ML19347D481
| ML19347D481 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Rancho Seco |
| Issue date: | 03/17/1981 |
| From: | Novak T Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Mattimoe J SACRAMENTO MUNICIPAL UTILITY DISTRICT |
| References | |
| TAC-42507, NUDOCS 8103260090 | |
| Download: ML19347D481 (22) | |
Text
-
r
_s f#"%o
// 0 UNITED STATES 3'
'h NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
{f X WASH mGToN, D. C. 20555 D
l Af..... f P. arch 17, 1981 c) Y! ), q,
//f Q
/
Cocket No. 50- 312 g
s J ~#
'F
'0? h [ M k
4
?D "r. J. J. ilatticoe Assistant General !!ar.ager and g9 yJ 4@#
j Chief Engineer
%\\g Sacramento flunicipal Utility District i
6201 S Street P. O. Box 15830 Sacramento, California 95813
Dear Mr. flattiroe:
SU3 JECT: ENVIRCNPENTAL QUALIFICATION CF SAFETY-RELATED ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT RE:
PANCHO SECO NUCLEAR GENEPATItiG STATION, LICENSi NO. DPR-54 Referste: Order for Modification of License Concerning the Environmental
~
Qualification of Safety-Related Electrical Equipment, October 24, 1980.
This letter transmits the preliminary results of our review of environmental qualifications of safety-related electrical equipment at your facility.
This evaluation was based on your submittals received over the past months.
The facility license was modified by the referenced Order of October 24, 1980, to require that all safety-related electrical equipment be qualified to
, specified requirements not later than June 30, 1982.
In addition, the Order noted that.a licensee is obligated to modify or replace inadequate equipment promptly.
The staff's review of your submittals has resulted in our identifying a number of potential equipcent deficiencies involving a lack of proper documentation, inadequate justification of assumed environmental conditions following an accident, and/or inadequate environmental testing of equipment, such that conformance to the DOR guidelines, as required by the Order, cannot be demonstrated. You are requested to review our identified deft-ciencies, and their ramifications, and provide us your overall finding regarding continued safe operation of your facility. Accordingly, in order to deternine whether your license should be modified or suspended, you are required pursuant to 10 CFR 50.54(f), to provide within 10 days of receipt of this letter, a written statement, signed under oath or affirmation sup-porting the safe operation of your facility, that takes into account the NRC staff's preliminary list of deficiencies.
8103260 0 %
~
P
a
. The purpose of this statement is to provide the NRC with needed assurance,
)y the licensee, regarding 'he continued safety of the facility until you i pan provide an item-by-f tem ier; valuation in a detailed documented manner at
'.a l ater date. A negative finding on your part concerning the safety of continued operstion would result in a unit shutdown, and should be reported as a Licensee Ev 't Report (LER) within twenty-four (24) hours of the deter-nimation to the appropriate NRC Regional Office.
Include in the LER the actions you have taken for the immediate resolution of the matter. A copy of any such LER should be sent to the Director, Division of Licensing, Office of Naclear Reactor Regulation.
Please submit a copy of your reply to us via telecopy.
Sincerely,
~
s A
7 M.*7 Thomas M. Novak, Assistant Director for Operating Reactors Division of Liceriing
Enclosure:
Evaluation Report cc w/ enclosure:
See t. ext page
-a
-a
Sacramento Municipal Utility Rancho Seco, Docket No. 50-312 District cc w/ enclosure (s):
David S. Kaplan, Secretary and Christopher Ellison, Esq.
General Counsel Dian Grueufch, Esq.
6201 S Street California Energy Comission P. O. Box 15830 1111 Howe Avenue Sacramento, California 95813 Sacramento, California 95825 Sacramento County Ms. Eleanor Schwartz Board of Supervisors California State Office 827 7th Street, Room 424 600 Pennsylvania Avenue, S.E., Rm. 201 Sacramento, California 95814 Washington, D. C.
20003 Business and Municipal Department Docketing and Service Section Sacramento City-County Library Office of the Secretary 828 I Street U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Cocrnission Sacramento, California 95814 Washington, D. C.
20555 Resident-Inspector / Rancho Seco Director, Crite ia and Standards c/o U. S. N. R. C.
Division 14410 Twin Cities Road Office of Radiation Programs (A14R-460)
Herald, CA 95638 U. S. Environa ntal Protection Agency Washington, D. C.
20460 Dr. Richard F. Cole atomic Safety & Licensing Board Panel U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission U. S. Environment'al Protection Agency Washington, D. C.
20555 Region IX Office ATTN: EIS COORDINATOR Mr. Frederick J. Shon 215 Fremont Street Atomic Safety and Licensing Board San Francisco, California 94111 Panel U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission Mr. Robert B. Borsum Washington, D. C.
20555 Babcock & Wilcox Nuclear Power Generation Division Elizabeth S. Bowers, Esq.
Suite 420, 7735 Old Georgetown Road Chaiman, Atomic Safety and Bethesda, Maryland 20014 Licensing Boarc Panel U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission Thomas Baxter, Esq.
Washington, D. C.
20555 Shaw, Pittman, Pctts & Trowbridge 1800 M Street, N.W.
Mr. Michael R. Eaton Washington, D. C.
20036 Energy Issues Coordinator Sierra Club Legislative Office Herbert H. Brown, Esq.
1107 9th Street, Room 1020 Lawrence Coe Lanpher, Esq.
Sacramento, California 95814 Hill, Christopher and Phillips, P.C.
1900 M Street, N.W.
Atomic Safety and Licens%g Board Washington, D. C.
20036 Panel
' S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission Helen Hubbard Washington, D. C.
20555 P. O. Box 63 Sunol, California 94586
Sacramento Municipal Utility ;
District 2
Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Board Panel U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission Washington, D. C.
20555
~
California Department of Health ATTN: Chief. Environmental Radiation Control Unit Radiological Health Section
' 714 P. Street, Room 498 Sacramento, California 95814 1
1
PARTIAL REVIEW EQUIPMENT EVALUATION REPORT BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION i
FOR SACRAMENTO MUNICIPAL UTILITY DISTRICT RANCHO SECO UNIT 1 DOCKET NO. 50-312 3 STAFF EQUIPMENT EVALUATION The staff evaluation of the licensee's response included an onsite inspection of selected Class IE equipment and an examination of the licensee's report for completeness and acceptability.
The criteria described in the 00R guidelines and in NUREG-0588, in part, were used as a basis for the staff evaluation of the adeqt.acy of the licensee's qualification program.
The NRC Office of Inspection and Enforcement performed (1) a preliminary evaluation of the licensee's response, documented in a technical evaluation report (TER) and (2) onsite verification inspections (April and December 1980) of selected safety-related electrical equipment.
The containment isola-tion system was inspected.
The inspection verified proper installation of equipment, overall interface integrity, and manufacturers' nameplate data.
The mancfacturer's name and model number from the nameplate data were compared to ir. formation given in the Component Evaluation Work Sheets (CES) of the licensee's report.
The site inspection is doc.emented in report IE 50-312/80-37.
No deficiencies were noted.
For this review, the documents referenced above have been f-tored into the overall staff evaluation.
3.1 Completeness of Safety-Ralated Equipment In accordance with IEB 79-010. 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.
l The staff developed a generic master list based upon a review of plant safety l
analyses and emergency procedures.
The instrumentation celected includes parameters to monitor overall plant performance as well as to monitor the per-farmance 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 on the licensee's submittal, the staff has concluded that the information on safety-related systems included in the submittal is insufficient to verify j
that those systems are all the systas required to achieve or support:
(1) emergency reactor shutdown, (2) containsent isolation, (3) reactor core cooling, (4) containment heat removal, (5) core residual heat removal, and (6) prevention of significant release of radioactive material to the environment.
The staff acknowled;;es the licenset's effort to include only those safety-related systems
located in a potential y harsh environment.
lawever, tais review recuires the listirg of all safety-related systems, both inside and )utsice cotentially harsh environments.
The list of safety-related systens submittec Dy the licensee is included in Appendix 0.
Display instrumentaticr. which provides information for the re.ctor operators to aid them in the safe handling of the plant was not soecif.sily identified by the licensee.
A complete list of all display instrument ion centioned in the LOCA anc HELS emergency procecures must be provided.
!.uic:ent cualifi-cation information in the form of su==ary sheets should be provided for all components of the display instrumentation exoosed to narsh environments.
Instrumentation which is not consicered to be safety related but.hirn is mentioned in the emergency procedure snould appear on the list.
For these instruments, (1) justification should be proviced for not considering the instrument safety related and (2) assurance shculd te provided that its subse-quent failure will not misleac the acerato or adversely affect the mitigation of the consequences of the accident.
The environmental qualification of post-accident sampling and monitoring and radiation monitoring equipment is closely related to the review of the TMI Lessons-Learned modifications and will be performed in conjunction with tnat review.
The licensee identified 204 items of equipment wnich 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 equip =ent enviror. ental quali-fication program.
These docu=ents 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 'n these documents.
On this basis, the staf f has assumed, unl~ss otherwise noted, that the analysis for developing the environmental envelope for Rancho Seco Unit 1, relative to the temperature, pressure, and the containment spray caustics, has been perfor:ed in accordance with the requirements stated above. The staff has reviewed the qualification documentation to ensure that the qualification specifications envelope the conditions established by the licensee.
During this review, the staff assumed that for plants designed and equipped with an automatic containment spray system wnich satisfies the single-failure criterion, the main-steam-line-break (MSLS) environmental conditions are enveloped by the large-break-LOCA environmental conditions. However, Rancho Seco Unit I has an automatic spray system with a delayed initiation.
Therefore, in accordance with Section 4.2.1 of the DOR guidelines, equipment inside containment snould be qualified for an MSLS environment.
This is discussed in Section 3.3 below.
' Equipment submergence has also been addressed where the possibility exists that flooding of equipment may result from HEL3s. _
3.3 Temoerature, Pressure, and Humidity Conditions Inside Containment The licensee has provided the results of accident analyses as follows:
Max Temo ('F)
Max Press (osic)
Humidity (*.)
LOCA 286 52 100 The staff nas concluded that the minimum temperature profile for equipment qualification purposes should include a margin to account for nigner-than-average temperatures in the upper regions of the contair. ment that can exist due to stratification, especially folicwing a postulated MSL3.
Use of the steam saturation temperature corresponding to the total building pressure (partial pressure of steam plus partial pressure of air) versus time will provide an acceptable margin for either a postulated LOCA or MSLS, whichever is control-ling, as to potential adverse environmentzi effects on cquipment.
The licensee's specified temperature (serv! a condition) of 286 F does not satisfy the above requirement. A saturation te;;;perature corresponding to the peak profile (299 F peak temperattre at 52 psig) should be used instead.
The licensee should update his equipment summary tables to reflect this c h ngt.
If there is any equipment that does not meer. the staff position, the liceriee must provide either justification that the equipment will perform its inteaded function under the specified conditions or propose corrective action.
The licensee states that the electrical equipment inside containment has been compared to the LOCA environment to determir.e qualification.
However, an analysis is bei'g performed to determine if the LOCA qualification conditions exceed or are equivalent to the maximum calculated MSLB conditions.
This analysis is scheduled for completion by June 30, 1981.
If it is determined that the MSLB environmental conditions are not enveloped by the LOCA conditions, the licensee should then update his equipment work sheets and either show that tne equipment is qualified to the M5LB environment or propose corrective action.
3.4 Temperature. Pressure, and Humidity Cenditions Outside Containment The licensee has provided the temperature, pressure, humidity and applicable i
environment associated with an HELB outside containment.
The following areas outside containment have been addressed:
(1) West decay heat pump room (001)
(
(2) Em decay heat pump room (002) l (3) HPI pump room B (043)
(4) Make-up pump room (044)
(5) Seal return cooler room (046)
(6) East penetration room (051)
(7) West penetration room (052)
(8) HPI. pump room A (053)
The staff has verified that the' parameters identified by the licensee for the HELBs are acceptable, with the exception of Room 053, HPI pump room A.
It was [
noted during the December 1980 IE site visit that the environmental prof'le for Room 053 does not include the effects of a break within the room of a steam line passing through the room.
Instead, the profile shows the conditions within the room as a result of a break external to the room.
Therefore, the licensee should revise the environmental profile for tnis room and update the component work sheets accordingly.
3.5 Submercence The maximum submergence levels have been establisned and assessed by the licensee.
Unless otherwise noted, the staff assumed for this review that the methodology employed by the licensee is in accordance with the appropriate criteria as established by Commission Memorandum and Order CLI-80-21.
The licensee's value for maximum submergence is 8 ft.
Ecuipment below this level has been icentified by tne licensee.
The licensee identi'ied 19 safety-related electrical components--S Bailey Meter level transmitte 3, 8 Bailey Meter flow transmitters, 3 Limitorque motor operated valves, and associated Cerro cable and Scotch insulation tape--as havir.1 the potential for becoming submerged after a postulated event.
The Cerro ca0le is qualified for submer-gence; the Bailey Meter levtl and flow transmitters perform their functions prior to submergence.
The Limitorque motor-operatec valves are used only to isolate the letdown coolers in the event of a tube ructure in the coolers, and they will not be subject to submergence during this event.
These velves are not required to operate after a LOCA when they could become submerged.
The Scotch insulation tape is used to insulate connections on she above equipment which, as stated previously, either performs its functions before submergence or is not required when subject to submergence.
For the equipment items discussed above, the licensee should provide an assess-ment of the failure modes associated with their submergence.
The licensee should also provide assuranca that the subsequent failure of these components will not adversely affect any other safety functions or mislead an operator.
Additionally, L1e licensee should discuss operating time, across the spectrum of events, in relatica to the time of submergence.
If the results of the licensee's assessment are acceptable, then the equipment may be exe.npt from the submergence parameter of qualification.
3.6 Chemical Soray The licensee provided only a value for the pH of the spray (that is, 9.3-9.5) and did not identify the concentration of :oric acid.
Further, no specific boric acid concentration or pH was given for the cualification environment.
Therefore, for the purpose of this review, the effects of cnemical spray aill te consicered unresolved.
The staff will review :ne licensee's response when it'is su mitted and ciscuss the resolution in a supplemental report.
3.7 Aging Section 7 cf the CCR guicelines cces not recuire a ;ualified life to te estao-listed fer all safety-relatec electrical ecui: ment.
However, tne following actions are recuirec:
(1) Make a detailed comparison of existing equipment and the materials identi-fied in Appendix C of the 00R guidelines.
The first supplement to IEB-79-OlB requires licensees to utilize the table in Appendix C and identify any additional materials as the result of their effort.
(2) Establish an ongoing program to review surveillance and maintenance records to identify potential age-related degradations.
(3) Establish component maintenance and replacement schedules which include considerations of aging characteristics of the installed components.
The licensee identified a number of equipment items for which a specified qualified life of 40 years was established.
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.
The 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 D0R guidelines, in NUREG-0588, and in the guidance provided in IEB-79-01B, 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 of 1 x 10s rads.
This value envelopes the 00R guideline requirements and is therefore acceptable.
A required value outside containment of 5.5 x 107 rads has been used by the licensee to specify limiting radiation levels within Rooms 001 and 002 of the auxiliary building.
This value appears to consider the radiation levels influ-enced by the source term methodology associated with post-LOCA recirculation fluid lines and is therefore acceptable.
4 QUALIFICATION OF EQUIPMENT The following subsections present the staff's assessment, based on the licensee's submittal, of the qualification status of safety-related electrical equipment.
The staff hcs separated the safety-related equipment into three categories:
(1) equipeent requiring immediate corrective action, (2) equipment requiring additional walification information and/or corrective action, and (3) equip-ment considv ed 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 conditions 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 environmental 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 wil' be ret Jired to take additional corrective actions to either establish qualifi-cation or replace the item (s) of concern.
This effort will becin 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 identify deficiencies.
It should be noted, as in the Commission Memorandum and Order,4that the deficien-cies identified do not necessarily mean that equipment is unqualified.
- However, they are cause for concern and may require further case-by-case evaluation.
4.1 Equipment Requiring Immediate Corre_ctive Action Equ pment Recuiring Additional Information and/or Corrective Actick 4.2 Appendix B identifies equipment in this category, including a tabulation pf deficiencies.
The deficiencies are noted by a letter relating to the leghnd (identified below), indicating that the information provided is not sufficient for the qualification parameter or condition. _
Leoend R
radiation T
- temperature QT qualification time RT - required time P
pressure H
- humidity i
CS chemical spray A
- material-aging evaluation; replacement tchedule; ongoing equipment surveillance S
- submergence M
margin I
- HELS evaluation outside containment not completed CM 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 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 equipment 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 environment does not degrade other safety functions or mislead the operator.
(3) The safety-related function can be accomplished by some other designated equipment that has been adequately qualified and satisfies the single-failure criterion.
(4) Equipment will not be subjected to a harsh environment as a result of the postulated accident.
The licensee is, therefore, required to supplement the information presented by providing resolutions.to the deficiencies identified; these resolutions should incluce 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, and discuss the resolution in a supplemental report.
~
1 It should be noted that in caser, 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, nn a timely basis, to ensure that qualification can be established by June 30, 1982.
4.3 Ecuipment Considered Acceptabla or Conditionally Acceotable Based on the staff review of the licensee's submittal, the staff identified the equipment in Appendix C as (1) acceptacle on the basis that the qualifi-cation program adequately envelooed the specific environmental plant parameters, or (2) conditionally acceptable subject to the Jatisfactory resolution of the staff concern identified in Se: tion 3.7.
For the equipment icentified as conditionally acceptable, the staff cetermined that the licensee did not clearly (1) state that an equipment material evaluation was conducted to ensure that no kr;cwn materials susceptible to degradation because of aging have been
- used, (2) est.ablish.an ongoing program to review the plant surveillance and main-tenance 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 sub-mitted and discuss the resolution in a supplemental report.
5 DEFERRED REQUIREMENTS IEB 79-019, Supplement 3 has relaxed the time constraints for the submission of the information associated with cold shutdown equipment and 1MI lessons-learned modifications.
The staff has required that this information be provided by February 1, 1981. The staff will provide a supplemental safety evaluation addressing these concerns.
_g.
APPENDIX B Equipment Requiring Additional Information and/or Corrective Action (Category 4.2)
LEGEND:
Desicnation 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 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 Plant ID No.
Deficiency Motor Operated Valve Limitorque HV20609 CS,A Motor Operated Valve Limitorque HV20610 CS,A Motor Operated Valve Limitorque HV20611 QT,T,P,H,R,A Motor Operated Valve Limitorque SFV22023 T,P,CS,R,A Motor Operated Valve Limitorque SFV24004 CS,A Motor Operated Valve Limitorque SFV46203 CS,A Motor Operated Valve Limitorque SFV46907 CS,R,A Motor Operated Valve Limitorque SFV53504 QT,T,P,H,CS,R,A Motor Operated Valve Limitorque SFV53603 CS,R,A B-1,
APPENDIX B (Continued)
Equipment Descriotion Manufacturer Plant 10 No.
Deficiency Motor Operated Valve Limitorque SFV53605 QT,T,P,H,CS,R,A Motor Operated Valve Limitorque SFV60001 CS,A Motor Operated Valve Limitorque SFV60003 R,A Motor Operated Valve Limitorque SFV70u03 QT,T,P,H,CS,R A Motor Operated Valve Limitorque SFV70003 QT,T,P,H,CS,R,A Motor Operated Val".
Limitorque SFV72501 CS,R,A Level Transmitter Bailey Meter LT26505 QT,T,P,H,CS,R,A Level Transmitter Bailey Meter LT26506 QT,T,P,H,CS,R,A Level Transmitter Bailey Meter LT26507 QT,T,P,H,CS,R,A Level Transmitter Bailey Meter LT26508 QT,T,P,H,CS,R,A Motor Allis Chalmers A529D QM Motor Allis Chalmers A529E QM Motor Westinghouse P261A QM Motor Westinghouse P2618 QM Flow Transmitter Bailey Meter FT26048 M,A Flow Transmitter Bailey Meter FT26049 M,A Flow Transmitter Bailey Meter FT26003 QT,T,P,H,R,A,RPS Flow Transmitter Bailey Meter FT26004 QT,T,P,H,R,A,RPS Motor Operated Valve Limitorque HV20001 CS,A Motor Operated Valve Limitorque HV20002 CS,A Motor Operated Valve Limitorque HV20003 QT,T,P,H,CS,R,A Motor Operated Valve Limitorque HV26008 T,M,A Motor Operated Valve Limitorque HV26038 T,M,A B-2
ADF5SDIX 3 (Cor.tir.ued)
I EcuiOrent Descri:: tion Fanufacturer Piar.t IO No.
Ce'icie cy Motor C::erated Valve Lisitor:ce W25105 R,A 2'otor C;:erated Vaive Limitare:.e
-V251C5 R.A Fator Ocerated 'talve Limitorcue 5F/25003 T.R.A 1
Motor Ocerated valve Limitorcue SFV25C04 R,A t
Motor Cterated Valve Li itortue iP/25C05 T.R,A Soter 0::erated Valve Li=itorque SF/25005 T,R,A Mo Or C;erated Valve Li=itercue SF/25040 T,M,;
Limit 5 iten NAFC0 HV20001-300 T.D,H,C5,A l
Limit 5-itch NANCO if/20001-330 T,P.H.C5,A Motor Joy A500A CS,A Meter Jcy A50C3 C5,A Motor Joy ASC00 CS,A Motor Joy A5000 C5,A Motor Jcy A532A C5,A Motor-Joy A5323 CS,A t
l Motor Joy A532C CS,A i
& tor Jcy A5320 CS,A Level Transmitter Sailey Meter LT20503A C5,A,5,M Level Transmitter Bailey Meter LT205033 C5,A,5,M Level Transmitter Bailey Meter LT20503C CS,A,5.M i
Level Transmitter Bailey Meter LT205030 CS,A,5,M Level Transmitter Bailey Nter LT20504A CS,R,A,5 i
Level Transmitter Bailey Meter LT205043 C5,R,A.5 S-3
.. +,
4
APPENDIX B (Continued)
Equipment Description Manufacturer Plant ID No.
Deficiency Level Transmitter Bailey Meter LT20504C CS,R,A,5 Level Transmitter Bailey Meter LT20504D CS R,A,5 Motor Operated Valve Limitorque SFV26016 T,M,A Motor Operated Valve Limitorque SFV26018 T,M,A Motor Operated Valve Limitorque SFV50005 R,A Motor Operated Valve Limitorque SFV50006 R,A Motor Operated Valve Limitorque SFV50007 R,A Motor Operated Valve Limitorque SFV50008 R,A Motor Operated Valve Limitorque SFV50009 R,A Motor Operated Valve L. nitorque SFV50010 R,A Motor Operated Valve Limitorque SFV50011 R,A Motor Operated Valve Limitorque SFV50012 R,A Motor Westinghouse P291A QM,A Motor Westinghouse P2918 QM,A Motor Operated Valve Limitorque SFV29015 R,A Motor Operated Valve Limitorque SFV29016 R,A Motor Operated Valve Limitorque SFV29107 QT,T,P,H,R,A Motor Operated Valve Limitorque SFV29108 QT,T,P,H,R,A Motor Operated Valve Limitorque HV21505 CS,A Motor Operated Valve Limitorque HV21515 QT,T,P,H,CS,R,A Motor Operated Valve Limitorque HV21517 CS,A Motor Operated Valve Limitorque HV22005 CS,A,5 Motor Jperated Valve Limitorque HV22006 CS,A,5
'B-4
AF ENDIX 3 (Ccntinuec)
Ecuip:ent Descriction Manufacturer 31 ant 10 'e.
Deficiency Motor 0:eratec Valve Limitercue MV22025 OT,T,3,H,05,R,A,5 Level Transsitter Sailey Meter LT21503A C5,R,A Level Transmitter Bailey Meter LT215035 05,R,A Level Transmitter Bailey Meter LT21503C CS,R,A Ters. Element Resereunt TE21023*
CM.C5,A,M Terp. Ele:ent Rose: cunt TE210235 GM,CS,A,M Tero. Ele:ent Rose: cunt TE21024A CM,CS,A,M Te:o. Element Resezcunt TE2102A3 Gw,C5,A,M Tero. Element Rose: cunt TE21031A GM,C5 A.M Te c. Ele:ent Rose: cunt TE210313 CM,CS,A,M Terp. Ele:ent Rosecount TE21032A QM,CS,A,M Temp. Element Rese cunt TE210323 (M,CS,A M Flew Transmitter Sailey Meter FT21027A CS,M,A,5 Flew Transmitter Bailey Meter FT210273 CS,M.A,5 Flow Transmitter Sailey Meter FT21027C CS,M.A,5 Ficw Transmitter Sailey Meter FT210270 C5,M A,5 Ficw Transmitter Bailey Meter FT2102EA C5,M,A,5 Flow Transmitter Beiley Meter FT210233 C5,M A,5 Flow Trans=itter Bailey Meter FT2102SC C5,M.A,5 Flow Transmitter Bailey Meter-
~FT2102SD C5,M,A,5 Pressure Switen Mercoid PSH53606 QT,T,P,H,R,A Pressure Switch Mercold PSM53617 QT,T,P,H,R A Pressure Seiten Mercoid PSH53619 QT,T,",H,R A 3-5 1
APPENDIX B (Continued)
Equipment Description Manufacturer Plant 10 No.
Deficiency Pressure Switch Mercoid PSH53620 QT,T,P,H,R,A Pressure Transmitter Westinghouse PT21037 QT,T,P,H,CS,R,A,RPS Pressure Transmitter Westinghouse PT21038 QT,T,P,H,CS,R,A,RPS Pressure Transmitter Westinghouse PT21039 QT,T,P,H,CS,R,A,RPS Pressure Transmitter Westinghouse PT21040 QT,T,P,H,CS,R,A,RPS 1
Temp. Element Rcsemount TE21029 CS,M,A,QM Temp. Element Rosemount TE21030 CS,M,A,QM Temp. Element Rosemount TE21033 CS,M,A,QM Temp. Element Rosemount TE21034 CS,M,A,QM Pressure Transmitter Foxboro PT21J42 CS,R,A,QM Pressure Transmitter Foxboro PT21043 CS,R,A,QM Pressure Transmitter Foxboro PT21092 CS,R,A,QM Pressure Transmitter Foxboro PT53606B T,R,A,QM Pressure Transmitter Foxboro PT53607 R,A,QM,M P. assure Transmitter Foxboro PT53608 M,R,A,QM l
Pressure Transmitter Rosemount PT21099 CS,R,A,QM Motor Allis Chalmers A529A T,A,QM Motor Allis Chalmers A5298 T,A,QM Motor-A771s Chalmers A529C T,A,QM Motor Westinghouse P236 T,A,QM Motor Westinghouse P238A T,A,QM Motor Westinghouse P2388 T,A,QM Flow Transmitter Bailey Meter Ff2J606 QT,T,P,H,R,A B-6
APPENDIA B (Continued)
Equipment Descriotion Manufacturer Plant ID No.
Deficiency Flow Transmitter Bailey Meter FT23805 QT,T,P,H,R,A Flow Transmitter Bailey Meter FT23806 QT,T,P,H,E,A Flow Transmitter Bailey Meter FT23807 QT,T,P,H,R,A Flow Transmitter Bailey Meter FT23808 QT,T,P,H,R,A Switch I.T.E Imcerial HSDP236 QT,T,P,H,R,A Switch GE H8?23508 QT,T,P,H,R,A Switch GE H8PA529B QT,T,P,H,R,A Motor Operated alve Limitorque HV23801 QT,T,P,H,CS,R,A Motor Operated Valve L1mitorque HV23802 QT,T,P,H,CS,R,A Motor Operated Valve Limitorque SFV23508 QT,T,P,H,R,A Motor Operated Valve Limitorque SFV23604 R,A Motor Operated Valve Limitorque SFV23616 T,M,A Motor Operated Valve Limitorque SFV23809 R,A Motor Operated Valve Limitorque SFV23810 R,A Motor Operated Valve Limitorque SFV23811 R,A Motor Operated Valve Limitorque SFV23812 R,A Electrical Penetrations Conax H7RP CS,M,A Cable Cerro Various T,CS,A Containment
' Terminal Blocks Kulka Various CS,R,A Containment Terminal Blocks Square D Various QT,T,P,H,R,A,RPS Outside Containment Insulation Tape Scotch Varicus QT,T,P,H,CS,R,A,5,RPS Containment B-7
APPENDIX B (Continued)
Equipment Description Manufacturer Plant ID No.
Deficiency Motor perated Valve Limitorque HV26007 T,A Motor Operated Valve Limitorque HV26037 T,A Motor Operated Valve Limitorque HV26046 M,A Motor Operated Valve Limitorque HV26047 M,A Motor Operated Valve Limitorque HV26039 T,A Motor Operated Valve Limitorque SFV26017 T,A Motor Operated Valve Limitorque SFV26019 T,A Motor Operated Valve Limitorque SFV23645 M,A Motor Operated Valve Limitorque SFV23646 M,A I
I l
l l
B-8
APPENDIX C Equipment Considered Acceptable or Conditionally Acceptable (Category 4.3)
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 - Subt argence i
M - Mart n 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 Plant ID No.
Deficiency Motor Operated Valve Limitorque SFV66308 A
600 V Power Control Cerro Various A
and Instrumentation Aux. Building Cable C-1
APPENDIX 0 Safety-Related Systems List Containmeat Isolatien System Core Flood System Control Rod Drive i
Decay Heat
' Heating Venting System Main Feedwater System Main Steam System Nuclear Service Cooling Water System Reactor Building Spray System Reactor Coolant System
. Reactor Protection System Safety Feature System Seal Injection and Makeup System
+
Interfaces 0-1
_