ML101940365

Calculation PBNP-994-21-05-P01, Rev. 0, Main Steam Piping GL 87-11 Break Location Determination, Enclosure 1, Attachment 3

ML101940365
Person / Time
Site:	Point Beach
Issue date:	09/26/2008
From:	Kandalepas C Automated Engineering Services Corp
To:	Florida Power & Light Co, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
GL-87-011 PBNP-994-21-05-P01, Rev. 0
Download: ML101940365 (47)

Text

ENCLOSURE 1 ATTACHMENT 3 NEXTERA ENERGY POINT BEACH, LLC POINT BEACH NUCLEAR PLANT, UNITS I AND 2 LICENSE AMENDMENT REQUEST 261 EXTENDED POWER UPRATE RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION PBNP-994-21-05-PO0, REVISION 0, MAIN STEAM PIPING GL 87-11 BREAK LOCATION DETERMINATION 46 pages follow

Page: 4 of 13 Calc. No.: PBNP-994-21-05-POI Client: Florida Power & Light Revision: 0 Station: Point Beach Nuclear Plant - Unit 1 Prepared By: Chris Kandalepas Calc.

Title:

Main Steam Piping GL 87-11 Break Location Determination Reviewed By: Dan Quijano Safety Related Yes I]I No El Date: 9/26/2008 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 P u rp o se ........................................................................................................................................................ 5 2.0 Background ................................................................................................................................................... 5 3.0 Assumptions and Analysis Notes ............................................................................................................ 6 4.0 M ethodology and Acceptance Criteria ................................................................................................... 7 5.0 References ................................................................................................................................................... 9 6.0 GL 87-11 Break And Leak Location Calculations ................................................................................ 10 7.0 Results & Conclusions ............................................................................................................................... 11 Attachments Pages A. Resultant Stress Calculations Tables ................................................................................................... AI-A3 B. SK-M S-FIG. I - Postulated Line Breaks ............................................................................................... B1 C. Calculation of Local Pipe Stresses at Integral Pipe Attachments ...................................................... C1-C24 D. Calculation of Com bined Stresses at Tee Node Point 395 ................................................................... D l-D2 E. Com bined Support Loads and Review of Non-Seismic Supports ..................................................... EI-E3 F. AES Technical Position Paper for HELB Program .............................................................................. F1-F3 Rev. 2 3.1-3 Form 3.1-3 Rev. 2

Automated Engineering CALCULATION SHEET Page: 5 of 13 Services Corp Caic. No.: PBNP-994-21-05-PO1 Client: Florida Power & Light Revision: 0 Station: Point Beach Nuclear Plant - Unit 1 Prepared By: Chris Kandalepas Caic.

Title:

Main Steam Piping GL 87-11 Break Location Determination Reviewed By: Dan Quijano Safety Related Yes W] No El Date: 9/26/2008 1.0 PURPOSE The purpose of this calculation is to establish the locations of intermediate high energy large breaks and leakage cracks utilizing the criteria given in Generic Letter 87-11 and its attachment USNRC Mechanical Engineering Branch Technical Position, MEB 3-1, Revision 2 (Reference 3).

Combined stress tables for the Main Steam piping, between the anchors at containment penetrations P-I and P-2 to HP Turbine Control Valves and to Condensers lSC-1A and 1SC-1B in the Turbine Building (Reference 6), are developed for the sole purpose of determining the locations of intermediate large breaks and leakage cracks in accordance with the combined stress equations defined in Reference 3.

2.0 BACKGROUND

Point Beach Nuclear Plant's (PBNP) licensing basis for High-Energy Line Break (HELB) is documented in the Final Safety Analysis Report (FSAR) (Reference 2, Appendix A.2). Appendix A.2 of the FSAR defines a high-energ_line as a line with design pressure greater than 275 psig and service temperature greater than 2000F. Both conditions have to be satisfied for a line to be designated high-energy. Additional background discussion regarding the BPNP HELB Program and details for establishing HELB break and leakage crack locations criteria (HELB Reconstitution Program) is provided in the AES technical position paper (see Attachment F).

Based on the above high energy line definition, Calculation PBNP-994-21-02 (Reference 8) identifies the Main Steam (MS) System Lines, Main Feedwater Piping, Steam Generator (SG) Blowdown Piping, and Sampling System Lines as high-energy lines (Reference 2, Appendix A.2).

The application of GL 87-11 methods to determine the new intermediate break and leakage crack locations is expected to be beneficial in addressing design concerns related to high energy line break effects. GL 87-11 still requires terminal end circumferential breaks to be postulated irrespective of the combined stress values at these locations.

This calculation determines break and crack locations in the high-energy lines outside containment, based on the combined stress criteria detailed in the GL 87-11 methodology. This calculation does not address the additional postulation of "a single crack, exclusive of stress, at the most severe location with respect to essential equipment" (IE Notice 2000-20, Reference 12), nor does this calculation address the consequences of or evaluate the impacts of breaks or cracks that are required to be postulated based on this criteria.

Form 3.1-3 Rev. 2

Automated Engineering CALCULATION SHEET Page: 6 of 13 Services Corp Calc. No.: PBNP-994-21-05-POI Client: Florida Power & Light Revision: 0 Station: Point Beach Nuclear Plant - Unit 1 Prepared By: Chris Kandalepas Calc.

Title:

Main Steam Piping GL 87-11 Break Location Determination Reviewed By: Dan Quijano Safety Related Yes [I No EL Date: 9/26/2008 3.0 ASSUMPTIONS AND ANALYSIS NOTES Assumptions Piping material, geonmetric data and stress analysis (computer results) given in the AOR(Reference 6) for Main Steam piping are used as input to develop the GL 87-11 combined stress tables that, in turn, are used to determine the intermediate break and leakage crack locations.

Analysis Notes The code of record for this plant is USAS B3 1.1 Power Piping Code, 1967 Edition (Reference 1). The Main Steam piping stress analysis documented in Reference 6 was performed using ASME B&PV Code, Section Ill, SubsectionzNC and ND, 1977 Edition up to and including 1978 Winter Addenda,(Reference 13). The use of this piping analysis Code is documented as acceptable in the Pipe Code Reconciliation Study performed by Impell (see Section 5.1.1 of Reference 10).

Application of the MEB 3.1, Rev. 2 methodology for Class 2 and 3 piping requires combined.stresses to be calculated in accordance with the 1986 ASME Section III, Class 2 requirements (Reference 4). As such, for consistency with the GL 87-11 criteria, additional computer analysis based on the 1986 ASME Section II1 Edition was performed (Reference 6). Stress results obtained from this analysis can be directly used and compared to the threshold limits as discussed in Section 4.0.

The piping between containment penetrations P-I and P-2 and valves IMS-2017A and IMS-2018A respectively was evaluated as seismic category I piping (Reference 6). The piping downstream of the valves is non-seismic, however, two supports in each direction past the seismic category I piping were evaluated as seismic category I supports. This was done to obtain the effect of the non-seismic portion on the seismic category I piping. In order to apply the GL 87-l1 criteria to the non-seismic region pipe stresses, it is necessary to show that the non-seismic supports can withstand the effects of the Operational Basis Earthquake (OBE). Therefore, the non-seismic supports are reviewed in Attachment E and shown to conform to Section 5.8 of DG-M09 (Reference 10).

The pipe stress analysis (Reference 6) calculated combined stresses at 30" tee Node Point 395 that were found to be slightly over the threshold limit for large break. Attachment D of the calculation removed some of the conservatism in the combined stresses by following ASME Section III Code, 1986 Edition and replacing the pressure portion of Equation 9 by the expression provided in Section NC-3651 (a).

Form 3.1-3 Rev. 2

te: 7 of .13 Cale. No.: PBNP-994-21-05-PO1 Client: Florida Power & Light Revision: 0 Station: Point Beach Nuclear Plant - Unit I Prepared By: Chris Kandalepas Cale.

Title:

Main Steam Piping GL 87-11 Break Location Determination Reviewed By: Dan Quijano.

Safety Related Yes [] No El Date: 9/26/2008 4.0 METHODOLOGY AND ACCEPTANCE CRITERIA This calculation uses the GL 87-11 (Reference 3) methodology to determine postulated pipe break and crack locations. The analysis in Reference 6 was performed using ASME B &PV Code,Section III, Subsection NC and ND, 1977 Edition up to and including 1978 Winter Addenda (Reference 13) as the piping code consistent with DG-G09 (Reference 10). For consistency with the GL 87-11 criteria and MEB 3-1, additional computer analysis based on the 1986 ASME Section III was performed (Reference 6). All stress components for the ASME Section III stress combination are obtained from the 1986 ASME Section III analysis.

The following is a discussion of the high-energy line break criteria used to establish the break locations using the GL 87-11 methodology.

4.1 Intermediate Large Breaks The GL 87-11 and MEB 3-I, Revision 2 criteria (Reference 3) for intermediate large breaks is based on the combined stress formula given by the sum of Equations 9 and 10 ofASME B&PV Code Section II, Class 2 and 3 as follows:

B13 PDo/2t + B2 M0)/Z+B 2 MoBE/Z + i MTH/Z >0.8 (1.8 Sh + SA) (1)

In above equation, the first term is the longitudinal pressure stress. The second and third terms represent the stresses due to deadweight and OBE loads cases respectively. The fourth term is the thermal expansion stress. A stress table which summarizes all Node Points that exceed the threshold limit for breaks and cracks was developed and is provided in Attachment A. Based on the results from the pipe stress analysis (Reference 6), stresses are shown for Equation 9 (Level B) and Equation 10.

Local stresses due to IWA's are also included and combined as applicable. The combined stresses are compared to the threshold limits for cracks and breaks.

Where:

P = Design internal pressure, psi Do = Outside diameter of the pipe, in t = Nominal thickness of the pipe, in MDw = Resultant moment due to dead weight, in-lbs MOBE = Resultant moment due to operating basis earthquake, in-lbs MTH = Resultant moment due to thermal expansion, in-lbs Sh = Material allowable stress at temperature, psi SA = Material allowable stress range, 3 psi Z = Section modulus of pipe, in i = stress intensification factor, as given in Figure NC-3673.2(b)-I Bl = primary stress index for pressure stress as given in Table NB-3681(a)-I B2 = primary stress index for bending stresses as given in Table NB-368 1(a)-I Form 3.1-3 Rev. 2

Automated I Page: 8 of 13 Engineering Services Corp Cale. No.: PBNP-994-21-05-POI Client: Florida Power & Light Revision: 0 Station: Point Beach Nuclear Plant - Unit 1 Prepared By: Chris Kandalepas Calc.

Title:

Main Steam Piping GL 87-11 Break Location Determination Reviewed By: Dan Quijano Safety Related Yes [I No EL Date: 9/26/2008 Large intermediate breaks are to be postulated only in locations where the combined stress exceeds the threshold value of 0.8(1.8Sh1 + SA) (Reference 3). The requirements for arbitrary intermediate large breaks are eliminated by Reference 3.

4.2 Circumferential Breaks at Terminal Ends of Main and Branch Lines Terminal Ends The GL 87-11 criteria state that circumferential breaks have to be postulated at terminal ends of the main run as well as the branch piping. Terminal ends of a piping run are defined as the ends terminating at-components, or at other piping (run pipe), or at intermediate anchors. Footnote 3 of MEB 3-1, Rev. 2 provides a definition for the term "terminal ends" which was missing in the Giambusso letter (Reference 5). The footnote defines terminal ends as "Extremities of piping runs that connect to structures, components (e.g., vessels, pumps, valves), or pipe anchors that act as rigid constraints to the piping motion and thermal expansion. A branch connection to a main piping run is a terminal end of the branch run, except where the branch run is classified as part of the main run and is shown to have a significant effect on the main run behavior..."

Terminal ends for the Main Steam piping are summarized on Table 7.1 (Section 7.0).

Branch Lines All branch lines to the Main Steam piping, except the 3" Main Steam piping to anchor EB-8-A 119, the 3" Main Steam piping to anchor EB-8-A 120, and the Main Steam piping to Auxiliary Feedwater Pump 1-P29, have been stress analyzed in Reference 6 along with the Main Steam header piping in a single computer model. The effects of the branch on the main run and vice versa have been automatically included in the overall stress analysis of the MS piping. Therefore, based on the Reference 3 criteria, branch points along the main run need not be considered as terminal ends of the branch line for the purpose of postulating a circumferential large break at these locations if the combined stresses at these locations do not exceed the large break threshold criterion.

4.3 High-Energy Line Leakage Cracks (Small Breaks)

The GL 87-11 and MEB 3-1, Revision 2 criterion for leakage cracks is based on the same combined stress formula given in equation (1) above, except the threshold stress value on the right side of the equation is reduced by one-half as follows:

Bi PD0/2t + B 2 MDw/Z + B2 MOBE/Z + i MTH/Z -Ž0.4 (1.8 Sh + SA) (2)

Leakage cracks are to be postulated in locations where the combined stress exceeds the threshold value of 0.4 (1.8 Sh + SA).

Form 3.1-3 Rev. 2

Automated Engineering CALCULATION SHEET Page: 9 of 13 Services Corp Calc. No.: PBNP-994-21-05-PO I Client: Florida Power & Light Revision: 0 Station: Point Beach N-uclear Plant - Unit I Prepared By- Chris Kandalepas Cale.

Title:

Main Steam Piping GL 87-11 Break Location Determination Reviewed By: Dan Quijano Safety Related Yes No Date: 9/26/2008

5.0 REFERENCES

1. USAS B3 1. 1.0, Power Piping Code, 1967 Edition.

2. PBNP FSAR, Appendix A.2, High Energy Pipe Failure Outside Containment.

3. Generic Letter 87 Relaxation in Arbitrary Intermediate Pipe Rupture Requirements, June 19, 1987

4. ASME Section III B&PV Code, Subsection NC and ND, 1986 Edition.

5. AEC-DOLs Letter to WPS of December 15, 1972 (Mr. Giambusso to Mr. James).

6. Shaw Calculation No. 129187-P-0008, Rev. OA, "Point Beach Unit 1- Main Steam Outside Containment -

Piping Qualification for Extended Power Uprate Conditions".

7. PBNP Accession No. WEI00 107, Piping System Qualification Report for Main Steam Outside Containment to I-1P Turbine Control Valves, Unit I Rev. 0, including Addenda A through D.

8. Calculation No. PBNP-994-21-02, HELB Reconstitution Program-Task 2, High Energy System Selection, Rev. 0.

9. Not Used.

10. DG-M09, Rev. 2, Design Requirements for Piping Stress Analysis.

11. Drawing M-201 Sh. 1, Revision 54, Piping Subsystems P&ID - Main & ReheatSteam System.

12. NRC Information Notice 2000-20, Potential Loss of Redundant Safety Related Equipment Because of the Lack of High Energy Line Break Barriers, 12/11/2000.

13. ASME Section III B&PV Code, Subsection NC and ND, 1977 Edition up to and including 1978 Winter Addenda.

14. Isometric Drawing: P-107 Revision 12, "Main Steam Outside Containment To H.P. Turbine Control Valves and to Condenser 30, 24 EB-l, 24, 18, 16 EB-2 & 1IOB-12".

15. ASME Code Case N-318-5, "Procedure for Evaluation of the Design of Rectangular Cross Section Attachments on Class 2 & 3 Piping," 4/28/94.

16. ASME Code Case N-392-1, "Procedure for Evaluation of the Design of Hollow Circular Cross Section Welded Attachments on Class 2 & 3 Piping," 12/11/89.

17. "Stresses in Elbows Created by Supported Lug Load," T. K. Emera and E. C. Rossow, 1979 PVP Spring Conference 79-PVP-5 1.

Rev. 2 Form 3.1-3 Form 3.1-3 Rev. 2

/_IM Automated Engineering Page: 10 of 13 Services Corp Cale. No.: PBNP-994-21-05-PO1 Client: Florida Power & Light Revision: 0 Station: Point Beach Nuclear Plant - Unit 1 Prepared By: Chris Kandalepas Cafc.

Title:

Main Steam Piping GL 87-11 Break Location Determination Reviewed By: Dan Quijano Safety Related Yes [] No [ Date: 9/26/2008 6.0 GL 87-11 BREAK AND LEAK LOCATION CALCULATIONS As discussed in Section 4.0, the threshold stress limits used by GL 87-11 are determined in accordance with the requirements of ASME Section III Code, for Class 2 and 3 piping. This Section provides additional information on the GL 87-11 method to determine postulated break and crack locations.

6.1 Application of GL 87-11 Criteria The requirements of GL 87-11 (Reference 3) are applied to the Main Steam piping from containment penetrations P-1 and P-2 to H.P.-turbine control valves and condensers lSC-IA and 1SC-IB. There are no intermediate anchors between the containment penetration anchors at Nodes 5 & 7010 and the Turbine Control Valves at Node§ 240& 380.

A stress table which summarizes all Node Points that exceed the threshold limit for breaks and cracks was developed taking piping stress data from Reference 6 computer analyses. The stress table is provided in Attachment A. Based on the results from the pipe stress analysis (Reference 6), stresses are shown for Equation 9 (Level B) and Equation 10. Local stresses due to IWA's are also included and combined as applicable. This information was then used to calculate the combined stress value for comparison to threshold values established per equations (1) and (2) that were defined in Section 4.0.

6.2 Calculation of Local Pipe Stresses due to IWA's The localized stresses developed on the pipe due to integral welded attachments (IWA) are calculated in Attachment C and are superimposed on the pipe stresses calculated by the computer analysis. As discussed in the pipe stress analysis guidelines DG-M09 (Reference 10) the specific methodology used to calculate IWA stresses uses as a guide the applicable Code Cases (such as N-318 and 392), Welding Research Council Bulletins or Finite Element Analysis as appropriate.

The IWA calculations are not intended to evaluate the IWA's or the weld between the IWA and the pipe, but rather calculate the local stresses for use in evaluating HELB point locations in accordance with Section 4.0 of this calculation. The local stresses are added to the piping system stresses to obtain the combined stresses and compare them to the threshold stress limits (see pipe stress table in Attachment A).

Form 3.1-3 Rev. 2

Automated Engineering Page: 11 of 13 Services Corp Cale. No.: PBNP-994-21-05-P01 Client: Florida Power & Light Revision: 0 Station: Point Beach Nuclear Plant - Unit 1 Prepared By: Chris Kandalepas Cale.

Title:

Main Steam Piping GL 87-11 Break Location Determination Reviewed By: Dan Quijano Safety Related Yes N-X- No E Date: 9/26/2008 7.0 RESULTS & CONCLUSIONS Results The Main Steam lines between the containment penetration anchors P-I and P-2 and the H.P. Turbine Control Valves and Condensers ISC-1A & 1SC-l B including branch lines (Ref. 6) have been evaluated for break and crack locations following the requirements and criteria of Generic Letter GL 87-11.

Large Breaks Terminal end circunferential breaks are to be postulated at the terminal ends of the main steam lines at the penetration anchors inside containment and at the H.P. Turbine Control-Valves. The terminal ends of the 6" lines to Condensers ISC-IA & ISC-I B also require large breaks to be postulated. Locations where large breaks are required to be postulated are summarized in Table 7.1 below.

As seen from the stress tables in Attachment A, there is a single location where the combined stresses exceed the Intermediate Large Break Limits, and as such, this location requires large break to be postulated. This location is also summarized in Table 7.1 below.

Table 7.1 - Postulated Larize Breaks at Terminal Ends and Intermediate Locations Break Location Node Point Notes 30" MS header at Containment Penetrations P-l& P-2 7010, 5 Terminal Ends Turbine Stop Valves 240, 380 Terminal Ends 8" & 6" branch lines from MS relief header (from 7070,8000, Terminal Ends lHX-lA) 8030,8060, 9055 8" & 6" branch lines from MS relief header (from 25016,25017, Terminal Ends IHX-IB) 25018,25019, 23020 Inlet side of control valves to condenser ISC-IA 630,725,825, Terminal Ends 925 Inlet side of control valves to condenser ISC-1B 2070,3065, Terminal Ends 4070,5065 3" MS to Auxiliary FW Pumps 16,7018 Terminal Ends 16" Elbow upstream of control valve lMS-2057 920 Intermediate Break All postulated large breaks at terminal ends and intermediate locations are shown on Drawing No. SK-MS-FIG. 1 (Attachment B)

Form 3.1-3 Rev. 2

Page: 12 of 13 Calc. No.: PBNP-994-21-05-P0 I Client: Florida Power & Light Revision: 0 Station: Point Beach Nuclear Plant - Unit 1 Prepared By: Chris Kandalepas Calc.

Title:

Main Steam Piping GL 87-11 Break Location Determination Reviewed By: Dan Quijano Safety Related Yes NI No 1i Date: 9/26/2008 Leakage Cracks (Small Breaks)

Leakage cracks need to be postulated at locations where the combined stress exceeds the threshold limits as shown in the stress table (Attachment A). Locations where leakage cracks are required to be postulated are summarized in Table 7.2 below.

Table 7.2 - Leakage Crack (Small Break) Locations Main Steam Lines Crack Location Node Point Notes 30" Pipe riser at supports EB-l-H3 & EB-1-H15 120,6010 30"x24" eccentric reducers 155,305 Outlet of check valve IMS-2017A 140 24" Elbow north of 24" Tee .290 24"x 18" eccentric reducer 437 6" Elbow (2"o elbow upstream of IMS-2054) 600 6" Elbows (3 elbows upstream of I MS-2055) 701,702,703,710,720, 6" Elbow (40" elbow upstream of IMS-2056) 770 6" Elbows (2 elbows upstream of lMS-2056) 802,810,820 6" Elbows (4 elbows upstream of l MS-2057) 870,880,890,900,901, 902,903,910,920 16" Elbow end (Ist elbow from 24x 16 tee) 1010 6" Elbow (2n" elbow upstream of IMS-2050) 2035 6" Elbows (2 elbows upstream of IMS-205 1) 3025,3030,3045 6" Elbow (2"4 elbow upstream of IMS-2052) 4030,4035,4040 6" Elbow (2 elbows upstream of IMS-2053) 5030,5035,5040,5045 5055 6"x3/4" branch conn. upstream of control valves 628,722,823,922,2068, 3062,4068,5062 6"Pipe upstream of 6"x3/4" branch connection 5060 30" Pipe riser (at support EB- I-H202) 6002,6001 Both ends of check valve IMS-2018A 390,385 24" Elbow & Pipe by HP Turb. Stop Valve IMS-2027 375,378 30" Tees by check valves IMS-2017A & IMS-201 8A 395,130 30" Tee near Penetration P-1 7000 30x30x24 Tees downstream of check valves 1MS-2017A 300,145

& IMS-2018A 24" Tee 275 24x24x16 Tee 415 16x 16x6 Tess at 6" lines to Condensers 550,555,557,565,1085, 1090,1095 Form 3.1-3 Rev. 2

Page: 13 of 13 Calc. No.: PBNP-994-21-05-PO1 Client: Florida Power & Light Revision: 0 Station: Point Beach Nuclear Plant - Unit 1 Prepared By: Chris Kandalepas Cale.

Title:

Main Steam Piping GL 87-11 Break Location Determination Reviewed By: Dan Quijano Safety Related Yes [] No LI Date: 9/26/2008 Conclusions An evaluation of the MS lines from containment penetrations P-I and P-2 to the respective H.P. Turbine Control Valves and Condensers lSC-IA & lSC-IB using the GL 87-11 and its associated USNRC Branch Technical Position MEB 3.1, Rev. 2 (Reference 3) is described in this calculation. The calculation shows that:

" No intermediate stress related and arbitrary large breaks are required to be postulated for the Main Steam header piping. An intermediate stress related large break is required to be postulated on the 6" line to condenser ISC-IA (Node Point 920just upstream of the terminal point at control valve IMS-2057).

• Circumferential large breaks are required to be postulated at the terminal ends as shown in Table 7.1.

" Leakage cracks (break size = 2 times the pipe wall thickness x Y2 the pipe internal diameter) are required to be postulated at the locations summarized in Table 7.2.

This calculation does not address the postulation of a single crack, exclusive of stress, at the most severe location with respect to essential equipment (IE Notice 2000-20, Reference 12), nor does this calculation address the consequences or evaluate the impacts of breaks or cracks that are required to be postulated based on this criteria.

Rev. 2 3.1-3 Form 3.1-3 Rev. 2

Calc. No. PBNP-994-21-05-P01, Rev. 0 Attachment A, Page Al of A3 Prepared by: Chris Kandalepas Checked by: Dan Quiiano Stress Table for Main Steam System - Unit I MS from Containment Penetration P-1 & P-2 to H.P. Turbine Control Valves and to Condenser (Based on analysis results from Shaw Group Pipe Analysis, Reference 6)

Input Data from Analysis .9B Eq. 10 Ratio Ratio Outside Pipe Pipe IWA Pipe IWA Comb. Limit Limit = COMMENTS NODES dia. thickness Stress Stress Stress Stress Stress for for Comb. St. Comb. St.

Do (in) t.(in) psi psi psi psi psi Crack Break Crack Limit Break Limit 120 30 0.908 10743 7830 1343 7367 27283 19800 39600 1.3779 0.6890 IWA (EB-1-H3) 140 30 0.908 11422 .... 10150 21572 19800 39600 1,.0895 0.5447 Valve IMS-2017A end 150 30 0.908 20774 9033 29807 19800 39600 1.5054 0.7527 30x24 Ecc. Reducer 155 24 0.968 16999 13448 30447 19800 39600 1.5377 0.7689 30x24 Ecc. Reducer 160 24 0.968 16997 13253 30250 19800 39600 1.5278 0.7639 30x24 Ecc. Reducer 240 24 0.968 10306 10550 20856 19800 39600 1.0533 0.5267 HP Turb. Stop Valve 290 24 0.968 9966 12958 10723 0 33647 19800 39600 1.6993 0.8497 24" Elbow, IWA(EB-1-H14....

437 18 0.750 18099 6534 24633 19800 39600 1.2441 0.6220 24x18 Ecc. Reducer 438 18 0.750 17996 6396 24392 19800 39600 1.2319 0.6160 24x18 Ecc. Reducer 560 16 0.656 7364 3200 744 2912 14220 19800 39600 0.7182 0.3591 IWA (EB-2-H9) 600 6.625 0.280 7747 5396 5439 3234 21816 19800 39600 1.1018 0.5509 6" Elbow, IWA(EB-2-H10) 628 6.625 0.280 14895 6943 21838 19800 39600 1.1029 0.5515 6x3/4 Branch Conn.

630 6.625 0.280 15567 7505 23072 19800 39600 1.1653 0.5826 Valve MS-2054 end 701 6.625 0.280 19537 7949 27486 19800 39600 1.3882 0.6941 6" Elbow End 702 6.625 0.280 18985 5396 8077 3234 35692 119800 39600 1.8026 0.9013 6" Elbow, IWA(EB-2-H11) 703 6.625 0.280 18384 7539 25923 19800 39600 1.3092 0.6546 6" Elbow End 710 6.625 0.280 17786 11245 29031 19800 39600 1.4662 0.7331 6" Elbow End 720 6.625 0.280 21781 11743 33524 19800 39600 1.6931 0.8466 6" Elbow End 722 6.625 0.280 13764 9105 22869 19800 39600 1.1550 0.5775 6x3/4 Branch Conn.

725 6.625 0.280 14818 8660 23478 19800 39600 1.1858 0.5929 Valve MS-2055 end 770 6.625 0.280 6025 14487 20512 19800 39600 1.0360 - 0.5180 6" Elbow End 802 6.625 0.280 10775 5396 6955 3234 26360 19800 39600 1.3313 0.6657 6" Elbow, [WA(EB-2-H12) 810 6.625 0.280 11942 11279 23221 19800 39600 1.1728 0.5864 6" Elbow End 820 6.625 0.280 10734 11634 22368 19800 39600 1.1297 0.5648 6" Elbow End 823 6.625 0.280 15835 5919 21754 19800 39600 1.0987 0.5493 6x3/4 Branch Conn.

825 6.625 0.280 16542 6436 22978 19800 39600 1.1605 0.5803 Valve MS-2056 end 870 6.625 0.280 8557 18992 27549 19800 39600 1.3914 0.6957 6" Elbow End 880 6.625 0.280 6578 16080 22658 19800 39600 1.1443 0.5722 6" Elbow End 890 6.625 0.280 18405 5088 23493 19800 39600 1.1865 0.5933 6" Elbow End 900 6.625 0.280 17794 5033 22827 19800 39600 1.1529 0.5764 6" Elbow End 901 6.625 0.280 16685 7948 24633 19800 39600 1.2441 0.6220 6" Elbow End 902 6.625 0.280 17349 5396 8235 3234 34214 19800 39600 1.7280 0.8640 6" Elbow, IWA(EB-2-H13) 903 6.625 0.280 15792 7516 23308 19800 39600 1.1772 0.5886 6" Elbow End 910 6.625 0.280 22278 14035 36313 19800 39600 1.8340 0.9170 6" Elbow End 920 6.625 0.280 25774 14702 40476 19800 39600 2.0442 1.0221 6' Elbow End 922 6.625 0.280 14935 11415 26350 19800 39600 1.3308 0.6654 6x3W4 Branch Conn.

925 6.625 0.280 15837 10892 26729 ;19800 39600 1.3499 0.6750 Valve 1MS-2057 end 1010 16 0.656 9718 10237 19955 19800 39600 1.0078 0.5039 16" Elbow End 2005 16 0.656 6995 2530 0 1963 11488 19800 39600 0.5802 0.2901 IWA (EB-2-H18)

Calc. No. PBNP-994-21-05-P01, Rev. 0 Attachment A, Page A2 of A3 Prepared by: Chris Kandalepas Checked by: Dan Quimano Stress Table for Main Steam System - Unit 1 MS from Containment Penetration P-1 & P-2 to H.P. Turbine Control Valves and to Condenser (Based on analysis results from Shaw Group Pipe Analysis, Reference 6)

Input Data from Analysis Eq. 9B Eq. 10 Ratio Ratio Outside Pipe Pipe IWA Pipe IWA Comb. Limit Limit = = COMMENTS NODES dia. thickness Stress Stress Stress Stress Stress for for Comb. St Comb. St Do (in) tn (in) psi psi psi psi psi Crack Break Crack Limit Break Limit 2035 6.625 0.280 12400 3108 6527 1477 23512 19800 39600 1.1875 0.5937 6" Elbow, IWA(EB-2-H19) 2068 6.625 0.280 10825 10675 21500 19800 39600 1.0859 0.5429 6x314 Branch Conn.

2070 6.625 0.280 10939 11360 22299 19800 39600 1.1262 0.5631 Valve 1MS-2050 end 3025 6.625 0.280 13210 9287 22497 19800 39600 1.1362 0.5681 6" Elbow End 3030 6.625 0.280 10280 3108 7432 1477 22297 19800 39600 1.1261 0.5631 6" Elbow, IWA(EB-2-H20) 3045 6.625 0.280 15875 6717 22592 19800 39600 1.1410 0.5705 6" Elbow End 3062 6.625 0.280 23746 9155 32901 19800 39600 1.6617 0.8308 6x3/4 Branch Conn.

3065 6.625 0.280 26243 10570 36813 19800 39600 1,8592 0.9296 Valve 1MS-2051 end 4030 6.625 0.280 12467 8005 20472 19800 39600 1.0339 0.5170 6" Elbow End 4035 6.625 0.280 12636 3108 8446 1477 25667 19800 39600 1.2963 0.6482 6" Elbow, IWA(EB-2-H21) 4040 6.625 0.280 11537 8265 19802 19800 39600 1.0001 0.5001 6" Elbow End 4068 6.625 0.280 10107 12850 22957 19800 39600 1.1594 0.5797 6x3/4 Branch Conn.

4070 6.625 0.280 10262 13682 23944 19800 39600 1.2093 0.6046 Valve 1MS-2052 end 5030 6.625 0.280 12438 10259 22697 19800 39600 1.1463 0.5732 6" Elbow End 5035 6.625 0.280 13039 3108 10918 1477 28542 19800 39600 1.4415 0.7208 6" Elbow, IWA(EB-2-H22) 5040 6.625 0.280 13559 10449 24008 19800 39600 1.2125 0.6063 6" Elbow End 5045 6.625 0.280 15717 9348 25065 19800 39600 1.2659 0.6330 6" Elbow End 5055 6.625 0.280 11947 9040 20987 19800 39600 1.0599 0.5300 6" Elbow End 5060 6.625 0.280 15997 4919 20916 19800 39600 1.0564 0.5282 6" Pipe 5062 6.625 0.280 22743 9756 32499 19800 39600 1.6414 0.8207 6x314 Branch Conn.

5065 6.625 0.280 25021 11419 36440 19800 39600 1.8404 0.9202 Valve lMS-2053 end 6010 30 0.908 1.1030 8253 4185 8584 32052 19800 39600 1.6188 0.8094 IWA (EB-1-H15) 6002 30 0.908 12309 ._ 8294 20603 19800 39600 1.0406 0.5203 30" Pipe 6001 30 0.908 12558 9257 21815 19800 39600 1.1018 0.5509 30" Pipe 6000 30 0.908 12576 9691 22267 19800 39600 1:1246 0.5523 30" Pipe 400 30 0.908 12590 9909 22499 19800 " 39600 1.1363 0.5682 30" Pipe 390 30 0.908 12062 14203 26265 19800 39600 1,.3265 0.6633 30"Valve (MS-2018 385 30 0.908 11506 10389 21895 19800 39600 1.1058 0.5529 30" Valve (MS-2018) 305 30 0.908 21622 8910 30532 19800 39600 1.5420 0.7710 30x24 Ecc. Reducer 310 24 0.968 18034 12947 30981 19800 39600 1.5647 0.7823 30x24 Ecc. Reducer 375 24 0.968 8982 12266 21248 19800 39600 1.0731 0.5366 24" Elbow 378 24 0.968 11030 10964 21994 19800 39600 1.1108 0.5554 24" Pipe 380 24 0.968 12089 12857 24946 19800 39600 1.2599 0.6299 HP Turb. Stop Valve 9921 3.5 0,216 5707 1160 207 314 7388 19800 39600 0.3731 0.1866 IWA (EB-1-H201) 9974 3.5 0.216 5637 1160 200 314 7311 19800 39600 0.3692 0.1846 IWA (EB-1-H200) 7000 30 0.908 22320 1453 23773 19800 39600 1.2007 0.6003 30" Tee 395 30 0.908 See Note 38895 19800 39600 1.9644 0.9822 30" Tee 300 24 0.968 22676 9769 32445 19800 39600 1.6386 0.8193 30x30o24 Tee 130 30 0.908 17873 6564 24437 19800 39600 1.2342 0.6171 30" Tee

Calc. No. PBNP-994-21-05-PO1, Rev. 0 Attachment A, Page A3 of A3 Prepared by: Chris Kandalepas Checked by: Dan Quiiano Stress Table for Main Steam System - Unit I MS from Containment Penetration P-1 & P-2 to H.P. Turbine Control Valves and to Condenser (Based on analysis results from Shaw Group Pipe Analysis, Reference 6)

Input Data from Analysis Eq. 9B Eq. 10 Ratio Ratio Outside Pipe Pipe IWA Pipe IWA Comb. Limit Limit = - COMMENTS NODES dia. thickness Stress Stress Stress Stress Stress for for Comb. St Comb. St.

Do (in) t, (in) psi psi psi psi psi Crack Break Crack Limit Break Limit 145 24 0.968 20693 9784 30477 19800 39600 1.5392 0.7696 30x30x24 Tee 275 24 0.968 17273 6579 23852 19800 39600 1.2046 0.6023 24" Tee 415 16 0.656 19087 5887 24974 19800 39600 1.2613 0.6307 24x24x16 Tee 550 6.625 0.280 17305 6499 23804 19800 39600 1.2022 0.6011 16x1 6x6 Tee 555 6.625 0.280 22906 7343 30249 19800 39600 1.5277 0.7639 16x1 6x6 Tee 557 6.625 0.280 15342 7606 22948 19800 39600 1.1590 0.5795 16x1 6x6 Tee 565 6.625 0.280 15263 8847 24110 19800 39600 1.2177 0.6088 16xl 6x6 Tee 1085 6.625 0.280 24844 3277 28121 19800 39600 1.4203 0.7101 16x16x6 Tee 1090 6.625 0.280 20468 2872 23340 19800 39600 1.1788 0.5894 16x16x6 Tee 1095 6.625 0.280 18791 3027 1 21818 19800 39600 1.1019 0.5510 16x16x6 Tee Note: Combined stresses at Node Point 395 are as shown in Attachment D.

Y Z'L X (SOUTH) 4ý3 J'u POINT BEACH NUCLEAR PLANT LEGEND- MAIN STEAM SYSTEM, UNIT I OUTSIDE CONTAINMENT TO HP TURBINE DENOTES POSTULATED PIPE LINE BREAK. CONTROL.VALVES & TO CONDENSERS ACCESSION NO, WE-1l0107 O - DENOTES BREAK NODE NUMBER.

SUBSYSTEM 30'-EB-I AM ZZI AUTOMATED ENGINEERING SERVICES CORP.

POSTULATED LINEBREAKS; ISOMETRIC 40 SH4UM BL.VD SUWE220, WHPE*tL,IL 00503 I0 ,SK-MS-FIG.1

Automated Engineering CALCULATION SHEET Page: Cl of C24 Services Corp Attachment C Cale. No.: PBNP-994-21-05-PO1 Client: Florida Power & Light Revision: 0 Station: Point Beach Nuclear Plant - Unit 1 Prepared By: Chris Kandalepas Cale.

Title:

Main Steam Piping GL 87-11 Break Location Determination Reviewed By: Dan Quijano Safety Related Yes [I No LI Date: 9/26/2008 CALCULATION OF LOCAL PIPE STRESSES AT INTEGRAL PIPE ATTACHMENTS The localized stresses developed on the pipe due to integral welded attachments (IWA) are calculated below and shall be superimposed on the pipe stresses calculated by the computer analysis.

As discussed in the pipe stress analysis guidelines (DG-M09, Ref. 10) the specific methodology used to calculate IWA stresses uses as a guide the applicable Code Cases (such as N-318 and N-392),

Welding Research Council Bulletins or Finite Element Analysis as appropriate. ASME Code Cases N-318-5 (Ref. 15) and N-392-1 (Ref 16) are used to calculate the local stresses due to shear lugs and hollow circular attachments respectively since these are the latest versions of the applicable Code Cases. Since the Code does not provide a criteria for analyzing pipe elbows with integral lugs, the method for calculating local stresses due to elbow lugs is in accordance with Reference 17.

The calculations below are not intended to evaluate the IWA's or the weld between the IWA and the pipe, but rather calculate the local stresses for use in evaluating HELB point locations in accordance with Section 4.0 of this calculation. The local stresses from the IWA analysis are added to the piping system stresses (Reference 6) using ASME B&PV Code Section III, Class 2 and 3, Equations 9 plus 10 to obtain the combined stresses and compare them to the threshold stress limits as given in Equations 1 and 2 in Section 4 (see pipe stress table in Attachment A).

Form 3.1-3 Rev. 2

Automated Engineering CALCULATION SHEET Page: C2,of C24

- Services Corp Attachment C Calc. No.: PBNP-994-21-05-POI Client: Florida Power & Light Revision: 0 Station: Point Beach Nuclear Plant - Unit 1 Prepared By: Chris Kandalepas Calc.

Title:

Main Steam Piping GL 87-11 Break Location Determination Reviewed By: Dan Quijano Safety Related Yes t] No El Date: 9/26/2008 Suppoit No. EB-1-H3 (Drawing P-307 Sh. 62A-62C):

Q:=30.0 in R0 := 0.5l)o R,= 15 in t.

t 0.908 in r = 14.546in 2

L, :=0.5 3.0in L,= 1.5in L2=0.5-3,Oin L2 .5in KL :=3.6 J, := mnin(t,-Lz2)c Lb = 0.908iri w := 0.375in Lb  :=Min(t, LI) Lb =0.908in Lr l.Sin Ld := ma{Lj,LQ2 ~d= i.5in Eq. 8 Eq. 9B Eq. 9C Eq. 9D Eq. 10 Peak**

",= I I I 112131 I I I 4J5~ lb III 01 01 01 01 01 01 Q,=H 1 2 3 V 4 I

- i 6 .:: lb 154481 213281 272091 01 111481 0I

?'f Jvq, -

-I ý.I I1I2 2 l I[ 6 I IU nI L

III 01 0 01 oI 01 01 Note: Loads are based on two lugs active (conservative). Shear lugs are welded to the clamp.

MA/Z (MA+M B/Z) (MA+M BIZ) (MA+M B/Z) Mc/Z Pstre~ss I I 1 2 7 3 1 5 .i*s: 1 no 11O I 0: 0 0 0 P:= 0.psi Pmax:= 0.psi (Note: Stress due to pressure is included in above pipe stresses)

Rev. 2 Form 3.1-3 3.1-3 Rev. 2

Automated Engineering CALCULATION SHEET Page: C3 of C24 Services Corp Attachment C Calc. No.: PBNP-994-21-05-PO0 Client: Florida Power & Light Revision: 0 Station: Point Beach Nuclear Plant - Unit 1 Prepared By: Chris Kandalepas Cale.

Title:

Main Steam Piping GL 87-11 Break Location Determination Reviewed By: Dan Quijano Safety Related Yes [N] No EL Date: 9/26/2008 Limitations 7 := -r y=16.02 < 50 OK P32= 0.103 < 0.5 OK t

L, l2 0.02 03 :=

3t= 0.103 < 0.5 OK < 0.075 OK ATTACI-IMENT PROPERTIES A1 := 4.L.L 2 A, = 9in2 3

ZIL = 4.5in ZIL:- . (ý)(L,4'1) 3 ZIN := (4)(LI2I. 2) ZIN = 4.5in 3 STRESS INDICES i:= L..3

¢2.2* 4 ' 0.0 ",5 "

A,, 0 = 50 dg Xo:= -0.45 Y.:= -0.55 1.8 40 -0.75 [.-0.60

(-0.94" SX,= ,+ Iog(o31) (-0 '9)' Y, : YO+ Iog(P 2 ) Y= -1.54 Xi= 1j.I4J S-1.59J 11ii:= -(x1 .,Cos(0 ) + Y 1 .isin(o0)) - ( ) .(Xsin(01 ) - yi,Cas(Oi))7 2 2=

q,[,2/

CT :=rna43.82 y 6.f fl3 2.(6 1)1.54, 1] Cr = 6.13 Br: 11a{3..Gr, 1) Br = 4.087 C1,: mna40.26y 0012 o( 2)47, d] CL = 1.18 BL:=m4{3CLI 1) BL= 1.00 CN := 111a40. 38y19.013. P2.(11 3 )3.4, ] CN = L.47 BN = 1.00 Form 3.1-3 Rev. 2

Automated Engineering CALCULATION SHEET Page: C4 of C24 Services Corp Attachment C Calc. No.: PBNP-994-21-05-PO1 Client: Florida Power & Light Revision: 0 Station: Point Beach Nuclear Plant - Unit I Prepared By: Chris Kandalepas Cale.

Title:

Main Steam Piping GL 87-11 Break Location Determination Reviewed By: Dan Quijano Safety Related Yes [I No El Date: 9/26/2008 LOCAL STRESSES j := 1.. 4 Eq. 8 Eq. 98 Eq. 9C Eq. 9D BT'W 1 ,j BLML Q2 j S4-j: -+

S.t 1 5671 27830 3 psi I" AI Z1L 2"L2 .Lb 99890 CT'W 1, 5 CL'ML1,5 Q2l,'

5,,=- + -, + 2.L , Snl = 4092.51 lpsi Range Al Z1L 2 -Lb Sp, = 14733.04psi Range CT-W 1 6 CL'MLI 6 +, ,6 2+

1,6 Peak**

A, ZIL 2.L2-, Snlee = 0psi MODIFIED CODE EQUATIONS B1 := 0.5 B2:= 1.0 for straight pipe EQ. 8 13--2 + Pstrtss + Sni = 5671psi 2-t 1,1 1,1 EQ. (9B) 132-t + Pstrýsl,2 + Stma1,2 = 7830psi EQ. (9C)

B 3-1 + Pstress + Stll, 9989psi 2t 1,3 1,3 EQ. (10) pstress 1 + LI=7367psi Form 3.1-3 Rev. 2

Engineering CALCULATION SHEET Page: C5 of C24 I/ Automated Services Corp Attachment C Cale. No.: PBNP-994-21-OS-Pol Client: Florida Power & Light Revision: 0 Station: Point Beach Nuclear Plant - Unit 1 Prepared By: Chris Kandalepas Cale.

Title:

Main Steam Piping GL 87-11 Break Location Determination Reviewed By: Dan Quijano Safety Related Yes 0 No 0 Date: 9/26/2008 Support No. EB-2-H9 (Drawing P-307 Sh. 16A-16B):

Geometry Input D,:= 16.0 in R,=0.5-D, Ro= 8 in t := 0.656 in r = 7.672in Do ttajpt Ru 2

L, 0.5.0.5in L,=0.25in ML~

L2 0.5 3.0in L2= I.5in KL 3.6 iL,=-0:656in

+:=min(t,I,)

w:= 0.25in L4,= 0,25in L,:= min(Lj,L.2 ) L~,= 0.25in Ld:= mar(L1, ) L~j = 1.5 in j:= 1..6 Eq. 8 Eq. 9B Eq. 9C Eq. 9D Eq. 10 Peak**

w=I.:IL LXJI 21314:I 5;::: 61." lb 1l1 21971 28961 3951 01 9761 111 0 0 0 0 0 01 ML = . 2 3 4 5 6  : b.in 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 MA/Z (MA+MB/Z) (MA+MB/Z) (MA+MB/Z) Mc/Z 1 2 3... "psi Pstress 01 0 O,0 0:

I l 01 01 1 01 P := 0, psi Pnax:= 0 psi (Note: Stress due to pressure is included in above pipe stresses)

Form 3.1-3 Rev. 2

/U k Automated Engineering CALCULATION SHEET Page: C6 of C24 Se-vices Corp Attachment C Calc. No.: PBNP-994-21-05-POI Client: Florida Power & Light Revision: 0 Station: Point Beach Nuclear Plant - Unit I Prepared By: Chris Kandalepas Cale.

Title:

Main Steam Piping GL 87-11 Break Location Determination Reviewed By: Dan Quijano Safety Related Yes 1] No E Date: 9/26/2008 Limitations 02:= --

y y=ll.7 < 50 OK P2 =0.196 < 0,5 OK t

r EL "I -:- 0.033 < 0.5 OK < 0.075 OK P1-P2 = 0.006 ATTACHMENT PROPERTIES 2

A1 := 4.LI.L2 A, = 1.5in 3

ZIL 0.75in ZiL: 3D(L,.2,)

3 Z N = 0.125in STRESS INDICES i:= L..3 (2.2' 40 Ao:= 2.0 0:= 50 .deg X.:= --070.0 0.5 o---0 0.05

.55 1..--0.75J .- 0.60) 11.8) 40

-1.4*0

-16 X, --= Y + log(p,) X, = -1.94 Y,:ý+ Iog(p 2 ) =Y r -2.24)

Y,-1 2 qi: -(xX,.,Cos (0i) + Y,.,sin(0 i)) - A0~I.( X,,sin(oj) - Y,.,Cos(0i))2 na381'.64 (i)154L CT =2.5 B7 = 1.657 CL: ina{0.26y1 .4 P-2 (,,)4.74,, C1, = 1.00 BL=na{3.CL. i BL = 1,00 CN: inafO.3R'yl . Pi . P2.(TI )3.4] CN = 1.00 1N=M43 .CN. I) BN = 1.00 Rev. 2 Formn Form 3.1-3 Rev. 2

AM Automated Page: C7 of C24 Engineering CALCULATION SHEET Services Corp Attachment C Cale. No.: PBNP-994-21-05-POI Client: Florida Power & Light Revision: 0 Station: Point Beach Nuclear Plant - Unit I Prepared By: Chris Kandalepas Calc.

Title:

Main Steam Piping GL 87-11 Break Location Determination Reviewed By: Dan Quijano Safety Related Yes [*] No L Date: 9/26/2008 LOCAL STRESSES j:= L.,4 Eq. 8 Eq. 9B Eq. 9C Eq. 9D Br'WI,j BL.MLIli Q2 1,j Stlli Il A, A, + ZI,, + 1 2.L 2 "Le S ill1.1 24271 :232001

39721 psi 0

Cr-W1 CL-ML . Q2 1 1'5 + 1,5 Snl = 1617.55Cpsi Range A, ZIL 2. L 2 .Lb s =KI,- S.11 Sp, = 5823.2psi Range 5

niee =0Psi Peak**

Snc. Al Z1f, 2.L-2.Lb MODIFIED CODE EOUATIONS B, := 0.5 B2 := 1.0 for straight pipe EQ. 8 P.D 0 B1B 2-*t 3.- +

+ sres,I + Still Pstress Stl,1 = 2427psi EQ. (9B)

BI, + Pstress + SM = 3200psi 2.t 1,2 1,2 EQ. (9C)

P-D.

13--- + Pstress +SmI = 3972psi 2t 1,3 1,3 EQ. (10) 5,,,

Pstress 1 + - = 2912psi Rev. 2 3.1-3 Form 3.1-3 Rev. 2

Automated Engineering CALCULATION SHEET Page: C8 of C24 Services Corp Attachment C Calc. No.: PBNP-994-21-05-POI Client: Florida Power & Light Revision: 0 Station: Point Beach Nuclear Plant - Unit 1 Prepared By: Chris Kandalepas Calc.

Title:

Main Steam Piping GL 87-11 Break Location Determination Reviewed By: Dan Quijano Safety Related Yes 0' No El Date: 9/26/2008 Support No. EB-1-H1I5 (Drawing P-307 Sh. 63A-63C):

Geometry Input D,:= 30.0 in R,:=O0.5 D, R,=15i D. -t t := 0.908 in r = 14.546in Run -Pij-2 L,0.5 3,0in L, = 1.5in 1ý 0.5 3,Oin L2= 1.5iii KL: =3.6 .=rnin(t, 1,)

-L L,,-=O.908in w := 0,375n 4=Min(t, L, 4= O.908in L,=mir(Li ,L2) L,~= I.5in Ld := na(L1 ,L12) Ld= 1.5in j:= 1..6 Eq. 8 Eq. 9B Eq. 9C Eq. 9D Eq. 10 Peak**

W 0:

I : 2 :2 ý3 O " A"-6:::

"0 [ 5 :!I 6:bl": j b F~1ý 712 - . 6 lb 1* 167001 224821 282621 01 129911 l0 ML ' 1:ý. 2 .ý J 4 6 Ib-in 1 00 00 0 Note: Loads are based on two lugs active (conservative). Shear lugs are welded to the clamp.

MA/Z (MA+MB/Z) (MA+MB/Z) (MA+MB/Z) Mc/Z 2 , .

-' psi 01 ol P : O.psi Prnax:= Opsi (Note: Stress due to pressure is included in above pipe stresses)

Form 3.1-3 Rev. 2

Automated Engineering CALCULATION SHEET Page: C9 of C24 Services Corp Attachment C Calc. No.: PBNP-994-21-05-POI Client: Florida Power & Light Revision: 0 Station: Point Beach Nuclear Plant - Unit I Prepared By: Chris Kandalepas Cale.

Title:

Main.Steam Piping GL 87-11 Break Location Determination Reviewed By: Dan Quijano Safety Related Yes NZ No E Date: 9/26/2008 Limitations

£2 2

=- r y= 16.0 < 50 OK P2 :=2 P2 = 0.103 < 0.5 OK t r I~.

I35:=- Lr 01 = 0.103 < 0.5 OK P1rP2 = 0.011 < 0.075 OK ATTACHMENT PROPERTIES A, := 4-1,,IL A, = 9in2 3

ZIL.<J(4)(LI.L 22) Z,,=4.5 in 3

ZIN : ý (".2 ZIN = 4.5in STRESS INDICES i:= 1..3 r22 40, ( 0.0 "* r 0,05" A. 2.80 deg X. -0.45] Y. -0.55 40 408 -0.75) -0.60

(-0.99" X =X,+ iog(PO 1 X, = ý-1.44, Y, := Y0 + log(p 2 )

- 54 11i=-X, 04j)+ Y, .sin(0i)) - I(..L(xi .Sin(0j) - Y, cos(oi))2 Cr = 6.13 B-r= 4.087 CL ma0f o26y cL= 1.18

= . 1'0 .(,2)4.74,] Br

= m4(3 CN., I)

BL = 1.00 CN= mab.38'y 1, 2

.P '(1) , f] CN = 1.47 BN = 1,00 Rev. 2 Form 3.1-3 Form 3.1-3 Rev. 2

Automated Engineering CALCULATION SHEET Page: CIO of C24 Services Corp Attachment C Cale. No.: PBNP-994-21-05-PO1 Client: Florida Power & Light Revision: 0 Station: Point Beach Nuclear Plant - Unit 1 Prepared By: Chris Kandalepas Calc.

Title:

Main Steam Piping GL 87-11 Break Location Determination Reviewed By: Dan Quijano Safety Related Yes [] No LI Date: 9/26/2008 LOCAL STRESSES j:= 1..4 Eq. 8 Eq. 9B Eq. 9C Eq. 9D

.BT'WI1 j BL.MLI Q21, Stl . - + + Q ,j S.1 =I I 3* 2 3 4,:]psi Ij A1 ZIL 2.L2-Lb 111 61311 82 531 103751 0I I I I CQ'W1 ,5, CL'MLi,5 Q2 ,5 S l .- + + Sl=4769.09psi Range A, ZIL 2.,L2 .Lb SD1 := KL'S~j Range

~=

Sp, Opsi7-)s S CTW, + 1c-Mý

,6 + 1,6

+ 2.L 2 -L,, Peak**

- Al1 ee"-+ Zlr, A

MODIFIED CODE EOUATIONS B1 := 0.5 B2 := 1.0 for straight pipe EQ. 8 P, D, B 1 .- + Pstres, 5

+ S+iI, = 6131psi 2.t EQ. (9B)

P.D. +

Bi.-- PStress + Sl, = 8253psi 2Et 1,2 1 ,2 EQ. (90)

D. sress +Stl 2.t = 10375psi 1,3 1,3 EQ. (10)

PStrCsst +

15 2 = 8584psi Form 3.1-3 Rev. 2

-/ lM Automated Engineering CALCULATION SHEET Page: ClI of C24 Services Corp Attachment C Calc. No.: PBNP-994-21-05-PO1 Client: Florida Power & Light Revision: 0 Station: Point Beach Nuclear Plant- Unit 1 Prepared By: Chris Kandalepas Calc.

Title:

Main Steam Piping GL 87-11 Break Location Determination Reviewed By: Dan Quijano Safety Related Yes 0* No Ei Date: 9/26/2008 Support No. EB-2-H1I8 (Drawing P-307 Sh, 61A-61B):

Geometry Input D.:= 16.0 in R0 :=0.5SD, R, = 8in I Run Pjj~

t  :~=0.656 in r = 7.672in Do 2

LO.5*O,5in L, = 0.25in 1 O20-33.0in L.ý 1.5jin Kt:= 3.6 L,: thir(t,LQ2 L, = 0.656in w: 0.25in Lt, : min(t, LI) L4 = 0.25in Lc=min(L 1 , L2 L, 0.25in Ld: mna(l- I,) Lu= 1.5ifl j:= 1..6 Eq. 8 Eq. 9B Eq. 9C Eq. 9D Eq. 9D Peak**

wi lb 2290 3169 01 658 0 Q2 20 4 5' :16 8: - 1ý:

lb 01 01 0 M Ll 2 1 oI 6 o b1 1 01 0 01 0 0 N 0 MA/Z (MA+MB/Z) (MA+MB/Z) (MA+MBdZ) Mc/Z s'tfCss-1 0 0 0 0 0 P:= 0ps *i Pmax:= 0-psi (Note: Stress due to pressure Is included in above pipe stresses)

Rev. 2 Form 3.1-3 Rev. 2

Automated Engineering CALCULATION SHEET Page: C12 of C24 Services Corp Attachment C Calc. No.: PBNP-994-21-05-POI Client: Florida Power & Light Revision: 0 Station: Point Beach Nuclear Plant - Unit I Prepared By: Chris Kandalepas Cale.

Title:

Main Steam Piping GL 87-1 t Break Location Determination Reviewed By: Dan Quijano Safety Related Yes [I No E] Date: 9/26/2008 Limitations

= - y11.7 < 50 OK 032=0.196 < 0.5 OK I'

tb

==0.033 < 0.5 OK < 0.075 OK ATTACHMENT PROPERTIES 2

A1 :=4.L1 -L2 Al = 1.5in 3

ZIL =0.75in ZIN:(4)L .. 2 ZIN =0.125in 3

STRESS INDICES i:= L..3 2.2 40] 0.0 f' 0.05 Ao:= 2.0 0 := 50 *deg X.:= -0.45 Y,:= -0.55

,1.8 40 -0.75 1-0.60

- 1.49" "-0.66")

X,: i. gV1 X, = -1,94 Y, := Y0 + log(3 2 ) -1.3-1.26 Y,

=-1.31" 1-2.24) 2 tW= -( X .coS(oi) . Y, sin(oi))_ -1 .-

iSin(i) - Yji-CoS(0i)) r=2

,2,1 Or = 2.5 Br = 1.657 rl:

nafý0.26y . P F02 .(T,2)4.4, CL = 1.00 BL- lni(_3 CLI 1) BL = 1.00 CN := Ma,0.38y I. 01 02' (,3)34] Cn = 1.00 BN:ý ma{-. CN. 1 BN = 1.00 Rev. 2 Form 3.1-3 Form 3.1-3 Rev. 2

Automated Engineering CALCULATION SHEET Page: C13 of C24 Services Corp Attachment C Calc. No.: PBNP-994-21-05-PO1 Client: Florida Power & Light Revision: 0 Station: Point Beach Nuclear Plant - Unit I Prepared By: Chris Kandalepas Calc.

Title:

Main Steaam Piping GL 87-11 Break Location Determination Reviewed By: Dan Quijano Safety Related Yes [] No 0I Date: 9/26/2008 LOCAL STRESSES j:= 1.. 4 Eq. 8 Eq. 9B Eq. 9C Eq. 9D SB111 liJ B -W " 1j A1

+ BL'ML J ZIL Q2 ,j 2.L2 -Lb

.S nil SI .I I .-

2 3 1 psi 5591 2530 35011 0I I l I I CI"WI,5 CL'MLI, Q21, S111I + + S,,, = 1090.524isi Range AI ZIL 2-L-2 .Lb Spl KL. S., p,=3925.89isi Range Cr.W 1,6 CL'ML,16 Q2,6 A

5 Peak**

S AI + ZIL ZcL:=L

- + 2.L2.rLb n1_-eeý 0 psi MODIFIED CODE EOIJATIONS B1 := 0.5  := 1.0 for straight pipe EQ. 8 131'-. + Pstress + S.n, = 1559psi EQ. (9B)

S2---- _D.+ Pstress1 + Stal1 ,2 = 2530psi EQ. (9C)

B 1 *t + + Sml1,3 =

1strs,3 3501psi EQ. (10)

Pstress + Sp- = 1963psi 1,5 2 Form 3.1-3 Rev. 2

Automated Engineering CALCULATION SHEET Page: C14 of C24 Services Corp Attachment C Calc. No.: PBNP-994-21-05-PO1 Client: Florida Power & Light Revision: 0 Station: Point Beach Nuclear Plant - Unit 1 Prepared By: Chris Kandalepas Cale.

Title:

Main Steam Piping GL 87-11 Break Location Determination Reviewed By: Dan Quijano Safety Related Yes N- No D] Date: 9/26/2008 Support No. EB-1-1114 (Drawing P-307 Sh. 40A-40B):

Geometry Input D, := 24.0 in R, := 0.5. Do R)= 12in D, - t r° I Ru t:= 0.968 in r = 11.516in DO1 2

L, 0.5-0.75in L, = 0.375in L2 0.5.7.Oin L2 = 3.5 in KL :=3.6 L,,:= min(t, L2) L, = 0:968in w:= 0.25in L,:= mi+,(L,) L= 0.375in Le := mi,(L 1 , L,2) L, = 0.375in Ld := ma(L, ,L2 ) Ld = 3.5in j:= 1,.6 Eq. 8 Eq. 9B Eq. 9C Eq. 9D Eq. 10 Peak**

W=1J 1.1 2  ::1:31 4  : 5.: l6 11 319141 31914 319141 0 0 0 1 . 2. 3  : 4*.J 5 6, lb Q2 =

1 0 0 0 0 Mi.,= 000 2 f 3 6 lb-in MA/Z (MA +MB/Z) (MA+MB/Z) (MA+M B/Z) Mc/Z 1>i!:" '2 2!:  ;.. 3.i::" ' ":::- "4.i: :5 ;.: psi

~stressý of 01 01 0 0 o

P := 0.psi Pmax:= 0. psi (Note: Stress due to pressure are included with the pipe system stresses)

Rev. 2 Form 3.1-3 Rev. 2

Automated Engineering CALCULATION SHEET Page: C15 of C24 Services Corp Attachment C Cale. No.: PBNP-994-21-05-POI i

Client: Florida Power & Light Revision: 0 Station: Point Beach Nuclear Plant - Unit I Prepared By: Chris Kandalepas Calc.

Title:

Main Steam Piping GL 87-1 1 Break Location Determination Reviewed By: Dan Quijano Safety Related Yes [] No El Date: 9/26/2008 Limitations y := - y= 11.9 < 50 OK 02 = 0.304 < 0.5 OK t

Ll r R*1=0.033 < 0.5 OK Pt 132 = 0.01 < 0.075 OK ATTACHMENT PROPERTIES A I :=4 .L ,l, A, = 5,25in2 2

2 2) Z3=0. 65in3 Z tL:= ( 4 ) ( L ,V 3

ZIN:=(I2~ ZIN =0.656in STRESS INDICES i:= 1..3 2.2 40 (0.0 ('0.05')

A:= 2.0 0:= 50 -deg X,:= -0o45 Yo:= -0.55 1.S 40 -0.75) -0.60)

(-1.49'

(-0.47" X, := X0 + log(p,) X = -1.94 Y, := yo+ Iog(P2) Y,= -1.07 L,-2.24) -1.12)

( 1.277' I=-(X. Cos(o ) + Y, sSn(oi)) - A0. (xi sin(o) - Yi Cos(0i)2

= 1.744 2.244)

CT =m4,3.82-y 6.131.132.(rl z1l54, 1] CT = 3.198 m3;=na{3.ýCr.i BT = 2.132 CL: ina{0.26y .,4 01-02 (n2)4.74,] CL = 1.00 BF, := ma{3 CL, 1) BL= 1.00 CM := ma{'10.3&y ,Pi . P2 .(.1 CN = 1,00 ma2C..i BN = 1.00 1 3 )3.4,1]

Rev. 2 3.1-3 Form 3.1!-3 Rev. 2

Automated Engineering CALCULATION SHEET Page: C16 of C24 Services Corp Attachment C Cale. No.: PBNP-994-21-05-POI Client: Florida Power & Light Revision: 0 Station: Point Beach Nuclear Plant - Unit I Prepared By: Chris Kandalepas Calc.

Title:

Main Steam Piping GL 87-11 Break Location Determination Reviewed By: Dan Quijano Safety Related Yes [] No L Date: 9/26/2008 LOCAL STRESSES j := L..4 Eq. 8 Eq. 9B Eq. 9C Eq. 9D BrTW 1 , BL'MLIj Q21,j

.ni- + +-

2-13] 1.3

,ij AI ZIL 2"L2"Lb 1 12~)581 129581 129581 04 psi 0ý C*W 1 , 5 CL' ML 1, 5 + Q21,5 Snl = 0 psi Range AI Z11, 2.L2 .Lb Spl:= KL, Snl S1,1 = 0 psi Range 1r'Wl,6C'ML1,6 Q21,6 Snl-ee .- + + 1 ee = 0 psi Sni Peak**

A1 S ZIL 2-L 2. 4, MODIFIED CODE EQUATIONS B, := 0.5 B2 ;= 1.0 for straight pipe EQ. 8 SP.Do B 1 .2-tt + Pstress + S', = 12958psi 2-t , 1, EQ. (9B)

P'D0 B P- + Pstress + S', = 12958psi 4-t 1,2 1,2 EQ. (9C)

PD.D B11 - + Pstrcss + Stal = 12958psi 4-t 1,3 1,3 EQ. (10)

Pstress + 0=psi I's 2 Form 3.1-3 Rev. 2

Automated Engineering CALCULATION SHEET Page: C17 of C24 Services Corp Attachment C Cale. No.: PBNP-994-21-05-Po0 Client: Florida Power & Light Revision: 0 Station: Point Beach Nuclear Plant - Unit I Prepared By: Chris Kandalepas Cale.

Title:

Main Steam Piping GL 87-11 Break Location Determination Reviewed By: Dan Quijano Safety Related Yes I] No [] Date: 9/26/2008 Support No. EB-2-H110, 1111. H12, & H13 (Drawing P-307 Sh. 17A-17B):

Geometry Inuit D, := 6.625 in k:= 0.5.Do R, = 3.312in R:= 9.000in r;= 3.173in 0:= acos ( RR D := 3.000 in 0 = 43.Odeg D

t:= 0.280in L = 4.396in sin(0)

KL:= 3.600 Wleg := 0,25in j:= 1..6 Eq. 8 Eq. 9B Eq. 9C Eq. 9D Eq. 10 Peak*

W =1 22691 29101 35511 01 6461 o Ilbf I I ..... I I I I I MA/Z (MA+M B/Z) (MA +MB1Z) (MA+M B'Z) Mc/Z Ptiress ý I ol 01 o0 O psi P:= 0 psi Pmax:= 0.psi (Note: Stress due to pressure are included with the pipe system stresses)

Local Stresses L0.5 rl.25 K:= K= 82 >15 & <_280 O.K.

1.75 t

Eq. 8 Eq. 98 Eq. 9C Eq. 9D Range Peak O.97.W.K 08 aLr-,b= 5251.81 6735.51 8219.11 O1 1495.21 0 psi L.r. (1+0.2L)

l. &.0.77.1+

0.47.(r. t)0.5] Eq. 8 Eq. 9B Eq. 9C Eq. 9D Range Peak LI&W-K tL+

0 C.,.b=l 6310.61 8093.41 9876.21 01 1796.71 0 1 psi Rev. 2 Form 3.1-3 Form 3.1-3 Rev. 2

/1ý Automated Engineering CALCULATION SHEET Page: C18 of C24 Services Corp Attachment C Cale. No.: PBNP-994-21-05-POI Client: Florida Power & Light Revision: 0 Station: Point Beach Nuclear Plant - Unit I Prepared By: Chris Kandalepas Cale.

Title:

Main Steam Piping GL 87-11 Break Location Determination Reviewed By: Dan Quijano Safety Related Yes No ED Date: 9/26/2008 i:= 1.. 4 Eq. 8 Eq. 9B Eq. 9C Eq. 9D 2 i '

Ii 3 kIbiI, Smn, = 1 42071 53961 6584 0 psi z i i I I S,[,:= . inaý FL-ib 5l c,,' b 1mb, 5)

Sl= 1797psi Range Spl KL' SOl Sll= 6468psi Range S',n: ma}(7L.mb 6'GC.'nb, 6) S'i= ".Psi Peak MODIFIED CODE EQUATIONS B, := 0,5 B2 := 1.0 for straight pipe EQ. 8 P.D0 B P1t 1- Pstress, 1 + stll ,1 = 4207psi 2-t EQ. (9B)

P.Do B'jP 1 + Pswrcss + St = 5396psi 2-t 1,2 1,2 EQ. (9C)

P.Do 131- ---, + Pstressl,3 +Stall,3 = 6584psi EQ. (10)

Pstress+ 5 Is 22-] = 3234psi Rev. 2 Form 3.1-3 Rev. 2

/Automated Engineering CALCULATION SHEET Page: C19 of C24 Services Corp Attachment C Cale. No.: PBNP-994-21-05-POI Client: Florida Power & Light Revision: 0 Station: Point Beach Nuclear Plant - Unit 1 Prepared By: Chris Kandalepas Calc.

Title:

Main Steam Piping GL 87-11 Break Location Determination Reviewed By: Dan Quijano Safety Related Yes [R] No El Date: 9/26/2008 SUtnort No. EB H19. H20. H21. & H22 (Drawing P-307 Sh. 23. 24A. 24B):

Geometry Input Do:= 6.625 in IZ, = 3.3I2in R:= 9.000in r-:= 3.17-In D := 3.000in 0 := acos CR+ R,) 0 = 43.Odeg D

t := 0.280 in L = 4.396in sin(0)

-KL := 3.600 W1eg :=-0.25in j:= 1,.6 Eq. 8 Eq. 9B Eq. 9C Eq. 9D Eq. 10 Peak**

• * ° W=

I 9071I 16761 I

24451 I 01 I

2951 I 01 IVI I

MA/Z (MA+M B/Z) (MA+M B/Z) (MA+M 8/Z) Mc/Z P.tres. ý ,.. . . 5 -- v: psi

. Ill 01 o0 01 01 01 P := 0.psi Pmax:= 0 psi (Note: Stress due to pressure are included with the pipe system stresses)

Local Stresses 05 1.25 K : K= 82 > 15 & <280 O.K.

t 1.7 5 0 85 0.97.W .K . Eq. 8 Eq. 9B Eq. 9C Eq. 9D Range Peak aL~mb .- J.1

=r

+ 0.21!)

°L.mb =1 2099.3 1 3879.3 1 5659.2 1 01 682.81 o01psi WK.77Li

0. 0.47-(rt)0.5] Eq. 8 Eq. 9B Eq. 9C Eq. 9D Range Peak OC.mnb:= aCnb =I 2522.61 4661.41 6800.1 1 ol 820.51 o01 psi L-r Rev. 2 3.1-3 Form 3.1-3 Rev. 2

Automated CALCULATION SHEET Page: C20 of C24 Engineering Services Corp Attachment C Calc. No.: PBNP-994-21-05-POl Client: Florida Power & Light 1Revision: 0 Station: Point Beach Nuclear Plant - Unit I Prepared By: Chris Kandalepas Calc.

Title:

Main Steam Piping GL 87-1 1 Break Location Determination Reviewed By: Dan Quijano Safety Related Yes [X] No E] Date: 9/26/2008 i:= 1..4 Eq. 8 Eq. 9B Eq. 9C Eq. 9D Stal i 3=n*rm 1,ianb i , i) Still=I1 16821 310aj1 53 01 psi S ri:= raa) L.rnb 1,5 ,'C.,nb ,5) Sr,= 820psi Range Sp1 '= 2954psi Range S', = 4ma (FL.mb 1,6' °C'mb 1,6) S"l= 0.OO0psi Peak MODIFIED CODE EQUATIONS 13 := 0.5 B2 := 1.0 for straight pipe EQ. 8 1--t + Pstrcss + Still = 1682psi EQ. (9B)

P. D, 3 +Pstress + S = 3108psi 2It 1,2 1,2 EQ. (9C)

Bl-tL2D+ Pstress,3 + S.,3 = 4533psi EQ. (10)

Pstress 1,5 + 2 = 1477psi Rev. 2 3.1-3 Form 3.1-3 Rev. 2

Engineering Automated CALCULATION SHEET Page: C21 of C24 Services Corp Attachment C Cale. No.: PBNP-994-21-05-POI Client: Florida Power & Light Revision: 0 Station: Point Beach Nuclear Plant - Unit 1 Prepared By: Chris Kandalepas Cale.

Title:

Main Steam Piping GL 87-11 Break Location Determination Reviewed By: Dan Quijano Safety Related Yes [2I No ED Date: 9/26/2008 Support No. EB-I-H200, H201 (Drawing P-307 Sh. 31 &_Sh. 32):

Geometry Input D,,:= 3.5-in  := 0.5. D,,

11ýý . R, = 1.75in Pipe

d. := 2.375in i-0 1.188in T:= 0.216in t := 0.154in r. - t =i I.034in KT := 2.0 j:= 1.6 Eq. 8 Eq. 9B Eq. 9C Eq. 9D Eq. 10 Peak-W=f 2301 2881 3481 01 391 01 lb Q2- 0 0ol 0b lb S 01 0. 0 0o lb.in MW= 0o 0o o o1 lb0in 0

01 01 MTr =

I o) 01 01 01 01 o1 lb-irs MA/Z (MA+MB/Z) (MA+MB/Z) (MA+MB/Z) Mc/Z PDo14t Psircss = I .. 01 01 01 01 o 01 P := 0.psi Pmax:= 0-psi (Note: Stress due to pressure are included with the pipe system stresses)

Limitations Ro y = 8.1 < 8,33 T

t OK

-=0.713 >0.2 <1.0 T

d.

f3=0.679 >0.3 <1.0 OK Do, Rev. 2 Form 3.1-3 Form 3.1-3 Rev. 2

Automated Engineering CALCULATION SHEET Page: C22 of C24 Services Corp Attachmcnt C Cale. No.: PBNP-994-21-05-POI Client: Florida Power & Light Revision: 0 Station: Point Beach Nuclear Plant - Unit I Prepared By: Chris Kandalepas Calc.

Title:

Main Steam Piping GL 87-11 Break Location Determination Reviewed By: Dan Quijano Safety Related Yes [] No LI Date: 9/26/2008 ATTACHMENT PROPERTIES AT:= n.(ro2- 1ri2) A T - 1,075in2 4

IT(n),

= r. _i) I= 0.666in 3

Zr 0.561in 2

Abar := (j),(r2 - ri2) Abar = 0.537in 3

Jbar := mii(tro .T,z,) Jbar = 0.561in STRESS INDICES C = (A,,) [(2y)l1](P112).(r>3) 1.0 Index Part IPRange A. 9]ý ' _ __

CV Pipe 0.3-1.0 1.40 0.81 (1) t.33 Attachment 0.3- 1,0 4.00 0.55 (b) 1.00 CL Pipe 0.3- 1.0 0.46 0.60 -0.04 0.86 Attachment 0.3 - 1.0 1.10 0.23 -0.38 0.38 Pipe 0.3-0.55 0.51 1.01 0.79 0.89 CN Attachment 0.3- 0.55 0.84 0.85 0.80 0.54 Pipe 0.55 -1.0 0.23 1.01 -0.62 0.89 Attachment 0.55-1.0 0.44 D.85 -0.28 0.54 Notes: (a) Replace ' with e-11r.

(b) Replace ,3"' with e-1-3 " *.

vpc:=(A 0 C.Y,)(2y)" '"'J(e- 1.2-p). P~(r3.cWp) CW.pip, ý 5.857 cwt =(Ao c{(y" I--I-]( e 1.35- p3).(,i 3.cwa) C = 8.654 CL pipe := (A 0 01p) [(2y)q 1.cipj( P1u2.,0 P).(T '3.01p) CL.pipý 1.857 CL.an := (A.,j,)[(2y)" -1.ca(~ ca).(13.c) CLa,,= 2.127 Form 3.1-3 Rev. 2

Automated Engineering CALCULATION SHEET Page: C23 of C24 Services Corp Attachment C Cale. No.: PBNP-994-21-05-POI Client: Florida Power & Light Revision: 0 Station: Point Beach Nuclear Plant - Unit 1 Prepared By: Chris Kandalepas Calc.

Title:

Main Steam Piping GL 87-11 Break Location Determination Reviewed By: Dan Quijano Safety Related Yes N] No El Date: 9/26/2008 CN.Pipe ifil > 0.55, (A o.cnpf,)[(2Y) p

-,12.cnp.2). (A o13.cj)[(2y)' L np.2) 1_(p T'2.cnp (113.c1)] ,)

CN.pip = 3.606 I)1 1)[(2'yl .cna ](,hI2.cnna. 1) (G13 cnna.

CN~atI := i1I > 0.55, (Aocna2)[(2y)" l.cna.2]( 112.cna.2) .(13.cna.2) ,(Aoxna.

CN.att = 4.359 Cw := ma.4(Cw.pije,Cw.att) Cw = 8.654 CL := ma(CL.piN),CL.att) CL 2.127 CN ma(CN.pipe, CN.at,) CN 4.359 CT =.0 for P. : 0.55 CT =CN for =1.0 By linear interpolation between 1.0 & C. for 0.55 < 1.0,

{.

CT linter0.55,(1.0,P] CT =1,960 Cw" Bw m4 2 ,1.-0 = 4.327 L  :=Ina-0 , 1-0) BL = 1,063 BN:= ina{.21 ,.) BN = 2.180 B1 := ma { ,1. BT = 1.000 Rev. 2 Form 3.1-3 Rev. 2

Automated P Engineering CALCULATION SHEET Page: C24 of C24 Services Corp Attachment C Calc. No.: PBNP-994-21-05-POI Client: Florida Power & Light Revision: 0 Station: Point Beach Nuclear Plant - Unit I Prepared By: Chris Kandalepas Calc.

Title:

Main Steam Piping GL 87-11 Break Location Determination Reviewed By: Dan Quijano Safety Related Yes I] No El Date: 9/26/2008 LOCAL STRESSES j:= L..4 Bw'WI j BL'MLj BN'MNij QIt j Q21 j 3r'MTr,j SMT + , + + +"-

ij AT ZT ZT Abar Abar Jbar Eq. 8 Eq. 9B Eq. 9C Eq. 9D SMT=l 9261 11601 14011 0 1 psi Cw'Wl, 5 CL'ML 1 , 5 CN'MN1 ,5 Q 1 I's Q2 1,5 CMI 5lb SNT:=- + +- + - + - + SNr - 314-AT ZT ZT Abar Abar Jbar N n2 lb SPT := KT*SNT SPT = 628-l Range

,2 in Cw'W 1, 6 CL'ML,6 CN'MN ,6 QI 6 Q21,6 CT'MT1,6 lb SNr.ee -- + + + + + SNT.ee = - Peak AT ZT ZT Abar Abar Jbar . 2 MODIFIED CODE EQUATIONS BI := 0.5 B2;= I.o for straight pipe EQ. 8 P.D, 926 B.t + Pstress + SMT = psi 2-t 1,1 1 EQ. (9B)

B .1 .-D. + Pstrss, + SMT,= l60psi 4-t 1,2 NT1,2 EQ. (9C) r _D.t + PSICSt, + NMT 1401psi 4-t 1,3 1,3 EQ. (10)

SpT Pes 5 + *2 = 314psi Rev. 2 Form Form 3.1-3 3.1-3 Rev. 2

/U Automated Engineering CALCULATION SHEET Page: DI of D2 Services Corp Attachment D Cale. No.: PBNP-994-21-05-Po1 Client: Florida Power & Light Revision: 0 Station: Point Beach Nuclear Plant - Unit I Prepared By: Chris Kandalepas Cale.

Title:

Main Steam Piping GL 87-I1 Break Location Determination Reviewed By: Dan Quijano Safety Related Yes I1 No r- Date: 9/26/2008 CALCIULATION OF COMBINED STRESSES AT TEE NODE POINT 395

Purpose:

Calculate the combined stresses at tee Node Point 395 for use in evaluating HELB point locations in accordance with Section 4.0 of this calculation.

Method:

The stresses at tee Node Point 395 are recalculated to remove some of the conservatism in the combined stress of Reference 6 by following Section NC-3651 (a) of the ASME Section III Code, 1986 Edition. The pressure portion of Equation 9 is replaced by the expression provided in the calculations below. All inputs are obtained from the pipe stress analysis (Reference 6).

Calculations:

Deadweight and thermal moments for Tee Node Point 395 are from (Reference 6). The OBE stress is obtained by subtracting the Equation 8 stress from Equation 9 stress provided in the stress summary of Reference 6.

D: 30-in t :=0.909 in DI := D - 2t DI = 28.184in P:= 1085psi n.(D4_- D 4) 3 Section Modulus: Z = 585.87in 32.D i:= 2.131 B! := 0,5 B2 := 3.178 Mxdw := 18210 ft.lbf Mydw := 75 I.ft.lbf Mzdw := 169ft-lbf Mxth := 477483ftf1bf Myt, := 9415ft. lbf M,(h,:= 164225 ft.lbf Geq9:= 17915psi 0 49ob, = 7508psi

'eq8':= 10407psi aobe := eq9 - 'cq8 Form 3.1-3 Rev. 2

Automated '

Engineering CALCULATION SHEET Page: D2 of D2 Services Corp Attachment D Calc. No.: PBNP-994-21-05-PO1 Client: Florida Power & Light Revision: 0 Station: Point Beach Nuclear Plant - Unit 1 Prepared By: Chris Kandalepas Calc.

Title:

Main Steam Piping GL 87-11 Break Location Determination Reviewed By: Dan Quijano Safety Related Yes 5d No EL Date: 9/26/2008 P.(D- 2,)2 alp = 8157psi D' - (D - 2.t)

MA= IMxdw 2+/- Mydw 2 + MAdW2 MA = 18226ff.lbf MA Udw := B2.-

z 9'dw = 1186psi M  := 4MMxth2 + Myth2 + Mzth2 MC = 505023ftllbf Mc z at, = 22043psi The combined Equation 9 and 10 stresses at Node 395 for use on the stress table of Attachment A are:

Gcomb= alp + crdw + cath + GYobo acornb = 38895psi Rev. 2 3.1-3 Form 3.1-3 Formn Rev. 2

Page: El of E3 CALCULATION SHEET Attachment E Calc. No.: PBNP-994-21-05-PO1 Client: Florida Power & Light Revision: 0 Station: Point Beach Nuclear Plant - Unit 1 Prepared By: Chris Kandalepas Calc.

Title:

Main Steam Piping GL 87-11 Break Location Determination Reviewed By: Dan Quijano Safety Related Yes E- No El Date: 9/26/2008 Review of Non-Seismic Simoorts Loads:

Support No, Load Global Forces (Ib)

(Point #) Combination Fx Fy Fz Comments Deadweight 270 Analyzed Load = 2600 lbs Thermal 3841 Maximum Upset Load = 6539 lbs > 2600 lbs EB-2-HA OBE 2428 ........ Minimum hanger item capacity = 6230 #

(460) Normal Min :270 Considering factor of safety (FS) = 2 and typical Normal Max ... 4111 catalog FS = 5, therefore, use 2.5 x catolog capacicy Upset-Min  :.... -2158 = 15500 # > 6539# O.K.

Upset Max 6539  ::_____: See Note 5 Deadweight ... -4258 -3 Analyzed Load: Fy 5400 Ibs, Fz = 2900 lbs Thermal- -98 3309 Max. Upset Load-Fy--4944 lbs < 5400 lbs O.K.

EB-2-H4 OBE 588 1451 Max. Upset Load Fz = 4757 lbs > 2900 lbs 47 Normal Min -4356 -3 Minimum hanger item capacity = 4500 #

Normal Max -4258 3306 Considering factor of safety (FS) = 2 and typical Upset Min -4944 -1454 catalog FS = 5, therefore, use 2.5 x catolog capacicy Upset Max -3670 4757 =11250#>4757# O.K.

Deadweight -2649 __::::::

Thermal -587  : Analyzed Load = 4500 lbs EB-2-H5 OBE 533 Maximum Upset Load = 3769 lbs < 4500 ibs O.K.

(480) Normal Min -3236 Normal Max ..... -2649 Upset Min .:-3769 Upset Max 2116. . . ........-

Deadweight -2491 .:.::.

Thermal .......... 1339 ........... Analyzed Load 3100 lbs EB2H6 OBE 760 Maximum Upset Load = 3251 lbs > 3100 lbs (8

(Normal Min Normal Max  ::___::_

-2491

-1152  :

Min. hanger item capacity = 3700 #> 3251 # 0, K.

Upset Min  ::::::::: -3251 .:::: .::

Upset Max .......... -392  :::::::::::::::::::::::

Deadweight -3413 Analyzed Load = 4800 lbs Thermal -1321 Maximum Upset Load = 5451 lbs > 4800 lbs EB-2-HB OBE .... 717 Minimum hanger item capacity = 4700 #

(525) Normal Min  :::::::' -4734 ........ Considering factor of safety (FS) = 2 and typical Normal Max __..__.__. -3413  ::: catalog FS = 5, therefore, use 2.5 x catolog capacicy Upset Min  :::::. -5451 =:::::::

11750 #> 5451 # O.K.

Upset Max _:_:_:::

- . . - ... ..... , -2696 . ,. :. :. . :. . :. . :..

Deadweight ........... -1178 ..........

Thermal 366 Analyzed Load = 1075 lbs EB-2-HIO 0..... ........... .BE.. 303 Maximum Upset Load = 1481 lbs> 1075 lbs (600) Normal Min  ::::_:::: -1178  ::::::Minimum hanger item capacity 2710 # (lug) O.K.

Normal Max -812  :::: See Note 2 Upset Min -1481 Upset Max -509 I

Rev. 2 I 3.1-3 Form 3.1-3 Rev. 2

Automated Engineering CALCULATION SHEET Page: E2 of E3 Services Corp Attachment E Calc. No.: PBNP-994-21-05-POl Client: Florida Power & Light Revision: 0 Station: Point Beach Nuclear Plant - Unit 1 Prepared By: Clu-is Kandalepas Cale.

Title:

Main Steam Piping GL 87-11 Break Location Determination Reviewed By: Dan Quijano Safety Related Yes 0] No , Date: 9/26/2008 Support No. Load Global Forces (Ib)

(Point #) Fx Fy Fz Comments Deadweight -2280  :::::::::Analyzed Load = 2200 lbs Thermal ....... 385  ::__:___ Maximum Upset Load = 2769 lbs > 2200 lbs EB-2-H11 OBE _______ 489 ............ Minimum hanger item capacity = 2710 # (lug) O.K.

Min (702 Normal _  : -2280  ::..... Considering factor of safety (FS) = 2 and typical Normal Max -1895 __:::___ catalog FS = 5, therefore, use 2.5 x catolog capacicy Upset Min 2769 6775#>2769# O.K.

_Upset Max .:::....... -1406  ::...See Note 2 Deadweight  :::: :_: -1177  :' : "" "

Thermal ..... 513 1. Analyzed Load 1200 lbs OBE  :..:::::::: 385 Maximum Upset Load = 1562 (bs > 1200 ibs N6rmal-Min -1177-  ::Minimum hanger item capacity-- 2710 # (lug)-O.K.

(802) Normal Max -664 See Note 2 Upset Min -1562  :

Upset Max  :::-279 Deadweight -. -2269 Analyzed Load 2300 lbs Thermal 646 Maximum Upset Load = 2910 lbs > 2300 lbs EB-2-H1-13 OBE .. ".".. "..'...... 641

...... -...  : : :Minimum hanger item capacity = 2710 # (lug)

(902) Normal Min -2269  :: Considering factor of safety (FS) = 2 and typical Normal Max  %. ... -1623  :  : catalog FS = 5, therefore, use 2,5 x catolog capacicy Upset Min -2910  ::6775 # > 2910 # O.K.

Upset Max -982 See Note 2 Deadweight -7228 Analyzed Load = 7200 lbs Thermal  :: 7 Maximum Upset Load = 10415 lbs > 7200 lbs E B H 17 EB-......OBE ,.......> . ,... 3187 .,,......., .. Minimum hanger item capacity = 8000 #

m..

Normal Min ... -7226 Considering factor of safety (FS) = 2 and typical Normal Max  : -7221 catalog FS = 5, therefore, use 2.5 x catolog capacicy Upset Min -10415 =20000 #>10415 # O.K.

Upset Max - -4034 Deadweight - -1411 -

Thermal  :::: 658 Analyzed Load = 1400 lbs EB-2H18 OBE -... 879 Maximum Upset Load = 2290 lbs > 1400 lbs (2005) Normal Min , -1411 Minimum hanger item capacity = 2710 # O.K.

Normal Max  ::-753 Support designed for uplift O.K.

Upset Min =-2290*. ...- i . . . . , . _...... . ... See Note 3 Upset Max 126 Deadweight -315 Thermal 348 Analyzed Load = 500 lbs EB-2-H19 OBE 548 - Maximum Upset Load = 863 lbs > 500 lbs (2035) Normal Min -315 ...... Minimum hanger item capacity = 2710 # (lug) O.K.

Normal Max  :.......... 33 Support designed for uplift O.K.

Upset Min -863 Upset Max  ::581  ::__ __ __ ___:_:_:_:_:__:

Form .. 1...Rev..

Form 3.1-3 Rev. 2

/Z* Automated Engineering CALCULATION SHEET Page: E3 of E3 Services Corp Attachment E Calc. No.: PBNP.994-21-05-PO1 Client: Florida Power & Light Revision: 0 Station: Point Beach Nuclear Plant - Unit I Prepared By: Chris Kandalepas Calc.

Title:

Main Steam Piping GL 87-11 Break Location Determination Reviewed By: Dan Quijano Safety Related Yes [I No Li Date: 9/26/2008 Support No. Load (Point #) Combination Global Forces b)

Fyy Fx Fx .... .... Fz .... Comments Deadweight -894 ......

Thermal - -145.......... Analyzed Load 1000 lbs EB-2-H20 OBE n 550 Maximum Upset Load = 1589 lbs > 1000 lbs (3030) Normal M. -.- 1039 Minimum hanger item capacity = 2710 # (lug) O.K.

Normal Max -894  :::::::: See Note 4 Upset Min .. .- 1589 ____:___

Upset Max  ::" "'..- . -3440 3 ...___"".. _:_:_________:_________

-D~ ~~...........

SDeadweight -330

.. ...' l.

"-1

. .Thermal 91  ::::

...... .Analyzed Load 500 lbs EB-2H21 OBE 443  :::Maximum Upset Load = 773 lbs > 500 lbs (4035) NormalMin -. . . 330  :"" Minimum hanger item capacity = 27-10#f(lug) O.K.

()

Normal Max -239..... . .Support designed for uplift O.K.

Upset Min ..  : 773  ::See Note 4 Upset Max 204 204 .......  :.:...._:_:_ ___:_:_:_____:_:_:.

Deadweight  :'-907 Thermal ... -295 I.. Analyzed Load 1300 lbs EB-2-H22 .OBE-..... 769 Maximum Upset Load = 1971 lbs > 1300 lbs M.

(5035) Normal Min -1202 Minimum hanger item capacity 2710 # (lug) O.K.

Normal Max -907 See Note 4 Ups -1971 MUpset Max_:%::::::: -138 :___:_:_:_________:_:_:

Where: Normal Min = MIN(DW, DW+TH)

Normal Max = MAX(DW, DW+TH)

Upset Min Normal Min - OBE Upset Max = Normal Max + OBE Notes..

1) Loads obtained from Shaw Group pipe analysis (Ref. 6), considering EPU conditions, are used in the load combinations.

The S&L support qualification (Ref. 7) is used as the basis for the review of these non-seismic supports.

2) Per Ref. 7 supports EB-2-H10, -H11, -H12, and -H13 are ganged to the same auxiliary steel. Aux. steel analysis shows maximum member I.C. = 0.552. Considering worst increase of 38% for hanger EB-2-H10 (1481/1075 = 1.38) the maximum I.C. = 1.38x0.552 = 0.76 < 1.0 O.K. Also, reactions are small and welds & embedded inserts are OK.

3) Per Ref. 7 support EB-2-H18 is attached to aux. steel that spans between two embedded channels. The aux. steel analysis shows significant margins available. Considering increase of 64% for EB-2-H1 8 worst case stress becomes:

9.0 ksl x 1.64 = 14.76 ksi < 23.76 ksi O.K.

4) Per Ref. 7 supports EB-2-H20, -H21, and -H22 are ganged to the same auxiliary steel. A single frame is installed to take the uplift forces for all supports. The down load is supported separately by each hanger. Since the uplift of 204# (EB-2-H21) is small the supports are evaluated separately as shown above.

5) Support EB-2-HA is a non-seismic support (rod hanger) and cannot withstand uplift forces. The upward load of 6539#

will be distributed to adjacent supports EB-2-H3 and EB-2-H4 which are loaded downwards and can accommodate the subject uplift load.

Form 3.1-3 Rev. 2

TECHNICAL POSITION PAPER FOR ESTABLISHING HELB BREAK & LEAKAGE CRACK LOCATION SELECTION CRITERIA Rev. 0, December 4, 2006 Rev. 1, August 7,2008 1.0 Introduction C -F2° N-* VoL )'

Point Beach currently utilizes different Pipe Break Outside Containment (PBOC) location selection criteria in the HELB Program and EQ Program in regards to environmental parameters. The HELB Reconstitution Program (Program), as currently envisioned, will prepare documented calculations for the pressure, temperature and humidity time histories for a variety of HELB scenarios. Since the Program will reconstitute the design basis for PBOC and the resultant event environment outside Containment, these environmental parameters would be equally applicable and used as the input to the EQ Program. With this approach PBNP will have a single unified HELB approach to address impacts on EQ and structural effects including compartment pressures and temperatures, jet impingement, pipe whip among others Before proceeding with the Program, a major consideration needs to be addressed and agreed upon by PBNP. This involves the adoption of Generic Letter 87-11 and its associated NRC Mechanical Engineering Branch Technical Position, MEB 3-1, Revision 2; Considerable -

discussions have taken place in the past on the extent and use of GL 87-11 and its associated MEB 3-1, Rev. 2. Currently, PBNP EQ Program uses a variation of the MEB 3-1 document involving the use of the combined stress threshold for break location of 0.8(1.2 Sh +SA) to establish the EQ parameters (Reference 4, 5). It is noted that Revision 1 of MEB 3-1 stipulates the above break location threshold limit.

The PBNP FSAR Appendix A.2 (Reference 2) states "Break locations are selected in accordance with Reference 1. Consideration of arbitrary intermediate pipe ruptures is no longer required per NRC Generic Letter 87-1 ." The Reference 1 stated in the foregoing quotation is the Giambusso Letter of December 19, 1972. The Giambusso criteria included the threshold limit of 0.8(S1,+SA) and other requirements.

PBNP HELB DBD T-47 (Reference 6) provides a detailed discussion of the background history for the break location criteria. Without repeating these details, it is appropriate to state that the HELB location criteria have evolved over the years and there is a realization that these sets of criteria are "non-mechanistic" in nature. In other words, even though the pipe is designed to all design and analysis rules, additional precautions were imposed to provide added assurance for designing the plant SSCs against postulated pipe breaks. To provide a basis for establishing break locations, the AEC and NRC staff promulgated rules that tied these location selections to the stresses in the piping system. As the ASME Section III Piping Code equations (specifically Equations 9 and 10) (Reference 10) evolved so has the break location stress threshold limits. These changes in the break location criteria have led to the numerous discussions cited in the HELB DBD and the differences in the criteria used in the EQ Program and the FSAR citation.

m'KAutomatedEngineeringServices Corp

HELB BREAK & LEAKAGE CRACK LOCATION SELECTION CRITERIA Page 2

__oCa.,eCO. r'B P-99i4-219-M "-ol ReA', 0 2.0 Line Characterization Criteria and Break Selection Rules A-ý64 -6I3,. F Pce 5r z It is noted that the criteria for the identification of HE lines outside containment (Design pressure>275 psi and service temperature > 200'F) and the fact that the current licensing bases of most vintage plants, including PBNP, do not recognize moderate energy lines, are separate and distinct criteria that should not be linked to the break location selection. In other words, changes to.the HE break location selection criteria do not automatically require the re-visitation of the criteria for high and moderate energy line characterization. In fact, SRP 3.6.2, GL87-11 and MEB 3-1, Rev. 2 do not address the line characterization criteria, which is reviewed in SRP 3.6.1.

Since the line characterization for line breaks remains the same as stated in the FSAR, the section of MEB 3-1, Rev. 2 pertaining to moderate energy lines do not apply since the PBNP licensing basis does not characterize lines in this category. Similarly, the HE line definition for PBNP remains unchanged and only the lines that satisfy the "and" criteria and the "normally depressurized" rule need to be included in the HELB Program.

3.0 Proposed Unified PBOC Criteria for the PBNP HELB Reconstitution Program The following criteria for the Pipe Break Outside Containment (PBOC) are proposed for the HELB-ReeonstitutionýProgram. Adoption and use of this set of criteria will be across all-PBNP Programs (EQ, HELB and others).

3.1 Retain the definition that all lines outside containment are designated as ASME Section III Class 2 and 3 as stated in the FSAR, Appendix A.2 and DG-M09 (Reference 9).

3.2 Retain the current definitions for HE lines, which does not require the characterization of lines for moderate energy.

3.3 Adopt the use of GL 87-11 and MEB 3-1, Rev. 2 rules for HE lines only including the rules for break and leakage crack location selection in their entirety. These rules utilize the 1986 ASME Code Equations 9 and 10 with the use of stress indices for dead weight and OBE resultant moments (132 indices) and longitudinal pressure (B1 indices) and stress intensification factors (i) for thermal expansion only. It is noted that the pipe stress analyses compute the resultant moments for the load cases. These resultant moments are independent of which Design Code is used. The code equations or in this case of establishing the break locations, the combined stress equation are computed from the stress resultants based on the specific formulations.

3.4 In addition, IN 2000-20 (Reference 7) clarifies the requirement of postulating a single open crack at the location most damaging to those essential structures and systems.

3.5 Types of breaks and cracks should be in accordance with the MEB 3-1 Section B,3.

3.6 When break criteria are based on stress calculation, it is recommended that breaks and cracks be based on the calculated stresses (Section B. I.c(2)(b)(ii)) and not at each pipe fitting (Section B. 1.c(2)(b)(i)) of MEB 3-1, Rev. 2. The stress requirement of Section B. 1.c(2)(b)(ii) should be based on the primary piping stress evaluation (Section NC/ND-

!t U*!;aAutomated Engineering Services Corp

HELB BREAK & LEAKAGE CRACK LOCATION SELECTION CRITERIA Page 3 3653 of the ASME Code Section III) and local stresses at the integral welded attachments(IWA), where applicable.

3.7 Where breaks locations are selected without the benefit of stress calculations, it is recommended that breaks be postulated at the piping welds to each fitting, valve, or welded attachment. Go.ec, No.- P8 -tJ 4-21-o0-POLI )ev. 0 4.0 Regulatory & Licensing Issues Ata-c.- F) Pakg e F'3 Use of the MEB 3-1 equations to determine break and crack locations does not require prior NRC approval. The 50.59 process and changes to the FSAR would be required.

In order to be compatible with the activities previously performed for the EQ Program, a 50.59 Screening/Evaluation should be performed to accept the use of the of the proposed PBOC criteria for determining break and crack locations.

The proposed PBOC criteria has the potential of eliminating all intermediate large breaks and almost all small breaks (leakage cracks), except the one (single) mandatory crack at the most adverse location. The 50.59 Screening/Evaluation should also address the elimination of the longitudinal crack at the terminal ends required by the Giambusso letter, but eliminated by MEB 3-1.

5.0 Conclusion The above approach would result in a single unified set of HELB/EQ criteria that would be applicable to all HELB related design parameters for the evaluation plant SSCs. The possible elimination of large breaks should result in lower environmental loads (compartment pressure and temperature) that would result in increasing design margins for the plant SSCs.

The HELB Reconstitution Program will utilize the Proposed PBOC Criteria and systematical address and documents the analysis and results in the various tasks outlined in the Task I Report (Reference 8) 6.0 ' References

1. "General Information Required for Consideration of the Effects of a Piping System Break Outside of Containment", AEC December 19, 1972 (Giambusso Letter)

2. PBNP FSAR Appendix A.2, High Energy Pipe Failure Outside Containment

3. USNRC Generic Letter GL 87-11, Relaxation in Arbitrary Intermediate Pipe Rupture Requirements and associated Revised MEB 3-1 of SRP 3.6.2

4. PBNP Calculation M-09334-3 57-HE. 1

5. PBNP Calculation M-09334-357-HE.2, Rev. 01, High Energy Line Breaks in Selected Piping Systems

6. PBNP HELB DBD T-47, High Energy Line Break Design Basis Document, Rev. 0

7. USNRC Information Notice 2000-20, Potential Loss of Redundant Safety-Related Equipment Because of the Lack of High-Energy Line Break Barriers

8. AES Corp. PBNP HELB Reconstitution Program Task 1 Report, Rev. 0.

9. PBNP Design Guide DG-M09, Rev. 2, Design Requirements for Pipe Stress Analysis.

10. ASME B & PV Code Section III, Subsections NC and ND, 1986 Edition.

u*, Automated EngineeringSet-vices Corp