ML17277A818

Forwards Response to Specific Issues Raised in Sser 3 (NUREG-0892) Addressing Seismic Qualification of safety- Related Electrical & Mechanical Equipment

ML17277A818
Person / Time
Site:	Columbia
Issue date:	09/19/1983
From:	Sorensen G WASHINGTON PUBLIC POWER SUPPLY SYSTEM
To:	Schwencer A Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
RTR-NUREG-0892, RTR-NUREG-892 GO2-83-844, NUDOCS 8309290309
Download: ML17277A818 (41)

Text

/'8

'EGULATORY~ FORMATION DISTRIBUTION SYO'M (RIBS)

ACCKS41ON NBR:8309290309 DDC,DATE: 83/09/19 NOTARIZED: NO DOCKET FACIL:50-347 HPPSS Nuclear Projects Unit 2i Washington Public Powe 05000397 AUTH, NAME AUTHOR AFFILIATION SORENSENFG.C, l'washington Public Power Supply System REC IP, NAME REC I t'IDENT AF F ILI ATION SCHWENCERFA, Licensing Branch 2

SUBJECT:

Forwards response to specific issues raised in SSER 8 (NVREG-0892) addressing seismic qualification of safety" related electrical 5 mechanical equipment, DISTRIBUTION CODE: A048S COPIES RECEIYED:LTR ENCL SIZE:

TYTLE; OR/Licensing Submittal: Equipment Qualification*

NOTES:

RECIPIENT COPIES RECIPIENT COPIES Io CODE/NAME LTTR ENCL ID CODE/NAME LTTR ENCL NRR LB2 BC 12 1 0 AULUCKeR ~ 01 1 1 12 13 1' INTERNAL: ELD/HDS2 1 1 GC 1 F IL'E': 09 1 1 NRR CALVOFJ NRR/DE/EQB 07 2 2 NRR/DL DIR 10 1 B Oe 1 NRR/DSI/AEB 1 1 Eb FILE 'Q 1. 1 RGN5 1 1 EXTERNAL ACRS 15 6 8 LPDR 03 1 1 NRC PDR 02 1 1 NSIC 05 1 NTIS 31 1 TOTAL NUMBER OF COPIES REQUIRE,D; LTTR 25 ENCL 20

0 r

e 'I

Washington Public Power Supply System P.O. Box 968 3000 George Washington Way Richland, Washington 99352 (509) 372-5000 September 19, 1983 G02-83-844 Docket No. 50-397 Director of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Attention: Mr. A. Schwencer, Chief Licensing Branch No. 2 Division of Licensing U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555

Subject:

NUCLEAR PROJECT 2 EQUIPMENT SEISMIC QUALIFICATION INTERIM REPORT The NRC Safety Evaluation Report Supplement (NUREG-0892, Supplement 3)

(SSER) addressed, among other things, seismic qualification of safety-related electrical and mechanical equipment. This letter transmits our responses to the following specific issues raised in the SSER: SSER Section 3.10. 1. 1, Adequacy of Interim Criteria; SSER Section 3. 10.1.2, Pressure Switch - SQRT Audit Item BOP-14; SAR Q 110.032, Similarity of Valves to Tested Prototypes; SAR Q 271.04, Equipment Affected by Fatigue; and, SAR Q 271.05, Results of In-Plant Tests.

It is submitted at this time to aid the Staff's review of our program prior to the time when we can provide a final fuel load status.

We are available to discuss these matters with you if it will aid your review.

Very truly yours, G. C. Sorensen, Acting Manager Nuclear Safety and Regulatory Programs KRW/sms cc: R Auluck - NRC WS Chin - BPA A Toth - NRC Site R Wright - NRC EQ Branch 8309290309 8309l9 PDR ADOCK 05000397 E PDR

r

'L

MNP-2 SAFETY EVALUATION REPORT SUPPLEMENT NUREG-0892, SUPPLEMENT 3 Response to Specific Issues:

1. SSER Section 3.10.1. 1 - Adequacy of Interim Criteria

2. SSER Section 3. 10.1.2 Pressure Switch - SgRT Audit Item BOP-14

3. SAR g 110.032 - Similarity of Valves to Tested Prototypes

4. SAR g 271.04 - Equipment Affected by Fatigue

5. SAR g 271.05 Results of In-Plant Tests

0 N

SSER SECTION 3.10.1.1 NRC Concern:

"The applicant is to confirm the adequacy of all assumed "g" values and inform the NRC in writing of the results when this confirmation is completed."

~Res ense:

All pipeline mounted items were evaluated against an assumed "g" load.

The next step was to refine our evaluation by use of "statused" as-built pipeline isometrics. (Statused as-built refers to the plant configura-tion of WNP-2 piping isometrics as of 1980-1982.) If the "statused" as-built loads were less than or equal to the assumed "g" level, no further

. analysis is performed pending verification of the "final" as-'built loads being equal to or less than the statused as-built loads.

If the statused as-built loads are greater than the assumed interim "g" valve, a reevaluation is performed.

The final step is to confirm that the final as-built piping analysis resulted in loads equal to or below the statused as-built or assumed "g" value (whichever was greater). This is accomplished as each anchor group is closed out.

We have presently accepted 72K of 700 pipeline mounted items against statused isometric pipeline loads. This completion percentage includes most all of the active valves. The 28K remainder consists predominantly of passive items in isometric runs which have lower loads.

The program will be in place through 100! completion and has been made' part of the ASNE Code piping anchor group close-out process. There-fore, closure of the ASNE Code piping anchor group stress analysis includes verification that pipeline mounted components are qualified to final as-built loads. You will be informed when the ASNE Code activity is completed.

SSER Section 3.10.1.2 NRC Concern:

"Pressure Switch (BOP-14)

The panel on which this item is mounted was qualified by test. The test consisted of multifrequency, multi-axis, random inputs. Test Response Spectra (TRS) from these tests enveloped the initial Required Response Spectra (RRS). Subsequently, based on further investigation, the RRS was changed, with the result that the TRS did not envelope the RRS in different regions. An effort was made to analyze this apparent inadequacy based on the natural frequency of the system. From this analysis, the lowest natural frequency of the system is estimated as 7.5 Hz. One unenveloped region is around 6.5 Hz, which is too close to the system frequency. As a result," the adequacy of the qualifica-tion test is in doubt. The applicant is to justify his present quali-fication or requalify the equipment."

Supply System Response:

The Supply System does not agree with audit conclusion that a system fre-quency of 7.5 Hz exists in the panels. The ronclJsion was based on a com-parison of Response Spectra Data between the control accelerometer and a response accelerometer located inside the control panel that houses the subject pressure switches. In order to provide conclusive data, an in-situ natural frequency test was performed on the control panel and internal com-ponent mounting points to determine a more accurate natural frequency behavior of the panel.

The attached test report, "Frequency Test for Hydrogen Recombiner Panel (0740-024-1351)" demonstrates that the lowest natural frequency (Struc-tural or,local) is 28.3 Hz, which is well above the nonenveloped portion of Required Response Spectra.

CALCULATION/PROBLEMCOVER SHEEr CalculatlonIProblem No: b - c'Z -FT-Tltle: ~l g . r ~rr h 2 eM'.

Client:

JobNo: ~ .

"4-'roject:

Design Input!

References:

KC ~7 l~d 1'o Assumptions:

Method:

~C%; ~E, ~g Remarks:

REV. NO. REVISION APPROVED DATE op 1 c~~ h.l g+

PeV~SeP W5P~ M kPD~S Cmc&43&

SAPe~ e<hcVRm Au (q66P 04lTS P%A4~iad p /iolse P8oQ iOC HOCG CLAP EDS 0008 STS Sheet ~ of

l.o 5.0 w.O s9 JOB NO ~ PAGE I

~l<< ~ eidis~~nuclear CALO NO OF IC' REV BY DATE CHECKED DATE An lmpell Corporation Company

POP F~W ~~ucruAU.

~~ cHPesW F-i LS 'YO e~ ~W~~

~f Fggqu~~tes b4 1F

&+~ vu

]Ac.

ss TRr WeQdentc<

I ~K'¹~

cacus'

~O Pss~h+L~ ~ ~ ~sL ~

~~w<s

~6L., s Wm ~

Ho lese AP84c6%. eccv w

t+n-1".

~T F~~ ef'~~ ~

1%5%kSC'PH~A Bgagta P&

~f'w Qv~tF L~ ~ s&$

TAG

. MLc MAGt~ BAG 5~i cu s R%%.

.ppggvegw~ ~ u)Mc-q ~ ~ ~~66 pg~~~

QO

~~/ 44

.kg@ ~f pg+Q<~e t IP bio ~~~ 6 >4':

Whu- 8 E- Ca4a(PRE~

~a

+a,, %3, Atm~

E~~

~

'uH~tg 8'.,o tc.

~P-

~see ~ vive ~i'm ~W ~T'

'At '

'I '.

(i c ci"! tl( ~

~ 20- JOB NO PAGE 1

~

'i ~

cr ee~ OALONO OF a 1 SY DATE CHECKED DATE An Impell Corporation Company t

Q ~for qe8g JOB NO ~> i'i' r" PAGE

~, ->>.> eidls~inuclear CALO NO OF REV BY DATE CHECKED An Impell Corporation Company t F

~~ W~~ OWTW Frequency Test Report Test Equipment and Test Sequence Document Test

Subject:

AC HZ Ab. A Analyzer: ~X Ben Rad 2512 Accel erome ter: ~ PCB 302A02 ~Y PCB 30BB09 Accel. Sensitivity: ~ 10mv/9 ~X 100 mvlg Amplifier Gain: ~10 ~ 100 Model of Impulse Points and Accelerometer Locations Impulse point indicated by circled letter: QA~

Accelerometer point indicated by circled number: Ql E

C Ch I

/

1 0:

%. ~

/ t/

hko~~.

>) ~s~ ~ P~CX ~

FO v b Mc B~ACCKSSsEbam 1

KCl 6 g ~Tcj Rl p;! \ s~Csa g t s:.Mt-"~

XP'tl"

. EE Gdi.r.l(-r JOB NO OqPO ~ r PAGE

~

2-g CC- " ~-'lcfl$ g+y~ AUc)egg CALO NO OF AEV SY DATE CHECKED DATE tel

~ ~ ~

~ ~

+4 J~ AC mtun~a00. e V

.41 051 )

0 ~F4 TNldiAUJO 01 ('o'5+0'e'0 0e00 LlN~CNCOPHt 0'00,'HZ J ~ SdC 05 VD<70

Frequency Test Report Impulse Data Document Equipment: ~A=- AR- ~P Impact Point:

Test Point:

Spectral Peaks Frequency Amplitude ~io

'B I, l

'78 w~.

Spectral Shape NOTES:

-l4c ~Y - HYO~ & '<~i'i i~<i'4

~

~

JOB MO OTTO PAGE C

elChs~~" nuclear CALO MO 7 OF DATE CHECKED DATE P~- V'l

Frequency Test Report Impulse Data Document Equipment: ~~-14&- 9 6 Impact Point:

Test Point:

'pectral Peaks Frequency Amplitude~ac

-tc,4M RQ.S t Spectral Shape NOTES:

gPPc& gg F gv >~t < TM7- H @No &em F ~ . F'4~"--

JOBNO 07)0-~Zg PAGE eicfis ~~~nuclear CALO NO FT- F'( OF DATE CHECKED DATE Fi

Frequency Test Report Impulse Data Document Equipment: ~Ac.i C-<+

Impact Point:

Test Point:

Spectral Peaks Frequency Ampl i tu de<<0 2& o~

cg.O e t,4q

. Spectral Shape NOTES:

MPPS

-QO& ('.cKO.

- u)dP-K eidis~~inucleat.

JOB NO CALO NO g7~

CD+1= L PAGE OF SY DATE CHECKED DATE

Frequency Test Report Impulse Data Document Equipment: AC; HE- <4 Impact Point:

Test Point:

Spectral Peaks Frequency Amplitude 5 tO I>~ <

(pO. 0

'pectral Shape NOTES: Y>)o >~6, t=~ip~ ~>0~3 &NDVG> p~t-=t

~P.c -H ~ e~eEH lan,'-~ poici ~ Mlc ~sp>..'==

iQpV~ 6(~ip lcog7 ~~wggt,~

C0~P'LW4~ ReQQhallay Os, '%~~~)

~~0 ~ ~ ylyqq Mc 6 R ~a icy pMqe. wo ~ape--e:..

43'L> '. i" i>. TAG

+~0' b4 A ~OmC+

<~Tt~bKiC',

uc Ww. PO

~i~ g~~

~n<Vgiod %e.ad iso +=

~ ~gq~~~~r~ ~ ~ PP-6 Fk'Qv -i>i "> TP~Y 0740- PAGE O'1>

BY DATE g

DATE et3 eidiS~"

wr nuClear JOB NO c"<< "o F'7- P'l C.~g OF

'10

~ol CHECKED

Frequency Test Report Impulse Data Document Equipment:

Impact Point:

Test Point:

Spectral Peaks (R~') (~ ~P ~)

Frequency Amplitude

'l0 z(

q ),se i', oa 402,0o Spectral Shape NOTES; ~o i ~cqc FM\~q.Q ~cx)cTL sN~u pp MAL ~c 8 g  !

P LMPA~W Ft)>~ F ~p ~eAyi.'.e~g Fb>gT +. ~i~

~ooze <qooccW SiC pip i~q~ ~~C.Wui o+<,:><t'Q eeqoiegg

~~ vL~~ LQ 4 inc.~

F'<b Q~kcg

~e i P~P 44 ~(~ ~4 OP X4,

<< +~~WC 64~,

~gcl t~L ~ecg YH1~

66ovp h,G 4PP~~ - V3QP -'L

<F'oe QCg ~ -H~LOC &4 ..C.n e . ~'-':-'~'-

JOSNO 07Jg -(>i PAGE 52 83 DATE t" 5 CHECKED

Z~~"-

DATE eidis ~" nuclear CALO NO FZ-V l OF l%

Frequency Test Report Impulse Data Document Equipment:

Impact Point:

Test Point:

Spectral Peaks Ceii (~>c '3.

Fr equkcy Ampl itude s4.ac i ~z,s~

0 (( t,O Spectral Shape NOTES:

'APP=-= - vvvlt - L V4'.'.C= H<D wC~ .hl CW+. >w" "..'

~

JOBNO ~quip- e~+ PAGE I<

cs e)cfis~<<" nuclear CALO NO OF SY DATE CHECKED DATE FT-Pl

Frequency Test Report Impulse Data Document Equipment:

Impact Point:

Test Point:

Spectral Peaks

{P~) (+(O 'P4 Frequency Ampl i tude

,0 4o,lG HLS t'g,oO ssk2.

Spectral Shape NOTES:

1 QFP~< - age'- 'Z (cc - K~e -

JOB NO ~ 74CJ O+Cc PAGE l~

eius ~<<~nut:lear

'Y

~.29.&3 Ct- ~ '7 M/Cg7 CALC NO OF DATE CHECKED DATE FT- P(

0

'I

~ ~

~!i teI ~ 0 i)

M ~000>> i?0 tg w gD

~W "000 o&o dt'ZII~PRKO HZ

-03 vDL<l

~ ' ~ J ~

~~ To CPGG:

(8't) 1 (ss j tS'f NoTc; DUE: T~ A p~iei.P ~~tLY'4~~ Tu~ ~F <.

p~L. ~.743~ PotWTS hk li PG50<~ ~VtQEP

• /x w~ eel~ .siqA<ri~Tvr.>mew~. tQ pd

~

eOOAWW P~~

g EPfec T 'Vh& ~EC>vG C.-C ~$ 6

~ t~~a.

~

MW ldC46PaeP m WC TlNG ut4tPO<.

16 ~g~. ~a,ec .%G PAYA~ aG~

6 -u~~~ id o4tpct-ir-,em ocvA. stqcK o~;,~

@Ccrc>Vtg~ GVgtt lg ~~( A /< LS LACorlsi~~~i bp.. p m M m'zP- =  %-'TS tY 4aAS t ~ti~ Ig Tl'tG Ft~ b~AA,'.5 \ c F F i'.L Ag)b l<-.i8 DP A TOP t Mr=gg-"q(.tp~~ '.

~@~ca Cea) TKAOht i, ~V,",og l 2t,+

2 3S.S 0

/

Wl.S ~

4PF~- - u)Wl~-2 Vgt.~ 4 ~g ~ - 'Hft".i'~i, g M.piwfc=4 JOB NO ~gag

~~'J t4:".

PAGE l5 5-&3 4-tt Q eidls ~~~ nuclear GALC NO r, OF

~ ~

BY DATE CHECKED DATE An Impell Corporation Company

>/s

~h CZ Pg Eg 88) si i(x')

So tO w~sHcg Cw~ )

No!C, SFECiN( Mo'- W 4. IS li- 5 4$ . > l'"- 'TRaY !rEc'c fan%'r </g bate wcT'.!. I",ir"..; Ar "le <Tv;:6wI"T~'ug<l4~q M~c wtgc6 ~\0- ~pu Yv PCS A,gC Mc W Gus ~<ALL< Ahad6 Aoi~E, tcNt= L Qp Stt '.6 go KPP~cyLT- ~~~i ~LE. cxcugi ~ ovgtwtc~

Or&~ 6 %WG. %tW~ P~ i~ed

~~i<~+ ~Wl QVC.<<t ~

~ODW M45to<vig O~ ~

9/~ MO E'/Q L~~

4>..<A~.

MVS> le PPC908dC tl R~C'-i~,i.t.

(5"-- erE+ pp lok t>)

F'lQAt bdPA:f4% ~ Hbrvbt D F~U-~-.c!

z<.'&p4O Wit WW,'

Rl

+ QA(a QFv " ~ uA

~, PQ ( p re lr PAGE JOBNO Oqd.u-g 4.-il m elders ~<<" nuclear CALO NO tl'F BY DATE CHECKED DATE An Impetl Corporation Company Fl'- %'l

5m'. PKIAgog 5S,g

'g~i; ~ S~p,gpg40 OCV~KWod 5,q~

~C.QP~Y M Lmd WH.tr +

OF Pa~g h& -tu l'l o~t~ FEW 'i ~<7l>54 ~A~R~

SET'y

-,A~ ~ g>~~

GV~, TAG C~ge~VQ-" ~

~ <TA P-.14',k40p46 geo~ QF smpm~

'ill

~

FGGVL.~, ~~@, ~ t ~rot4Q why ~q'~=m~~

~ ~~~ ~ W~, ~~VQ~Q,,

94 Fu64vi~d OP u~t~ Ho~-.t w o. KIwPK+

~Q> sag gcT P&u<~Y K Y- awoCo~e.< Pscwb, ~&~tv 8tc 8 JOB NO 0'f ~ O~ PAGE

&t\ "B3 eldls ~" nuclear '"""'Cv'n OF lg REV BY DATE CHECKED DATE Impel t Corporation Company

l' h

t

DS~~~>M LSS 6~ ~ P~t ~ e,wc~

SiOe ra St~

W~Y Nwt~)ter

'b(o.G Ha tt'-~7 'T~ bAt'5

<l,S 6~ T~ pe Cnf.5 9q. Sin, zo 6iK Q49@u fSP Qo LO

~

~&oQ4~ uP~

~,~ ~gWq

~

Vl ~ pFGVgoOa

~GAD Fc-6TaN S6 LW

~~~tgC,

~~M Dc hVDA~g Khan

'TVr6 /WE I 5 ~bNiCnMN QMlpl G9 QA&8& oQ ~a

~ious U3 -

b.'gt.[<

g- P 9; i,C, g,! -r:r>e.< ~

+S.t'>>'Y PAGE

-Zo-e JOB NO gt7 Cp ~'i'~o eidis ~<<" nuclear CALO NO OF DATE CHECKED DATE An Impall Corporation Company

v P 5- ~QF-8 edcY ~Y - 6 ~wed

>OB MO W~Sider

@7~-~

PM PAGE

d. il.e> eidis ~~~nuclear CALO MO W- et OF o,

BY DATE CHECKED DATE An Impell Corporation Company

~5IIR 110. 32 question:

"'...provide a discussion of how you establish the similarity of valves to a tested prototype. This discussion should include, but not be limited to, those characteristics such as valve type, size, geometry, pressure rating, stress level, manufacturer, actuator type, and actuator load rating."

~Res onse:

The following,information was made available to the NRC Seismic gualifi-cation Review Team (S(RT) during their audit.

The safety-related valve operability static deflection test program was implemented to demonstrate valve operability by applying a static test load representing the most adverse dynamic and operating loads to a candidate test unit. The test procedure calls for stroking the valve open and closed using the minimum design specification actuator power supply. Acceptable performance was defined as smooth operation within the test unit specification operating time limits.

The test candidates were chosen from "families" of valves (see attached flow chart). All safety-related active valves were first segregated by valve supplier, then actuator type (i.e., electrical AC, electrical DC, air, hydraulic). These groups were then further categorized by type (i.e., gate, globe, butterfly), pressure class, body material (i.e.,

carbon steel, stainless steel), yoke leg configuration, and pipeline size.

Test candidates were chosen from these resulting "families" based on the highest dynamic and'operating loads compared to the lowest available actuating force (i.e., motor operator - available torque output). The use of an operability test to establish qualification was limited..to~

its "family" and to additional similar "families" different only in connecting pipe size and only within the size ranges defined in Table 3.9.3.2-1 (attached).

I '1 fI II h

C~~~%un v

~N-57ru 7Zz7" C~PD]nays SDEC7/oH fAocr ss

~RFF7Y WE4R%N rqC7/ VZ V4d VFS S-O/r T- g ~ ~ZN- pnR+urr7c7 am@

3iYCPOm/Zr. ~W~cr//~ o7HF4z SM'7 BP d/ F4]97M 7S F g7.c, Pfo Fog P.e. Nap og P/4'P. a7HdRS S087 8Y v/88'-YPF

&4o8C +u~KFr-g D7ffFAZ o<T SY Pgr ssrrEF 4Z8<S

/~OLL 6 ooN OTh'&5 sowr BY'os Y &8mN8L.

Sgzra~S~

SOer 8Y yoga Se</sw) gszc77oy drgs7-No~ ay SonY Sip~ z /~ 7H ~ 7"o ~<~s'r PgLVW

/O ru /2 rw /g /w gpyggM e od u/=r r"~rronl QOC gPgFN7)977'&cKA~

poR opepery8'A'july')p~

rZS7-c" RAnrpR7F' gpyjzco 779aa P~ZVZ cuirh 73'+

sam~~ JgRrarn 8 9'.z.z-/FS/ZFSZZZCr H/aya 7" PIPE&~

ax 7 E47 gc yscs ~ 8'XIZAID 404L/j/C4j7OAJ Tb gowns g gdaas7-l7 c Tu87& PdXce'I

-Cob(DO'cr Teer

J I

r, 4

1

TABLE 3.9.3.2-1

~

Valve Qualification Limits

'-Size of Qualified Valve Qualification extends o:

1J'2 1 1-1t'2 2 3 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 36 V

1/2'X X X X X X X X 2 X X X 3 X X X 4 X X X X'

X X X X io X X X X 12 -

X X X X X X X X 'X X X X X X X X X 18 X X X X X X 2'0 X X X X X X X X 22 X 'X X X X X X X 24 X X X X X X X 26 X X X X X X X 28 X X X X X X X 30 X X X X X X 36 X X- -X X

SAR 271. 04 question:

"Identify all equipment which may be"affected by fatigue due to vibration and describe your methods and criteria to qualify this equipment for such loading conditions."

~Res onse:

A list of all equipment affected by the hydrodynamic load associated fatigue as..welltas the analytical criteria used to qualify this equipment is defined in Sections 3.0 and 5.0 of the NNP-2 "Dynamic gualification Report", October 1982, transmitted to the NRC by our letter G02-82-827, dated October 5, 1982.

SAR 271.05 guestion:

"Describe the results of any in-plant tests, such as in situ impedance tests, and any operational tests you have planned to confirm the quali-fication of any item of equipment."

~Res onse:

Com leted In-Plant Tests Miscellaneous equipment items such as pipeline mounted solenoid valves, panels (see separate guestion SER 3. 10.1.2) HPCS diesel generator, switchgear, etc. have been tested to verify equipment response characteristics. The results of these supplemental in-plant tests are available in our qualification files. These results were used in conjunction with other data (analysis and tests) to confirm and strengthen the qualification documentation.

No in-plant testing was used solely as the only documentation of the equipment's seismic capability.

Planned In-Plant Tests A total of 18 in-situ valve operability static deflection tests have presently been defined. Nine valve static deflection tests have been successful, i.e. the valves have operated, under load, smoothly and within the defined valve operational time limits. The remaining valve static deflection tests are to be completed as the equipment becomes available, as part of the pre-operational testing program.

Natural frequency and model response tests on air handling units are planned to verify analysis and establish similarity to the tested units.

It is the Supply System position that this response provides adequate description of the planned tests and identification of past tests. If additional detail on any specific past or planned test is required, lt will be made available upon request.

V ~ ~