ML20214D400: Difference between revisions

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(StriderTol Bot insert)
 
(StriderTol Bot change)
 
Line 27: Line 27:
===Background===
===Background===
Discussions were held with the CP&L sta#f regarding the acceptance criteria used for selection of fire barrier penetration seals at Brunswick Steam Electric Plant, Units 1 and 2.      The list of attendees is provided in the enclosure.
Discussions were held with the CP&L sta#f regarding the acceptance criteria used for selection of fire barrier penetration seals at Brunswick Steam Electric Plant, Units 1 and 2.      The list of attendees is provided in the enclosure.
By letter dated November 22, 1977, the NRC approved the CP&L commitment to provide fire barrier penetration seals with a fire rating equivalent to that required of the fire barrier in which they are used. To implement this conunitment, CP&L instituted a program to develop acceptance criteria, review seal test data and, finally, select a seal material and seal configuration to be used in approximately 3500 fire barrier penetrations at the Brunswick facility. CP&L requested that a meeting be held with the NRC staff to discuss the acceptability of the selected seals relative to current NRC criteria.
By {{letter dated|date=November 22, 1977|text=letter dated November 22, 1977}}, the NRC approved the CP&L commitment to provide fire barrier penetration seals with a fire rating equivalent to that required of the fire barrier in which they are used. To implement this conunitment, CP&L instituted a program to develop acceptance criteria, review seal test data and, finally, select a seal material and seal configuration to be used in approximately 3500 fire barrier penetrations at the Brunswick facility. CP&L requested that a meeting be held with the NRC staff to discuss the acceptability of the selected seals relative to current NRC criteria.
Meeting Summary CP&L described the configuration of the proposed seals and the seal materials used to form the seals. These seals meet the testing and acceptance criteria selected from several industry and regulatory standards for (1) fire exposure rating, (2) structural integrity (fire hose stream impact), and (3) unexposed surface temperature rise due to the fire. Detailed information was provided to describe the testing procedures used to determine unexposed (cold side) surface temperature. During testing the proposed seals maintained a cold side temperature of less than 325F above ambient which is consistent with ANI/MAERP* temperature rise criterion. Although this criterion does not meet the 250F temperature rise guidance of Branch Technical Position (BTP) ASB 9.5-1 of NUREG-08000, alternatives to the specific guidance of the BTP may be found acceptable by the NRC staff if adequate justification is provided.
Meeting Summary CP&L described the configuration of the proposed seals and the seal materials used to form the seals. These seals meet the testing and acceptance criteria selected from several industry and regulatory standards for (1) fire exposure rating, (2) structural integrity (fire hose stream impact), and (3) unexposed surface temperature rise due to the fire. Detailed information was provided to describe the testing procedures used to determine unexposed (cold side) surface temperature. During testing the proposed seals maintained a cold side temperature of less than 325F above ambient which is consistent with ANI/MAERP* temperature rise criterion. Although this criterion does not meet the 250F temperature rise guidance of Branch Technical Position (BTP) ASB 9.5-1 of NUREG-08000, alternatives to the specific guidance of the BTP may be found acceptable by the NRC staff if adequate justification is provided.
Based on the information provided at the meeting, it was concluded that further review by the NRC staff would be required to determine the acceptability of the seals selected by CP&L for the Brunswick facility.
Based on the information provided at the meeting, it was concluded that further review by the NRC staff would be required to determine the acceptability of the seals selected by CP&L for the Brunswick facility.

Latest revision as of 19:34, 4 May 2021

Summary of 861015 Meeting W/Util Re Acceptance Criteria for Fire Barrier Penetrations.Util Described Configuration of Proposed Seals & Seal Matls Used.Further Review by NRC Required.List of Attendees Encl
ML20214D400
Person / Time
Site: Brunswick  Duke Energy icon.png
Issue date: 11/18/1986
From: Sylvester E
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
NUDOCS 8611240065
Download: ML20214D400 (4)


Text

_. . .

NOV 181986 Dockets Nos. 50-325/324 LICENSEE: Carolina Power and Light Company (CP&L)

FACILITY: Brunswick Steam Electric Plant, Units 1 and 2 4

SUBJECT:

SUMMARY

OF MEETING HELD ON OCTOBER 15, 1986: FIRE BARRIER PENETRATION SEALS

Background

Discussions were held with the CP&L sta#f regarding the acceptance criteria used for selection of fire barrier penetration seals at Brunswick Steam Electric Plant, Units 1 and 2. The list of attendees is provided in the enclosure.

By letter dated November 22, 1977, the NRC approved the CP&L commitment to provide fire barrier penetration seals with a fire rating equivalent to that required of the fire barrier in which they are used. To implement this conunitment, CP&L instituted a program to develop acceptance criteria, review seal test data and, finally, select a seal material and seal configuration to be used in approximately 3500 fire barrier penetrations at the Brunswick facility. CP&L requested that a meeting be held with the NRC staff to discuss the acceptability of the selected seals relative to current NRC criteria.

Meeting Summary CP&L described the configuration of the proposed seals and the seal materials used to form the seals. These seals meet the testing and acceptance criteria selected from several industry and regulatory standards for (1) fire exposure rating, (2) structural integrity (fire hose stream impact), and (3) unexposed surface temperature rise due to the fire. Detailed information was provided to describe the testing procedures used to determine unexposed (cold side) surface temperature. During testing the proposed seals maintained a cold side temperature of less than 325F above ambient which is consistent with ANI/MAERP* temperature rise criterion. Although this criterion does not meet the 250F temperature rise guidance of Branch Technical Position (BTP) ASB 9.5-1 of NUREG-08000, alternatives to the specific guidance of the BTP may be found acceptable by the NRC staff if adequate justification is provided.

Based on the information provided at the meeting, it was concluded that further review by the NRC staff would be required to determine the acceptability of the seals selected by CP&L for the Brunswick facility.

Therefore, CP&L will document the information presented at the meeting and provide the following additional information relative to the proposed seals:

  • American Nuclear Insurers / Mutual Atomic Energy Reinsurance Pool l

l 4

$$k#$00$k$Ibb F -

2-

1. A summary of the test report.
2. A discussion of the equivalence between the tested seal configuration and the installed configuration at the Brunswick facility.
3. Sketches of the as-tested and as-installed seal configuration.

This information will be submitted for NRC review by December 31, 1986.

The NRC staff will review the above information to determine if the proposed seal acceptance criteria provide an acceptable alternative to the guidance of BTP ASB 9.5-1.

N Ernest D. Sylvester, Project Manager BWR Project Directorate #2

! Division of BWR Licensing

Enclosure:

As stated cc w/ enclosure:

See next page DISTRIBUTION iDocketJ11ef NRC PDR LocalPDd PD#2 Reading DMuller ESylvaster 0GC-Bethesda EJordan BGrimes ACRS(10)

NRC Participants i

OFFICIAL RECORD COPY DBL:PD#2 b DB : 2

~

ESylvester:cb D / .

11/17/86 1 86 -

l l

Mr. E. E. Utley Brunswick Steam Electric Plant i Carolina Power & Light Company Units 1 and 2 j cc:

Mr. P. W. Howe Mr. C. R. Dietz Vice President Plant General Manager Brunswick Nuclear Project Brunswick Nuclear Project Box 10429 Box 10429 Southpert, North Carolina 28461 Southport, North Carolina 28461 Thomas A. Baxter, Esquire Mr. H. A. Cole Shaw, Pittman, Potts & Trowbridge Special Deputy Attorney General 2300 N Street, N. W. State of North Carolina Washington, D. C. 20037 Post Office Box 629 Raleigh, North Carolina 27602 Mr. D. E. Hollar Associate General Counsel Mr. Robert P. Gruber Carolina Power & Light Company Executive Director Post Office Box 1551 Public Staff - NCUC Raleigh, North Carolina 27602 Post Office Box 29520 Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0520 Mr. Christopher Chappell, Chairman Board of Commissioners Post Office Box 249 Bolivia, North Carolina 28422 Mrs. Chrys Baggett State Clearinghouse Budget and Management 116 West Jones Street j Paleigh, North Carolina 27603 Resident Inspector U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission @

Star Route 1 1 Post Office Box 208 Southport, North Carolina 28461 Regional Administrator, Region II U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 101 Marietta Street, Suite 2900 Atlanta, Georgia 30303 l

Mr. Dayne H. Brown, Chief l Radiation Protection Branch l Division of Facility Services -

N. C. Department of Human Resources l 701 Barbour Drive Raleigh, North Carolina 27603-2008

b MEETING ATTENDEES NRC CP&l_

DNotley GFoster DKubicki MKhan ESylvester R0ates RSchrauder 9

)

l l

l