ML20129B568

Transcript of 850621 Interview of W Rogers in Oak Harbor,Oh Re 850609 Event.Pp 1-17

ML20129B568
Person / Time
Site:	Davis Besse
Issue date:	06/21/1985
From:	Rogers W NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III)
To:
Shared Package
ML20129B571	List: ML20129B568 ML20129B578
References
NUDOCS 8507290197
Download: ML20129B568 (21)

Text

__

1 1 BEFORE Tile FACT FINDING TASK FORCE g

\l 2 OF Til E NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 3 - - - - -

4 Ret 5 Davis-Bosse ovent  :

6 sf June 9, 1985 7

8 - - - - -

9 INTERVIEW OF WALT ROGERS 10 - - - - -

11 Interview of WALT ROGERS by tne Nucioar 12 Regulatory Commission Fact Finding Task Force,

() 13 taken betore me, Celesto C. Dawley, a Registered 14 Professional Reporter and Notary Public in and for 15 the State of Onio, at the Site Emergeny Operations 10 Conter, Davis-Bossa Nuclear Plant, Oak li a r b o r , Onio, 17 on Thursday, June 21, 1985, commencing at 5:30 la o'clocx p.m.

19 - - - - -

20 21 MEMBERS OF Tile TEAM 22 J. T. Beard 23 Ernie Rossi n 24 - - - - -

U ACE PEDERAL REPORTERS INC.

(202) 347-3700 8507290197 850621 (DR ADOCK 05000346 PDR

2 e

1 MR. ROSSI: This is a second interview 2 with Walt Rogers, the senior resident inspector. lie 3 had asked to talk with us again because he had some 4 additional things he wanted to tell us and, as I 5 understand it, some items to put into the record, so 6 at this point I will turn it over to you, Walt.

7 Ma. ROGERS Thank you. I think the main 8 point was that there were some questions asked of me 9 that I deferred to say I would go back and loon at 10 the records or at least you could refer to the i 11 records and I have done that.

i 12 Tnore was a specific question Mr. Lanning

() 13 was making of whether there was a requirement tor a 14 third auxiliary feedpump or startup foodpump, some 15 type of pump, and yes, thero is a requirement, 16 specifically, it is part of license amendment No. 83 17 dated January de 1985, signed by Mr. Al De Agazio.

'id MR. BEARD: Say the date again. I didn' t 19 get it jotted down..

l 20 MR. ROGERS: January 8, 1985, was the date 21 in which tne cover letter is from Mr. De Agazio to 22 Mr. Crouse, and A woeld like to see that the team J

23 gets this and present this to you.

(3 24 One particular item in here of this V

ACE FEDERAL REPORTERS INC.

(202) 347-3700 i

3 1 amendment is that No. 3, that Toledo Edison will 2 install a startup foodpump, associate piping, and l

l 3 valves to remove the hazards to the auxiliary 4 feedpumps before commencing Cycle 6. Tne licensee 5 is in Cycle 5 at this point in time.

6 MR. BEARD: Walt, while we are on this ,

7 subject, is there a safety evaluation report 8 attached to this amendment?

9 MR. ROGERS: Yes, there is a safety i 10 evaluation report in there and it also references a 11 licensee submittal of November 12, 1984, and I also 12 nave a copy of that. That snows the application tor

() 13 amendment with the safety evaluation attached by the 14 licensee in it.

15 MR. BEARD: I have both of these 16 identified. He want to have things numbered.

.) 17 MR. ROSSI: Wayne Lanning will take care i

l 18 of tnese.

19 MR. LANNING: The license amendment you 20 referred to, Mr. Rogers, is Amendment No. 83, this 21 document?

22 MR. ROGERS: Yes.

23 MR. LANING: We will marx tha t as em 24 Exhibit 1.

U ACE FEDERAL REPORTElt3 INC.

(202) 347-3700

4 1 MR. BEARD: Get to the next one. This one, O 2 excuse me for asking you to repeat, this is the 3 licensee submittal related to Amendment No. 837 4 MR. ROGERS: Yes.

5 MR. ROSSI: That only requires them to --

6 MR. ROGERS: Install a startup feedpump.

7 MR. ROSSI: A new startup feedpump?

8 MR. ROGERS: Yes.

9 MR. BEARD: That license does not address 10 the question of the electric nonsafety related 11 startup feedpump they have presently in operation?

12 MR. ROGERS: No, it does not. From

() 13 reading the correspondence, I think it is pretty 14 much interred that the reason for the new startup 15 teedpump is to protect the two auxiliary teedpumps 16 unat are now presently in the station from the 17 startup teedpump that is actually installed now 18 because of the hazard trom a high-energy break.

19 MR. BEARD: Is it your understanding then 20 that the implication is that the present startup 21 teedpump would be removed?

22 MR. ROGERS: I don't Know whether it would 23 be removed as much as whether it would be taKen out s

24 of service.

%p J

ACE FEDERAL REPORTERS INC.

(202) 347-J700

5 1 MR. BEARD: You mean like permanently O 2 valved out?

3 MR. ROGERS: At least the auction valves 4 and discharge valvea would be shut. Whether it 5 would be capable of actually operating at some point 6 in tne future, I don' t know. It would depend upon 4

7 how the licensee was intending to actually power up 8 that pump; whether they were planning on using the 9 old power feeds for the new pump, the old power j 10 feeds for tne old startup toedpump to be used for i

11 the new startup teedpump. The actual condition of I

12 tne now startup tendpump I can't speak or with

() 13 complete certainty.

14 MR. ROSSI: Does it address the capacity 15 tor the new startup feedpump?

16 MR. ROGERS: Yes, it does. In the actual 17 words --

l 18 MR. BEARD: You are referring to the 19 license amendment document itself?

3 20 MR. ROGERS: Yes. The new system should 21 have sufficient flow capacity to remove the decay 22 heat from at least one steam generator following a 23 design basis accidents.

24 MR. BEARD: So would you interpret that to

/

Os ACE FEDERAL REPORTERS INC.

(202) 347-3700 i

b 1 a nundred percent of the decay n es.t removal O 2 requirements?

3 MR. ROGERS: As stated hore, I believe so.

4 MR. ROSSI: We can find out --

4 5 HR. ROGERS: -- what the real thing is, but i 6 I think so. That statument there it seems could bo 7 subject to interpretation.

8 MR. ROSSI: We recognize that.

I 9 MR. ROGERS: I guess some other documents 10 here -- there was some discussion about the water 11 nammer and those actions that Region III nad taxon 12 or had s ta ted to the licensee -- not to the 11consue, i

() 13 but had determined that a confirmation of action

14 lotter would be appropriate and --

1 15 MR. BEARDS Now, excuse me. Are you  !

16 talking about the water hammer in the aux teedwater

17 system?

, 18 HR. ROGERS Yes, and I would like to 19 present the team for their review those items that 20 were considered a part of the confirmatory action 21 letter.

22 MR. ROSSI: Can you just keep track of 23 these as we go and mark each one and put the title i

24 in at the tima ne hands it to you and that will save ACE FEDERAL REPORTERS INC.

(202) 347-3700

7 '

4 1 us getting any more involved in keeping tracx?

i CE) 2 MR. BEARD: I guess tha t beconcs Exhibit 3.

i

) 3 MR. ROGERS The other item deals with -- '

t 4 that also deals around tne startup teodwater system, 5 and I did reference an inspection report on what x

6 happened with regard to the valving, that naving the 7 startup feedpump not protected from the high-energy 8 break spectrum or not protecting auxiliary feedwater

.; 9 pump being protected from a high-energy breax J

10 spectrum, 11 MR. ROSSI You should probably hand her i 12 each ot tnese in the series.

i

() 13 MR. ROGERS This is an inspection report.

14 It is already docxated. It is in the PDR of I 15 Inspection Report 0415. That is the number it the 16 team wishes to review that to see what actions were 17 taken in that regard. i

) la - - - - -

19 Thoreupon, Exhibits Nos. ,

20 1 through 4 were marked 21 for purposes of identification.

i 22 -- - - -

. 1 i 23 MR. ROGERS: Also I have another document '

i j 24 thst is a part o the licensoe's updated safety ACE FEDERAL REPORTERS INC.

(202) 347-3700 i

1

. .m - - - . _ - . . -.. - . , . .. . _ _ _ . _ _ .-

.._..---._ . ..~..

6 1 analysis report that this dues discuss protection of 2 the piping in this area, and it specifically deals 3 with the startup toodwa te r feedpump system that I 4 tnink it might have some bearing in your l

5 undarstanding of this phenomenon of the water hammer 6 and what actions were taken.

7 MR. BEARD: Could you give me a reference 8 by section number or page number?

9 MR. ROGERS: I have the page number, 10 3.6-66.

11 MR. BEARD: 66?

12 MR. ROGERS: Yes.

() 13 MR. BEARD: That is the current updated 14 FSAR?

15 HR. ROGERS: P'r o v i d e d the control copy I 16 got it from is being kept current. I am assuming it 17 is a current page.

18 MR. ROSSI: In any event, we nave the 19 thing for the transcript.

20 MR. ROGERS: The other item I would like 21 to discuss is something that Dr. Rossi stated during 22 the interview and that was in my transient analysis 23 of the situation desling with the sequence ot events i

24 and those things that evolved, and I guess part of ACK FEDERAL REPORTERS INC.

(202) 347-3700

i 9

4 i

1 it has become an item of discussion dealing with

?

o- 2 part or what the licensee did in datormining their 3 sequence of events, and I guess I have talked and 4 incorrelated with one of tne individuals that pretty i

.5 auch works up the sequence of events, or at least 6 the first sequence of events, that was presented i j 7 bacx in Washington. f

< r i B Discussion here was the licensee --

it t 9 appears from his discussion that what the intent of f

j 10 tnat original sequence of events was to try to 1

1

! 11 explain the response of the plant to the transient, '

I

. 12 now the plant responded to the transient, and-not

() 13 necessarily try to identify all ene equipment i

1 14 maltunctions that took place throughout the 15 transient, and tnat that original sequence of evonts, 1

j 16 as I reviewed what the licensing staff transmitted j 17 as they presented to me, tne third page of that l 18 document does very specifically state that tnis was >

l 19 preliminary dats, and I guess _just a comment tros my l *

20 point of view, that when you are involved in an

} 6 I

21 incident especially -- I have been involved in a '

[

j 22 number of,'I guess, what I call fairly significant-i

23 transients out heru, that the capability to sit down l .

l 24 and look at the graphs, the computer points, and all ACE FEDERAL REPORTERS INC.

(202) 347-3700 l'

l

10 1 of that in a matter of minutes or hours is not 2

2 reasonable. It is unreasonable to assess the whole 3 situation and the whole transient in a matter of 4 minutes or even hours from a standpoint of looking 5 at it in detail to determine all the problems you 6 have associated.

7 It is one thing when you are dealing with 8 whst appears to be a routine reactor trip versus 9 something that is apparent, things aren't working 10 properly or completoly properly. I just, I tninx 11 the team has some insight into that given the amount 12 of time and analysis that they spent looxing into

() 13 this event, and that just from the standpoint of 14 transient analysis, which there is very limited it 15 any transient analysis given on the Labcock and 16 Wilcox units in your training, that it behooves 17 people to kind of use a little common sense and 18 understanding of wnat you are getting in the time 19 frame in which you get information about failures 20 snd what has actually happened to the facility, 21 especially if the facility is not in any intent 22 trying to return to power, but trying to explain and 23 understand everything as to what actually is 24 happening or has happened to the facility. I just ACE FEDERAL REPORTERS INC.

(202) 347-3700

11 1 put my two' cents worth in.

th

\

l 2 MR. BEARD: Are you referring to the 3 sequence of events that the licensee developed and 4 tesnsmitted by telecopy to Betnesda on the 10th of 5 June, that first Monday?

6 MR. ROGERS: Ues.

7 MR. BEARD: Are you aware of the 8 conditions of the request of such a sequence?

9 MR. ROGERS: Based upon discussion with 10 the individual, I am. I was not physically nere at 11 the site during that time framo, but I can pretty 12 much imagine the type of turbulence that had to

()fs 13 surround that individual at the time, especially 14 since no was one or the key individuals in trying to 15 assess the event, given he was woxe up in the middle 16 of tne nignt like a lot of otner people were.

17 MR. BEARD: Let me understand something, 18 Walt, because I mignt have been involved in the 19 request for that.

20 Out here at the plant the event happened a 21 little after midnight Saturday night or early Sunday 22 morning, and I understand, if I remember correctly, 23 that the licensee indicated that they had meetings

,r 3 24 and debriefing Sunday afternoon and therefore nad

, (-)

l ACE FEDERAL REPORTERS INC.

(202) 347-3700 l~

i

f 12 l ^

1 spent some time looxing at where the plant had been?

('"h 2 MR. ROGERS: Yos.

t 3 MR. BEARD: Monday wnun we all got in to 4 worx, there were several meetings within NRR and l

l 5 other offices in which we were trying to get a i

6 handle as to the best available information at that 7 time on what had happened, and I think that it was 8 agreed that somebody, maybe the project manager or 9 somebody, would put together the best available ,

l 10 sequence of events at tnat point in time, so that 11 tne team, wnen it lett, would have the benefit of 12 the best available information when we lett.

() 13 In retrospect it appears that it the

\

14 licensee spent time Sunday afternoon debriuting 15 people, that ought to be tor a first cur fairly 16 decent; shouldn' t it?

l l

17 MR. ROGERS: In some respects it could be l

18 given the_ significance and the number of failures '

19 you have. Debriefing of the people is one thing, I

20 but like in this case, to put together the sequence 21 of events the individual had about two h o u r,s to pull 22 it together and a lot of tnings are going on at that 23 time, and I am just saying that people have to 24 realize that when something is preliminary, it is 3-

-V ACE FEDERAL REPORTERS INC.

(202) 347-3700

l' i

l' 13 i

l 1 just preliminary and take that with a grain of salt.

! ('D

- 1 2 That once you got out here there may be a number of 3 other things that have been discovered or even they 4 Knew aboad of time but just didn't feel at tnat 5 point in time were that significant to bring out to 6 actually determine wnst the responso of tne facility 7 was to the event.

8 In terms ot there may be a valvo railuro 9 that may not have caused a significant 10 depressurization or overpressurization or the steam 11 generator or the reactor coolant system and that may 12 not be-thero, but really in these first 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> or

,a

(_) 13 so, a lot of wha t- you got is if you got to sit back 14 and really kind of put it together, even though you 15 may have all the pieces, the time tramo to sit down 16 and really look at what you have got and start 17 fitring the pieces together, enat sometimes it taxes f 18 a little longer than what you really may think. (

19 MR. BEARD: You said you hsve been ,

20 involved with a number of events because there have 21 been somo up here and you have soon the first 22 sequence of ovents for other events, and I am sure 23 you have seen, like I have that as time goes on r" 24 people get time to sit down and put the pieces C

ACE FEDERAL REPORTERS INC. l (202) 347-3700 l

~  :

I 14 1 together, as you say, more details arise, and it O.

D 2- becomes a 11ttle firmer.

3 MR. ROGERS: Yes. ,

4 MR. BEARD: In comparison with.other 5 events, do you find the first sequence of events 6 that.was produced that Monday significantly 7 different in any way?

i 2 8 MR. BEARD: I don't think it was that 9 ' terribly significantly different. -I thinx the main 10- thing is that sequence of events is normally'not an

. 11- external document. I think that may be the big j 12 difference here that, as.an external document it

() 13' probably didn't receive the number of reviews that 14 it would-normally, receive and people, you know, one 1

I 15 person says this and may not-say -- well another one

! 16 may look at=it from a different-perspective and say 17 well, maybe this needs to be here or that needs to 18 be here.

) 19 MR. BEARD: This one is'probably 1

i 20 comparable to others; is that correct?

'21 MR. ROGERS: I think so.

22 MR. BEARD: What about-comparable to other 2 3' . utilities? ,

24. MR. ROGERS: I' don't.know about other ACE PEDERAL REPORTERS'INC.

s (202) 347-3700 J

~ , 4-< mr e ---r ~ +..,s-g, w-- w 'e-, -,y- +--e.r,- ---a4 -t

• y , ,mamer-m

\

15 1

i 1 utillities. I can' t speak from any foroxnowledge or i 2 that.

3 MR. BEARD: Did you have sometning you 4 wanted to entor into the record 7. i 5 MR. ROGERS: I don't know. I will ask you 6 all.

7 This is the LER that originally started 8 discussing the potential: piping breaks on the 9 startup feedwater pump piping. I' brought it along ,

i ,

- 10 just -- if you all thought'it would be of interest.  ;

i 11 MR. ROSSI: Yes, that would definitely be

.)

12 of interest, so we would line to have that too.

1

( 13' MR. BEARD: As I understand it, the 14 licensee identified this problem in this LER and had

. 15- proposed some corrective action, so that would i

16 certainly be a xey item.

17 MR. ROGERS: That is LER 84009.

18 -- -- -

1

-19 Thereupon, Exhibits Nos.-

20- 5 and 6 were marked tor 21 purposes of identification.

22 - - -- -

i 23 MR. ROGERS: I thank you all for your' time.

- 24 I know itihas been 'a.long week for everyone.

,- O

, ACE FEDERAL' REPORTERS INC.

! (202)'347-3700

-~ , - ~ ,,e n,_n-r-- +

16 1 MR. ROSSI: Thank you.

' rN J t

2 MR. BEARD: I think this information will 3 be useful, thank you.

4 MR. ROSSI: We thank you for looking this 5 up, and it will be useful.

6 At this point we will close this interview 7 then.

8 9

10 11 12

() 13 14 15 16 17.

18 ,

19 20 21 22 23 24 ACE FEDERAL REPORTERS INC.

(202) 347-3700

17 1 CERTIFICATE

{~) '

2 I, Celeste C. Dawley, a Registered 3 Professional Reporter and Notary Public in and for 4 the State et Ohio, do hereby certify that I took the 5 proceedings and that the toregoing transcript of 6 such proceedings is a full, true and correct 7 transcript of my abona'ypy notes as so taxen.

8 1 do turther cortify that I was called 9 there in the capacity of a Court Reporter, and am 10 not otherwise interested in tnis proceeding.

11 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I havo hereunto set my 12 hand and atrixed my seal of ottice at Columbus, Ohio, 13 on this _

day of Yt'/At/s , 1985.

14 0 15 6 - O CELESTE C. DAWLEY, RPR and [/

16 Notary Public in and for thV State of Ohio.

17 18 My Commission expires August 25, 1987.

19 20 21 22 23 f^, 24 L)

ACE FEDERAL REPORTERS INC. (

(202) 347-3700

1 DIRECTIONS FOR MAKING CORRECTIONS

( If you have any corrections that you wish to make on your transcript, please do so on the following page in the following fashion:

Indicate the page of the correction, the line number, and then the change

to be made and the reason for making

the change. Date and sign all correc-4 tion pages that correspond with your j transcript.

I

?,

I i

i i

4 J

Page Line Correction or change and reason therefor 7-m

s l

hE O

i I

1 d.. .

Page No. DATE SIGNATURE l

. . , , . )Ift Ch p.o.= =aci,9[0,

• , UNITED STATES e e NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION iy ,I wasmucTON, D. C. 20555 b b 'b 3

'CI(e8 January 8,1985 Docket No. 50-346 Mr. Richard P. Crouse Vice President, Nuclear y Toledo Edison Company 6,p, Edison Plaza - Stop 712 f 300 Madison Avenue Toledo, Ohio 43652

SUBJECT:

AMENDMENT NO. 83 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. NPF-3; LICENSE CONDITION RELATING TO STARTUP FEEDWATER PUMP OPERATION The Commission has issued the enclosed Amendment No. 83 to Facility Operating License No. NPF-3 for the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station, Unit No.1. This amendment consists of the addition of a new license condition which imposes three operational restrictions relating to the use of the startup feedwater pump ia response to your application dated November 12, 1984.

Copies of the Safety Evaluation supporting this amendment and the Notice of.

Issuance are enclosed.

Sincerely, aMst .

Albert W. e Agazio, Pro ct .anager Operating Reactors Branch #4 Division of Licensing

Enclosures:

1. Amendment No. 83

2. Safety Evaluation

3. Notice cc w/ enclosures:

See next page ,

t 4

l i

I

• ge,s usg'c, .

[f .p,j UNITED STATES s- .

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

, waswisc TON, 0. C. 20555 N...../ TOLEDO EDISON COMPANY AND THE CLEVELAND ELECTRIC ILLUMINATING COMPANY DOCKET NO. 50-346 DAVIS-BESSE NUCLEAR POWER STATION UNIT NO.1 AMENDMENT TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE Amendment No.83 License No. NPF-3

1. The Nuclear Regulatory Comission Ithe Comission) has found that:

A. The application for amendment by the Toledo Edison Company and The Cleveland Electric Illuminating Company (the licensees) dated November 12, 1984, complies with the standards and requirements of t,he Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (the Act) and the Ccmission's rules and regulations set forth in 10 CFR Chapter I; B. The facility will operate in conformity with the application, the provisions of the Act, and the rules and regulations of the Comission; C. There is reasonable assurance (i) that the activities authorized by this acendment can be conducted without endangering the health and safety of the public, and (i1) that such activities will be conducted in compliance with the Comission's regulations; D. The issuance of this amendment will not be ininical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public; and E. The issuance of this amendment is in accordance with 10 CFP Part 51 of the Comission's reoulations and all applicable reouirements have been satisfied.

2.

Accordingly, Facility adding paragraph (Operating 2.C. License 3)(t) to read No. NPF-3 is hereby anended by as follows:

6

,t 4 # L

^

L .

8 Toledo Edison shall operate the Star +.up Feedwater Pump (SUFP) System with the following cperational restrictions:

1. Toledo Edison will station an operator in the Startup Feedwater Pump / Auxiliary Feedwater Pump (SUFP/AFW) area during operation of the SUFP to monitor SUFP/ Turbine Plant Cooling Water (TPCW) pioing status in the AFW Pump Rooms, in the event of SUFP/TTCW pipe leakape, the operator will trip the SUFP locally or notify the Control Room to trip the SUFP, and isolate the SUFP/TPCW piping.

2. Toledo Edison will isolate and maintain isolation outside the SUFP/AFW area of the SUFP suction, discharge, and turbine plant cooling water piping, when the SUFP is not in operation (Modes 1, 2 and 3).

3. Toledo Edison will install a SUFP, associated pipino, and valves, to remove the hazards to the AFW pumps before comencing Cycle 6.

3. This license amendment is effective as of its date of issuance.

FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMFISSION

f. Y' Gus C. Lainas Assistant Director for Operating Reactors Division of Licensing, Date of Issuance: January 8,1935 i

6

,pe us .9 s

f*.

[(t

3. '

) -

UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WA5HINGTON. D. C. 20555 N.'..../

SAFETY EVAL'UATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION SUPPORTING AMENDMENT NO. 83 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. NPF-3 TOLEDO EDISON COMPANY AND THE CLEVELAND ELECTRIC ILLUMINATING COMPANY DAVIS-BESSE NUCLEAR POWER STATION, UNIT NO. 1 DOCKET NO. 50-346 -

1.0 Introduction By letter dated November 12, 1984, the Toledo Edison Company submitted an application to amend Facility Operating License No. NPF-3 for the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station, Unit No. 1. The proposed amendment would add a new license condition which would allow for the use o' the startup feedwater pump (SUFP) for the duration of Cycle 5 operation whenever the facility is in operational. Modes 1, 2 or 3. The license condi' tion also adds certain procedural- reouirements to provide compensatory measures and requires that Toledo Edison Company install a new SUFP and associated system components to permanently remove the harard to the auxiliary feedwater (AFW) pumps from SUFP operation. This installation is to be completed orior to Cycle 6 operation.

2.0 Discussion and Evaluation i

In a Licensee Event Report (LER) No. Ba-009 dated June 18, 1984 Toledo Edison Company identified one high and three moderate energy lines in the AFW pump rooms 237 and 238 whose failures have not been analyzec.

These lines are the SUFP discharge (high) and suction lines and the turbine plant cooling water (TPCW) piping which cools the SUFP. The SUFP is located in AFW pump room 238 and can jeopardize AFW pump 1-2 due to a pipe leak or break which includes the effects of jet impinge: rent, pipe whip, flooding, and environmental conditions. The AFW pump 1-1, located in room 237, can be jeopardized by flooding and high ambient temperature.

During a meeting on September 19, 1984, Toledo Edison procesed to install a new SUFP system and documented this commitnent in their submittal dated October 18, 1984, and Never.ber 21, 19E4 This new SUFP and associated piping and valves will be located outside of the AFV ru p reces. The new systen should have suf ficient flow capacity to remove the decay hat from at least one steam gererator follo,.ing design Latis accidents.

e

~

2 Until the new SUFP is operational Toledo Edison company has comitted to the following interim measures. The SUFP suction and discharge lines and the TPCW lines will be isolated by means of manual valves located outside of the AFW pump rooms during operational Modes 1, 2 and 3 when the SUFP is not in operatinn. During startup and shutdown when the SUFP is used (operational Modes 1, 2 and 3), an operator will be stationed in the AFW/SUFP area to monitor system operation. In the event of pipe leakage, the operator will imediately trip the SUFP locally or notify the control room operatnr to trip the pump and to isolate the SUFP and TPCW piping from cutside the AFW pump rooms.

Toledo Edison has confimed that hydrostatic testino of the high and moderate energy lines to the requirements of ANSI B31.1 has been completed to demonstrate the integrity of the SUFP and TPCW piping.

Ve will require that a license condition, concerning these interim measures, be in place prior to using the existing $UFP. The license condition should address 'he following items.

1. In operating Modes 1, 2 or 3, the SUFP suction and discharge lines and the TPCW lines in tne AFW rooms shall be isolated by means of manual valves from outside of the AFW rooms and the pressure in the piping will be verified to be less than 275 psig.

2.* In operating Modes 1, 2 or 3 and when using the SUFP, an operator will be stationed in the SUFP/AFW area to monitor for pipe leakace. Upon identification of pipe leakage, the operator will manually trip the SUFP locally ne notify the control room operator to trip the SUFP and to isolate the SUFP suction and discherge lines and the TFCW lines.

3. The new SUFP system shall, be installed prior to startup following the 1986 refueling, Cycle 6.

In Toledo Edison's submittal dated Novembar 12, 1984, they stated that the hydrostatic testino has been successfully completed for the SUFP suctinn and discharoe lines. Toledo Edison has confimed that hydrostatic testing of the TPCW lines has also been completed (Toledo Edison Company letter dated December 21,1984).

Based on having a license condition, successfully hydrostatically testing the associated SUFP and TPCW piping, and the low probability of pipe failure, we conclude that limited operation of the existing SUFP, until installation of a new remotely incated SUFP is ccmplete, is acceptable.

3.0 Environmental Consideration An Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact has been issued for this amendment.

4

, , e _.

3 4.0 Conclusion We have enneluded, based on the considerations discussed above, that:

(1) there is reascnable assurance that the health and safety of the public will not be endangered by operation in the proposed manner, and (2) such activities will be conducted in compliance with the Comission's regulations and the issuance of this amendment will not be inimical to the comon defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.  ;

Dated: January 8,1985 Principal Contributor: John Pidgely

.m

\

f 9

+

0 l

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