TXX-3314, Forwards Environ Qualification Review for Facilities & Certification Forms
| ML20008F822 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Comanche Peak  |
| Issue date: | 05/07/1981 |
| From: | John Marshall TEXAS UTILITIES SERVICES, INC. |
| To: | Burwell S Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| TXX-3314, NUDOCS 8105120108 | |
| Download: ML20008F822 (131) | |
Text
_
TEXAS UTILITIES SERVICES INC.
Log i T;X-33I4 File i 10010 m n aa w. row ta.osu_ u rex u m oi May 7, 1981 Mr. Spottswood Burwell coff )
e
/,0 Licensing Branch 2 U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Cormission S
fFf
'/
s Washington, D.C.
20555 8
Cp k MA'c iligggf J
SUBJECT:
COMANCHE PEAK STEAM ELECTRIC STATION
^ wa
=D p DOCKET N05. 50-445 and 50-446 y
SUBMITTAL OF ENVIRO!CiENTAL QUALIFICATION p
REVIEW AND CERTIFICATION FORMS q,
tu
Dear Mr. Burwell:
By this transmittal, envirom: ental qualification review forms are sutrnitted to assist in the review of the Comanche Peak Steam Electric Station dockets. A list of the review forms being sutraitted is attached. 40 copies of each review form are enclosed.
Sincerely, h
J. S. tiarshall JSM:tts Attachment Enclosure cc:
D. N. Chapman A. T. Parker D. R. Woodlan R. D. Calder J. C. Kuykendall J. T. Merritt S. C. Relyea N. S. Reynolds H. C. Schmidt R. E. Ballard ARMS
!8105120\\O8 C_
ATTACHMENT TO TXX-3314 Environmental Qualification Review Forms NUMBER DESCRIPTION ESID.1 Service Water' Pump Motors ES6 (1 of 2) 480V Transformers ES8 (1 of 2)
Battery Chargers ES13A 8KV Power Cable ES13B.1 600V Control Cable ES138.2 (1 of 2) 600V Power and Lighting Cable ES13C Instrument Cable ES22 Solid State Sequencers SS15 Airlock Electrical Penetration Assemblies MS13 Medium Pump Motors MS15B Sump Pump Motors MS208.1 (1 of 3)
Motor Operated Valves i
MS25A Service Water Screen Motcrs MS80B (1 of 5)
Centrifugal Water Chillers, NCC's MS81 (1 of 2)
HVAC Coolers, Motors MS83B HVAC Fan Motors MS87 (1 of 2)
Control Room Air Conditioning Motors MS92B Vaneaxial Fan Motors i
l l
l t
I
Pcg3 1 of 7 i
COMANCHE PEAK STEAM ELECTRIC STATION IEEE 323-1974 CLASS IE EQUIPMENT QUALIFICATION DOCUMENTATION REVIEW FORM A.
[QUIPMENT/ DOCUMENTATION IDENTIFICATION 1.
SPECIFICATION NO.
2323-ES-lD.1 2.
VENDOR Siemens-Allis (S-A).
3.
APPLICABLE QUALIFICATION DOCUMENTS:
STATUS TRANSMITTAL DOCUMENT (AEN, APP)
(GTN & DATE)
(a) S-A equipment qualification form wound motors for Class lE safety related services) Issue 2, APP GTN-33847, 7 '.o/79 September 25, 1978 t
i 4.
CLASS IE EQUIPMENT / FUNCTION (per specification):
Service water pump motors drive nuclear safety related service water pumps which are essential to the safe shutdown of the plant, and whose failure or damage could result in significant release of radioactive material.
d These motors are located in the Service Water Intake Structure i
which is outside the Containment Building.
Combination of operating history, 5.
QUALIFICATION METHOD (S) analysis and ongoing qualification.
i REVIEWER' J.R. Isgro' hh DATE 9/9/80 REVIEWER J.R.
Isgro
,M~
DATEj.!/.[f/
,w--m-------
,,w-w,
,-r-,
,---n-w
~
Pcg3 2 cf 7 SPEC. M D D /d,/
N.
QUALIFICATION CIECELIST DOC /FAGE REF I
ND 4/A 1.
DOES DOCUMENTATION ADDRESS ALL IB 3 (a) /3 NQUIPMENT SPECIFISD7 NO N/A 3.
DOES DOCUMENTATION ADDRESS CPSES 3(a)/4, 5 SPSCIFIC PARAMETERS?
NO R/A 2a DO NORMAL PARAMETERS FOR QUALIFIED 3 (a) /10, 11, 12 LIFE AND AGING ENVII4PE CPSES WORMAL 13, 16, 17, 18, PARAMZTERS?
19 WO N/A 2b.
DO ABNORMAL / ACCIDENT PARAMETERS USED 3 (a ) /17, 18, 19
{
IN QUALIFICATION ENVELOPE CPSES ABNORMAI/ ACCIDENT PARAMETERS?
NO N/A 3.
IS DOCUMENTATION AUDITABLE AND 3 (a)/coyar aheet TRACEABLE To CPSES EQUIPMENT 7 and 3 NO N/A 4.
IS QUALIFIED LIFE EXPLICITLY STATED?
3 (a) /19 YES NO 4a. DO AGING RESULTS SUPPORT Tgg (see reaark No. 1 QUALIFIED LIRE?
NO N/A 5.
DOES QUALIFICATION METHOD (S) COtiFORM 3 (a ) /1, 2 NITH IEEE STD. 323-19747 (remark No. 1)
YES NO Sa. DOES TEST SEQtT4NCE CONFORM TO (see reaark No. 1 l
IEEE STD. 323-19747 h
4.
ARE FAILURE CRITERIA FOR TESTS (see reaark No. 1 YE5 NO i
DEFINED?
YES NO 7.
IF THE EQUIPMENT WOUID BE EXPOSED (see remark No. 2 To DBA, WAS QUALIFICATION BY TYPE TEST 7 h NO N/A 8.
DCES DEMONSTRATED OPERABILITY 3(a)/10-13, 17 ENVE1 OPE CPSES REQUIREMENTS?
"YES NO h Sa. DOES NON-DETRIMENTAL FAILURE (see remark No.
3.
ENVELOPE CPSES REQUIREMENTS 7 h
NO N/A 9.
ARE MARGINS DEFINED?
3(a)/10, t9 NO N/A 9a. DO MARGINS MEET OR EXCEED IEEE 3(a)/19 STD. 323-19747 l
NO N/A
- 10. ARE INSTALLATION AND MOUNTING INTER 1 3(a)/15 FACES, AS REQUIRED FOR QUALIFICATION, SPECIFIED?
NO N/A
- 11. ARE MAINTENANCE REQUIREMENTS AND 3 (a) /18 COMPONEET REPLACEMENT INTERVALS SPECIFIED7 s'
i
_ ~... _ __.. _.__,_- _ _.. _.._ 1..._ ___. _ __.. _ _ _. _ _ _.., _
70g3 3 cf 7 3.
QUALIFICATION CHECKLIST (Cont'd)
DOC /PAGE REF t
12.
AGING METHODOLOGY h NO N/A 12a. WAS ARRHENIUS METHODOLOGY USED IN 3(a)/9, 17, AGING PER NUREG 05887 APPendia C
'kES NO 12b. ARE THERMAL AGING PARAMETERS JUSTIFIED? g g
YES NO 12c. WAS THE TEMPERATURE USED FOR ACCELERATED THERMAL AGING VERIFIED TO BE LESS THAN (see remark 1 TEMPERATURES AT WHICH KNOWN MATERIAL and 3(a)/6, 9 PHASE CHANGES OCCUR PER NUREG 05887 h NO N/A 12d. WAS MECHANICiL AGING JUSTIFIED.
3 (a) /13 i
(CYCLIC DUTY REQUIREMENTS SPECIFIED)?
NO N/A 12a. i.
DOES RADIATION AGING ENVELOPE 3(a)/7 12, CPSES REQUIREMENTS?
Appendix A NO N/A 12e. ii. WAS COBALT 60 USED FOR THE RADIATION 3 (a) /6, 17 SOURCE?
YES N/A 12f. HAVE KNOWN SYNERGISTIC EFFECTS BEEN (see remark 1 CONSIDERED PER NUREG 05887 i
4 l
i 4
n
,y.,
-.,.,,,----,,_...n-.,
e---,_..--nee--,,--,--.,,---,,,,a--
,.a,m
._.,n....
--..s..
Pcg3 4 cf 7
(
CHECKLIST REMARKS _
Siemens-Allis qualification of motors is based on an 1.
analytical approach to operating history and insulation system comparison of control group of motors.
Ongoing aging tests per IEEE 275-1966 are being conducted by S-A to verify qualified life by analysis.
At the i
conclusion of these tests, the qualified life will be Radiation endurance adjusted accordingly, if required.
of the CPSES motor insulation system wag verified by actual Cobalt 60 exposure tests to 2x10 Rads (gamma )
TID.
i 2.
The only DBA these motors will be exposed to is the OBE and SSE due to their location in the service water intake structure, which is outside the containment building.
\\
3.
There were no non-detrimental failures stated by the vendor during the tests he performed.
l 1
l i
l i
i I
~..
Paga 5 cf 7 C.
QUALIFICATION CONTINGENCIES DOC /PAGE REF 1.
MAINTENANCE INTERVALS l
a)
Lubticants (grease) 3 (a)/18 l
l
~
l i
l l
2.
REPLACEMENT INTERVALS l
a) 'Lubricante (oil) 3(a)/18 b)
Stator assembly 3 (a)/20 3.
STORAGE REQUIREMENTS (not specified) 4.
INSTALLATION REQUIREMENTS (not specified) l i
5.
MOUNTING REQUIREMENTS a)
Bolts 3 (a)/ Appendix B, Page 5 b)
Siemens-Allis (formerly Allis-Chalmers) Drawing No. 55-937-005-406, Rev. 7 Approved GTN-25458, 3/21/78 4
Pcg3 6 cf 7 D.
REMARJX The analysis of Section XII-B of reference document 3(a) verifies the superiority of the Epoxy VPI (Comanche Peak Motors) versus the asphalt insulation system (Control Groups Motors) which has been in operation for 25 years.
Based on this ar.alysis and the use of 90% factor, to account for minor variations in manufacturing and application, the qualified life of the VPI -ystem is 0.9 x 24 or 22.5 years.
Section XII.B.4 of reference document 3(a) and the associated curve shown in Appendix C, represent a pr.rallel analytic approach to insulation qualification and may be compared to the above cited experience with gsphalt-mica systems.
At a total temperature of 77 C, the insulation life is 57 years and the applicatior of a 90% factor would result in a qualified life of the VPI system of 51 years.
This serves as verification of the conservative qualified life estimate of 22.5 years.
1 REVIEWER J. R..Isgro h
u,1/-
J an..--n-,--
,.,,_---------nm,_
w-n _,_ - -.,, -..,.., _ _,, -...,, -.,,.,,,,, _.. - - - - -
1 Pg. ~
7 E.
FNv!Er.rrrAL QUAL ATION SUPMARY DATA 4
i i
j 4
NJIrtu u ter!.3T:c 1 Mrc.
_ rr~ost sr./Acc. Ervrson. rxYrtr.m:s [ or"sniLITY T7Pf*/ CAT:"6 uni ET;-'?CT./AMMA TYPE / M EL Pe rtArtt.U:n t.ai.C I F I t.D L4.s i e t.u MM n r.g uom LIFE e r
,,in
- mer, spac._
ACCUWACY QUAL.
O'JAL, evd-Service Service Siemens-Temperature 122*
122*F one (1) 8 N/A N/A 22.5 Operat-B3 ES-WIter Mater.
Allis Fore Pu p Intake Mound
_ year years rears Lng 1D.1 i
930*C l
Motors /
Structure Motors /
Pressure:
Atmosphe-
!1)
(1)
History,
C.tegory d Nem Type ric naalysis 1,
ENbI sging F-VPI Relative 1004 (1)
(1)
Insulation Humidity:
testa t
System 5
8 Padiation:
10 Rode 2x10 (1)
Rods i
I i
j (1) W es e p.trameters wer s demonstra ted by opera :ing history or analysis.
i i
I i
1 2323 Project Guide i
Pcg3 1 cf 7 COMANCl!E PEAK STEAM ELECTRIC STATION IEEE 323-1974 CLASS IE EQUIPMENT QUALIFICATION r
DOCUMENTATION REVIEW FORM A.
EQUIPMENT / DOCUMENTATION IDENTIFICATIOr, 1.
SPECIFICATION NO. 2323-ES-6 2.
VENDOR Westinghouse (1 of 2) 3.
APPLICABLE QUALIFICATION DOCUMENTS:
STATUS TRANSMITTAL DOCUMENT (AEN, APP)
(GTN & DATE)
W Document No. M7331B Rev. A, (a) AI:g.1979 incl. procedur_e papef.4o. JEF21477 APP GTN-31283, 11/6/"
W Material Engineering Report (b) 1;o. 840 (Proprietary)
N/A N/A (c) ITT Exane II Test Report N/A N/A Dupont Nomex Bulletin NX-7, (d) November 1979 N/A N/A (e)
(f)
(g)
(h) 4.
CLASS IE EQUIPMENT / FUNCTION (per specification) -
489V Class lE load center trr~ fSrmers are used to supply pcaer to various Class lE 480V loads via 480V switchgear and 480V motor control centers.
This equipment is located in the safeguards building.
5.
QUALIFICATION METHOD (S)
Operating experience, history,tvoe tests
/2,/,7,/IO REVIEWER A. Kaffashan /.
4,,
DATE
,MM, j)
DATE A g[
REVIEWER a
tnrennhnn ry8yv yi~
Pcg3 2 of 7 SPEC. 2323-ES-6 DOC /PAGE RET i
B.
QUALIFICATION CHECKLIST NO N/A 1.
DOES DOCUMENTATION ADDRESS ALL II 3a/ Table I & II, page EQUIPMENT SPECIFIED?
YfS N/A 2.
DOES DOCUMENTATION' ADDRESS CPSES See remarks SPECIFIC PARAFITERS?
NO N/A 2a DO NORMAL PARAMETERS FOR QUALIFIED 3a/ Appendix 13 OYES LIFE AND AGING EINELOPE CPSES NORMAL PARAMETERS?
YES NO N/A 2b.
DO ABNORMAL / ACCIDENT PARAMETEF.S USED 3a/ Appendix 13 IN QUALIFICATION E!NELOPE CPSES ABNOTW.AL/ ACCIDENT PARAMETERS?
NC N/A 3.
IS DOCUMENTATION AUDITAELE AND 3a/8 TRACEABLE TO CPSES EQUIPME!.5 NO N/A 4.
IS QUALIFIED LIFE EXPLICITLY STATED? 3a/3rd para., page 6 NO N/A 4a.
DO AGING RESULTS SUPPORT THE 3a/ Appendix 1, page3&<
See remarks QUALIFIED LIFE?
NO N/A 5.
DOES QUALIFICATION METHOO (S) CONFOTv. 3a/l WITH IEEE STD. 323-19747 YES N/A Sa.
DOES TEST SEQUENCE CONFORM TO See remarks IEEE STD. 323-1974?
NO N/A 6.
ARE FAILURE CRITERIA FOR TESTS 3a/ Appendix 13, page DEFINED?
See remarks YES NC 7.
IF THE E WIPMENT WOULD BE EXPOSED See remarks TO DBA, WAS QUALIFICATION BY TYPE TEST?
DOES DEMONSTRATED OPERABILITY See remarks f
NO N/A 8.
EINELOPE CPSES REQUIREMENT?
YES N/A Ba, doi:S NON-DETRIMENTAL FAILURE oEC remarks E!NELOPE CPSES REQUIREMINTS?
l NO N/A 9.
ARE MARGINS DEFINED?
l 3a/ Appendix 13 e
@ NO N/A 9a.
DO MAR NS T OR EXCEED IEEE See remarks N/A 10.
ARE INSTALLATION AND MOUNTING INTER-3a/3 and 4 h NO FACES, AS REQUTcED FOR QUALIFICATION, SPECIFIED?
NO N/A 11.
ARE MAINTENANCE REQUIREMENTS AND 3a/4 "see remarks" COMPONENT REPLACEMENT MATE.*ALS SPECIFIED?
l
Pcg3 3 of 7 B.
QUALIFICATION CHECKLIST (Cont'd)
DOC /PAGE REF 12 AGING METHODOLOGY NO N/A 12a. WAS ARRHENIUS METHODOLOGY USED IN 3a/ Appendix, page ?
AGING PER NUREG 05887 NO N/A 12b. ARE THERMAL AGING PARAMETERS JUSTIFIED? 3a/ Appendix 13 YES h N/A 12c. WAS THE TEMPERATURE USED FOR ACCELERATED see remark THERMAL AGING VERIFIED TO BE LESS THAN TEMPERATURES AT WHICH KNOWN MATERIAL PHASE CHANGES OCCUR PER NUREG 05887 YES NO 32d. WAS MECHANICAL AGING JUSTIFIED see remarks (CYCLIC DUTY REQUIREMENTS SPECIFIED)?
OYES NO N/A 12e. i.
DOES RADIATION AGING ENVELOPE 3a/ Appendix 13 CPSES REQUIREMENTS?
h NO N/A 12e. ii. WAS COBALT 60 USED FOR THE RADIATION SOURCE?
YES h N/A 12f. HAVE ENOhN SYNERGISTIC EFFECTS BEEN see remarks CONSIDERED PER NUREG 0588?
i i
l
.--_...----,,,,,,n.-
Fcga 4 cf 7 CHECKLIST REMARKS
(
2.
Qualifi, cation has been performed by operating and
~
hist ry analysis and the parameters used in this report envelope those of CPSES.
4a.
The equipment is qualified for 40 years with a minimum loss of life on the basis of 75% average loading (GTH-5 0 35 8, 11/24/80).
Sa.
IEEE Standard 323, Section 6. 3.2 (4) was not performed due to the high temperature insulation materials used in the transformers.
Since these insulating materials do not experience any degradation during their qualified life, Westinghouse does not see any need to pre-age them (3a/ Appendix 1 and 13, IEEE Standard 323A-1975, Supplement to IEEE 323-1974).
6.
See Appendix 13 reference No. 8:
ANSI C57-96, " Guide for Loading Dry Type Distribution and Power Transformers".
7.
Not applicable.
8 & 8a. Environmental parameters, loading, size of the transformer (i.e., operability) envelope CPSES requirements, but detrimental failure is not defined (GTN-50358, 11/24/80).
i 9.
Margin is defined in ANSI C-57-12-00 1973 " General l
Requirements for Distribution Power and Regulatory Transformers".
(Reference 4, sheet 21).
9a.
Westinghouse Materials Engineering Report No. 848.
11.
Component replacement materials are not required.
12c.
Material changes were not expected by Westinghouse based on the tests performed (GTN-50 35 8, 11/24/80).
12d.
This equipment does not require a mechanical aging test.
12f.
Not defined by Westinghouse.
m l\\-
- - - - - - - - - - - - ~
~
- - - - - ~ - - - -
- - - - ~
- - - ~ ' - - -
' ~ ' ~ " -
Pcg3 5 of 7 b.
QUALIFICATION CONTINGENCIES DOC /PAGE REF l.
MAINTENANCE INTERVALS Per Westinghouse I.L. 47.067-1A 3 a/ Appendix 5 s
2.
REPLACEMENT INTERVALS Not required.
3.
STORAGE REQUIREMENTS Per Westinghouse I.L.
47-069-1A 3 a/ Appendix 4 4.
INSTALLATION REQUIREMENTS Per Westinghouse I.L.
47-069-1A 3 a/ Appendix 4 5.
MOUNTING REQUIREMENTS l
- USI (Site) used welding whereas 3a/4
.iestinghouse drawings 1983C99, 8693D37 call for bolts.
GTN-50015, 11/5/80 sent to W l
for resolving this discrepancy.
l l
e I
Pcg3 6 of 7 D.
REMARKS I
This qualification has been done on the basis of the combination of field experience history, type' tests and evaluation of " Westinghouse transformerettes program".
To supplement their summary report, Westinghouse submitted to G&H the following supporting documents curing a G&H factory audit of the Westinghouse report, to further substantiate the stated qualification (GTN-50358, 11/24/80):
1.
Westinghouse Materials Engineering Report No. 848.
(Note:
This report is a Westinghouse proprietary document).
2.
ITT-Exane II test report 3.
Dupont Nomex Bulletin 6%-7, November 1979.
Y
,,,a l
~
e
~
c.
rNv RoNMtwTAr. ouAuritu 4 su m A Y DATA Page'7 of 7 8
EQUIPMENT LOCATION MrC.
_ADNORMAL/ACC, F,NV I RON. EXTREMES I OPERARII.17Y
{ ACCURACY QUAL.
QUAL.
PURCHAst I
TYPE /CATECORY sTRUCT./ AREA TYPE /MODEL s Ale ant:Tr te f.5 tr i t i t.O Ot M H F:V OLM HTQ m EM LIRE METw6ii m.
- sprc, 480V Load Safeguards Westing-Temp.
104*-122r 290-ACC.
ACC.
40 Comb.
B22 ES-6 4
Canter Unit Building /
house Pressure Atmos.
320C DUR.
DUR.
years Test SubItation Swit chgear 2000KVA Rel. Humid.
70%
A W s.
& Anal 3
Transformer / roon Dry type /
Radiation
(.10 95g Cctegcry d ASL 10 4
4 4
1 1
l i
F 4
4 r
8
Pcga 1 of 7 COMANCHE PEAK STEAM ELECTRIC STATION IEEE 323-1974 CLASS IE EQUIPMENT QUALIFICATION DOCUMENTATION REVIEW FORM A.
EbUIPMENT/DOCUMENTATIONIDENTIFICATION 1.
SPECIFICATION NO. 2323-ES-8B 2.
VENDOR Power Conversion (1 of 2)
__ Products (PCP) 3.
APPLICABLE QUALIFICATION DOCUMENTS:
STATUS TRANSMITTAL DOCUMENT (AEN, APP)
(GTN & DATE)
(a) PCP No. OR-12442, Rev. 4 APP GTN-42425, 12/11/79 (b) PCP No. QP-12442, Rev. 4 APP GTN-39851, 9/13/79 (c) PCP No. 1-9010-119 APP GTN-39851, 9/13/79 Telecon between D.S. Bagga (G&H)
(d) and L.G. Lutz (PCP)
N/A GTN-50313, 11/20/LO PCP - Analysis of Anchoring Method (e) of 3SD-130-300 Battery Chargers,Ibv.l2 AEN GTN-45205, 3/27/80 PCP - Revised Stress Calculation for (f) Anchorage of Batterv Charger 3SD-130-330 AEN GTN-50247, 11/17/80 (g)
(h) 4.
CLASS IE EQUIPMENT / FUNCTION (per specification):
~
The Class lE battery chargers in conjunction with the Class lE batteries provide dc power for various Class lE equipment such as:
circuit breaker operation, control equipment, instrumentation, l
static inverters and emergency lighting.
The Class 1E batter chargers are located in the Electrical and Control Building at Elevation 792'.
5.
QUALIFICATION METHOD (S)
Type test and analysis REVIEWER D.S.
Bagga
~ [O d6f+ '
DATE /2[/5/kO ff Rev. 1 d,if!{f /.
REVIEWER D. S. Bagga hMA 9 DATE i
y I
P: iga 2 cf 7 SPEC._2323-ES-8B 3.
QUALIFICATION CMECKLIST
_ DOC / PACE RET NO N/A 1.
DOES DOCUMENTATION ADDRESS ALL zE 3a/3, 3b/7 EQUIPMENT SPECIFIED?
NO N/A 2.
DOES DOCUMENTATION ADDRESS CPSES 3b/B-2, 3 SPECIFIC PARAMETERS?
NO N/A 2a DO NORMAL PARAMETERS FOR QUALIFIED 3b/A-2, 3b/B-3 LIFE AND AGING ENVELOPE CPSES NORMAL PARAMETERS?
NO N/A 2b.
DO ABNORMAL / ACCIDENT PARAMETERS USED 3b/A-2, 3b/B-3 IN QUALIFICATION ENVELOPE CPSES ABNORMAL /ACCIDE!C PARAMETERS?
NO N/A 3.
IS DOCUMENTATION AUDITABLE Atc Sa/XVIII-6, 3b/13 TRACEABLE M CPSES EQUIPME!C?
YES NO W/A 4.
IS QUALIFIED LIFE EXPLICITLY STATED?
3a/22 YES NO N/A 4a.
DO AGING RESULTS SUPPORT THE 3a/IV-1,2,3,3b/F2, QUALIFIED LIFE?
3b/H-3,4,3b/I-2 NO N/A S.
DOES QUALIFICATION METHOD (S) CONFORM WITH IEEE STD. 323-19747 3a/3 (See remarks)
NO N/A Sa.
DOES TEST SEQUENCE CONFORM TO 3d IEEE STD. 323-19747 i
NO N/A 6.
ARE FAILURE CRITERIA FOR TESTS 3a/IV-1, 3b/F-2, DEFINED?
3b/H-3,4,3b/J-2, YES NO 7.
IF THE EQUIPMENT WOULD BE EXPOSED TO DBA, WAS QUALIFICATION BY TYPE TEST?
NO N/A 8.
DOES DEMONSTRATED OPERABILITY 3b/F-2, 3a/VI-1, ENVELOPE CPSES REQUIREMENTS?
3b/I-1, 3a/VIII-l NO N/A Ba. DOES NON-DETRIMENTAL FAILURE 3a/19-21 ENVELOPE CPSES REQUIREMENTS?
NO N/A 9.
ARE MARGINS DEFINED?
3b/F-2, 3b/H-3, h NO N/A 9a. DO MARGINS MEET OR EXCEED IEEE j g 3,' ]g/H-3, STD. 323-19747 NO N/A
- 10. ARE INSTALLATION AND MOUNTING INTER-3a/ Appendix XX FACES, AS REQUIRED FOR QUALIFICATION, page V-2 SPECIFIED?
NO N/A
- 11. ARE MAINTENANCE REQUIREMENTS AND 3a/23, 24 COMPONENT REPLACEMENT INTERVALS SPECIFIED?
1 l
Pcga 3 of 7 B.
QUALIFICATION CHECKLIST (Cont ' d)
DOC /PAGE REF 12 AGING HETHODOLOGY OYESNO N/A 12a. WAS ARRHENIUS METHODOLOGY USED IN 3a/vII-1, 3c/1 AGING PER HUREG 05887
@ ~ h N/A NO N/A 12b. ARE THERMAL AGING PARAMETERS JUSTIFIED? 3b/H-3, 3b/I-2, YES 12c. WAS THE TEMPERATURE USED FOR ACCELERATED
~
THERMAL AGING VERIFIED TO BE LESS THAN (See Remarks)
TEMPERATURES AT WHICH KNOWN MATERIAL PHASE CHANGES OCCUR PER NUREG 0588?
ES NO N/A 12d. WAS MECHANICAL AGING JUSTIFIED 3b/F-2
~
(CYCLIC DUTY REQUIREMENTS SPECIFIED)?
NO N/A 12e. i.
DOES RADIATION AGING ENVELOPE 3a/22 CPSES REQUIREMENTS?
h N/A 12e. ii. WAS COBALT 60 USED FOR THE RADIATION (See Remarks)
YES l
SOURCE?
YES NO N/A 12f. HAVE KNOWN SYNERGISTIC EFFECTS BEEN (See Remarks)
CONSIDERED PER NUREG 0588?
l l
1 e
- ~ - - -
~~~
Pcg3 4 of 7 I
CHECKLIST REMARKS 5.
In addition, guidance has been obtained from the proposed Standard IEEEP-650 " Qualification of Class lE Battery Chargers and Static Inverters for Nuclear Power Generating Station" (Draft No. 7, May 16, 1978).
l lhc,f.
Material phase changes and synergistic effects are not addressed in qualification document.
l 12eii.
Analysis is done in the case of radiation aging.
No radiation source is used.
l t
l l
Pcg3 5 of 7
/
C.
QUALIFICATION CONTINGENCIES DOC /PAGE REF g
1.
MAINTENANCE INTERVALS 3a/23 2.
REPLACEMENT INTERVALS 3a/23 l
l 3.
STORAGE REQUIREMENTS l
i None specified.
4.
INSTALLATION REQUIREMENTS None specified.
i I
l' 5.
MOUNTING REQUIREMENTS Weld 3a/ Appendix XX, V-2 and V-4 DCA-3380, Rev, 1 i
l
-_.._~.
Pcg3 6 cf 7 i
k D.
REMARKS PCP, Inc., Qualification Report consists of the results of qualification of all components with the~ exception of class lE fuses in the battery charger, therefore, more than one reference is provided on the Document /page column of the qualification checklist.
PCP agreed to expedite Gould (subvendor) for providing Class lE fuses Qualification Document.
Qualification Plan and Report provide adequate details to evaluate the battery charger with respect to the requirements of IEEE 323-1974.
Wire and cables are qualified in accordance with the applicable requirements of IEEE 383-1974.
Magnetic components and control transformers (the only age sensitive devices on the circuit boards) are qualified in accordance with the requirements of IEEE 259-1974, "IEEE Standard Test Procedure for Evaluation of Systems of Insulation for Specialty Transformers".
e l
f t
l l
REVIEWER D.S. Bagga
/$tt9h z-l
- I S.
AC 3
ME 8
cP d
y p P.
S e
r U
E e
'y w
i t
l t
l a
o b
F f
E 1
f
?
7 R
1 o
B r
i o
t e
,D i
f 7
t,O y
d i
An et l
i l
g Q u psdas m
n U
h yenni u
d^
a Tt aas h
e.
P e
e f
.t v
i i
l I E 8
so t
a AF 0 rn)
UI 4 y( 2 a
u QL l
c e
r r
a s
e A
5 y
m.
/
9 Y
l N
0 C P o
4 A
R t
n flr A
0 i
9 a
C Q
/
A F t
M t
D
)
l e
C am et 0
T lM.
eo Y
5 o
SN1
(
t
- l. b F
l d
t g
2 e
p n-A 2
r l
ii t 1
i l
rcn E Q u
r r.
uce t
q D k dad i
[
i
] '
r r
S e
s F.
M M b
l R
l Fs my a
F i
o T
l 2 m
% 4 A at v
2t 5
0/
hi r
cl e
X 1 A 9
1 N F.
i t
l m n
0 au i
N O l.
th R
1 n
r V
l Ps.
ed a
I me e
o N
e 2 m 3'
A nl y
t 2t 0
0/
ol 0
F. 1' 1 A 9
1 N ro 1
C vt r
nn 0
A
/. l' ny eoc s
eey or nn r
I l
rvt it A
T.
M t
uii t s au o
t R
M std ai n
i O A p, s a i i m N
l mel m d e iC c
l D A er eu ah C
a n
p A
l' TPRh RC a:
i ia c
n
/
t 1
o s
an c
tn
.o Cnt 0
ro i
CM oc 3
ei t
F/
riul1 pt y
ME esd e-oa l
P wrod00 r
o Y
oero50 se r
T P vPM33 up t
oo c
u e
A ns l
E iu e
n s"
R t o
+liio NA nu f
O /.
on o
oDt I
ci TT t r/u t
t AC ct qbm f n n
CU endi o OR l ol ro oo e
c m
LT ECBtR s
e S
l
'f c
uo a
Y r
o l
R a-d hs p
h c/
To Cas' r
e Nc 8 u R.
EE ey MT ydi r
- o
- r 1
h 2
e PA rnro g
I C eagg e a Do r
U/
t se t
a QE t rst EP oy h
aeea Nb T
B gcc gIHc Y
.J ji.iiI
,l I;i1!
- ii!l 1'
1!1{ai j!I.l.
1 1f!ll; 1
P;g3 1 cf 7 COMANCHE PEAK STEMS ELECTRIC STATION IEEE 323-1974 CLASS IE EQUIPMENT QUALIFICATION DOCUMENTATION REVIEW FORM A.
EQUIPMENT / DOCUMENTATION IDENTIFICATION.
1.
SPECIFICATION NO.
2323-ES-13A 2.
VENDOR Okonite 3.
APPLICABLE QUALIFICATION DOCUMENTS:
STATUS TRANSMITTAL DOCUMENT (AEN, APP)
(GTN t. DATE)
(a)
Okonite file No. 7465.1 APP DAL"293, 8/22/78 (b)
Okonite transmittal No. A-59, (Info only)
(N/A)
February 21, 1980 (c)
(d)
(e)
(f)
(g)
(h) 4.
CLASS IE EQUIPMENT / FUNCTION (per specification) ?
8KV cable is used to supply power to various Class lE medium voltage equipment (e.g., motors, transformers) outside containment of CPSES.
5.
QUALIFICATION METHOD (S)
Type test REVIEWFR T. S. Cardile
.[.
DATE 9/12/8d 3f26[f/
R&l REVIY,WER T.
S. Cardile e
v 71r d DATE 6)#/
Rev. 2 REVIEWER T. S. Cardile [/ 'f DATE
P ga 2 cf 7 t
SPEC. 2323-ES-13A
~
3.
QUALIFICATION CHECKLIST DOC /PAGE REF
(
- lo N/A 1.
DOES DOCUMENTATION ADDRESS ALL IE 38/l EQUIPMENT SPECIFIED?
JES N/A 2.
DOES DOCUMENTATION ADDRESS CPSES See remarks SPECIFIC PARAMETERS?
NO N/A 2a DO NORMAL PARAMETERS FOR QUALIFIED 3a/ Appendix 2 LIFE AND AGING ENVELOPE CPSES NORMAL PARAMETERS?
NO N/A 2b.
DO ABNORMAL / ACCIDENT PARAMETERS USED 3a/ Appendix 4 IN QUALIFICATION EINELOPE CPSES ABNORMAL / ACCIDENT PARAMETERS?
NO N/A 3.
IS DOCUMENTATION AUDITABLE AND 3a/l TRACEABLE TO CPSES EQUIPMENT?
/E NO N/A 4.
IS QUALIFIED LIFE EXPLICITLY STATED?
3a/ Appendix 2 ES NO N/A 4a.
DO AGING RESULTS SUPPORT THE 3a/ Appendix 2 QUALIFIED LIFE?
h NO N/A 5.
DOES QUALIFICATION METHOD (S) CONFORM 3a/4, 1 WITH IEEE STD. 323-19747 NO N/A Sa.
DOES TEST SEQUENCE CONFORM TO 3a/4, 1 IEEE STD. 323-19747 NO N/A 6.
ARE FAILURE CRITERIA FOR TESTS 3a/4 DEFINED?
OfES NO N/A 7.
IF THE EQUIPMENT.WOULD BE EXPOSED 3a/2, 1 TO DBA, WAS QUALIFICATION BY TYPE TEST?
OYES NO N/A Ba, DOES DEMONSTRATED OP'ERABILITY 3a/8, 3 ENVELOPE CPSES REQUIREMENTS?
NO N/A 8b. DOES NON DETRIMENTAL FAILURE 3a/B, 9 ENVELOPE CPSES REQUIREMENTS?
YES N/A 9.
ARE MARGINS DEFINED 7 see remarks YES NO N/A 9a. DO MARGINS MEET OR EXCEED IEEE see remarks STD. 323-19i47 YEL NO N/A
- 10. ARE INSTALLATION AND MOUNTING see remarks INTERFACES, AS REQUIRED FOR QUALIFICATION, SPECIFIED7 YES NO N/A
- 11. ARE MAINTENANCE REQUIREMENTS AND see remarks COMPONENT REPLACEMENT INTERVALS SPECIFIED7 2
I l
Pag 3 3 Cf 7 B.
QUALIFICATION CHECKLIST (Cont'd)
DOC /PAGE RET
(
12.
AGING METHODOLOGY h NO N/A 12a. WAS ARRHENIUS METHDOLOGY USED IN 3a/ Appendix 2 AGING PER NUREG 05887 NO.N/A 12b. ARE THERMAL AGING PARAMETERS 3a/ Appendix 2 JUSTIFIED 7 NO N/A 12c. WAS THE TEMPERATURE USED FOR AC-3b/ item h CELERATED THERMAL AGING VERIFIED TO BE LESS THAN TEMPERATURES AT WHICH KNOWN MATERIAL PHASE CHANGES OCCUR PER NUREG 05887 YES NO 12d. WAS MECHANICAL AGING JUSTIFIED see remarks (CYCLIC DUTY REO?!IREMENTS SPECI-FIED)?
NO N/A 12e DOES RADIATION AGING ENVELOPE 3a/3,3a/ Appendix (1)
CPSES REQUIREMENTS?
NO N/A 12e WAS COBALT 60 USED AS THE RADI-3a/ Appendix 3 (ii) ATION SOURCE 7 YES N/A 12f. HAVE KNOWN SYNERGISTIC EFFECTS see remarks BEEN CONSIDERED PER NUREG 05887 l
P;ga 4 Cf 7 CHECKLIST REMARXS
(
2)
Specific CPSES parameters are not addressed.
- However, Okonite makes reference to G&H Specification 2323-ES-13A on page 1 of reference 3a.
2b)
Although Okonite's profile is shorter, it is more severe due to higher temperatures, see document 3 (a), Appendix 4.
5,5a) Qualification methods and test sequences meet IEEE 323-1974 as. interpreted by IEEE 383-1974.
),9a) Margins are not specifically defined, however, by comparing the CPSES specific environmental parameters to the parameters used in Document 3a, we find that there is margin such as the following:
1.
Radiation - over 100%
2.
Temperature - over 75%
3.
AC dielectric breakdown test - 8 times the value of the. cable 4.
Effects of relative humidity need not be considered 1
in the aging of electrical cable insulation per NUREG -0588.
Fur *her, the degree of margin is enhanced since the cable was subjected to DBA (see document 3a/ Appendix 4), and all the CPSES Class 1E 6.9KV circuits are located outside the containment.
From the aforementioned, we conclude that margins exceed the suggested values mentioned in IEEE 323-1974.
10.
Installation and mounting interfaces are not apolicable for qualifying cable since, there are no specific installation and mounting interfaces required for cable.
11.
Maintenance requirements and component replacement intervals are not applicable for cable since there are no moving parts involved, and cable is qualified for 40 years.
12d.
Mechanical aging for cable is not applicable since there are no mechanical moving parts involved.
12f.
No materials could be identified by the reviewer as having known synergistic effects.
See also document 3b, item K.
\\
l i
-w-gam
,----e-
-a p
g
.a,
, - - - - -n 9
r me
- eim, 9-y-.--
,9yy-y--,y-
- - - -a
- ,----we.---e--e ey,-.y--,----
i
Pcg3 5 of 7
(
C.
QUALIFICATION CONTINGENCIES DOC /PAGE REF i
1.
MAINTENANCE INTERVALS Not applicable 2.
REPLACEMENT INTERVALS Not applicable 3.
STORAGE REQUIREMENTS Not specified by vendor i
4.
INSTALLATION REQUIREMENTS l
Not specified by vendor l
l S.
MOUNTING itEQUIRF.HENTS l
Not applicable
---,-----,.,,--wo~,e-_,+-,,,----<,,--..---,,---,--n,,,
,-n--..
- - -, - - - - =w,
,.-,----w e
-w,,
r we
i Pcg3 6 of 7 i
D.
REMARKS 1.
The sample cable tested had a SKV rating with a 90 mil wall insulation.
The LOCA test performed on this sample is a more severe test than would occur on an 8KV sample with a 140 mil wall (see 3a/1).
Pressure differentials per mil of insula-tion are much higher for the 90 mil wall sample (at 115 sig:
90 mil wall = 128 lbs. per mil ver-sus 140 mil = 0.82 lbs. per mil, see 3b/ Item e).
O e
e h.
REVIEWER
l 1\\
j t
A s.
T, C 3
- t 1
'rp es SE h
f r
3 t
a 1
8 B
7 8
!O Lm g
A
't t
E P
U s
Q R
e U
T N
s R
r E
LE a
c ita A
l M.
/
u C Di N
s Y
n A
i i
R U
e C
A l
C Q
/
b A
l l
N a
l i
c l
s a
A Y
M.
0 y c
A I
i 3 a i
T T
f D
L l
1 D r
t t
c Y
n e
A l
A R
CR e
M E Q M
P 0
CU U
O 0
. f 4
i
)
s a S
[
l X
08 4
d N
S g
A r
34 3A5 7
a g O
E i-M 1 (M lO 0
r 2 0
1 l i 0
a H 6 0 N 9
o n t
M H.
sr m
F p u d a @ (S X S f.
F I
8 N )P o
aS %1 RE -
g R D 54t eel D2D)
M m
3 l 29 FEE 3 E a T
41 att xA3A g p 0 oA
- 5. H 7 P E 2 I
X 31 S aS2R2R(
2 B
MN P7 g I 3 e
F E
ll I
s h I
b 3 o s t D.
0 T a
L A
M I
8 g B
0 l
n U
O X
Q P
t' g
O(
3H1C C i i
l y
H O -
I i
F s%
xS a 0 A85 e d V C.
t A
N 0 p0 O. D t
r 0 m N 2
v e T
E I
800 A
p 3 p H
r r N
S 251 2R S 2 p &P9 e e E
s dI P
M C
i N
C t s O
A R
/, R i
n y
o n I
t E
em o
r n o V
A T ru i
t c
M M E uH t
s o
F R
M
.s a
i d e O A ps i
m b
N R mel d
e t
D A ere a
h n t E
A l'
TPR R
C e o m
1 i
n L
E i d D
eo a e
.O tk t e CM iOd n n r
o n /. a e
c 'y F/
o MEP k ou t
Y OCg e i T
d d s
i L
g d
s m A
n-n n u E
P ina d
i h f A d o dl C* /.
l ct ni s e nau) e v i 't e h b (*
I u
l i TT AC l
B pm b t CU enl gs a a OR l cieng gl LT l xauin e
S AetFli r r w
'f Y
R o o 7O d
P t
r s
r' G e
y f
. t t
rT w
,r V c FA oso K e IC P eIJ 8 f J/
l e 0'E Vbt 4"
)
EP K aa Y
(
T 8CC
~
I i
- ,i' 4
1 I
i
{
Ia i
Pcg3 1 Cf 7 COMANCHE PEAK STEAM ELECTRIC STATION IEEE 323-1974 CLASS IE EQUIPMENT QUALIFICATION i
DOCUMENTATION REVIEW FORM A.
' EQUIPMENT / DOCUMENTATION IDENTIFICATION 1.
SPECIFICATION NO._ 2323-ES-13B.1 2.
VENDOR,Cerro-Rockbeston 3.
APPLICABLE QUALIFICATION DOCUMENTS:
STATUS TRANSMITTAL DOCUMENT (AEN, APP)
(GTN & DATE)
Qualification of Firewall III (a) Class IE Elactric Cables APP GTN-19949. 7/11/7 Firewall III Specification (b) No. RSS-3-021 APP GTN-1QQdR. 7/11/7 Addendum dated 10/30/80 (c) to Document 3a APP GTN-90dRO, 1?/2/8 Rockbestos Company Letter Dated (d) 3 /3 /81. From J. Mervin (Attached)
N/A N/A (e)
(f)
(g)
(h) 4.
CLASS IE EQUIPMENT / FUNCTION (per specification):
600V control cable used to supply control signals to various Class 1E equipment (e.g, motors, valves, etc.), outside and inside the containment of CPSES.
5.
QUALIFICATION METHOD (S)
Type Test REVIEWER / w T_
c: _ carr141,
DATE 1/21/81 REVIEWER T. S. Cardile DATE Y/-G/P/
l Pcg] 2 cf 7 SPEC. M-6-/3B,1 i
/*~
N.
QUALIFICATION CHECKLIST DOC /PAGE REF
@ NO N/A 1.
DOES DOCUENTATION ADDRESS ALL IE 3a/1 EQUIPMENT SPECIFIED7 fES h N/A 2.
DOES DOCUMENTATION ADDRESS CPSES See remarks SPECIFIC PARAMETERS?
h NO N/A 2a DO NORMAL PARAMETERS FOR QUALIFIED 3a/2, 5 LIFE AND AGING ENVEI4PE CPSES NORMAL PARAMETERS?
h NO N/A 2b.
DO ABNORMAL / ACCIDENT PARAMETERS USED Ja/8; 3b/7 IN QUALIFICATION ENVELOPE CPSES See remarks ABNORMAL /ACCIDEW PARAMETERS?
NO N/A 3.
IS DOCUMElfrATION AUDITABLE AND 3c TRACEABLE TO CPSES EQUIPMElfr?
8YES YES NO N/A 4.
IS QUALIFIED LIFE EXPLICITLY STATED?
3a/5, 3b/7 NO N/A 4a.
DO AGING RESULTS SUPPORT THE 3a/2, 7 QUALIFIED LIFE 7 h
NO N/A 5.
DOES QUALIFICATION METHOD (S) CONTORM 3a/1, 2, 3 NITH IEEE STD. 323-19747 NO N/A Sa.
DOES TEST SEQUENCE CONFORM TO 3a/1, 2, 3; 3b/7 IEEE STD. 323-1974?
h NO N/A 6.
ARE FAILURE CRITERIA FOR TESTE 3a/2, 3, 4 I
DEFINED?
h NO N/A 7.
IF TEZ EQUIPKENT WOULD EE EXPOSED 3a/2, 3; 3b/7 TO DBA, WAS QUALIFICATION BY TYPE TEST 7 NO N/A 8.
DOES DEMONSTRATED OPERABILITY 3a/5; 3b/7 ENVELOPE CPSES REQUIREMENTS?
NO N/A 8a.
DOES NON-DETRIMDiTAL FAILURE 3a/5; 3b/7 ENVELOPE CPSES REQUIREMENTS?
YES O N/A 9.
ARE MARGINS DEFINED?
See remarks YES @ N/A 9a. DO MARGINS MEET OR EXCEED IEEE See remarks STD. 323-19747 h
- 10. ARE INSTALIATION AND MOUNTING INTER-See remarks YES NO FACES, AS REQUIRED FOR QUALIFICATION, SPECIFIED?
YES NO
!/A
- 11. ARE MAINTENANCE REQUIRE!iENTS AND See remarks COMPONENT REPLACEMENT INTERVALS SPECIFIED?
l
POg3 3 of 7 B.
QUkLIFICATION CHECKLIST (Cont'd)
DOC /PAGE REF 12.
AGING METHODOLOGY h NO N/A 12a. WAS ARRHENIUS METHODOLOGY USED IN 3a/2, 7 AGING PER NUREG 05887 NO N/A 12b. ARE THERMAL AGING PARAMETERS JUSTIFIED?
3a/2, 7 h NO N/A 12c. WAS THE TEMPERATURE USED FOR ACCELERATED 3d/2 THERMAL AGING VERIFIED TO BE LESS THAN TEMPERATURES AT WHICH KNOWN MATERIAL PHASE CHANGES OCCUR PER NUREG 05887 NO h 12d. WAS MECHANICAL AGING JUSTIFIED YES See remarks (CYCLIC DUTY REQUIREMENTS SPECIFIED)?
h NO N/A 12e. i.
DOES RADIATION AGING ENVELOPE 3a/3, 5, 9:
CPSES REQUIREMENTS?
3b/7 NO N/A 12e. ii. WAS COBALT 60 USED FOR THE RADIATION 3a/9 SOURCE?
OYE NO N/A 12f. HAVE KNOWN SYNERGISTIC EFFECTS BEEN 3d/3 CONSIDERED PER NUREG 05887 s
I e
i l_
Pcg3 4 cf 7 CHECKLIST REMARKS I
2.
Specific CPSES parameters are not addressed.
- Howevsr, Rockbestos makes reference to G&H specification 2323-ES-13B.1 in document 3c.
2b.
Although Rockbestos's profile is shorter, it is more severe due to higher temperatures - see document 3a, page 8.
5,5a. Qualification methods and test sequences meet IEEE 323-1974 as interpreted by IEEE 383-1974.
9,9a. Margins are not specifically defined, however, by comparing the CPSES specific environmental parameters to the parameters used in document 3a, we find that there is margin such as the following:
1.
Radiation
.5%
2.
Temperature - over 75%
3.
Effects of relative humidity need not be considered in the aging of electrical cable insulation per NUREG-0588.
Further, the degree of margin is enhanced since the cable was subject to higher temperatures.than specified for CPSES during the DBA (see documeng 3a/8) and the cable exposure time of 350 hours0.00405 days <br />0.0972 hours <br />5.787037e-4 weeks <br />1.33175e-4 months <br /> at 150 c, dictated by the l
Arrhenius slope (see document 3a/7), to simulate 40 years I
installed life was adjusted to 1300 hours0.015 days <br />0.361 hours <br />0.00215 weeks <br />4.9465e-4 months <br />, thereby introducing more margin.
From the aforementioned, we conclude that all the margins exceed IEEE 323-1974 except for radiation which is below the suggested IEEE 323-1974 margin of 10%.
10.
Installation and mounting interfaces are not applicable for qualifying cable since, there are l
no specific installation and mounting interfaces l
required for cable.
11.
Maintenance requirements and component replacement intervals are not applicable for cable since there are no moving parts involved, and cable is qualified for 40 years.
12d.
Mechanical aging for. cable is not applicable since there are no mechanical moving parts involved.
-,-e
Page 5 of 7 C.
QUALIFICATION CONTINGENCIES DOC /PAGE REF 1.
MAINTENANCE INTERVALS Not applicable 2.
REPLACEMENT INTERVALS Not applicable 3.
STORAGE REQUIREMENTS Not specified by vendor 4.
INSTALLATION REQUIREMENTS Not specified by vendor
~
i 5.
HOUNTING REQUIREMENTS Not applicable m.~
. _......... _.. _,. ~ _ _.
, -.. _ - _,,,.. ~. _ _
,_.m
,._.----.-_,_,_.-_,,-7..._
Pcg3 6 Cf 7 D.
REMARKS The* Qualification of Firewall III Class ~.1E Electric Cables qualification report is a
~
generic report and, therefore, does not include specific CPSES parameters.
S 1
l i
l REVIEWER b
DarE
/4//ei ii
(
E lr9 S
Ac 1,
Wg-3
- Os S3 U
E1 f
T rE 4
7 m
1 8
8 E
f 5
o 0
Am t
7 I
u U
s w,
e Q
e g
u P
t T
v a
i s
r R
LE a
E Ar 0e P
Ui 4y Ot no i
ta A
l n.
/
u Y
N n
C m n
A i
R U
e C
A l
C o
/
b A r N
a n
c l
s a
A Y
M.
0 y e
t 3 a T
T l
A I
D 1 D r
n L
t I
c Y
R A
e A
R l
9 E o CR e
e P
t CU O
i AD E
tv s
tS o
g
)
N S
g 0g 3oH O
E i
1(
I 0 TP9 g
I M M s
x r
3 r 2 n
i F p41S a
4 aS He1 T.
F t
D 8l 6l 2Ok1F g
R D 6300.A
- 2. k 3 0. M N NM97 oA A a7 a
T 410 X
311 2 R F
E e
h
)
I o
b 3 o t
L MT A
N r.
0 n
0g U
O a
O R r g
1(
3H1 i
I i
i x
y H D - C L
V c Fs%
Sa 0
A85 d
D r 0 mN 2
A N t 0 p 0 0. A p e
3 p H
T E r 800 r
N s
2512RS2 P &P9 e
E 1
d M
C N
C 9
i O
A d
s in y
n R
/, n I
t r
emo r
o V
A T rui t
c N
M n uHt s
E R
M
.s a
i e
O A ps.i m
b N n meld e
B A erea h
t E
A P C
o T,'P R R n
L s-E o
d t eI e
.D sri e
O GM eiI n
F/
t F ME k /. l y
l P
c t
Y ooa i
T RCW l
8 i
A m
E u
R h
NA s
O /.
g e
I n
v Tf i
i AC d
t EU l
a R
li l
I T l u e
S AB i
r Y
l -
f R
oe o
TO rt NC tad s
EE nc 4
MT o, a, C
PA C
c IC e
3 U/
vl y QE n br
'E EP n ao TT e
Cg a-
.i s
j l'
!i 1,
- j
- 4I
Pcg3 1 cf 7 COMANCHE PEAK STEAM ELECTRIC STATION IEEE 323-1974 CLASS IE EQUIPMENT QUALIFICATION DOCUMENTATION REVIEW FORM A.. EQUIPMENT / DOCUMENTATION IDENTIFICATION 1.
SPECIFICATION NO. 323t_vn_12n_3 2.
VENDOR Okonite (1 of 2) 3.
APPLICABLE QUALIFICATION DOCUMENTS:
STATUS TRANSMITTAL DOCUMENT (AEN, APP)
(GTN & DATE)
(a)
Okonite file No. 7465.2.B APP DAL-363_. 9/22/7[
(b)
(c)
(d)
(e)
(f)
(g) _
l (h) 4.
CLASS IE EQUIPMENT / FUNCTION (per specification) :
600v cable used to supply power to various class lE low voltage equipment (e.g., motors, transformers, etc.)
outside and inside the containment of CPSES:
5.
QUALIFICATION METHOD (S)
Tvoe test REVIEWER T. S. Cardile
[
DATE 9/12/80 e
l s.Cera1ie' l c; d oATE we,/3 nEvmmR T.
Pcg3 2 of 7 SPEC 2323'-ES-13B.2 B.
QUALIFICATION CHECKLIST DOC /PAGE REF t
NO N/A 1.
DOES DOCUMENTATION ADDRESS ALL IE 3a/l EQUIPMENT SPECIFIED7 YES N/A 2.
DOES DOCUMENTATION ADDRESS CPSES See remarkt SPECIFIC PARAMETERS?
^
NO N/A 2a DO NORMAL PARAMETERS FOR QUALIFIED 3a/ Appendix 2 LIFE AND AGING ENVELOPE CPSES NORMAL PARAMETERS?
NO N/A 2b.
DO ABNORMAL /ACCIDEh7 PARAMETERS USED 3a/ Appendix 4 IN QUALIFICATION ENVELOPE CPSES l
ABNORMAL / ACCIDENT PARAMETERS?
NO N/A 3.
IS DOCUMENTATION AUDITABLE AND 3a/1 TRACEABLE TO CPSES EQUIPMENT 7
(
YEe NO N/A 4.
IS QUALIFIED LIFE EXPLICITLY STATED?
3a/ Appendix 2 YES NO N/A 4a.
DO AGING RESULTS SUPPORT THE 3a/ Appendix 2 QUALIFIED LIFE?
OES NO N/A S.
DOES QUALIFICATION METHOD (S) CONFORM 3a/4, 1 WITH IEEE STD. 323-19747 l
l YES NO N/A Sa.
DOES TEST SEQUENCE CONFORM TO 3a/4, 1 i
NO N/A 6.
ARE FAILURE CRITERIA FOR TESTS 3.a/4 DEFINED?
NO N/A 7.
IF THE EQUIPMEhT WOULD BE EXPOSED 3a/1, 4 TO DBA, WAS QUALIFICATION BY TYPE E0 N/A 8.
DOES DEMONSTRATED OPEABILITY 3a/9, 10 ENVELOPE CPSES REQUIREMENTS 7 NO N/A' 8b.
DOES NON-DETRIMENTAL FAILURE 3a/9, 10 ENVELOPE CPSES REQUIREMENTS YES N/A 9.
ARE MARGINk
$EFINED?
reAa'rk's see YES N/A 9a. DO MARGINS MEET OR EXCEED IEEE see remarks STD. 323-19747 YES NO N/A
- 10. ARE INSTALLATION AND MOUNTING see remarks 1
INTERFACES, AS REQUIRED FOR QUALIFICATION, SPECIFIED?
YES NO N/A
- 11. ARE MAINTENANCE REQUIREMENTS' see remarks l
AND COMPONENT REPLACEMENT l
INTERVALS SPECIFIED?
I
-r
,,e v-o
-w--
y
Paga 3 of 7 i
i B.
QUALIFICATION CHECKLIST (Cont'd)
DOC /PAGE REF 12.
AGING METHODOLOGY OYES NO N/A 12a. WAS ARRHENIUS METHODOLOGY USED 3a/ Appendix 2 IN AGING PER NUREG 05487 YES NO N/A 12b. ARE THERMAL AGING PARAMETERS 3a/ Appendix 2 JUSTIFIED 1 YES NO N/A 12c. WAS THE TEMPERATURE USED FOR see remarks ACCELERATED THERMAL AGING VERI-FIED TO BE LESS THAN TEMPERATURES AT WHICH KNOWN MATERIAL PHASE CHANGES OCCUR PER NUREG 05887
) 12d.
YES NO WAS MECHANICAL AGING JUSTIRED see remarks (CYCLIC DUTY REQUIREMENTS SPECIFIED)?
OYES NO N/A 12e DOES RADIATION AGING ENVELOPE 3a/3, Appendix 3 (i)
CPSES REQUIREMENTS?
YES NO N/A 12e WAS COBALT 60 USED AS THE 3a/ Appendix 3 (ii) RADIATION SOURCE 7
(
N/A 12f. HAVE KNOWN SYNERGISTIC EFFECTS see remarks YES BEEN CONSIDRED PER NUREG 05887 i
,m.,
,.. _ ~ _,.. _,
.,.,,m,,,
Pcg3 4 of 7 f
CHECKLIST REMARKS
_2)
Specific CPSES parameters not addressed 2b)
Although Okonite's profile is shorter, it is more severe due to higher temperatures.
See document 3 (a), Appendix 4.
5,5a)
Qualification methods and test sequences meet 1
IEEE 323-1974 as interpreted by IEEE 383-1974.
9,9a)
Margins are not specifically defined, however, by comparing the CPSES specific environmental parameters to the parameters used in document 3(a),
1 we find that there is margin such as the following:
1.
Radiation - 0.5%
2.
Temperature - over 75%
3.
AC dielectric breakdown test - 16 times the value of the cable 4.
Effects of relative humidity need not be considered in the aging of electrical cable insulation per NUREG-0538.
Further, the degree of margin is enhanced since the cable was subject to a DBA, which was proven to be more severe by Okonite (see document 3a/ Appendix 4),
From the aforementioned, we conclude that all of the margins exceed IEEE J23-1974 except for radiation which is below the sug~gested IEEE 323-1974 margin of 104.
10.
Installation and mounting interfaces are not applicable for qualifying cable since, there are no spccific instal-lation and mounting interfaces required for cable.
11.
Maintenance requirements and component replacement inter-vals are not applicable for cable since there are no moving parts involved, and cable is qualified for 40 years.
12c.
No materials could be identified by the reviewer as having l
known phases changes in the range rf temperatures used during the teating.
12d.
Mechanical aging for cable is not applicable sinesthere are no mechanical moving parts involv.ed.
12f.
No materials could be identified by the reviewer as having knqwn synergistic effects.
l i
l' - -..
... ~
Pcg3 5 cf 7.
~
C.
QUALIFICATION CONTINGENCIES DOC /PAGE REP t
1.
MAINTENANCE INTERVALS Not~ applicable l
2.
REPLACEMENT INTERVALS Not applicable 3.
STORAGE REQUIREMENTS l
l Not specifiedby vendor 4.
INSTALLATION REQUIREMENTS Not specified by vendor 5.
MOUNTING REQUIREMENTS Not applicable e
.----o,-._
....-m.,
,_.---,_-_,.,.y--
,___-.,-,y-
__.-m.
P g3 6 cf 7 D.
RIMARKS None O
e I
e R r, w azvzzwsa DAT.E 9/12/80 i., e r
~
-.s E.
ENVIROMP' INTAL OUAL1PICATION SUp9tARY DATA Page 7 Of 7 l
WIrrr"7 LCCATICM terc.
AP?'OPMAt./ACC. ENVI ROst. EXTRFMES OPERASILITY l ACCURACY l QUAL.
I r
~
ggAg,,
pggenggg
_TTrE/CATecoMT STRUCT./ AREA TYPE /MODEL PARAMETER j SI'ECIFIED DLM kEQ DEM REQ i r r.P' LIFE
- ==r a-REF.
SPEC.
4 I
600V Power All Okonite Temp.
280P 345F ACC 130 N/A N/A 40 Test 5-15 EG-13 and lighting Buildin'gs Co.
Pressure 50psig 114psig DUR Days years B.2 i
caI>16,cate-Rel.' Humid (* >100%
Satu-go$yla,d rated steam Radiation 2.0x10 2.1x10 RADS (g&b)
RADS (MIN) 8 g
2.25x10 RADS I
(MAX)
(g)
Chemistry Spray 2300
.28 ppm H 90 Molar 3 3 G NAOH To (3000 PHB-10 ppm) H3 B0.064 3
Molse NA S 0 3
3 1
.59%
NAOH P'4 10.59 77F (per IEEE 323-197d,)
cEffects of relative humj dity need rlot be considered in the aging <,f electrical c ible insulatio n PER mNttG-05 48.
i
PCgo 1 of 8 COMANCHE PEAK STEAM ELECTRIC STATION IEEE 323-1974 CLASS IE EQUIPMENT QUALIFICATION DOCUMENTATION REVIEW FORM A.
EQUIPMENT / DOCUMENTATION IDENTIFICATION 1.
SPECIFICATION NO.
2323-ES-13C 2.
VENDOR Cerro-Rockbestos 3.
APPLICABLE QUALIFICATION 00CUMENTS:
STATUS TRANSMITTAL DOCUMENT (AEN, APP)
(GTN & DATE)
Qualification of Firewall III (a) Class lE Electric Cables APP GTN-19949, 7/11/7 Firewall 111 Specification No.
e APP GTN-19949, 7/11/7 (b) RSS-3-021 Addendum dated 10/30/80 (c) to commane h ano G"- 5 0 4 9 9, 12/3/8 (d)
(e)
(f)
(g) l (h) 4.
CLASS IE EQUIPMENT / FUNCTION (per specification) :
l Instrument and thermocouple cable used to obtain signals from various Class lE instrumentation equipment outside and inside the containment of CPSES.
1 l
l 5.
QUALIFICATION METHOD (S)
Type Test T.S. Cardile _DATE
//11/9 /
REVIEWER w
Rev. 1 r
f/k/8/
REVIEWER A T.S. Cardile DATE
.,7-.
,._r
Pcgas 2 cf f SPEC. 2323-ES-13C E.
QUALIFICATION CHECKLIST
_ DOC /PAGE REF_
NO N/A 1.
DOES DOCUMENTATION ADDRESS ALL IE 3a/l EQUIPMENT SPECIFIED7 YES N/A 2.
DOES DOCUMENTATION AIOT.ESS CPSES See remarks SPECIFIC PARAMETERS?
NO N/A 2a DO NORMAL PARAMETERS FOR QUALIFIED 3a/2, 5 OYES LIFE AND LGING ENVELOPE CPSES NORMAL PARAMETERS?
NO N/A 2b.
DO ABNORMAL / ACCIDENT PARAMETERS USED 3a/8; 3b/7 IN QUALIFICATION ENVELOPE CPSES SEE REMARKS ABNORMAL / ACCIDENT PARAMETERS?
NO N/A 3.
IS DOCUMENTATION AUDITABLE AND 3c TRACEABLE TO CPSES EQUIPMENT?
NO N/A 4.
IS QUALIFIED LIFE EXPLICITLY STATED 7 3a/5; 3b/7 8YES YES NO N/A 4a.
DO AGING RESULTS SUPPORT THE 3a/2, 7 QUALIFIED LIFE 7 h NO I;/3 5.
DOES QUALIFICATION METHOD (S) CONFORM 3a/1, 2, 3 NITH IEEE STD. 323-1974?
NO N/A Sa.
DOES TEST SEQUENCE CONFORM TO 3a/1,2,3; 3b/7, IEEE STD. 323-19747 h NO N/A 6.
ARE FAILUPE CRITERIA FOR TESTS 3a/2, 3, 4 DEFINED?
YES NO N/A 7.
IF THE EQUIPMENT WOULD BE EXPOSED 3a/2, 3; 3b/7 TO DBA, 'a' AS QUALIFICATION BY TYPE TEST 7 YES NO N/A 8a. DOES DEMONSTRATED OPERABILITY 3a/5; 3b/7 ENVELOPE CPSES REQUIREMENTS 7
~
HO N/A Sb.
DOES NON DETRIMENTAL FAILURE 3a/5 3b/7 FNVELOPE CPSES REQUIRI24ENTS?
YES NO N/A 9.
APE MARGINS DEFINED?
See remarks YES NO N/A 9a.
DO MARGINS MEET OR EXCEED IEEE See remarks SID. 3I3-19747 YES NO 10.
ARE INSTALLATION AND MOUNTING INTER-See remarks FACES, AS REQUIRED FOR QUALIFICATION, SPECIFIED?
YES NO 11.
ARE MAINTENANCE REQUIREMENTfi AND See remarks COMPONENT REPLACEMENT INT %RV ALS l
SPECIFIED?
i l
Pcg3 3 of 8 B.
QUALIFICATION CHECKLIST (Cont'd)
DOC /PAGE REF
- 12. AGING METHODOLOGY O'YESNO N/A 12a. WAS ARRHENIUS METHODOI4GY USED IN 3a/2, 7 AGING PER NUREG 05887 h NO N/A 12b. ARE THERMAL AGING PARAMETERS JUSTIFIED? 3a/2, 7 YES N/A 12c. WAS THE TEMPERATURE USED FOR ACCELERATED See remarks THERMAL AGING VERIFIED TO BE LESS THAN TEMPERATURES AT WHICH KNOWN MATERIAL PHASE CHANGES OCCUR PER NUREG 05887 YES NO 12d. WAS MECHANICAL AGING JUSTIFI E See remarks (CYCLIC DUTY REQUIREMENTS SPECIFIED)?
N3 N/A 12e(1) DOES RADIATION AGING ENVEIOPE CPSES 3a/3,5,9; 3b/7 REQUIREMEKIS?
OYES10 N/A 12e(ii) h"AS COBALT 60 USED AS THE RADIATION 3a/9 SOURCE?
h N/A 12f. HAVE INOWN SYNERGISTIC EFFECTS BEEN See remarks YES CONSIDERED PER NUREG 0588?
l l
Pcg3 4 of 8 CHECKLIST REMARKS 2.
Specific CPSES parameters are not addressed.
However, Rockbestos makes reference to G&H specification 2323-ES-13C in document 3c.
2b.
Although Rockbestos's profile is shorter, it is more severe due to higher temperatures.
See document 3a, page 8.
5,5a.
Qualification methods and test sequences meet IEEE 323-1974 as interpreted by IEEE 383-1974.
9,9a.
Margins are not specifically defined.
- However, by comparing the CPSES specific environmental parameters to the parameters used in document 3a, we find that there is margin such as the following:
1.
Radiation
.5%
2.
Temperature - over 754 3.
Effects of relative humidity need not be l
considered in the aging of electrical cable ins 61ation per NUREG 0588.
Further, the degree of margin is enhanced since the cable was subjec t to higher temperatures than specified for CPSES during the DBA (see document 3a/8) andtgecable exposure time of 840 hours0.00972 days <br />0.233 hours <br />0.00139 weeks <br />3.1962e-4 months <br /> at 150 C, dictated by the Arrhenius slope (see document 3a/7),
to simulate 40 year installed life was adjusted to 1300 hours0.015 days <br />0.361 hours <br />0.00215 weeks <br />4.9465e-4 months <br />, thereby introducing more margin.
From the aforementioned, we conclude that all the margins exceed IEEE 323-1974 l
except for radiation which is below the suggested,TEEE 323-1974 margin of 10%.
l
{
10.
Installation and mounting interfaces are not l
applicable for qualifying cable since, there are no specific installation End mounting interfaces l
required for cable.
l 11.
Maintenance requirements and component replacement intervals are not applicable for cable since there are no moving parts involved, and cable is qualified for 40 years.
1
-.v..
,y r.
r,-.,--
_-r---,,
Pcgo 5 of 8
(
. 12c.
No materials could be identified by the reviewer as having known phase changes in the range of temperatures used during the testing.
12d.
Mechanical aging for cable is not applicable since there are no mechanical moving parts involved.
12f.
No materials could be identified by the reviewer as having known synergistic effects.
e e
O
Pcga 6 of 8 C.
QUALIFICATION CONTINGENCIES DOC /PAGE REF 1.
MAINTENANCE INTERVALS Not applicable 2.
REPLACEMENT INTERVALS 1
Not applicable l
3.
STORAGE REQUIREMENTS Not specified by vendor l
4.
INSTALLATION REQUIREMENTS Not~specified by vendor l
1 5.
MOUNTING REQUIRF"ENTS Not applicable t
l
Pcg3 7 Of 8 3
D.
REMARKS I
The Q ualification of Firewall III Class 1E Electric Cables qualification report is a generic report and, therefore, does not include specific CPSES parameters.
)
i I
RsvIrwsa k L 4
g F.
5.
C AC 3
E 1
IICP 9' S S U
E IF f
F o
E 6
R 1
4 B
8 8
15
,. D 0
I O g
AH t
P UT QE s
n M
e T
it 8
s l
r R
LE a
E AF 0 e P
UI 4 y OL ro it A
a M
/
l Y
R N
u C
n T
A n
R i
UC A
e
(' Q l
/
A H
N b
I ac s
l A
Y M.
0 y a
e T
T I
3 a c
A I
D i
D L
I 1 D r
t t
Y n
c R
A e
A R
l E 0 CR W
P 0
CU e
U O
t AD f
S g
g 0
3 oH o
N S
i 1
3 TP9 O
E s
x r0 0
r 2 g
I M
M Fp4l S a0) B 4 a He1 n
0 O. D )
8l0M 6l 2 Ok1 F i
T F
E 63 A
R D o3P oA Aa 7
g
- 2. M ( PH3 0. M N NM97 a
Ag 4l0 C
T 3l 2R(
I X
F E
e I
D.
3 o h
L A
N l
0 T
t U
O i
8 B
0 O
R F g
0 3 H1 n
I I
i 1
) y H
A -
i L
V C.
Fs4 xSba 0
OE r 0 m N
d A
N t
0 p 0 0. D &
T E P 800 AgP 3 p H
e N
S E
2 5 )12R( S 2 p
&P*
r o
M C
i d
d N
C i
O A
i n y
R
/. R.
emo r
s rui t
n I
t t
V A T uHt s
o N
M
.s a
i c
F E
R M
ps.i m
e O A meld e
b N R erea h
R A TPRR C
E A P t>
L s
n E
o-t eI d
.D e
O sri GM eiI e
F/
bF n
ME k /. l y
l P
c Y
ooa t
T RCW i
! ~
M i 4 A
m E
u R
NA s
h O /.
gn e
ITT i
v AC d
i CU l
t OR l
i a
LT l
l u
S A
B er Y
f R
e To t
o Nc n
ad s
EE e
c, t
MT m
PA un
,a c
IC roe e
U/
til y f
QE f
stbr EP E
naao Y
T ItCg f a{
l t
I
,l*
}
t i<
!1Ii, i4 i
Ii i
Pcga 1 of 9 COMANCHE PEAK STEAM ELECTRIC STATION I
IEEE 323-1974 CLASS IE EQUIPMENT QUALIFICATION DOCUMENTATION REVIEW FORM l
A.
EQUIPMENT / DOCUMENTATION IDENTIFICATION 1.
SPECIFICATION NO.
2323-ES-22 2.
VENDOR Automation Ind./
Vitro Labs 3.
APPLICABLE QUALIFICATION DOCUMENTS:
STATUS TRANSMITTAL DOCUMENT (AEN, APP)_
(GTN & DATE)
(a) Qualification Report Solid-State.
APP GTN-24960, 3/3/73 Safeguards System Sequencer, Rev. A GTN-23590, 1/ L/78 R;v.
(b) Seismic Qualification Report ?b,2462-1 APP Solid State Safeguards System Sequencer (c) Reliability / Availability Analysis APP GTN-23308, 12/19/77 for Solid State Safeguards System Secuencer Vitro Qualification Report APP GTN-52095. 3/9/81 (d) __for Tefzel Insulated 1/c Wire 4.
CLASS IE EQUIPMENT / FUNCTION (per specification):
(2) solid-state sequencers per unit.
Each There are two sequencer is used for loading one 6.9KV safeguard bus in a pre-established time sequence in the event of loss,
(blackout) and/or and subsequent restoratien of, bus voltage in the event of a loss-of-coolant accident (LOCA).
There are two (2) 6.9KV safeguard buses per unit, one. (1) for train "A"
and one (1) for train "B".
solid-state sequencers are located in the All four (4) main control room (El. 830'-0").
5.
QUALIFICATION METHOD (S)
Analysis and on-going qualifica*4m"-
'M DATE
/3 _/
REVIEWER._S..R _EAng REVIEWER S.
R. Wang
$[$/
DATE h.//0./91y Rev.1
~
Pega 2 of 9 SPEC. 2323-IS,22 3.
QUf.LIFICATION CHECKLIST DOC /PAGE REF h NO N/A 1.
DOES DOwVMENTATION.DDRESS ALL IE 3 (a)/1 EQUIPMENT SPECIFIED?
NO N/A 2.
DOES DOCUMENTATION ADDRESS CPSES 3 (a)/1 (see remarks-SPECIFIC PARAMETERS?
NC N/A 2a DO NORMAL PARAMETERS FOR QUALIFIED 3 (a)/8 and 3 (a)/13-LIFE AND AGING ENVELOPE CPSES NORMAL 14 PARAMETERS?
NO N/A 2b.
DO ABNORMAL /ACCIDE)ff PARAMETERS USED See remarks IN QUALIFICATION ENVELOPE CPSES ABNORMAL /ACCIDE Tr PARAMETERS?
NO N/A 3.
IS DOCUMEffrATION AUDITABLE AND 3(a)/1 TRACEABLE 10 CPSES EQUIPMENT 7 NO N/A 4.
IS QUALIFIED LIFE EXPLICITLY STATED?
3 (a) /9 NO N/A da.
DO AGING RESULTS SUPPORT THE 3 (a)/10 (see remar}
QUALIFIED LIFE 7 NO N/A 5.
DOES QUALIFICATION METHOD (S) CONFORM 3 (a)/10 (see remar)
WITH IEEE STD. 323-1974?
b. DOES TEST SEQUENCE CONFORM TO 3 (e) /7 (see remarks' I
YES NO IEEE STD. 323-19747 6.
ARE FAILURE CRITERIA FOR TESTS 3(a)/13 (see remarks h
N/A 8
DEFINED?
YES NO 7.
IF THE EQUIPMENT WOUID BE EXPOSED TO DBA, WAS QUALIFICATION BY TYPE TEST 7 NO N/A 8.
DOES DEMONSTRATED OPERABILITY 3 (a)/ Appendix A ENVELOPE CPSES REQUIREMENTS?
(see remarks)
NO h Ba. DOES NON-DETRIMENTAL FAILURE see remarks YES ENVELOPE CPSES REQUIREMENTS?
YES NO N/A 9.
ARE MARGINS DEFINED?
3 (a) /8 (see remarks YES NO N/A 9a. DO MARGINS MEET OR EXCEED IEEE 3 (a) /8 (see remarks STD. 323-1974?
NO N/A
- 10. ARE INSTALLATION AND MOUNTING INTER-(see remarks)
FACES, AS REQUIRED FOR QUALIFICATION, SPECIFIED?
YES NO N/A
- 11. ARE MAINTENANCE REQUIREMENTS AND 3 (a)/4 and 3 (a)/9 COMPONENT REPLACEMENT INTERVALS (see remarks)
SPECIFIED?
~
Pcg2 3 of 9 B.
QUALIFICATION CHECKLIST (Cont'd)
DOC /PAGE REF 12.
AGING METHODOLOGY NO h 12a. WAS ARRHENIUS METHODOLOGY USED IN YES AGING PER NUREG 05887 (see remarks)
NO h 12b. ARE THERMAL AGING PARAMETE'RS JUSTIFIED?
(see remarks)
YES NO h 12c. WAS THE TEMPERATURE USED FOR ACCELER YES THEPJIAL AGING VERIFIED TO BE LESS THAN TEMPERATURES AT WHICH KNOWN MATERIAL PHASE CHANGES OCCUR PER NUREG 0588?
NO h 12d. WAS MECHANICAL AGING JUSTIFIED YES (see remarku (CYCLIC DUTY REQUIREMENTS SPECIFIED)?
h 12e.
YES NO i.
DOES RADIATION AGING ENVELOPE (see remarks' CPSES REQUIREMENTS?
NO h 12e. ii. WAS COBALT 60 USED FOR THE RADIATION YES (see remarks)
SOURCE?
YES NO 12f. HAVE KNOWN SYNERGISTIC EFFECTS BEEN (see remarks)
CONSIDERED PER NUREG 05887 e
l 1
~ - - - - - - -
Pcga 4 of 9 2.
Document 3(a) did not address specific CPSES parameters, but states "the reequencers ara qualified for class 1E service in the specified environment" and references G&H specification 2323-ES-22, 2a & 2b.
The qualified life and abnormal / accident parameters used in qualification are based on vendor's current l.
estimate that the safeguard systems sequencers can be expected to perform the required safety functions (during normal plant operation sequencer does not function, except for testing), with a satisfactorily high probability of success.over the 40 year design life.
Satisfactory performance of modules and components similar to those utilized in the sequencer design was evidenced when tested at:
132 VAC, 60 Hz + 1% power source g
120 F ambient temperature, and 90% relative humidity i
These parameters are much higher than G&H specified.
However, the parameters of pressure 0" to 1/10" wager gauge (WG) and total integrated ratiation dose, 10 rads (gamma) over 40 years, as specified in G&H specification are not mentioned in document 3(a).
Refer to G&H specification 2313-ES-22 Rev. 2, paragraph 3.4.2.b (page 3-7).
4a.
The vendor specified that the qualification program is based on analysis and real-time on-going equipment operationF to provide assurance that performance of
(
installed equipment will remain acceptable throughout the life of the plant.
5.
By using analysis verified by on-going qualification.
Sa.
Acceptance test sequence used by vendor is based on
" test procedure TP2462-1005".
This is not a type test sequence as defined in IEEE 323-1974, but is a design qualification test procedure.
Qualification is by analysis, verified by on-going qualification.
6.
The vendor's qualification program includes the collection and analysis of failure data for Class lE equipment installed and operating in nuclear power generating plants, but failure criteria for test are not defined.
8.
Appendix A is solid state safeguard sequencers test procedure TP2462-1005.
8a.
There have been no non-detrimental failures reported by the l
vendor to date.
9.
Design margins of:
132 VAC, 60 Hz + 1% power source g
120 F ambient temperature, and 90% relative humidity I
are stated in 3(a)/8.
These are much higher than specified in G&H specification 2323-ES-22 Rev. 2, paragraph 3.4.2.b (page 3-7).
CHECKLIST REMARKS (CONT'D) 9a.
See. attached Table 9a.
The installation and mounting interfaces are shown on
' ' 10.
vendor's drawing 2462-1000, titled, " Outline Dimensions and Foundation Requirements" and document 3 (b) page II-3, titled, " Safeguards System Sequencer Mounting".
11.
Replacement subassemblies (recommended spare parts) are listed on page 4 through 6 of document 3(a).
Electronic assemblies can be expected to fail randomly at intervals which are short in comparison to 40 year life requirement.
Solid state safeguards sequencers are designed for rapid failure detection and replacement for such assemblies.
So far as maintenance is concerned, there is no special maintenance required to maintain qualification (refer to vendor's instruction manual Page 35).
12a - 12f.
The qualification document did not address arrhenius (except 12eii) methodology, thermal aging, mechanical aging, radiation aging and synergistic effects.
However, the document did indicate (3 (a) page 14) that the electronic assemblies can be expectsd to fail randomly at an average rate which is relatively constant, i.e.,
the failure rate does not increase with time.
To utilize the designed failure detection system and to replace the necessary component as necessary, for the equipment as a whole, the effect of any aging phenomena tends to be minimized.
In addition, document (3 (a) Page 11)
See Remark da.
12fil also referred to the 1974 Dupont report covering IEEE This 383 qualification of tefzel insulated cable.
that a Cobalt Dupont report specified in Section IV-B, 60 was used as radiation source for 200 Mrad gamma radiation at the rate of 1 Mrad per-hour for wire in-sulation test.
.,,n---,
p
-c-
---,y-
Specified by Specified by Specified by Margins as compared G&ll spec.
Qualification IEEE Std to IEEE Std ES-22 Report 3 (a) 323-1974 323-1974 Remarks Parameter l
Margin specified Tsmperature 75 P + 5 120 F Temperature in Qualification 120 = 75 + 45 specified for Report is much
~
test is con-5 11 = 60%
higher than H
= 6.6%
75 75 ducted under spec. ES-22 saturated steam condition same as above Ralative 50% + 5%
90%
Not specified 90 = 50 + 40
~
Ilumidity hh=80%
hg
= 10%
i UPS.from battery Voltage ll8V AC i 2%
i 10% rated Exceed supplied inverter 132V + 1%
value Meet
~
120V AC i 10%
Pressure 0" to 1/10" Not specified 10% of gauge but not more water gauge than 7.03(10-1)Kg/cm' Frequency 60 11z i 1%
6011z + 1%
+5% of rated Meet value unless otherwise specified m
O i
W
Pcge 7 of 9 DOC /PAGE REF QUALIFICATION CONTINGENCIE_S
'l C.
MAINTENANCE INTERVALS 1.
No special maintenance is required to maintain qualification REPLACEMENT INTERVALS 2.
No routine replacement is required to maintain qualification STORAGE REQUIREMENTS 3.
Per "On-site Storage Procedure", vendor document No. VL-C-46605, dated 2/20/80.
INSTALLATION REQUIREMENTS 4.
2462-1000 sheet 1 of 1 Per drawing
" Outline Dimensions and Foundation Requirements", dated 4/11/79.
MOUNTING REQUIREMENTS 5.
3b/II-3 Bolt Automation Industries drawing
..Rev.
No. 2462-1000, Sheet 1 of 1
" Outline Dimensions and Foundation Requirements" Revised dated 5/23/76.
sub. via vendor letten of 4/5/79.
,.--_.-v,--,-
_--.-w,-,
Page 8 of 9 j
REMARKS Although documentation fails to address a few points (such as arrhenius methodology, synergistic effects, l
etc.), the documentation is generally quite conservative.
Also, Vitro is verifying the results of referencedocume l
and reporting, on a biennial basis, the results of j
seismic testing of real-time aged components.
(
l l
1
~
Ad REVIEWER ~
/-
lII,'
g g
aC 2
sE 2
t e
cP g S S
y E
p I
9 F
9 f
E o
R 3
9 ',t t
e Lo n
4eg e
a jt P
gr t) o3 as N(
ry LE AF 0
UI 4
QL e
t) m o2 n
N(
YC a A
RU e
C t)
C o o2 A
y l
n N(
tne d
Y M i
T E c
I O
L I
A I
R n
A e
a R
t) s E o.
o1 f
i P
t O p N(
o s
i n
B S
t t
o E
l l
i l
M M i
i i
i t
a F
f F
cd V
Z cd a
i R o 0t ee%
2 H
t ee r
n T
2 o pl 0 3
0 o pl u
n XE 1NSf9 1
6 NSf D
e i
"0 e
B r,
2 s
h N t O
I 1
1 t
S) r t
a R r
/
C l
DA a
5l re5 A) i AM J
r n
I I
V. C.
i oeg1 VS Z
RMry o
o FTt u4 8P H
Ae f
F E e 5
aa0 l U 0
0Gv0 C.
7 "0 w G 5 s
l(
6 1( o4 s.
o i
t C
i A
d t
t
/. n i
y n
n r
e m
c o
e o
1 t
A T r
u e
n i
m p
M u
H g
t e
e P
R M
. s a
a r
R O A ps t
T i
i N R me l
l d
u d
R A er e
o r
a q
n.
A P TP R
V F
R e
a t
l n
L ns E
oe b
y o
D ii an t
i
.o t r Lo i
t CM at i
l a
F/
ms,os i
c ME ou
.ri b
i P
td ct v a
f Y
unnii rei T
AIIVD e ll M
A l
)
1 ba 0au "O
cQ E
o R
r ti NA t
nl g epn O /.
n I
o'
'0 m pi TT C
3 pao AC 8
i G
CU nm.
ut -
MR(
Y
) ) )
r.
R e
123 To t s d
( ( (
NC ad r
EE t r ey MT S asc r PA umno S
IC d geeg E
U/
i et ue T
QE lf sqt O
EP oaye a N
YT SSSSC
- 3Ii;!
- I
,ilI!!? ilnf jj;
- il1I J
Jt 1
- i!
4i
)!.!1 iI
l P ga 1 of 9 COMANCHE PEAK STEAM ELECTRIC STATION I
IEEE 323-1974 CLASS IE EQUIPMENT QUALIFICATION DOCUMENTATION REVIEW FORM A.
EQUIPMENT / DOCUMENTATION IDENTIFICATION 1.
SPECIFICATION NO.
2323-SS-15 2.
V3NDOR CB&I/Conax 3.
APPLICABLE QUALIFICATION DOCUMENTS:
STATUS TRANSMITTAL DOCUMENT (AEN, APP)
(GTN & DATE)
(a) Conax Report No. IPS-421, Rev. B APP GTN-41061, 10/25/75 (b) Conax Report No. IPS-353.2, Rev. O APP Attached with (c) Conax Report No. IPS-325, Rev. O APP
> IPS-421, Rev. B (d) Conax Report No. IPS-423, Rev. O APP (Seismic Qualification)
(e) CB&I No. VPS-54 6, Rev. O APP Attachment to Cona)
(f) Conax Report No. IPS-78 APP Report No. IPS-208,
. transmitted via (g) Conax Report No. IPS-202 APP J
GTN-18142, 4/28/77 l
(h) CB&I No. VPS-533, Rev. 4 APP GTN-18144, 4/28/77 (i) CB&I No. VPS-535, Rev. 4 APP GTN-18144, 4/28/77 l
j)
Conax Report NO. IPS-221, Rev. E APP GTN-20330, 7/28/77 1
k)
CBI Letter DBE-429, 6/27/77 APP GTN-20330, 7/28/77 1)
Wyle Test Report No. 42988-1, 8/4/75 AEN GTN-8523, 5/3/76 I
l m)
CBI Design Calculations, C.L. DBE-264, 3/22/76 AEh GTN-8523, 5/3/76 n)
CBI Design Calculation, C.L. DBE-AEN Telecon, 7/22/76 319, 7/2/76 o)
CBI Letter DBE-304, 6/13/76 AEN Telecon, 7/22/76 p)
CBI Letter DBE-330 8/2/76 APP GTT-354, 8/5/76 l
with attachment GTT-357, 8/6/76 l
(Approves items --
L thru o) r)
CBI Certification of Stress Report App GTT-1093, S/5/77 C.L. DBE-410, 4/7/77 GTT-17963, 4/25/77 l
Pcgo 2 of 9 l
4.
CLASS IE EQUIPMENT / FUNCTION (per specification):
(
Electric penetration assemblies, Conax Model P/N 7414-10000-01 thru -06, for Containment Personnel Air Locks and Emergency Air Locks provide a meansfor the continuity of L.V. Power, control and communication circuits through the air lock barriers while maintaining the integrity of the barriers.
These circuits are not required to remain functional during and after a DBA.
However, functionality has been demonstrated by the vendor.
5.
QUALIFICATION METHOD (S) Combination of analysis and tvoe tant l
l N.K. Kundu A/. K. M.
/D!l7![lO DATE REVIEi!ER REVIEWER N.K.Kundu dfM-DATE 4/5/8f Rev. 1 t.
e-,_-.----,.
..,,--,.,----,,,--,--.-,,.---,,--.---n,,,,-n,..,-----.,-.,,,,,-,n,----
rcg3 J Cf 5 SPEC. 7323-SF/f S.
QUALIFICATION CMECKLIST DOC /PAGE REF h NO N/A 1.
DOES DOCUMENTATION ADDRESS ALL IE 3a/2 NQUIPMENT SPECIFIED?
YES_ h N/A 2.
DOES DOCUMEW ATION ADORESS CP3ES See remarks SPECIFIC PARAMETERS?
h N/A 2a DO NORMAL PARAMETERS FOR QUALIFIED 8ee reaarks YES LIFE AND AGING ENVEICPE CPSES NORMAL PARAMETERS?
j h
NO N/A 2b.
DO ABNORMAL / ACCIDENT PARAMETERS USED 3a/15 (see reaarks)
IN QUALIFICATION ENVELOPE CPSES ABNORMAL /ACCIDEW PARAMETERS?
i h NO N/A 3.
IS DOCUMEW ATION AUDITABLE AND 3a/2 TRACEABLE M CPSES EQUIPMENT?
h N/A 4.
IS QUALIFIED LIFE EXPLICITLY STATED?
See remarks YES
@ N/A 4a.
DO AGING RESULTS SUPPORT THE See reaarka YES QUALIFIED LIFE 7 h NO N/A 5.
DOES QUALIFICATION METHOD (S) CONIVRM 3a/1 NITH IEEE STD. 323-19747
~
NO N/A Sa.
DOES TEST SEQUENCE CONFORM TO 3a/6, 3b/5 and 6 IEEE STD. 323-19747 h No N/A 6.
ARE FAILURE CRITERIA FOR TESTS 3a/3 i
DEFINED?
NO N/A 7.
IF THE EQUIPMEW WOUID BE EXPOSED 3a/1 (see remarks)
M DBA, NAS QUALIFICATION BY TYPE TEST 7 NO N/A 8.
DOES DFAONSTRATED OPERABILITY 3b/iii ENVELOPE CPSES REQUIREMENTS?
h NO N/A Sa. DOES NON-DETRIMENTAL FAILURE 3b/34, 35, & 36 ENVELOPE CPSES REQUIREMENTS?
YE NO N/A 9.
ARE MARGINS DEFINED?
3b/4 YE NO N/A 9a. DO MARGINS MEET OR EXCEED IEEE 3b/4 STD. 323-1974?
h NO N/A
- 10. ARE INSTALLATION AND MOUNTING INTER-see remarks FACES, AS REQUIRED FOR QUALIFICATION, SPECIFIED?
YES NO
- 11. ARE MAINTENANCE REQUIREMENTS AND See remarks COMPONENT REPLACEMENT INTERVALS SPECIFIED?
~~-e--
,,,--~-w
-,-,,_v.n.
, - ~ - - -
,-n,,.
- 4w a
,w..
,----n-
-w,---
,w-_
Pcg3 4 of 9'
f S.
QUALIFICATION CHECKLIST (Cont'd)
DOC /PAGE ;EF 12 AGING METHODOLOGY NO N/A 12a. WAS ARRHENIUS METHODOLOGY USED IN 3c/7(see remarks)
AGING PER NUREG 0588?
YES @ N/A 12b. ARE THERMAL AGING PARAMETERS JUSTIFIED? see remark 3 NO Q 12c. WAS THE TEMPERATURE USED FOR ACCELERATED YES THERMAL AGING VERIFIED TO BE LESS THAN TEMPERATURES AT WHICH KNOWN MATERIAL PHASE CHANGES OCCUR PER NUREG 05887 NO N/A 12d. WAS MECHANICAL AGING JUSTIFIED 3a/9 (CYCLIC DUTY REQUIREMENTS SPECIFIED)?
NO N/A 12e. i.
DOES RADIATION AGING ENVELOPE 3/10 and CPSES REQUIREMENTS?
3a/ Appendix A h NO N/A 12e. ii. WAS CO3 ALT 60 USED FOR THE RADIATION 3a/ Appendix A SOURCE?
and 3b/9 YES NO N/A 12f. HAVE KNOWN SYNERGISTIC EFFECTS BEEN See remarks CONSIDERED PER NUREG 0588?
i l
Pcga 5 cf 9 CHECKLIST REMARKS
(
2.
Conax document 3a/3 specifically addresses CPSES's LOCA environmental parameters.
Specific CPSES's normal environmental parameters (except radiation dose in 3a/ll) are not addressed in Conax documents.
However, Conax states (3a/21) that the EPA's meet the requirements of CBEI specifications (3h and 31) which specifically address both CPSES normal and LOCA service environments (3h/2 and 31/2).
2a.
No thermal aging test per IEEE Standard 317-1976 was performed.
The prgtotype EPA has undergone age conditioning for 169 hours0.00196 days <br />0.0469 hours <br />2.794312e-4 weeks <br />6.43045e-5 months <br /> at 255 F and Conax report does not indicate the equivalent time and temperature for normal operating conditions.
- However, by documented analysis, Conax has indicated that normal operating temperature will have no major detrimental impact on the EPA materials and has established the following temperatur-versus life relationships:
1.
For electrical integrity of EPA conductor insulation system -
90g0yearsatnormalserviceconductortemperatureof 75 C (3c/7).
2.
For leakage about the interface of the polysulfone sealants withtggfeedthrusheath,and/ortheconductorinsulation-(
2 X 10 years at normal service sealant temperature of 65 C (3c/8).
3.
For leakage 'aboutithe interface of the 0-ring aperture and/or bushing seals with the header plate -
infinite life for temperature at or below 450 F (reference document 3a, Appendix A, Item 1).
l Abnormal / accident parameters of temperature, pressure, humidity l
2b.
and radiation used in qualification envelope CPSES abnormal /
l accident parameters.
The prototype EPA with Viton 0-rings aperture seal was subjected to chemical spray per Table Al of Appendix A of IEEE Standard 323-1974 (3b/25).
The subject EPA has silicone 0-ring aperture seals and Conax report did not address the effect of chemical spray on the silicone 0-rings.
However, since the header plates are located either inside the air locks or outside the CPSES containment, there will be no direct impingemen.t of chemical sprays to the 0-rings.
l 4.
Although a qualified life is not explicitit stated, the reports clearly indicate a normal service life of much greater than 40 years.
See checklist remarks, item 2a above.
da.
See checklist remarks itam 2a above.
7.
The prototype unit with viton 0-rings for aperture seal was tested for DBA environmental exposure.
The subject EPA's have silicona 0-rings for aperture seal.
By separate testing, Conax has verified that silicone performance is better than viton (3a/ Appendix A).
Ptg3 6 cf 9
(
(CONT'D)
CHECKLIST REMARKS 10.
The installation and mounting interfaces of the tested prototype are indicated on Conax drawing No. 7641-10000, which is included in Appendix D of document 3b.
This drawing refers to the parts list for the details of the mounting hardware.
The parts list is not included in the qualification documents.
The installation and mounting interfaces of the subject EPA's are iddicated on the CB&I drawings.
The EPA's are installed in the Air Locks by CB&I ner Conax installation manual.
11.
The complete EPA has a design qualified life of greater than forty (40) years without sny special requirement of maintenance or component replacement.
12a.
Arrhenius criteria was used on prior test data to establish the life of +.he electrical insulation system.
9060 years is expgeted life at normal conductor l
temperature of 75 C.
There will be insignificant l
degradation of insulation characteristics due to temperature over the 40 year design life of the penetrations.
On this basis, it is concluded that thermal aging of the insulation system to simulate a 40 year service life is not appropriate.
12b.
There was no thermal aging as required by IEEE Standard 317-1976.
By use of prior test data and documented analysis (Conax Report No. IPS-325), the vendor has indicated that this test is not required (3a/20).
12c.
Please see remark under item 12b above.
12f.
The qualification documents do not address synergistic effects.
l l
I l
l l
~.
Pcg3 7 of ?
C.
QUALIFICATION CONTINGENCIES DOC /PAGE REF t'
1.
MAINTENANCE INTERVALS No special maintenance is required to maintain qualification.
2.
REPLACEMENT INTERVALS No routine replacement is required to maintain qualification.
l l
3.
STORAGE REQUIREMENTS No special requirements are indicated in the qualification documentation.
4.
INSTALLATION REQUIREMENTS No special requirements are indicated in the report.
5.
MOUNTING REQUIREMENTS l
Bolts 3h/6 31/7 3j/3 3L/3, 10 thru 18 Weld and Bolts 3m, 3n G&H Dwg 2323-S1-0513 Rev. 6 CBI Dwgs listed in 3m, 3n, CBI letter l
DBE-484, 11/15/78
Pcg3 4 Of 9 I
D.
REMARKS The qualification program is generally in accordance with IEEE Standard 317-1976, the daughter document of IEEE Standard 323-1974.
The major difference between the tested prototype and the subject EPA is the aperture seal material.
The prototype had Viton whereas the subject EPA has silicone 0-rings.
By separate material testing, the vendor has demonstrated that silicone will have better performance than Viton.
Another important aspect is the qualification document didnotspecificallyagdressthelowerlimitofthe service temperature (O F).
The service temperatures are clearly indicated in the CBI procurement specifications (3h and 31) and according to the Conax report, these specifications are met.
o REVIEWER N. K. Kundu N N-
8 MU 1
CP RS S
O S
sn Y
o s
i n
9 t
o
.r i
i f
f 6
l t
o t
4 H-t i
_ B s
l 9
e n
LQ n p&e o
e l
c i oy y
g Ah bittl a
a U i t
l l
l 's fe R t P
Q n
o gi e n i, n
e 0
t u
Cnot as i
s n
e o
n
- rn r
e E
eea s
I i
o AF rt h0 r v
r 0 l, gat 4 y s
Jv i
0I i
e n
t e
n A
e t
n
/
d n
T i
N C n i
A c
d R
c i
U a
c c
C A
t a
C Q
/
A r s
W i
ts p
p o
d p
n A
V M
a T
T l
i A
t.
l t
t n
t n
n t
Y n
e e
R A
d d
A R
i i
M E V c
c M
e c
c f
P t
t o
l g
a a
S k
,5 i
1 N
5 s
x O
F.
p 8
y
/
r. 3H0 1
a m
oa0 O1 a
3 a 5.
- M M F 5. 0 I
m oeB a=
- 1. la" g d r
T F
4 0
o l r 3NH s
A R
I 420 0 a p
361 21 R s
0 :c f aH & P o.
n C
T I
X nd F
E gr n
e q
I D.
g ni i
L i
0 A
N t
U O
I s
M& o1 iu r
p g
y P
T -
rq u
O R
t ue d
I I
F1 s 0
)
a P 3 6
d r V C 8
0 1 db r 0O H 1
y 600 xa&
p 0B O8 A
N t
241 2 R g s
3 3AH dt t
T E
P 2H NP eo i
N
(
T.
t t
M C
l g
n y
as e
N C
O A
e eey o
r ti t
R
/.
t rvt i
t n
n iy i
I I
D V
A T.
uii t
s at N
M
.std a
i m
mi l
F R
D psai N
i r
a O A H
l mel m d
e l
ereu a
h eg c
be i
P A
TPRh R
C t
r F.
A l'
t 1 t
s1 c
N u
e t
E
/
1 ml l
P 06
.D a
e O
- 0 yn cM xl 0 -
t o d
F/
ae40 u ii n.
ME nd1 0 r rt ad P
oo4 0h gc e
Y Cm71 t T
em et t
r i nf ur A
i st E
t e
l ss R
n l
ea en NA e/
i rc ro O /.
mg sr ui pm nnese sr e
ITT iidii st hd AC adi mr ec t
CU tl s r
)
re os X R nit ea Pl Ba IT ouuhb
- E
- w S
CBOt r
Y R
n e
To od pr b
Nc i e -
i y
EE ctt nt adcky MT iaaon nncr PA rricel aeoe I C tt c me gl g U/
ceohnnkr e
QE onsti ncert Er esiaoomia g
l.fP a wt sl cac
- r 1
i I
1, 4
4
POg31 of 7 COMANCHE PEAK STEAM ELECTRIC STATION IEEE 323-1974 CLASS IE EQUIPMENT QUALIFICATION DOCUMENTATION REVIEW FORM A.
EQUIPMENT / DOCUMENTATION IDENTIFICATION 1.
SPECIFICATION NO.
2323-MS-13 2.
VENDOR ~ Bingham-Willamette/
Siemens-Allis Motors 3.
APPLICABLE QUALIFICATION DOCUMENTS:
STATUS TRANSMITTAL DOCUMENT (AEN, APP)_
(GTN & DATE)
(a) Siemens-Allis (S-A) Doc. No.
APP
- GTT-7 4 91, 1-19-81 090319 Nwd, Rev.
1, 10-14-80 (b)
Bincham Willamette Co.
(Bwc)
GTT-7515, 2-4-81 Telex No. 0230, 12/5/80 l
- G&H Approval Rev. in process 4.
CLASS IE EQUIPMENT / FUNCTION (per specification) :
These motors drive the Spent Fuel Pool Cooling Water Pumps which are located in the Fuel Handling Building, outside the CPSES con-tainrent.
These pumps are part of the Spent Fuel Pool Cooling inctor and Cleanup System (SFPCCS) which provides cooling for the two spent fuel pools, and are essential to the safe shutdown of the plant.
Combination of Operating History, Type 5.
QUALIFICATION METHOD (S) Test, Analysis and ongoing Otta t i fi ca+-i nn REVIEWER J. R. Isgro DATE 4/2/81 y
.(
i-m-
.m.
e,,,,.
P ga 2 cf 7 SPEC. MS-13 3.
QUALIFICATION OtECXLIST DOC / PACE REF h NO N/A 1.
DOES DOCUMENTATION ADDRESS ALL IE 3a/3 EQUIPMENT SPECIFIED?
NO N/A 2.
DOES DOCUMENTATION ADDRESS CPSES 3a/5 SPECIFIC PARAMETERS?
NO N/A 2a DO NORMAL PARAMETERS FOR QUALIFIED 3a/12 thru 16, and LIFE AND AGING ENVELOPE CPSES NORMAL 18 thru 23.
PARAMETERS?
N/A 2b.
DO ABNORMAL / ACCIDENT PARAMETERS US E 3a/20, 21, 22.
h NO IN QUALIFICATION ENVELOPE CPSES ABNORMAL / ACCIDENT PARAMETERS?
NO N/A 3.
IS DOCUMENTATION AUDITABLE AND 3a/ coyer sheet &
TRACEABLE '!O CPSES EQUIPMENT?
page 3.
NO N/A 4.
IS QUALIFIED LIFE EXPLICITLY STAT c?
3a/23 hl YES NO 4a.
DO AGING RESULTS SUPPORT THE See remark 4a.
QUALIFIED LIFE 7 NO N/A S.
DOES QUALIFICATION METHOD (S) CONFORM 3a/1, 2 (Remark 4:
NITH IEEE STD. 323-19747 YES NO Sa.
DOES TEST SEQUENCE CONFORM TO See Remark 4a.
IEEE STD. 323-19747 h
6.
ARE FAILURE CRITERIA FOR TESTS See Remark 4a YES NO DEFINED 7 YES NO 7.
IF THE EQUIPMERI WOUID BE EXPOSED See Remark 7-TO DBA, NAS QUALIFICATION BY TYPE TEST?
h NO N/A 8.
DOES DEMONSTRATED OPEPABILITY 3a/12 thru 16, an ENVELOPE CPSES REQUIREMENTS?
18 thru 23.
YES NO Sa. DOES NON-DETRIMENTAL FAILURE See Remark Ba.
ENVELOPE CPSES REQUIREMENTS?
l k NO N/A 9.
ARE MARGINS DEFINED?
3a/12, 19, 20, 21 NO N/A 9a. DO MARGINS MEET OR EXCEED IEEE 3a/12, 19, 20, 21 STD. 323-19747 h NO N/A
- 10. ARE INSTALLATION AND MOUNTING INTER-3a/10, 20, 21 &
FACES, AS REQUIRED,FOR QUALIFICATION, Appendix B, Pg.
SPECIFIED?
l YE NO N/A
- 11. ARE MAINTENANCE REQUIREMENTS AND 3a/21, 24 COMPONENT REPLACEMENT INTERVALS SPECIFIED?
l l
l
\\
~
Pcge 3 of 7 B.
QUALIFICATION CHECKLIST (Cont'd)
DOC /PAGE REF 12 AGING METHODOLOGY OYESNO N/A 123. WAS ARRHENIUS METHODOLOGY USED IN 3a/11 AGING PER NUREG 0588?
YES NO N/A 12b. ARE THERMAL AGING PARAMETERS JUSTIFIED?
See Remark 4a-YES NO I 12c. WAS THE TEMPERATURE USED FOR ACCELERATED See Remark THERMAL AGING VERIFIED TO BE LESS THAN 4a and 3a/7 TEMPERATURES AT WHICH KNOWN MATERIAL PHASE CHANGES COCUR PER NUREG 0588?
NO' h 12d. WAS MECHANICAL AGING JUSTIFIED YES See Remark 12d, (CYCLIC DUTY REQUIREMENTS SPECIFIED)?
NO N/A 12a. i.
DOES RADIATION AGING ENVELOPE 3a/ Appendix A, CPSES REQUIREMENTS?
NO N/A 12e. ii. WAS COBALT 60 USED FOR THE RADIATION 3a/ Appendix A SOURCE 7 (sheet 3 ).
YES N/A 12f. HAVE KNOWN SYNERGISTIC EFFECTS BEEN See Remark 12f CONSIDERED PER NUREG 05887 O
t l
l i
Pcg3 4 of 7 CHECKLIST REMARKS Siemens-Allis motor qualification is based on an analytical da.
approach to operating history and insulation system comparison of a control group of motors.
Ongoing comparison tests.are being conducted to establish correlation betweenrthe insulation system used on the control group motors and the CPSES modern epoxy MICA VPI systems (both irradiated and non-irradiated).
At the conclusion of these IEEE 275 tests, information will be available to confirm or extend;the qualified life of the Radiation endurance of the CPSES motor in'sula-CPSES motors.
tion sygtem was verified by actual Cobalt 60 exposure testing to 2x10. rads (gamma) TID.
The only DBA these motors will be exposed to is the OBE and SSE due to their locat ion in the Fuel Handling Building, which 7.
is outside the CPSES c3ntiainment.
No non-detrimental failures were found by the vendor during Sa.
the tests he has performed to date (See 4a above).
Mechanical aging (cyclic duty) is not applicable po this 12d.
equipment.
12f.
Soc nonark 4a, also no known synrgistic effects have been identified by the vendor in the testing he has completed to date.
i l
l I
l
Page 5 of 7 s
C.
QUALIFICATION CONTINGENCIES DOC /PAGE REF 1.
MAINTENANCE INTERVALS a) Lubricants 3a/21r
~
b) Bearings Ja/24 2.
REPLACEMENT INTERVALS a) Lubricants 3a/21 b) Bearings 3a/24 3.
STORAGE REQUIREMENTS (Not specified by vendor) 4.
INSTALLATION REQUIREMENTS a) Terminals 3a/10, 21 b) Lubricants 3a/20 l
l j
S.
MOUNTI'NG REQUIREMENTS a) 4 Bolts - 7/8" @
3a/ Appendix B, Page 7 6
l e
e e-w ge.,--..-
ca.-v
- -.r--r----
r w-e-
- - ~
+-v.
- - - - = - - - - - - - - -
-w-
--.m-e cw--
-+-m
-ywerew
+--
w7--
r--
- ,v-v
- --ye M
Pcg3 6 cf 7 D.
REMARKS The analysis of Section XII. B of reference docmument 3(a) verifies the superiority of the Epoxy VPI insul-
~
ation system (Comanche Peak Motor Construction) versus the asphaltic MICA insulated Control Group M6 tors, which have been in operation for approx. 27 years (since 1953).
VPI insulated motors have been in operation for approx.
11 years (since 1969). #.Under continuous operating con-ditions, the asphalt resin system is rated 130'C by IEEE Standards.
The newer #VPI system is rated 155'C.
by IEEE Standards, but the epoxy is rated by thermo-gravimetric analysis at an index of 167'C. (approx. 10 to 30'C higher than the melting point of the asphalt).
The effects of gamma radiatien (Cobalt 60 source) on U-bars insulated with VPI systgm, show that up to an accumulated dose level of 2x10 Rade, the Siemens-Allis system improves with respect to power fzetor, and de-creases insignificant 1y ig diele:tric breakdown (32kv initially to 30kv at 2x10 Rads on an in3ulation system designed for 4160v.)
Based on the above, the present qualified life (see re-mark 4a) assignment of 27 years is conservative.
g I
REVIEWER J.
R.
Tscro
/W gj.
,r,
s.
DATE 4/2/81 y
..____,..,--_...m_
,,_.m e.,-_...m,,
y
.-7
l l
["g gC nE S
eP g *,
N g
p
- 7 f
F o,
E 3
s B
, s 7
yi g
e
,n t
rsen g
Lo i
a o y pi a
AH
- P UT b
r tl yt QE m
egsaTs t
o f pnin e
t C " oOiHA & r LE AF 7
UI 2
- QL A
/
e s
i N
Y r
C p A
R U
A C
/
C u N
A r H
A Y M 7
- T T F 2
- A I
D Y
D L
r 1
Y R
a A
e A
R y
t E 0 e
P
- l pu O p 1
S
'a N
S O
E 8
m s
r I
M M F
0 sm o
e T
F D
N R D 1da m
4 ve C
T 5
xag t
0Ag I
X 9
2R(
A 6( a F
E I
D L
F 4 s
A N
t U
O I
0 s o
4 Q
R t'
I B
2 1 d m
0 L
V C 2
xa t
0 T
E E
1 4 R A
1 A
N t
N S
E M
C r
N C
o e
ey O
A 4
a i
r vt l
/.
8 r
t u
ii l
i 1
t V
A T e: a s
td N
M E
R M pei s
ai t
O A mrd e
l m N R eua r
eu R A R
A l'
TtR P
RH L
s E
n F
a
.DO es f/
l GM mipoe un.
F/
ME eli o pI sos P
il rryP niy Y
SADpTVItS T
A dd"-
- c E
6 nl R
a B '-
NA o /.
H 0
I g1 TT AC l n8 CU ei OR ul L LTS F
E Y
n l
p d R
i To e
m l
N C.
u u
y o
Et F
P/r Mf o
nl eoe Qt Ep eottt
\\
y poaom y
[l SPWM4l'
]
1 i(
f'
- f) j'.;l'l!
4 lt!
il
, i
!1 i!1 i!.
i 11 <
3
- Ili4!lii:i.
Page 1 of 7 COMANCHE PEAK STEAM ELECTRIC STATION IEEE 323-1974 CLASS IE EQUIPMENT QUALIFICATION
(
DOCUMENTATION REVIEW FORM
. EQUIPMENT / DOCUMENTATION IDENTIFICATION A.
1.
SPECIFICATION No.
2323-MS-15B
_2.
VENDOR Crane Deminc/
Reliance Motors APPLICABLE QUALIFICATION DOCUMEN'13:
3.
STATUS TRANSMITTAL (AEN, APP)
(GTN & DATE)
DOCUMENT APP GTN-43367, 1/18/80 (a) Reliance Summary Report No. NUC-9_
APP GTN-43080. 1/10/80 (b) Reliance Seismic Analysis No.
~79b-A-47 N/A (c) Crane-Demina Letter of 2/07/79 (d) Supplemental Reoort to Nim-9 APP GTN-51731. 2/17/81 FIO GTN-51733. 2/17/81
. (e) Certification of Qualification NUC-14 (f)
(g)
(h) 4.
CLASS IE EQUIPMENT / FUNCTION (per specification) :
These Class lE motors are used to drive safety related safeguards This equipment is located outside the containment l
sump pumps.
building.
l S.
QUALIFICATION METHOD (S)
Type tests ___and analysis gg
_DATE
/0 3/ [f. 7 REVIEWER J.R.
Iscro 4,!/J'k /
DATE
.,M t REVIEWER 4.
Pcg3 2 of 7 SPEC. 2323-MS-15B 3.
QUALIFICATION CHECKLIST DOC /PAGE REF NO N/A 1.
DOES DOCUMENTATION ADDRESS ALL IE See remarks EQUIPMENT SPECIFIED7 YES l N/A 2.
DOES DOCUMENTATION ADDRESS CPSES See remarks SPECIFIC PARAMETERS?
NO N/A 2a DO NORMAL PARAMETERS FOR QUALIFIED 3a/5,6,8 thru 15 LIFE AND AGING ENVELOPE CPSES NOPt.AL PARAMETERS?
NO N/A 2b.
DO ABNORMAL / ACCIDENT PARAMETERS USED 3a'/14, 15 IN QUALIFICATION ENVELOPE CPSES ABNORMAL /ACCIDE!C PARAMETERS?
I NO N/A 3.
IS DOCUME!GATION AUDITABLE AND 3c, 3e l
TRACEABLE 'IO CPSES EQUIPMENT 7
- YES, NO N/A 4.
IS QUALIFIED LIFE EXPLICITLY STATED?
3a/21 YES' NO N/A 4a.
DO AGING RESULTS SUPPORT THE 3a/21 j
QUALIFIED LIFE 7 l
OYES NO N/A 5.
DOES QUALIFICATION METHOD (S) CONFORM See remarks WITH IEEE STD. 323-19747 h)
NO N/A Sa.
DOES TEST SEQUENCE CONFORM TO See remarks IEEE STD. 323-19747
) NO N/A 6.
ARE FAILURE CRITERIA FOR TESTS 3a/19 DEFINED?
YES NO N/A 7.
IF THE EQUIPMENT NOULD BE EXPOSED l
'IO DBA, WAS QUALIFICATION BY TYPE TEST 7 l
f NO N/A 8.
DOES DEMONSTRATED OPERABILITY 3a/21 ENVELOPE CPSES REQUIREMENTS?
h NO N/A 8a. DOES NON-DETRIMENTAL FAILURE 3d/3 ENVELOPE CPSES REQUIREMENTS?
YES) NO N/A 9.
ARE MARGINS DEFINED?
3a/6,7,21 YESI NO N/A 9a. DO MARGINS MEET OR EXCEED IEEE 3a/6,7,21 STD. 323-1974?
YES h. N/A
- 10. ARE INSTALLATION AND MOUNTING INTER-See remarks FACES, AS REQUIRED FOR QUALIFICATION, SPECIFIED?
YES N/A
- 11. ARE MAINTENANCE REQUIREMENTS AND See remarks COMPONENT REPLACEMENT INTERVALS SPECIFIED?
'(
l
Pcg3 1 of 7
(
B.
QUALIFICATION CHECKLIST (Cont'd)
DOC /PAGE REF 12.
AGING METHODOLOGY h NO N/A 12a. WAS ARRHENIUS METHODOLOGY USED IN 3a/5, 6 AGING PER NUREG 05887 h (NO N/A 12b. ARE THERMAL AGING PARAMETERS JUSTIFIED?
3a/7 YES
)N/A 12c. WAS THE TEMPERATURE USED FOR ACCELERATED See remarks THERMAL AGING VERIFIED TO BE LESS THAN TEMPERATURES AT WHICH KNOWN MATERIAL PHASE CHANGES OCCUR PER NUREG 05887 OYESNO N/A 12d. WAS MECHANICAL AGING JUSTIFIED 3a/14, 1E (CYCLIC DUTY REQUIREMENTS SPECIFIED)?
(
h NO N/A 12e. i.
DOES RADIATION AGING ENVELOpg 3a/8 thru 15 CPSES REQUIREMENTS?
(
h NO N/A 12e. ii. WAS COBALT 60 USED FOR THE RADIATION 3a/14 SOURCE?
YES NO N/A 12f. HAVE KNOWN SYNERGISTIC EFFECTS BEEN See remarks CONSIDERED PER NUREG 05887 l
l
(
EB9e 4 of 7 CiECXLIST REMARKS 1.
NUC-9 is a " generic" qualification document by Reliance, and is used to qualify all their Nuclear Power Motor Systems Random-Wound Hotors, for outside containment applications.
2.
See 1 above.
5 & Sa. Reliance has qualified these motors to the requirements of IEEE 334-1974, Section 5, which follows the guidelines of IEEE 323-1974 for qualification methods and test sequence, and IEEE 117-1974 for qualification of the insulation system for thermal life.
Any installation and mounting interfaces required for 10.
quali'fication would be defined on the seismic qualification document, reference 3b.
11.
Although specific maintenance requirements and component replacement materials are not specified, Reliance states on pages 20 and 21 of reference 3a, that the bearings be treated as a replacement element by the end user, and the maintenance program suggested in the appropriate Reliance Electric Instruction Manual be adhered to maximize the installed equipment life.
12c.
See Remarks 5&5a above, also IEEE 117-1974 allows the selec-tion of "motorettes" as the basis for thermal evauation of Class H, type RH insulation systems.
Reliance has selected the "motorette" method since the motor industry finds it suitable tn. adequately determine the life characteristics of insulation systems.
Although synergistic effects are not specfically addressed, 12f.
Reliance has included some reference documents on the effects of simultaneous radiation and thermal exposure on their magnet wire.
Please refer to reference 3a, page 9, items
.a and d.
\\
--,e--
a,
-w--
,-,-,+,,,w
,-,~e-p,,-,,
w-,
e
._e.
J.
-sw er y
Paga 5 of 7 DOC /PAGE REF C.
QUALIFICATION CONTINGENCIES
(
1.
MAINTENANCE INTERVALS No specific intervals stated.
3a/20, 21-See Checklist Remark 11.
2.
REPLACEMENT INTERVALS Bearings - no specific interval 3a/20 - See stated.
Checklist Remark 11.
3.
STORAGE REQUIREMENTS No specific storage requirements stated.
i l
[
4.
INSTALLATION REQUIREMENTS See Checklist No specific installation i
Remark 10 requirements stated 5.
MOUNTING REQUIREMENTS 3b/4A Bolts I
i
Paga 6 of 7 D.
REMARXS Reliance Electric 334-1974, Based on the requirements of IEEE Motors with Class H, type RH insulation are qualified forradg while Class H, l
(
g total integrated radiation dosage of 2 X 10 l
rada.
type RN insulation has a higher rating of 1 X 102 t
334-1974 Thehmally,accordingtotherequirementsofIEEEparagraph 5 l'
life - temperature function of:
5 22
- 5.8930 Log. life (hours)
=
A 350,000 hours0 days <br />0 hours <br />0 weeks <br />0 months <br /> of life (approximately 40 years),
m operating temperature allowed within the motor w themaxi-D.for Solving T motor operating tegperatures, at a " Class B" normal operating be 174.8 C.
temperature of 130 C, the qualified life begomes 748 years.
At a " Class F" operating temperature of 155 C, the qualifiedThus, life becomes 135 years.
life is very conservative and contains a large margin.
These qualification values also include the effects of humidity aging and normal operating vibration, and voltage up to 100%j ratings up to 600 volts a-c.
J Based on these data, Reliance Electric Company Class lE continuous duty motors with Class H type RH or Class H type RN insulation, 334-1974 and IEEE 323-1974.
meet the requirements of IEEE a
/40 REVIEWER-(
E.
B SAC S
E I
MS P
g S
U M
i 7P t
e ar 7
e 4
F p
7 E
o R
B t
r f
i o
o o
t LM i
c y
t u
7 A
n etl
- a d
? U g
Q u psasmn n
n yenioi o
a TTAsCb c
P r
s o
LE r
f AF 0 a UI 4 e C
QL r
0.
9 er A
gu u
/
nt r
Y s.
N it r e
C u A
ce R
up U
A d m C
/
ee C 0 N
J t A
3 1
r 7
)
a l
e o
Cx y
u a
Y M nn
'8 l
e m
7 E ois n
1 D
Ct u 4
o 7t t
1 n s
I R
)
e i
A 2
si R
(
E U ab n
o N i
o P
L wm r
t I
E er a
S D
ro r
E xA s
uf u
T I
8 4 R
% o t
d M
M.
08 0 m cC H D 4
0 0t a*
d Y
7 21 1 A
- 1 X
<m E
u.
n4 u
O.
a7 s
m s
N I
F) s A
O I
R f
- C4 a
s ee msmo h v I
i 2*
OS V C 20l D t a N
F 15 xA a5 t e
t 4.RG9A i
n E
P
(
4 yl S
t e
d C
{
e C
d e i
/. H un y:
ec c
A r:
t n c
t V t o te aa a
A Y ai ir rw M E rt du t o f
R M ea is sl o
s O A pi m
nl e
oa n
N H md B A ea ur m
o.
A P TR Hp ed "t t
n o
a L
/
o ep r
E
,,i rs u
D e
.o cHHt u-d GM nR am tt F/
a sl e ao r
ME iesut rh o
P l pass e"
f Y
eyl ny p
T RTCI S nr d
eo e
s tf r
A a
i E
R s
l ef l C u
NA d/aro a*
q rgma d
t0 e
O /.
anr ee o1 r
I TT uiost d.
t AC gd ns
.l t s
y sep l u t
CU el eti m al i
OR fil LT aul cuho up l
S BAaosc S
t i
ce b
Y ar a
R u
r TO d
et e
NG dp h a p
E E rm y
Tr O
M T au/r s
e P A uP so e
p I C g
rc t
) m
)
y e po e o
1 e 2
/E
( t
(
f r. t t N
~*. t Y
auoa SsMC i1 l
i
P2g3 1 of G COMANCHE PEAK 6 TEAM ELECTRIC STATION IEEE 323-1974 CLASS IE EQUIPMENT QUALIFICATION DOCUMENTATION REVIEW FORM A.
EQUIPMENT / DOCUMENTATION IDENTIFICATION 1.
SPECIFICATION NO.,_MS-20B.1 2.
VENDOR Bore Warner (1 of 3)
_ Nuclear Valve Div.
3.
APPLICADLE QUALIFICATION DOCUMENTS:
STATUS TRAN3MITTAL DOCUMENT (AEN, APP)
(GTN & DATE)
(a) Report No. 1736. Rev.
A. 21 Nov.1979 APP GTN-34194. 2 /15/7!'
Oualification Test Plan & Test Results Report for a Pneumatic -
Hydraulic Operator P/N 38991.
(b)
Final Report F-C4033-1. Jan. 1975 AEN GTN-48286, 8212/8i Tests of Raychem Flamtrol Insulated
& Jacketed Electrical Cables.
4.
CLASS IE EQUIPMENT / FUNCTION (per specification) :
These pneumatic - hydraulic actuators are used to control the feedwater isolation valves for each unit at CPSES, and are located outside the containment in the main feedvater supply lines, between the high feedwater heaters and the steam gen-erator.
One isolation valve for each feedwater line is pro-vided.
The operators main function is to close on demand under all postulated environmental conditions.
5.
QUALIFICATION METHOD (S)
Type Test g
REVIEWER (n
DATE 3/31/81 f/ ~ '
\\
/
8
____, _ ~
Pcg3 2 Cf 8 SPEC. ms-2 on.1 (1 og 3}
(
B.
QUALIFICATION CMECKLIST DOC /PAGE REF h NO N/A 1.
DOES DOCUMENTATION ADDRESS ALL IE 3a/7 EQUIPMENT SPECIFIED7 h NO N/A 2.
DOES DOCUMENTATION ADDRESS CPSES 3a/ Appendix II, Table I SPECIFIC PARAMETERS 7 h
NO N/A 2a DO NORMAL PARAMETERS FOR QUALIFIED 3a/9 LIFE AND AGING ENVELOPE CPSES NORMAL PARAMETERS 7 hj NO N/A 2b.
DO ABNORMAL / ACCIDENT PARAMETERS USED 3a/9, 10 IN QUALIFICATION ENVELOPE CPSES ABNORMAL / ACCIDENT PARAMETERS 7 (Y
NO N/A 3.
IS DOCUMENTATION AUDITABLE AND 3a/ Appendix II.
TRACEABLE TO CPSES EQUIPMElff?
h NO N/A 4.
IS QUALIFIED LIFE EXPLICITLY STATED 7 3a/8, 28 h NO N/A 4a. DO AGING RESULTS SUPPORT THE 3a/24 QUALIFIED LIFE 7 h NO N/A 5.
DOES QUALIFICATION METHOD (S) CONFORM 3a/6 thru 11, 19.
NITH IEEE STD. 323-19747 NO N/A 5a.
DOES TEST SEQUENCE CONFORM TO 3a/ll thru 17, 19
[ES)
IEEE STD. 323-19747 NO N/A 6.
ARE FAILURE CRITERIA FOR TESTS 3a/28 e
DEFINED 7
) NO N/A 7.
IF THE EQUIPMENT NOUID BE EXPOSED 3a/27 TO DBA, NAS QUALIFICATION BY TYPE TEST 7 h NO N/A 8.
DOES DEMONSTRATED OPERABILITY 3a/27 ENVELOPE CPSES REQUIREMENTS?
@ NO N/A 8a. DOES NON-DETRIMENTAL FAILURE 3a/20 thru 23 ENVELOPE CPSES REQUIREMENTS?
h N/A 9.
ARE MARGINS DEFINED?
See remark 9,
YES
@ NO N/A 9a. DO MB GINS MEET OR EXCEED IEEE See remark 9ar STD. 323-19747 h NO N/A
- 10. ARE INSTALLATION AND MOUNTING INTER-3a/7 FACES, AS REQUIRED FOR QUALIFICATION, SPECIFIED?
NO N/A
- 11. ARE MAINTENANCE REQUIREMENTS AND 3a/28 COMPONENT REPLACEMENT INTERVALS SPECIFIED?
m
- m--,
wa
,-meyw--,-n-en---,,-ge
-,,-e,,,-rw-n,,nn-,,-
,,,,,--,--,nn,nrv
,--r-er-.mme.-,,,,w,-n
-,,.e,-,,,,-n-m,--n--,.e--ww,,-
n.
P0g3 3 of 8 i
B.
QUALIFICATION CHECKLIST (Cont'd)
DOC /PAGE REF 12.
AGING METHODOLOGY h NO N/A 12a. WAS ARRHENIUS METHODOLOGY USED I'i 3a/11 AGING PER NUREG 05887 h NO N/A 12b. ARE THERMAL AGING PARAMETERS JUSTIFIED?
3a/11 remark
~
YES @ N/A 12c. WAS THE TEMPERATURE USED FOR ACCELERATED see THERMAL AGING VERIFIED TO BE LESS THAN 12c.
TEMPERATURES AT WHICH KNOWN MATERIAL PHASE CHANGES OCCUR PER NUREG 05887 h NO N/A 12d. WAS MECHANICAL AGING JUSTIFIED 3a/11, 20, 21.
(CYCLIC DUTY REQUIREMENTS SPECIFIED)?
h NO N/A 12e. i.
DOES RADIATION AGING ENVELOPE 3a/12, 24 &
CPSES REQUIREMENTS?
Appendix II.
M NO N/A 12e. ii. WAS COBALT 60 USED FOR THE RADIATION 3a/12 SOURCE?
h# N/A 12f. HAVE KNOWN SYNERGISTIC EFFECTS BEEN see remark 12f, YES CO.NSIDERED PER NUREG 05887
.l i
t t
s I
. ~.
Pag 3 4 cf 8
(
CHECKLIST REMARKS
-9 Although margins are not specifically defined by Borg-Warner, the following compariscne snd calculated margins can be made:
a.
Temperature:
Qualified value (normal) = 120'F av' rage e
(P.sf. 3a/9)
Specified value (normal) = 104*F. (Ref.
3a/ Appendix II) 16'F (exceeds IEEE 323 Margin (normal)
=
Rec. margin of +15'.F)
Qualified values (accident) = 340-215F(for one year)
Specified values (accident) = 200-1221'(for one year)
Margin (accident) = + 93*F (for one year) b.
Pressure:
Qualified valus (normal) = OPSIG (average)
Specified value (normal)
=-0.1W.G.
(.004PSIG)
Margin (normal)
=
0 Qualified value (accident) = 110PSIG-15PSIG (one year)
Specified value (accident) = atmospheric (OPSIG)
Margin (accident) = 15PSIG or 15,=
infinite (0xceeds IEEE 323 rec. mar-gin of + 10%)
i c.
P.adiation:
Qualified value (normal) = 1.20x10 Rads (40 yrs.)
4x10 Rads (40 yrs.)
Specified value (normal)
=
Rads or Margin (normal)=1.16xlg100=29001 116x10 x 4x104 (no rec. IEEE 323 margin on normal dose, therefore, exceeds spec. value) 6 Qualified value (accident) = 3x10 Rads Specified value (accident) = Included in normal t
Margin (accident) - 1.8x106 Rads or 4
ll8x10 x100 = 2950%
4x109 (exceeds IEEE 323 rec. maigin of +10%
l on accident dose) l
5 of 8 i
9a.
Margins generally exceed those recommended in IEEE 323-1974 as demonstrated in Remark 9 above.
This information was not required when Borg-Warner performed
-12c.
the type tests in April 1978.
12f.
Same ss Remark 12c above.
e
- 4
--,a,,,--v-..---
,--.e.
m e-e-a-n e.
-,-,---,.,-,non-4-,,m.,
-.,--m
-,,e,
Page 6 of 8 i
C.
QUALIFICATION CONTINGENCIES DOC /PAGE REF 1.
MAINTENANCE INTERVALS 3a/28 2.
REPLACEMENT INTERVALS 3a/28 3.
STORAGE REQUIREMENTS (Not specified by Vendor)
(
4.
INSTALLATION REQUIREMENTS 3a/7 f
l I
5.
MOUNTING REQUIREMENTS 3a/7 and 3a/25 l
i l
l l
POg3 7 of 8 i
D.
REMARKS The type test operator demonstrated the capability to successfully complete and pass a qualification test program based on customer specifications and IEEE Standards as required by the Nuclear Power By completion of this test program, Industry.
the Vendor considers the operator fully qualified for outside containment use within the environmental conditions stated in ref. 3a.
By comparison of the vendor qualification parameters with the specifica-tion parameters (see Remark 9)j G&H considers ade-quate margin has been demonstrated in accordance 323-1974.
with the requirements of IEEE
(
REVIEWER J.
R.
Isaro d[4' DATE 3/31/81
g s.
gC 1
nE eP 8
nS S0 U
M2 P
8 f
F 1
o E
B R
O
,n g
Ln Aa et P
UQ o ps m
ye I
TT r
LE 0 a AF 4 e UI QL y
A
/
R N
Y r.
C U A
H U
A C
/
C C A E N
I R
e A
Y M.
m q
T T r ase A
I D
saR D
L s
l l
n I
Y R
ee r
u a
o R
A sdde tdi - t i
A R
4 E 0 o
ndl sevnnnt P
l nanl ot noeoi W
P t
U O H Comuapaermcd S
)
N S
5 a
O E
1 F
6 nu I
M M
- G*
0 ss T
F i
0I500 1 d a A
R D 1 S1 4 9 xag C
T 1 P23>
3R(
I X
F E
I D.
F L
A N
t' U
O 0
)
I Q
R F 0
a s
2 4
m I
I L
V C o
0 sm A
N D
m 2
0 1 i a t
2 0
xAg T
E P
N S
M C
1 4 R(
A 1
E N
C e
O A
r R
/ H u
n I
L e
t ey o
t V
A T r
a vt i
N M
u r
ii t
t E
R M
s e
td a
O A s
p ai i
N R e
m l m d
R A r
e eu a
E A P P
T RH R
L E
D 5
. O 9
GM 9
F/
8 ME T P
I Y
S/
T h AE a
R e
NA d/rr O /. rgeA ant ITT uiag AC gdwn CU eldi OR fi ep LT auei S
SBFP 6
Y R
TO
/
a NC cc/
EE ii ry 9
t T tl or PP A aut o e
IC emaag U/
vurre QE l ed et E P anypa YT VPHOC
Pcgs 1 of 7 COMANCHE PEAK STEAM ELECTRIC STATION
(
IEEE 323-1974 CLASS IE EQUIPMENT QUALIFICATION DOCUMENTATION REVIEW FORM EQUIPMENT / DOCUMENTATION IDENTIFICATION A.
1.
SPECIFICATION NO.
2323-MS-25A
_2.
VENDOR Envirex/ Reliance Motors 3.
APPLICABLE QUALIFICATION DOCUMENTS:
STATUS TRANSMITTAL (AEN, APP)
(GTN & DATE)
DOCUMENT _
wn_ mm-o.
ArN GTN-5_13 8 2, 1/26/8 (a) Feliance sum =ry napnv+
GTN-10 '171, 6/2/77 APP (b) Reliance Seismic Report No. 76-A-57a and Reliance letter of 4/19/77 (2pages)
AEN GTN-51382. 1/26/8 (c) Supplement to NUC-9, 9/22/80 N/A
~
(d) Envirex letter of 7/30L79 N/A (e) Envirex letter of 9/22/B0 (Nn* roc'd am n# A / ~7 / Q 1 1 (f } Certification of Oualification FRC-l's (g)
CLASS IE EQUIPMENT / FUNCTION (per specification) :
4.
These Class lE motors are used to drive safety-related This equipment Service Water System travelling mereens.
i is located in the Service Water Intake Structure, which l
j is outside the Containment Building.
l Type tests and analysis l
S.
QUALIFICATION METHOD (S) __
/0!2/
O DATE
_.~
REVIEWER J.R.
Isgro
_ /
(Rev. 1) l
/
d '.
M
DATE 4/7/81 REVIEWER
[/
~/
r l
Pcga 2 of 7 SPEC. 2323-MS-25A B.
QUALIFICATION CHECKLIST DOC /PAGE REF NO N/A 1.
DOES DOCUMENTATION ADDRESS ALL IE See remarks EQUIPMENT SPECIFIED7 YES N/A 2.
DOES DOCUMENTATION ADDRESS CPSES See remarks SPECIFIC PARAMETERS?
NO N/A 2a DO NORMAL PARAMETERS FOR QUALIFIED 3a/5, 6, 8 thru 15 LIFE AND AGING ENVELOPE CPSES NORMAL PARAMETERS?
NO N/A 2b.
DO ADNORMAL/ ACCIDENT PARAMETERS USED 3a/14, 15 IN QUALIFICATION ENVELOPE CPSES ABNORMAL /ACCIDE!C PARAMETERS?
NO N/A 3.
IS DOCUMEtCATION AUDITABLE AND 3d, 3e, 3f TRACEABLE TO CPSES EQUIPMENT?
NO N/A 4.
IS QUALIFIED LIFE EXPLICITLY STATED 7 3a/21 NO N/A 4a.
DO AGING RESULTS SUPPORT THE 3a/21 QUALIFIED LIFE 7 NO N/A S.
DOES QUALIFICATION METHOD (S) CONFORM See remarks WITH IEEE STD. 323-19747 See remarks NO N/A Sa.
DOES TEST SEQUENCE CONFORM TO
!EEE S*.1 323-1974?
i NO N/A 6.
ARE FAILURE CRITERIA FOR TESTS 3a/19 DEFINED?
YES NO 7.
IF THE EQUIPMEtc W3ULD BE EXPOSEC TO DBA, WAS QUALIFICATION BY TY'?E TEST?
3a/21 NO N/A 8.
DOES DEMONSTFJ+TED OPERABILITY ENV.3 LOPE CPSES REQUIREMENTS?
NO N/A 8a. DOES NON-DETRIMENTAL FAILURE 3c/3 ENVEI. OPE CPSES REQUIREMENTS?
3a/6, 7, 21 YS NO N/A 9.
ARE MARGINS DEFINED?
NO N/A 9a. DO mal: GINS MEET OR EXCEED IEEE 3a/6, 7,
21 STD. ~23-1974?
YES N/A
- 10. ARE INSTALLATION AND MOUNTING INTER-See remarks F..CES, AS REQUIRED FOR QUALIFICATION, SPECIFIED?
YES N/A
- 11. ARE MAINTENANCE REQUIREMENTS AND See remarks COMPONENT REPLACEMENT INTERVALS SPECIFIED?
Paga 3 of 7 f
B.
QUALIFICATION CHECKLIST (Cont'd)
DOC /PAGE REF 12.
AGING METHODOLOGY
(
h NO N/A 12a. WAS ARRHENIUS METHODOLOGY USED IN 3a/5, 6 and 3c/2 AGING PER NUREG 0588?
Figure 2 h NO N/A 12b. ARE THERMAL AGING PARAMETERS JUSTIFIED?
YES (
) N/A 12c. WAS THE TEMPERATURE USED FOR ACCELERATED See remarks THERMAL AGING VERIFIED TO BE LESS THAN TEMPERATURES AT WHICH KNOWN MATERIAL PHASE CHANGES OCCUR PER NUREG 0588?
( f)
NO N/A 12d. WAS MECHANICAL AGING JUSTIFIED 3a/14, 15 (CYCLIC DUTY REQUIREMENTS SPECIFIED)?
(
ff NO N/A 12e. i.
DOES RADIATION AGING ENVELOPE 3a/8'thru 15 CPSES REQUIREMENTS?
(
)NO N/A 12e. ii. WAS COBALT 60 USED FOR THE RADIATION 3a/14 SOURCE?
YES N/A 12f. HAVE KNOWN SYNERGISTIC EFFECTS BEEN See remarks CONSIDERED PER NUREG 0588?
l l
1
Page 4 of 7 CHECKLIST REMARKS 1
1.
NUC-9 is a " generic" qualification document by Reliance, and is used to qualify all their Nuclear Power Motor Systems Random-Wound Motors, for outside containment applications.
2.
See 1 above.
5.s Sa. Reliance has qualified these motors to the requirements of IEEE 334-1974, S.ection 5, which follows the guidelines of IEEE 323-1974 for qualification methods and test sequence; and IEEE 117-1974 for qualification of the insulation system for thermal life.
10.
Any installation and mounting interfaces required for quali'fication would be defined on the seismic qualification document, reference 3b Also, see reference 3c, page 5, para. Y 11.
Aldrmgh gecific maintenance requirements and component replacement materials are not specified, Reliance states
~
'on pages 20 and 21 of reference a, that the bearings be treated as a replacement element by the end user, and the maintenance program suggested in the appropriate Reliance Flectric Instruction Manual be adhered to maximize the installed equipment life.
12c.
See remarks 5&5A above, also IEEE 117-1974 allows the selec-tion of "motorettes" as the basis for thermal evaluation of Class H, type RH insulation systems.
Reliance has selected the motorette method since the motor industry finds it suit-able to adequately determine the life characteristics of in-sulation systems.
12f.
Although synergistic effects are not specfically addressed, Reliance has included some reference documents on the effects of simultaneous radiation and thermal exposure on their magnet wire.
Please refer to reference 3a, page 9, items a and d. Also, see reference 3c, page 5, para. V.
O e
i Paga 5 of 7 DOC /PAGE REF j
QUALIFICATION CONTINGENCIES C
t i
1.
MAINTENANCE INTERVALS No specific intervals stated.
3a/20, 21-See Checklist Remark 11.
2.
REPLACEMENT INTERVALS Bearings - no specific interval 3a/20 - See Checklist Remark 11.
stated.
3.
STORAGE REQUIREMENTS No specific storage requirements stated.
INSTALLATION REQUIREMENTS 4.
See Checklist No specific installation Remark 10 requirements MOUNTING REQUIREMENTS 5.
3b, c and d Bolts e
D y
.,.,, e
-~n
. +,
g
<,,g,-
n
,,,n
Pigo 6 of 7 i
D.
REMARKS Based on the requirements of IEEE 334-1974, Reliance Electric Hotors with Class H, type RH insulation are 9""
8 total integrated radiation dosage of 2 X 10 rads while class H, type RN insulation has a higher rating of 1 X 102 rads.
Thermally, according to the requirements of IEEE 334-1974 paragraph 5.1.1, these insulation systems have a projected life - temperature function of:
= p122
- 5.8930 Log. life (hours)
A Solving T for 350,000 hours0 days <br />0 hours <br />0 weeks <br />0 months <br /> of life (approximately 40 years),
the maximbm operating temperature allowed within the motor will be 174.8 C.
Looking at this relationship in terms of " commercial" at a " Class B" normal operating motor operating tegperatures, temperature of 130 C, the qualified life begomes 743 years.
ht a " Class F" operating temperature of 155 C, the qualified lif. becomes 135 years.
Thus, it can be seen that the qualified life is very conservative and contains a large margin.
These qualification values also include the effects of humidity up to 100%, aging and normal operating vibration, and voltage ratings up to 600 volts a-c.
Based on these data, Reliance Electric Company Class 1E continuous duty motors with Class H type RH or Class H type RN insulation, meet the requirements of IEEE 334-1974 and IEEE 323-1974.
I l
l l
I W
j I
REVIEWER L*
/
jf t
~--
Page 7 of 7 I EQUIPMENT LOCATION MFC.
ADNORMAI./ACC. ENVIRON. EXTRFMES I OPERARILITY l ACCURACY
- QUAL.
- QUAL,
'P*)pC3Idg ITypE/CATEcoRY STRUCT./ AREA TYPE /MOnEL l' A RAM ET t.R I
Sl*> C I F I t.D D6 M 64 FU OFM REQ
- Ur M LTFF METHOD REP-SPEC.
S rvice Service Reliance /
Temperature 110*F 74.8C(l)
(2)
Con-N/A N/A 40 Type B-5 MS-25A Water Water Type Ril, tinuous 3
rears Test &
System Intake Class II Radiation 10 Rads 4.04x Traveling Structure [
Analy-Insulation 0
10 Rads gramma Screen Outside System ganna Motors /
h Cttegory d
-f.],
Humidity:
1001 100%
Pressure Atmos.
Atmos.
Notes:
(1) The actt al total tenperature demonstrated 1,y the manu facturer was 174,8'C.
Mductj ng 90*C for c onductor operati ng temperat ure plus 10*C for " hot-upot" allowar ce, leaves 74.8'C
~or ambient (mas) temg crature.
(2) Operabi] ity required for duration of accider t.
Assume'l duration is one year.
O
rC93 1 Cf 7
.4 CCHANCHE PEAK STEAM ELECTRIC STATION IEEE 323-1974 CLASS IE EQUIPMENT QUALIFICATION DOCUMENTATION REVIEW FORM A.. EQUIPMENT / DOCUMENTATION IDENTIFICATION 1.
SPECIFICATION NO.
2323-Ms-80s 2.
VENDOR York-Borer warner /
3.
APPLICABLE QUALIFICATION DOCUMENTS:
Gould STATUS TRANSMITTAL DOCUMENT
(_AEN, APP)
(GTN & DATE)
(a) _ Gould No. CC-323, 74-34, Rev. 2 APP GTN-41764,11/16, (b)_ Gould No. SC-191 Rev. 1 APP York Transmittal No. Y-169, GTN-41908,11/26, (c) dated 2/6/80 (Att. B to SC-191 Rev. 1)
APP GTN-45617, 4 /_16, Borg-Warner Corporation Letter (d) dated 3/2/81 From A. Shanko (Attached)
N/A N/A (e)
~
(f)
(g) __
(h) 4.
CLASS IE EQUIPMENT / FUNCTION (per specification):
The Gould size 5 combination starters are used to control the Class lE chiller motors, The centrifugal water chillers are located outside containment and are essential for furnishing cooling water to the emergency fan-coil units that cool the areas housing engineered safeguards system motors and electrical equipment during emergency conditions.
5.
QUALIFICATION METHOD (S) Combination:
Type test, Operating history and Analysis REVIEWER T.
- g. cardiin, DATE 10/1(;/an
'M( - M DATE
$//61 Rev. 1 REVIEWER T.
S. Cardile
-,s.
--w-y c.
~Pcg3 2 cf 7
~
QUALIFICATION CHECKLIST DOC / PACE REF WD N/A 1.
DOES DOCUMENTATION ADDRESS ALL IE 3a/3 psges after EQUIPMENT SPECIFIED?
cover sheet, 1 NO N/A 2.
DOES DOCUMENTATION ADDRESS CPSES 3a/2 SPECIFIC PARAMETEPJ7 OTES No N/A 2a DO NORMAL PARAMETERS FOR QUALIFIED 3a/2 LIFE AND AGING ENVEI4PE CPSES NOPJ4AL PARAMETERS?
OYES NO N/A 2b.
DO ABNORMAL / ACCIDENT PARAMETERS USED 3a/2 IN QUALIFICATION ENVELOPE CPSES ABNORMAL /ACCIDElfT PARAMETERS?
NO N/A 3.
IS DOCUMElftATION AUDITABLE AND 3a/3 pages after TRACEABLE TO CPSES EQUIPMENT 7 cover sheet NO N/A 4.
IS QUALIFIED LIFE EXPLICITLY STATED 7 3a/1, 7,17, Attach-mentS F,G,H,I,J,K OYES NO N/A da. DO AGING RESULTS SUPPORT THE 3a/ Attachments D, F, QUALIFIEC LIFE 7 G,E,I,J,K NO N/A 5.
DOES QUALIFICATION METHOD (S) CONFORM 3a/1, 9, 10, 17 NITH IEEE STD. 323-19747 h NO N/A 5a.
DOES TEST SEQUENCE CONFORM TO-3a/1, 9, 10, 17 IEEE STD. 323-1974?
OYESNO N/A 6.
ARE FAILURE CRITERIA FOR TESTS 3a/9, Attach 2sent A DEFINED 7 i YES
-NO 7.
IF THE EQUIPME)ff WOUID BE EXPOSED See remarks to DLA, NAS QUALIFICATION BY TYPE TEST 7 h NO N/A 8.
DOES DD10NSTRATED OPERABILITY 3a/10, 11, 17 ENVELOPE CPSES REQUIRDiENTS?
NO N/A Sa. DOES NON-DETRIMENTAL FAILURE 3a/10, 11, 17 ENVELOPE CPSES BEQUIREMENTS?
YES N/A 9.
ARE MARGINS DEFINED?
Soc returk.:
YES 10 N/A.
9a. DO MARGINS MEET OR EXCEED IEEE Sec renark:
STD. 323-19747 NO N/A
- 10. ARE INSTALLATION AND MOUNTING INTER-3b/3 pages after FACES, AS REQUIRED FOR QUALIFICATION, cover sheet, 3, 7C SPECIFIED?
71 3c/dwg SK-D-8921, Rev !
YES NO N/A
- 11. ARE MAINTENANCE REQUIREMENTS AND 3a/1, II, 12, 13 COMPONENT REPLACEMENT INTERVALS Attach,cnt E SPECIPIED7
POg3 3 cf 7 3.
QUALIFICATION CHECKLIST (Cont'd)
DOC /PAGE REF 12.
AGING METHODOLOGY YES N/A 12a. WAS ARRHENIUS METHODOLOGY USED IN
~
AGING PER NUREG 05887 see rea.srks NO N/A 12b. ARE THERMAL AGING PARAMETERS JUSTIFIE YES N/A 12c. WAS THE TEMPERATURE USED FOR ACCELERAT THERMAL AGING VERIFIED TO BE LESS THAN TEMPERATURES AT WHICH KNOWN MATERIAL see remarks PHASE CHANGES OCCUR PER NUREG 05887 OYESNO N/A 12d. WAS MECHANICAL AGING JUSTIFIED see re w ks (CYCLIC DUTY REQUIREMENTS SPECIFIED)?
NO N/A 12a. i.
DOES RADIATION AGING E!NELOPE 3a/2 CPSES REQUIREMENTS?
YES NO N/A 12a. ii. WAS COBALT 60 USED FOR THE RADIATION SOURCE?
M YES h N/A 12f. EAVE KNOWN SYNERGISTIC EFFECTS BEEN see rem &$k' CONsZDERED PER NUREG 05887 see remarks l
l s
i e
l
PCg] 4 cf.7 f'u' CHECKLIST REMARKS 7.
Equipment located outside containment not exposed to DBA.
9.
A design margin was demonstrated, not defined. See Document 3a/4 and 6 9a.
Gould does not address values of margin suggested in IEEE 323-1974, nor can it be determined if these suggested IEEE values are exceeded.
12a.
Gould justifies their qualified life statement for terminal blocks, IRC resistors, current transf'ormers, ground sensors, current relays and micron control transformers with the use of operating history and analysis (see document 3a/ Attachments G, H, I, J, and K).
Sub-vendor life stat.ements in document 3a/ Attachment F, and document 3a/ Attachment D containing data from test (R-323-3) performed on representative samples of Gould equipnent does not state what aging methodology they used to thermally age their equipnent.
12c.
No materials could be identified by the reviewer as having known phase changes in the range of temperatures used during the testing.
12d.
CPSES specific cycling requirement is 3300 cycles with a 10% margin.
Gould cycling requirements exceed the specific CPSES cycling require-ments (see document 3a/ Attachments A and D).
l 12e(ii) The following equipment was done by Analysis (no radiation source I
used):
i
- 1) Current transformer type TKM-1
- 2) dagnetic overload relay (Allen Bradley)
- 3) Terminal blocks
- 4) Control tranformer 3KVA Micron
- 5) Current sensor resistor The remainder of the equipment was irradiated by a Cobalt 60 source.
See Document 3d attached.
12f.
No materials could be identified by the reviewer as having known synergistic effects.
l l
l w
n,, --- -, - - -
Page 5 of 1 C.
QUALIFICATION CONTINGENCIES 1
DOC /PAGE REF 1.
MAINTENANCE INTERVALS Attachment Esee document 3a/11, 12, 13 2.
REPLACEMENT INTERVALS See document 3a/11, 12, 13
, 14, 15 3.
STORAGE REQUIREMENTS i
See document 3a/12, 15 i
t 4.
INSTALLATION REQUIREMENTS i
See documents 3b/3 pages aft i
SK-D-8821, Rev. 5 sheet, 3, 70, 71 and 3c/ drawing er cover 5
MOUNTING REQUIREMENTS a.
Fillet welds b.
Gould drqwing SK-D-8821, Rev 3b/3, 70
.5
'3e
i Page 6 of 7 D.
REMARKS The Gould test progrma consists of two parts, A and B.
- Test A was performed on devices removed from actual field use.
Some of these devices have been in use for 40 years.
Those devices deficient in any of the envi-ronmental aging parameters were subjected to the ap-propriate aging required to bring them to an and of life condition or a 40 year life state.
Test A by it-self is not being used to qualify the equiperat.
The intent of Test A is to add credence to Test B. Test B was perfrmed on new devices taken from stock.
All new devices were subjected to full accelercted aging.
I Functional test of both Test A and Test B was used, among other things, to confirm that the devices can still perform their Class 1E functions.
In addition, the devices were operated during the vibration portion of the seismic withstandability evaluation, in order to demonstrate proper operation during the DBE.
i i
i REVIEWER M
l DATE
/o/fr/86
/
/
7 l
i.
8 g
gC 0
E 9
gP S
S g
e
,. 'r N
s s
on hi Tr 7
b F
f E
2
. o o
m 3
st B
7 y
ad e
,n r
ee y
- go yr
,n g
g Am b t,l
,rnt i
a a
Ut msaseis 4 q 0u P
Qr oeniPti as e
o CTAsO aH i r o
s f g
- r n
E
'
- a ei IAF 0e sg U I.
4 y QI u ><
ne it a A
ni n
/
er Y
v.
N e
)
C u A
bo r R
ep U
A vp C
/
C o aa N
h A r p
sh et c
io A
Y M.
vt T
T d 2
A I.
i r
's t
n l
c i
ee v
R
- R A
sj d
eb e
A R
M E o CR hu w
M P r.
CU t s o
u O H AD l
s f e l
)
or o
n S
g e
f o
E
(
ew M M s0S e m
e r
T F
E C
01 D n os b
A R D 0
0 xAo S r c
T 5 -
11 RN e
t i
X r
E t
s S
e.
u t.
0 i
D e r.
a t
c A
sae A
N 5
e R
urt s
u O
8 o
R 0'
p aa m
S dPt a
I 5
t V C ds0 e
l S
r A
N t
n eg Ct e01
)
g r
E 1'
0 oi0 xqo ine w
5 N
r 5l f1 1 (
f f ir M
C gi p
n C
d l AL i n y
a e
o A
R
/, H.
e mo r
ul r c
t t'
r lui t
t aa n
u t
s ct e e
v A 1:
s a
i I
u M
t anY t
r R
N ps
.i m
e n
O A me l d e
mm0 i
N n er ea h
on4 a
ro m
r.
A l'
f r i i
d c
dvr n
t E
n eno a
D I
vE
.O o
n e
CM meo c
F/
f ehi n
ME l
rt t a
P u
i l
Y o
sfd l
T G
3 a a i
1 c
o e
ea A
iyc v
E l
l e vn r
R al/l r eae u
NA cogoA d
f s
i rnr ni O /.
rtit s I
nil d
TT t nd ns o
e AC col oe tf i
Cu eCicc d no f
OR l
unc ee i
LT E&B' A
nid c
J E
1 cn e
l oie p
Y o
ff S
R r
ren To t
d ed a r
NC n
p o
y EE o
MT C*
d #' r so d
t et n
TA o
sc e
e'g IC r
t eim V
U/
o a
e Tve QE to*,l t
eh EP e
a
- dt YT M 3R C
. I'
\\d f;-
.i l
'Ii
)
- 1 il i).
i!
1 q
l!I lIi iI.{
Pc93 1 Cf 7 i
COMANCHE PEAK STEAM ELECTRIC STATION IEEE 323-1974 CLASS IE EQUIPMENT QUALIFICATION DOCUMENTATION REVIEW FORM A.
EQUIPMENT / DOCUMENTATION IDENTIFICATION 1.
SPECIFICATION NO.
2323-MS-81 2.
VENDOR AAF/ Reliance Moto2
( l of 2) 3.
APPLICABLF QUALIFICATION DOCUMENTS:
STATUS TRANSMITTAL DOCUMENT (AEN, APP)_
(GTN & DATE)
(a)
Reliance' Report No. NUC-9 APP GTN-45434, 4/08/E (b)
AAF Report No. NESE-404 APP GTN-38677, 7/31/;
(c)
AAF Letter of 11/08/78
_N/A AAF Letter of 11/12/80 and (d) attached NUC-14 motor certificate FIO GTN-5 0 4 0 9.114 9 / 8 0 Supplement Report to NUC-9, (e) 11/18/80 FIO
$7N-505 65.12 / 4 /8 0 (f)
(g)
(h) 4.
CLASS IE EQUIPMENT / FUNCTION (per specification) :
The Class lE motors are used to drive safety-related emergency fan-coil units, which serve safety-related pump rooms.
This equipment is located outside the containment building.
5.
QUALIFICATION METHOD (S)
Type tests and analysis' comination REVIEWER f)F DATE /4' 2./!d d REVIEWER 4?vM DATE [
8 el/
ff'
/
Prg) 2 or 7 QUALIFICATIONCbECKLIST DOC /PAGE PIF B.
r NO N/A 1.
DOES DOCUMENTATION ADDRESS ALL IE See remarks EQUIPMENT SPECIFIED?
YES
.;O N/A 2.
DOES DOCUENTATION ADDRESS CPSEE,
See remarks SPECIFIC PARAMETERS?
NO N/A 2a DO NORMAL PARAMETERS FOR QUALIFIED 3a/5, 6, 8 thru 15 LIFE AND AGING RNVELOPE CPSES NORMAL PARAMETERS?
N/A 2b.
DO ABNORMAL / ACCIDENT PARAMETERS USEC 3a/14, 15 h
NO IN QUALIFICATION ENVELOPE CPSES ABNORMAL / ACCIDENT PARAMETERS?
NO N/A 3.
IS DOCUENTATION AUDITABLE AND 3e, 3d TRACEABLE TO CPSES EQUIPENT?
IS QUALIFIED LIFE EXPLICITLY STATED? 3a/21 h
NO N/A 4.
h NO N/A 4a.
DO AGING RESULTS SUPPORT THE 3a/21 QUALIFIED LIFE?
h NO N/A 5.
DOES QUALIFICATIOP METHOD (S) CONTOPG See remarks WITH IEEE STD. 323-19747 NO N/A Sa.
DOES TEST SEQUENCE CONFORM TO See remarks IEEE STD. 323-1974?
NO N/A 6.
ARE FAILURE CRITERIA FOR TESTS 3a/19 DEFINED?
YES NO 7.
IF THE EQUIPMENT WOULD BE EXPOSED TO DBA, WAS QUALIFICATION BY TYIE TEST?
NO N/A 8
DOES DEMONSTRATED OPERABILITY 3a/21 ENVELOP 3 CPSES REQUIREENTS?
YES NO N/A 8a.
DOES NON-DETRIMENTAL FAILURE ENVELOPE CPSES REQUIREMENTS?
3e/3 h NO N/A 9.
ARE MARGINS DEFINED?
3a/6, 7,
21 NO N/A 9a.
DO MARGINS MEET OR EXCEED IEEE 3a/6, 7,
21 STD. 323-1974?
10.
ARE INSTALLATION A R MOUNTING INTER-See remarks h N/A YES FACES, AS REQUIRED FOR QUALIFICATION, SPECIFIED?
YES N/A 11.
ARE MAINTENANCE REQUIFIt'INTS ANO See remarks COMPONE!.T REFLACEMENT JNTERVALS SPECIFIED?
[
Prga 3 of 7 o
B.
QUALIFICATION CHECKLIST (Cont'd)
DOC /PAGE REF 12.
AGING METHODOLOGY NO N/A 12a. WAS ARRHENIUS METHODOLOGY USED IN 3a/5, 6; 3e/2 AGING PER NUREG 0588?
NO N/A 12b. ARE THERMAL AGING PARAMETERS JUSTIFIED? 3a/7 YES O N/A 12c. WAS THE TEMPERATURE USED FOR ACCELERATED See remarks THERMAL AGING VERIFIED TO BE LESS THAN TEMPERATURES AT WHICH KNOWN MATERIAL PHASE CHANGES OCCUR PER NUREG 0588?
OYESNO N/A 12d. WAS MECHANICAL AGING JUSTIFIED 3a/14, 15 (CYCLIC DUTY REQUIRFMENTS SPECIFIED)?
NO N/A 12e. i.
DOES RADIATION AGING ENVELOPE 3a/8 thru 15 CPSES REQUIREMENTS?
OYESNO N/A 12e. ii. WAS COBALT 60 USED FOR THE RADIATION 3a/14 SOURCE?
YES NO N/A 12f. HAVE KNOWN SYNERGISTIC EFFECTS BEEN See remarks CONSIDERED PER NUREG 0588?
l l
l l
,-,ye<
e-,
e, p
,w-,e a_
,,,-4,,,,-
.g-,
a
Pcgn 4 of-7 CHECKLIST REMARKS 1.
NUC-9 is a " generic" qualification document by Reliance, and is used to qualify all their Nuclear Power Motor Systems Random-Wound Motors, for outside containment applications.
2.
See 1 above.
5& Sa. Reliance has qualified these motors to the requirements of IEEE 334-1974, Section 5, which follows the guidelines of IEEE 323-1974 for qualification methods and test sequence, and IEEE 117-1974 for qualification of the insulation system for thermal '.ife.
10.
Any installation and mounting interfaces required for quali'fication would be defined on the seismic qualification document, reference 3b. Also, see ref. 3e, page 5, para. V.
11.
Although specific maintenance requirements and component rep 2acement, materials are not specified, Reliance states on pages 20 and 21 of reference 3a, that the bearings be treated as a replacement element by the end user, and the maintenance program suggested in the appropriate Reli'ance Electric Instruction Manual be adhered to maximize the installed equipment life.
12d.
See remarks 5&5a above,also IEEE 117-1974 allows the selec-tion of "motorettes" as the basis for thermal evaluation of Claca H, type RH, insulation systems.
Reliance has selected the "motorette" method since the motor industry finds it suitable to adequately determine the life characteristics of insulation systems.
12f.
Although synergistic effects are not specfically addressed, Reliance has included some reference documents on the effects of simultaneous radiation and thermal exposure on their magnet wire.
Please refer to reference 3a, page 9, items
.a and d.
Also, see reference 3e, page 5, paragraph V.
l l
9 4
l
Prgs 5 of 7 DOC /PAGE REF C.
QUALIFICATION CONTINGENCIES 1.
MAINTENANCE INTERVALS No specific intervals stated.
3a/20, 21-See Checklist Remark 11.
2.
REPLACEMENT INTERVALS Bearings - no specific interval 3a/20 - See stated.
Checklist Remark 11.
3.
STORAGE REQUIREMENTS No specific storage requirements stated.
4.
INSTALLATION REQUIREMENTS No specific installation See Checklist Remark 10 requirements stated i
l I
f 5.
MOUNTING REQUIREMENTS 3b/ Attachment III, Bolts page 3 Note:
The equipments shipped have six AAF Drawings:
mounting attachments in lieu of four as qualified per MC-134-685B, 3/22/78
(
document 3b and AAF drawings.
MC-134-700B, 3/23/78 DCA is under preparation.
l l
Page 6 of 7 I
D.
REMARKS Based on the requirements of IEEE 334-1974, Reliance Electric Motors with Class H, type RH insulation are qualified for g
total integrated radiation dosage of 2 X 10 rady while class H, type RN insulation has a higher rating of 1 X 102 rads.
Thermally, according to the requirements of IEEE 334-1974 paragraph 5.1.1, these insulation systems have a projected life - temperature function of:
5122 Log. life (hours)
- 5.8930
=
A Solving T 350,000 hours0 days <br />0 hours <br />0 weeks <br />0 months <br /> of life (approximately 40 years),
the maximb.for operating temperature allowed within the motor will be 174.8 C.
Looking at this relationship in terms of " commercial" motor operating temperatures, at a " Class B" normal operating temperature of 130 C, the cualified life becomes 743 years.
At a " Class F" operating temperature of 155 C, the qualified life becomes 135 years.
Thus, it can be seen that the qualified life is very conservative and contains a largo margin.
These qualification values also include the effects of humidity up to 100%j aging and normal operating vibration, and voltaga ratings up to 600 volts a-c.
Based on these data, Reliance Electric Company Class lE continuous duty motors with Class H type RH or Class H type RN insulation, meet the requirements of IEEE 334-1974 and IEEE 323-1974.
l l
d W
l
y l
g.
gC 1
nE 8
cP g3 S
g M
'p 5n it F
7 a
E r
~
R B
e 7
p n
o f
e i
o
,,G n
p s
r I G i nys y
o A
n Q m-n bott l
t 7
U mi s
a c
otf e n
u e
g CaoT&A dn a
P s
o r
c.
LE a
ta Cr A
- e
/
0 p m
N 9 m Y n.
e.
C g
T A
n R
i)
U A
t.
CC Q
/
cx A F N
ua d m l
R i
- s D
r t u t
a no n
e A
Y M ou
.e y
T T r.
Cn Ci A
I D
i
" b e
D L
0 m n
a o
I Y
B 4
R A
7 r s
)
A R
1 o i
E :0 2
M f
(
P t
s n
U O k i:
a S
)C S
w*
i t
N S
1" D
r 8 a
O E
(8 xA e 4 r
I M M 4 R r
T E
E 7
u
- 0. O u
d 4
0 A
R D O
t 7
0 C
T I
X 1
2l cs
)
d a
-e e
F E
C I
f v m
O.
0 ua u
L A
N U
O i
5 ne s
t
(
al s
O R V F
7 m,
A 0 s I
I L
V C 2
4 1d ee A
N E 2
5 xa h c T
E P 1
9 4R t n N
S a
t E
M C
j vw a
N C
e bo e
l d
O A
r
- n dl i
R
/
R u
I L
E t
y o
ea c
V A T a
t i
t c
a a
r "t N
M F
r i
t E
R M
e d
a O A p
i i
t o f
N R m
m d
sp o
D A e
u a
nc E
A P T
H R
o n
n -
)
L n
et i
o d o t
E a
e%
D ec, i r
O ciHHt GM nr R am r
u F/
at s l e u
d ME icseut t r l eapss ao r
P Y
ell yny rf o
T RECTI S e
f 3 0 m
d A
& p e '0 e
E
/
i R
s
- ssu t1 r
NA d yd gmq i
O /.
rrnd oE l s u
I aaal o au q
tl e
TT uiHBR.
AC gl t s op r
CU eil gpca t
OR f xenmee e
y LT auuiul r l r t
S SAFlPEA a u.
i.
u9 t a i
Y cr b
R TO d
ae a
NG y
p r
EE cl y
em e
MT dni/r h e p
Tt O
U/
ear oe E
QE EP fl entt T
)
)
Y aemaoa O
1 2
T S ref mc N
(
(
1!
!ii 4
P2g3 1 of 7 COMANCHE PEAK STEAM ELECTRIC STATION s
t IEEE 323-1974 CLASS IE EQUIPMENT QUALIFICATION DOCUMENTATION REVIEW FORM A.
EQUIPMENT / DOCUMENTATION IDENTIFICATION 1.
SPECIFICATION NO.
2323-MS-83B 2.
VENDOR Buf falo Force 1W 3.
APPLICABLE QUALIFICS. TION DOCUMENTS:
STATUS TRANSMITTAL DOCUMENT (AEN, APP)
(GTN & DATE)
(a) Westinghouse No. WCAP-9112*, 5/1/78 APP
_GTN-43283. 1/16/8(
(b) Buffalo Forge No. DO-146F, Rev. F APP GTN-38899. R/08/75 (c) " Seismic Analysis" G&H No. 4 to 10&21 APP GTN-1A199. 7/25/71 B.uffalo Forge Company Letter (d) Dated 3/3/81 From K. Canazzi (attached) N/A N /A (e)
(f)
(
(9)-
(h)
- WC.AP-9112 is Appendix "C" of Buffalo Forge No. DO-146F, Rev. F 4.
CLASS IE EQUIPMENT / FUNCTION (per specification):
These motors are used to drive fans. which service (supply air, exhaust air, recircular air, etc.) vital equipment areas.
This equipment is located outside the containment building.
1 i
i 5.
QUALIFICATION METHOD (S)
Type test 0h[
t REVIEWER T.
q.
- cara41, DATE 10 /14 / A n REVIEWER T. S. Cardile
[
DATE 4N/ Ol
- - - - +
m w.
- i., _. - - - --
~
N.
QUALIFICATION CHECKLIST DOC /PAGE REF NO N/A I.
DOES DOCUMENTATION ADDRESS ALL IE
'3a/ Title cet SQUIPMENT SPECIFIED7 NO N/A 2.
DOES DOCUMENTATION f.DDRESS CPSES 3b/ Appendix A SPECIFIC PARAMETERS?
NO N/A 2a DO NORMAL PARAMETERS FOR QUALIFIED 3a/2 LIFE AND AGING ENVEI4PE CPSES NORMAL PARAMETERS?
NO N/A 2b.
DO ABNORMAL /ACCIDElff PARAMETERS USED 3a/2 IN QUALIFICATION ENVELOPE CPSES ABNORMAL / ACCIDENT PARAMETERS?
NO N/A 3.
IS DOCUME) CATION AUDITABLE AND 3a/ Title sheet TRACEABLE TO CPSES EQUIPME!C?
NO N/A 4.
IS QUALIFIED. LIFE EXPLICITLY STATED?
3a/2, 3, 5 YES NO N/A 4a.
DO AGING RESULTS SUPPORT THE 3a/3, 10, 12 QUALIFIED LIFE 7 NO N/A 5.
DOES QUALIFICATION METHOD (S) CONFORM 3a/0, 3, 4 WITH IEEE STD. 323-19747 OYE NO N/A Sa.
DOES TEST SEQUENCE CONFORM TO 3a/0, 3, 4 IEEE STD. 323-19747
~
NO N/A 6.
ARE FAILURE CRITERIA FOR TESTS 3a/8, 14 DEFINED 7 YES NO 7.
IF THE EQUIPMENT NOUIb BE EXPOSED Soc renark:
TO DBA, WAS QUALIFICATION BY TYPE TEST 7 YES NO N/A 8.
DOES DEMONSTRATED OPEkABII'ITY 3a/s,10 ENVEI4PE CPSES REQUIREMDITS?
i YES NO N/A Ba.
DOES NON-DETRIMENTAL FAILURE ENVELOPE 3a/9, 10 CPSES REQUIREMENT?
@ NO N/A 9.
ARE MARGINS DEFINED?
3a/9, 10 YES N/A 9a. DO MARGINS MEET OR EXCEED IEEE See remarks STD. 323-19747 h NO N/A
- 10. ARE INSTALLATION AND MOUNTING INTER-3a/1 (See Sec. C5)
FACES, AS REQUIRED FOR QUALIFICATION, SPECIFIED?
NO N/A
- 11. ARE MAINTENANCE REQUIREMENTS AND 3a/1 COMPONENT REPLACEMENT INTERVALS SPECIFIED?
t.
Pcga 3 of 7
'l B.
QUALIFICATION CHECKLIST (Cont'd)
_ DOC /PAGE REF 12.
AGING METHODOLOGY NO N/A 12a. WAS ARRHENIUS METHODOLOGY USED IN AGING PER NUREG 05887
'3a/7, 11, 12, 13, h NO N/A 15 12b. ARE THERMAL AGING PARAMETERS JUSTIFIED 73a/7,11,12,1 h N/A 12c. WAS THE TEMPERATURE USED FOR ACCELERATE YES See remarks THERMAL AGING VERIFIED TO BE LESS THAN TEMPERATURES AT WHICH KNOWN MATERIAL PHASE CHANGES OCCUR PER NUREG 0588?
p NO N/A 12d. WAS MECHANICAL AGING JUSTIFIED 3a/2 I
(CYCLIC DUTY REQUIREMENTS SPECIFIED)?
NO N/A 12e. i.
DOES RADIATION AGING i:NVELOPE 3a/7 CPSES REQUIREMENTS?
h NO N/A 12e. ii. WAS COBALT 60 USED FOR THE RADIATION 3d SOURCE?
YES N/A 12f. HAVE KNOWN SYNERGISTIC EFFECTS BEEN see remarks CONSIDERED PER NUREG 0588?
J l
i I
e e
I
-.,,-.,-r-..,-
e-----,-
--,,--n.,
P;ga 4 eg.7 CHECKLIST REMARKS 7
~
Equipment located outside containment not exposed to LOCA 9a.
Marg 4ns were defined, but not specificall suggested values. y in~accordance with the IEEE 323-1974 See also Remarks on following Section D.
12c.
No materials could be identified by the reviewer as having known phase changes in the range of temperatures used dur-ing the testing.
12f.
No materials could be identified by the reviewer as having known synergistic effects.
I
~
9 4
i Page 5 of 7 C.
QUALIFICATION CONTINGENCIES DOC /PAGE REF l.
MAINTENANCE INTERVALS See document 3a/l 2.
REPLACEMENT INTERVALS See document 3a/l 3.
STORAGE REQUIREMENTS
(
Not spcified by vendor.
4.
INSTALLATION REQUIREMENTS See document 3a/l l
l S.
MOUNTING REQUIREMENTS Bolts 3a/l 3c/5 Buffalo Forge Drawings D2-1547'5Rev.A D2-1548,
(
-..r.
_.-,._v.
..c-,.
..-,.._,.._,,,_.,..,.r,___
c...
,_,._.-,,.r,.,
Pag 3 6 of 7 D.
REMARKS The additional nine cycles of thermal aging (and
. simulated service) to the total of 4845 hours0.0561 days <br />1.346 hours <br />0.00801 weeks <br />0.00184 months <br /> at 210*C provides a test margin of 3.5 times.
4 e
b I
f/6,/e/
DATE l
l
l g,--
f f
8 ge 3
ng 5
s
,h, W
L g-(p W
[
g f
7 a
? f, f
m f
t r
0 o
gg 5
t
!a 8
s 7
e 4
I
(,
n
. n a
g 4o.
- a j 's ( l s
h P
c I
e-s d
d i
I f
s
, g
,1I, l
'{
,l I,
o s
r E
,r AF a
p I
EY C
e UI OL 0
!I 1
2 u
A 0
r.
/
Y i
N
- iI C m A
s tt r
U h
C A
C o
/
4 A
F N
3 H
4 fo A
Y t
l T
T A
I h
a D
L to t
Y n
t R
A A
R e
M E y CR h
M P r U
O s
CU t
a AD S
o
- g N
S t
(
O E
)
s 8 I
M M.
e C os0S e T
F t
c A
R O 0m01 Dn i
C T
3 t0 xAo I
X 1 A12RN w
F E
e I
)
s D
g L
A N E
(
d U
o t
s e
o%0S Q
R r e
t I
t L
V C.
Cm01 Dn a
A N
l Ot 0 xAo l
T E
P SA14RH u
N S
m E
i M
C s
N C
d O
A e
in y
s R
/. s.
emo r
(
I 1
t rui t
V A T uHt s
g N
M
.s a
i t
n r
R n O A ps.i m
i N n meld e
g n A erea h
a E
A P
TPRR C
- a L
m E
o g
r D
l/ n e
.O aeie h
CM f gt s f rsu 1
t F/
MEP uoeo f
Y BFWh o
T s
8 s
se A
t e
t
. / p el E
,s n-nl t c R
v.ed/em-y/
eal im t y NA k rrggot rg.
dmcoguo ec O /.
eauan cnan.eti rnqo e
r I
TT ctt uil eiidd rrti eR AC i n c gS ermldil at nd o9 t
sotil sepcol Ct CU vii OR r
rfi et rxiti meCiA n ol LT ert auiaauuuh ol uVe Man s
S essbdrpabosce&bH m f o.
ri s t e Y
ti m R
To nd sdi edt Nc oy t a Er MT t r 5
e yT QE nt T* f EP aa
- o y
I C
- j. '
f' lI
,4 4
~~
e.:.
u.
pag 31 og 7 t
a C0HANCHE PEAK STEAM ELECTRIC STATION IEEE 323-1974 CLASS IE EQUIPMENT QUALIFICATION
~ - -- ~~20CLMENTATION REVIEW FORM A.'J'BOUIPMENT/ DOCUMENTATION IDENTIFICATION
'~
- 3.. SPECIFICATION NO.
2323-MS-87 2.
VENDOR CVI/ Westinghouse f
(1 or 2) 3.
APPLICABLE QUALIFICATION DOCUMENTS:
STATUS TRANSMITTAL DOCUMENT
_(AEN, APP)
(GTN & DATE)
(a)CVI No. B587-9936, Rev. B, 11/8/78 APP GTN-32543, 12/20/7 lWestinghouse WCAP-9112)
(b) Westinghouse Seismic Analysis for APP
-GTN-31027, 10/27/7 Fan Motors (c) Westinghouse Seismic Analysis APP GTN-31027, 10/Lf.,/7 for Compressor Motors, 7/24/80 (d)CVI Corporation Letter Dated 3/10/81 N/A
~/
-..-J N/A ' ]..
From N. Eifert (Attached)
(e)
~
s.
(f)
.(g)
E.b f; (h)
-s 4.
CLASS IE EQUIPMENT / FUNCTION (per specification):
d -
I
- These Class lE motors are used to drive the safety related control--'"-
room air conditioning unit compressors and fans.
This equipment
( is located outside the containment building.
1 Q.,(QUALIFICATIONMETHOD(S)
Type test REVIEWER
- * *" ~ T.'"S. Cardile 1
'DATE ^""10/l'4/80W "
NEk ER' O' O.'YS['Cardil'e 6_
$ die Yk/PJ Rb M F
Pcg3 2 of 7 SPEC. N M ",N U
( '
3.
QUALIFICATION CuzCKLIST DOC /PAGE REF NO N/A 1.
DOES DOCUMENTATION ADDRESS ALL ZE 3a/Addende NQUIPMENT SPECIFIED?
h NO N/A 2.
DOES DOCUMENTATION ADDRESS CPSES 3a/Addende SPECIFIC PARAMETERS?
NO N/A 2a DO NORMAL PARAMETERS FOR QUALIFIED 3a/Addendu, 3a/2 LIFE AND AGING ENVELOPE CPSES NORMAL PARAMETERS?
NO N/A 2b.
DO ABNORMAL /ACCIDE}C PARAMETERS USED 3a/ Addend e, 3a/2 IN QUALIFICATION ENVELOPE CPSES ABNORMAL / ACCIDENT PARAMETERS?
NO N/A 3.
IS DOCUMEICATION AUDITABLE AND 3a/ Addendum TRACEABLE TO CPSES EQUIPMENT?
NO N/A 4.
IS QUALIFIED LIFE EXPLICITLY STATED?
3a/2, 3, 5 NO N/A 4a.
DO AGING RESULTS SUPPORT THE 3a/3, lp, 12 QUALIFIED LIFE 7 NO N/A 5.
DOES QUALIFICATION METHOD (S) C'ONFORM 3a/0, 3, 4 NITH IEEE STD. 323-1974?
NO N/A Sa.
DOES TEST SEQUENCE CONFORM TO 3a/0, 3, 4 IEEE STD. 323-19747 4
NO N/A 6.
ARE FAILURE CRITERIA FOR TESTS 3a/8, 3a/14 DEFINED?
YES NO 7.
IF THE EQUIPMElc WOUlf BE EXPOSED See remarks TO DBA, NAS QUALIFICATION BY TYPE TEST?
NO N/A Ba.
DOES DEMONSTRATED OPERABILITY ENVELOPE 3a/9, 10 CPSES REQUIREMENTS?
h NO N/A ab. DoES NON DETRIMENTAL FAILURE ENVELOPE 3a/9, 10 CPSES REQUIREMENTS?
h NO N/A 9.
ARE MARGINS DEFINED?
3a/9, 10 YES @ N/A 9a. DO MARGINS MEET OR EXCEED IEEE See remarks STD. 323-1974?
h NO N/A
- 10. ARE INSTALLATION AND MOUNTING INTER-3a/1, 3b/2, 5 FACES, AS REQUIRED FOR QUALIFICATION, 3c/2, 5 SPECIFIED?
NO N/A
- 11. ARE MAINTENANCE REQUIREMENTS AND 3a/1 COMPONENT REPLACEMENT INTERVALS
~
SPECIFIED?
i I
e
,..-.---,,,--e
.,.._,.-,.--c.
y_.,
_v.w..
.-y..
,.,-....._,r..
Pcga 3 of 7 B.
QUALIFICATION CHECKLIST (Cont'd)
DOC /PAGE REF 12.
AGING METHODOLOGY NO N/A 12a. WAS ARRHENIUS METHODOLOGY USED IN 3a/7, 11, 12, 13, AGING PER NUREG 05887 15 h NO N/A 12b. APE THERMAL AGING PARAMETERS JUSTIFIED? 3a/7,12,12,13,1 YES N/A 12c. WAS THE TEMPERATURE USED FOR ACCELERATED See remarks THERMAL AGING VERIFIED TO BE LESS THAN TEMPERATURES AT WHICH KNOWN MA2ERIAL PHASE CHANGES OCCUR PER NUREG 05887 h NO N/A 12d. WAS MECHANICNL AGING JUSTIFIED 3a/2 (CYCLIC DUTY REQUIREMENTS SPECIFIED) ?
h NO N/A 12e. i.
DOES RADIATION AGING ENVELOPE 3a/ Addendum, 3a/7 CPSES REQUIREMENTS?
NO N/A 12e. ii. WAS COBALT 60 USED FOR THE RADIATION 3d SOURCE?
YES h N/A 12f. HAVE KNOWN SYNERGISTIC EFFECTS BEEN See remarks CONSIDERED PER NUREG 05887 l
l
,--...n.,
a.
w
Pcg3 4 of.7 t
CHECKLIST REMARKS 7.
Equipment located outside containment not exposed to LOCA.
9a.
Margins were defined, but not specifically in accordance with the IEEE 323-1974 suggested values.
See also remarks in following Section D.
12c.
No materials could be identified by the reviewer aF having known phase changes in the range of temperatures v. sed dur-ing the testing.
12f.
No materials could be identified by the reviewer as having known synergistic efffects.
\\
e i
l l
l 9
,.--v
, -, - -,. - - - - - - - -. - -.. ~ -
~,. _. - - - - -.-
,,_,.-e,
,r--e-------,,---
Page 5 of 7
(
C.
QUALIFICATION CONTINGENCIES DOC /PAGE REF 1.
MAINTENANCE INTERVALS See document'3a/1 2,
REPLACEMENT INTERVALS See document 3a/1 s
3.
STORAGE REQUIREMENTS
(
Not specified by vendor l
4.
INSTALLATION REQUIREMENTS See document 3a/1 l
S.
MOUNTING REQUIREMENTS Bolts 3a/1 3b/2, 5 3c/2, 5 l
1
, _. -.. -.. ~. - - - -..,,....,.
,__,.,,---n
._n-,.,
..,-,,,,n-
i Page 6 of 7 D.
REMARKG The addicional nine cycles of thermal aging (also simulated service) to the total of 4845 hours0.0561 days <br />1.346 hours <br />0.00801 weeks <br />0.00184 months <br /> at 210*C provides a test margin of 3.5 times.
i l
(
i f
REVIEWER DATE
/0[///So
/
/
]
M 7
yt 0
cP gS t S y
M p
d F
i 7
E 4
v R
B o
f r
0 *
,i 3
I m
C 7
L 0
A m
- t 1
e U
i D
Q r-s 2
a a.
e T
t P
a jj r
s LE r
a AF be u
UI o
QL 4 y t
4 8
A 4
M
/
Y
)
N f
l C
T i
A R
l U
a CC O A
t A E
/
o I
R N
t e
ht A
Y M T
T E o
A I
D o
L I
)
Y B
e R
A c
A R
. n E Q CR i
n P
E CU v
o O H AD r
s a
I s
)
N S
g O
E s
(
d I
M M Co s0Se e
T EE 0 m 01 Dn t
A R D 3 t 0xAo a
.c T
i X
1A 12RN l
i r
E t
S m
. D i
D i
tA N E c
A s
u O
I e
R d
o R F p
n I
I S
a L
V C dsO e
(
A N E Ct e0l n
r E P O ol0 x o
g w
SNf 1 l N
n S
E n
C w
C d
g O
A in y
a a
/
H e
mo r
i L
t' r
ui t
l v
A T u
Ht s
a n
M E n
. s a
i i
E R
M ps
.i m
r O A me l d e
e N R er ea h
h B
A c
t L
o E
D a
s
.O r
e GM o
l F/
pn c
nE I ro y
P Voi c
YT CCt
)
9 A
l s( s E
l o p
e e
R ar/im t em 3
NA ct guo t ni O /. }{d d qo eit rliiER rn ITT tCd o
5 AC c
lCt tl CU OR ediA n oa3 l nuVe mn LT ef S
i'E a b II m of d i. o et ee in
.Y
, R vt td 6 d[i TO 1$ldd' s
g 0
Nc 8
r
- 3. i f c Ee t
a dd,'
!C rCer*
pTt u/
'o E h $'t l rP rfotnoh
'C A CNh II o1l o
ty ;
T.
?
f c
~
t l
II,l:lfi
) Page 1 of 7
~~'
COMANCHE PEAK STEAM ELECTRIC STATION
~
IEEE 323-1974 CLASS IE EQUIPMENT QUALIFICATION DOCUMENTATION REVIEW FORM EQUIPMENT / DOCUMENTATION IDENTIFICATION _
A.
2.
VENDOR _Jov/ Reliance Motors l.
SPECIFICATION NO. 2323-MS-92B 3.
APPLICABLE QUALIFICATION DOCUMENTS:
STATUS TRANSMITTAL (AEN. APP)
(GTN & DATE)
DOCUMENT APP GTN-3257 3.12/21/78 (a) Reliance No. NUC-9 (b) Joy Report No. S-145 APP GTN-45512, 4/10/80 (c) Joy Report No. S-146 APP GTN-26716. 5/8/78 (d) Joy Report No. S-1 AEN GTN-20605,8/10/77 GTN-22331. 11/7/77 APP (e) Addendum 263/77C to Report No. S-1 (f) Joy Mfq. Co. letter of 10/24/78
_ N/A GTN-52049, 3/5/81 FTn (g) Reliance Cert of Qualif. NUC-15 (not reeived by GKH u n# a/7/81 (h) Supplemental Report to NUC-9 CLASS IE EQUIPMENT / FUNCTION (per specification) :
4.
These Class lE motors are used to drive safety-related vaneaxial t
~
fans, which serve safety related equipment areas.
Thi; equipment is located outside t.he containment building.
~
5.
QUALIFICATION METHOD (S)
Type tests and analysis DATE
/d 2./
O
~ j ' *~
REVIEWER J.R.
Isgro
/
/
pey, i
[/
/. [ s O,/ w' -
f DATE REVIEWER
~.
Pega 2 ef 7 SPEC. 2 323-MS-92B (I
B.
QUALIFICATION CHECKLIST DOC /PAGE REF NO N/A 1.
DOES DOCUMENTATION ADDPISS ALL IE See remarks EQUIPMENT SPECIFIED7 See remarks YES N/A 2.
DOES DOCUMENTATION ADDRESS CPSES SPECIFIC PARAMETERS?
NO N/A 2a DO NORMAL PARAMETERS FOR QUALIFIED 3a/5, 6, 8 thru 15
^
LIFE AND AGING ENVELOPE CPSES NORMAL PARAMETERS?
NO N/A 2b.
DO ABNORMAL / ACCIDENT PARAMETERS USED 3a/14, 15 IN QUALIFICATION ENVELOPE CPSES ABNORMAL / ACCIDENT PARAw2TERS?
NO N/A 3.
IS DOCUMENTATION AUDITABLE AND 3f, 3g TRACEABLE TO CPSES EQUIPMENT?
NO.
N/A 4.
IS QUALIFIED LIFE EXPLICITLY STATED?
3a/21
[Y
)
NO N/A 4a.
DO AGING RESULTS SUPPORT THE 3a/21 QUALIFIED LIFE?
See Remarks NO N/A 5.
DOES QUALIFICATION METHOD (S) CONFORM WITH IEEE STD. 323-19747 See Remarks
/ NO N/A Sa.
DOES TEST SEQUENCE COFFORM TO IEEE STD. 323-19747 i
NO N/A 6.
ARE FAILURE CRITERIA FOR TESTS 3a/19 DEFINED?
See Remarks 7.
IF THE EQUIPMEffr WOULD BE EXPOSED YES NO j
M DBA, WAS QUALIFICATION BY TYPE TEST?
) NO N/A 8.
DOES DE!10NSTFATED OPERABILITY 3a/21 ENVELOPE CPSES REQUIREMENTS?
h~, NO N/A Ba. DOES NON-DETRIMENTAL FAILURE 3b/3 ENVELOPE CPSES REQUIREMENTS?
YESJ NO N/A 9.
ARE MARGINS DEFINED?
3,a/6, 7,
21 ESj NO N/A 9a. DO MARGINS MEET OR EXCEED IEEE 3a/6, 7, 21 STD. 323-1974?
See Remarks YES N/A
- 10. ARE INSTALLATION AND MOUNTING INTER-FACES, AS REQUIRED FOR QUALIFICATION,
'~~
SPECIFIED?
See Remarks l
YES
) N/A
- 11. ARE MAINTENANCE REQUIREMENTS AND COMPONENT REPLACEMENT INTERVALS SPECIFIED?
.(
l
Pcga 3 of 7
[t B.
QUALIFICATION CHECKLIST (Cont'd)_
DOC /PAGE REF 12.
AGING METHODOLOGY 3a/5, 6
(
AGING PER NUREG 05887 NO N/A 12a. WAS ARRHENIUS METHODOLOGY USED IN 3a/7
) NO N/A 12b. A"E THERMAL AGING PARAMETERS JUSTIFIED?
YES NO N/A 12c. WAS THE TEMPERATURE USED FOR ACCELERATED See Remarks THERMAL AGING VERIFIED TO BE LESS THAN TEMPERATURES AT WHICH KNOWN MATERIAL PHASE CHANGES OCCUR PER NUREG 05S8?
(
f) NO N/A 12d. WAS MECHANICAL AGING JUSTIFIED 3a/14, 15 (CYCLIC DUTY REQUIREMENTS SPECIFIED)?
(Y
) NO N/A 12e. i.
DOES RADIATION AGING ENVELOPE 3a/8 thru 15 CPSES REQUIREMENTS?
( bh NO N/A 12e. ii. WAS COBALT 60 USED FOR THE RADIATION 3a/14 SOURCE?
12f. HAVE KNOWN SYNERGISTIC EFFECTS BEEN See Remarks YES(EhN/A CONSIDERED PER NUREG 0588?
l l
i l
--Pa9F 4 of 7
(
CHECKLIST REMARKS NUC-9 is a " generic" qualification document by Reliance, and is used to qualify all their Nuclear Power 1.
applications.
2.
See 1 above.
5 & Sa. Reliance has qualified these motors to the requirements of IEEE 344-1974, for qualification methods and test 323-1974, for qualification of the of IEEE sequences, ar.3 IEEE 117-1974 insulation system for thermal life.
This equipment is located outside containment and is not ex-7.
posed to a DBA.
Any installation and mounting interfaces required for quall'fication would be defined on the seismic qualification 10.
documents, reference 3b thru 3e.
AldrAgh agecific maintenance requirements and component 11.
replacement materials are not specified, Reliance statesthat the bearings be on pages 20 and 21 of reference 3a, treated as a replacement element by the end user, and the maintenance program suggested in the appropriate Reliance Electric Instruction Manual be adhered to maximize the installed equipment life.
See Remark 5&5a above also IEEE-ll7-1974 allows the selection 12c.
of "motorettes" as the basis for thermal evaluation of Class H, type RH insulation systems.
Reliance has selected the " Motor-ette" method since the motor industry finds it suitable to ad-quately determine the life characteristic of insulation systems.
Although synergistic effects are not specfically addre 12f.
of simultaneous radiation and thermal exposure on their items Please refer to reference 3a, page 9, magnet wire.
.a and d.
l I
i l
. _.. ~, _
.. _,...... _,.,. _.. _ _. _ _... _, _.. _.. ~..
f Page 5 of ;
DOC /PAGE REP 5.
QUALIFICATION CONTINGENCIES 1.
MAINTENANCE INTERVALS No specific intervals stated.
3a/20, 21-See Checklist Remark 11.
2.
REPLACEMENT INTERVALS Bearings - no specific interval 3a/20 - See Checklist Remark 11.
stated.
STORAGE REQUIREMENTS 3.
No specific storage requirements stated.
INSTALLATION REQUIREMENTS 4.
See Checklist No specific installation Remark 10 requirements MOUNTING REQUIREMENTS 5.
3b, e and d Bolts 5
n.
---..-n--
-,-n.
e
,~ --.,,., -,. - - -,
~
,,.. ~..