ML17229A786: Difference between revisions
StriderTol (talk | contribs) (Created page by program invented by StriderTol) |
StriderTol (talk | contribs) (Created page by program invented by StriderTol) |
||
| Line 19: | Line 19: | ||
{{#Wiki_filter:St.Lucie Units 1 and 2 Docket Nos.50-335 and 50-389 L-98-175 Attachment 3 Page i'Calculation No: Title: 0 Revision for NRC GL 92-08 RAI¹2 Revision for Heat Load INITIAL ISSUE ol-I4-98 12-17-96 8-12-96 Oro-fr-98 12-17-96 8-12-96 oro-~r.I 1 2-18-96 8-14-96 No.Descri tion Date REVISIONS Chkd Date A r Date 980b300530 980b2b PDR ADQCK 05000335 P PDR ampcalc.05/98 | {{#Wiki_filter:St.Lucie Units 1 and 2 Docket Nos.50-335 and 50-389 L-98-175 Attachment 3 Page i'Calculation No: Title: 0 Revision for NRC GL 92-08 RAI¹2 Revision for Heat Load INITIAL ISSUE ol-I4-98 12-17-96 8-12-96 Oro-fr-98 12-17-96 8-12-96 oro-~r.I 1 2-18-96 8-14-96 No.Descri tion Date REVISIONS Chkd Date A r Date 980b300530 980b2b PDR ADQCK 05000335 P PDR ampcalc.05/98 | ||
Page ii Calculation No.Rev.Title Pa e 10 12 12 13 15 Section Cover List of Effective Pages Table of Contents 1.0 Purpose 2.0 References | Page ii Calculation No.Rev.Title Pa e 10 12 12 13 15 Section Cover List of Effective Pages Table of Contents 1.0 Purpose 2.0 References 2.0 References 2.0 References 2.0 References 2.0 References 2.0 References 2.0 References 2.0 Reference 3.0 Methodology 3.0 Methodology 3.0 Methodology 4.0 Assumptions/Bases 4.0 Assumptions/Bases 4.0 Assumptions/Bases 4.0 Assumptions/Bases Rev.0 0 0 Pa e 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Section 5.0 Calculation 5.0 Calculation 5.0 Calculation 5.0 Calculation 5.0 Calculation 5.0 Calculation 5.0 Calculation 5.0 Calculation 6.0 Results 6.0 Results Rev.P ampcalc.05/98 Page iii CALCULATION NUMBER REV.1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 Cover Sheet List of Effective Pages Table of Contents Purpose/Scope References Methodology Assumptions/Bases Calculation Results 10 12 16 24 ICEA Pub.No.S-66-524 5.NEMA Std WC7-88, Excerpt Table 2-4 5 6-1 NUCON International, Inc.,"Pyrolysis Gas Chromatography Analysis of 9 Thermo-Lag Fire Barrier Samples", P.O.No.LJ950 WP-006, 12 May 1995 NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION"SECOND REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION | ||
2.0 Reference 3.0 Methodology | |||
4.0 Assumptions/Bases 4.0 Assumptions/Bases 4.0 Assumptions/Bases 4.0 Assumptions/Bases Rev.0 0 0 Pa e 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Section 5.0 Calculation | |||
6.0 Results Rev.P ampcalc.05/98 Page iii CALCULATION NUMBER REV.1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 Cover Sheet List of Effective Pages Table of Contents Purpose/Scope References Methodology Assumptions/Bases Calculation Results 10 12 16 24 ICEA Pub.No.S-66-524 5.NEMA Std WC7-88, Excerpt Table 2-4 5 6-1 NUCON International, Inc.,"Pyrolysis Gas Chromatography Analysis of 9 Thermo-Lag Fire Barrier Samples", P.O.No.LJ950 WP-006, 12 May 1995 NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION"SECOND REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION | |||
-GENERIC LETTER 92-08,"THERMO-LAG 330-1 FIRE BARRIERS", ST.LUCIE PLANT, UNIT 1 AND 2, AND TURKEY POINT PLANT, UNIT 3 AND 4 (TAC NO.M82809)ampcalc.05/98 CALCULATION NO.REV.SHEET NO.~1.0 ELIBEQSE The purpose of this calculation is to determine or update ampacity values for power cables routed in St.Lucie Unit 1 and Unit 2 conduits wrapped with Thermo-Lag fire barrier systems as listed in previous calculations (Ref.2.3).This document outlines the methodology used to determine power cable ampacity including derating factors.Wrapped conduit derating factors are determined for existing fire barriers and for upgraded systems.Existing cable protection will be upgraded on certain conduits to maintain required levels of protection. | -GENERIC LETTER 92-08,"THERMO-LAG 330-1 FIRE BARRIERS", ST.LUCIE PLANT, UNIT 1 AND 2, AND TURKEY POINT PLANT, UNIT 3 AND 4 (TAC NO.M82809)ampcalc.05/98 CALCULATION NO.REV.SHEET NO.~1.0 ELIBEQSE The purpose of this calculation is to determine or update ampacity values for power cables routed in St.Lucie Unit 1 and Unit 2 conduits wrapped with Thermo-Lag fire barrier systems as listed in previous calculations (Ref.2.3).This document outlines the methodology used to determine power cable ampacity including derating factors.Wrapped conduit derating factors are determined for existing fire barriers and for upgraded systems.Existing cable protection will be upgraded on certain conduits to maintain required levels of protection. | ||
The cables in the conduits have been evaluated to require protection because no redundant functions or alternate conduit routes exist to eliminate the need for protection (Ref.2.76-2.88).By performing an evaluation with upgraded conduit wrap, cable ampacity margins may be verified to ensure adequate capabilities exist for providing power to affected electrical loads.Revision 1 to this calculation adds a discussion of the operating heat loads (Watts per foot)for the wrapped cables and a comparison of the cables at St.Lucie plant to the cables tested at Omega Laboratories for Texas Utilities'omanche Peak Plant (Ref.2.26).Heat load factors provide an additional assurance that cables installed at St.Lucie are enveloped by the test configuration. | The cables in the conduits have been evaluated to require protection because no redundant functions or alternate conduit routes exist to eliminate the need for protection (Ref.2.76-2.88).By performing an evaluation with upgraded conduit wrap, cable ampacity margins may be verified to ensure adequate capabilities exist for providing power to affected electrical loads.Revision 1 to this calculation adds a discussion of the operating heat loads (Watts per foot)for the wrapped cables and a comparison of the cables at St.Lucie plant to the cables tested at Omega Laboratories for Texas Utilities'omanche Peak Plant (Ref.2.26).Heat load factors provide an additional assurance that cables installed at St.Lucie are enveloped by the test configuration. | ||
| Line 77: | Line 42: | ||
Fire barriers were installed on the e conduits prior to the re-evaluation which removed protection requirements (Ref.Table 5.2).3.3 3.4 Review Unit 2 Appendix R wrapped summary drawing, 2998-G-411, Sheet 6J (Ref.2.48)for conduits shown and listed as protected or shown as e protection not required by further evaluation. | Fire barriers were installed on the e conduits prior to the re-evaluation which removed protection requirements (Ref.Table 5.2).3.3 3.4 Review Unit 2 Appendix R wrapped summary drawing, 2998-G-411, Sheet 6J (Ref.2.48)for conduits shown and listed as protected or shown as e protection not required by further evaluation. | ||
Fire barriers were installed on the e conduits prior to the re-evaluation which removed protection requirements (Ref.Table 5.3 5.5.4).f Review Unit 2 raceway and conduit layout drawings for conduits wrapped with Thermo-Lag 330-1 fire barriers for RG 1.75 separation (Ref 2.38-2.47, 2.49-2.70). | Fire barriers were installed on the e conduits prior to the re-evaluation which removed protection requirements (Ref.Table 5.3 5.5.4).f Review Unit 2 raceway and conduit layout drawings for conduits wrapped with Thermo-Lag 330-1 fire barriers for RG 1.75 separation (Ref 2.38-2.47, 2.49-2.70). | ||
3.5 Identify cables in conduits covered with Thermo-Lag 330-1 fire barrier systems not previously identified in SSAs;i.e., RG 1.75 and cables in conduits designated e.3.6 Determine cable function from review of associated control wiring diagrams and compile listings of power cables affected.Signal and control cables do not carry sufficient current to generate heat in the cable and reduce ampacity.Power cables to valves are excluded due to the short duration of valve operation. | |||
3.7 Review calculations issued by EBASCO, Services, Inc.and FPL Engineering to determine loads and currents used for affected power cables.Select worst case loading from background information and determine which loads will be applied to the cables continuously or longer than the time which will heat the cable from the load current (Ref.2.3-2.16, 2.18-2.24). | |||
cables in conduits covered with Thermo-Lag 330-1 fire barrier systems not previously identified in SSAs;i.e., RG 1.75 and cables in conduits designated e.3.6 Determine cable function from review of associated control wiring diagrams and compile listings of power cables affected.Signal and control cables do not carry sufficient current to generate heat in the cable and reduce ampacity.Power cables to valves are excluded due to the short duration of valve operation. | |||
calculations issued by EBASCO, Services, Inc.and FPL Engineering to determine loads and currents used for affected power cables.Select worst case loading from background information and determine which loads will be applied to the cables continuously or longer than the time which will heat the cable from the load current (Ref.2.3-2.16, 2.18-2.24). | |||
3.8 For motors, determine kilovolt-amperes (KVA)rating from horsepower rating and then calculate current based on line voltage (480 or 4160 volts)to device.Motor kilovolt-amp and efficiencies are discussed in Assumption 4.10 and 4.11.3.9 Obtain derating factors for multiple power cable installed in the same conduit, the number of current carrying conductors in the conduit (C/C)and the Ampacity Correction Factor (ACF)calculated in PSL-BFSM-98-005 (Ref.2.110)~3.9.1 The (C/C)derating factor adds a percentage based on the adverse effect of mutual inductance of energized current carrying conductors and the effects on other conductors within the same raceway.For conduits with more than three[3]energized'conductors, the mutual inductances cause the current to move away from other energized conductors which creates inductive heating and losses within the conduit.ampcalc.05/98 CALCULATION NO.REV.SHEET NO.~3.0 3.9.2 In response to the NRC request for additional information (Ref.2.105), a new fire barrier heat transfer calculation (Ref.2.110)was created specifically for St.Lucie fire barrier installations. | 3.8 For motors, determine kilovolt-amperes (KVA)rating from horsepower rating and then calculate current based on line voltage (480 or 4160 volts)to device.Motor kilovolt-amp and efficiencies are discussed in Assumption 4.10 and 4.11.3.9 Obtain derating factors for multiple power cable installed in the same conduit, the number of current carrying conductors in the conduit (C/C)and the Ampacity Correction Factor (ACF)calculated in PSL-BFSM-98-005 (Ref.2.110)~3.9.1 The (C/C)derating factor adds a percentage based on the adverse effect of mutual inductance of energized current carrying conductors and the effects on other conductors within the same raceway.For conduits with more than three[3]energized'conductors, the mutual inductances cause the current to move away from other energized conductors which creates inductive heating and losses within the conduit.ampcalc.05/98 CALCULATION NO.REV.SHEET NO.~3.0 3.9.2 In response to the NRC request for additional information (Ref.2.105), a new fire barrier heat transfer calculation (Ref.2.110)was created specifically for St.Lucie fire barrier installations. | ||
This calculation determines a new ACF based on fire barrier testing performed for FPC Crystal River Station.This revised ACF was reviewed against existing ACF and added in Tables 5.5.a, 5.5.b and 5.5.c.3.9.3 ICEA (Insulated Cable Engineers Association) cable data tables give ampacities | This calculation determines a new ACF based on fire barrier testing performed for FPC Crystal River Station.This revised ACF was reviewed against existing ACF and added in Tables 5.5.a, 5.5.b and 5.5.c.3.9.3 ICEA (Insulated Cable Engineers Association) cable data tables give ampacities | ||
| Line 98: | Line 59: | ||
Using the cable tray derating factor for three-hour (3-hr)fire barriers gives a more conservative estimate of the current carrying margin for the affected cables (11001F, 11001G, 11001H, 11001J, 21801W, 21801X, 21801Y and 21801Z).aepcalc.05/98 II f//CALCULATION NO.REV.SHEET NO.~4.0 4.6 This calculation applies to cables in protected conduits inside and outside containment of both St.Lucie units.The ambient temperature for cables inside containment is assumed to be 50'C.Outside of the containment buildings, ambient temperatures are assumed to be 40'C (104'F).Operating temperatures in the RAB are normally closer to 30'C;however, for conservatism, the higher temperature will be used.4.7 Power cables utilized in St.Lucie station are rated for operation at 90'C conductor temperature. | Using the cable tray derating factor for three-hour (3-hr)fire barriers gives a more conservative estimate of the current carrying margin for the affected cables (11001F, 11001G, 11001H, 11001J, 21801W, 21801X, 21801Y and 21801Z).aepcalc.05/98 II f//CALCULATION NO.REV.SHEET NO.~4.0 4.6 This calculation applies to cables in protected conduits inside and outside containment of both St.Lucie units.The ambient temperature for cables inside containment is assumed to be 50'C.Outside of the containment buildings, ambient temperatures are assumed to be 40'C (104'F).Operating temperatures in the RAB are normally closer to 30'C;however, for conservatism, the higher temperature will be used.4.7 Power cables utilized in St.Lucie station are rated for operation at 90'C conductor temperature. | ||
The higher the insulation temperature rating, the greater the allowable ampacity for a given conductor size.4.8 Conduits protected in St.Lucie Unit¹1 use (3)hour barrier one and one-quarter (1-'/i)inch nominal thickness material.Conduits protected in St.Lucie Unit¹2 may be protected with one (1)hour 5/8" nominal thickness material or three (3)hour one and one-quarter (1-~/i)inch nominal thickness material.Upgrades to the fire barrier systems for one-hour (1-hr)protection was provided by using nominal 5/8" thickness Thermo-Lag 330-1 pre-shaped half-round sections overlaid with 3/8" nominal thickness Thermo-Lag sections.Three-hour (3-hr)upgrades is provided by using one and one-quarter (1-~/~)inch nominal thickness Thermo-Lag base material with overlays of Thermo-Lag 770-1.The number of 770-1 wraps is dependent on conduit cable fill percentages. | The higher the insulation temperature rating, the greater the allowable ampacity for a given conductor size.4.8 Conduits protected in St.Lucie Unit¹1 use (3)hour barrier one and one-quarter (1-'/i)inch nominal thickness material.Conduits protected in St.Lucie Unit¹2 may be protected with one (1)hour 5/8" nominal thickness material or three (3)hour one and one-quarter (1-~/i)inch nominal thickness material.Upgrades to the fire barrier systems for one-hour (1-hr)protection was provided by using nominal 5/8" thickness Thermo-Lag 330-1 pre-shaped half-round sections overlaid with 3/8" nominal thickness Thermo-Lag sections.Three-hour (3-hr)upgrades is provided by using one and one-quarter (1-~/~)inch nominal thickness Thermo-Lag base material with overlays of Thermo-Lag 770-1.The number of 770-1 wraps is dependent on conduit cable fill percentages. | ||
4.9 Conductor current values for 600 volt cables are based on lEEE standard values (Ref.2.75)for conductors rated 600 to 5000 volts, 90'C (194'F)ambient temperature with no solar heating and zero (0)ft/s ventilation/air flow.4.10 Where load values are only known in kilovolt-amperes (KVAs), the current is determined by;amps (single phase AC or DC): P3xV amps (three phase AC)ampcalc.05/98 CALCULATION NO.REV.SHEET NO.~4.0 4.11 The ampacity testing performed for Comanche Peak Plant was performed for conduits ranging in size from 3/4 inches to 5 inches.Conduits covered with Thermo-Lag 330-1 fire barriers at St.I ucie plant range from 1-1/2" to 5".The heat load (I'R loss)from each cable section is included in Tables 5.5a, 5.5b.5.5.5c.These heat loads were compared to the tables/charts used by Turkey Point where heat loads were compared to the Omega Point Laboratory test for Texas Utilities Comanche Peak Plant (Ref.2.20).From this it is concluded that the test samples utilized are representative of the configuration at St.Lucie.4.12 There are no installed cable tray sections at St.Lucie protected by Thermo-Lag fire barriers.However, there is a large pull box installed in St.Lucie Unit 2 elevation (-)0.50', box 8243'I-SA which was reviewed due to size.The box is a 42" x 42" x 12" enclosure used as a pullbox for the power cables to AFW pump 2A.The horizontal surface on the bottom of the enclosure is expected to be most affected by fires in the 12" box depth.Because the original test performed by TSI included a 12" cable tray section and the Comanche Peak test included a 24" cable tray section, the large enclosure in St.Lucie Unit 2 is considered bounded by the previous tests.Revision 2 to PCM 97040, to upgrade to south wall of the 28.67'levation of the Reactor Auxiliary Building'A'able Penetration Area Extension (Loft), will add a short section of Thermo-Lag fire barrier to cable tray C17 at plan point (2116), near column RAI-RA3.This is a control cable tray and is not affected by the installation of Thermo-Lag fire barriers.Control cables are not required to be evaluated for cable ampacity derating due to low level of current normally used.4.13 ln accordance with Reference 2.101, the thickness of the Thermo-Lag and the gaps within the Thermo-Lag, found during the inspection of the correctly installed configurations for the Unit 1 5 2 one hour and three hour barriers, were in accordance with the installation instructions of TSI.Therefore, the configuration of the Thermo-Lag barriers at St.Lucie are bounded by the TSI installation instructions. | |||
current values for 600 volt cables are based on lEEE standard values (Ref.2.75)for conductors rated 600 to 5000 volts, 90'C (194'F)ambient temperature with no solar heating and zero (0)ft/s ventilation/air flow.4.10 Where load values are only known in kilovolt-amperes (KVAs), the current is determined by;amps (single phase AC or DC): P3xV amps (three phase AC)ampcalc.05/98 CALCULATION NO.REV.SHEET NO.~4.0 4.11 The ampacity testing performed for Comanche Peak Plant was performed for conduits ranging in size from 3/4 inches to 5 inches.Conduits covered with Thermo-Lag 330-1 fire barriers at St.I ucie plant range from 1-1/2" to 5".The heat load (I'R loss)from each cable section is included in Tables 5.5a, 5.5b.5.5.5c.These heat loads were compared to the tables/charts used by Turkey Point where heat loads were compared to the Omega Point Laboratory test for Texas Utilities Comanche Peak Plant (Ref.2.20).From this it is concluded that the test samples utilized are representative of the configuration at St.Lucie.4.12 There are no installed cable tray sections at St.Lucie protected by Thermo-Lag fire barriers.However, there is a large pull box installed in St.Lucie Unit 2 elevation (-)0.50', box 8243'I-SA which was reviewed due to size.The box is a 42" x 42" x 12" enclosure used as a pullbox for the power cables to AFW pump 2A.The horizontal surface on the bottom of the enclosure is expected to be most affected by fires in the 12" box depth.Because the original test performed by TSI included a 12" cable tray section and the Comanche Peak test included a 24" cable tray section, the large enclosure in St.Lucie Unit 2 is considered bounded by the previous tests.Revision 2 to PCM 97040, to upgrade to south wall of the 28.67'levation of the Reactor Auxiliary Building'A'able Penetration Area Extension (Loft), will add a short section of Thermo-Lag fire barrier to cable tray C17 at plan point (2116), near column RAI-RA3.This is a control cable tray and is not affected by the installation of Thermo-Lag fire barriers.Control cables are not required to be evaluated for cable ampacity derating due to low level of current normally used.4.13 ln accordance with Reference 2.101, the thickness of the Thermo-Lag and the gaps within the Thermo-Lag, found during the inspection of the correctly installed configurations for the Unit 1 5 2 one hour and three hour barriers, were in accordance with the installation instructions of TSI.Therefore, the configuration of the Thermo-Lag barriers at St.Lucie are bounded by the TSI installation instructions. | |||
4.14 FPL participated in a generic industry test program managed by the Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI)which included verification of the chemical composition of Thermo-Lag material.As part of the NEI test program, a pyrolysis gas chromatographic analysis was used to qualitatively compare the organic constituents of various Thermo-Lag samples.St.Lucie provided (9)samples from installed and warehouse Thermo-Lag materials. | 4.14 FPL participated in a generic industry test program managed by the Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI)which included verification of the chemical composition of Thermo-Lag material.As part of the NEI test program, a pyrolysis gas chromatographic analysis was used to qualitatively compare the organic constituents of various Thermo-Lag samples.St.Lucie provided (9)samples from installed and warehouse Thermo-Lag materials. | ||
AII of the samples tested at NUCON Laboratory in Columbus, Ohio were found consistent in terms of chemical composition (Ref.2.103).Results of the testing program were sent directly to the NRC by NEI letter dated October 3, 1995.Per Reference 2.102, the NRC stated that there was essentially no differences between the samples for different lots, areas of the country and the year the material was purchased. | AII of the samples tested at NUCON Laboratory in Columbus, Ohio were found consistent in terms of chemical composition (Ref.2.103).Results of the testing program were sent directly to the NRC by NEI letter dated October 3, 1995.Per Reference 2.102, the NRC stated that there was essentially no differences between the samples for different lots, areas of the country and the year the material was purchased. | ||
Revision as of 09:53, 6 May 2019
| ML17229A786 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Saint Lucie  |
| Issue date: | 06/16/1998 |
| From: | FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT CO. |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML17229A785 | List: |
| References | |
| PSL-OFJE-96-001, PSL-OFJE-96-001-R02, PSL-OFJE-96-1, PSL-OFJE-96-1-R2, NUDOCS 9806300530 | |
| Download: ML17229A786 (31) | |
Text
St.Lucie Units 1 and 2 Docket Nos.50-335 and 50-389 L-98-175 Attachment 3 Page i'Calculation No: Title: 0 Revision for NRC GL 92-08 RAI¹2 Revision for Heat Load INITIAL ISSUE ol-I4-98 12-17-96 8-12-96 Oro-fr-98 12-17-96 8-12-96 oro-~r.I 1 2-18-96 8-14-96 No.Descri tion Date REVISIONS Chkd Date A r Date 980b300530 980b2b PDR ADQCK 05000335 P PDR ampcalc.05/98
Page ii Calculation No.Rev.Title Pa e 10 12 12 13 15 Section Cover List of Effective Pages Table of Contents 1.0 Purpose 2.0 References 2.0 References 2.0 References 2.0 References 2.0 References 2.0 References 2.0 References 2.0 Reference 3.0 Methodology 3.0 Methodology 3.0 Methodology 4.0 Assumptions/Bases 4.0 Assumptions/Bases 4.0 Assumptions/Bases 4.0 Assumptions/Bases Rev.0 0 0 Pa e 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Section 5.0 Calculation 5.0 Calculation 5.0 Calculation 5.0 Calculation 5.0 Calculation 5.0 Calculation 5.0 Calculation 5.0 Calculation 6.0 Results 6.0 Results Rev.P ampcalc.05/98 Page iii CALCULATION NUMBER REV.1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 Cover Sheet List of Effective Pages Table of Contents Purpose/Scope References Methodology Assumptions/Bases Calculation Results 10 12 16 24 ICEA Pub.No.S-66-524 5.NEMA Std WC7-88, Excerpt Table 2-4 5 6-1 NUCON International, Inc.,"Pyrolysis Gas Chromatography Analysis of 9 Thermo-Lag Fire Barrier Samples", P.O.No.LJ950 WP-006, 12 May 1995 NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION"SECOND REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
-GENERIC LETTER 92-08,"THERMO-LAG 330-1 FIRE BARRIERS", ST.LUCIE PLANT, UNIT 1 AND 2, AND TURKEY POINT PLANT, UNIT 3 AND 4 (TAC NO.M82809)ampcalc.05/98 CALCULATION NO.REV.SHEET NO.~1.0 ELIBEQSE The purpose of this calculation is to determine or update ampacity values for power cables routed in St.Lucie Unit 1 and Unit 2 conduits wrapped with Thermo-Lag fire barrier systems as listed in previous calculations (Ref.2.3).This document outlines the methodology used to determine power cable ampacity including derating factors.Wrapped conduit derating factors are determined for existing fire barriers and for upgraded systems.Existing cable protection will be upgraded on certain conduits to maintain required levels of protection.
The cables in the conduits have been evaluated to require protection because no redundant functions or alternate conduit routes exist to eliminate the need for protection (Ref.2.76-2.88).By performing an evaluation with upgraded conduit wrap, cable ampacity margins may be verified to ensure adequate capabilities exist for providing power to affected electrical loads.Revision 1 to this calculation adds a discussion of the operating heat loads (Watts per foot)for the wrapped cables and a comparison of the cables at St.Lucie plant to the cables tested at Omega Laboratories for Texas Utilities'omanche Peak Plant (Ref.2.26).Heat load factors provide an additional assurance that cables installed at St.Lucie are enveloped by the test configuration.
Revision 2 of this calculation changes the cable tabulations for cable current carrying capacity based on IEEE ambient conditions with'No Sun-0 Ft/s'elocity air flow (Ref.2.75)and to enhance the calculation in response to NRC questions from the Sandia National Laboratories'eview to clarify existing assumptions and inputs (Ref.2.105).Engineering reviewed the ampacity derating tests performed by Underwriters Laboratories for Florida Power Corporation (FPC)for Crystal River Nuclear Station (Ref.2.109)as recommended by the NRC to determine applicability to St.Lucie Plant.FPC installed upgrades to Thermo-Lag fire barriers using Mecatiss fire barrier systems.This is not applicable to St.Lucie installations; however, the initial/baseline fire tests provide information on existing Thermo-Lag fire barriers.The FPC testing concluded that for one (1)inch conduit, installation of Thermo-Lag 3-hour fire barriers increased the current carrying capacity of affected cables;i.e., Ampacity Derating Factor (ADF)of 4.26%and Ampacity Correction Factor (ACF)of 1.04.For four (4)inch conduit, one hour Thermo-Lag fire barriers also increased the current capacity of affected cables;i.e., ADF of 3.31%and ACF of 1.03%.Three hour fire barriers on four (4)inch conduit derated the current capacity of affected cables;however, not to the degree that had been previously reported;i.e., ADF of 2.69%and ACF of 0.973.Derating factors originally used for St.Lucie Plant cables are more conservative than these values and are therefore bounded by the FPC testing.Revision 0 and Revision 1 of this calculation listed all affected cables in protected conduits whether the cable provided power, control, low level signal or other function which was only intermittently energized, such as valve power cables.Revision 2 removed the cables that do not require consideration of ampacity derating for continuous loading.ampcalc.05/98 CALCULATION NO.REV.SHEET NO.~2.0 2.1 Florida Power 5 Light Company, St.Lucie Plant Unit No.1, Appendix"R" Safe Shutdown Analysis, 8770-B-048, Revision 2.2.2 Florida Power 5 Light Company, St.Lucie Plant Unit No.2, Appendix"R" Safe Shutdown Analysis, 2998-B-048, Revision 1.2.3 FPL Calculation PSL-BFJE-93-002, Revision 1,"Ampacity Derating Response to NRC GL 92-08 for Cable Routed in Conduits with Thermo-Lag 330-1 Fire Barrier System Coating" FPL Calculation PSL-O-F-J-E-90-011, Revision 2,"Station Blackout Hot Standby Loads".2.5 FPL Calculation PSL-O-F-J-E-90-012, Revision 1,"Station Blackout Cold Shutdown Loads".2.6 FPL Calculation PSL-1-F-J-E-90-015, Revision 0,"Safety Related Batteries 1A and 1B".2.7 FPL Calculation PSL-2-F-J-E-90-016, Revision 0,"Safety Related Batteries 2A and 2B".2.8 FPL Calculation PSL-1-F-J-E-90-017, Revision 0,"Battery Chargers'lA, IAA,'IB, 1BB, 1AB Kilowatt Input Demand".2.9 FPL Calculation PSL-2-F-J-E-90-018, Revision 0,"Battery Chargers 2A, 2AA, 2B, 2BB, 2AB Kilowatt Input Demand".2.10 FPL Calculation PSL-2-F-J-E-90-019, Revision 0,"Unit 2 Battery Chargers 2A, 2AA, 2B, 2BB and 2AB Sizing".2.11 FPL Calculation PSL-2-FJE-90-020, Revision 4,"St.Lucie Unit 2 Emergency Diesel Generator 2A and 2B Electrical Loads".2.12 FPL Calculation PSL-2-F-J-E-90-025, Revision 0,"Evaluation of Calculation WHL-39, Rev.0".2.13 FPL Calculation PSL-2-FJE-90-028, Revision 1,"Unit 2 Low DC System Voltage Calculation".
2.14 FPL Calculation PSL-1-F-J-E-91-002, Revision 0,"Instrument Inverters 1A, 1B, 1C 5 1D AC Output Loading".2.15 FPL Calculation PSL-1-F-J-E-91-004, Revision 0,"Unit 1 High DC System Voltage Analysis".
2.16 FPL Calculation PSL2-FJE-91-007, Revision 0,"PSL2-Comparison of Anticipated Electrical Loading Conditions to Equipment Ratings".2.17 FPL Evaluation JPN-PSL-SEMP-92-039, Revision 1,"Operability Assessment of Thermo-Lag 330-1".ampcalc.05/98 CALCULATION NO.REV.SHEET NO~2.0 (cont'd)2.18 FPL Calculation PSL-2FJE-93-001, Revision 1,"St.Lucie-Unit 2 Short Circuit, Voltage Drop and PSB-1 Analysis Calculation." 2.19 FPL Calculation PSL-OFJE-93-004, Revision 0,"St.Lucie Station Blackout Emergency Diesel Generator Transient Analysis".
2.20 FPL Calculation PTN-BFJM-96-005, Revision 0,"Fire Barrier Ampacity Correction Factors-Extrapolation of Test Results for 3 Hour Barrier".2.21 EBASCO Services, Incorporated, Calculation EC-100, Revision 1,"Fire Wrapped Conduits Cable Ampacity Document for St.Lucie Units 1 and 2".2.22 EBASCO Services, Incorporated, Calculation EC-192, Revision 2,"MOV TOL Heater Selection Calculation".
i 2.23 EBASCO Services, Incorporated, Calculation WHL-8, Revision 7,"Power Cable Ampacity Document for St.Lucie¹2".2.24 EBASCO Services, Incorporated, Calculation WHL-25, Revision 2,"Instrument Inverters AC Output Loading".2.25 Industrial Testing Laboratories (ITL)Report No.84-10-5, Dated October, 1984,"Ampacity Test for 600 Volt Power Cables Installed in a Five Foot Length of Two Inch Conduit Protected with Three Hour Fire Rated Design of Thermo-Lag 330-1 Fire Barrier System." 2.26 Omega Point Laboratories,"Ampacity Derating of Fire Protected Cables", Project No.12340-94583,95165-95168,95246, Electrical Test to Determine the Ampacity Derating of a Protective Envelope for Class 1E Electrical Circuits, dated March 19, 1993;Prepared for: TU Electric-Comanche Peak Steam Electric Station.2.27 Florida Power&Light Company, St.Lucie Plarit Unit 1, Drawing 8770-G-366, Revision 34, Reactor Containment Bldg El.45'-0 Conduit, Trays&Grounding Plans.2.28 Florida Power&Light Company, St.Lucie Plant Unit 1, Drawing 8770-G-375, Sheet 1, Revision 22, Reactor Containment Bldg Penetration Details.2.29 Florida Power&.Light Company, St.Lucie Plant Unit 1, Drawing 8770-G-390, Revision 20, Reactor Auxiliary Building El-0.50'onduit, Trays and Grounding Sh.1.2.30 Florida Power&Light Company, St.Lucie Plant Unit 1, Drawing 8770-G-391, Revision 27, Reactor Auxiliary Bldg El-0.50'onduit, Trays&Grounding-Sh.
2.2.31 Florida Power&Light Company, St.Lucia Plant Unit 1, Drawing 8770-G-392, Revision 35, Reactor Auxiliary Building El.19'-6 Conduit, Trays&Grounding-Sh.1.ampcalc.05/98 CALCULATION NO.REV.SHEET NO.~2.0 (cont'd)2.32 Florida Power&Light Company, St.Lucie Plant Unit 1, Drawing 8770-G-393, Revision 30, Reactor Auxiliary Building El.19'-6 Conduit, Trays&Grounding-Sh.2.2.33 Florida Power&Light Company, St.Lucie Plant Unit 1, Drawing 8770-G-395, Revision 20, Reactor Auxiliary Building, El.43'-0, 62'-0 Conduit, Trays&Grounding.
2.34 2.35 Florida Power&Light Company, St.Lucie Plant Unit 1, Drawing 8770-G-424 S01, Revision 6, Fire Protection Reactor Auxiliary Building El-0.50'.Florida Power&Light Company, St.Lucie Plant Unit 1', Drawing 8770-G-424 S02, Revision 7, Fire Protection Reactor Auxiliary Building El.19.50'.2.36 Florida Power&Light Company, St.Lucie Plant Unit 1, Drawing 8770-G-424 S03, Revision 7, Fire Protection Reactor Auxiliary Building El.43.00'.2.37 2.38 Florida Power&Light Company, St.Lucie Plant Unit 1, Drawing 8770-G-424 S04, Revision 4, Fire Protection Reactor Auxiliary Building El.19.50'nd El.43.00'.11 Florida Power&Light Company, St.Lucie Plant Unit 2, Drawing 2998-G-366, Revision 14, Reactor Containment Bldg.El.45'-0 Conduit, Trays&Grounding Plan.2.39 Florida Power&Light Company, St.Lucie Plant Unit 2, Drawing 2998-G-375, Sheet 1, Revision 13, Reactor Containment Bldg.Penetration Details.2.40 Florida Power&Light Company, St.Lucie Plant Unit 2, Drawing 2998-G-390, Revision 16, Reactor Auxiliary Building El.(-)0.50'Conduit, Trays&Grounding Sh.1.2 41 Florida Power&Light Company, St.Lucie Plant Unit 2, Drawing 2998-G-391, Revision 17, Reactor Auxiliary Building El.(-)0.50'Conduit, Trays&Grounding Sh.2.2.42 Florida Power&Light Company, St.Lucie Plant Unit 2, Drawing 2998-G-392, Revision 15, Reactor Auxiliary Building El.19'-6 Conduit Trays&Grounding-Sh.
1.2.43 Florida Power&Light Company, St.Lucie Plant Unit 2, Drawing 2998-G-393, Revision 14, Reactor Auxiliary Building El.19'-6 Conduit, Tray&Grounding-Sh.
2.2.44 Florida Power&Light Company, St.Lucie Plant Unit 2, Drawing 2998-G-395, Revision 14, Reactor Auxiliary Building El.43'-0, 62'-0 Conduit, Trays&Grounding Sh.2.2.45 Florida Power&Light Company, St.Lucie Plant Unit 2, Drawing 2998-G-411, Sheet 2, Revision 4, RAB El.19.50'onduit Layout.anpcnlc.05/98 i 2.0 CALCULATlON NO.(cont'd)REV.SHEET NO.~2.46 Florida Power 5.Light Company, St.Lucie Plant Unit 2, Drawing 2998-G-411, Sheet 3, Revision 4, RAB El.19.50'onduit Layout.2.47 Florida Power 5.Light Company, St.Lucie Plant Unit 2, Drawing 2998-G-411, Sheet 4, Revision 4, RAB El.19.50'onduit Layout 2.48 Florida Power&.Light Company, St.Lucie Plant Unit 2, Drawing 2998-G-411, Sheet 6J, Revision 1, R.A.B.and R.C.B.Appendix'R'rapped Conduit Summary.2.49 Florida Power 5 Light Company, St.Lucie Plant Unit 2,'Drawing 2998-G-411, Sheet 7, Revision 7, RAB El.19.50'onduit Layout.2.50 Florida Power 5.Light Company, St.Lucie Plant Unit 2, Drawing 2998-G-411, Sheet 8, Revision 5, RAB EI.19.50'onduit Layout.2.51 Florida Power 5 Light Company, St.Lucie Plant Unit 2, Drawing 2998-G-411, Sheet 9, Revision 5, RAB El.19.50'onduit Layout.2.52 Florida Power 5.Light Company, St.Lucie Plant Unit 2, Drawing 2998-G-411, Sheet 10, Revision 4, RAB El.19.50'onduit Layout.2.53 Florida Power 5 Light Company, St.Lucia Plant Unit 2, Drawing 2998-G-411, Sheet 13, Revision 3, RAB El.19.50'onduit Layout.2.54 Florida Power 8c Light Company, St.Lucie Plant Unit 2, Drawing 2998-G-411, Sheet 14, Revision 5, RAB El.19.50'onduit Layout.2.55 Florida Power 5.Light Company, St.Lucie Plant Unit 2, Drawing 2998-G-411, Sheet 15, Revision 3, RAB El.19.50'onduit Layout.2.56 Florida Power 5 Light Company, St.Lucie Plant Unit 2, Drawing 2998-G-411, Sheet 16, Revision 2, RAB El.19.50'onduit Layout Sh.16.2.57 Florida Power 8c Light Company, St.Lucie Plant Unit 2, Drawing 2998-G-411, Sheet 17, Revision 3, RAB El.19.50'onduit Layout Sh.17.2.58 Florida Power 5 Light Company, St.Lucie Plant Unit 2, Drawing 2998-G-411, Sheet 18, Revision 2, RAB fl.19.50'onduit Layout Sh.18.2.59 Florida Power&Light Company, St.Lucie Plant Unit 2, Drawing 2998-G-411, Sheet 19, Revision 4, RAB El.19.50'onduit Layout Sh.19.ampcalc.05/98 CALCULATION NO.REV.SHEET NO.~2.0 (cont'd)2.60 Florida Power&.Light Company, St.Lucie Plant Unit 2, Drawing 2998-G-411, Sheet 20, Revision 7, Reactor Auxiliary Building Electrical Penetration Area Conduit Layout Sh.20.2.61 Florida Power&Light Company, St.Lucie Plant Unit 2, Drawing 2998-G-411, Sheet 22, Revision 9, RAB El.43.00'onduit Layout.2.62 Florida Power&Light Company, St.Lucie Plant Unit 2, Drawing 2998-G-411, Sheet 23, Revision 6, RAB El.43.00'onduit Layout Sh.23.2.63 Florida Power&.Light Company, St.Lucie Plant Unit 2, Drawing 2998-G-411, Sheet 29, Revision 9, RAB El.43.00'onduit Layout Sh.29.2.64 Florida Power&Light Company, St.Lucie Plant Unit 2, Drawing 2998-G-411, Sheet 30, Revision 7, RAB El.43.00'onduit Layout.2.65 Florida Power&Light Company, St.Lucie Plant Unit 2, Drawing 2998-G-411, Sheet 34, Revision 12, Reactor Auxiliary Building El.43.00'onduit Layout Sh.34.2.66 Florida Power&Light Company, St.Lucie Plant Unit 2, Drawing 2998-G-411, Sheet 35, Revision 9, RAB El.43.00 Conduit Layout.2.67 Florida Power 8c Light Company, St.Lucie Plant Unit 2, Drawing 2998-G-411, Sheet 36, Revision 7, Reactor Auxiliary Building El.43.00'onduit Layout Sh.36.2.68 Florida Power&Light Company, St.Lucie Plant Unit 2, Drawing 2998-G-411, Sheet 37, Revision 6, Reactor Auxiliary Building El.43.00'onduit Layout Sh.37.2.69 Florida Power&.Light Company, St.Lucie Plant Unit 2, Drawing 2998-G-411, Sheet 38, Revision 7, Reactor Auxiliary Building El.43.00'onduit Layout Sh.38.2.70 Florida Power&Light Company, St.Lucie Plant Unit 2, Drawing 2998-G-411, Sheet 39, Revision 8, RAB El.43.00'onduit Layout.2.71 Florida Power&Light Company, St.Lucie Plant Unit 1, Cable and Conduit Lists, 8770-A-328.
2.72 Florida Power&Light Company, St.Lucie Plant Unit 2, Cable and Conduit Lists, 2998-A-328.
2.73 Florida Power&.Light Company, St.Lucie Plant Unit No.1, Control Wiring Diagrams (CWD), 8770-B-327 series.2.74 Florida Power&.Light Company, St.Lucie Plant Unit No.2, Control Wiring Diagrams (CWD), 2998-B-327 series.anpcnlc.05/98 CALCULATION NO.REV.SHEET NO.~2.0 (cont'd)2.75 IEEE Standard Power Cable Ampacity Tables, IEEE Std.835-1994, Approved Date September 22, 1994.2.76 Engineering Evaluation St.Lucie Unit 1, JPN-PSL-SEMP-94-052,"Review of Appendix'R'ualification of Thermo-Lag Protected Conduits in Fire Area A." 2.77 Engineering Evaluation St.Lucie Unit 1, JPN-PSL-SEMP-94-053,"Review of Thermo-Lag Protected Conduits in Fire Area 8." 2.78 Engineering Evaluation St.Lucie Unit 1, JPN-PSL-SEMP-94-054,"Review of Thermo-Lag Protected Conduits in Fire Area C." 2.79 Engineering Evaluation St.Lucie Unit 1, JPN-PSL-SEMP-94-055,"Review of Appendix R'ualification of Thermo-Lag Protected Conduits in Fire Area E." 2.80 Engineering Evaluation St.Lucie Unit 1, JPN-PSL-SEMP-94-056,"Review of Thermo-Lag Protected Conduits in Fire Area N." 2.81 Engineering Evaluation St.Lucie Unit 1, JPN-PSL-SEMP-94-064,"Review of Thermo-Lag Protected Conduits in Fire Area O." 2.82 Engineering Evaluation St.Lucie Unit 2, JPN-PSL-SEMP-94-057,"Review of Appendix'R'ualification of Thermo-Lag Protected Conduits in Fire Area A." 2.83 Engineering Evaluation St.Lucie Unit 2, JPN-PSL-SEMP-94-058,"Review of Appendix'R'ualification of Thermo-Lag Protected Conduits in Fire Area B." 2.84 Engineering Evaluation St.Lucie Unit 2, JPN-PSL-SEMP-94-059, Qualification of Thermo-Lag Protected Conduits in Fire Area C.""Review of Appendix'R'.85 Engineering Evaluation St.Lucie Unit 2, JPN-PSL-SEMP-94-060,"Review of Appendix'R'ualification of Thermo-Lag Protected Conduits in Fire Area H." 2.86 Engineering Evaluation St.Lucie Unit 2, JPN-PSL-SEMP-94-061,"Review of Appendix R'ualification of Thermo-Lag Protected Conduits in Fire Area I." 2.87 Engineering Evaluation St.Lucie Unit 2, JPN-PSL-SEMP-94-062,"Review of Appendix'R'ualification of Thermo-Lag Protected Conduits in Fire Area M." 2.88 Engineering Evaluation St.Lucie Unit 2, JPN-PSL-SEMP-94-063,"Review of Appendix'R'ualification of Thermo-Lag Protected Conduits in Fire Area O." ampcalc.05/98 CALCULATION NO.REV.SHEET NO.~2.0 (cont'd)2.89 Standard Handbook for Electrical Engineers, 11th Edition.2.90 Westinghouse Electric Corporation Drawing¹9552D65, Sheet 3,"St.Lucie Unit No.2 Electric Hydrogen Recombiner Solid State Power Controller Schem", EMDRAC No.2998-3031, Revision 1~2.91 St.Lucie Unit No.1, Cable&Conduit List 8770-B-328, Installation Notes, Sh.12, Rev.9.I 2.92 FPL St.Lucie Unit 1 Drawing 8770-G-275 Sh.1, Revision 12,"6.9kV Swgr&4.16kV Swgr One Line Wiring Diagram Sh.1".2.93 FPL St.Lucie Unit 1 Drawing 8770-G-275 Sh.7, Revision 12,"480V Motor Control Centers One Line Wiring Diagram Sh.7".2.94 FPL St.Lucie Unit 2 Drawing 2998-G-275 Sh.18, Revision 5,"4.16kV Switchgear No.2A3 and 2B3 One Line Diagrams".
2.95 FPL St.Lucie Unit 2 Drawing 2998-G-275 Sh.19, Revision 3,"4.16kV Switchgear No.2AB, No.2A4 and No.2B4 One Line Diagrams".
2.96 FPL St.Lucie Unit 2 Drawing 2998-G-275 Sh.35, Revision 8,"480V Motor Control Center No.2B5 (Sh.1)One Line Diagram".2.97 FPL St.Lucie Unit 2 Drawing 2998-G-275 Sh.41, Revision 7,"480V Motor Control Center No.2B6 Sh.2 One Line Diagram".2.98 ICEA Publication No.S-19-81, NEMA Standards Publications No.WC3-1980, Approved September 19, 1979," Rubber-Insulated Wire and Cable for the Transmission and Distribution of Electrical Energy", Table 2-4.2.99 ICEA Publication No.S-66-524, NEMA Standards Publication No.WC7-1988," Cross-Linked Thermosetting-Polyethylene-Insulated Wire and Cable for the Transmission and Distribution of Electrical Energy".2.100 ICEA Publication No.S-68-516, NEMA Standards Publication No.WC8-1988," Ethylene-Propylene-Rubber-Insulated Wire and Cable for the Transmission and Distribution of Electrical Energy".2.101 Engineering Evaluation St.Lucie Units 1&2, JPN-PSL-SEEP-94-108, Revision 1,"Evaluation of Existing Thermo-Lag Fire Barriers" ampcalc.05/98
'2.0 CALCULATION NO.(cont'd)REV.SHEET NO.0I 2.102 Engineering Evaluation JPN-PSL-SENP-95-030,"Response to NRC Request for Additional Information Dated 12/28/94".
2.103 NUCON International, Inc.,"Pyrolysis Gas Chromatography Analysis of 9 Thermo-Lag Fire Barrier Samples, Performed for Florida Power 5 Light Company" (Attachment 2).2.104 EPRI Power Plant Electrical Reference Series, Volume 4,"Wire and Cable", Section 4.4.2.105 NRC Second Request for Additional Information
-Generic Letter 92-08,"Thermo-Lag 330-1 Fire Barriers", St.Lucie Plant, Units 1 and 2, and Turkey Point Plant, Units 3 and 4 (TAC No.M82809), Dated April 23, 1998.2.106 NRC"SAFETY EVALUATION OF AMPACITY ISSUES RELATED TO THERMO-LAG FIRE BARRIERS AT COMANCHE PEAK STEAM ELECTRIC STATION, UNIT 2 (TAC NO.M85999)", To C.Lance Terry, Group Vice President, Nuclear TU Electric, Dated June 14, 1995.2.107 NRC"CRYSTAL RIVER UNIT 3-REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION REGARDING THERMO-LAG RELATED AMPACITY DERATING ISSUES (TAC NO.M91772)", To Mr.Roy A.Anderson, Senior Vice President, Nuclear Operations, Florida Power Corporation, Date May 22, 1997.2.108 FLORIDA POWER CORPORATION to U.S.Nuclear Regulatory Commission,"Response to Request for Additional Information Regarding Thermo-Lag Related Ampacity Derating Issues", Dated July 3, 1997 2.109 NRC"SAFETY EVALUATION ADDRESSING THERMO-LAG RELATED AMPACITY DERATING ISSUES FOR CRYSTAL RIVER (TAC NO.M91772)", Dated November 14, 1997.2.110 FPL Calculation PSL-BFSM-98-005, Revision 0,"ELECTRICAL AMPACITY CORRECTION FACTORS FOR THERMO-LAG FIRE BARRIERS".
2.111 FPL Construction Specification MN-3.21, Revision 8,"INSTALLATION AND INSPECTION GUIDELINES FOR THERMO-LAG FIRE BARRIER MATERIAL".
mapcalc.05/98 CALCULATION NO.REV.SHEET NO.~3.0 3.1 Review the Appendix R Safe Shutdown Analysis (SSA)for cables identified as requiring protection and conduits identified with fire barriers (Ref.2.1&2.2).3.2 Review Unit 1 Fire Protection drawings, 8770-G-424 S01, S02, S03 and S04 (Ref.2.34-2.37)for conduits shown and listed as protected or shown as e protection not required by further evaluation.
Fire barriers were installed on the e conduits prior to the re-evaluation which removed protection requirements (Ref.Table 5.2).3.3 3.4 Review Unit 2 Appendix R wrapped summary drawing, 2998-G-411, Sheet 6J (Ref.2.48)for conduits shown and listed as protected or shown as e protection not required by further evaluation.
Fire barriers were installed on the e conduits prior to the re-evaluation which removed protection requirements (Ref.Table 5.3 5.5.4).f Review Unit 2 raceway and conduit layout drawings for conduits wrapped with Thermo-Lag 330-1 fire barriers for RG 1.75 separation (Ref 2.38-2.47, 2.49-2.70).
3.5 Identify cables in conduits covered with Thermo-Lag 330-1 fire barrier systems not previously identified in SSAs;i.e., RG 1.75 and cables in conduits designated e.3.6 Determine cable function from review of associated control wiring diagrams and compile listings of power cables affected.Signal and control cables do not carry sufficient current to generate heat in the cable and reduce ampacity.Power cables to valves are excluded due to the short duration of valve operation.
3.7 Review calculations issued by EBASCO, Services, Inc.and FPL Engineering to determine loads and currents used for affected power cables.Select worst case loading from background information and determine which loads will be applied to the cables continuously or longer than the time which will heat the cable from the load current (Ref.2.3-2.16, 2.18-2.24).
3.8 For motors, determine kilovolt-amperes (KVA)rating from horsepower rating and then calculate current based on line voltage (480 or 4160 volts)to device.Motor kilovolt-amp and efficiencies are discussed in Assumption 4.10 and 4.11.3.9 Obtain derating factors for multiple power cable installed in the same conduit, the number of current carrying conductors in the conduit (C/C)and the Ampacity Correction Factor (ACF)calculated in PSL-BFSM-98-005 (Ref.2.110)~3.9.1 The (C/C)derating factor adds a percentage based on the adverse effect of mutual inductance of energized current carrying conductors and the effects on other conductors within the same raceway.For conduits with more than three[3]energized'conductors, the mutual inductances cause the current to move away from other energized conductors which creates inductive heating and losses within the conduit.ampcalc.05/98 CALCULATION NO.REV.SHEET NO.~3.0 3.9.2 In response to the NRC request for additional information (Ref.2.105), a new fire barrier heat transfer calculation (Ref.2.110)was created specifically for St.Lucie fire barrier installations.
This calculation determines a new ACF based on fire barrier testing performed for FPC Crystal River Station.This revised ACF was reviewed against existing ACF and added in Tables 5.5.a, 5.5.b and 5.5.c.3.9.3 ICEA (Insulated Cable Engineers Association) cable data tables give ampacities
[Ic]for three conductor (3/c)or triplex cables in a conduit in air.Revision 1 to this calculation used the cable ampacity for cables in conduit in free air with'No Sun-2 Ft/s'ir velocity based on operating conditions in the Reactor Auxiliary Buildings of St.Lucie plant.In response to NRC concerns in the 1998 RAI (Ref.2.105), for Revision 2 the current carrying capacity of individual cables was changed to'No Sun-0 Ft/s'ir velocity.This ambient condition is for cables installed indoors with no ventilation.
Changing the ambient conditions reduced the cable current capacity a maximum of 4.4%for size 00[1/c¹2/0 AWG].The cable ampacities are derated when the number of conductors in a conduit exceeds three (3).Cable ampacity is multiplied by the following correction factor for inductive heating (Ref.2.104): Total Number Ampacity Correction Earth M~arati~3 4-6 7-24 1.00 0.80 0.70 3.10 Calculate derated ampacity (I')for each power cable.(I')=lc x (ACF)x (C/C Derating%)3.11 Determine margin percent (%)between rated cable capacity and the derated ampacity (I'):%Margin=(DaratedMm~
-1)x 100 Load Amps Required(l) 3.12 Operating heat loads (Watts per foot)are calculated as follows: Watts/foot
=(¹of conductors)
(resistance per 1000 ft)(load current)~/1000 The heat loads for the derated current load on a.,cable type is compared to the operating heat load for the actual current load on a cable to assure cable design is not exceeded.ampca lc.05/98 CALCULATION NO.REV.SHEET NO.~3.13 Cable resistance values are given at a temperature of 25'C.Table 6-1 (attached) provides the following temperature conversion equation for copper conductors:
R1=R2 (259.6/[234.5
+T2]);,where; R2=R1 ([234.5+T2]/259.5)R2=R1 ([234 5+90]/259.5)=R1 (1.2505)R1=resistance at 25'C R2=resistance at operating temperature T2=cable temperature; i.e., 90'C 4.0 4.1 Fire protection wrap used at St.Lucie station is the Thermal Science, Inc.(TSI)Thermo-Lag Fire Barrier System.Typically, the half-round"clamshell" covers applied over conduits have a nominal thickness of 6/8" for one (1)hour ratings and one and one-quarter (1-/i)inch for three (3)hour ratings.Installation of all required fire barriers was reviewed and confirmed or upgraded to be installed per Construction Specification MN-3.21 (Ref.2.'111).4.2 The original design calculations for derating factors based on heat transfer determined that Thermo-Lag barriers reduced ampacity by approximately 12%, however, for conservatism, a derating factor of 15%was selected for power cable sizing (Ref.2.21).4.3 Control and instrumentation cables are not subject to ampacity limits due to the small levels of current used.Voltage drop in the control circuit is usually the limiting factor for cable design and normally requires the installation of larger cables to perform required functions.
This applies to control and signal cables in conduits, cable trays and enclosures.
The continuous device current load was used as a basis for this calculation.
Momentary load requirements, i.e., those lasting less than 1 minute, are not considered.
Loads of this duration are not sustained long enough to induce heat in the affected power cables.Abnormally high levels of current for devices are detected by protective devices and the component is designed to be separated from the power source before the condition damages the component or cable.4.5 Fire protection barriers in St.Lucie Unit 1 and Unit 2 were originally installed on cable conduits and conduit boxes only.There are no power cable trays wrapped with fire barriers at the St.Lucie station.However, sections of conduits 11001F-3", 11001H-3", 21001F-4" and 21001H-4" are routed in a"banked" configuration for portions of their route.There were no tested configurations for banked conduit runs;therefore, the ampacity correction factor for cable tray were used.The banked conduits are in a single plane, the conduit size of 4 inches is similar to the depth of cable tray used at St.Lucie and the required protection is for one-hour (1-hr)with detection and suppression.
Using the cable tray derating factor for three-hour (3-hr)fire barriers gives a more conservative estimate of the current carrying margin for the affected cables (11001F, 11001G, 11001H, 11001J, 21801W, 21801X, 21801Y and 21801Z).aepcalc.05/98 II f//CALCULATION NO.REV.SHEET NO.~4.0 4.6 This calculation applies to cables in protected conduits inside and outside containment of both St.Lucie units.The ambient temperature for cables inside containment is assumed to be 50'C.Outside of the containment buildings, ambient temperatures are assumed to be 40'C (104'F).Operating temperatures in the RAB are normally closer to 30'C;however, for conservatism, the higher temperature will be used.4.7 Power cables utilized in St.Lucie station are rated for operation at 90'C conductor temperature.
The higher the insulation temperature rating, the greater the allowable ampacity for a given conductor size.4.8 Conduits protected in St.Lucie Unit¹1 use (3)hour barrier one and one-quarter (1-'/i)inch nominal thickness material.Conduits protected in St.Lucie Unit¹2 may be protected with one (1)hour 5/8" nominal thickness material or three (3)hour one and one-quarter (1-~/i)inch nominal thickness material.Upgrades to the fire barrier systems for one-hour (1-hr)protection was provided by using nominal 5/8" thickness Thermo-Lag 330-1 pre-shaped half-round sections overlaid with 3/8" nominal thickness Thermo-Lag sections.Three-hour (3-hr)upgrades is provided by using one and one-quarter (1-~/~)inch nominal thickness Thermo-Lag base material with overlays of Thermo-Lag 770-1.The number of 770-1 wraps is dependent on conduit cable fill percentages.
4.9 Conductor current values for 600 volt cables are based on lEEE standard values (Ref.2.75)for conductors rated 600 to 5000 volts, 90'C (194'F)ambient temperature with no solar heating and zero (0)ft/s ventilation/air flow.4.10 Where load values are only known in kilovolt-amperes (KVAs), the current is determined by;amps (single phase AC or DC): P3xV amps (three phase AC)ampcalc.05/98 CALCULATION NO.REV.SHEET NO.~4.0 4.11 The ampacity testing performed for Comanche Peak Plant was performed for conduits ranging in size from 3/4 inches to 5 inches.Conduits covered with Thermo-Lag 330-1 fire barriers at St.I ucie plant range from 1-1/2" to 5".The heat load (I'R loss)from each cable section is included in Tables 5.5a, 5.5b.5.5.5c.These heat loads were compared to the tables/charts used by Turkey Point where heat loads were compared to the Omega Point Laboratory test for Texas Utilities Comanche Peak Plant (Ref.2.20).From this it is concluded that the test samples utilized are representative of the configuration at St.Lucie.4.12 There are no installed cable tray sections at St.Lucie protected by Thermo-Lag fire barriers.However, there is a large pull box installed in St.Lucie Unit 2 elevation (-)0.50', box 8243'I-SA which was reviewed due to size.The box is a 42" x 42" x 12" enclosure used as a pullbox for the power cables to AFW pump 2A.The horizontal surface on the bottom of the enclosure is expected to be most affected by fires in the 12" box depth.Because the original test performed by TSI included a 12" cable tray section and the Comanche Peak test included a 24" cable tray section, the large enclosure in St.Lucie Unit 2 is considered bounded by the previous tests.Revision 2 to PCM 97040, to upgrade to south wall of the 28.67'levation of the Reactor Auxiliary Building'A'able Penetration Area Extension (Loft), will add a short section of Thermo-Lag fire barrier to cable tray C17 at plan point (2116), near column RAI-RA3.This is a control cable tray and is not affected by the installation of Thermo-Lag fire barriers.Control cables are not required to be evaluated for cable ampacity derating due to low level of current normally used.4.13 ln accordance with Reference 2.101, the thickness of the Thermo-Lag and the gaps within the Thermo-Lag, found during the inspection of the correctly installed configurations for the Unit 1 5 2 one hour and three hour barriers, were in accordance with the installation instructions of TSI.Therefore, the configuration of the Thermo-Lag barriers at St.Lucie are bounded by the TSI installation instructions.
4.14 FPL participated in a generic industry test program managed by the Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI)which included verification of the chemical composition of Thermo-Lag material.As part of the NEI test program, a pyrolysis gas chromatographic analysis was used to qualitatively compare the organic constituents of various Thermo-Lag samples.St.Lucie provided (9)samples from installed and warehouse Thermo-Lag materials.
AII of the samples tested at NUCON Laboratory in Columbus, Ohio were found consistent in terms of chemical composition (Ref.2.103).Results of the testing program were sent directly to the NRC by NEI letter dated October 3, 1995.Per Reference 2.102, the NRC stated that there was essentially no differences between the samples for different lots, areas of the country and the year the material was purchased.
cuapcslc.05/98
'CALCULATION NO.REV.SHEET NO.~4.0 4.15 Applying the Revision 2 ampacity correction factors for 3-hour fire barriers to cable 110028 (Battery Charger 18)reduced the percent margin to approximately 2%.This was acceptable with existing derating factors but did not allow for any other variables or potential derating factor increases.
A review of the background for the load current of this cable showed that the calculation for sizing the battery chargers and Revision 1 of this made the assumption that for worst case loading, the chargers were assumed to be in'current-limit'onditions (315 Amps).After the initial 60 seconds following a I.OOP, the chargers are loaded on the respective emergency diesel and any current not required by the dc system is used to recharge the battery.Current demand to recharge the station batteries is rninirnal due to the short duration of the discharge.
Based on system loading, only approximately (6)Ampere-hours is discharged from the battery which represents 0.25%of the battery capacity.In actual application, removing 0.25%capacity from the battery results in a smaller additional current draw from the chargers.Normal recharging takes place over a longer period of hours, typically between 8-10 hours (Ref.2.8 5, 2.9).Based on the battery loading calculation (Ref.2.6), the battery/charger will see a peak demand following the LOOP of 228 Amperes which will further diminish after the first (30)minutes.Using this value results in a margin of 39.65%for cables 110028 and 116018..In addition, with installed detection and automatic suppression, protection for conduit 110028 is only required to be for 1-hour.Calculation PSL-BFSM-98-005 (Ref.2.110)concluded that 3-hour wrap on a 4" conduit extrapolated for 1-hour protection has a ACF of 0.952.With this ACF, the cable ampacity margin for 110028 becomes 64.09%.To replace the existing Thermo-Lag wall around Fire Zone C-578, Train'8'C Equipment/Inverter Room, fire barriers were removed from 110028 and Battery Charger 188 conduit 116018, cable 116018, was chosen be relied on for safe shutdown in this area.The cables to Charger 188 are physically the same size as Charger 18 cables and the conduit, 116018, is routed more convenient for protecting.
ampcalc.05/9>
i'CALCULATION NO.REV.SHEET NO.~5.0 5.1 The documents listed in Section 2.0 of this calculation were reviewed to identify the cables wrapped with Thermo-Lag which must be considered for ampacity derating factors.5.2 Bill of Material listings were reviewed for cables identified in 5.1 to determine individual cables insulation voltage rating and intended generic use, i.e., power or control and tabulated in Table 5.1.5.3 From information listed in documents of Section 2.0 and appropriate bills of material, Tables 5.2, 5.3 and 5A were generated to identify affected cables in wrapped conduits.These tables identify cable types, usage voltage class, insulation voltage rating, a description of the cable load for power cables and the number of current carrying conductors in each conduit.5.4 Motor load kilowatt and current ratings vary in prior documents depending on base values used.For this calculation, current values for motors were determined from nameplate listings on referenced One-Line List drawings.5.5 From this information and Section 2.0;Tables 5.5.a, 5.5.b and 5.5.c were created.5.6 During the 1997 refueling outages for both St.Lucie units, cables in conduits previously required to be protected were reworked or rerouted into areas where the cables were no longer required to be protected.
St.Lucie Unit 1 PCM 97034 rerouted cables 11001F, 11001G, 11001H and 11001J which connect Station Service Battery 1A to DC Test Panel 1A from elevation 19.5'ommon Hallway and'B'lectrical Cable Penetration areas, Fire Zones C55W and C-78, to elevation 43.0'rom the'A'attery Room, through the'A'witchgear Room to the Cable Spread Room where the'A'est panel is located, Fire Zones A60 and B57.The cables which connect the'A'C bus through the manual transfer switch, inverter 1A and to Instrument Bus 1lVIA, 11009G, 11009J and 11009Q, were relocated from the 19.5'ommon Hallway, Fire Zone C55W, to the Cable Spread Room, Fire Zone B57, where the equipment is located.St.Lucie Unit 2 PCM 96143 relocated cables 21001A, power to Battery Charger 1A from MCC 1A5, cables 21810A and 21756Y which supply 125 volt dc power to 480 volt Switchgear 1A2 and 4160 volt Switchgear 1A3 for breaker control and operation, and cables 20645C and 20646A which supply power to miscellaneous equipment fed from RTG Boards 105 and 106.These cables were relocated out of the 19.5'ommon Hallway, Fire Zone C55W and the'B'witchgear Room, Fire Zone C56, into the'A'C Equipment/Inverter Room through the Cable Spread Room, Fire Zone B52.The above cables have been removed from Tables 5.5a, 5.5b or 5.5c.ampcalc.05/98
'0 5.0 CALCULATION NO.(cont'd)REV.SHEET NO.~St.Lucie Plant Cable Types St.Lucie Unit 1: Reference Unit 1 Bill of Materials, 8770-B-325 BOM Cable Identification D02-02 D03-03, D03-06, D03-07, D03-08 D03-12 D1 5-06 D26-02, D26-06 52-08 BOM Sheet Sht.D2-1 Sht.D3-1 Sht.D3-9 S}lt.D26-01 Sht.D52-01 Revision No.Description Power Cable, 600V Crosslinked Polyethylene PVC Jacket for Overall Jacket (T e XLPP)Control Cable, 600V, Crosslinked Polyethylene PVC Jacket for Overall Jacket (T e XLPPP)Control Cable, 600V, Crosslinked Polyethylene PVC Jacket for Overall Jacket (T pe XLPPP)Power Cable, 5000V (Re.CARS)Power Cable, 600V, HT Kerite Insulation, FR Overall Jacket (Ty e HT)Control Cable, 600V, FR Kerite Insulation, FR Overall Jacket (T e MCCC)St.Lucie Unit 2: Reference Unit 2 Bill of Materials, 2998-B-325 BOM Cable Identification D15-01, D15-02, D15-03 D26-02, D26-03, D26-04, D26-06, D26-07, D26-08 D26-10 D52-03, D52-08 D54-05, D54-06, D54-07 D61-05, D61-06 D98 D99 BOM Sheet Sht.D11-01 Sht.D26-01 Sht.D26-09 Sht.D52-01 SIlt.D54-01 SIlt.D61-01 Revision No.3 Description Power Cable, 5000V, Crosslinked Polyethylene, Lead Sheath 5 Neo rene Overall (T e XLPSLN)Power Cable, 600V, HT Kerite Insulation, FR Overall Jacket (Type HT)Power Cable, 600V, HT Kerite Insulation, FR Overall Jacket (T e LVPC)Control Cable, 600V, FR Kerite Insulation, FR Overall Jacket (Type MCCC)Power Cable, 600V, Non-shielded, HT, Kerite Insulation FR Jacket (T e LVPC)Si nal Re: D26, D52, D54 Re: D26 arapcalc.05/98 CALCULATlON NO.REV.SHEET NO.~6.0 (cont'd)ABLE 5.2 St.Lucie Unit 1 Cables in Conduits with (3)Hour Thermo-Lag 330-1 Fire Barrier System Protection CABLE CONDUIT BM/Id Type Uolt Insulation Device c/c 10504 A 10832A.11601B 11002F 110026 11002H 11002J 11002M 11002 N 11002P 11002Q 10504A 11552 11601B 11002F, 14885 11002F, 14885 11002H, 14886 11002H, 14886 11002M 11002M 11002P 11002P D26-06 D15-06 D02-02 D02-02 3-1/c¹2 3-1/c¹4/0 2-1/c¹500 1-1/c¹500 Class Rating M 600 U 5000 M 600 M 600 D02-02 D02-02 D02-02 D02-02 1-1/c¹500 1-1/c¹500 1-1/c¹500 1-1/c¹500 M 600 M 600 M 600 M 600 D02-02 1-1/c¹500 M 600 D02-02 1-1/c¹500 M 600 D02-02 1-1/c¹500 M 600 HVE-9B ICW P1A Batt Chgr 1BB 125VDC Bus 1B Batt.Leads II II I(I1 II II II II II II 125VDC Bus 1B Batt.Leads 2 2 2 2 hlQZES: Reference 8770-B-328, Sheet BA, Revision 2,"Cable and Conduit Notes".C-control or low voltage power (i.e., 120 volt to ground)M-.-medium voltage (i.e., 480 volt nominal)c/c-number of current carrying conductors in same conduit List Installation ampcnlc.05/98 CALCULATION NO.REV.SHEET NO.~5.0 (cont'd)St.Lucie Unit 2 Cables in Conduits with (3)Hour Thermo-Lag 330-1 Fire Barrier System Protection CABLE CONDUIT BM/Id Type Volt Insulation c/c 20251A 20504A 20629A 20834A 2093 1A 20948 F 2095 6H 209 90H 21001A 21009E 21009J 21009K 21009U 21608B 21801A 21801 W 21801X 21801Y 21801Z 25071P 20504 A 20336 21696 25019Y 20948F 22020Q 250 19Y 21001 A 21009 G 21009 J 28161J 21009H 22020Q 21801A 21001F, 28058J 21001F, 28058J 21001H, 28058D 21001H, 28058D D15-03 D98-01 D15-06 D15-03 D26-06 D15-01 D98-01 D26-04 D26-04 D26-04 D26-04 D99-04 D26-04 D98-01 D26-04 D26-02 Class 3-1/c¹4/0 V 3-1/c¹4/0 P 3-1/c¹4/0 V 3-1/c¹4/0 V 2-1/c¹2 P 3-1/c¹500 V 2-1/c¹4/0 P 2-1/c¹2/0 P 3-1/c¹2/0 P 2-1/c¹2/0 P 2-1/c¹2/0 P 2-1/c¹2/0 P 2-1/c¹2/0 P 2-'1/c¹4/0 P 3-1/c¹2/0 P 2-1/c¹500 P D26-02 2-1/c¹500 P D26-02 2-1/c¹500 P D26-02 2-1/c¹500 P Rating 5000 LPSI P2A 600 (D26-03)2HVE-9B 5000 AFW P2A 5000 ICW P2C 600 Swgr 2A3-5 5000 Xfmr 2B2/2BS 600 (D26-03)DG 2A Exc Cub 600 Swgr 2A2-6 600 Bat Chgr 2A 600 Inst Bus 2MA 600 Inv 2A 600 (D26-04)Inv 2C 600 Inst Bus 2MC 600 (D26-03)DG 2A CP 600 Bat Chgr 2AA 600 DC Bus 2AA DC Bus 2AA 600 DC Bus 2AA DC Bus 2AA 600 DC Bus 2AA DC Bus 2AA 600 DC Bus 2AA DC Bus 2AA 4 hKEES Reference 2998-B-271, Sheet 2-14, Revision 2,"Electrical General Installation Notes".L-low level signal, not power C-control or low voltage power (i.e., 120 volt to ground)P-medium voltage power (i.e., 480 volt nominal)V-high voltage (i.e., 4160 volt nominal)c/c-number of current carrying conductors in same conduit ()D-¹(cable size)duplex construction
()T-¹(cable size)triplexed construction
()STP-¹(cable size)shielded twisted-pair ampcnlc.05/98 CALCULATlON NO.REV.SHEET NO.~5.0 (cont'd)HRBLE R4 St.Lucie Unit 2 Cables in Conduits with (1)Hour Thermo-Lag 330-1 Fire Barrier System Protection CABLE CONDUIT BM/Id Type Volt Insulation c/c 20292 A 20597 J 20597N 20630A 20833 A 20946F 20948 A 210 10U 21118 A 21643 G 21643R 25050W 20292A 20597N 20597N 28093 C 21553 22006S 20948 A 21010H 22020Q 22016H 21643R 25067M D26-08 D26-03 D99-01 D15-03 D15-03 D15-01 D15-01 D26-04 D98-10 D26-10 D26-10 D26-04 1-3/c¹12T 4-1/c¹4/0 3-1/c¹4/0 3-1/c¹4/Q 3-1/c¹4/0 3-1lc¹500 3-1/c¹500 2-1/c¹2/0 2-1/c¹4 2-1/c¹4 2-1/c¹4 2-1/c¹2/0 Class Rating P 600 P 600 P 600 (D26-03)V 5000 V 5000 V 5000 V 5000 P 600 P 600 (D26-10)P 600 P 600 600 Hydz Pmp 2B 1-T H2 Recomb 7 H2 Recomb 7 AFW P2B 3 ICW P2B 3 Xfmr 2A5 3 Xfmr 2B2/2B5 3 Inst Bus 2MD 2 DG 2A Ann 6 RM/RS26-1 2 RM/RS26-18 2 125V Bus MD 3 ampcalc.05/98 CALCULATlON NO.REV.SHEET NO.~5.0 (cont'd)St.Lucie Unit 1 (3)Hour Thermo-Lag 330-1 Fire Barrier System Wrap Ref.Cable Affected Device Cable Size Cable Hp/Load Resistance KVA Amps/1000 ft (lt)(Ref 2.98-2.100 ACF (Ref.2.20)ACF'Ref.C/C 2.110)C/C Derating Cable Ampacity (ic)IEEE Rev 2 Derated Derated Ampacity Ampacity (I')(I')Rev 2 Maximum Derated Heat Load watts/ft)Actual Heat Load (Watts/ft)
Margin Margin Rcv 2 2.93 10504 A HVE-9B 3-1/C A2 0.2113 40 49.80.973 3 1.0 112 89.6 108.976 5.55 1.52 91.02 122.40 2.6 11002F 11002G 2.92 10832A 2.6 11601 B ICW PI A CHRGR IBB 125VDC TEST PNL IB 3-1/C I4/0 2-1/C F500 l-l/C f500 I I/C gSOO 0.0278 0.0278 68 KVA 228 213 0.0655 600 81.80.80.69.973 3.94 2.51 2 1.0 1.0 1.0 398 398 190.4 231.574 318.4 374.12 549.24 405.96 7.67 24.63 1.29 5.52 5.34 143.95 185.89 111.30 64.09 114.70 90.59 2.6 11002H 11002J 125VDC TEST PNL IB I-I/C f500 1-1/C f500 0.0278 213.69.51 2 1.0 398 549.24 405.96 24.63 5.34 114.70 90.59 2.6 2.6 11002M 11002N 11002P 11002 125VDC BUS IB 125VDC BUS IB l-l/C//500 l-l/C$500 l-l/C f500 l-l/C ft500 0.0278 0.0278 213 213.80.80.94 2.94 2 1.0 1.0 398 398 318.4 374.12 318.4 374.12 24.63 24.63 5.34, 5.34 114.70 75.64 114.70 75.64 hlates 4 battery chargers are current-limited to 315 amps output, protected conduit 11601B with cable 11601B to Charger 1BB, same load as 11002B 1.Conduits protected with 3-hour wrap not required and not upgraded.Cables 10504A and 10832A (AFC'0.973)Ref.2.110 anpcalc.05/98 CALCULATION NO.REV.SHEET NO.~5.0 (cont'd)Iah~A~St.Lucie Unit 2 (3)Hour Thermo-Lag 330-1 Fire Barrier System Wrap Ref.Cable Affected Device Cable Size Cable Resistance
/1000 ft (Ref 2.98-2.100 Hp/KVA Load Amps (lr)ACF (Ref.2.20)ACF'Ref.2.110)C/C C/C Derating Cable Ampacity (lc)IEEE Rev 2 Derated Derated Maximum Ampacity Ampacity (I')Derated Heat (I')Rev 2 Load (Watts/It)
Actual Heat Load (Watts/II)
%Margin%Margin Rev 2 2.94 20251 A 2.97 20504 A 2.94 20629A LPSI P2A 2HVE-9B AFW P2A 3-1/C//4/0 3-1/C g4/0 3-1/C$4/0 0.0655 0.0655 0.0655 400 50 60 65 350 47.80.80.80 0.952 0.952 0.952 1.0 1.0 1.0 190.4 226.576 7.6725 190.4 226.576 7.6725 190.4 226.576 7.6725 0.4913 0.8302 0.4341 295.20 320.43 353.15 248.58 382.08 2.95 20834 A ICW P2C 3-1/C g4/0 0.0655 600 82.4.80 0.952 1.0 190.4 226.576 7.6725 1.3342 139.81 174.97 2.19 2.94 2.7 20948F 20956H a21118A 21608B 2.7 20931A SWGR2A3 STA SVC Xfinr 2B2/2BS DG 2A EXC CUB 2-1/C g2 3-1/C F500 2-1/C I4/0 2-1/C S4 2-IICI/'4IO 0.2113 0.0278 0.0655 1933 KVA 50.0 negligible 6.0.80 0.5.80 268.80 0.952 0.952 0.952 0.80 1.0 0.80 112 398 318.4 378.896 152.32 181.2608 9.2370 9.8208 71.68 85.2992 4.7390 0.0002 0.9825 0.0141 14876 24.18 16959.84 41.38 216.16 262.52 2.13 20990H SWGR 2A2 2-1/C//4/0 0.0655 0.5.80 0.952 0.80 152.32 181.2608 6.5472 31516 36152.16 2.24 21009 E 2.6 21009 J INVTR2A C In)2-1/C k2/0 INST BUS 2MA 2-1/C It2/0 0.1053 0.1053 10 KVA 24.7.80.80 0.952 0.952 1.0 1.0 173 173 4.4157 138.4 164.696 138.4 164.696 4.4157 0.1285 0.2883 48b23 566.79 291.35 345.12.26 21009K 2.24 21009U 2.13 21801W 21801X INVTR2C C In 2-1/C tr2/0 INST BUS 2MC 2-1/C g2/0 125VDC BUS 2AA 2-1/C f500 2-1/C$500 0.1053 0.1053 0.0278 10 KVA.80 28.4.80 278.69 0.952 V 0.952 0.952 1.0 1.0 0.80 173 173 796 138.4 164.696 4.4157 138.4 164.696 4.4157 439.392 606.2336 23.4547 0.2883 0.1699 8.5940 291.35 409.86 65.20 345.12 479.92 118.07 2.13 21801Y 21801Z 125VDC BUS 2AA 2-1/C k'500 2-1/C$500 0.0278 278.69 0.952 0.80 796 439.392 606.2336 23.4547 8.5940 65.20 118.07 ampcalc.05/98 CALCULATION NO.REV.SHEET NO.~5.0 (cont'd)St.Lucie Unit 2 (1)Hour Thermo-La 330-1 Fire Barrier S stem Wra Ref.Cable Affected Device Cable Size Cable Resistance
/1000 ft (Ref 2.98-2.100 HP/Load ACF KVA Amp s (Ref.(lt)2.20)ACF'Ref.2.110)Rev.2 CIC C/C Derating Cable Ampacity (Ic)IEEE Rev 2 Dented Ampa city (I')Derated Maximum Actual Heat Ampacity (I')Derated Heat Load Rev.2 Load (Watts/ft)(Watts/It)
%Margin%Margin Rev 2 2.96 20292A 2.17 20597J 2.90 20597N 2.94 20630 A 2.94 20833 A HYDRAZINE PUMP H2 RECOMB AFW P2B ICW P2B 1-3/C tr12T 4-1/C//4/0 3-1/C 8'4/0 3-1/C/14/0 3-1/C//4IO 2.1058 0.0655 0.0655 0.0655 3 4.6 600 82.4.89 75 KVA 350 47.89.94.94.94.94 3 1.0 7 0.70 3 1.0 3 1.0 28 148.274 211.82 211.82 26.32 156.604 4.21 10.86 9.50 9.50 0.1337 3.7139 0.4341 1.3342 461.09 70.98 367.72 166.78 472.17 74.00 376.00 171.50 2.19 20946F 2.94 STA.SVC Xfmr 2AS 3-1/C//500 0.0278 1933 KVA 268.89.94 3 1.0 398 354.22 374.12 11.43 5.99 38.15 39.60 2.19 20948A 2.94 2.24 21010 U 2.13 21118 A STA SVC Xfmr 2B2/2BS 3-1/C t/500 120VAC INST BUS 2-1/C I/2/0 2MD DG 2A Ann 2 I/C 4'4 0.0278 0.1053 0.3364 1933 KVA 10 KVA 268.89 1.0 28.4.89.94.94.94 3 1.0 2 1.0 6 0.80 398 173 85 354.22 153.97 60.52 374.12 162.62 11.43 5.47 0.1699 0.002 38.15 467.22 6166 39.60 472.61 6292.00 2.22 21643 G RM/RS-26-1 2-1/C$4 0.3364 2.5.89.94 2 1.0 85 75.65 79.9 4.13 0.0042 3032.80 3096.00 2.22 21 643 R 2.7 2SOSOW 2.24 RM/RS-26-18 2-1/C I/4 125YDC BUS MD 2-1/C//2/0 0.3364 0.1053 2.5.89 1.5.94.94 2 1.0 3 1.0 85 75.65 153.97 79.9 162.62 4.13 8.20 0.0042 0.001 3032.80 10639 3096.00 10741.33 anpcalc.05/98 CALCULATION NO.REV.SHEET NO.~6~0 E1KULXS The results shown in Tables 5.5.a., 5.5.b.and 5.5.c.indicate that when using newer ampacity correction factor (ACF)as determined in calculation, PTN-BFJM-96-005, for upgraded Thermo-Lag fire barrier installations, sufficient margin exists between operating cable loads and cable current carrying capacity (ampacity).
This calculation revisited prior calculations, and Appendix R and RG 1.75 documents to eliminate the conservatism that existed in the earlier calculations when considering the load on a specific cable.Ampacity values used in this calculation are loads that exist longer than 60 seconds;i.e., do not include the battery or valve loads during the first minute which are reduce significant'ly for longer operation.
As listed above, the smallest margin for St.Lucie Unit 1 Thermo-Lag (3)hour upgraded wrapped conduits is~>.This margin is for the 125 volt DC power cables from Battery 1A to Battery Test Panel 1A for supplying 125 volt DC bus 1A.Loads on these cables are steady state loads after the first minute of operation when the cable is subjected to continuous loads.Loads on the battery cable are higher in the first minute due to cycling of valves and other motors.The smallest Unit No.2 margin for (3)hour upgraded wrapped conduits is M~Q for the 4160 volt power feeder cables to Station Services Transformers 2B2/2B5.This value contains some conservatism since it assumes 100%transformer loading.For (1)hour upgraded wrapped conduits in St.Lucie Unit 2, the smallest margin is 39~for the 4160 volt feed to Station Services Transformer 2A5.This value includes conservatism, similar to the margin to Transformers 2B2/2BS, since it assumes 100~transformer loading.The original calculations for cable derating in St.Lucie Unit 1 and Unit 2 used a value considered conservative at 15%.This calculation has determined that acceptable power cable margins exist for installed cables in St.Lucie Plant Unit 1 and Unit 2 when using derating values of 11%for (1)hour fire barriers and 20%for (3)hour fire barriers assuming the installation of Thermo-Lag 330-1 and Thermo-Lag 770-1 upgrade fire barrier systems.A revision to the cables in conduits 21001F-4" and 21001H-4" was included in Revision 1 to this calculation.
These conduits were found to be in a banked configuration for part of their route.For conservatism, the ampacity derating factor for cable trays was applied to these conduit sections.The resultant ampacity margin changed from 91.53%to 65.20%using the cable tray derating factor of 31%'.ampcalp.05/98 wo I CALCULATION NO.REV.SHEET NO.~6~0 RRZULXR Revision 1 concluded that installed conduit configurations at St Lucie plant are bounded by test performed at Omega laboratories for Texas Utilities'omanche Peak Nuclear Plant.Revision 2 to this calculation resulted in lower margins based on the cable current carrying capacity for ambient indoor conditions of No Sun-0 Ft/s'ir flow/ventilation.
In addition, field walk downs for enhancements of the Thermo-Lag fire barriers on conduits 11002F-3" and 11002H-3" in the Unit 1 Reactor Auxiliary Building Cable Spreading Room, identified sections of these conduits where a common enclosure extended over both conduits.Cables in these conduits were derated using the existing cable tray derating factors to determine margins.As a result of the recalculation of circuits protected with Thermo-Lag fire barriers, the resultant lowest ampacity margin in Unit 1 for three-hour (3)fire barriers is~99'or the cables in conduit 11601B-3".
In Unit 2, the lowest margin for conductors in conduits with three-hour (3)protection is~~for the power feeder to Station Service transformer 2B2/2B5.The smallest margin with one-hour (1)protection is~~, for the power feeds to Station Services transformers 2A5 and 2B2/2B5.Based on the more conservative values used in the St.Lucie ampacity derating calculation above and the review of the FPC ampacity derating test, the configuration and ampacity derating for St.Lucie is bounded by the FPC tests.ampcalc.05/98