ML20149M079

Summary of 871112 Meeting W/Util in Bethesda,Md Re Jet Impingement Effects in Break Exclusion Region of Main Steam & Feedwater Piping at Plant.Meeting Notice & List of Attendees Encl

ML20149M079
Person / Time
Site:	Comanche Peak
Issue date:	02/18/1988
From:	Malloy M NRC OFFICE OF SPECIAL PROJECTS
To:	NRC OFFICE OF SPECIAL PROJECTS
References
NUDOCS 8802250295
Download: ML20149M079 (6)

Text

_ - - -

4

-f '

. f *Ea

/

!" 3 s\'g UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

'; ; ;E WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 k.....,/ February 18, 1988 Docket Nos. 50-445 and 50-446 APPLICANT: Texas Utilities Electric Company (TV Electric)

FACILITY: Comanche Peak Steam Electric Station (CPSES),

Units 1 and 2

SUMMARY

OF MEETING ON NOVEMBER 12, 1987 - JET IMPINGEMENT EFFECTS IN BREAK EXCLUSION REGION OF THE MAIN STEAM AND FEEDWATER PIPING AT CPSES On November 12, 1987 representatives of the NRC staff and TV Electric met to discuss an open FSAR review item on the jet impingement effects in the break exclusion region of the main steam and feedwater piping at CPSES, Units 1 and 2. This meeting was a follow-up to the NRC staff trip report dated October 21, 1987 on review of the same subject which was performed on September 10, 1987. A copy of the meeting notice and list of attendees is provided in Enclosure 1.

The open FSAR review item is related to jet impingement effects from a postulated non-mechanistic 1 sq. ft. break in the main steam and feedwater piping outside the containment penetration area known as the "break exclusion region." The open item has a lengthy history dating back to 1978 and is most recently cocumented in FSAR Questions 010.1, 010.7, and 010.20 and in a request for additional information from V. Noonan (NRC) to W. G. Counsil (TV Electric) dated August 14, 1985 (Enclosure 2). The staff performed a walkdown on September 10, 1987 in the plant cubicles where the break exclusion region of the main steam and feedwater piping are located to identify nearby safety-related equipment which could be impacted by jet impingement from the postulated break. At that time it appeared that several conduits which con-trolled the closure of the main steam isolation valves in other cubicles could be impacted by a single postulated jet impingement. There appeared to be little, if any, safety-related equipment in the vicinity of the break exclusion area piping aside from the conduit, instrumentation, and piping components associated with the main steam and feedwater systems. The staff requested TV Electric representatives to identify any essential systems or components which could be impacted by a single postulated jet impingement causing a loss of system or component integrity or operability. TV Electric comitted to revisit this open issue at a later date. While reviewing the jet impingement issue, the TV Electric representatives indicated that augmented in-service inspection (ISI) require-  :

ments for piping in the break exclusion region have been deleted from the FSAR. l The staff noted that this is an open issue in that the break exclusion region

, requires augmented ISI per Branch Technical Position ASB 3-1 of SRP Section 3.6.1.

TV Electric committed to revisit this open issue at a later date.  ;

During this follow-up meeting initial discussions centered on which pipe break exclusion guidelines are applicable to CPSES. Since both the staff and TV Electric Og22 g g h k 1

[

February 18, 1988 Summary of Meeting on 11/12/87 -

2-were aware of a soon to be putlished revision of ASB 3-1 of SRP 3.6.1 which would eliminate jet impingement effects on essential equipment associated with.a 1 sq. ft. break in the break exclusion region of the main steam and feedwater piping outside of containment, discussions on the applicability of various older guidelines with respect to this issue were considered unnec-essary. The staff agreed to reexamine the open FSAR review item on the jet

. impingement effects following publication of the revised ASB 3-1 cf SRP 3.6.1 and in conjunction with TU Electric commitments on maintaining separation and on lack of concentration of essential equipment in the break exclusion region of the main steam and feedwater piping outside of containment. The revision to ASB 3-1 of SRP 3.6.1 was published in the Federal Register on January 25, 1988 (Enclosure 3). by letter dated January 18, 1988 (TXX-88077), TV Electric pro-vided commitments for NRC review (Enclosure 4).

With regard to the open issue on augmented ISI, TU Electric representatives stated that they have rereviewed this issue and have decided to continue to '

exclude welds in piping that is 4" or less in diameter. However, they will revise the FSAR in a future amer.dment to reinstate augmented ISI for welds in piping that is more than 4" in diameter. Response to FSAR Question 112.3 will be revised.

(original signed by)

Melinda Malloy, Project Manager Comanche Peak Froject Division ,

Office of Special Projects l

Enclosures:

1. Meeting Notice and List of Attendees

2. Letter from V. Noonan to W. Counsil dated 8/14/85

3. SRP Revision

4. TXX-88077 dated 1/18/88

. cc: See next page DISTRIBUTION Docket File CGrimes MMalloy LMarsh AMurphy AThadani NRC PDR PMcKee AVietti-Cook JRichardson MVagins J0'Brien Local PDR JLyons DTerao LShao. RBosnak ACRS(10)

OSP Reading RWarnick WLeFaye RDierson GArlotto CPPD Reading JhWilson JCraig RHermann 0GC-Bethesda SEbneter/JAxelrad FMiraglia EJordan JPartlow J I D AD:CPP 0}P MMalloy4cm tAVietti-Cook JHWilsn$d 02//7/88 02//7/88 02//s /88'

, y 4 ,

--w-w,, - - - , ,- ,e r ,m-- ,.n-. r,------- ,- ,.,,.r,,--w-r.-..e,,,-,w-,~r,--- , ,---:-,-r- m y p w- s -- p

k -

Sumary of Meeting on 11/12/87 were aware of a soon to be published revision of ASB 3-1 of SRP 3.6.1 which would eliminate jet impingement effects on essential equipment associated with a 1 sq. ft. break in the break exclusion region of the riain steam and feedwater piping outside of containment, discussions on the applicability of various older guidelines with respect to this issue were considered unnec-essa ry. The staff agreed to reexamine the open FSAR review item on the jet impingement effects following publication of the revised ASB 3-1 of SRP 3.6.1 and in conjunction with TV Electric commitments on maintaining separation and on lack of concentration of essential equipment in the break exclusion region of the main steam and feedwater piping outside of containment. The revision to ASB 3-1 of SRP 3.6.1 was published in the Federal Register on January 25, 1988 (Enclosure 3). By letter dated January 18,1WU TTXX-88077), TV Electric pro-vided commitments for NRC review (Enclosure 4).

With regard to the open issue on augmented ISI, TV Electric representatives stated that they have rereviewed this issue and have decided to continue to exclude welds in piping that is 4" or less in diameter. However, they will revise the FSAR in a future amendment to reinstate augmented ISI for welds in piping that is more than 4" in diameter. Response to FSAR Question 112.3 will be revised. .

/

Melinda Malloy, Project Man r Comanche Peak Project Divis on Office of Special Projects

Enclosures:

1. Meeting Notice and List of Attendees

2. Letter from V. Noonan to W. Counsil dated 8/14/85

3. SRP Revision

4. TXX-88077 dated 1/18/88 cc: See next page l

k

W. G. Counsil Comanche Peak Steam Electric Station Texas Utilities Electric Company Units 1 and 2 cc:

Jack R. Newman, Esq. Asst. Director for Inspec. Programs Newman & Holtzinger, P.C. Comanche Peak Project Division Suite 1000 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 1615 L Street, N.W. P. O. Box 1029 Washington, D.C. 20036 Granbury, Texas 76048 Robert A. Wooldridge, Esq. Regional Administrator, Region IV Worsham, Forsythe, Sampels & U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Wooldridge 611 Ryan Plaza Drive, Suite 1000 2001 Bryan Tower, Suite 2500 Arlington, Texas 76011 Dallas, Texas 75201 i

Lanny A. Sinkin Mr. Homer C. Schmidt Christic Institute Director of Nuclear Services 1324 North Capitol Street Texas Utilities Electric Company Washington, D.C. 20002 Skyway Tower 400 North Olive Street, L.B. 81 Ms. Billie Pirner Garde, Esq.

Dallas, Texas 75201 Government Accountability Project Midwest Office Mr. Robert E. Ballard, Jr. 104 East Wisconsin Avenue Director of Projects Appleton, Wisconsin 54911 Gibbs and Hill, Inc.

11 Penn Plaza New York, New York 10001 David R. Pigott, Esq.

Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe 600 Montgatery Street Mr. R. S. Howard San Francisco, California 94111 Westinghouse Electric Corporation P. O. Box 355 Anthony Z. Roisman, Esq.

Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15230 Suite 600 1401 New York Avenue, NW Renea Hicks Esq. Washington, D.C. 20005 Assistant Atto-ney General Environmental Protection Division Robert Jablon j P. O. Box 12548, Capitol Station Bonnie S. Blair  !

Austin, Texas 78711 Spiegel & McDiarmid l 1350 New York Avenue, NW 1 Mrs. Juanita Ellis, President Washington, D.C. 20005 a798 Citizens Association for Sound Energy 1426 South Polk George A. Parker, Chairman Dallas, Texas 75224 Public Vtility Committee Senior Citizens Alliance Of Ms. Nancy H. Williams Tarrant County, Inc.

CYGNA Energy Services 6048 Wonder Drive j 2121 N. California Blvd., Suite 390 Fort Worth, Texas 76133 Walnut Creek, CA 94596 )

i

=

l W. G. Counsil Comanche Peak Electric Station Texas Utilities Electric Company Units 1 and 2 cc:

Joseph F. Fulbright Fulbright & Jaworski 1301 McKinney Street Houston, Texas 77010 Roger D. Walker Manager, Nuclear Licensing Texas Utilities Electric Company Skyway Tower 400 North Olive Street, L.B. 81 Dallas, Texas 75201 Mr. Jack Redding c/o Bethesda Licensing Texas Utilities Electric Company 3 Metro Center, Suite 610 Bethesda, Maryland 20814 William A. Burchette, Esq.

Counsel for Tex-La Electric Cooperative of Texas Heron, Surchette, Ruckcrt & Rothwell Suite 700 1025 Thomas Jefferson Street, NW Washington, D.C. 20007 James P. McGaughy, Jr.

GDS Associates, Inc.

Suite 720 1850 Parkway Place .

Marietta, Georgia 30067 Administrative Judge Peter Bloch U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Correnission Washington, D.C. 20555 Elizabeth 8. Johnson Administrative Judge Oak Ridge National Laboratory P. O. Box X, Building 3500 Oak Ridge, Tennessee 37830 Dr. Kenneth A. McCollom 1107 West Knapp i Stillwater, Oklahoma 74075 Dr. Walter H. Jordan 881 West Guter Drive  ;

Oak Ridge, TN 37830 i l

ENCLOSURE 1 MEETING LIST LIST OF ATTENDEES i

l

l l l l

[ps asa #o' UNITED STATES

! 7, NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION wAsMiwoToN. o. c. 2 osse

{. i

. i November 5, 1987

% ,,,,, /

, Dacket Nos.: 50-445 and 50-446 Christopher 1. Grimes, Director f MEMORANDUM FOR:

Comanche Peak Project Division Office of Special Projects FROM: Melinda Malloy, Project Manager Comanche Peak Project Division Office of Special Projects

SUBJECT:

FORTHCOMING MEETING WITH TU ELECTRIC l Date and Time: Thursday, November 12, 1987  ;

1:00 pm - 4:00 pm J i

Location: Room 319 East-West / West Tower 4350 East-West Highway Bethesda, MD 20814 )

Purpose:

To discuss open FSAR review item on jet impingement effects in and inservice inspection requirements for the break exclusion region of the main steam and feedwater piping at the Comanche Peak Steam Electric Station.

Participants:

NRC Applicants U'~Terao D. Woodlan, et al.

W. LeFave M. Malloy I

{ /  :

MN. d Melinda Malloy, Project M er

\

1 Comanche Peak Project Div n l Office of Special Projects Members of the public planning to attend should contact:

M. Malloy (301)492-7624 or A. Vietti-Cook (301)492-4555 cc: See next page

^- .

4

Q b /fu h tr.u % dt y ub>le gej .

apJ Cte.cG i &

veca mau fb dw Mcan cae< - i blada ?ig a cesc s .

k I orc losP MdukloYh6+. -

0 UEC / O&C 3 (mdLL 0100 L  !

N dC f 0 C1 C cyewI nae.>

QRt ' osP h .uso f /p,;s AS&fW '

Jacu T sooina 7 a 31,,,,,,

N '

hod ME' 10 TV ~

c c e m aic_

b bO b DMNb

% Hou woe, e..nin u. L & Mows ;

NRQNcA/oesr/rS6 Decl Terro e ya c 1

am

~g UNITED STATES

'[

,m g t

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 k,, / AUG 141985 EllCLOSURE 2 Docket Nos.: 50-445 and 50-446 Mr. W. G. Counsil Executive Vice President Texas Utilities Generating Company 400 N. Olive Street, L. B. 81 Dallas, Texas 75201

Subject:

Request for Additional Information Concerning Protection from Jet Impingment Outside Containment

Reference:

TUGC0 letter TXX-4;13, J. Beck to B. Youngblood, dated February 14, 1Q85 In the referenced response to a staff question concerning the impact of super-heated steam released by a main steam line break outside containment, you noted that the effects of jet impingement due to a break in the superpipe region of the main steam and feedp tar pipe had not been considered. During a recent telephone conference call, members of your staff advised that some safety- ,

related cables for the "A" train and numerous safety-related cables for the I "B" train are located in the imediate vicinity of the main steam lines. This may violate the major goals of the staff's pipe break criteria, which is to separate safety-related equipment from high energy lines whenever possible.

In order for us to evaluate the effects of jet impingement, we require a response to the enclnsed request for additional infonnation. Please advise 1 Mr. S. B. Burvell, of my staff, of your schedule for responding to these '

questions.

l Should you you have questions concerning this request for additional information, i Mr. Burwell will arrange conference calls or a meeting with the staff reviewers,  !

as necessary.  !

Sincerely,

)Y

. oo , ctor for Coma che Peak Project Division f Licensing

Enclosure:

As stated cc: See next page oc- n -' ' S, u , .. - .

- / 99

Wa G. Counsil Comanche Peak Steam Electric Station '

Texas Utilities Generating Company Units 1 and 2 l

cc:

Nicholas S. Reynolds, Esq. Resident Inspector / Comanche Peak Bishop, Liberman, Cook, Nuclear Power Station l Purcell & Reynolds c/o U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 1200 Seventeenth Street, NW P. O. Box 38 Washington, D.C. 20036 Glen Rose, Texas 76043 Robert A. Wooldridge, Esq. Regional Administrator, Region IV l Worsham, Forsy'the, Sampels & U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission i Wooldridge 611 Ryan Plaza Drive, Suite 1000 2001 Bryan Tower, Suite 2500 Arlington, Texas 76011 Dallas, Texas 75201 Mr. Homer C. Schmidt Larry A. Sinkin Manager - Nuclear Services 3022 Porter Street, NW #304 Texas Utilities Generating Company Washington, D.C. 20008 .

Skyway Tower l 400 North Olive Street, L.B. 81 l Dallas, Texas 75201 Mr. Robert E. Ballard, Jr. Ms. Billie Pirner Garde l Director of Projects Citizens Clinic Director i Gibbs and Hill, Inc. Government Accountability Project ,

11 Pen Plaza 1901 Que Street, NW I New York, New York 10001 Washington, D.C. 20009 David R. Pigott, Esq. I Mr. A. T. Parker Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe Westinghouse Electric Corporation 600 Montgomery Street P. O. Box 355 San Francisco, California 94111 l Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15230 Anthony Z. Roisman, Esq.

Renea Hicks, Esq. Trial Lawyers for Public Justice {

Assistant Attorney General 2000 P. Street, VW i Environmental Protection Division Suite 611 P. O. Box 12548, Capitol Station Washington, D.C. 20036 -

Austin, Texas 78711 Nancy E. Wiegers Mrs. Juanita Ellis, President Spiegel & McDiarmed Citizens Association for Sound Energy 1350 New York Avenue, NW l 1426 South Polk Washington. 0.C. 20005-4798 l Dallas, Texas 75224 ,

Ms. Nancy H. Williams CYGNA -

101 California Street San Francisco, California 94111 l l

l l

l l

l l

l Texas Utilities Electric Company Comanche Peak Electric Station i Units 1 and 2 CC*

Resident Inspector - Comanche Peak i c/o U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission P. O. Box 1029 Granbury, Texas 76048 Mr. John W. Beck Manager - Licensing Texas Utilities Electric Company Skyway Tower 400 N. Olive Street, LBf81 '

Dallas, Texas 75201 Mr. Jack Redding Licensing Texas Utilities Generating Company 4901 Fairmont Avenue Bethesda, Maryland 20814 William A. Burchette, Esq.

Heron, Burchette, Ruckert & Rothwell Suite 700 1025 Thomas Jefferson Street, NW Washington, D.C. 20007 Mr. James McGaughy Southern Engineering Company of Georgia 1800 Peachtree, Street, NW

' Atlanta, Georgia 30367-8301 i

l I

e 3

1 l

1 l

ENCLOSURE l

REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION COMANCHE PEAK NUCLEAR POWER PLANT UNITS 1 AND 2 AUXILIARY SYSTEMS BRANCH QO10.34 In your response to question QO140.1, subsection 1.d you stated that jet loads were not considered in piping tunnels that contain break exclusion regions of main steam lines. You also stated, in a conference call on July 24, 1985 that some safety-related cables for train "A" and numerous safety-related cables for train "B" are

- located in the inmediate vicinity of the main steam lines. In order for us to complete our review, we need the identification of safety systems that can be affected by jet impingment resulting from a one square foot non-mechanistic break in the superpipe area of the high energy lines. Your response should demonstrate that no single break will result in the loss of the safe shutdown capability for the plant.

6 0

0 1

---..-- -w - _.

~ ~~ .- __ - -

~

, T.

- ENCLOSURE 3 19 68 Federal Hegister / Vol. 53. No.15 / Monday january 25.19M l Notices Washington. DC 20,*al, telephone (202) planning to attend this meeting arc orbitrary one square foot break are no i 3824(M. urged to contact the above named longer postulated in the break exclusion I.lca liardesty, individual one or two days before the zone of main steam and feedwater federo/Rc;ister buiwn Officer. scheduled meeting to be advised of any piping outside the containment.

january 19.19aa. changes in schedule, etc., which may Evironmental qualification effects and have occurred. pressurization effects for structural lFR Doc. 88-1377 Filed 1-22-88. 8.45 arnj Date lanuary 2o.196a. design resulting from the arbitrary one s w ,e coog % .c m Whrun. ' square foot break are retained in the revision: however, other postulated pipe Assistant Ex ecutive Dimetorfor Proicct rupture requirements may control NUCLEAR REGULATORY Review.

n e ua fic o COMMISSION p Doc. es-14:5 Filed 1-12-48, a.45 a m] g C ill

• ""*""" continue to enforce separation and Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards, Subcommittee on Safety isolation oiessential equipment in the Philosophy, Technology, and Criterta; break exclusion zone as the preferred Stesiderd flevleur Plast Revielest Meeting method of providing protection without, ne Nuclear Regulatory Commission however postulating jet impingement The ACRS Subcommittee on Safety (NRC) is revising section B.1.a.(1) of effects in the break exclusion zone.

Philosophy. Technology, and Criteria Branch Technical Position ASB 3-1 in The regulatory analysis prepared by will hold a meeting on February D.1DE Standard Review Plan (SRP) 3.6.1.%" Lawrence Livermore National Room 1040.171711 Street. NW- revision is effective immediately. This 1.aboratory for this action is availab!c Washington. DC. action is estimated as a negligible value- for inspect!on and copying for a fee at The entire meeting will be open to impact revision made only for regulatory the NRC Public Document Room at 1717 public attendance. ,

efficiency and to introduce more il Street. NW, Washington, DC.

He agenda for the subject meeting realistic technical requirements. The For additionalinformation concernics this' shall be as follows: text of section B.1.a.(1) which was revision to SRP 3.6.1 telephone: John A.

Tucsday Fcbruary9.1988-Hop.m. deleted is as follows: o Brten,0fnce of Nuctent Regulatory i untilthe conclusion of business Even though portions of the main '

Research. lso11492-39:a.

De Subcommittee will discuss the steam and feedwater lines meet the Dated at Rockrine, Maryland, this 19th day near. final draft of the Staff's proposed break exclusion requirements ofitem of January 198& l Implementation Plan for the Safety Coal D.1.6. (sic) of BTP MEB 3-1. they should For the Nuclear Regulatory Cnmmissloa.

Policy Statement. be separated from essential equipment.

Oral statements may be presented by Eric s' Beckford.

in order for essential equipment to be

1. Y rnembers of the public with the concurrence of the Subcommittee properly separated, the essential equipment must be rotected from the p Docht7 %d 16 tu am)

Chairman; written statements will be jet impingement an environmental teceptx! and made available to the effects of an assumed longitudint.1 break sumo cwe ruo+-as Committee. Recordings will be permitted of the main steam and feedwater lines. -

only during those portions of the Each assumed longitudinal break should i meeting w hen a transcript is being kept. have a cross sectional area of at least and questions may be asked only by one square foot and should be Duquesne Ught Co. et a!4 members of the Subcommittee,its postulated to occur at a location that Consideration of issuance of consultants, and Staff. Persons desiring has the greatest effect on essential Amendment to Facility Operating to make oral statements should notify equipment. License and Prcposed No Significant f,I 1

the ACRS staff member named below as The deleted test erroneously wrote Hazards Consideration Determination l far in advance as is practicable so that B.1.6 instead of B.1.b. and Opportunity for Hearing '

I appropriate arrangements can be made, ne new text of section B.1.a.(1)

During the initial portion of the which is now effective is indicated The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory

-]

meeting, the Subcommittee, along with below- , Commission (the Commission)is i eny of its consultants who may be Even though portions of the main considering issuance of an amendment '

present, may exchange preliminary steam and feedwater lines meet the to Facility Operating Ucense No. NPF-views regarding mattces to be break esclusion requirements of item 73, issued to Duquesne Ught Company. I considered during the balance of the B.1.b. of BW MEB 3.-1, they should be Ohio Edison Company.ne Cleveland ,

meeting, separate from essential equipment, Electric illuminating Company, and The tl The Subcommittee will then hear Designers are cautioned to avoid

• Toledo Edison Company (the licensee). l presentations by and hold discussions concentrating essential equipment in the for operation of the Beaver Valley

^

with representatives of the NRC Staff. break exclusion zone. Essential Power Station. Unit 2. located in '

its consultants, and other interested equipment must be protected from the Shippingport Pennsylvania, persons regarding this review. environmental effects of an assumed The proposed amendment would  : i Further information regarding topics nonmechanistic longitudinal break of incorporate a temporary change to i I to be discussed. whether the meeting the main steam and feedwater lines. Technical Specification 3.3.3.2 to rela x has been cancelled or rescheduled, the Each assumed nonmechanistic the required number of incore detector i Chairman's ruling on requests for tbn longitudinal break should have a cross thtmbles from 75% to 50% for the '

opportunity to present oral statements sectional area of at least one square foot remainder of Cycle 1. In addition. for and the time n!!otted therefor can be and should be postulated to occur at a compensatory measures tho peaking obtained by a prepaid telephor e call to location that has the greatest effect on factor surveillance requirements would the cenizant ACRS str.ff member. Mr. es sential equipment. be revised to increase the uncertainty Dean flouston (telephone 20 /c34-3071 The essential dilference is that b:t fat turs applied to the i;eaking factors bctween 7:30 a m. and 415 p m persons impingement effects ossociated with the when a flus map is perfarmed with ksn O

. -:. ; ; 25 ;t:17 u t :EniE tv3:  ::iE.:I

, P

~

ENCLOSURE 4 l 1 1.o # TXX 88077 l

' El F =5 F1 e f 10010 903.6

=., .:: Ref f 10CFR50.30(a)

=

. =

TUELECTRIC January 18, 1988 wmaa,c.c a Esorwne het M nor**

U. 5. Nuclear Regulatory Comission ATTN: Document Control Desk Washington, D.C. 20555

SUBJECT:

COMANCHE PEAX STEAN ELECTRIC STATION (CPSES)

DOCXETS NOS 50 445 AND 50 446 REQUEST FOR A00!TIONAL IhFORMATION CONCERNING PROTECTION FROM JET IMPINGEMENT OUTSIDE CONTAINMENT Gentlemen:

By letter dated August 14, 198 you requested additional information concerning the effects nf jet impingement due to a break in the superpipe region of the main steam and feedwater piping. The NRC staff was concerr j that the essential cables located in this area could constitute a violation of a tajor goal of the staff's pipe break criteria, which is to separate safety relat 1 equipewnt from high energy lines whenever possible.

A small quantity of essential cables is lu:ated in the superpipe areas; however, these cables service equipment that, because of their function, are appropriately located in these areas. Other essential cables are not located in, and do not transit through, these areas. The quantity and function of the essential cables breakare that locatedgoals.

separation in these areas do not constitute a violation of the staff's pipe Further, TV Electric comits to exercise caution in the design of any future modifications so as to avoid concentrating essential equipment in these superpipe areas.

Very truly yours.

W. G. Counsil y

c Mr. R. D. Martin, Region IV Resident inspectors, CPSES (3) l

^

/-

k wh - y /7

,m y.g n y,,, UH M Tow n.'n '