ML19209B211

Responses to Miami Valley Power Project Interrogatories Re Contention 17.Contains Affirmation That Test at Const Technology Labs Was Designed to Qualify Fire Barrier Capability of Kaowool Matl Only.Certificate of Svc Encl

ML19209B211
Person / Time
Site:	Zimmer
Issue date:	09/11/1979
From:	Borgmann E CINCINNATI GAS & ELECTRIC CO.
To:	MIAMI VALLEY POWER PROJECT
References
NUDOCS 7910090330
Download: ML19209B211 (20)

Text

~~-._ T/C-..'n 4 E#[6 g4 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

--NUCLt;AR REGULATORY CC.9 MISSION E*S\g ,%A, I/a h +&/E L'In The Matter of

, , THE CINCINNATI GAS & ELECTRIC )

COMPANY, ET AL.

)Docket No. 50-358

)(Wm. H.Zimmer. Nuclear Power )

Station))APPLICANT'S RESPONSES TO INTERVENOR MIAMI VALLEY POWER PROJECT'S INTERROGA13 RIES TO APPLICANT REGARDING CONTENTION 17" , September 11, 1979

, ll 3'[791009 G3D

-..QUESTION 1:

At the Zimmer Nuclear Power Station (herein-after "ZPS-1"), how many layers of Kaowool, and what thickness of Kaowool, envar the cable trays.

If the number of layers and thickness varies, list every combination of thickness and number of layers of Kaowool used to cover the cable trays at ZPS-1.

ANSWER: Wherever Kaowool is utilized, three layers, with each layer one inch thick, will be installed.

, 6 11 13 J ' T.

_ . - ..__.QUESTIOt! 2:

At ZPS-1, what is the average percent fill of EPR inculated, Hypalon jacketed control cables?ANSWER: 20%._j 1 ~J e l-'

_ _ . _ ..QUESTION 3:

At ZPS-1, what is the minimum and maximum fill of EPR insulated, Hypalon jacketed control cables?

ANSWER: Maximum 60%; minimum less that 1%.

, emmD/q lr I }d..

. . . - . . . - - .

-.. . . . - . .

QUESTION 4:

Once they are energized, will any of the cables at ZPS-1 produce heat?

ANSWER: Yes..I-1.,,.o , 1J ,-

_ _ . _ _ . . . . _ . . .

.____OUESTION 5:

If the answer to the previous interrogatory is in the affirmative, describe in detail the maximum amount of heat which will, under normal operating conditions, be generated by cables at ZPS-1.

ANSWER: The maximum amount of heat generated under normal operating conditions is 26.1 watts per foot.i nD'lJ._v

- . . . ...._..-OUESTION 6:

If the answer to interrogatory 4 is in the affirmative, describe in detail the maximum amount of heat which can be produced under any conceivable set of circumstances by cables at ZPS-1.

ANSWER: The maximum amount of heat generated during a plant shutdown is 32 watts per foot.

.IiJ

-.. . _ - - .. - - - --..-.OUESTION 7:

How were the conditions discribed (sic) in your answers to interrogatories 5 and 6 taken into consideration in tests regarding the fire safety of cable trays at ZPS-l?

ANSWER: The test at Construction Technology Laboratories was designed to qualify the fire barrier capability of the Kaowool material only.Therefore, ccble loads were not simu-lated during the test.

The fire severity of the test is significantly greater than that anticipated in the area of any Kaowool wrapped cable trays, based on fire loadings and the protective systems installed.

.f f)-'-

- - _ .. - - - -.-- - - . . _ . -

-. - - .-QUESTION 8:

Describe in detail the contact that flames had with Kaowool in each fire protection test regarding the cable trays at ZPS-1.

In answering this interrogatory, indicate whether the flames surrounded, had some con-odet with, or had no contact with the Kaowool.ANSWER: The Kaowool wrapped cable trays were placed inside the furnace at Construction Technology Laboratories.

The lower trays in the furnace were contacted by the flames.

The test pro-cedures which required a certain time-temper-ature relationship did not require the cable trays to be in contact with the flame.

.&0 i J-J

. - - - . . - - -. . . . .. - _ ....- .-. . _ ..QUESTION 9:

How did the sealing of the cable trays as described on page 9 of the report submitted

, by Construction Technology Laboratories on their Fire Protective Cable Tray Fire Test which concerned ZPS-1 differ from the manner in which cable trays are actually sealed at the ZPS-1 site?

ANSWER: Cable trays tested at Construction Technology Laboratories were sealed by stuffing with Kaowool as described on p.

9 of the CTL report.At the Zimmer station, where the Kaowool butts to a floor, ceiling or wall, a qualified silicone elastomer will be used.

.n?, , d-'_

_ _ ..QUESTION 10:

During any of the fire testing of cable trays for ZPS-1, were any of the cable tray supports located outside of the fire zone?

If so, describe in detail the construction, and location of each such support with regard to the fire zone.

ANSWER: No.However, it should be neced that because of space limitations of the furnace chamber, the vertical hanger support was not included.

Both horizontal and vertical hanger supports will be insulated at the site, in the manner described in the CTL report.

• iiJ. _ J s I

. . - - ... - - . . - .

~.OUESTION 11:

Identify all studies which concern the flow of heated air within the cable trays at ZPS-1.Attach copien of such studies to your answers to these interrogatories.

ANSWER: " Flow of heated air within the cable trays at ZPS-1" was not studied.

..6 6$5 a-d OUESTION 12:

Identify the location and use of all cables

, which do not meet IEEE 383 specifications.

ANSWER: Within the tray system, the cables which do not meet IEEE-383 specifications, are identi-fied on page 09.1 of the Fire Protection Evaluation Report.

These cables will be covered with approved retardant material.

.~,, 7 l,1J-e

___ . . _ _ _ .

OUESTION 13:

Were any cables of the type described in your answer to interrogatory 12 used in any fire protection test reoarding the cable trays at ZPS-l?ANSWER: No.i-#el#( i l ./-'N

. _ _ _ _ .

_OU"STION 14:

If the answer to interrogatory 13 is in the negative, explain why they were not so tested.ANSWER: Only three nonessential cables are installed in the cable tray systems which are not qualified to IEEE-383.

The cable trays in which these cables are located do not require fire barriers.

See also response to Interrogatory 12.

__O yllJ-/

- _ . . . ._

____OUESTION 15:

Identify and attach to your answer to these interrogatories copies of all studies which concern the manner in which Kaowool affects the build-up of heat in cable trcys.

ANSWER: Conductivity data for Kaowool appears on page"A-ll" of the CTL report.

The density of Kaowool material used in the test as well as in the actual installation is eight pounds per cubic foot.

l-: ,o 1 ,1J.V ,

-_OUESTION 16:

Supply the manufacturer's specifications for every type of cable which is channeled through a cable tray at ZPS-1.

ANSWER: The Sargent & Lundy specifications to which the manufacturers supplied cables are available for inspection during normal business hours at the offices of CG&E through prearrangement with counsel.

.4*k iJ--

.-.._-.. - - . - -. . - - _ - - - - - - - - .

, s VERIFICATION State of Ohio

)) ss County of Hamilton )

Earl A. Borgmann, being first duly sworn, states that he is Senior Vice President for The Cincinnati Gas &

Electric Company; that he has been duly authorized to exe-cute, verify and file the foregoing document " Applicants' Responses to 'Intervenor Miami Valley Power Project's Inter-rogatories to Applicant Regarding Contention 17'"; that he has read the contents of same and that the statements con-tained therein are true and correct to his best information, knowledge and belief.

• Wr__-.Earl A.Borgm6dn Subscribed and sworn to before me this lith day of September, 1979.

'/,)O Notary Public " , Vi?,2:'"A ? ':UHLHOTER

-, Notr/ F.a..:.

t :a Cf CLJ Lty Ccm.rt:in E.,m.m Aff 23,1932

-, . ,-,,){"

._..-- .. .UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION In the Matter of

))THE CINCINNATI GAS & ELECTRIC )

COMPANY, ET AL.

)Docket No. 50-358

)(Wm. H.Zimmer Nuclear Power

)Station))CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that copies of " Applicants' Responses to 'Intervenor Miami Valley Power Project's Inter-rogatories to Applicar.t Regarding Contention 17'", dated September 11, 1979, in the captioned matter, were served upon the following by deposit in the United States mail this 11th day of September, 1979.

Charles Bechhoefer, Esq.

Dr. Lawrence R.

Quarles Chairman, Atomic Safety Atomic Safety and Licensing and Licensing Board Appeal Board U.S.Nuclear Regulatory U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Commission Washington, D.C.20555 Washington, D.C.20555 Dr. Frank F.

Hooper, Member Michael C.

Farrar, Esq.

Atomic Safety and Licensing Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Appeal Board School of Natural Resources U.S.Nuclear Regulatory University of Michigan Commission Ann Arbor, Michigan 48109 Washington, D.C.20555 Mr. Glenn O. Bright, Member Chairman, Atomic Safety and Atomic Safety and Licensing Licensing Board Panel Board U.S. Nuclear Regulatory U.S.Nuclear Regulatory Commission Commission Washington, D.C.20555 Washington, D.C.20555 Richard S. Salzman, Psq.

Chairman, Atomic Safety and Chairman, Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Board Panel Licensing Appeal Board U.S.Nuclear Regulatory U.S.Nuclear Regulatory Commission Commission Washington, D.C.20555 Washington, D.C.20555 g 1 h*

. - . ... ... . . .-.--.--Charles A. Barth, Esq.

William Peter Heile, Esq.

Counsel for the NRC Staff Assistant City Solicitor Office of the Executive City of Cincinnati Legal Director Box 214 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Cincinnati, Ohio 45202 Commission Washington, D.C.

20555 Troy B. Conner, Jr., Esq.

Leah S.Kosik, Esq.

Counsel for The Cincinnati Attorney at Law Gas & Electric Company 3454 Cornell Place Conner, Moore & Corber Cincinnati, Ohio 45220 Suite 1050 1747 Pennsylvania Avenue N.W.

Washington, D.C.20006 Mr. Chase R. Stephens John D. Woliver, Esq.

Docketing and Service Section Clermont County Community Office of the Secretary Council U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Box 181 Commission Batavia, Ohio 45103 Washington, D.C.

20555*., ,, William J.

Moran /.-4 I kd-'