Regulatory Guide 1.75: Difference between revisions

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(Created page by program invented by StriderTol)
(StriderTol Bot change)
 
(10 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Adams
{{Adams
| number = ML043630448
| number = ML003740265
| issue date = 02/07/2005
| issue date = 09/30/1978
| title = Criteria for Independence of Electrical Safety Systems, Rev. 3
| title = Physical Independence of Electric Systems
| author name = Aggarwal S K
| author name =  
| author affiliation = NRC/RES/DET/MEB
| author affiliation = NRC/RES
| addressee name =  
| addressee name =  
| addressee affiliation =  
| addressee affiliation =  
Line 10: Line 10:
| license number =  
| license number =  
| contact person =  
| contact person =  
| case reference number = DG-1129
| document report number = RG-1.75, Rev 2
| document report number = RG-1.075, Rev 3
| document type = Regulatory Guide
| document type = Regulatory Guide
| page count = 5
| page count = 4
}}
}}
{{#Wiki_filter:1Standards promulgated by the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) may be purchased from the IEEE Service Center,445 Hoes Lane, Piscataway, NJ  08854 (800-678-4333).The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) issues regulatory guides to describe and make available to the public methods that the NRC staff considers acceptablefor use in implementing specific parts of the agency's regulations, techniques that the staff uses in evaluating specific problems or postulated accidents, and data that thestaff need in reviewing applications for permits and licenses.  Regulatory guides are not substitutes for regulations, and compliance with them is not required.  Methodsand solutions that differ from those set forth in regulatory guides will be deemed acceptable if they provide a basis for the findings required for the issuance or continuanceof a permit or license by the Commission.This guide was issued after consideration of comments received from the public.  The NRC staff encourages and welcomes comments and suggestions in connectionwith improvements to published regulatory guides, as well as items for inclusion in regulatory guides that are currently being developed.  The NRC staff will revise existingguides, as appropriate, to accommodate comments and to reflect new information or experience.  Written comments may be submitted to the Rules and Directives Branch,Office of Administration, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001.Regulatory guides are issued in 10 broad divisions:  1, Power Reactors; 2, Research and Test Reactors; 3, Fuels and Materials Facilities; 4, Environmental and Siting;5, Materials and Plant Protection; 6, Products; 7, Transportation; 8, Occupational Health; 9, Antitrust and Financial Review; and 10, General.Requests for single copies of draft or active regulatory guides (which may be reproduced) should be made to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC20555, Attention: Reproduction and Distribution Services Section, or by fax to (301) 415-2289; or by email to Distribution@nrc.gov.  Electronic copies of this guide andother recently issued guides are available through the NRC's public Web site under the Regulatory Guides document collection of the NRC's Electronic Reading Room at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/ and through the NRC's Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS) athttp://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html, under Accession No. ML043630448.  Note, however, that the NRC has temporarily suspended public access to ADAMS sothat the agency can complete security reviews of publicly available documents and remove potentially sensitive information.  Please check the NRC's Web site for updatesconcerning the resumption of public access to ADAMS.U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSIONRevision 3February 2005REGULATORY GUIDEOFFICE OF NUCLEAR REGULATORY RESEARCHREGULATORY GUIDE 1.75 (Draft was issued as DG-1129, dated December 2003
{{#Wiki_filter:U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
)CRITERIA FORINDEPENDENCE OF ELECTRICAL SAFETY SYSTEMS
Revision 2 Septsmber 1978 REGULATORY GUIDE
OFFICE OF STANDARDS DEVELOPMENT
REGULATORY GUIDE 1.75 PHYSICAL INDEPENDENCE OF ELECTRIC SYSTEMS
A.


==A. INTRODUCTION==
INTRODUCTION  
Section 50.55a, "Codes and Standards," of 10 CFR Part 50, "Domestic Licensing of Production andUtilization Facilities," requires in 10 CFR 50.55a(h) that protection systems for plants with construction permits issued after January 1, 1971, but before May 13, 1999, must meet the requirements stated in either IEEE Std. 279,
Section 50.55a, "Codes and Standards," of 10  
"Criteria for Protection Systems for Nuclear Power Generating Stations,"
CFR Part 50, "Domestic Licensing of Production and Utilization Facilities,"  
1 or IEEE Std. 603-1991, "Criteria forSafety Systems for Nuclear Power Generating Stations."
requires in paragraph (h) that protection systems meet the requirements set forth in the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers Standard,  
1 For nuclear power plants with construction permitsissued before January 1, 1971, protection systems must be consistent with their licensing basis or may meet the requirements of IEEE Std. 603-1991.  The safety systems for plants with construction permits issued after May 13,
"Criteria for Protection Systems for Nuclear Power Generating Stations" (IEEE 279).1 Sec tion 4.6 of IEEE Std 279-1971 (also designated ANSI N42.7-1972) requires, in part, that chan nels that provide signals for the same protec tive function be independent and physically separated. General Design Criterion 3, "Fire Protection," of Appendix A,  
1999, must meet the requirements of IEEE Std. 603-1991.Section 4.6 of IEEE Std. 279-1971 requires, in part, that channels that provide signals for the sameprotective function must be independent and physically separated. Section 5.6.1 of IEEE Std. 603-1991 states,
"General Design Criteria for Nuclear Power Plants," to I0 CFR
"Redundant portions of a safety system provided for a safety function shall be independent of, and physically separated from, each other to the degree necessary to retain the capability of accomplishing the safety function during and following any design basis event requiring that safety function.General Design Criterion (GDC) 17,
Part 50 requires, in part, that structures, systems, and components important to safety be designed and located to minimize, consistent with other safety requirements, the probability and effect of fires. General Design Criterion  
"Electric Power Systems," in Appendix A to 10 CFR Part 50 requires, in part, that electric power  
17,  
1.75-2from the transmission network to the onsite electric distribution system shall be supplied by twophysically independent circuits that are designed and located so as to minimize to the extent practical the likelihood of their simultaneous failure under operating and postulated accident and environmental conditions. GDC 21, "Protection System Reliability and Testability," requires, in part, that redundancy and independence designed into the protection system shall be sufficient to assure that no single failure results in a loss of the protection function.  GDC 22, "Protection System Independence," requires that the effects of natural phenomena, and of normal operating, maintenance, testing, and postulated accident conditions on redundant channels do not result in loss of the protection function.This regulatory guide describes a method acceptable to the NRC staff for complying with theNRC's regulations with respect to the physical independence requirements of the circuits and electric equipment that comprise or are associated with safety systems.This regulatory guide contains information collections that are covered by the requirementsof 10 CFR Part 50, which the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) approved under OMB control number 3150-0011.  The NRC may neither conduct nor sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to,an information collection request or requirement unless the requesting document displays a currently valid OMB control number.
"Electric Power Systems," requires, in part, that the onsite electric power supplies, including the batteries, and the onsite electric distribution system have sufficient in dependence to perform their safety functions assuming a single failure. General Design Cri terion 21,  
"Protection System Reliability and Testability," reqxiires, in part, that independ ence designed into protection systems be suffi cient to ensure that no single failure results in loss of the protective function.


2Standards promulgated by the IEEE may be purchased from the IEEE Service Center, 445 Hoes Lane, Piscataway, NJ  08854.1.75-3
This guide describes a method acceptable to the NRC staff of complying with IEEE Std 279
1971 and Criteria 3, 17, and 21 of Appendix A
to 10 CFR Part 50 with respect to the physical independence of the circuits and electric equipment comprising or associanted with the
'Copies may be obtained from the Institute of Eectrical and Electronics Engineers.


==B. DISCUSSION==
United Engintering Center. 345 East
IEEE Std. 384-1992, "Standard Criteria for Independence of Class 1E Equipment and Circuits,"
47th Street. New York, New York 10017.
2was prepared by Working Group SC 6.5 of IEEE Nuclear Power Engineering Committee and wasapproved by the Standards Board on June 18, 1992.  This standard provides criteria and requirements for establishing and maintaining the independence of safety-related equipment and circuits, and auxiliary supporting features by physical separation and electrical isolation.  Based on the results of separation testing completed by the nuclear industry on internally generated electrical faults, the following significant changes were incorporated in IEEE Std. 384-1992:  (1) separation distance criteria were reduced for certain configurations identified in IEEE Std. 384-1981, and (2) separation distance criteria were added for configurations that were not previously addressed.  These configurations include cable trays and conduits, cable trays and cable in free air, and conduits and cable in free air.  The underlying separation criteria are that (1) physical separation and (2) electrical isolation must be provided to maintain the independence of safety-related circuits and equipment so that the safety functions required during and following any design-basis event can be accomplished .Section 5.6(3) of IEEE Std. 384-1992 provides general criteria for independence between safety-related and non-safety-related circuits. When minimum separation cannot be met, it allows an analysis of non-safety-related circuits to demonstrate that the safety-related circuits are not degraded below an acceptable level.  If the analysis is successful, the non-safety-related circuits can remain as non-safety- related circuits.  However, Section 5.5.2(3) contradicts Section 5.6(3) by stating that the analyzed circuits are still called "associated circuits" following an analysis or test demonstrating that the safety-related cables are not degraded below an acceptable level.  The staff position is that (1) non-safety-related circuits that are not separated from safety-related circuits through the minimum separation or barriers, must be treated as "associated circuits," and (2) the cables that are associated because they are powered from a safety- related source serving non-safety-related loads or share the safety signal must also be treated as associated circuits.  Both of these groups of associated circuits should not ever become associated with a redundant division through its proximity or shared signal to preserve the independence.The term "associated circuits" has a different connotation in this regulatory guide than it doesfor fire protection (Appendix R to 10 CFR Part 50).  This regulatory guide defines "associated circuits"
as "non-safety-related circuits that are not physically separated or not electrically isolated from safety- related circuits by acceptable separation distance, safety class structures, barriers, or isolation devices."
The "associated circuits" in Appendix R include both safety-related and non-safety-related circuits because they involve alternative and redundant safe shutdown equipment.  Post-fire safe-shutdown capability is distinctly different from, and credits operability of different equipment than the safety- related equipment required for emergency shutdown of a nuclear power plant.  Regulatory Guide 1.189,
"Fire Protection for Operating Nuclear Power Plants," provides additional guidance concerning the fire protection area.IEEE Std. 384-1992 includes an informative appendix that provides background informationabout the cable testing program that various public utilities conducted to support the criteria for reducedseparation distance.  In particular, the appendix states - and the NRC staff agrees - that the use of cable wrapping is an acceptable method to reduce separation distances, but each wrapping system should be analyzed or tested on a case-by-case basis.  This method will be subject to approval by the NRC staff.


1.75-4
Class 1E power system, the protection system, systems actuated or controlled by the protec tion system, and auxiliary or supporting sys tems that must be operable for the protection system and the systems it actuates to perform their safety-related functions. This guide ap plies to all types of nuclear power plants.


==C. REGULATORY POSITION==
This guide addresses only some aspects of defense against the effects of fires. Additional criteria for protection against the effects of fires are provided in Regulatory Guide 1-120,  
Conformance with the requirements of IEEE Std. 384-1992, "Standard Criteria for Independenceof Class 1E Equipment and Circuits," provides a method that the NRC staff considers acceptable for satisfying the agency's regulatory requirements concerning physical independence of the circuits and electrical equipment that comprise or are associated with safety systems, subject to the following:(1)Sections 7.1.2.1, 7.1.2.4, and 7.2.2.3 of IEEE Std. 384-1992 should be supplementedas follows:The breaker or fuse that is automatically opened by fault current may be used as an isolation device,provided that (a) the fault current under bolted and arcing fault conditions (assuming multiplefaults of all non-safety-related loads and load current of all safety-related circuits) will causethe nearest circuit breaker or fuse to interrupt the fault current prior to initiation of a trip of anyupstream protection device, and (b) periodic testing of circuit breakers (visual inspection of fusesand fuse holders) during every refueling must demonstrate that the overall coordination schemeunder multiple faults of non-safety-related loads remains within the limits specified in the designcriteria for the nuclear power plant.(2)The summary results of the analysis performed to meet the requirements ofIEEE Std. 384-1992, for example, to comply with Sections 5.5.2, 5.6, 6.1, etc.,
"Fire Protection Guidelines for Nuclear Power Plants.,  
should be included in the final safety analysis report for the nuclear power plant.(3)Section 6.1.1.2 of IEEE Std. 384-1992 should be supplemented as follows:Cable splices in raceways should generally be avoided to the extent that it is practical to do so.(4)Section 5.6(3) of IEEE Std. 384-1992 should not be construed as allowing less thanminimum separation of non-safety-related circuits from safety-related circuits to be justified by analyses without treatment of the affected non-safety-related circuits as associated circuits.(5)Section 3 of IEEE Std. 384-1992 references several industry codes and standards. If a referenced standard has been separately incorporated into the NRC's regulations, licensees and applicants must comply with the standard as set forth in the regulation.
B.


If a referenced standard has been endorsed by the NRC staff in a regulatory guide, the standard constitutes an acceptable method of meeting a regulatory requirement as described in the regulatory guide. If a referenced standard has been neither incorporated into the NRC's regulations nor endorsed in a regulatory guide, licensees and applicants may consider and use the information in the referenced standard, if appropriately justified, consistent with regulatory practice.
DISCUSSION
Draft IEEE Standard, "Criteria for Separa tion of Class
1E Equipment and Circuits,"
dated July 20, 1973, was prepared by Ad Hoc Subcommittee
6 of the Nuclear Power Engineering Committee (NPEC) of the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers. The draft was -subsequently modified by NPEC in August. 1973 incident to the normal process of developing its technical content. The modified draft standard provided criteria for the separation of redundant Class IE equipment and circuits installed at nuclear power plants.


1.75-5
Inasmuch as there was an urgent need for explicit guidance in the area of physical inde pendence of electric systems and in view of the considerable guidance already available from the modified -IEEE draft standard, the staff prepared a document entitled "Appendix 1 to Regulatory Guide 1.75 - Physical Independence of Electric Systems." This- Appendix, which was essentially the modified IEEE
draft standardi further modified to (a) address ac ceptably those portions of the standard on which there was not complete agreement, (b)
*Lines indicate substantive changes from previous issue.


==D. IMPLEMENTATION==
USNRC REGULATORY GUIDES
The purpose of this section is to provide information to applicants and licensees regardingthe NRC staff's plans for using this guide.  No backfitting is intended or approved in connection withthe issuance of this guide.Except in cases in which an applicant or licensee proposes or has previously establishedan acceptable alternative method for complying with specified portions of the NRC's regulations, the methods described in this guide will be used in the evaluation of (1) submittals in connection with applications for construction permits, design certifications, operating licenses, and combined licenses for application of independence criteria to safety systems, and (2) submittals from operating reactor licensees who voluntarily propose to initiate system modifications if there is a clear nexus between the proposed modifications and this guidance with respect to the requirements for physical independence of the circuits and electrical equipment that comprise or are associated with safety systems.REGULATORY ANALYSISA separate regulatory analysis was not prepared for this regulatory guide. The regulatory analysisprepared for Draft Regulatory Guide DG-1129, "Criteria for Independence of Electrical Safety Systems,"
1egmatumy Guidee am band to &oxbo mid ruW
dated December 2003, also provides the regulatory basis for this regulatory guide.  The NRC issued DG-1129 to solicit public comment concerning the draft of this third revision of Regulatory Guide 1.75.A copy of the regulatory analysis for DG-1129 is available for inspection and copying for a feeat the NRC's Public Document Room (PDR), which is located at 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville,Maryland; the PDR's mailing address is USNRC PDR, Washington, DC 20555-0001.  The PDR can also be reached by telephone at (301) 415-4737 or (800) 397-4205, by fax at (301) 415-3548, and by email toPDR@nrc.gov.  Copies are also available at current rates from the U.S. Government Printing Office atP.O. Box 37082, Washington, DC 20402-9328 or by telephone at (202) 512-1800.  In addition, copiesare available at current rates from the National Technical Information Service at 5285 Port Royal Road, Springfield, VA 22161, on the Internet at http://www.ntis.gov, or by telephone at (703) 487-4650. In addition, the regulatory analysis is available electronically as a part of Draft Regulatory Guide DG-1129 through the NRC's Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS)
WsHIMl
at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html, under Accession No. ML040020126.  Note, however,that the NRC has temporarily suspended public access to ADAMS so that the agency can complete security reviews of publicly available documents and remove potentially sensitive information.
&M
Ie pt*1c nietodsoospable to la NRC eteff Of knmoain
0
e- c WW
-
lie Se0ef prob poei*dted
*
e*derm or so po"
gAdence 10
ml e
I
tdpMry GAd we not hedtfuftn fW mqs, aid arm V1 with lambI not requke. Melsad end sa&udmw ebrn
10
o
*-oee K ut
& In tho s p ud b e to cepbo ah N lt v ro s a bob fore ta *W
usgmIb~ pw bounnce or earitirwnsoe pe1 i
&
kOr @OWN
b Canuiets aid euggeelion for harovenientah In 0-  
gidsa we encoasgjac at eld Oim&oWd rgde w be etwbed. as ep te Pr


Please check the NRC's Web site for updates concerning the resumption of public access to ADAMS.}}
====c.  o d ====
o th w4d to re~ct ume Inonilon or axpelence. This ii was meted ma mult of eslienei receitved *rom to pidec ond eddkonad gaff rviw.
 
a imw dsid be em W W In ft liCowN
a Wo ied N eo I. Poum RcOtMrs
 
====s. vmrxon ====
2. ReeahwdimdTeat Revmo~
7. Traiopution S. Fukl m
od Metmkba F~im
::o
=o M
4. Esikonmiirm mid 1::hig
5.ari~itR~
& Mstmwih mid ProectW
a eral feqoast for uhig egooes of bmaed dMn Wkhd noy be uprOduce) or tar i
ancemen aien asmaswefc detkution kt f *de cone of kftns gides
""ons ei*Id be nod& In ug W"
W
U,& Nuch Reg.Aty Comnakn. Wi*kns
.
D.C. Z.
 
AtmnW
Dkocw.
 
Dmiden Of Tedhad bInu.on mid Documeo Caga.
 
I
*
 
describe logical extensions of the standard's.
 
provisions that were acceptable to the staff, and (a) provide clarification where necessary,. 
was endorsed by the February 1974 version of this guide.
 
Subsequent to the issuance of the February
1974 version of this guide, the modified MEEE
draft standard upon which the guide and its Appendix were based evolved, in the normal course of standard development, into IEEE Std
384-1974,
"IEEE Trial-Use Standard Criteria for Separation of Cuss JR Xupmen-
-Cir- cults" (also designated ANSI N41.14). IEEE Std
384-1974 has undergone balloting within Ad Hoc Subcommittee .6 and NPEC and was approved by the IEEE Standards' Board on February 28,
1974. This revision to the guide endorses, with certain exceptions, IEEE Ptd 384-1974.
 
The NRC staff does not agree with certain"
provisions of the trial-use standard such as those pertaining to the definition of "raceway,"
the routing of power cables through the cable spreading area(s) and control room', and tie status of non-Class-lI circuits that are. not separated from associated circuits by accept able distance or bairiers. This lack of agree ment is reflected in Regulatory Positions C. 1,
2, 4, 6, 7, 9, 10, and 12.
 
There are also several regulatory positions that are logical extensions of the standard's provisions and reflect current staff review practice.
 
For example, a provision of the standard that addresses the
"degree of separation commensurate with the damage
3otential of the hazard" does not specifically zover cable tunnels which, in the event of a fire, may not effectively separate redundant circuits or equipment. As another example, the standard requires that methods of identification distinguish between redundant Class
1E
systems, associated circuits, and non-Class-IX
systems.
 
By implication, associated circuits assigned to different redundant divisions should also be identified.
 
However, the provision is implicit.
 
An explicit provision should be provided.
 
Detailid bases are included herein for those regulatory positions that are significantly at iariance with the standard's provisions. The remaining regulatory positions are logical ex tensions or clarifications of the standard's pro visions.
 
C.
 
REGULATORY POSITION
IEEE Std 384-1974 sets forth criteria for the separation of circuits and equipment. that are redundant. The determination of which circuits and equipment are redundant and the degree of redundancy required is outside the scope of this guide and the standard. The standard also sets forth criteria relating to tests and analyses for determining the flame-retardant characteristics of proposed cable installations.
 
The criteria are acceptable provided such tests and analyses are based on realistic premises and are otherwise fully applicable to the actual.
 
cable installations.
 
The guidance in IEEE Std 384-1974, "IEEE
Trial-Use Standard Criteria for Separation of Class IR
Equipment and Circuits,"
dated
,farch 15, 1974, is generally acceptable to the NRC staff and provides an adequate basis for complying with IEEE Std 279-1971 and the Commission's General Design Criteria 3, 17, an& 21- of Appendix A to 10 CFR Part. 50 with.
 
respect to the physical independence of the circuits and electric equipment comprising or associated with the Class 1E power system, the protection system, systems actuated or controlled by the protection system, and auxiliary or supporting systems that must be operable for the protection system and the systems it actuates to perform their safety related functions, subject to the following:
1. Section 3,
"Isolation Device," should be supplemented as follows:
"(Interrupting de vices actuated only by fault current are not considered to be isolation devices within the context of this document.)"
Basis: Logical extension of the standard's provisions. The standard defines "isolation device" in terms of preventing malfunctions in one section of a circuit from causing un acceptable influences in other sections of the circuit or other circuits. Under the postu lated conditions of a loss-of-coolant accident,. 
loss of offsite power, and a cable tray fire, the proximity of circuits energized from re dundant Class 1E power sources could lead to concurrent high fault currents (e.g., short to ground) which, in turn, threaten the re dundant main circuit breakers.
 
Also, the susceptibility of non-Class-IE loads ener gized from redundant Class 1E power sources to design basis events (e.g., seismic events)
could similarly threaten the redundant main circuit breakers. Tripping of the main circuit breakers would cause the. loss of emergency power to redundant "divisions" of equipment.
 
It is recognized that proper breaker or fuse coordination would preclude such an event.
 
However, because the main breakers are in series with the fault and could experience momentary currents above their setpoints, it is prudent to preclude the use of inter rupting devices actuated only by fault cur rent as acceptable devices for isolating non Class-IE circuits from Class 1E or associated circuits.
 
Breakers that trip on receipt of a signal other than one derived from the fault current or its effects (e.g., an accident signal) are acceptable since the downstream circuits would. already be isolated from their respec tive power sources under accident conditions and could pose no threat to these sources.
 
1.75-2 KYý
 
2. Section 3,
"Raceway". Interlocked armor
"enclosing cable should not be construed as a
"raceway". 
Basis: There is no precedent or other known R
reason for considering such cable to be a "raceway". This regulatory position is con sistent with current industry practice, including the provisions of the National Elec tric Code.
 
3. Section 4.3 should be supplemented as.
 
follows: "In general, locating redundant cir cuits and equipment in separate safety class structures affords a greater degree of assur ance that a single event will not affect redun dant systems.
 
This method of separation should be used whenever practicable and where its use does not conflict with other safety objectives."
4. Associated circuits installed in accordance with Section 4.5(1) should be subject to all re quirementa placed on Class lE circuits such as cable derating, environmental qualification, flame retardance, splicing restrictions, and raceway fill unless it can be demonstrated that the absence of such requirements could not significantly reduce the availability of the Class IE circuits.
 
Basis: This is a logical extension of the stanaard's provisions. The specified minimum acceptable separation distances for raceways carrying Class 1E circuits are predicated on assumptions related to flame retardance, cable derating, etc. The placement of cables of lesser qualification in these raceways would nullify these assumptions.
 
5. The "Note" following Section 4.5 should be supplemented as follows: "This exemption is limited and does not extend to other require ments such as those of General Design Criter ion 17."
6. Analyses performed in accordance with Sections 4.5(3), 4.6.2, and 5.1.1.2 should be submitted as part of the Safety Analysis Report and should identify those circuits installed in accordance with these sections.
 
Basis: Extension of Regulatory Guide 1.70,
'Sfhdard Format and Content of Safety Ana lysis Reports for Nuclear Power Plants,"
to provide the information needed in order for the staff to independently verify conformance to the standard.
 
7. Non-Class-lE instrumentation and control circuits should not be exempted from the pro visions of Section 4.6.2.
 
Basis: There is no firm technical basis for an unrestricted exemption of these circuits.
 
Exemptions should be justified by analysis.
 
8. Section 5.1.1.1 should not be construed to imply that adequate separation of redundant circuits can be achieved within a confined space such as a cable tunnel that Is effectively unventilated.
 
9. Section 5.1.1.3 should be supplemented as follows: "(4) Cable splices in raceways should be prohibited."
Basis: Splices have been identified as the n--iUting cause of several fires in raceway$. 
Even where the separation distance is adequate to prevent a fire in the raceways of one division from affecting cables in a
redundant division, all practicable means should be used to prevent the occurrence of a fire. This position against splices in race ways is therefore prudent. Splices are not, by themselves, unacceptable. If they exist, the resulting design should be justified by analyses. The analyses should be submitted as part of the Safety Analysis Report.
 
10. Section 5.1.2, the phrase "at a sufficient number of points" should be understood to mean at intervals not to exceed 5 ft throughout the entire cable length.
 
Also, the preferred method of marking cable is color coding.
 
Basis: This is a logical extension of the nsn-ard's provisions.
 
A
5-ft maximum marking distance is considered necessary to facilitate visual verification that the cable installation is in conformance with separation criteria.
 
11. Section 5.1.2 should be supplemented as follows: "The method of identification used should be simple and should preclude the need to consult any reference material to distinguish between Class 1E and Non-Class-lE circuits, between Non-Class-lE circuits associated with different redundant Class 1E systems, and between redundant Class lE systems."
12. Pending issuance of other acceptable criteria, those portions of Section 5.1.3 (ex clusive of the Note following the second para graph) that permit the routing of power cables through the cable spreading area(s) and, by implication, the control room, should not be construed as acceptable.
 
Also, 'Section 5.1.3 should be supplemented as follows: "Where feasible, redundant cable spreading areas should be utilized."
Basis: This is a prudent specific interpreta
-n--of the standard's provisions in the ab sence of specific guidance. The staff recog nizes that subsequent investigation may prove that this approach is too conservative;
however, in the absence of supporting evidence to the contrary, this conservative approach is desirable.
 
1.75-3
 
The use of redundant cable spreading areas Is aloic" extension of the standard's provi sions re. Section 5.1.1.1). 
13. No significance should be attached to the different tray widths Illustrated in Figure 2.
 
14. Section 5.2.1 should be supplemented as follows:
"And should have independent air supplies,
15. Where ventilation is required, the sepa rate safety. class structures required by Sec tion 5.3.1 should be served by independent.
 
ventilation systems.
 
16. The first paragraph of Section 5.7 should be augmented as follows, "The separation re UNITED STATES
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
WASHINGTON. 0. C. 20551 O*FI*IAL
MJSI NESS
PENALTY FOR PRIVATE USE. 3300
quirements of 5.6 apply to instrumentation cabinets."
D.
 
IMPLEMENTATION
The purpose o this section is to provide in formation to applicants and licensees regarding the NRC staff's plans for using this regulatory guide. This guide reflects current NRC staff practice. Therefore, except in those cases in which the applicant proposes an acceptable alternative method for complying with specified portions of the Commission's regulations, this guide will he used by the NRC staff in evaluat ing all construction permit applications for which the issue date of the Safety Evaluation Report is February 1, 1974, or after.
 
POSTAGI AN: PIECE PAID
U.S. NUCLIAN UEDULATO1"
COMU15gS6ON
1.75-4}}


{{RG-Nav}}
{{RG-Nav}}

Latest revision as of 02:06, 17 January 2025

Physical Independence of Electric Systems
ML003740265
Person / Time
Issue date: 09/30/1978
From:
Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research
To:
References
RG-1.75, Rev 2
Download: ML003740265 (4)


U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

Revision 2 Septsmber 1978 REGULATORY GUIDE

OFFICE OF STANDARDS DEVELOPMENT

REGULATORY GUIDE 1.75 PHYSICAL INDEPENDENCE OF ELECTRIC SYSTEMS

A.

INTRODUCTION

Section 50.55a, "Codes and Standards," of 10

CFR Part 50, "Domestic Licensing of Production and Utilization Facilities,"

requires in paragraph (h) that protection systems meet the requirements set forth in the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers Standard,

"Criteria for Protection Systems for Nuclear Power Generating Stations" (IEEE 279).1 Sec tion 4.6 of IEEE Std 279-1971 (also designated ANSI N42.7-1972) requires, in part, that chan nels that provide signals for the same protec tive function be independent and physically separated. General Design Criterion 3, "Fire Protection," of Appendix A,

"General Design Criteria for Nuclear Power Plants," to I0 CFR

Part 50 requires, in part, that structures, systems, and components important to safety be designed and located to minimize, consistent with other safety requirements, the probability and effect of fires. General Design Criterion 17,

"Electric Power Systems," requires, in part, that the onsite electric power supplies, including the batteries, and the onsite electric distribution system have sufficient in dependence to perform their safety functions assuming a single failure. General Design Cri terion 21,

"Protection System Reliability and Testability," reqxiires, in part, that independ ence designed into protection systems be suffi cient to ensure that no single failure results in loss of the protective function.

This guide describes a method acceptable to the NRC staff of complying with IEEE Std 279

1971 and Criteria 3, 17, and 21 of Appendix A

to 10 CFR Part 50 with respect to the physical independence of the circuits and electric equipment comprising or associanted with the

'Copies may be obtained from the Institute of Eectrical and Electronics Engineers.

United Engintering Center. 345 East

47th Street. New York, New York 10017.

Class 1E power system, the protection system, systems actuated or controlled by the protec tion system, and auxiliary or supporting sys tems that must be operable for the protection system and the systems it actuates to perform their safety-related functions. This guide ap plies to all types of nuclear power plants.

This guide addresses only some aspects of defense against the effects of fires. Additional criteria for protection against the effects of fires are provided in Regulatory Guide 1-120,

"Fire Protection Guidelines for Nuclear Power Plants.,

B.

DISCUSSION

Draft IEEE Standard, "Criteria for Separa tion of Class

1E Equipment and Circuits,"

dated July 20, 1973, was prepared by Ad Hoc Subcommittee

6 of the Nuclear Power Engineering Committee (NPEC) of the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers. The draft was -subsequently modified by NPEC in August. 1973 incident to the normal process of developing its technical content. The modified draft standard provided criteria for the separation of redundant Class IE equipment and circuits installed at nuclear power plants.

Inasmuch as there was an urgent need for explicit guidance in the area of physical inde pendence of electric systems and in view of the considerable guidance already available from the modified -IEEE draft standard, the staff prepared a document entitled "Appendix 1 to Regulatory Guide 1.75 - Physical Independence of Electric Systems." This- Appendix, which was essentially the modified IEEE

draft standardi further modified to (a) address ac ceptably those portions of the standard on which there was not complete agreement, (b)

  • Lines indicate substantive changes from previous issue.

USNRC REGULATORY GUIDES

1egmatumy Guidee am band to &oxbo mid ruW

WsHIMl

&M

Ie pt*1c nietodsoospable to la NRC eteff Of knmoain

0

e- c WW

-

lie Se0ef prob poei*dted

e*derm or so po"

gAdence 10

ml e

I

tdpMry GAd we not hedtfuftn fW mqs, aid arm V1 with lambI not requke. Melsad end sa&udmw ebrn

10

o

  • -oee K ut

& In tho s p ud b e to cepbo ah N lt v ro s a bob fore ta *W

usgmIb~ pw bounnce or earitirwnsoe pe1 i

&

kOr @OWN

b Canuiets aid euggeelion for harovenientah In 0-

gidsa we encoasgjac at eld Oim&oWd rgde w be etwbed. as ep te Pr

c. o d

o th w4d to re~ct ume Inonilon or axpelence. This ii was meted ma mult of eslienei receitved *rom to pidec ond eddkonad gaff rviw.

a imw dsid be em W W In ft liCowN

a Wo ied N eo I. Poum RcOtMrs

s. vmrxon

2. ReeahwdimdTeat Revmo~

7. Traiopution S. Fukl m

od Metmkba F~im

o

=o M

4. Esikonmiirm mid 1::hig

5.ari~itR~

& Mstmwih mid ProectW

a eral feqoast for uhig egooes of bmaed dMn Wkhd noy be uprOduce) or tar i

ancemen aien asmaswefc detkution kt f *de cone of kftns gides

""ons ei*Id be nod& In ug W"

W

U,& Nuch Reg.Aty Comnakn. Wi*kns

.

D.C. Z.

AtmnW

Dkocw.

Dmiden Of Tedhad bInu.on mid Documeo Caga.

I

describe logical extensions of the standard's.

provisions that were acceptable to the staff, and (a) provide clarification where necessary,.

was endorsed by the February 1974 version of this guide.

Subsequent to the issuance of the February

1974 version of this guide, the modified MEEE

draft standard upon which the guide and its Appendix were based evolved, in the normal course of standard development, into IEEE Std 384-1974,

"IEEE Trial-Use Standard Criteria for Separation of Cuss JR Xupmen-

-Cir- cults" (also designated ANSI N41.14). IEEE Std 384-1974 has undergone balloting within Ad Hoc Subcommittee .6 and NPEC and was approved by the IEEE Standards' Board on February 28,

1974. This revision to the guide endorses, with certain exceptions, IEEE Ptd 384-1974.

The NRC staff does not agree with certain"

provisions of the trial-use standard such as those pertaining to the definition of "raceway,"

the routing of power cables through the cable spreading area(s) and control room', and tie status of non-Class-lI circuits that are. not separated from associated circuits by accept able distance or bairiers. This lack of agree ment is reflected in Regulatory Positions C. 1,

2, 4, 6, 7, 9, 10, and 12.

There are also several regulatory positions that are logical extensions of the standard's provisions and reflect current staff review practice.

For example, a provision of the standard that addresses the

"degree of separation commensurate with the damage

3otential of the hazard" does not specifically zover cable tunnels which, in the event of a fire, may not effectively separate redundant circuits or equipment. As another example, the standard requires that methods of identification distinguish between redundant Class

1E

systems, associated circuits, and non-Class-IX

systems.

By implication, associated circuits assigned to different redundant divisions should also be identified.

However, the provision is implicit.

An explicit provision should be provided.

Detailid bases are included herein for those regulatory positions that are significantly at iariance with the standard's provisions. The remaining regulatory positions are logical ex tensions or clarifications of the standard's pro visions.

C.

REGULATORY POSITION

IEEE Std 384-1974 sets forth criteria for the separation of circuits and equipment. that are redundant. The determination of which circuits and equipment are redundant and the degree of redundancy required is outside the scope of this guide and the standard. The standard also sets forth criteria relating to tests and analyses for determining the flame-retardant characteristics of proposed cable installations.

The criteria are acceptable provided such tests and analyses are based on realistic premises and are otherwise fully applicable to the actual.

cable installations.

The guidance in IEEE Std 384-1974, "IEEE

Trial-Use Standard Criteria for Separation of Class IR

Equipment and Circuits,"

dated

,farch 15, 1974, is generally acceptable to the NRC staff and provides an adequate basis for complying with IEEE Std 279-1971 and the Commission's General Design Criteria 3, 17, an& 21- of Appendix A to 10 CFR Part. 50 with.

respect to the physical independence of the circuits and electric equipment comprising or associated with the Class 1E power system, the protection system, systems actuated or controlled by the protection system, and auxiliary or supporting systems that must be operable for the protection system and the systems it actuates to perform their safety related functions, subject to the following:

1. Section 3,

"Isolation Device," should be supplemented as follows:

"(Interrupting de vices actuated only by fault current are not considered to be isolation devices within the context of this document.)"

Basis: Logical extension of the standard's provisions. The standard defines "isolation device" in terms of preventing malfunctions in one section of a circuit from causing un acceptable influences in other sections of the circuit or other circuits. Under the postu lated conditions of a loss-of-coolant accident,.

loss of offsite power, and a cable tray fire, the proximity of circuits energized from re dundant Class 1E power sources could lead to concurrent high fault currents (e.g., short to ground) which, in turn, threaten the re dundant main circuit breakers.

Also, the susceptibility of non-Class-IE loads ener gized from redundant Class 1E power sources to design basis events (e.g., seismic events)

could similarly threaten the redundant main circuit breakers. Tripping of the main circuit breakers would cause the. loss of emergency power to redundant "divisions" of equipment.

It is recognized that proper breaker or fuse coordination would preclude such an event.

However, because the main breakers are in series with the fault and could experience momentary currents above their setpoints, it is prudent to preclude the use of inter rupting devices actuated only by fault cur rent as acceptable devices for isolating non Class-IE circuits from Class 1E or associated circuits.

Breakers that trip on receipt of a signal other than one derived from the fault current or its effects (e.g., an accident signal) are acceptable since the downstream circuits would. already be isolated from their respec tive power sources under accident conditions and could pose no threat to these sources.

1.75-2 KYý

2. Section 3,

"Raceway". Interlocked armor

"enclosing cable should not be construed as a

"raceway".

Basis: There is no precedent or other known R

reason for considering such cable to be a "raceway". This regulatory position is con sistent with current industry practice, including the provisions of the National Elec tric Code.

3. Section 4.3 should be supplemented as.

follows: "In general, locating redundant cir cuits and equipment in separate safety class structures affords a greater degree of assur ance that a single event will not affect redun dant systems.

This method of separation should be used whenever practicable and where its use does not conflict with other safety objectives."

4. Associated circuits installed in accordance with Section 4.5(1) should be subject to all re quirementa placed on Class lE circuits such as cable derating, environmental qualification, flame retardance, splicing restrictions, and raceway fill unless it can be demonstrated that the absence of such requirements could not significantly reduce the availability of the Class IE circuits.

Basis: This is a logical extension of the stanaard's provisions. The specified minimum acceptable separation distances for raceways carrying Class 1E circuits are predicated on assumptions related to flame retardance, cable derating, etc. The placement of cables of lesser qualification in these raceways would nullify these assumptions.

5. The "Note" following Section 4.5 should be supplemented as follows: "This exemption is limited and does not extend to other require ments such as those of General Design Criter ion 17."

6. Analyses performed in accordance with Sections 4.5(3), 4.6.2, and 5.1.1.2 should be submitted as part of the Safety Analysis Report and should identify those circuits installed in accordance with these sections.

Basis: Extension of Regulatory Guide 1.70,

'Sfhdard Format and Content of Safety Ana lysis Reports for Nuclear Power Plants,"

to provide the information needed in order for the staff to independently verify conformance to the standard.

7. Non-Class-lE instrumentation and control circuits should not be exempted from the pro visions of Section 4.6.2.

Basis: There is no firm technical basis for an unrestricted exemption of these circuits.

Exemptions should be justified by analysis.

8. Section 5.1.1.1 should not be construed to imply that adequate separation of redundant circuits can be achieved within a confined space such as a cable tunnel that Is effectively unventilated.

9. Section 5.1.1.3 should be supplemented as follows: "(4) Cable splices in raceways should be prohibited."

Basis: Splices have been identified as the n--iUting cause of several fires in raceway$.

Even where the separation distance is adequate to prevent a fire in the raceways of one division from affecting cables in a

redundant division, all practicable means should be used to prevent the occurrence of a fire. This position against splices in race ways is therefore prudent. Splices are not, by themselves, unacceptable. If they exist, the resulting design should be justified by analyses. The analyses should be submitted as part of the Safety Analysis Report.

10. Section 5.1.2, the phrase "at a sufficient number of points" should be understood to mean at intervals not to exceed 5 ft throughout the entire cable length.

Also, the preferred method of marking cable is color coding.

Basis: This is a logical extension of the nsn-ard's provisions.

A

5-ft maximum marking distance is considered necessary to facilitate visual verification that the cable installation is in conformance with separation criteria.

11. Section 5.1.2 should be supplemented as follows: "The method of identification used should be simple and should preclude the need to consult any reference material to distinguish between Class 1E and Non-Class-lE circuits, between Non-Class-lE circuits associated with different redundant Class 1E systems, and between redundant Class lE systems."

12. Pending issuance of other acceptable criteria, those portions of Section 5.1.3 (ex clusive of the Note following the second para graph) that permit the routing of power cables through the cable spreading area(s) and, by implication, the control room, should not be construed as acceptable.

Also, 'Section 5.1.3 should be supplemented as follows: "Where feasible, redundant cable spreading areas should be utilized."

Basis: This is a prudent specific interpreta

-n--of the standard's provisions in the ab sence of specific guidance. The staff recog nizes that subsequent investigation may prove that this approach is too conservative;

however, in the absence of supporting evidence to the contrary, this conservative approach is desirable.

1.75-3

The use of redundant cable spreading areas Is aloic" extension of the standard's provi sions re. Section 5.1.1.1).

13. No significance should be attached to the different tray widths Illustrated in Figure 2.

14. Section 5.2.1 should be supplemented as follows:

"And should have independent air supplies,

15. Where ventilation is required, the sepa rate safety. class structures required by Sec tion 5.3.1 should be served by independent.

ventilation systems.

16. The first paragraph of Section 5.7 should be augmented as follows, "The separation re UNITED STATES

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

WASHINGTON. 0. C. 20551 O*FI*IAL

MJSI NESS

PENALTY FOR PRIVATE USE. 3300

quirements of 5.6 apply to instrumentation cabinets."

D.

IMPLEMENTATION

The purpose o this section is to provide in formation to applicants and licensees regarding the NRC staff's plans for using this regulatory guide. This guide reflects current NRC staff practice. Therefore, except in those cases in which the applicant proposes an acceptable alternative method for complying with specified portions of the Commission's regulations, this guide will he used by the NRC staff in evaluat ing all construction permit applications for which the issue date of the Safety Evaluation Report is February 1, 1974, or after.

POSTAGI AN: PIECE PAID

U.S. NUCLIAN UEDULATO1"

COMU15gS6ON

1.75-4