ML20140C249

Request for Info:Evaluation of Exemption Requests from 10CFR50.48 & 10CFR50,App R,Peach Bottom Atomic Power Stations,Units 2 & 3

ML20140C249
Person / Time
Site:	Peach Bottom
Issue date:	01/02/1986
From:	CALSPAN CORP.
To:	NRC
Shared Package
ML20140C246	List: ML20140C241 ML20140C249
References
CON-NRC-03-81-130, CON-NRC-3-81-130 NUDOCS 8603250289
Download: ML20140C249 (3)

Text

.

.~

REQUEST FOR INFORMATION (PSI) 50-277 & 50-278 FRC PROJECT: C5506 lNRCDOCKETNOS.:-

NRC TAC NO.:

NRC CONTRACI NO. : NRC-03-81-130 FRC ASSIGNMENT:

ERC TASK: 629 36 EVALUATION OF EXDPTION REQUESTS FROM 10CFR50.48 AND APPDiDIX R TO 10CFR50 PHILADELPHIA ELECTRIC COMPA!N (PECO)

PEACH BOMGM A'IOMIC POWER STATIOliS UNITS 2 and 3 January 2, 1986 0603250289 860313 PDR ADOCK 05000277 F PDR FRANKLIN RESEARCH CENTER OtVl90N OF ARVIN/CALSPAN 20tt) 1 RACE STREET 5, PHILADELPHIA.PA 19103

-- -. .u.

j Request for Information (RFI)

Appendix R Exemption Requests

Peach Bottom Atomic Power Stations Units 2 and 3 ,

Docket Nos. 50-277 and 50-278 j The following information is needed to evaluate the

! Appendix R exemption requests made in the Licensee's letters f dated May ~23, 1985 and September 24, 1985. Information regarding the Structural Steel Survivability Analysis submitted by licensee letter dated March 29, 1985 is also requested.

1 (Note:' Page numbers in this RFI refer to those of the licensees letters.)

280.1 The statement is made on page 4 of the September.24 letter that 'an exemption is requested from the requirement for a fixed suppression system in Fire Areas 8 and 50." Page 5 of the same exemption states

" Essentially,..., this proposed exemption requests that i the wall at el. 195' be considered equivalent to a j three-hour barrier for purposes of separating two fire l areas.' clarify the specific intent of this exemption

request.

280.2 On page 4 of the Structural Steel Survivability

,! Analysis, it is stated that fixed ventilation systems are assumed not to contribute to the ventilation rate, j since installed fire dampers will actuate. To

facilitate the staff's review, provide the following

a. Confirm that all ventilation openings through l

boundaries used in the analysis are provided with fire dampers (Ex. Fire Area 50, el. 195'). l j b.'

Discuss the impact on the analysis of fire dampers remaining open until they reach actuation temperature. .

1 I h-t e

i _1 i

l

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

m, -

1. , = __m...._ _ o

. i

~ '

1.'  :

280.3 The description of' Fire Areas 8 and 50 in the September 24, 1985 letter (page 6) describes the location of safe shutdown components, equipment and circuits. They are I i located on the lower elevations of Fire Area 8 (el. ~

135' and 165') and lower elevations of Fire Area 50 (el. 116' and below). Provide the following:

5

a. Describe.the fire protection systems on the elevations containing these safe shutdown components, equipment and circuits.

b. Identify the closest spatial separation between redundant safe shutdown components or circuits.

l

c. Describe any intervening combustibles near the open penetrations on el. 195'. The description should address the open stair in Fire Area 8.

280.4 On page 4 of the May 23, 1985 letter, the licensee requests exemption from the requirements of Section III.G.2 for two ventilation penetrations based on minimal combustible loading and radiological plant i safety concerns. Sufficient information is not j provided to evaluate this exemption. Describe the

location of redundant safe shutdown equipment with

respect to these openings. Provide additional information on the level of fire protection in this area to justify that the existing level of fire protection provides a. level of safety equivalent to

that required by Appendix R.

280.5 On page 11 of the Structural Steel Survivability Analysis, the licensee states that the model conservatively assumes that no heat is lost through the j

floor only.

} a. Provide the basis for including the total wall j surface area for heat loss considering the depth of

the hot gas layer and the doors assumed open during j the analysis.

j b. Describe the sensitivity of the analysis to varying heat sink surface areas. For example, how do the

results vary for concrete heat sink surface areas consisting of the area of the ceiling and the area of the walls above the opened doors.

J .

2-i

.m_,___.m., .. ,_._._..__m_,____._,,_..,_,.--_,,__,,,__..._._.,_-_.-.m. . _ . , _ _ , - _ , _ _

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