ML20198A870
| ML20198A870 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Crane  |
| Issue date: | 12/30/1997 |
| From: | Langenbach J GENERAL PUBLIC UTILITIES CORP. |
| To: | NRC OFFICE OF INFORMATION RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (IRM) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19317C839 | List: |
| References | |
| 6710-97-2489, NUDOCS 9801060119 | |
| Download: ML20198A870 (16) | |
Text
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - - - _ - - _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ - _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ - _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ -.
e o GPU Nuciear inc.
l Route 141 South
(
Post Office Box 480 NUCLEAR Middletown. PA 170510480 fe1717 644 7621 Ol7)948 800$
December 30, 1997 6710 97-2489 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 4
Atiention: DocumentControl Desk Washington,DC 20555 Gentlemen:
Subject:
Three Mile Island Nuclear Station, Unit I (TMI 1)
Operating License No. DpR-50 Docket No. 50-289 10 CFR 50 Appendix R ExemptionRequest-Response to Request far Additiorallnfonnation NRC letter dated August 19,1997 (6710-97-3378) requested additionalinformation regarding the TMI l request for exemption from the requirementsof 10 CFR 50, Appendix R, Section lil.G.2.c.
Attachment I to this letter provides an itemized response to each of the NRC questions. As a result of reevaluation of cable failure temperatures in assessing conductor temperatures, correction to certain cable failure temperatures and associated cable qualineation ratings were identified. These corrections are listed in the enclosed Table 4. Although the corrected cable qualification ratings for the identified envelopes are reduced from the original rating of 60 minutes, the revised rating of 57 minutes is still supported by the associated fire hazards analysis provided in the original exemption request submitted December 31,1996, f
/ -00 lo k
9001060119 971230 PDR ADOCK 05000299 F
P DR, ll['-lj,lff,], f ujl, fff,,lll'.
...e_
o.
~
x no g
\\
\\ ! A
,J ui GhbtF MjLQ_ PD/-
-[
inn ne j
e
'6710 97 2489 Pege 2 c
'ihe attached Applied Analysis Corporation Calculation C-9000 814 5310-002, Revision 0, dated
' ay 25,1995 contains Preprietary information as defined in 10 CFR 2.790(a)(4). Accordingly,it is requested that this document be withheld from public disclosure. An aflidavit certifying the basis for this application for withholding as required by 10 CFR 2.790(b)(1)is also attached to this letter (AttachmentIV).
If additionalinfbrmation is required, please contact Mr. David J. Distel, GPU Nuclear Regulatory A(Tairs,at (201)316-7955.
Sincerely, "y
- un,
James W.1.angenbach Vice President and Director,TMl
/DJD/ lab cc: Administrator, Region i TMl Senior Reddentinspector TMI l Senior Project Manager Applied Analysis Corporation-J. Cajigas Attachments:
1.
Itemized Response to NRC Re-luest for AdditionalInfonnation 11.
CalculationC 9000 814 5310 002," Thermal AnalysisofThermo l.ag3301 Fire llarrier Tests", Revision 0, dated May 25,1995 111. GPU Nuclear Memo No. 5350 95 063 IV. Applied Analysis Corporation Aflidavit Certifying Request for Withholding from Public Disclosure
'Page1of8 l
ATfACilMENT I NRC OUliSTION l.
Sandia National Laboratories (SNI,) ma'e the following finding aller a review of the licensee's cabic functionality assessment method:
Th: :lcensee basis for its determination of the temperature response measured during the fire endurance tests has not been adequately established. Of particular concern to SNL in this regard is that the licensee has taken fire test data from a test that lasted for less than one hour (i.e.,50 minutes) and has extrapolated that data to a one hour exposure period using a thermal model that was not included in the submittal. The extrapolation of fire endurance data beyond the actual test duration is, at best, an uncertain practice. Many factors can influence the thermal response of a fire endurance test, and certain of these factors may not be amenable to analysis or extrapolation.
Further, although Suppleraent 1 of GL 8610 states that cable functionality assessments can be made if they are " based on a comparison of the fire barrier internal temperature profile measured during the fire endurance test to existing cable specific performance data",
altemative methodologies can be used provided that the technical basis can be established for the assessment of the thermal exposure conditions.
Given the above finding, the licensee is requested to provide the supporting document, Calculation C-9000 814 5310 002 and a detailed explant.tlon of both the uncertainties and conservatisms in these extrapolations. Specifically, the licensee should address the lbilowing points:
4 llow has the analysis treated the potential for material burn through in extrapolating the Nlil test data assessment?
On what basis has the licensee thermal extrapolation model been validated?
Documentation of the extrapolation model should be in detail so as to allow independent implementation and verification. The licensee is requested to provide the corresponding validation results and studies for stalf review.
Response
Cal ulation C-9000 814 5310 002 " Thermal Analysis Of Thermo Lag 330-1 Fire liarrier Tests"is included as Attachment II. The following discussion addresses the remainder of the request.
i
' Page 2 nf 8 NUMARC/Niil fire endurance test No. 2 1 contained 2" and 4" aluminum conduits protected with nominal 0.5" thick 'lhermc-Lag 330-1 pre shaped conduit sections. This test was ended aller 50 minutes of fire exposure when some of the installed thennocouples(TC) exceeded the AS I M lil 19 allowable temperature limits. A separate NUMAPC/Niil fire endurance test, No.1-6, contained 5" and 3" aluminum conduits protected with nominal 0.5" thick Thenno Lag 3301 pre-shaped conduit sections with " structural upgrades " The test No.1 6
" structural upgrade" consisted of stress skir. (TSI 330-69 material) applied at the seams of the Thermo Lagpre shapedsectionswithThenno Lag 3301 Trowel Gradematerialof about 0.25" total thickness. The stress skin upgrades covered about 6" inches of conduit centered at each of the Thermo Lag pre shaped barrier seams. Since, for example,the conduit's horizontal member (nonnally the hottest area in the furnace)is approximately 60" long and each Thermo Lag pre shaped section is 36" long, only a small percentage of the total horizontal banier length is " upgraded" with the additional thickness of Thermo Lag trowel grade material. Test No.1 6 was performed fbr the full 60 minute rating of the barrier material.
A thennal analysis was used to extrapolate the test 2-1 data from 50 to 60 mmutes. The basic pnnciple of the analysis is that the overall thennal conductance of the Thermo Lag material,0.5" thick 3301 pre shaped sections in this case, can be developed from test data as a time-dependent thennal conductance and thus macroscopically treat the complex heat transfer mechanisms occurring within the Thenno-Lag material during the fire exposure.
Using the test data, a time-dependent thennal conductance for the Thermo Lag material can be calculated from the furnace / specimen TC temperature data and heat transfer principles.
The method is described in detailin GPUN Calculation No. C 9000 814 5310 002. Ihe calculation uses test data from the barrier / furnace region that exhibited the highest temperatures during the test and therefore results in conservative estimates of the overall thermal perfbnnance of the barriers.
The method was validated by perfonning simulations of bcth the 21 and 1-6 tests using the calculated thennal conductance for the Therno Lag barrier. Calculation Figure 618 compares the calculated Thermo Lag thennal perfonnance for the 2"-5" baseline and upgraded aluminum conduit barriers tested in tests No.16 and 2-1. As indicated by this comparison, there is no obvious improvement in the thennal insulating properties of the upgraded barriers vs. the nominal barriers. The figure shows that, when nonnalized to the exposure area, the calculated thermal perfonnances of all these barriers are very similar.
This conclusion is documented in Section 6.8 of the calculation. Calculation Figures 6 24 and 6 26, show that using the average Thermo Lag thermal performance from the 4" and 5" aluminum conduits from the baseline and upgraded tests, both tests can be simulated with very good accuracy for the catire test period. Similarly, calculation Figures 6-28 and 6 30 reallinn this conclusion for the 2" and 3" aluminum conduits. Considering that the averaged Thermo Lag thennal performance used in these simulations was calculated from separate tests, for different size conduits, tmd at different regions within the test furnace the accuracy of the simulations provides a good engineering verification of this methodology.
The calculation also validates the assumption that the test No.1-6 upgrades are of structural nature and do not affect the thennal perfbnnance of the barrier.
' Page 3 cf 8 The calculated thennal performance for the 2" 5" aluminum conduit baniers compared in calculation l'igure 618 does not suggest a trend for any of the barriers, baseline or upgraded, toward severe Thenno-l.ag burn through as that observed in Figure 6 32 for the 3/4" aluminum conduit in test No. 21. In this last case, a severe Thermo Lag material consumption / bum through trend is observed as early as 35 minutes into the test (see Figure 6 32). The post test examination of the 3/4" aluminum conduit specimen in test No. 21 showed several locations of Thenno Lag material burn through as discussed on page 15 of the N!!! Test 21 test report. Converselv even the 2"(for 50 minutes) and 3"(for 60 imnutes) aluminum conduits, tested in tests No. 21 and 16 respectively, were observed as having no bum through locations and their barriers exhibited both charred and uncharred material still remaining. Note that none of the 2" and larger conduit specimens tested under Tests 16 or 21 exhibited the rapid rise in temperature observed in the NIil Test 2-1 lbr 3/4" aluminum conduit and that even the 2" aluminum conduit in the 21 test shows no indications of an imminent increase in the rate of temperature rise at 50 minutes.
Therefore, there is no evidence from the NIil 2-1 Test TC temperature data, post exposure test observations, or from calc *.: lated Thermo Lag barrier thermal perfonnance data that leads to suggest that either of the 2" and 4" aluminum conduit specimens in this test were about to experience a barrier " burn through" during the remaining 10 minuies of the test.
The thermal behavior of the burned Thermo-Lag material is complex. Itowever, the thennal conductance signatures developed in the calculation indicate that once the outside charred coat is produced (@ about 30 minutes for a I hr. barrier, see calculation Figure 6-
- 18) th:s charred coat mid any uncharred Thenno Lag material remaining underneath insulate the protected specitnen until the charred coat itselfis consumed by the fire, i.e.,
until the fire burns through the coat. The more vulnerable small conduits tested in both the baseline and " upgraded" tests were observed to contain similar quantities of both charred and, commonly, uncharred material at the end of the test. Therefore, the Thenno Lag materhl thennal performance caletited Ihr the 50 60 minute period for the 3" and 5" cluminum conduits in " upgraded" tcst No.1 6 is deemed appropriate for ex'rapolating the baseline test No. 2-1 for 2" and 4" aluminum conduit barrier performance to 60 minutes.
There is no evidence that indicates that the char coats on the 2" and 4" aluminum conduit at the end of the 50 minute burn in Test 2-1 were about to be completely consumed in the next 10 minutes since similar "non upgraded" portions of Thenno Lag 3301 material in Test 1-6 survived a 60 minute ASTM lil19 burn without the char coat being consumed. Since the ASTM Ill 19 test temperature is essentially the same at 50 minutes (1661*F) and at 60 minutes (1700"F) and both tests' l-6 and 2-1 furnace temperature reached 1700 F in less than 50 minutes, the Thenno-Lag material conditions experienced during the 50-60 minute period of the " upgraded" test No.1-6 is a reasonable representation of the Thenuo-Lag material conditions that would be expected during the same period for the baseline test No.
2-1. As an added conservatism, the test No. 2-1,2" conduit barrier performance extrapolation documented in calculation Figures 6 28 and 6-29 assumed a furnace temperature profile consistent with test data at this location, which exceeds the ASTM lil19 Standard Temperature Curve by at least 40 F during the 50-60 minute period.
Page 4 of 8 i
liased on the above discussion, the extrapolations of Thenno Lag fire barrier thermal perfonnance documented in the attached calculation are considered acceptable alternative methodologies for estimating barrier thennal perfonnance under the fire exposure conditions specified by AS1M El19. These calculations have been design reviewed by two independent panics and, in one case, the computations were reproduced using an attemate computer program. There is no evidence from the NEl Test 21 TC temperature data, post exposure test observations, or from calculated Thermo-Lag barrier thennal performance data to suggest that " burn through" of even the most vulnerable 2" aluminum conduit banier used in the subject extrapolations wra imminent during the remaining 10 minutes of fire exposure. A " burn through" of the TMI I limiting 2" nluminum conduit i
barrier in Test 2 1, in the event it would have been exposed for an additional 10 minutes, is not deemed likely because even the 3/4" aluminum conduit test specimen was observed to contain a reasonabic amount ofinsulating char material remaining after 50 minutes. It should be noted that for the TMI l conduit extrapolation, additional conservatism is preaent since: a) the thermal diffusivity of aluminum is higher than that of steel and thus using aluminum conduit calculations to represent the TMI l steel conduits is conservative, and b) the application of empty conduit thennal performance data to represent field installations with a 48 84% cable fill, i.e., of higher thermal capacity, is also conservative.
NRC Ouestion 2.
Many of the fire krier tests performed by the industry have failed due to burn through.
SNL would consider burn through to be a case where the virgin Thermo Lag barrier material is fully consumed at any given location during the test leaving only a fragile char layer visible it appears that the NEI tests were evaluated using a different interpretation of bum through.
Specifically, SNL makes the following observations:
SNL has reviewed the documentation for NEl test 2 1 as presented in the NEl Applicction Guide. Particularly troubling to SNL are certain passages included in the post test inspections of the test artict:s. The licensee applications involve 2" or larger conduits; hence, only the corresponding 2" and larger test results are of direct interest Consider for example the desenption for the 2" conduit. The NEl/ Omega Point Laboratories (OPL) test report cites the following:
For the vertical section: "Several areas having 0 in uncharred material remaining."
For the horizontal section: "Several areas in section having 0 in, uncharred material remaining "
Similar descriptions are given for the 4" and 6" conduits as well, particularly in the case of each horizontal section. This condition is not described as a " burn through"in the ieport, but it is unclear how NEl/0PL defined a " burn through". SNL's finds that this physical description is a clear indication that burn through was, at the very least, imminent at the time Of test termination. Once the virgin Thermo-Lag..as been
Pagc 5 cf 8 consumed and there is no remaining uncharred material, bu.n throughis all but inevitable unless the test is stopped. The statemenis of no remaining virgin material in "several areas" raises troubling questions for the TMI Unit I analysis and in particular the validity of any data extrapolations.
I The material Themm Lag 330 1 is purported to derive its primary fire protective ability through sublimation (direct solid to gaseousphase transition)and intumesent(the swelling ard formation of a cher layer as a result of the combustion process) behavior.
Once the virgin material has been consumed, the only protective mechanism left active is the modest msulating power of the char layer. The charred material is relatively fragile, and may be dislodged from the cables dur% fire exposure. Unlike the virgin material, the char layer is porous and significant heat transfer through the char layer would be expected and the 'emperature will experience a sudden increase in the rate of temperature rise. Therefore,an understandingof burn throughbehavioris critical for predictingthe ultimate thennal raponse of the protected commodity to the exposure fire.
The licensee is requested to discuss the post test physical inspection results for the relevant test items from th Niil test report and specifically to address the implicationsorthe statements such as "several areas having 0 inch of uncharred material remaining" with regards to the application of the NIII test results for extrapolation purposes such that the subject cables will be able to continue to function during the full one hour period.
Resoonse As discussed in the response to Question No.1, the " insulating" properties of the Thermo-Lag char material should not be overlooked. The low density char not only acts as an insulato, but it also re irradiates and convects heat away from the protected raceway. This insulating effect was chserved on every test analyzed in the referenced calcriation and manifests itself as a constant "thennal conductivity" over the 30 60 minute period (i.e.,
once the virgin material is burned an only char remains - see calculation Figure U 21).
The char barrier should not be characiciized as fragile since it appears to survive not only the fire and heat effects for at least 30 minutes following its formation but also endures the lose t.. ream portion of the test. Therefore, a " burn-through" of the Thermo Lag material should not be characterized as the point of which the Thermo Lag virgin material has been bumed into the char layer, but rather the point at which the char layer has been consumed and no longer protects the raceway. To ignore the protective properties of the Thenno Lag char layer would not be a fair characterization of this fire barrier material since a significant portion of the fire protection capability of Thermo Lag is dependent on the char layer.
NF.1 post-test observations such as "Several areas having 0 inches uncharred material remaining" describe a condition in which all the Thermo Lag virgin material has been charred but do not describe a " burn-through" or an imminent " burn through." These same observations are made to describe the post-test examinations of Test 1-6, a test that was successful. Note that the low density char swells the original Thermo-Lag meterial to more than twice its original thickness and that a " burn thmugh," as discussed in the response to Question No.1, would not occur until the char layer is consumed.
'Page 6 of 8 it is felt that the thermal analyses performed in Reference i provide a good understanding of the thermal behavior of the Thermo Lag barrier meterial during fire exposure and, in particular, the " insulating" characteristics of the char layer. This understanding, coupled with the technical insight obtained from NEl Tests 1-6 and 21 and the calculational conservatisms used in the analyses, insure that the extrapolation of the Test 21 data for an additional 10 minutes of fire exposure is technically reasonable. The referenced calculation and the response to Question No. i provide additional technical support on the Test 2-1 extrapolations.
NRC Ouestion 3.a SNL finds that the licensee's submittal has not established an adequate basis for the assumed cable damage or lhilure threahold. SNL does not question the acceptability of the cited NUREG/CR test results in general, but rather, the applicability af the cited result to the licensee's cables. The licensee is requested to provide the cited GPUN memo 5350 95 063 for review along with any supporting documentation.
Resoonse GPU Nuclear Memo No. 5350 95 063 is included as Attachment 111. T his memo cites the lowest recommended cable failure temperatures for each of the major cable insulation types from Table 6 of SNL paper SAND 92-1404C,"The Estimation of Electrical Cable Fire-Induced Damage Limits". Enclosed Tables 1 and 2 identify each cable that is the subject of the exemption request and the corresponding insulation types and cable failure temperatures per SNL paper SAND 921404C Review of the enclosed Tables 1 and 2 shows that SNL paper SAND 92 1404C applies to all cables that are part of the exemption request and, thus, provides an adequate basis for the cable failure temperatures.
NRC Ouestion 3.b SNL finds that the licensee has not established an adequate basis for the assessment of individual circuit performance requirements. While the cited cable performance results are appropriate for low to medium voltage power cables and control applications, they may not be appropriate for higher voltage power nor instrument circuits. The licensee is requested to: (1) identify each of the analyzed circuits as either power, control, or instrumentation along with the corresponding voltage and ampacity loads for all power cables; and (2) provide an assessment of circuit performance requirements for both a limiting voltage power cable application and for a limiting instrumentation case. This assessment should include a direct link between circuit functionality requirements and the cited damage threshold.
t L
I'
' Page 7 0f 8 Essoonse i
There are no instrumentation circuits that are part of the Thil 1 exemption request. The control and power cables that are protected by envelopes that are part of the exemption request are identified in the enclosed Table 1 and Table 2 respectively. Enclosed Table 3 lists all the power cables from Table 2 and includes the associated voltage and ampacity loads, and shows that only low voltage cables rated at 600 V and medium voltage cables rated at 5 KV are within the scope of the subject exemption request. Since the exemption request includes only low to medium voltage power cables and control cables, no further analysis is required. Thus, the cited NUREG/CR reports apply to the subject Thil 1 cables and provide an adequate basis for the assessment of cable performance requirements.
NRC Ouestion 3.c SNL finds that the licensee's analyses have not adequately addressed the issue of power cable self heating effects, and in particular, that the cited cable performance tests upon which the cited functionality limits are based have nel bounded this effect Ilence, the submittal is deficient in this regard.
Specifically, SNL makes the following observations:
SNL finds that the licensee's inclusion of an additional 7* F increment to allow for cable self heating effects is not adequate to address the concern. It would appear that the licensee is attempting to address self heating efTects by simply incrementing the ambient exposure to reflect the ambient temperature withir the fire barrier. The specific question is what is the additional temperature increment between the cable itself and the ambient temperature at the onset of the fire, not what is the temperature of air immediately around the cable. A second f.ctor to be considered is the fact that the cited licensee documents
(
Reference:
Letter from J. Drendien to J.W. Langenbach. "TSI Derating Check",
G/C/Th11 lCS/16503 dm.~ September 15,1988) supporting this value were reviewed separately as a part of the licensee ampacity assessments. As a result l
of this separete review, the licensee has agreed that the cited tests were not of l
adequate quality to be used in the context of the regulatory process and hence, l
has withdrawn their reliance on those results for ampacity derating process. The l
exact same objections would apply in this application, in particular, the licensee l
has not demonstrated an adequate level of quality assurance for these tests, nor has the licensee demonstrated that the cited tests actually measured a limiting case for the electrical raceways installed in Th11-1.
As noted by the licensee on page 11 of the Topical Report #094 attached to the subject submittal, the SNL test cited as the basis for the licensee assumed cable damage limits did involve an imposed voltage potential, but did not involve imposed current flows during the tests, it is not correct to infer that cable self-heating is bounded by tests such as those performed by SNL. Therefore, the licensee assessments should independently allow for the ohmic effect for energized power cables, t
~~
~~
~
Page 8 of 8 The licensee is requested to: (1) identify each of the fire barrier envelopes that includes power cables within the protected envelope; (2) for each power cable circuit determine whether or not it is reasonable to postulate that the circuit might be energized at the outset of a fire: (3) for all energized cables assess the temperature increment that characterizes the rise in temperature of the cable above the surrounding ambient due to ohmic heating effects consistent with the licensee's own ampacity assessments; and (4) for each impacted envelope explicitly include the cable self heating effect in the functionality assessment including consideration of the mutual heating effect for collocated but non-energized i
cables.
]
1(esponse As requeste( the enclosed Table 2 identilles the fire barrier envelopes that are within the scope of the exemption request that contain power cables. Enclosed Table 3 identifies whether or not the power circuit is expected to be energized at the outset of a fire. Table 3 also provides conductor temperature fbr the expected load currents as calculated by GpUN C.
I101-770 E420 019, it is conservative to assume that the conductor temperature and cable inside insulation circumference temperature is the same as the cable outside insulation circumferencetemperature. Thus,the calculated conductor temperatureis taken as the cable temperature at the outset of a fire. Functionalityassessments have been performed using the new cable initial operating temperature and there is no impact on the cable qualification rating as a result. These assessments are documented in the TMI l Thermo Lag electronic database available for NRC review. This revised r.. modology addresses and bounds the issue of power cable self heating.
NltC Ouestion 3.d As a final point of note, the licensee has apparently assumed that an equivalent cable qualification rating of"at least 57 minutes"is suflicient to meet the intent of the Appendix R requirement Ihr a one-hour barrier system. The licensee is requested to providejustification (br the above assumption.
liesnonse The exemption request submittal does not assume that a cable qualification rating of at least
$7 minutes is suflicient to meet the intent of the Appendix n requirement for a one-hour barrier system. This statement is typically made where the cable qualification rating of the barrier is at least 60 minutes because if the cable will perform its function both during and aller a fire exposure of one hour,it is considered to meet the intent of the regulation.
The basis for acceptability of a 57 minute cable qualification rating is provided in the fire hazards analysis fbr each fire archone described in the exemption request.
4
- Table I A Exemption Requ e1 Fire 11arrier Envelopes Titt Cont:in 600V Control Cables (Sorted by Envelope No.)
t Envelopc Fire Arca Cable Manufacturcr Insulation Cabic Failurc l
No.
or Zone No.
T)pe Telnperature ('C)
No I AXC-livil A144/4 CH2324 kmkhentos Xl l'l 299 1AXC4101 All4A$
CR262A Rakkstos XI.PL 299 I ANC-lin6 AH4 /.4 CR $72 A Hrwkletos XIJ't 299 I ANC41K4.
Altt /-4 CR$N2A Rwklotos XI PI 299 l AXC4 tkJN Alti /.4 CONo t Rwkhestos XI.PL 299 l AXC-i !K)9 All4 /.1 CR212 A Rakbestos XI.PL 299 ICCC f lKil f il-F/4 CQ2121l R<sktestos XI.PL 299 1000 11101 1814/4 CE262A Rm ktwatna XI J't.
299 ICCC4 lM))
Fil4/4 Chil2 A Rmkbestre XI.PL 299 10C041801
[ 11/4 -
R V179 A Hwk testos XI.PL 299 10C041902 l' 14/4 R V29 kmktwstm N henne 396 10001H07 1114 / 4 FAl9 firarul-Res XI.PL 299 10Cl).I 001 C144 A 1 1D3031 Kerrte 111 Kerste(i PR)
._ 370 104'l)- Fil01 ClkFA I LD5011 A Kerne lli Kerste(LPR) 370 1001)I Hot CILFA 1
)D%014 Kerne ilT Lerne(i PM) 370 ICClkillol ClkF A.I I D$014 A Kente til Kente(I PR) 370 ICClkhl01 CitiA.I CQ2121:
Rm khentos XI Pl.
299 ICCD l'Il01 Citt A.1 Ch262A HmkMinn Xll'L 299 10ClklH01 CibtA.I Call?A Rwkletos XI.PL 299 ICClkiHot Cll4 A.I R V179 A Rwk hestm XI.PL 299 ICCD41104 Cll4 A l CE262A kmk Mtna XI.PL 299 ICCitl'Im4 Cll t A 1 Chil2A Rcwk Mtos XI.Pt 299 BCClkilE4 CILFA l RV29 R wklaton M hcone 396 i CCD-l'It0N C164 A 1 l.D107A Ilrarul-Ret XI.PL 299 1001)4 HON Cil4 A.I
}D3011A Kmte li'l Kerste(I PR) 170 ICClkillog Clkl A 1 LDt014A Kmte ill kerne (I PR)
.170 ICClkillio C164 A.1 I D 409 A lirand-Ret XI PL 299 ICCD l il21 ll1442 CR232C Okonnte
!?R 370 ICClkill21 1114/.2 CR262A R<wk hentos XI.PL 299
- ICClkill21 ll14/ 2 CR362il Rnckhestna XI.PL 299 10CikFel21 F164/ 2 CR165ll Rnck bentos XI.PL 299 IIIIIillo?
F 114/.I Cllt 134 A Hm kletna XI.PL 299 ll11C-6002 t ill Al CilF364 R ocktetos XI.PL 299 f lilC-I ll02 Fil l/ l I/124 Rock bestos XI.PL 299 1111C.I'l102 t il4 /.I 1.T33A Rwk bestm XI PL 299 111104110$
Fil4Al LD5011 Kente llT Kente(t.PR) 370 11110-l!l05 l'il 141 t!)3034 Kente 111 Konte(FPR) 370 l
t illC-t alo7 Fil4/-l CQ212H Rwktwstos XI.PL 299 18110 11607 l'il4 /. !
R Vi?9 A Rakbestm XI.PL 299 lillC-Illli l'Il 1 Al CR2320 Okonde I PR 370 t illC-Illl i l'Il4/.I CR30211 Kente Kente F R 372 IFilC41111 1114 4 8 CR312C Kmte Amte F R 372 ll'IlC illit tild / l CR322L Kente Kente l k 3.2 ll1101011 lit-l/ l CR36211 Rwktestos XI.PL 299 t i llc-Fill i Fli4Al CR363tl Rmkleston N1.PL 299 tillC Illl3 1114 /.I RA933 Kerne Kente l R 372 t hillkill01 INPil4 /.i CHil51 Kente Kerste l R 372 1%Illkillot thPil4/.1 0111154 kwk heston Mhcone 396 ISillkl H01 1 APil4/.1 l 'I l l Kente Kmte t R 372 ISilD4tt01 1%Pil4/ l 1.T12 Kente Kente l R 372 lhilD41101 thril4/.1 1.T16 Kerne Kente FR 372 IhilD41I01 Isril4 /.I
!!! 19 Kmte Kente i R 372 INillki'll01 ISPil4 /A l.131 Rockbeston Lisone 396 Isillkiltni 1%Pil4 /.I Ifl $1 Kmte kerite i R 372 1%Illk8 e101 IsPil4%l I.X61 kmte Kente I R 372 1 h1141'1403 1%Pil F/ 2 01114x9 Kente Kente i R 372 INElkilkB 15Pil442 1.R i l Kente Kente l R 372 I Ni fD41tD s ISPildh2 13t12 Kente Kerne l R 372 ISillkflKl3 ISPildh2 1.R 16 Kente Kerne t R 372 l
l%IllkFH03 ISPil4/-2 I Rl9 Kente Kente l R 372 t hillkt IK3 1%Pil442 iR47 Kmte Kente } R 372 IsilD4 001 ISPil4A2 1.N51 Kente Kerite t R 372 l
Isillkillot isPil4 /4 1.X 51 Kente Kente FR 372 l -.
I
- Table in Enmption Request Fire Barrier Envelopes That Contrin 600V Control Cables (Sorted by Cable No.)
Cable Fire Arca or ZoHe Envelope Manufacturer Insulation Cable Failure No No No.
Type Temperature ('d
(.Hl4k9 1%M14 /.2 ISillkl HO)
Amte Amte 6 R 172 CIO I SI 1%Pil4/.1 1 kilD-l llol Kente Kente i R 372 01111$4 1%Pil.1/.I
'%llD lH01 kalbestm hilmwie 396 I
C hi1 $4 A IHlbi IHIC-lIWi2 kmatswa XI.PL 299 Clll364 1164 / I I HlC-HWi2 kmklest(s XI.PL 299 COkul AILl/.4 l A\\C.l HON Rakhes <=
XI.PL 299 i
CQ232H Cil4 A.I lCCD41103 Rm L hestos XI J't 299 0Q21211 l'Il4 /.I 1111C41607 kmLtwatm XI.PL 299 0 424211 1114 / 4 iCCC4160l Hm Lhestm XI Pl 299 CR212 A Alki/.1 I A\\C.llM19 R oci bestos XlPL 299 CR212 A All l /.S l ANC4 lN)1 Ratheston XI.PL 299
~ 'CR212C l il.1/.I 18110 1H13 Okonnte IPR 370 CR212C Ilid / 2 lCCl)-l H2)
Okorute LPR 370 CR 262 A A18 } /.S I ANC.HW11 Rxk bestos XI PI 299 CH262A i 11 4 /.2 100 D-l 1621 kmkleston XI PL 299 CRl02H 1814 /.1 tille Illt)
Kmte Kente l R 372 CR1120 1Il4A1 Illied ill 3 Kente Kente l'R 372 LR122L i 114 /.I Ii1104 HI 3 Kente Kente i R 372 CR162il I 114 /.I illiCd til3 Ra khestos XI.PL 299 CR162il i H4 /.2 lCCD.) N1 Rmihestos XI.PL 299
+
(. R16 Sin i 11 4 /.1 1I Ilc.) til 3 Rmihestos XI.Pl 199 CR16SH I 11 4 /.2 1CCD41521 Rxkheston N1.PL 299 CR 572 A Alkib4 1ANC41106 Rmilest<m XI.PL 299 CR$k2A AD4 /.4 1 AXC4 H06 Rmihestre XI J'E 299 0%262 A Cil4 A.l 1CCD4 HOL Rosilwstus XI PE 299 CS262A Clkra.1 ICCl>Hl04 Ra k hestre XI.PL 299 0%262A l l14 /4 10CC4'1601 Rakheston NI.PL 299 Chil 2 A Cll4 A.]
10CD41601 Rxkheston XI.PL 299 CS112 A C144 A.1 ICCI Al lW)4 kak hestos XIJ'E 299 CSil2A Ilid /4 1CC'?.H101 Rockbestos XI.PL 299 LA19 1114 / 4 10CC4'10 /
Hrand-Rex XI Pt 299
&D107A Cll 5 A l ICClki HON lirand-Rex XI PL 299 l 'D 409 4 Cil4 A.)
ICCD4Illo Hrand-Res XI.PL 299 iD5011 C H4 A.I 1001)4 H01 Kente llT Nente () PR) 370 109014 Hl.)/ l IHIC4160$
Amte lli Kente (t PR) 370 iD3011A Cli4A l 10CD4 8601 Kente ill Kente(IPR) 370 iD4014A Cll4 A 1 ICCiLilt9s Kente 111 Kente(LPR) 370 i
1Diole Cil4 A.I lCCD41601 Kente lli Kente (I PR) 370 lD5014 til4/.I IHlC4110$
Kente ill Kente(LPR) 370 l D5014 A Cil4 A.I ICClki Ho t Kmte ill Kente () PR) 370 LD3044 A Cil4 A.I ICClkt il0N Kente 1;l Kente(I PR) 370 1 RIi 1%Pil4/.2 1%IllbiH03 Kente Kente i R 372 1.R I 2 1%Pild /.2 15)lD-lik))
Kente Kente l R 372 1 R16 ISPilf/.2 1%IID.IH01 Ken'f Kente I R 172 1 R19 INPil442 1%llD4 H01 Kente Kente l R 372 1.R 4 7 1%Pild /.2 1%)likiHot Kente Kmte i R 372 1.1 I I INPil4/4 1%)liki H01 Kente Kmte i R 372 LT12 1%Nt4LI l%IllbHlot Konte Kente l R 372 1.116 ISPil.171 ISilD Hlu t Kente Kente i R 372 1.T l 9 1%N1471 1%IID Hl01 kmte Kente I R 372 1424 H14WI I MIC.H N12 Rxk twstos XI.PL 299 1431 INPil4bt l%IllhMN)I Rockheston Silmwie 396 LT34A Hi l /.I IHIC.I'llo2 Rockbestos XI.PL 299 t /1 $1 1%Pil4%I 1%)lD4llol Kmte Amte I R 372 IASI 1%PH4 /.2 ISittbl'Iloi Kmte Kmte i R 372 I A33 1%Pil4/.2 15111 4 110 3 Kente Kente FR 372 1A6I 1%Pil4 /.I l%llD41101 Kente Kente i R 372 RK953 1114 7 1 iHIC.Hil3 Kente Kente i R 372 RV29 Cll441 ICEI).H106 Rathestas hibeone 390 RV29 l~l14/.6 1000.L1602 Rakhestos hilicone 396 R VI?9A Cll4 A.I ICCD41101 13 cwktwstos XI.PL 299 RVl79A 1114 / 4 I Hic.Hl07 Rockbenton XI.Pl.
299 R Vl79 A Hl474 ICCC.l lW))
Rathestos N1.Pl 299 t
--~,.,,y
,,,,...-m.,
-,,74
,,,,-,,._-,.-,,-v.-.-m y
---.--m--
r.,,
~ -. -
4 i
Table 2A Exempoon Request Fire Barner Emtlopes 'niat Contain 600V or SKV Power Cables (Sorted By Emtlope No )
Emtiope Fire Area or Cable Manufacturer Insulauon Cable Fa. lure lead Tag No.
Load No.
Zone No.
No.
Type Temperature Descripuon
('C)
I AXC-FB01 AB-FZ-5 CG83 Kente ifF(EPR) 370 IC-P-IA 1.u.
lise Cooling Pump A I AXC-FB07 AB-FZ4 CG102 Brand-Rex XLPE 299 MU-V-14 A Make-up Suction Isolation Vahr I AXD-FB01 AB-FZ-7 LS5 Kente ifT(EPR) 370 NS-P-IC Nuclear Services Ccoling Pump C i
I AXD-FB02 AB-FZ-7 LP6 Kente HT (EPR) 370 NS-P-1 A Nuclear Semces Coolmg Pump A ICCC-FB04 FH-FZ-6 LP5A Kente HT(EPR) 370 IC-480V-ESV 480V IC Engd Srgds. Vahe MCC l
ICCC-FB05 FH-FZ-6 LPSB Kente HT(EPR) 370 IC480V-ESV 480V IC Engd Sfgds Vahe MCC ICCD-F3301 CB-FA-1 LS5 Kente HT (EPR) 370 NS-P-IC NucIcar Senices Cooling Pump C ICCD-FB01 CB-FA-1 LS7 Kente llT (EPR) 370 IB480V-ESV 480V IB Engd. Sfgds. Vahr MCC ICCD-FB02 CB-FA-1 LP5A Kente HT (EPR) 370 IC4*)V-ESV 430V IC Engo Sfgds. Vahr MCC l
i.
ICCD-FB02 '
CB-FA-1 LP5B Kente IIT (EPR) 370 IC480V-ESV 480V IC Engd. Sfgds. Vahr MCC l
l
' 1CCD-FB09 CB-FA-1 ED313 Kente HT (EPR) 370 IQ-DC 125/250V DG B ES DC Dist. Pnt. IQ i
ICCD-FB12 CB-FA-1 Cll3 Kente HT (EPR) 370 Batterv Charger IB Batterv Charger IB ICCD-FBI 3 CB-FA-1 CII4 Rockbestos XLPE 299 Batterv Charger ID Batterv Charger ID ICCD-FBIS CB-FA-1
- ED60C Rockbestos XLPE 299 IF-DC 125/250V Engd. Sfgds. DC Dist Pnl. IF l
- ICCD-FBIS CB-FA-1 ED60D Rockbestos XLPE 299 IF-DC 125/250V Engd. Sfgds DC Dist. Pnl. IF
[
ICCD-FB17 CB-FA-1 ED55 Kerite HT(EPR) 370 IB-DC 125/250V Main DC Dist. Pnt. IB
{
I ICCD-FBIS CB-FA-1 ED56 Kente ifF(EPR) 370 IB-DC 125/250V Main DC Dist. Pnl. IB ICCD-FB19 CB-FA 1 EA4 Kente HT (EPR) 370 VBD ID 120V Vital AC Dist. Pnl VBD ICCD-FB20 CB-FA-1 EA2 Kente HT(EPR) 370 VBB IB 120V Vital AC Dist. Pnl. VBB 1CCD-FB21 CB-FA-1 ED52A Kente IIT(EPR) 370 1B-DC 125/250V Main DC Dist Pnt. IB ICCD-FB21 CB-FA-I ED52B Kente HT(EPR) 370 IB-DC 125/250V Main DC Dist. Pnt. IB ICCD-I-Bd CB-FA-1 LS4A Kente itT(EPR) 370 IC-480V-ESV 480V IC Engd Sfgds. Vahe MCC l
ICCD-FB22 CB-FA-I LS4B Kente HT(EPR) 370 IC480V-ESV 480V IC Engd Sfgds. Vahr MCC f
ICCD-FB24 CB-FA-1 LS2 Kente ifF(EPR) 370 DC-P-1B Decar IIcat Closed C3rle Pump B
[
IFilC-FB01 FH-FZ-1 ME7 Kente IIT(EPR) 370 MU-P-IC Make-Up / IIPI Pump C
[
l iFilC-FB04 FE FZ-1 MEII Kente ifF(EPR) 370 IT480V-SHES 480V IT ES Screen House Switchgcar t
1SHD-FB05 ISPH-FZ-1 MEII Kente hT(EPR) 370 1T480V-SHES 480V IT ES Screen llouse Switchgcar i
ISHD-FB06 ISPII-FZ-2 MDII Kente HT(EPR) 370 iR480V-SHES 480V 1R ES 3creen House Switchgcar l
k
..~.r
...m_,
t.
i t
t l
l Table 2B Exemption Request Fire Barner Emtlopes That Centam 600V or SKV Power Cabics (Sorted By Cabic No )
i d,
[
Cabic.
Emtlope Fire Arca or Manufacturer lasulation Cabic Failure Load Tag No.
Imd
[
j No.
No.
Zone No.
Type Temperature Description
(*C) 4 I
CG83 I AXC-FB01 AB-FZ-5 Kerste llT(EPR) 370 IC-P-1A Incrmediate Coolmg Pump A b
CG102 1AXC-FB07 AB-FZ4 Brand-Rex XLPE 299 MU-V-14 A Make-up Suction Isolation Vahr C513 ICCD-FBI 2 CB-FA-1 Kente ifr(EPR) 370 Batterv Charger IB Batterv Charger IB
[
CH4 1CCD-FB13 -
CB-FA-1 Rockbestos XLPE 299 Batterv Charger ID Batterv Charger ID
(
f EA2 ICCD-FB20 CB-FA-1 Kerite fir (EPR) 370 VBB IB 120V Vital AC Drst. Pnt. VBB i
j7 EA4 ICCD-FB19 CB-FA-1 Kente HT (EPR) 370 VBD ID 120V Vital AC Dist. Pnl VBD 1'
ED52A 1CCD-FB2I CB-FA-1 Kerite HT (EPR) 370 1B-DC 125/250V Main DC Dit Pnt. IB ED528 ICCD-FB21 CB-FA-1 Kerste HT(EPR) 370 IB-DC 125/250V Main DC Dist Pnl IB
?.D55 ICCD-FB17 CB-FA-1 Kente ifr(EPR) 370 IB-DC n5/250V Main DC Dist. Pnl. IB ED56 ICCD-FBI 8 CB-FA-1 Kerite ifT(EPR) 370 IB-DC 125/250V Main DC Dist. Pnl. IB ll ED60C ICCD-FBIS CB-FA-1 Rockbcssos XLPE 299 IF-DC 125/250V Engd. Sfgds. DC Drst. Pnt. IF ED60D ICCD-FBIS CB-FA-1 Rockbestos XLPE 299 IF-DC 125/250V Engd_ Sfgds. DC Dt1 Pnl. IF
)-
ED3I3 1CCD-FB09 CB-FA-1 Kerite HT(EPR) 370 IQ-DC 125/250V DG B ES DC Dist Pnl. IQ
]
LP5A ICCC-FB04 j Fil-FZ-6 Kente HT(EPR) 370 IC480V-ESV 480V IC Engd. Sfgds Vahr MCC LPSA ICCD-FBO ?
CB-FA-1 Kerite HT(EPR) 370 IC-480V-ESV 480V IC Engd. Sfgds. Vahr MCC E
LP5B 1CCC-FB05 Fli-FZ-6 Kcnte ifr(EPR) 370 1C-480V-ESV 480V IC Engd. Sfgds. Vahr MCC
-LPSB ICCD-FB02 CB-FA-1 Kerite IIT(EPR) 370 IC-480V-ESV 48CV IC Engd. Sfgds Vahr MCC LP6 I AXD-FB02 AB-FZ-7 Kerite IIT(EPR) 370 NS-P-1 A Nucicar Scnices Cooling Pump A f
o LS2 ICCD-FB24 CB-FA-1 Keiite HT(EPR) 370 DC-P-1B Decav Heat Ckncd Cytle Pump B i
LS4A 1CCD-FB22 CB-FA-1 Kerite IIT(EPR) 370 1C-480V-ESV 480V IC Entd. Sfgds. Vahr MCC l
l LS4B ICCD-FB22 CB-FA-1 Kcrite IIT(EPR) 370 IC480V-ESV 480V IC Engd Sfgds. Vahr MCC LS5 1 AXD-FB01 AB-FZ-7 Kerite ifT (EPR) 370 NS-P-IC Nuclear Seniccs Cooling Pump C LS5 ICCD FB01 CB-FA-1 Kerite IIT (EPR) 370 NS-P-IC Nucicar Senices Cooling Pump C f
LS7 1CCD-FB01 CB-FA-1 Kerite FIT (EPR) 370 1B-480V-ESV 480V IB Engd. Sfgds. Vahe MCC l
MDII ISHD-FB06 ISPil-FZ-2 Kerite IIT(EPR) 370 1R-480V-SHES 4 ROV IR ES Screen flouse Switchgcar
{
ME7 IFilC-FB01 Fil-FZ-I Kente IIT (EPR) 370 MU-P-IC Make-Up / HPI Pump C
[
MEII IFliC-FB04 FH-FZ-1 Kente IIT(EPR) 370 IT480V-SHES 480V IT ES Screen House Switchgcar
[
MEX I ISHD-FB05 ISPil-FZ-I Kente IIT(EPR) 370 IT-480V-SHES 480V IT ES Screen House Switchgcar l
I ll l
l II
's *7 L. p s.
Table 3 Exemption Request 600V or SKV Power Cables (Sorted By Cable No.)
Cable Envelope Reasonable !o Cable Nomiral Ampetity in Load Maximum Conducter No.
No.
be Energized Re.ed Cable Condent* With Current Design Temperatuse At at Outset of Voltage Operating Fire Barrier (A)
Ambient Load Fire?
(V)
Voltage (A)
Temperature
('C)
(V)
("C)
CG83 1 AXC-FB01 Yes 600 460 AC 134 92 40 62 CG102 1AXC-FB07 No 600 460 AC 33 6
40 4I CII3 ICCD-FB12 Yes 600 460_^C 77 41 35 48 Cil4 ICCD-FBl3 Yes 600 460 AC 77 41 35 48 EA2 ICCD-FB20 Yes 600 120 AC 212 100 35 45 EA4 JCCD-FB19 Yes 600 120 AC 212 100 35 45 f
l ED52A ICCD-FB21 Yes 600 125 DC 460 IC 35 40 l
ED52B ICCD-FB21 Yes 600 125 DC 60 151 35 40 ED55 ICCD-FB17 Yes 600 125 DC 212 150 35 58 ED56 1CCD-FB18 Yes 6(X) 125 DC 212 150 58
_ _ D(4C ICCD-FB i5 Yes 600 125 DC 212 72 35 40 E
ED60D ' ICCD-FB14
'Jes
_68ML 125 DC 212 72 35 40 ED313 ICCD-FB05 Yes 600 125 DC l '.2 26 35 36 LP5A ICCC-FB04 Yes 600 480 AC 288 80 35 40 ICCD-FB02 Yes 600 480 AC 2S8 80 40 45 LP5B ICCC-FB05 Yes 600 480 AC 288 80 35 40
'CCD-FBG2 Yer 600 480 AC 288 80 40 45 LP6 I AXD-FB02 Yu 600 460 AC 212 143 40 61 LS2 ICCD-FB24 Yes 690 460 AC 154 115 35 60 LS4A ICCD-FB22 Yes 600 480 AC
?SS 89 35 41 LS4B 1CCD-FB2.2 Yes 600 480 AC 288 89 35 4I 40 62 i
LS.i i AXD-FB01 Y;.=
600 460 AC 212
, d 56 ICCD-FB01 Yes 600 460 AC 212 l
35 LS7 ICCD-FB01 Yes 600 480 AC 354 140 35 46 MD11 1S11D-FB06 Yes 5000 4160 AC 288 70 40 44 54
. ME7 IFIIC-FB01 Yes 5000 4160 AC 212 92 40 ~
5 MEl1 IFl!C-FB04 Yes 5000 4160 AC 288 70 40 44 f
ISi1D-FB05 Yes 5000 4160 AC 288 70 40 44 or a sin.gle cable in a wrapped tray. Cable tray derating factors are applied
- Circuits MD11, ME7, and MEl1 are single armored cables which are either wrapped in in both cases.
TABIE4 Cil ANGI 1 TO EXEMPTION REOUEST CABI E OUAl lFICATION RATINGS 1
Cable Oual. Ratine Fire Area / Zone Envelone Tm From To AB-FZ-3 1 AXC-FB09 2" Conduit 60 Min.
57 Min.
AB FZ-3 1 AXC-FB09 2" Radial Bend Conduit 60 Min.
57 Min.
AB FZ-4 1 AAC-FB06 2" Conduit 60 Min.
57 Min.
AB FZ-4 1 AXC-FB06 2" Radial Bend Condait 60 Min.
57 Min.
AB-FZ-4 1 AXC-FB08 2" Conduit 60 Min.
57 Min.
AB-FZ-5 i AXC-FB03 2" Conduit 60 M:n.
57 Min.
AB FZ-5 1 AXC-FB03 2" Radial Bend Conduit 60 Min.
57 Min.
AB-FZ-5 1 AXC-FB03 2" Condulet 60 Min.
57 Min.
AB-F7.-7 Delete 1 AXD-FB-02,"2" Radial Bend Conduit CB FA-1 1CCD-FB03 2" Conduit 60 Min.
57 Min.
CB FA-1 1CCD-FB03 2" Condulet 60 Min.
57 Min.
CB-FA 1 1CCD-FB03 2" Radial Bend Conduit 60 Min.
5' CB-FA-1 1CCD-FB03 3" Conduit 60 Min.
57 Min.
CB-FA-1 1CCD-FB03 3" Condulet 60 Min.
57 Min.
CB-FA-1 1CCD-FB03 3" Radial Bend Conduit 60 Min.
57 Min.
Cll-FA-1 1CCD-FB04 2" Conduit 60 Min.
57 Min.
CB-FA-1 ICCD-FB04 2" Condu'et 60 Min.
57 Min.
CB-FA-1 1CCD-FB04 2" Radial Bend Conduit 60 Min.
57 Min.
CD-FA-1 1CCDfB13 2" Conduit 60 Min.
57 Min.
CB FA-1 1CCD-FB13 2" Radial Bend Conduit 60 Min.
57 Min.
Fil-FZ1 IFl!C-FB07 3" Condulet 60 Min.
57 Min.
FH-FZ1 1FHC-FB07 3" Conduit 60 Min.
57 Min.
Fil-FZ1 IFIIC-FB07 3" Radial Bend Conduit 60 Min.
57 Min.
Fil-FZ2 1CCD-FB23 2.5" Conduit 60 Min.
57 Min.
FI'FZ2 1CCD-FB23 2.5" Radial Bend Conduit 60 Min.
57 Min.
Fil-FZ2 1CCD-FB23 2.5" Condulet 60 Min.
57 Min.
i
_