ML20112J145
| ML20112J145 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Byron, Braidwood, 05000000 |
| Issue date: | 07/31/1983 |
| From: | Borgen R, Weber D, Yost M EG&G, INC. |
| To: | NRC |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20105B661 | List: |
| References | |
| CON-FIN-A-6415, FOIA-84-262 EGG-EA-6332, NUDOCS 8501180186 | |
| Download: ML20112J145 (30) | |
Text
__________ _ _ _ _ _ _
L EGG-EA-6332 JULY 1983 AUDIT OF THE ENVIR0flMENTAL QUALIFICATION OF SAFETY-RELATED ELECTRICAL EQUIPMEllT AT THE BYRON UNITS 1 AND 2 AND BRAIDWOOD UNITS 1 AND 2 R. A. Borgen D. A. Weber M. W. Yost 8501180196 840524 W$$L
-262 PDR Prepared for the U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Under DOE Contract No. OE-AC07-761001570 FIN No. A6415
+
'M
i EGG-EA-6332 i
l AUDIT OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL QUALIFICATION OF SAFETY-RELATED ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT AT BYRON UNITS 1 AND 2, AND BRAIDWOOD UNITS 1 AND 2 i
Docket Nos. 50-454, -455, -456, and -457 R. A. Borgen D. A. Weber M. W. Yost Published July 1983 Reliability and Statistics Branch i
Engineering Analysis Division EG&G Idaho, Inc.
l t
Prepared for the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.
20555 I
under DOE Contract No. OE-AC07-76IO01570 FIN No. A6415 l
?
d i
ABSTRACT Byron Units 1 and 2, and Braidwood Units 1 and 2 were audited to determine the environmental qualification of safety-related electrical equipmeni. Results of the audit are summart:ed in this report.
l i
i f
i 1
1 1
4 4
NRC FIN No. A6415--Equipment Qualification Case Reviews 11
SUMMARY
An audit of the environmental qualification of safety-related electrical equipment at Byron Units 1 and 2, and Braidwood Units 1 and 2 was conducted by a team composed of representatives of the Reliability and Statistics Branch of EG&G Idaho, Inc., and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staff. Qualification deficiencies for individual equipment items are provided in Appendix A.
Summaries of the central file reviews are provided in Appendix B.
It was concluded from the audit that the applicant must supply additional information to the staff before a determination of acceptability can be made.
1 111
4 FOREWORO This report is supplied as part of the " Equipment Qualification Case Reviews" being conducted for the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, Division of Engineering, Equipment Qualification Branch by EG&G Idaho, Inc., Reliability and Statistics Branch.
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission funded the work under the authorization, B&R 20-19-40-41-2.
iv
)
w
CONTENTS ABSTRACT..............................................................
11
SUMMARY
111 FOREWORD..............................................................
iv
'1.
INTRODUCTION.....................................................
I 2.
BACKGROUND.......................................................
2 3.
PURPOSE..........................................................
3 4.
SCOPE............................................................
3
- 5.. EVALUATION.......................................................
3 6.
CO NC LU S I ON S......................................................
5 7.
REFERENCES.......................................................
5 APPENDIX A--EQUIPMENT QUALIFICATION STATUS............................
7 APPENDIX B--SUMMARIES OF CENTRAL FILE REVIEWS.........................
15 3
V
..,n,.----.n...
.,n
~ - + -. -
~,-------n.-n-,-~.-agna.-~
ax-
~. n.-- -
.a.
4 J
e q'-
j i
g:
j
- t. -
]. :
t 1
.f r
i i.
1 i-l 1
1$
1 k
a 5
4.
I 4
s I
a f
{
i 4,
1 I
I J
+
1 i
l A
n 1
i i
I t,.
1 n
a k
I
?
t 3
I e
3 I
9 4
4 1
i l
}
I 4
9wifM**-
PF+s yg--T p W pM Wme',
-, 7W WWFW g-
_+y,_
, egg.
,pmp w wr ymym g mw g M c
AUDIT OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL QUALIFICATION OF SAFETY-RELATED ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT AT BYRON UNITS 1 ANO 2, AND BRAIDWOOD UNITS 1 AND 2 1.
INTRODUCTION 1
Equipment which is used to perform a necessary safety function must be demonstrated to be capable of maintaining functional operability under all service conditions postulated to occur during its installed life for the time it is required to operate. This requirement, which is embodied in General Design Criteria 1 and 4 of Appendix A and Sections III, XI, and l
XVII of Appendix B to 10 CFR 50, is applicable to equipment located inside as we.il as outside containment. More detailed requirements and guidance l
relating to the methods and procedures for demonstrating this capability l
has been set forth in 10 CFR 50.49, " Environmental Qualification of Electric Equipment Important to Safety for Nuclear Power Plants," and NUREG-0588, " Interim Staff Position on Environmental Qualification of Safety-Related Electrical Equipment." This NUREG supplements IEEE Standard 323-1974, and vaaicus NRC Regulatory Guides and industry standards.
On June 21-24, 1983 a team comprised of representatives of the Reliability and Statistics Branch of EG&G Idaho, Inc., and the NRC staff conducted an audit of the environmental qualification of safety-related electrical equipment for Byron Units 1 and 2, and Braidwood Units 1 and 2 Nuclear Stations. The work effort consisted of:
(1) a pre-audit review of the licensee's submittal, (2) an audit of the licensee's central files for selected equfpment items, and (3) an onsite visual inspection of the l
equipment items at Byron Units 1 and 2.
Qualification deficiencies for l
individual equipment items are provided in Appendix A.
Summaries of the I
central file reviews are provided in Appendix B.
l l
l l
i 1
2.
BACKGROUND f
l NUREG-0588 was issued in December 1979 to promote a more orderly and l
l systematic implementation of equipment qualification programs by industry I
and to provide guidance to the NRC staff for its use in ongoing licensing l
reviews. The positions contained in this report provide guidance on l
(1) how to establish environmental service conditions, (2) how to select methods which are considered appropriate for qualifying equipment in different areas of the plant, and (3) other specific topics such as margin, l
l aging, and documentation.
In February 1980 the NRC requested certain near term Operating License (OL) applicants to review and evaluate the environmental qualification documentation for each item of safety related electric equipment and to identify the degree to which their qualification programs comply with the staff positions discussed in NUREG-0588.
IE Bulletin 79-018 " Environmental Qualification of Class IE Equipment," issued January 14, 1980, and its supplements dated February 29, September 30, and October 24, 1980 l
established environmental qualification requirements for operating
{
reactors.
This bulletin and its supplements were provided to OL applicants l
for consideration in their review. A final rule on environmental l
qualification of electric equipment important to safety for nuclear power plants became effective on February 22, 1983. This rule, Section 50.49 of 10 CFR part 50, specifies the requirements to be met for demonstrating the environmental qualification of electrical equipment important to safety l
located in a harsh environment.
In accordance with 10 CFR 50.49, the electrical equipment in Byron Units 1 and 2, and Braidwood Units 1 and 2 may be qualified in accordance with the acceptance criteria specified in Category I of NUREG-0588.
The qualification requirements for mechanicai equipment are principally contained in Appendices A and B of 10 CFR 50.
The qualification methods defined in NUREG-0588 can also be applied to mechanical equipment.
2
3.
PURPOSE l
The purpose of this audit is to evaluate the adequacy of Byron Units 1 and 2, and Braidwood Units 1 and 2 environmental qualification program for electric equipment important to safety as defined in 10 CFR 50.49, and for safety-related mechanical equipment. A discussion of open items, as well
(
as any unresolved issues, is provided in this report.
4.
SCOPE The scope of this report includes an evaluation of the completeness of the list of equipment to be qualified, the criteria which they must meet, the environments in which they must func+. ion, and an assessment of the qualification documentation for the equipment. The principal area of review was the qualification of safety-related equipment which must function in order to prevent or mitigate the consequences of a loss-of-coolant accident (LOCA) or high energy line break (HELB) inside or outside of containment, while subjected to the harsh environments associated with these accidents.
5.
EVALUATION General areas of concern which remain as a result of both the audit and the pre-audit review are as follows:
1.
During the plant walkdown, it was noted that some equipment items that were located below flood level were not qualified for submergence during a LOCA. These items need to be either relocated above flood level or qualified for submergence.
The applicant must conduct a plant walkdown inside containment and identify all essential equipment and interfaces which are below I
flood level and provide documentation to show: (a) items not qualified for submergence have been relocated above flood level and (b) items not relocated, that have not previously been qualified for submergence, are now qualified.
3 f
2.
The Qualification Data Sheets (QDS) did not reflect current information (i.e. specified environments), did' not agree with equipment installed, did not agree with their respective data sheets and lacked information regarding submergence and equipment environment (harsh vs. mild).
The applicant agreed there were oroblems with the data sheets but had not determined corrective action by the end of the audit.
These discrepancies should be addressed, 'and corrective action documented and made available for review.
3.
The 00 sheets for additional equipment items, including TMI Action Plan Equipment and generic electrical items, were not available.
Specific areas of concern regarding the equipment that was reviewed during the audit are:
1.
Confirmation that Rosemount 1153 Series B transmitter will be replaced at proper intervals should be provided.
2.
Comparison of the postulated chemical spray conditions with the actual tested conditions for the Reliance fan motor for Reactor Containment Forced Cooling (RCFC) is required. This comparison should be made available for review.
3.
The Conax Electrical Penetrations require insulation resistance measurement data during LOCA exposure tests.
The applicant indicated, during the audit, that this' information was available from the vendor.
This information, along with surveillance information on monitoring the long term condition of the penetrations, should be included in the plant file for qualification acceptance.
4.
The Anchor / Darling Main Steam Isolation Valve file lacks information in several areas (pressure, temperature, operating I
s 4
P -
time etc.) to adequately determine qualification.
This file should be reviewed in detail, revised, aiid made available for a re-review.
5.
The Marathon 1600 series terminal block file that was reviewed only covered terminal blocks used for control circuits.
This file lacked information on insulation resistance values during LOCA test conditions. Also the leakage current during the LOCA test appeared to be too high for instrumentation applications.
The applicant should provide acceptable insulation resistance values as measured during LOCA conditions for those terminal blocks used for control applications and complete specifications and testing for terminal blocks used in instrumentation applications.
6.
Information is required on surveillance techniques to monitor the long term condition of Okonite EPR insulated cable and Dekorad instrumentation cable located inside containment.
i 6.
CONCLUSIONS l
As a result of the audit it was concluded that the Byron Units 1 and 2, and Braidwood Units 1 and 2 environmental qualification program was not complete. The licensee must supply additional information to the staff before a determination of acceptability can be made.
7.
REFERENCES l
1.
Interim Staff Position on Environmental Qualification of Safety l
Related Electrical Equipment, NUREG-0588.
2.
IEEE Standard for Qualifying Class IE Equipment for Nuclear Power Generating Stations, IEEE Std. 323-1974.
3.
Environmental Qualification Report for Class 1E Equipment, Byron Units 1 and 2, and Braidwood Units 1 and 2, Commonwealth Edison Co.
I l
5
<L_
e e
e APPENDIX A EQUIPMENT QUALIFICATION STATUS 7
e
.i I
- l l
I APPENDIX A EQUIPMENT QUALIFICATION STATUS NOTES 1.
The review of the Q.0. sheets was done by selecting one or two Q.0, sheets for each different equipment type. Comments on one Q.0. sheet may apply to many more sheets.
2.
Generic concerns mentioned earlier are not usually mentioned under
- Comments, 3.
Commonwealth Edison Company (CECO) evaluation codes are:
Q Qualified Q.I.P.
Qualification in Progress I.J.
Interim Justification CAT.A,B,C,0.
Category designation per NUREG-0588, Appendix E.
r 4
'h e
9
7 APPENDIX A Ites Q.D.S CEE0 16 umber Equipment Manufacturer Model Number Evaluation Comments 1.
Limit switch NAMCO EA 180 8156 Q
Submergence deficiency.
Series 8101 Q
Aging and replacement part deficiency.
EA 170 8054 0
Operating time deficiency.
Series 2.
Solenoid ASCO NP.8320A 8080 Q
s 106E v.
NP-8320A.
8131 Q
Submergence deficiency.
183E NP-8320A K506 Q
184E NP-831 8-150 Q
Submergence deficiency.
654E a
3.
Valve operator Limitorque SM8 A017 Q
Quallfled Ilfe claimed 40 years 9115'F, maximune O
5eries normal temperature is 130*F.
A020 Q
Westinghouse thermal tag analysis M0Q-EQ-148 (6-1-82).
Numbered A051 Q
Thermal lag analysis (non Westinghousel), sub-r -
series mergence NA but elevation below flood level. -
(270571) for example Model nundser given appears' to be serial number.
4.
ilydraulic 8org Warner P/N 38971 0000 Q.I.P.
5 second qualification time is short. 325* for operator 3 hours3.472222e-5 days <br />8.333333e-4 hours <br />4.960317e-6 weeks <br />1.1415e-6 months <br /> an error.
5.
Hydraulic Anchor Darling D004 Q
Documentation deficiences in temperature, operator temperature profile, pressure, operating time, time period after the accident during which failure must not occur, wrong component identification, and no model nuadser.
6.
flydraulic Borg Warner ISO Valve 0072 1.J.
Replacement ordered, not specifled or qualified.
operator 7.
Hydraulic Burg Warner DWG No. 85460 0010 I.J.
Interin justification adequate, operator
APPENDIX A (continued)
Item 0.0.5 CECO Number Equipment Manufacturer Model Number Evaluation Comments 8.
Electrical Conax W 537 Q
No model number, no test model number. Are penetration CAT.B penetrations all identical?
W 655 0
CAT.A 9.
Containment Westinghouse Frame: 5809P W 553 Q
Remark GRJR068 does not apply. Qualification spray pump motor Type LLD method by analysis only.
10.
Centrifugal Westinghouse 5.0. 75F W 554 0
What has been dpRADS7e to qualify bearings and charging pump 32350 lubricant to 10 Qualification by motor partial type test and analysis.
11.
Junction box Borg Warner W 622 Q.I.P.
Junction boxes are a part of feed water isola-tion valves--no model nueer given--qualifica.
tion to 0588 CAI.B while F.W.I.V. is CAT.A?
Qualification figures given with no reference.
12.
Junction box Connectron NU-2 W 661 Q
Junction boxes are a part of main steam isola-tion valves, no pressure qualification 0588
[
CAT.B while associated M$ly is CAI.A.
13.
Junction box Westinghouse W 669 CAT.C Why is this on the equipment qualification listi 14.
Terminal block System Control Marathon W 705 0
Terminal blocks used for instrumentation and in local 1600 series control appilcations need insulation resistance instrument panel data for control appilcations. Need complete in containment test data for instrumentation appilcations.
15.
Junction box Westinghouse W/L 236 86 W 672 Q.I.P.
power range neutron detector 16.
RHR pump motor Westinghouse 50 74F W 735 0
See Item to coments.
1282 17.
Safety injection Westinghouse 50 74F W-741 Q
See Item 10 coments.
pump motors 18601 18.
Auxillary Rellance 350 HP W.756 CAT Accident dose of 106 RADS does not agree with building HVAC Type R8i 0
CAT.D designation.
supply fan Class F
F j.g.
APPENDIX A (continued)
Ites Q.0.5 CECO Number Equiguent Manufacturer Model Number (valuation Comments 19.
HVAC control Johnson W-760 CAT No model number. See Item 18 comments.
panel Controls D
W 826 Q.I.P.
W 829 20.
Auxiliary Reliance 500 HP W 764 Q
None building hvAC Class F exhaust fan Type R81 21.
Auxiliary Reliance 75 HP W 768 Q
Mone building HVAC Class H exhaust bonster Type RH fan 22.
HVAC starter Johnson W 789 Q.I.P.
No model number.
panel Controls e
23.
Cubicle cooler Westinghouse 3 HP W 801 Q
fan Class H mm W 822 Q
Radiation values inaccurate.
24.
Primary Reliance Part No.
W 859 Q
Require chemical spray flow rate and chemical containment 600287 52 composition used for environmental testing to vent system support qualification.
RCFC fan 25.
Level 8arton 752 8524 Mild Q.0.5. states qualification will be addressed transmitter with mild environment equipment. It is not listed there, 50 it is not addressed.
26.
Radiation General RD 23 Wuo6 Q.l.P.
detectors Atomics80-142
~
27.
Flow Barton 288A FS 35 N543 Q. l.P.
Indicating suitch 28.
Hand suitch Westinghouse OT2 G416 Q.I.P.
Part of Johnson Controls Qualification Program.
29.
Pressure suitch United J 302-5164 YOOO Q. l.P.
Electric PS 167 30.
Level Barton 764 Lot 4 8501 4
Suhmergence testing still in progress, reloca.
transmitter tion possible, post LOCA accuracy of 16% ok ?
Should be qualification in progress.
m r
APPENDIX A (continued)
Item 0.D.5 CECO Number Equipment Manuf ac t urer Model Number Evaluation Comments 31.
Pressure Darton 763 1037 Q
See Item 30 comments.
transmitter 32.
F low Barton 752 1588 CAT Reactor coolant flow transmitters--is CAT.C transmitter C.
correct for DHE? (LOCA) 33.
Pressure Veritrak 76 PH2 X029 Q.l.P.
transmitter 34.
R.T.D.
RDr DWG 21204 0216 Q
Accu'acy information not suppIted.
r Rev. 10 35.
Pressure Barton 386 X005 0.I.P.
Johnson Controls Qualification Program.
transmitter 36.
Flow controller Love 54 8187 N502 Q.I.P.
Johnson Controls Qualification Program.
8115 37.
Flow transmitter llays 252A 1515 Q.I.P.
Johnson Controls Qualification Program.
U 38.
Positioner III NH 95 J500 Q.I.P.
Johnson Controls Qualification Program.
NH 91 J504 39.
Pressure switch Solon 1PS/7P2 A557 Q.l.P.
Johnson Controls Qualification Program.
40.
Differential Hays T00252 A629 Q.I.P.
Johnson Controls Qualification Program.
pressure transmitter 41.
Differential Moore ADM A643 Q.l.P.
Johnson Controls Qualification Program.
pressure relay Industries MD538 42.
Position Itght Westinghouse ETC 1010 Q.l.P.
Johnson Controls Qualification Program.
IL508 43.
Temperature-United C3030-103 5026 Q.I.P.
Johnson Controls Qualification Program.
switch Electric 15504 44.
Instrument Eaton Corp.
Dekorad Sunenary Q
Require method to monitor long term aging /
Cables Cables Sheet
.iegradation.
45.
Power Cable Okontte Okonite EPR Summary Q
Require method to monitor long term aging /
Insulated Sheet degradation.
Cable
c P
n APPENDIX A (continued)
Ite=
0.o.5 CECO Nueer Equipment Manufacturer Model Numher Evaluation Comment s 46.
Switchboard Wire Rockbestos Firewall SIS Summary Q
None Sheet 47.
Cable Spilce Raychem Corp.
WC5F-070-N Susunary Q
None WC5F-650-N Sheet WCSF-300-N
.WCSF-200-N 48.
Electrical Sunker Ramo W915 0
Sutmergence deficiency Penetration.
Corp.
49.
Flow Transmitter Rosemount Il530P5E22P8 1539 Q
To be replaced at proper intervals.
50.
Current Relay Masonellan 8005A N012 Q.I.P.
No data listed Signal Converter M
h i
e d -
APPENDIX 8 SUMMARIES OF CENTRAL FILE REVIEWS e
s E
-15
APPENDIX B SUMMARIES OF CENTRAL FILE REVIEWS Oekorad Instrument Cable This cable is used throughout Byron Units 1 and 2, and Braidwood Units 1 and 2.
The specified accident parameters are:
temperature, 320 F; pressure 50 psig; relative humidity, 100%; chemical spray, borated water spray, pH 8
8.5 to 10.5; radiation, 2.0 x 10 rads TID; and operating time, 12 months.
Environmental testing has been performed on similar cable and is reported in Commonwealth Edison Co., Environmental Qualification File 25C, for Dekorad Instrument Cable. The maximum environmental parameters to which the tested cables were exposed are:
temherature,340F; pressure, 105 psig; relative humidity, 100%; chemical spray, 10.5 pH; radiation, 8
2.0 x 10 rads TID, and an operating time of 100 days with justi-fication to encompass the specified operating time. of 12 months. The cables were aged for 7 days at 121*C, and a life of >40 years at 127"F was calculated using Arrhenius methodology.
It is concluded that the Dekorad instrument cable is qualified for the specified environment. Documentation to support this conclusion is contained in the applicant's qualification file.
However, the applicant shculd supply information on how they intend to monitor the effects of long term aging / degradation of this cable.
Reliance Fan Motor Model TEA-01 150/100 H.P.
This motor is located inside containment in environmental Zone 6.
The fan motor is installed in the primary containment ventilation system and is 17 u
a.
used to dissipate heat during normal operation and lower temperature and pressure during a DBA.
L The specified accident parameters are:
temperature, 320*F; pressure, 40 psig; humidity, 100%; chemical spray, borated water spray, pH 8.5-10.5; 0
radiation, 2 x 10 rads TID; and operability time, 30 days post LOCA.
Environmental testing of a similar motor is recorded in the Joy
. 'i Manufacturing Co. Test Report No. X-604 and appendices. The test parameters are temperature, 415 F; pressure; 78 psi; humidity, 100%;
0 radiation, 2 x 10 rads TID, test duration,'423 days; aging was at 415 F
.for 100 hours0.00116 days <br />0.0278 hours <br />1.653439e-4 weeks <br />3.805e-5 months <br />. Testing and analysis was used to obtain a qualified life of t
40 years.
- .;j A statement from the applicant concerning the chemical spray flow rate and chemical composition used for environmental testing is needed to jj' support qualification. The applicant stated this information will be T
forwarded to the NRC.
p' Rosemount Differential pressure Transmitter, Model 1153 DP5E22PB, Series 1153-B 4:
This transmitter is located in the Auxiliary Building and is used as a flow transmitter in the Auxiliary Feedwater System.
The specified accident parameters are:
temperature, 140'F; pressure,
- i, 4
atmospheric;_ humidity, 70%; radiation, 1 x 10 rads TIO; and operability, continuous.
-3 Environmental testing of this transmitter is recorded in Rosemount
' id i< <,1 Test Report No. 108026.
=?
The test parameters are: temperature, 318*F; pressure, 73 psig; 7
humidity, 100%; radiation, 2.2 x 10 rads TID; test duration, 8 hours9.259259e-5 days <br />0.00222 hours <br />1.322751e-5 weeks <br />3.044e-6 months <br /> at 318*F, 58 hours6.712963e-4 days <br />0.0161 hours <br />9.589947e-5 weeks <br />2.2069e-5 months <br /> at 265 F post DBE 14 days at'150*F and 23 days at 203 F; aging was at 203 F for 47 days. Test and a". lysis was used to develop a 18 1
qualified life of 8 2/3 years. The applicant stated the entire transmitter will be replaced at given intervals to maintain qualified equipment installation for 40 years.
It is concluded that the Rosemount Transmitter is environmentally qualified as stated and must be replaced at proper intervals.
Marathon Terminal Block Model 1600 These terminal blocks are used to terminate instrument and control cables in the local instrument panel inside containment.
The specified accident parameters are:
temperature, 320 F; pressure, 50 psig; humidity,100%; chemical ' spray, borated' water spray, pH of 8
8.5-10.5; radiation, 2 x 10 rads TID;-and operability time, continuous.
Environmental testing of this type of terminal block is recorded in Wyle Test Report No. 45611-1.
The test parameters are:
temperature, 345 ; pressure, 50 psig; humidity,100%; chemical spray, 0.5 GPM/sq. ft. of NA0H Boric Acid with a 8
pH of 8.5-10.5; radiation, 2 x 10 rads TID; and test duration; 27 hours3.125e-4 days <br />0.0075 hours <br />4.464286e-5 weeks <br />1.02735e-5 months <br /> at 325'F; extended to three years at 325*F by Arrhenius calculations using 2 peaks of 345 F -for 3 hours3.472222e-5 days <br />8.333333e-4 hours <br />4.960317e-6 weeks <br />1.1415e-6 months <br /> each. Testing and analysis was used to obtain a qualified life of 40 years.
A remaining concern is that the applicant stated these terminal blocks are being used for instrumentation terminations as well as control applications.
It appears the test was conducted for the latter because the leakage current acceptance level is excessive for the instrumentation terminations.
In addition insulation resistance data during LOCA testing was not present in the test report.
+
19 3
.,e.
l Okonite EPR Insulated Cable This cable is used throughout Byron Units 1 and 2, and Braidwood Units 1 and 2.
The specified accident parameters are:
temperature, 320 F; pressure, 40 psig; relative' humidity; 100's; chemical spray, borated water spray pH 8
8.5 to 10.5; radiation, 2.0 x 10 rads TID; and. operating time, 12 months.
Environmental te' sting has been performed on similar cable and is reported in Okonite Report No. NQRN-1A.
The maximum environmental parameters to which the tested cables were exposed are:
temperature,
~
7 345 F; pressure,112 psig; relative humidity,100?s; chemical spray, 8
10.5 pH; radiation, 2.0 x 10 rads TID; and operating time, 12 months.
The cables were aged for 21 days at 105*C, and a life of >40 years at 90 C was calculated using Arrhenius methodology.
It is concluded that the Okonite EPR insulated cable is qualified.for the specified environment.- Documentation to support this conclusion is contained in the applicant's file. However, the applicant should supply information on how they intend to monitor the effects of long term aging / degradation on this cable.
Anchor Darling hydraulic Valve Operator, Eouipment No. IMS001A This valve operator is located in the steam tunnel and is used to actuate the main steam isolation valves.
The specified accident parameters temperature, 325"F; pressure, 23 psig (changed to 19.7 PSI during the, are:
4 audit); relative humidity 100!s; radiation 1.0 x 10 rads TID; and operating time, 10 seconds.
Testing on a similar actuator is detailed in Anchor Darling Test Report No. QR-10. Temperature testing was at a peak calculated value of 328*F for 3 minutes followed by 284 F for 24 minutes. A second identical cycle followed with A.C. solonoids substituted for D.C. solonoids.
The test was conducted with steam at atmospheric pressure.
Pressure testing 20
was completed by separate operat'ional testing of a similar assembly which involved the lowering of inlet air pressure.
Radiation aging at 6
2.5 x 10 rads TID bounded the specified dose. Accelerated thermal aging, utilizing Arrhenius methodology, showed a variable qualified life for various components.
This resulted in a 40 year qualified life if certain components are changed out at specified intervals.
Documentation deficiencies included changing the specified pressure during the audit, lack of a known or specified operating time and a time that failure must not occur, lack of documentation concerning possible failure modes, erroneous identification of the wrong terminal block as a value accessory, and varied values for the temperature profiles.
In conclusion, the review indicated that-inadequate information was contained in the review package to assure qualification. This file should be revised to address these deficiencies and submitted for review.
21
'O U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMIS$lON fit $11 BIBLIOGRAPHIC DATA SHEET EGG-EA-6332 4 TaTLE AND SUBTITLE
- 2. (Leave e/wi41 Audit of the Environmental Qualification of Safety-Related Electrical Equipment at the Byron Units 1 and 2 and, 1 RECIPIENT S ACCESSION NO.
Braidwood Units 1 and 2 7, AUTHORIS)
- 5. DATE REPORT COMPLETED
^
R. A. Boraen. D. A. Weber. M. W. Yost "IY
- 9. FERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND MAILING ACORESS //nclude lep Code /
OATE REPORT ISSUED MONTH l YEAR July 1983 EG&G Idaho, Inc.
s.ft,,,,,,,,,,
Idaho Falls, ID 83415
- 8. (Leave blank)
- 12. SPONSORING ORGANIZATION NAME ANO MAILING ADDRESS (Include Zia Cooel
- 10. PROJECT / TASK / WORK UNIT NO.
Division of Engineering Office of n,irloar Qoneilatnev Qoccarch
- 11. FIN NO.
U.S. Nuclear Regulator Commission A6415 Washington, DC 20555
- 13. TYFE OF REPORT PE RICO Cove RE O (Inclusive dates /
- 15. SUPPLEMEN TARY NOTES
- 14. / Leave otankt
- 16. ABSTR ACT (200 worcs or less)
Byron Units 1 and 2 and Braiduood Units 1 and 2, were audited to determine the environ-mental qualification of safety-related electrical equipment.
Results of the audit are summarized in this report.
?
17 KEY WOROS AND OOCUMENT AN ALYSIS 17a OESCRIPTORS 5 l s
170. IDENTIFeE RSTOPEN-ENDE O TERMS 18 AV AILABILITY STATEMENT
- 19. SE CURITY CLASS (Tn,s recorr/
21 NO OF PAGES Unclassified Unlimited 20 SE CUFiTY CL ASS (Tn,s onget 22 PRICE Unclassified S
snC aOnu ass m an i{ -: