ML19343D155
| ML19343D155 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | McGuire  |
| Issue date: | 04/03/1981 |
| From: | Tedesco R Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Parker W DUKE POWER CO. |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8104090633 | |
| Download: ML19343D155 (19) | |
Text
'.
j * * %<
o, UNITED STATES D
I
[jg e, 'j NUCt. EAR REGULATORY COMMISSION wAsmNGTON, D C. 20555
- c, y
' y e, m; w-+....f a
APR 3 1981 ANI f
Nm Docket No.:
50-369 C? "" A 0 7 I98f g 9
7 v, s, Duke Power Company ATTN: William 0. Parker, Jr.
1 Vice President - Steam Production P. O. Box 33189 4
Charlotte, North Carolina 28242
Dear Mr. Parker:
Subject:
Environmental Qualification of Safety-Related Electrical Equipment - Equipment Evaluation Report (McGuire Nuclear Station, Unit 1)
In our letter to you dated February 24, 1981, we provided the results to date of our environmental qualification review-for safety related electrical equipment. We neglected to indicate that the February 24, 1981 enclosure was considered to be a draft document and frem that viewpoint should not have included Sections 1, 2, and 6.
This matter was discussed by the staff at the recent McGuire ASLB hearing at which time the staff stated that we would provide you and the parties to the hearing a revised report which would be properly entitled Equipment Evaluation Report (enclosure) and only contain Sections 3, 4 and 5 (Tr. 4552). As stated at the hearing, this Report does not address the issue of equipment qualification for a postulated hydrogen burn (Tr. 4554-55). That issue was addressed during the course of the recently-completed hearing (Tr. 4554-55).
The enclosure provides the preliminary results of our review of environmental qualifications of safety-related electrical equipment at the McGuire Station.
This evaluation was based on your submittals received over the past months.
You are requested to review our identified deficiencies, and their ramifications, and Irovide us, within 10 days of the date of this letter, your overall finding under oath or affirmation, supporting the safe operation of your facility with regard to compliance with General Design Criterion 4, that takes into account the NRC staff's preliminary list of deficiencies. Compliance with
- 8104090 @
P
2-GDC 4 must be established prior to the issuance of a full power operating license. Corrective action of the deficiency stated in Appendix A must be accomplished prior to power operation. A complete response to the enclosure 1.1cluding your detailed assessment of the. indicated deficiencies will be required after the staff has issued its Safety Evaluation Report on Environmental Qualification.
In accordance with the guidance of the Commission's Memorandum and Order dated May 23, 1980, all electrical equipment subject to this review should be in compliance with NUREG-0588 no later than June 30, 1982.
Sincerely, S '~ k~.c L
a Robert L. Tedesco, Assistant Director for Licensing Division of Licensing
Enclosure:
Equipment Evaluation Report, March 24, 1981 cc:
See next page u
9 1
l l
l
_. ~. _
Mr. William O. Parker, Jr.
Vice President, Steam Production Duke Power Comoany P. O. Box 2178 422 South Church Street Charlotte, North Carolina 28242 cc:
Mr. W. L. Porter Mr.-Tom Donat Duke Power Company Resident Inspector McGuire NPS P. O. Box 2178 c/o U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 422 South Church Street Post Office Box 215 Charlotte, North Carolina ~ 28242 Cornelius, North Carolina 28031 Mr. R. S. Howard Shelley Blum, Esquire Powcr Systems Division 1402 Vickers Avenue Westinghcuse Electric Corocration Ourhan, North Carolina 127707 P. O. Box 355 Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15230 Dr. Richard F. Cole
~ Administrative Judge Mr. E. J. Keith U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission EDS Nuclear Incorporated Washington, D. C.
20555 220 Montgomery Street San Francisco, California 9:104 Mr. J. E. Houghtaling NUS Corcoration 2535 Countryside Boulevard Cl ea rwa te r, Florida 33515
-Mr. Jesse L. Riley, President The Carolina Environmental Study Group 854 Henley Place Charlotte, North Carolina 2S207 J. Michael McGarry, III, Esq.
Debevoise & Liberman 1200 Seventeenth Street, N. W.
Washington, D. C.
20035 f
Robert M. Lazo, Esq., Chairman Atomic Safety and Licensing Board U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D. C.
20555 Dr. Emmeth A. Luebke Atomic Safety and Licensing Board U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D. C.
20555 L
I L_
3 ENCLOSURE 9
~ EQUIPMENT EVALUATION REPORT BY THE-0FFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION EQUIPMENT QUALIFICATION BRANCH FOR DUKE POWER COMPANY McGUIRE. UNIT 1 DOCKET NO.-50-369 0
9 9
EQUIPMENT EVALUATION REPORT BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION EQUIPMENT QUALIFICATION BRANCH FOR DUKE POWER COMPANY McGUIRE UNIT 1 DOCKET NO. 50-369 3 STAFF EQUIPMENT EVALUATION The staff evaluation of the licensee's response included an onsite inspection of selected Class IE equipment, audits of environmental qualification documenta-tion, and an examination of the licensee's report for completeness and accepta-bility. The criteria described in the DOR guidelines and in NUREG-0588, in part, were used as a basis for the staff evaluation of tne adeouacy of the licensee's qualification program.
The NRC Office of Inspection and Enforcement performed an onsite verification inspection (April 30 through May 2, 1980) of selected safety-related electrical equipment.
Selected components in the pressurizer, reactor coolant sample, containment pressure, and cabling systems were inspected at Unit 1.
The inspec-tion verified proper installation of equipment, overall interface integrity, and manufacturers' nameplate data. The manufacturer's name and model number from the nameplate data were compared to information given in the Component Evaluation Work Sheets (CES) of the licensee's report.
The site inspecticn is documented in report IE 50-369/80-7.
No deficiencies were noted.
For this review, the documents referenced above have been factored into the overall staff evaluation.
NRR performed an audit on November 19 and 20, 1980 of environmental qualification documentation and/or test data for 11 items.
No significant concerns were identified during the IE inspection or the NRR audits.
3.1 Completeness of Safety-Related Equioment In accordance with IEB 79-01B and NUREG-0588, the licensee was directed to (1) establish a list of systems and equipment that are required to mitigate a LOCA and an HELB and (2) identify components needed to perform the function of safety-related display information, post-accident sampling and monitoring, and radiation monitoring.
The staff developed a generic master list based upon a review of plant safety analyses and emergency procedures.
The instrumentation selected includes parameters to monitor overall plant performance as well as to monitor the' per-formance of the systems on the list.
The systems list was established on the basis of the functions that must be performed for accident mitigation (without regard to location of equipment relative to hostile environments).
The list of safety related systems provided by the licensee was reviewed against the staff-developed master list.
Based upon information in the licensee's submittal, the equipment location references, and in some cases subsequent conversations with the licensee, the staff has verified and determined that the systems included in the licensee's submittal are those required to achieve or support:
(1) emergency reactor
[
shutdown, (2) containment isolation, (3) reactor core cooling, (4) containment heat removal, (5) core residual heat removal, and (6) prevention of signifi-cant release of radioactive material to the environment.
However, the licensee did not include the main steam isolation system.
The licensee should address or justify the omission of this system.
The staff therefore concludes that the systems identified by the licensee (listed in Appendix 0) are acceptable, with the exception of those items noted above and discussed in Section 5 of this report.
The licensee identified 115 types of equipment items which were assessed by the staff.
- 3. 2 Service Conditions Commission Memorandum and Order CLI-80-21 requires that the DOR guidelines and the "For Comment" NUREG-0588 are to be used as the criteria for establishing the adequacy of the safety-related electrical equipment environmental quali-fication program.
These documents provide the option of establishing a bounding pressure and temperature condition based on plant-specific analysis identified in the licensee's Final Safety Analysis Report (FSAR) or based on generic profiles using the methods identified in these documents.
On this basis, the staff has assumed, unless otherwise noted, that the analysis for developing the environmental envelopes, relative to the temperature, pressure, and the containment spray caustics, has been performed in accordance with tne requirements stated above. The staff has reviewed the qualification documentation to ensure tnat the qualification specifications envelope the conditions established by the licensee.
In addition, the staff assumed, and requires the licensee to verify, that the containment spray system is not subjected to a disabling single-component failure.
Equipment submergence has also been addressed where the possibility exists that flooding of equipment may result from HEL8s.
3.3 Temperature, Pressure, and Humidity Conditions Inside Containment The licensee has provided the results of accident analyses as follows:
Max Temp ( F)
Max Press (psig)
Humidity (%)
LOCA:
Lower compartment 230 14.8
- 100, Upper compartment 180 14.8 100 MSL8:
Lower compartment 327 not provided 100 The staff has concluded that there is reasonable assurance that the actual temperatures and pressures in the plant will not exceed the curves provided for locations anywhere within the containment for these postulated events.
Margins for the test conditions are addressed in Section 3.9 of this evaluatica.
The licensee's minimum temperature profile for qualification purposes is based on a conservative MSLB analytical model that results in temperatures higher than what might realistically be expected; it is therefore acceptable. >
l t
The licensee has not provided a temperature and pressure profile for MSLB accidents in the upper compartment.
The staff will accept the same tempera-ture profile used for LOCA conditions in the upper compartment.
The licensee should either update his equipment summary tables to reflect this change or provide justification for not using this value.
If the latter option is chosen then the licensee should provide the analysis--including the basis, assumptions, and the results in the form of temperature and pressure profile.
If the licensee agrees with the staff's position, the licensee must provide either justification that the equipment will perform its intended function under the specified conditions or propose corrective action.
3.4 Temperature, Pressure, and Humidity Conditions Outside Containment The licensee has provided the temperature, pressure, humidity and applicable environment associated with an HELB outside containment.
The following area outside containment has been addressed:
(1) Auxiliary building The staff has verified that the parameters identified by the licensee for the MSLB are acceptable.
3.5 Submergence The maximum submergence levels have been established and assessed by the licensee.
Unless otherwise noted, the staff cssumed fcr this rev cw that the methodology employed by the licensee is in accordance with the anornoriate criteria as established by Commiss'on Memce - d and M r CLI-EC-C.
The licensee's value for maximum submergence is 740 ft. C in.
Equi;= ant below this level has been identified by the licensee, along with some justification.
The licensee identified 27 safety-related electrical equipment items as having the potential for becoming submerged after a postulated event.
In these cases, the licensee indicated that these components perform their function prior to submergence and are not required to operate after a LOCA.
The licensee should provide an assessment of the failure modes associated with the submergence of these components.
The licensee should also provide assurance that the subsequent failure of these components will not adversely affect any other safety functions or mislead an operator.
Additionally, the licensee should discuss operating time, across the spectrum of events, in relation to the time of submergence.
If the results of the licensee's assessment are acceptable, then these components may be exempt from the submergence parameter of qualification.
3.6 Chemical Spray The licensee's FSAR value for the chemical concentration is 2000 ppm boric acid solution; the exact volume percent used by the vendor for qualification testing should be verified by the licensee.
Therefore, for the purpose of this review, the effects of chemical spray will be considered unresolved.
The staff will review the licensee's response when it is submitted and discuss the resolution in a supplemental report.
y c
1 m
_ e
-m-y anw-s-
e
3.7 Aging NUREG-0588 Category II delineates two aging program rtquirements.
Valve operators committed to IEEE Standard 382-1972 and moters committed to IEEE Standard 334-1971 must meet the Category I requirements of the NUREG.
This requires the establishment of a qualified life, with maintenance / replacement schedules based on the findings.
All other equipment must be subjected to an aging program which identifies aging-susceptible materials within the component.
Additionally, the staff requires the licensee to (1) establish an ongoing program to review surveillance and maintenance records to identify potential age-related degradations (2) establish component maintenance and replacement schedules which include considerations of aging characteristics of tne installea components The licensee identified a number of equipment items for which a specified qualified life was established (for example, 5 years, 15 years, or 40 years).
In its assessment of these submittals, the staff did not review the adequacy of the methodology nor the basis used to arrive at these values; the staff has assumed that the established values are based on state-of-the-art technology and are acceptable.
For this review, however, the staff requires that the licensee submit supple-mental information to verify and identify the degree of conformance to the above requirements.
The response should include all the equipment identified as required to maintain functional operability in harsh environments.
licensee indicated that this phase of the response is outstanding and that the review is in progress.
The staff will review the licensee's response when it is submitted and discuss its evaluation in a supplemental report.
3.8 Radiation (Inside and Outside Containment)
The licensee has provided values for the radiation levels postulated to exist following a LOCA.
The application and methodology employed to determine these values were presented to the licensee as part of the NRC staff criteria con-tained in the DOR guidelines, in NUREG-0588, and in the guidance provided in IE8-79-018, Supplement 2.
Therefore, for this review, the staff has assumed that, unless otherwise noted, the values provided have been determined in accordance with the prescribed criteria.
The staff review determined that the values to which equipment was qualified enveloped the requirements identified by the licensee.
The value required by the licensee inside containment is an integrated dose ranging from 4 x 105 to 1 x 108 rads.
The radiation service condition pro-vided by the licensee is lower (4 x 107 rads) than provided in the 00R guide-lines for gamma and beta radiation.
The licensee is requested to either proiide justification for using the lower service condition or use the service condition provided in the 00R guidelines for both gamma and beta radiation.
If the former option is chosen, then the analysis--including the basis, assump-tions, and a sample calculation--should be provided. -
4 A required value outside containment of 1 x 108 rads has been used by the licensee to specify luniting radiation levels for the annulus ventilation system fans in the auxiliary building.
This value appears to consider the radiation levels influenced by the source term methodology associated with post-LOCA recirculation fluid lines and is therefore acceptable.
3.9 Margi, The staff in its review has determined that the licensee did not in all cases appropriately consider margin.
Therefore, the licensee should review the margin requirements of NUREG-0588, Category II, and upgrade the environmental aualification submittal and component works sheets accordingly, or provide adequate justification for not considering margin.
4 QUALIFICATION OF EQUIPMENT The following subsections present the staff's assessment, based on the licensee's submittal and staff audits, of the qualification status of safety-related electrical equipment.
The staff has separated the safety related equipment into three categories-(1) equipment requiring immediate corrective action, (2) equipment requiring additional qualification information and/or corrective action, and (3) equip-ment considered acceptable if the staff's concern identified in Section 3.7 is satisfactorily resolved.
In its assessment of the licensee's submittal, the NRC staff did not review the methodology employed to determine the values established by the licensee.
However, in reviewing the data sheets, the staff made a determination as to the stated conditior.s presented by the licensee.
Additionally, the staff has not completed its review of supporting documentation referenced by the licen-see (for example, test reports).
It is expected that when the review of test reports is complete, the environmentcl qualification data bank established by the staff will provide the means to cross reference each supporting document to the referencing licensee.
If supporting documents are found to be unacceptable, the licensee will be required to take additional corrective actions to either establish qualifi-cation or replace the item (s) of concern.
This effort will begin in early 1981.
An appendix for each subsection of this report provides a list of equipment for which additional information and/or corrective action is required. Where appropriate, a reference is provided in the appendices to ident fy deficiencies.
i It should be noted, as in the Commission Memorandum and Order, that the deficien-cies identified do not necessarily mean that equipmo,i. is unqualified.
- However, they are cause for concern and may require further case-by-case evaluation.
4.1 Equipment Requiring Immediate Corrective Action Appendix A identifies equipment (if any) in this category.
The licensee was asked to review the facility's safety-related electrical equipment.
The licensee's review of this equipment identified one equipment type requiring immediate corrective action; these items are solenoid valves.
In Significant Deficiency Report SD 369/80-18, the licensee documented that the corrective action for these solenoid valves will be to replace their coils with a coil of a new design which will undergo qualification testing.
The staff will review and evaluate the results of this qualification testing for the new coil design.
With the exception of the above, in this review the staff has not identified any safety-related electrical equipment which is not able to perform its intended safety function during the time in which it must operate.
4.2 Equipment Requiring Additional Inforaation and/or Corrective Action Appendix B identifies equipment in this category, including a tabulation of deficiencies.
The deficiencies are noted by a letter relating ta the legend (identified below), indicating that the information provided is not sufficient for the qualification parameter or condition.
Legend R
- radiation T
- temperature QT qualification time RT - required time P
pressure H
- humidity CS - chemical spray A
- material-aging evaluation; replacement schedule; ongoing equipment surveillance S
- submergence M
- margin I
- HELB evaluation outside containment not completed QM qualification method RPN - ecuipment relocation or replacement; adequate schedule not provided EXN exempted equipment justification inadequate SEN - separate-effects qualification justification inadequate QI qualification information being developed RPS equipment relocation or replacement schedule provided As noted in Section 4, these deficiencies do not necessarily mean that the equipment is unqualified.
However, the deficiencies are cause for concern and require further case-by-case evaluation.
The staff has determined that an acceptable basis to exempt equipcent from qualification, in whole or part, can be established provided the following can be established and verified by the licensee:
(1) Equipment does not perform essential safety functions in the harsh environ-ment, and equipment failure in the harsh environment will not impact safety-related functions or mislead an operator.
(2a) Equipment performs its function before its exposure to the harsh environ-ment, and the adequacy for the time margin provided is adequately justified, and
(2b) Subsequent failure of the equipment as a result of the harsh environr does not degrade other safety functions or mislead the operator.
(3)
'd.e se'~ r-related function can be accomplished by some other designated equipme.
' hat has been adequately qualified and satisfies the single-failure c.!terion.
(4) Equipment will not be subjected to a harsh environment as a result of :he postulated accident.
The licensee is, therefore, required to supplement the information presented by providing resolutions to the deficiencies identified; these resolutions should include a description of the corrective action, schedules for its completion (as applicable), and so forth. The staff will review the licensee's response, when it is submitted, ard discuss the resolution in a supplemental report.
It should be noted that in cases where testing is being conducted, a condition may arise which results in a determination by the licensee that the equipment does not satisfy the qualification test requirements.
For that equipment, the licensee will be required to provide the proposed corrective action, on a timely basis, to ensure that qualification can be established by June 30, 1982.
4.3 Ecuipment Considered Acceptable or Conditionally Acceptable Based on the staff review of the licensee's submittal, the staff identified the equipment in Appendix C as (1) acceptable on the basis that the qualifica-tion program adequately enveloped the specific environmental plant parameters, or (2) conditionally acceptable subject to the satisfactory resolution of the staff concern identified in Section 3.7.
For the equipment identified as conditionally acceptable, the staff determined that the licensee did not (1) complete and document the equipment material review and evaluation to ensure that no known materials susceptible to degradation because of aging have been used, (2) establish an ongoing program to review the plant surveillance and mainte-nance records in order to identify equipment degradation which may be age related, and/or (3) propose a maintenance program and replacement schedule for equipment identified in item 1 or equipment that is qualified for less than the life of the plant.
The licensee is, therefore, required to supplement the information presented for equipment in this category before full acceptance of this equipment can be established.
The staff will review the licensee's response when it is submitted and discuss the resolution in a :iupplemental report.
~
i 5 DEFERRED REQUIREMENTS IEB 79-01B, Supplement 3 has relaxed the time constraints for the submission of the information associated with cold shutdown equipment and TMI lessons-1 learned modific.tions.
The staff has required that this information be pro-vided by February 1,1981.
The staff will provide a supplemental safety evaluation addressing these concerns.
1 i
i f
4
)
1 i
i e
e 9
4 8-4 4
,,-,-,y
,.-,.,,,,.v_.%4.
-.w2,,
--e,- -,
,....,p-
,t
,,,,-,m__.5.%._.,,,
,m,,
.p.._
., -,,,,,.*w F
WP
'++r---v*m-+-m'werew'"
APPENDIX A Equipment Requiring Immediate Corrective Action (Category 4.1)
LEGEND:
Designation for Deficiency R-Radiation T-Temperature QT - Qualification time RT - Required time P-Pressure H-Humidity CS - Chemical spray A-Material aging evaluation, replac;ient schedule, ongoing equipment surveillance 5-Submergence M-Margin I-HELB evaluation outside containment not completed QM - Qualification method RPN - Equipment relocation or replacement, adequate schedule not provided EXN - Exempted equipment justification inadequate SEN - Separate effects qualification justification inadequate QI - Qualification information being developed RPS - Equipment relocation or replacement schedule provided Equipment Description Manufacturer Component No.
Deficiency
- Valve Solenoid Operator VALCOR V70900-21-1 T,H,A,M V70900-21-3
" Items for which NRR conducted an audit of environmental qualification documentation A-1
APPENDIX B Equipment Requiring Additional Information and/or Corrective Action (Category 4.2)
LEGEND:
Designation for Deficiency R-Radiation T-Temperature QT - Qualification time RT - Required time P-Pressure H-Humidity CS - Chemical spray A-Material aging evaluation, replacement schedule, ongoing equipment surveillance S-Submergence M-Margin I-HELB evaluation outside containment not completed QM - Qualification method RPN - Equipment relocation or replacement, adequate schedule not provided EXN - Exempted equipment justification inadequate SEN - Separate effects qualification justification inadequate QI - Qualification information being developed RPS - Equipment relocation or replacement schedule provided Equipment Description Manufacturer Component No.
Deficiency Pressure Transmitters Barton Lot 2 CS,A,M Level Transmitters Barton Lot 2 CS,A,M Level Transmitters (NR)
Barton Lot 2 CS,A,M
- Resistance Temperature Rosemount 176KF CS,A,N Detectors (NR)
Hydrogen Recombiner Westinghouse-A CS,A,M Sturtevant
" Items for wnich NRR conducted an audit of environmental qualification documentation B-1
APPENDIX B (Continued)
Equipment Description Manufacturer Component No.
Deficiency Containment Air Joy / Reliance 2XF-330081 CS,A,M Return Fans
- Hydrogen Skimmer Fans Joy / Reliance 1YF-882315 CS,A,M
- Valve Motor Operators Rotork NA1 QT,A,CS,M Valve Motor Operators Limitorque SMB QT,A,CS,M Valve Solenoid Operators ASCO NP8316E34E CS,QT,A,M Valve Solenoid Operators ASCO NP8316E36E CS,QT,A,M
- Valve Solenoid Operators Target Rock 77CC CS,A,M Containment Air Return Isolation Damper Motors Rotork 11NAZ1 CS,A,M Dif ferential Pressure Solon 7PSIADW CS,A,M Switch Electrical Penetrations 0.G. O'Brien Types A,3,C,0,E,F, QT,CS,A,M G,H,J,K,L,M Control, Instrumentation Okonite EP Insulation CS,A,M and Power Cables Instrumentation Cables Okonite Tefzel 280 Insulation QT,CS,A,M
- Control and Power Anaconda EP and EP/Hypalon CS,A,M Cables Insulation Control Cables Brand Rex XLPE Insulation QT,CS,A,M
- Instrumentation Cables Samuel Moore EP/Hypalon Insulation QT,CS,A,M Cable Terminations /
Raychem WCSF-N QT,CS,A,M Splices Material
- Cable Entrance Seals 3M Co.
XR-5240 QT,CS,A,M Stem Mounted Limit NAMC0 EA-180 QT,CS,A,M Switches EA-740
" Items for wnich NRR conducted an audit of environmental qualification documentation B-2
APPENDIX 8 (Continued)
Equipment Description Manufacturer Component No.
Deficiency Radiation Monitor General Atomics RD-23 T,P,H,R,A,C^,
QT,M,QM,QI Radiation Monitor Rockbestos RSS-6-104 T,P,H,R,A,CS, Cables QT,M,QM,QI Acoustic Monitor TEC 914 T,P.H,A.R.CS, QT,QM,M,QI Pump Motors Westinghouse 72F44587-1573 H,P,A,M,QM Pump Motors Westinghouse 72F44587-2573 H,P,A,M,QM Pump Motors Westinghouse 72F44587-3573 H,P,A,M,QM Pump Motors Westinghouse 72F44587-4573 H,P,A,M,QM Pump Motors Westinghouse 72F4468r1574 H,A,M,QM,P Pump Motors Westinghouse 72F44689-2574 H,A,M,QM,P Pump Motors Westinghouse 72F44689-3574 H,A,M,QM,P Pump Motors Westinghouse 72F44689-4574 H,A,M,QM,P Pump Motors Westinghouse 72F44690-1574 H,A,M,QM,P Pump Motors Westinghouse 72F44690-2574 H,A,M,QM,P Pump Motors Westinghouse 72F44690-3574 H,A,M,QM,P Pump Motors Westinghouse 72F44690-4S74 H,A,M,QM,P Pump Motors Westinghouse 72F36530-1575 R,i.,A,M,QM,P Pump Motors Westinghouse 72F36531-1575 R,H,A',M,QM,P Pump Motors Westinghouse 72L10936-1575 R,H,A,M,QM,P Pump Motors Westinghouse 72L10937-1575 R,H,A,M,QM,P Pump Motors Westinghouse 73F69618-1575 H,A,M,QM,P Pump Motors Westinghout2 73F69618-2575 H,A,M,QM,P B-3
f 1
APPENDIX B (Continued) t Equipment Description Manufacturer Component No.
Deficiency Pump Motors Westinghouse 73F69618-3575 H,A,M,QM,P Pump Motors Westinghouse 73F69618-4575 H,A,M,QM,P Pump Motors Westinghouse 72F44649-1574 H,A,M,QM,P i
Pump Motors Westinghouse 72F44649-2574 H,A,M,QM,P Pump Motors Westinghouse 72F44650-1576 H,A,M,QM,P Pump Motors Westinghouse 72F44650-2576 H,A,M,QM,P Air Handling Unit Reliance 3YF-882311 H,A,M,QM Current / Voltage Alarm Rochester Inst.
ET1215 R H,P,A,M,QM, QT,QI Fuse Bussmann FNA R,H,P,A,M,qM, QT,QI Fuse Bussmann KTK R,H,P,A,M,QM Fuseblock Bussmann 3792 R H,P,A,M,QM Fuseblock Bussmann 3839 R,H,P,A,M,QM
- Fuseblock Bussmann 4439 R,H,P,A,M,QM Fuseblock Bussmann 4575 R,H,P,A,M,QM Indicating Light Cutler-Hammer E29 R,H,P,A,M,QM Optical Isolator Electro-Max 1750123 R,H,P,A,M,QM Power Supply Lambda LCS R,H,P,A,M,QM, QT,QI Relay Cutler-Hammer D23 R,H,P,A,M,QM Relay Cutler-Hammer D26 R,H,P,A,M,QM Relay Struthers-Dunn 219 R,H,P,A,M, QM,T,
" Items for wnicn NRR conducted an audit of envircnmental qualification documentation B-4
APPENDIX B (Continued)
Equipment Description Manufacturer Component No.
Deficiency Relay Agastat 7000 Series R H,P,A,M, QM,T,QT Resistor Ohmite
' Brown Devil R,H,P,A,M, QM,T,QT Surge Suppressor General Semi-Tranzorb R,H,P,A,M, conduc+.or QM
" Switch and Indicating Cutler-Hammer E30 R H,P,A,M, Light QM Switch Cutler-Hammer 10250T R,H,P,A,M, QM Terminal Block States ZWM R,H,P,A,M, QM Terminal Block Buchanan Unknown R,H,P,A,M, QM,QT Valve Solenoid Operators ASCO NP8316E36E QT,H,P,A, M,QM Valve Motor Operators Limitorque SMB H,P,A,M,QM Valve Motor Operators Rotork NA1 H,P,A,M,QM Valve Motor Operators Rotork NA2 H,P,A,M,QM
- Limit Switches NAMCO EA-170 T,H,P,A,M, QM
" Limit Switches NAMCO EA-180 QT,A,M Valve Solenoid Valcor V526 QT,A,tS,M Operators V573 Solenoid Valve Powers 265-0002 R,A Annulus Vent fan Unknown Unknown R,A Unit Control Panel
^ Items for wnich NRR conducted an audit of environmental qualification documentation B-5
APPENDIX B (Continued)
Equipment Description Manufacturer Component No.
Deficiency AVFU Allison Control Unknown Unknown R,A Panel Temperature Controller Love Controls 54 R,A Temperature Controller Love Controls 834 R,A Temperature Controller Love Controls 838 R,A Temperature Controller Love Controls 8134 R,A Temperature Controller Love Controls 8160 R,A Temperature Controller Love Controls 8165 R,A Temperature Controller Love Controls 8173 R,A Temperature Controller Love Controls 8174 R,A Thermostat United Electric 8006-6CS R,A RTO Weed 101-1 R,A 2N-A-3-C-6-2-1 Differential Solon 7PS10W R,A Pressure Switch Differential Solon 7PS1ADW R,A Pressure Switch Diesel Batteries Nife HIP 4 R,A O
8-6
APPENDIX C Equipment Considered Acceptable or Conditionally Acceptable (Category 4.3)
Equipment Description Manufacturer Component No.
Deficiency Pump Motors Westinghouse 71F13494-1572 A
Pump Motors Westinghouse 71F13494-2572 A
Pump Motors Westinghouse 71F13495-1572 A
j Pump Motors Westinghouse 71F13495-2S72 A
Pump Motors Allis-Chalmers Unknown A
Fan Motors Reliance 2YF-273608 A
Fan Motors Reliance 1YF-882812 A
Fan Motors Reliance 1YF-273608 A
Fan Motors Reliance 2YF-882311 A
600 Volt Load Centers Could K-Line A
Motor Control Centers Nelson Electric Class 10350 -
A j
Potential Transformers, Westingnouse PTM-75 A
RCP Switch Gear Motor Operated Dampers Rotork 7A/3MW A
Limit Swtich Micro Switch LSM4N A
Level Transmitters Barton 386A A
C-1
APPENDIX D i
Safety-Related Systems List Function System Emergency Reactor Shutdown Reactor Coolant Reactor Protection Safeguards Actuation Chemical and Volume Control Containment Isolation Containment Isolation Main Feeowater Chemical and Volume Control Component Cooling Residual Heat Removal Auxiliary Feedwater Sampling Safety Injection Reactor Core Cooling Upper Head Injection Residual Heat Removal Accumulators Safety Injection Charging Containment Heat Removal Ice Condenser Containment Spray Residual Heat Removal Core Residual Heat Removal Residual Heat Removal Power Operated Relief Valves Main Feedwater Auxiliary Feedwater Component Cooling Water Service Water Prevention of Significant Release Ice Condenser of Radioactive Material to the Hydrogen Recombiners Environment Containment Radiation Sampling Supporting Systems Emergency Power Safety Equipment Area Ventilation Control Room Habitability 1The NRC staff recognized that there are differences in nomenclature of systems because of plant vintage and engineering design; consequently, some systems performing identical or similar functions may have different names.
In those instances, it was necessary to verify the function of the system (s) with the responsible IE regional reviewer and/or the licensee.
D-1 i
.