ML17059B660
| ML17059B660 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Nine Mile Point  |
| Issue date: | 07/07/1997 |
| From: | Agosta C, Alvi M NIAGARA MOHAWK POWER CORP. |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML17059B657 | List: |
| References | |
| S.0SEWSCP162, S.0SEWSCP162-R, S0.0SEWSCP162, S0.0SEWSCP162-R00, NUDOCS 9708070121 | |
| Download: ML17059B660 (14) | |
Text
VNIAGARA U MOHAWK NUCLEARENGINEERING ATTACHMENT E Page 1 ( Next~~
CALCULATIONCOVER SHEET Last Ga NINE MILEPOINT NUCLEARSTATION Unit(1,2orO=Both):
1 Discipline:
STRUCTURAL TNe SCREENING EVALUATIONWORKSHEETS FOR PANEL CP162 CalculatIon No.
SO.OSEWSCP162 (Sub)system(s)
NA Buikiing Floor Elev.
~
Index No.
CARMEN R. AGOSTA Checker(s
/Approver(s) 0 (A&b Rev Descrl tion Design Chan e No.
B Date Chk Date A
Date 00 INITIALISSUE NA el%
Computer Output/Microfilm Filed Separately (Yes / No / NA): NA Safety Class (SR/NSR/Qxx): SR Superseded Document(s):
NONE Document Cross Reference(s) - For additional references see page(s):
NA Ref No NER-1 S-012 Document No.
Doc T
NER Index Sheet Rev 00 SO.OSQUGANCHOR CALC SO.O 00 General Reference(s):
- 3. GENERIC IMPLIMENTATIONPROCEDURE (GIP)
- 4. NMPC Letter to NRC, File Code NMP1L 1044, dated March 11, 1996 Remarks:
NONE Confirmation Required (Yes / No): No Final Issue Status File Location Operations Acceptance See Page(s):
(APP / FIO/VOI): APP
( Gale/Hold ): Gale Required ( Yes/No ): No Evaluation Number(s) / Revision:
NR Copy ofApplicabilityReview Attached (Yes / N/R)VN/R Key Words: NMP-1, STRUCTURAL, SQUG, SEWS, SEISMIC VERIFICATION Com ponent ID(s) / EPN(s) / Line Number(s):
PNL-PRO-162 PNL-PRC-1 67 PNL-PRO-172 FORMAT5 NEP-DES48-F0140
NT NlAGARA LlM0HAwK NUCLEAR ENGINEERING CALCULATIONCONTINUATIONSHEET Page~
(Next~
Nine Mile Point Nuclear Stat/on Originator/D C-Z3-
~
ef.
Unit:
1 Checker/Date Disposition:
Caicuiation No
/:7-l7 SO.OSEWSCP162 00 PURPOSE:
Document the Screening Evaluation Work Sheets (SEWS) forthe AP/REACTOR PROTECTION SYSTEM ¹162 CONTROL CABINET, equipment number CP162.
Cabinets CP167 and CP172 are similar and are evaluated using the analysis for CP162 here-in.
This SEWS has been prepared as part ofthe commitment to use the SQUG (GIP) methodology to document the seismic adequacy of SSEL components.
CONCLUSION: The CP162 cinch anchor analysis concluded the anchorage is adequate based on the analysis in Attachment A, the cinch anchor capacities given in Calculation SO.OSQUGANCHOR (Ref. 2) and the bolt tightness check results confirming these type of anchors are tight.
Therefore, the SQUG outlier for CP162 Is resolved.
ATTACHMENTS A. SEWS for Equipment ID Number 167A B. The Outlier Seismic Verification Sheet (OSVS) for Equipment ID Number 167A FORMAT¹ NEP-DES@8, Rev. 01 (F02)
Niagara Ilohawk Power Corporation - Nine Mile Point 1 SCREENING EVALUATIONWORK SHEET (SEWS)
GIP Rev 2, Corrected, 2/14/92 Status: No Sheet1of 3
ID: CP16~( Rev.
)
Class: 20. Instrumentation and Control Pane(s and Cabinets
==
Description:==
AP/REACTOR PROTECTION SYS MG SET ¹162 CONTROL CABINET A
ILL'l-7 Building TB Manufacturer, Model, Etc.:
Floor El 277.00 Room, Row/Col: A7,8 SEISMIC CAPACITYVS DEMAND Elevation where equipment receives seismic input Elevation of seismic input below about 40'rom grade (grade = 243.00)
Equipment has fundamental frequency above about 8 Hz (est. frequenc
= )
Capacity based on:
1.00 Bounding Spectrum Demand based on:
1.00* Design Basis Ground Response Spectrum 277.00 Yes SRT 8.0000 E-001 LOG 1.6000 E-002 2.0000E-001 LOG Hz Capacity
..... Demand 1.0000 E+002 Capaci Demand 1
Demand 2 File F:tGIPtGIPispectra.des F:tGIPLPROJ003Rspectra.des F:>GIMP ROJ003Rspectra.des Record Labei Bounding Spectrum UNIT:(PLANT(BLDG:(BUILDINGIE/Q:(SSEJELEV:(ELEVATION(ROW/
COL:
LL DIR: DIR NODE: 1 UNIT:JPIANTJBLDG:(BUILDING(E/Q:JSSEJELEV:(ELEVATION(ROW/
COL:
LLDIR: DIR NODE: 1 Does capacity exceed demand' ATTACHMENT CALC NO REVISION PAGE NO
4
SCREENING EVALUATIONWORK SHEET (SEWS)
GIP Rev 2, Corrected, 2/14/92 Status: Yes Sheet2of3 ID: CP162¹(Rev.
1)
Class: 20. Instrumentation and Control Panels and Cabinets
==
Description:==
AP/REACTOR PROTECTION SYS MG SET ¹162 CONTROL CABINET Building: TB Manufacturer, Model, Etc.:
Floor El.: 277.00 Room, Row/Col: A7,8 CAVEATS - BOUNDINGSPECTRUM I&C/BS Caveat 1 - Earthquake Experience Equipment Class.
l&C/BS Caveat 2 - Computers and Programmable Controllers Evaluated Separatel 18C/BS Caveat 3-Strip Chart Recorders Evaluated.
l&C/BS Caveat 4 - Structural Adequate l&C/BS Caveat 5-Adjacent Cabinets or Panels Bolted Together.
l&C/BS Caveat 6-Drawers or Equipment on Slides Restrained.
l&C/BS Caveat 7 - Doors Secured.
I&C/BS Caveat 8 - SuNcient Slack and Flexibilityof Attached Lines I&C/BS Caveat 9 - Adequate Anchorage.
l8C/BS Caveat 10- Potential Chatter of Essential Relays Evaluated.
l&C/BS Caveat 11 - No Other Concerns.
Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Is the intent of all the caveats met for Bounding Spectrum' ANCHORAGE
- 1. The sizes and locations of anchors have been determined
- 2. Appropriate equipment characteristics have been determined (mass, CG, natural freq.,
d p', c t
ofrdtation)
- 3. The type of anchorage is covered by the GIP
- 4. The adequacy of the anchorage installation has been evaluated (weld quality and length, nuts and washers, expansion anchor tightness, etc.)
- 5. Factors affecting anchorage capacity or margin of safety have been considered: embedment length, anchor spacing, free-edge distance, concrete strength/condition, and concrete cracking.
- 6. For bolted anchorages, any gaps under the base are less than 1/4
- 7. Factors affecting essential relays have been considered: gaps under the base, capacity reduction for expansion anchors.
- 8. The base has adequate stiffness and the effect of prying action on anchors has been considered.
- 9. The strength of the equipment base and the load path to the CG is adequate
- 10. The adequacy of embedded steel, grout pads or large coITcrete pads have been evaluated.
- 11. The anchorage capacity exceeds the demand.
Are anchorage requirements met?
Yes Yes Yes*
Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes ATTACHMENT CAI.C NO REVISION PAGE NO
SCREENING EVALUATIONWORK SHEET (SEWS)
GIP Rev 2, Corrected, 2/14/92 Status: Yes Sheet 3 of 3 ID: CP162¹(Rev.
1)
Class: 20. Instrumentation and Control Panels and Cabinets
==
Description:==
AP/REACTOR PROTECTION SYS MG SET ¹162 CONTROL CABINET Building TB Manufacturer, Model, Etc.:
Floor El.: 277.00 Room, Row/Col: A7,8 INTERACTIONEFFECTS
- 1. Soft targets are free from impact by nearby equipment or structures
- 2. Ifthe equipment contains sensitive relays, it is free from all impact by nearby equipment or structures.
- 3. Attached lines have adequate flexibility
- 4. Overhead equipment or distribution s stems are not likelyto collapse.
- 5. No other adverse concerns were found.
Is equipment free of interactioneffects'es N/A Yes Yes Yes IKhKR SRT are W. Djordjevic and C. Agosta - Outlier Evaluation In Revision 0, these panels were declared outliers because they use Cinch type leaded anchors which are not covered by the GIP.
External analysis 95C2873-C-003 evaluates the anchorage using data developed by Westinghouse Savannah River (referenced in calculation) and shows a HCLPF PGA equal to 0.37g. Q Cy<c.~S'o.0 1~~c h'<<~i,dl) I cl~y
/do rtAP 7'ubsequently, bolt tightness checking was conducted on ~ accessible Cinch anchor installations withwni~ne failurego hold tightness.
Since this failure rate is les&hen 1% and the HCLPF is equivalent to about a 1% failure rate, no reduction factor is applied to Cinch anchors.
Therefore, this equipment is found acceptable for A%6 design basis purposes and the outlier is resolved.
The HCLPF remains at 0.37g PGA.
Evaluated by:
Date:
ATTACHMENT CAl.C NO REVlSlON PAGE NO
ATTACHMENT CALG NO REVlSlON PAGE NO Revision 2
Sheet 1 of 2 Exhibit 5-1 OUTLIER SEISVIC VERIFICATION SHEET (OSVS) 1.
OUTLIER IDENTIFICATION, DESCRIPTION, AND LOCATION Equipment ID Number PIKfdZ Equipment Class Zd Equipment Room or Equipment Location:
Building Floor Elevation
/
Row/Col umn Base Elevati on ZF Description OPS ldZ4 MD /8ZB M&n/
2.
OUTLIER ISSUE DEFINITION a ~
Identify all the screening guidelines which are not met.
(Check more than one if several guidelines could not be satisfied.)
Mechanical and Electrical E ui ment Capacity vs.
Demand Caveats Anchorage Seismic. Interaction Other Essential Rela s
Capacity vs.
Demand Mounting, Type, Location Other Tanks and Heat Exchan ers Shell Buckling Anchor Bolts and Embedment Anchorage Connections Flexibility of Attached Piping'ther Cable and Conduit Racewa s
Inclusion Rules Other Seismic Performance Concerns Limited Analytical Review Other b.
1 Shell buckling and flexibilityof attached piping only apply to large, flat-bottom, vertical tanks.
Describe all the reasons for the outlier (i.e., if all the listed outlier issues were resolved, then the signatories would consider this item of equipment to be verified for seismic adequacy):
&8i>~IS u n se ~
dv
+Jr'/NM WEE d7 NY~
F R
5-10
....APACHMENY
'AI.C IIO REVISiON PAGE No is~
Revision 2
F Corrected, 6/28/91 Exhibit 5-1 (Cont'd)
Sheet 2 of 2 OUTLIER SEISVIC VERIFICATION SHEET (OSVS)
~~~. Q/%.'Ai~ ~PDJWf b. Provide information needed to implement proposed method(s) for resolving outlier (e.g., estimate of fundamental frequency). 4. CERTIFICATION: Approved by: (For Equipment Classes 80 - 822, all the Seismic Capability Engineers on the Seismic Review Team (SRT) should sign; there should be at least two on the SRT. One signatory should be a licensed professional engineer. For Relays, the Lead Relay Reviewer should sign.) ~u S. Pg g~/ p~ Print or Type Name Date Si ture The information on this OSVS is, to the best of our knowledge and belief, correct and accurate, and resolution of the outlier issues listed on the previous page will satisfy the requirements for this item of equipment to be verified for seismic adequacy: Print or Type Name Signature Date Print or Type Name Signature Date