ML20148H863
| ML20148H863 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Fort Calhoun  |
| Issue date: | 03/23/1988 |
| From: | Callan L NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV) |
| To: | Andrews R OMAHA PUBLIC POWER DISTRICT |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8803300099 | |
| Download: ML20148H863 (22) | |
Text
.
p-Q s.
In Reply Refer To:
MAR 2 3128 Docket:
50-285 Omaha Public Power District ATTN:
R. L. Andrews, Division Manager-Nuclear Production 1623 Harney Street Omaha, Nebraska 68102 Gentlemen:
This letter documents the Enforcement Conference conducted in'the NRC Region IV office on March 15, 1988, with you.and other membecs of your staff. An attendance list for the meeting is enclosed.
The meeting addressed the lack of fire barrier seals inside of some electrical conduits.
We found the meeting to be beneficial.
Enclosed are the handouts presented.
Sincerely, 0::ji:ml Signed By:
L..J. CALLAN L. J. Callan, Director Division of Reactor Projects.
Enclosures:
As stated cc:
Fort Calhoun Station ATTN:
W. G. Gates, Manager P.O. Box 399 Fort Calhoun, Nebraska 68023 Harry H. Voigt, Esq.
LeBoeuf, Lamb, Lt by & MacRae 1333 New Hampshire Avenue, NW Washington, D. C.
20036 Kansas Radiation Control Program Director Nebraska Radiation Control Program Director h(W W
DRP b
[DRP/B PI/DRP/B TFWestennan LJCallan RMullikin:cnm 3/W88 y 3/p/88 3/ gt/88
/ a 8803300099 880323 PDR ADOCK 05000285 Q
DCD, _
1-
,t.,.
Omaha Public Power District
-E-bec distrib by RIV:
R.D. Martin, RA RPSB-DRSS Section Chief (DRP/B)
HIS System RIV File DRP RSTS Operator Project Engineer, DRP/B Lisa Shea, Rfi/ALF T. Bournia, NRR Project Manager DRS TSS RRI 1
l l
W
-,\\.p.
NRC FIRE PROTEOl%ON MEETING AGENDA MARCH 15, 1988 OPENING REMARKS / INTRODUCTION:
R.L. ANDREWS OVERVIEW OF MEETING:
J.J. FISICARO IMMEDIATE ACTIONS TAKEN/RESULTS ACHIEVED:
J.E. LECHNER
- FIRE WATCH PATROL
- DETERMINATION OF IMMEDIATE SAFETY SIGNIFICANCE
- WALKDOWN
- SEALING OF CONDUITS
- COMPLIANCE WITH TECH. SPEC. COMMITMENTS 1
REVIEW OF OPPD' S FIRE PROTECTION COMMITMENTS:
S.K. GAMBHIR
- BRANCH TECHNICAL POSITION 9.5.1. APP.A
- OCTOBER 1978 SUBMITTAL
- FIRE PROTECTION SER DATED NOVEMBER 1980
- RE-CONSTITUTION OF CONDUIT SEALING CRITERIA
- COMPLIANCE WITH SER COMMITMENTS
- RE-EVALUATION OF SEALING CRITERIA (PER GENERIC LETTER 86-10)
TOPICAL REPORT ON TESTING OF CONDUIT SEALS MIKE MOWRER CORRECTIVE ACTIONS / FUTURE UPGRADES:
J.E. LECHNER
- EXCELLENCE IN OPERATION REVIEW
- REVISED FIRE HAZARD ANALYSIS SAFETY SIGNIFICANCE T.L. PATTERSON CLOSING STATEMENT AND CONCLUSIONS R.L. ANDREWS
, u.
~
u.-
REQUIRED l
3 HR
=
j i
BARRIER \\!
i SWITCHGEAR i
SWITCHGEAR i
i ROOM i
ROOM i
i A
B j
4..
4.,
4.,
4.,
. CONOUIT CONDUIT l
CONOUIT CONDUIT l
BATTERY BATTERY ROOM ROOM A
B
'a s s a m e s s e a m e s e m a m m a m m.
% s s a e e a e a e a a e s a a e m a e m.
SWITCHGEAR/ BATTERY ROOM PHYSICAL LAYOUT
C,'.' t -
BTP APCSB 9.51 A?PENDIX A
AUGUST 23, 1976 PAGES 15 AND 16 APPLICATION DOCKETED BUT CONSTRUCTION PLANTS LitlDER CONSTRUCTION AND PERMIT NOT RECEIVED AS OF //l/76 OPERATING PLANTS (j) Floors, wall and ceilings enclos-(j)
SAME.
The fire hazard in each ing separate fire areas should area should be evaluated to have minimum fire rating of three determine barrier requirements, hours.
Penetrations in these fire If barrier fire resistance can-barriers, including conduits and not be made adequate, fire piping, should be sealed or closed detection and suppression to provide a fire resistance rat-should be provided, such as:
ing at least equal to that of the fire barrier itself.
Door open-(i) water curtain in case of ings should be protected with
- fire, equivalent rated doors, frames and hardware that have been tested and (ii) flame retardant approved by a nationally recog-
- coatings, nized laboratory.
Such doors should be normally closed and (iii) additional fire locked or alarmed with alarm and barriers.
annunciation in the control room.
Penetrations for ventilation sys-tem should be protected by a stan-dard "fire door damper" where required.
(Refer to NFPA 80, "Fire Doors and Windows.")
norizontal) t s) Cable horizontal and vrequired for the firshould be and cable tray i
- s sealed e barrier. o give protectionpenetration t
(.
tration qualificati of fire barriers (verti ertical cable trays The design h
Openings insidespecified by ASTM E Il9 at least equivalent to th on tests of fire barrier penet should be qualified b should use the time t cal and described abovethe fire barrier p "Fir e Test of Building Coemperaturey tests.gtions for L
conduit larger than fo r
at t s h easkseujej e;kher Openings insideenetration; these should be seals nstructionexposure The pene-ur inches in diameter the fire barrdescribed above sealed at the fire b mf 1%c
)
curve or should beand Materials. "
conduit four inchesshould be qualified b unless the arrier and hot gases.ier4with noncombustibconduit extendsand should be qualifi y tests sealed at isolation or less in diameter Fire barrier penet as barrier integrity or pr le at least five feet on ed by tests essure differentials material to prevent rations that must mai as under the the passageeach side should be qualified by 3
Plants for conditions of ntain specified above.
testenvironmentalof smoke issued a CP, by Julwhich (a) CP applicati Appendix A (dwere issued prior to J to maintain the y 1, 1976; or (b) c ons onstruction permitswere docketed prior to this position.ated Augustuly 1,1976, should foll 23, 1976 to B
, but were ow the guidelines IP or APCSB operating licenses not 9.5-1; dated May 1 of either (a)
, 1976; or (c) 29 PAGES 9.5.1dAND 46
\\
t e.
1 m
CHEMTROL PROGRAM
?
OPPD SUBMITAL DATED OCTOBER 18, 1978 6.0 Other Small Openinas Certain openings in smzIl conduits, small gaps, and small repairs are to be accomplished by utilizing U.L. listed and fire-rated silicone caulk sealants.
(See CiEMTROL Spacification Nos. 3440 and 3450).
7.0 Larae Openinas 7.1 Where larger penetration openings do not economically permit the entire volume of the opening to ' e sealed with expanded silicone o
elastomeric foam (refer to Item 2.0, Work Scope, as contained herein), Applicator is to provide FIREWALL sprayed on, fast-cure fiberglass reinforced cementitious matrix to thickness as specified.
Densities 0f Ge cured grodud shah bg as selected ig) ranges kom
.80 gm/cm3 (50 lbs./ft. ) to 2.0 gm/cm (125 lbs./ft.
(Refer to CHEMTROL Specification No. 4000.)
m OA
- c.
SER DATED
?
NOVEMBER 17, 1980 item 3.1.20 - Cable Penetration Seals SER Section 3.1.20 indicates that the licensee will upgrade the electrical cable penetration seals to a design demonstrated by test to have a 3 hour3.472222e-5 days <br />8.333333e-4 hours <br />4.960317e-6 weeks <br />1.1415e-6 months <br /> fire resistance rating.
By letter dated October 18, 1978, the licensee described the proposed modifica-tions to achieve the 3 hour3.472222e-5 days <br />8.333333e-4 hours <br />4.960317e-6 weeks <br />1.1415e-6 months <br /> fire resistance rating. The licensee also indi-cated that penetration seals being installed have passed tests conducted generally in agreement with the methods and criteria described in the NRC August 30, 1977 letter to the Omaha Public Power District, except that no pressure differential was applied across the seals during the test.
The licensee stated that Chemtron Corporation, to whose installation procedures Fort Calhoun cable penetration seals have been installed, acknowledged that a 3 hour3.472222e-5 days <br />8.333333e-4 hours <br />4.960317e-6 weeks <br />1.1415e-6 months <br /> fire test was successfully conducted with a positive pressure of 9.0 inches of water maintained on a 5,885 square inch penetration.
Because the largest penetration in the plant is 1,924 square inches, and because the maximum expected nonfire differential pressure is approximately 0.5 inches of water, we find the proposed modifications for cable penetration -seals satisfactory and consider this item to be closed.
~
PAGE 5
RF CONSTITUTION OF CONDUIT SEALING CRITERIA BACKGROUND
- NO PROBLEM WITH EXTERNAL SEALING
- NO PROBLEM WITH SEALING OF " SLEEVES"
- NRC CRITERIA FOR SEALING INSIDE OF CONDUITS WAS NOT CLEAR - (1978 TIME FRAME)
- NO INDUSTRY GUIDANCE WAS AVAILABLE CRITERIA USED IN 1978 SEALED PER CHEMTROL PROCEDURE (OCT, 1978 SUBMITTAL)
MXVA SEAL IF e < 10' x
e SLEEVES l
9._._
SEALED AT PENETRATION SUBSEQUENT REVISIONS
- THE CRITERIA WAS REVISED TO REQUIRE SEALING FOR CONDUITS > 2" IF e < 5' -0"
( MP-FP-2)
'982-
% up-ep.3
COMPLIANCE WTIll SER COM3dITMENTS (PARAGRAPH G.0 0F 1978 SUBMITTAL)
-- NC SPECIFIC COMMITMENTS WERE INTENDED TO SEAL INSIDE OF ALL CONDUITS
-- PARAGRAPH 6. 0 ( PAGE 2. 02) WAS INTENDED AS MATERIAL SPECIFICATION - NOT AN INSTALLATION SPECIFICATION.
(REFERENCE - PROMATEC LETTER)
- CRITERIA WAS DISCUSSED WITH AMERICAN NUCLEAR INSURERS (ANI)
(REFERENCE - TELECON WITH ANI AND JOE ALDERI)
-- CONSISTENT WITH INDUSTRY PRACTICE (1978-1980)
-- GOOD FAITH EFFORT TO COMPLY WITH REQUIREMENTS ASAP
,\\. *, s.
ORIGINAL DOCUMENT ILLEGIBLE RETYPED FOR CLARITY 3-14-88 ORIGIN AL INCLUDED FOR INFORMATION NEXT PAGE To whom it may concern:
This information is provided regarding penetration seals for Fort Calhoun Power i
Station.
I was the cognizant engineer responsible for the sealing of penetration sea!s.
During the course of the effort a question arose concerning sealing of opened ended conduits.
Note:
As a matter of course all conduits which acted as a sleeve (e.g. penetration wall then went in tray) were sealed.
Since all of our seals / seal designs were/had to be approved by ANI (the authority having jurisdiction),
the question was asked when would an opened ended conduit not require a seal.
The response was >10'.
There was no other issues regarding the sealing of conduits (i.e., conduit systems were not traced t? an elbow or condulet, opened and sealed, only opened ended conduits were sealed.
I Respectfully, Joseph M. Aldieri 3/11/88 i
)
i l
s,, t -
3 RECORD OF TELEPHONE COMMutilCATION M.R. NO.
FC-77-15 FILE NO.
GSE-FCl-79-782 DATE: 10/24/79 TIME:
TELEPHONE tt0.
87-36 PARTY CALLING:
JOSEPH M. ALDIERI
'OPPD-GSE (NAME)
(COMPANY)
PARTY ANSWERING: WAYNE HOLMES AMERICAN hUCLEAR INSURERS (NAME)
(COMPANY)
SUBJECT:
FIRE seals IN CONDU:T TELECON
SUMMARY
(Including Decisions and Commitments)
I asked Wayne, if he was aware of any requirements relative to acceptance criteria for conduit runs, which did not terminate at the fire barrier.
(i.e.,
extended a certain distance beyond the fire barrier).
Wayne stated that there wasn't any.
I noted that various "rules of thumb" have been established and considered them only as "nice to do item" since they are not based on any test data.
He agreed.
I asked if we were to pack mineral wool arouno the ends of such conduit runs, would it be considered as a fire barrier.
Wayne said no.
ORIGIN AL DOCUMENT ILLEGIBLE RETYPED FOR CLARITY 3-14-88 ORIGINAL INCLUDED FOR INFORMATION NEXT PAGE Forward information to J. Connolley DISTRIBUTION CGK, JMA, SKG, JEC, (FC)
GSE-A-1-4 Form Rev. 8/85
t.
4 PRC Minutes February 2,1980 Page Two I'"EM ACTIO:I Procedure Changes PRC Reviewed the followins, Pre;ced ar CLOSED 5229 (ST-CO:iT-7) 5228 (ST-c":T-5213 (SP-ICI-1) 5227 (0.9. T-;.
5230 (MP-RC-6-6-1 A) 51914 (DCR 78-50/SRDCO 79-80) 5139 (MR-PC-78-56/SPDco 79-73)
Final Review of:
5219 (MP-RC-6-1) 5186 (MP-VA-3) 5189 (SRDC0 79-80) 5162 (SRDC0 79-30)
Telecon between J. Alderi and PRC Reviewed and concurs with telecon.
I Wayne Rolnes of American Nuclear Insurers concerning Pire Seals in Conduit dated 10-24-79 1
CLOSED Letter to PRC concerning PRC Reviewed and approved per letter Cancellation of SP-RCS-6 PC-131-80.
I concerning RCP Motor Oil Collection System Pabrication Control CLOSED
'RC Subecessittee concerning PRC Reviewed and approved per letter Kaplacement of Main Steam Line PC-126-SO.
Pesnetration Bellows MR-PC-78-2.
CLOSED Letter from Chess Nuclear concern-PRC Reviewed per letter dated 1-25-80.
ing Barsvell Disposal Site Burial S ace Allocation Revisions.
P C:oSED
'1HI-2 Task Force Meeting Minutes PRC Reviewed and any open items place <1 1-29-80.
on Open Item Checklist.
CIASED I4tter from CSE concerning PRC Reviewed per latter PC-80-59.
Inspection of Safety Related Piping Inside Containment in reference NRC I.E.Bulletin 79-14
\\'\\
CrosED g
\\ 3
,s i
t*
A.
PROGd5SM.MATUuALS AND TICHNOLOCES,INC.
i March 11, 1988 Or.aha Public Power District 1623 Harney Street Omaha, Nebraska 68102 Attention:
Mr. Stanley R. Crites Nuclear Engineering Generating station Engineering Sub$cct:
Request for Clarification
Dear Mr. Crites:
This is to confirm our telephone conversation this dato regarding work which I was involved in as the Project Manager for Choctrol Corporation for Ocaha Pub-lic Power District at the Fort Calhoun Nuclear Power Station. Thin work took pl4ce during the period of September through December of 1978.
To the best of my recollection, Paragraph 6.0 of Chemtrol's Guido Specifica-tion for Design FC225 is a material specification, and should not be con-i sidered as an installation specification. The emphasis of this item is placed on the material being tn, listed, and has nothing to do with the type of opening that the material is utilized to seal.
j Regarding the original contract scopo (portaining to open ended ccnduit temi-nations), Mr. Joe Aldori, Project Engiaeer at that period of time for OPPD, and (as Project Manager for Cheatrol Corporation), did discuss the issue of conduits, that were cemented in place in firo walls, which temir.ated within ten feet of the fire barrier wall. I recall that Mr. Alderi directed us to provide a oilicone foam seal in such conduits which terminated wit.hin ten feet j
of the fire barrior wall. The seal design utilized would have been the same design for a throc hour fire rated scal; however, it would have been installed at the point of termination, and only on the side of the wall, where the con-duit tominated within ten feet of the fire barrior. It was considered that i
any eenduits that ran a distance greater than ton feet frem the l' ire barrior before terminating were regarded as continuous run conduit and, ao such, were not scaled. As regarda blockout openings in the Control Room floor, these openings were sealed as por tested design as a fire seal, and cable and/or conduit, which penetrated the opening, were considered merely to be penetra-ting clementa. However, if the conduit terminated within the alab, at the top of the blockout, an appropriate fire seal design was installed, at that point of conduit termination, just as if it were part of the continuous opening of the blockout.
M P.O. BOX 4672
- HOUSTON, TEXAS 77210. (71D 6%tm i
d
RE EVALUATION OF SEALING CRITERIA
( GENERIC LETTER 86 10 )
.s. component under consideration is capable of performing its intended function during and after the postulated fire, as needed. Licensees seeking exemptions from Section III.G.2 must show that the alternative proposed provides reasonable assurance that this criterion is met.
(Note also that Section III.G.2 applies only to equipment needed for hot shutdown. Therefore, an exemption from III.G.2 for cold shutdown equipment is not needed. The tem "damage by fire" also includes damage to equipment from the normal or inadvertent operation of fire suppression systems.
4.
Fire Area Boundaries The term "fire area" as used in Appendix R means an area sufficiently bounded to withstand the hazards associated with the area and, as necessary, to orntact imnortant eenioment within the area from a fire outside the area.
In order tc mee: the rag i n kn, fire area boundcries need em be completely sealed floor-to-ceiling, wall-to-wall boundaries. However, all unsealed openings should be identified and considered the evaluating the effectiveness of the overall barrier. IWhere fire area boundaries are not wall-to-wall, floor-to-ceiling boundaries with all penetrations sealed to the fire rating required of the boundaries, licensees must perform an evaluation to assess the adequacy of fire boundaries in their plants to determine if the boundaries will withstand the hazards associated with the area. This analysis must be performcd by at least a fire protection engineer and, if required, a systems engineer. Although not required, licensees may submit their evaluations for staff review and concurrence. However, if certain cable penetrations were identified as open SER items at the time Appendix R becare effective,Section III.M of the rule applies (see 10 CFR 50.48(b)), and any variation from the requirements of Section III.M requires an exemption.
In any event, these r
h analyses must be retained by the licensees for subsequent NRC audits.
5.
Automatic Detection and Sucoression Sections III.G.2.b and III.G.2.c of Appendix R state that "In addition, fire detectors and automatic fire suppression system shall be installed in the fire area..."
Other provisions of Appendix R also use the phrase "fire detectors and an automatic fire suppression system in the fire area..."
(see e.g.,
SectionIII.G.2.e).
In order to comply with these provisions, suppression and detection sufficient to protect against the hazards of the area must be installed.
In this regard, detection and suppression providinq less than full area coverage may be adequate to comply with the regulation. Where full area suppression and detection is not installed, licensees must perform an evaluation to assess the adequacy of partial suppression and detection to protect against the hazards in the area. The evaluation must be performed by a fire protection engineer and, if required, a systems engineer. Although not required, licensees may submit their evaluations to the staff for review and concurrence.
In any event, the evaluations must be retained for subsequent NRC audits. Where a licensee is providing no suppression or detection, and exemption must be requested.
1
l%R 03 kB ih:31 FRF. LOSS CC41 TROL MIS 433 7241 P.U3 s,' t.
s h: D N0'q::;).f \\. h p;
W$ h.$a ' A r,c
. 0 $p.a q
5 1.0 PURPOSB The purpose of this document is to establish a technically based policy regarding internal fire sealinge of electrical conduits penetrating fire barriers at the Port Calhouri Station.
2.0 BACKGROUtg The Fort Calhoun Station committed to APCSB 9.5-1, Appendix A, "Overall '
Requirements of Nuclear Plant Fire Protection Program."
The guidance
. established in 9.5-1 Appendix A in paragraph D.1.(j) states:
(j) "Floors, valls, and ceilings enclosing separate fire areas should have a minimum fire rating of three hours.
Penetrations in these fire barrices, including conduits and piping, should be sealed or closed to provide a fire resistance rating at least equal to that of the fire barrier itself..."
and in paragraph D.3.(d) states:
"(d) cable and cable tray penetration of fire barriers (vertical and horizontal) should be sealed to give pro-tectitn at least equivalent to that fire barrier.
The design of fire barriers for horizontal and vertical cable trays should, as a minimum, meet the requirements of ASTM E-119, "Fire Test of Building Construction and Materials," including the hos'e stream test."
Neither of these references are specific to internal sealing of con-duits.
The CMEB 9.5-1 (NUREG 0800) in paragraph 5.a.(3) references internal sealing of conduits as follows:
"(3) Openings through fire barriers for pipe, conduit, and cabic trays which separate fire areas should be sealed or closed to provide a fire resistance rating at least equal to that required of the barrier itself.
Openings inside conduit larger than 4 inches in diameter should be scaled at the fire barrier penetration. Open-ings inside conduit 4 inches or less in diameter should be sealed at the fire barrier unless the conduit extends at least 5 feet on each side of the fire barrior and is sealed either at both ends or at the fire barrice with noncombustible materials to prevent the passage of smoko and hot gases..."
1 l
.$,4
The policy applied at Fort Calhoun Station is stated in HP-FP-2, Appen-dix B, paragraph c.3. Type D:
"Inside of conduits with a required minimum depth of RTV foan of 7 inches.
NOTE:
Type D seals only applicable to 2" or larger conduits which do not extend 5 feet into the Fire Area on one side."
Subsequent to the establishment of this policy, additional technical information in the form of a fire test was developed by a group of utilities. Based on this test data, Fort Calhoun Station should change its policy regarding internal sealing of conduits as outlined in Sec.
tion 4.0 below.
3.0 RRPHRENCES 3.1 Appendix A to Branch Technical Position APCSB 9.5-1 "Guidelines for Fire Protection for Nuclear Power Plants Docketid prior to July 1, 1976" Rev. 1, November 18, 1976.
3.2 Branch Technical Position'CHEB 9.5-1 "Guidelines for Pire Protec-tion for Nuclear Power Plants" Rev. 2, July, 1981.
3.3 Omaha Public Pover District, Fort Calhoun Station, Unit 1, Fire Hazards Analysis (updated) Rev. O, October 12, 1987.
l 3.4 Fort Calhoun Station Unit No. 1, Maintenance Procedure HP-PP-2 Pire Barrier Penetration Sel s.
l l
r 3.5 Conduit Fire Protection Research Program, Final Report, Profes-l sional Loss Control, Inc., June 1, 1981.
4.0 POLTCY The purpose of'a fire barrice is to prevent the spread of a firc' from
~
one side of the barrier to the other.
Openings in the barrier must be
~
protected to the level necessary to prevent fire propagation.
The design objective for conduit penetrations as with door openings, duct penetrations and cable tray penetrations is to prevent the spread of fire through the barrier.
Open conduits that terminate at the vall should be treated as sleeves and should be sealed with rated scals as described HP-FP 2.
General policy for scaling of other ccnduits penetrating fire barriers to pre-vent the propagation of fire is outlined belov.
1.
Conduits that terminate in junction boxes or other noncombustible closure need no additional sealing.
Conduits that run through an area but do not term'nate in that area need not be scaled in that area.
2
p-
~
a
. s. ;-s;.
2.
Open conduits smaller than 2" ciameter that terminate 1 foot or greater from the barrier need not be sealed.
3.
Open conduits of 2" diameter that terminate 3 feet or greater from the barrier need not be sealed.
Open conduits of greater than 2" in diameter that terminate 11 feet 4.
or greater from the. barrier and have a cable fill of 40% or greater need not be sealed.
ThN sealing requirements for open conduits can be summerizcd in the following table.
Open Terminatio!!
Distance (Jt)
Conduit Diameter-(in)
<1' 11' 23'
<2" Y
N N
2" Y
Y N
>2" Y
Y Y(1)
(1) "0TE: only if conduit cable fill density is <40%
When sealing of conduits, other than sleeves, is required, the sesl may be a plug of ceramic fiber and need not be applied at the vall but at the pen end of the conduit.
5.0 JUSTIFICATION These design guidelines are based un the conduit seal fire test con.
ducted on November 13, 1980, at Construction Technology 1,aboratories (See Reference 3.5).
The test slab in.arporated 101 conduit penetra-tions of diameters from 1/2" through 6", projecting from l' t rough 7' outside the furriace. The test slab was exposed to the ASTM E 419 stan-dard fire exposure for 3 hours3.472222e-5 days <br />8.333333e-4 hours <br />4.960317e-6 weeks <br />1.1415e-6 months <br />.
During the test, no flanes propagated through the conduits and no cables were ignited on thc unexposed side of the test slab.
Only one conduit (a 2" open conduit'with 10% cable fill, terminating 1 foot from the slab) exceeded 7000F at its end.
Onen conduits larger than 2" diam tested, but internal temperature measurements vere made,e,ter vere not a 3", 4", and 6" conduit.
Based on these internal temperatures, it can be concluded tnat conduits larger than 2" diameter which terminate 3' or greater from the barrier and a caw e fill density of 40% or greater need not be sealed.
which i
V37 3
..n.
gn p :13 v.ypg<.Arr,n \\ S g
pXa 7-v.;
.a.
.v.
v.aua a.
4 ASSISSYsV?
0..
7,L S u,rr7,ncr,n,\\
n 7y
..a u.... u
< ANUA;RY 22
~?HRJA:1Y '.0,1988
" TO ASSESS THE ADEQUACY OF Tile FORT CALHOUN FIRE PROTECTION PROGRAM IN LIGHT OF CURRENT REGULATORY PHlLOSOPHY WITH THE INTENTION OF BEING AN INDUSTRY STANDARD BEARER IN THE FIELD 0F NUCLEAR POWER PLANT FIRE PROTECTION."
THE ULTIMATE G0AL: TO ACHIEVE AND MAINTAIN A SALP RATING OF "1" IN THE AREA 0F FIRE PROTECTION w
i i
l l
l REVISED i
FIRE HAZARD j
ANALYSIS 1
f l
l 1
i
s;
- p..
~
R3 CUT 0lY 10CUMTS U"JZ3l 1
APCSB 9.5-1 Appendix A ASB 9.5-1 NUREG 0800 10 CFR 50 Appendix R i
Generic Letter 81-12 Generic Letter 86-10 l.E. NOTICE 84-09 SECY 85-306 NRC INSPECTION MODULES (various applicable)
NRC SALP REPORTS since 1981 NFPA CODES (various applicable)
L w
,. _...,. -,.