager-Peach Bottom Licensing j

j PECO Energy Company

]

PECO Energy Company -

Nuclear Group Headquarters Plant Manager Correspondence Control Desk

~ Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station P.O. Box No.195

. 1848 Lay Road Wayne, PA 19087-0195 Delta, PA 17314 1

L

r l

e REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION REGARDING VERIFICATION

. SEISMIC ADEQUACY OF MECHANICAL AND ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT IN OPERATING REACTORS PEACH BOTTOM ATOMIC POWER STATION. UNITS 2 AND 3 l

l

1. Describe what reviews were performed to determine if any local operator actions required to

)

I safety shut down the reactor (i.e., implement the SSEL (safe shutdown equipment list)) could j

l be affected by potentially adverse environmental conditions (such as ioss of lighting, excessive heat or humidity, or in-plant baniers) resulting from the seismic event. Describe how staffing was evaluated and describe the reviews that were conducted to ensure operators had adequate time and resources to respond to such events.

2. As part of the licensee's review, were any control room structures that could impact the operator's ability to respond to the seismic event identified? Such items might include, but are not limited to: MCR ceiling tiles, non-bolted cabinets, and non-restrained pieces of equipment (i.e., computer keyboards, monitors, stands, printers, etc.). Describe how each of these potential sources of interactiorm has been evaluated and describe the schedule for implementation of the final resolutions.

3. Describe what reviews were performed to determine if any local operator actions were required to reposition " bad actor relays." For any such activities, describe how adverse environmental conditions (such as loss of lighting, excessive heat or humidity, or in-plant barriers) resulting from the seismic event were analyzed and dispositioned. Describe how I

staffing was evaluated and describe the reviews that were conducted to ensure operators had adequate time and resources to respond to such events.

l

4. Describe which of the operator actions asseciated with resetting SSEL equipment affected by I

postulated relay chatter are considered to be routine and consistent with the skill of the craft.

j if not considered skill of the craft, what training and operational sids were developed to I

ensure the operators will perform the actions required to reset affected equipment?

5. Assume the alarms associated with " bad actor relays" are expected to annunciate during the seismic event. Do the operators have to respond to those annunciators and review the annunciator response procedures associated with them for potential action? How would those additional actions impact the operators' ability to implement the Normal, Abnormal, and Emergency Operating Procedures required to place the reactor in a safe shutdown condition?

6. To the extent that Normal, Abnormal, and Emergency Operating Procedures were modified to provide plant staff with additional guidance on mitigating the A-46 Seismic Event, describe what training was required and provided to the licensed operators, non-licensed operators, and other plant staff required to respond to such events.

ENCLOSURE

.