ML18018A453

Forwards Request for Addl Info in Support of Seismic & Dynamic Qualification Review of Qualification Program Outlined in FSAR & Onsite Audits

ML18018A453
Person / Time
Site:	Harris
Issue date:	02/02/1983
From:	Knighton G Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:	Utley E CAROLINA POWER & LIGHT CO.
References
NUDOCS 8302250499
Download: ML18018A453 (54)

Text

FEB 2 1983 Docket Nos.:

50-400 and 50-401 Hr. E.

E. Utley Executive Vice President Carolina Power and Light Company Post Office Box 1551

-Raleigh, North Carolina 27602

Dear I1r. Utley:

~

~

DISTRIBUTION

~ Qocument Control (50-400/401)

NRC PDR L PDR NSIC PRC System LB¹3 Reading JLee NPKadambi

Attorney, OELD TIINovak ACRS (16)

Jordan, IE Taylor, IE nrie'1

Subject:

Request for Additional Information for Seismic ynd Dynamic gualification Review for Shearon Harris 1/2 (Docket Nos.

50-400 and 50-401)

Seismic and dynamic qualification review consists of two elements (a) a review of the qualification program outline as described in the FSAR, and (b) an on-site audit tPat reviews in detail the equipment as installed and the qualification documentation.

Since the FEAR contains very little information on the completeness and adequacy of the implementation of the Shearon Harris equipment qualification program, an on-site audit is an important element of our review.

There aIre two audit teams, (1) the Seismic qua'Iification Review Team (SgRT) and (2) the;Pump and Valve Operability Review Team (PVORT).

Each team is lead by one NRC reviewer and includes personnel from a national laboratory.

The attached information request specifically Attachment 1, 2, and 3, is to assist these two teams in the implementation of their respective review responsibilities.

Since we are conducting the review with the assistance of a national laboratory, we request that one copy of the completed f1aster Listing of Seismic and Dynamic gualification and Notes form be submitted to the NRC and sent to:

Nr. C. Hiller EGEG Idaho Inc.

Post Office Box 1625 Idaho Falls, Idaho 83415 Hr. J.

N. Singh EG8G Idaho Inc.

Post Office Box 1625 Idaho Falls, Idaho 83415 I'Ir. Hiller and IIr. Singh are the responsible parties at the Idaho National 8302250499 830202 PDR ADOCK 05000400 A

PDR DATEP ooeoooooooooooooooeoooo

~

~ o ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ eeo ~ e ~ o ~ ~

NRC FORM 318 (1040) NRCM 0240 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY

~

~ oooo I

r

~

~ ee ~

~ ~ ~

~

~

~ ~ o

~

~ ~ e ~ ~ ~ ~ o ~ e ~ ~ ~

j USQPO: 1991~960

4

- 4, gbll A

h

~ 4 I '

'1 Sb.

fl 'I f ~ 0 r

~%

~Bry ~s C

K%-~~

Hr. E.

E. Utley Hhen greater than 855 of the safety-related equi~pment is qualified and documented in an auditable manner, and installed on site, you should complete and submit the Master Listing of Seismic and Dynamic gualification and Notes.

Approximately one week after receiving this 4%ster Listing you will be informed of equipment selected for audit.

Hithin three weeks, Attachment 2 and 3 are to be completed only for the selected.equipmerit'nd submitted to the NRC and the National Laboratory.

Roughly two weeks after receiving the more detailed forms, the on-site audit is conducted.

The audit dates are mutually agreed to by you and the review teams.

Attachment 4 and 5 pertain to containment isolation dependability.

The ddmonstration of containment purge and vent valve operability is required by BTP CSB 6-4 and is reviewed in depth by the Equipment gualifichtion Branch as a separate and identifiable evaluation.

Submittals are to be made only ttp the NRC regarding this issue.

Sincerely, Attachments:

As stated George W. Knighton, Chief Licensing Branch No.

3 Division of Licensing cc:

See next page OL:LB83 gg NPKadambi/

~ ~I(78030

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

OFFICEI SURNAME/

DATEP NRG FORM 318 (10-80) NRCM 0240 GBa i

" "(755"""

DL ton 4/')'7N'FFlCIAL RECORD COPY USGPO: 1981~5-960

4

~

~

C

~

1

Mr. E.

E. Utley Executive Vice President Power Supply and Engineering and Construction Carolina Power 8 Light Company Post Office Box 1551

Raleigh, North Carolina 27602 cc:

George F. Trowbridge, Esq.

Shaw, Pittman, Potts 5

Trowbridge 1800 M Street, NW Washington, DC 20036 Richard E. Jones, Esq.

Associate General Counsel Carolina Power 8 Light Company 411 Fayetteville Street Mall

Raleigh, North Carolina 27602 M. David Gordon, Esq.

Attorney Associate General State of North Carolina"'.

0.

Box 629 Raleigh, North Carolina 27602 Thomas S. Erwin, Esq.

115 W. Morgan Street Raleigh, North Carolina 27602 Mr. George Maxwell Resident Inspector/ Harris NPS c/o U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Route 1, Box 315B New Hill, North Carolina 27562 Gharles D. Barham, Jr.,

Esq.

Vice President 8 Senior Counsel Carolina Power 8 Light Company Post Office Box 1551 Raleigh, North Carolina 27602

r. John Runkle,'xecutive'Coordinator onservation Council of North Carolina 307 Granville Road Chapel Hill, North Carolina 27514

r. Wells Eddleman 8-A Iredell Street Durham, North Carolina 27705

~r., George Jackson Secretary Environmental Law project School of Law, 064-A University of North Carolina Chapel Hill, North Carolina 27514 Dr. Phyllis Lotchin 108 Bridle Run Chapel Hill, North Carolina 27514 Mr. Travis Payne, Esq.

723 W. Johnson Street P. 0.

Box 12643 Raleigh, North Carolina 27605 Mr. Daniel F.

Read, President CHANGE P. 0.

Box 524 Chapel Hill, North Carolina 27514 Ms. Patricia T.

Newman, Co-Coordinator Mr. Slater E.

Newman, Co-Coordinator Citizens Against h'kc'lear Power 2309 Weymouth Ct.

Raleigh, North Carolina 27612 Richard D. Wilson, M.D.

725 Hunter Street Apex, North Carolina 27502 Regional Adminstrator - Region II U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 101 Marietta Street Suite 3100 Atlanta, Georgia 30303

/

~

~

~

~

I I

0 Equipment qualification Branch Audit Review Teams Request for Information K

To confirm the extent

.o which safety-re)a+ed equipment meets I

the requirements of the Ghneral Design Criteria (GDC) of 10 CFR Par. 50, the NRC staff, assisted by Technical Assistance Contractors, will conduct a plant site audit and review. It is our intent to conduct a plant specific on-site Pump and Valve Operability Review Team (PVORT) audit concurrent with the Seismic gualification Review Team (SgRT) audit.

Me.

believe such scheduling should minimize manpower and scheduling conflicts I

'or the applicant, the NRC staff, and our technical assistance contractors.

Since the site audit is performed on a sampling basis't is necessary to I

ensure that 85 to 90 percent of the safety related equipment are qualified and installed before the audit.

In order that the staff is familiar with the seismic and dynamic qualification programs currently being conducted, it is reouested that all test roarams be identified b

submittin a brief descri tion of the ro ram, items bein

tested, the vendor or the testin laborator

involved, and the dates and location of the tests.

In ormation about the ongoing test programs should be submitted as soon as possible so that the NRC staff can review and witnes's relevant tests for selected-items.

A lis. of all safety-related equipment should be provided so that an

- assessment of the equipment qualification status can, be made by the staff.

Equipment should be divided first by system then by component type.

Attach-ment N shows a tabular format which should be followed to present the status su+nary of all safety-related equipment.

h S

jij T- -'+=4 t

~ge VlJ~ V4

After the information on Attachment fl is received, and it is determined that ihe equi pment'ualification is substantially

complete, selections will be made of the equipment to be audited, and reviewed, by the SgRT and PVORT.

Specific information on equipment selected for audit by each

.review team will be requested.'he information that will be requested for those equipment selected by the SgRT is shown in Attachment

=..2.

The information that will be requested for those equipment selected by PVORT is shown in Attachment b3.

In addition, the applicant will be requested to provide a complete set of floor response spectra identifying thei r applicability to the equipment listed in Attachment 01.

For. the.equipment selected by the S(RT for audit, the combined Required

Response

Spectra (RRS) or the combined dynamic response will be reviewed.

The SgRT will examine and compare the equipment on-site installation v/s the.est configuration and mounting, and determine whether the test, or analysis which has been conducted conforms to the applicable standards and agrees with the RRS.

In cases where the plant is a

BWR facility, the 4

equipment qualifying documentation must also provide evidence that the hydrodynamic loads in the (0 - 100)

Hz frequency range have been accounted for.

For the equipment selected by the PVORT for audit, the applicant must provide evidence that appropriate manufacturers'ests have been conducted,

reviewed, and aoproved, and that the equipment meets, or exceeds the design requirements.

The applicant must also provide, qualification test and or analysis results that provide assurance that the equipment, will operate (function) during and following the Design Basis Events (DBE) and all appropriate combinations thereof.

I 0

0

~,,

l

~

T h

4 lq I

L'i '

/

i,

The specific information requested in Attachments

-.".2, and 83 should be provided to the NRC s.aff two weeks prior to the plant s',te visit; The applicant should make available at the plant site all the pertinent documents and reports of. the qualification for the selecied equipment.

After the visit, the applicant should be prepared to submit certain selected documents and reports for further staff review.

The purpose of the audits is to confirm the acceptability of'he qualification procedures, and implementation of ihe procedures to all safety-related equipment based on the review of a few selected pieces.

If a number of deficiencies are observed or significant generic, concerns arise, the deficiencies should be removed for all e ui ent im ortant to safet subject to confirmation by a follow-up audit of randomly selected i ems before. the fuel loading date.

The site audiis will also include a review of the extent to which the documentation of equipment qualification is complete.

The acceptance

. criteria for requirements on records is provided in Section 3.10 of the Standard Review Plan Revision 2 (NUREG-800).

Ano her element of the seismic and dynamic qualification review deals with ihe containment isolation valves for the purge and vent systems to assure their ability to close against postulated accident pressure inside contain-ment.

Information needed for this review and the basis, for the review are provided in Attachments 4 and 5.

l p

~

~,

,I e

I

]-'

I MASTER LISTING OF SEISMIC AHD DYHAMIC QVAI IF ICAT104

SUMMARY

AHD STATUS OF SAFETY RELATED EQUIPMEHT I ASSOC IA ED EXPLANATORY NOTE

II x

%N T

I HQSTER LISTING OF S EISHlC AHO'YNAMICQUALIFICATIOHSUMMQ'Y AhJD &ATUA~F ~I=<T ~

VI.IHTHnWa.:

3) 0 cKPT hJ0-OBLITY')E.:

NESS:

PA% 6 0F.'-

FOR.

EQUIPM E'H T L I S TFD BELOW'IIC SVPPI.IER IS

-. A/E Q, NSSS f3, OTIICR E3.

SAFTY 5YSTEM k'UNCTIOhJ ARE:.

DENT:

vo E g u I 1~ PA C H T'r-'ST. aatP NO

'g p f='

N D MAHUFACTlJQl AND

>CHIC Rl PT Io hl I4oer=c.

PlO.

IOC+gi OA Ibtt04V 7 IIIG gag. gltlLDIhl($

AhlD TITf zLsvAT'Iahl Sass hllC ullllV E<b pyl/A IPli'Vl (zPA)

Lob &$

CONS IDERED IIAI.TWS7 YSIS VsHC :N F/8 noN OI~P u,vdL SFIOI sWf-REF TloH ggg f.IFf(j47lgg LoWP5T VATQPJll-gT~Tjig Mg7IIon.

FRaatu~MGY CODES Aa)~

S rnxlXA RD-"

~ ~

I

~

y%

II

'I "I

~ y I(

]) II I

TACH'ENT k'I (Continued)

NOTES To MASTER LISTING (1)

The information on Plant

Name, Docket No., etc.,

are pertinent to the power station and will be the same for all sheets.

The equipment is listed by supplier (circle one after "SUPPLIED BY:") and by system (indicate name and function of system after "SYSTEM AND FUNCTION:").

Typical safety systems, for example, are Engineered Safeguard Actuation, Reactor Protection, Containment Isolation, Steamline Isolation, Main Feedwa er Shutdown and Isolation,.

Emergency

Power, Emergency Core Cooling, Containment Heat Removal, Containment Fission Product

Removal, Containment Ccrbustible Gas Control, Auxiliary Feedwater, Containment Ventilation, Containment Radiation Monitoring, Control Room Habitability Systan, Ventilation for Areas Containing Safety Equipment, Ccmponent Cooling, Service

Vater, Emeroency Systens to Achieve Safe Shutdown, Pos accident Sampling and Monitoring, Radiation Monitoring, Safety-Related Display Instrumentation.

The supplier will usually he either A/E

.or NSSS, Use separate sheets for each system.

Use additional sheets when a given system has more equipment than can be, listed on one sheet.

(3)--"IDENT. HO." is to be filled in by the organization preparing the list.

Each equipment listed should have separate identification number.

The following form is reccrnmended:

(a)

For A/E supplied equipment, the number may be "BOP-XXX." If more than one group is preparing forms, the number;.ay be "BOP-M-XXX" (Mechanical) or "BOP-IC-XXX" (Instrunen.ation and Control ).

(b)

For HSSS supplied equipment, the. number may be NSSS-M-XXX, NSSS-IC-XXX, etc.

(c)

The number written on each line (for each listed equipment) should be an ordered numeric listing for the above indicated-XXX (-001 through ccropletion).

These numbers need not follow in order for each system

(-002 and -004 may be with one system, but -003 may be with another system).

(d)

Inside the parenthesis should be the "BOP-M," "NSSS-IC," etc.

.(4)

The "TYPE" refers to its generic

name, such as pressure transmitter, indicator, solenoid value, cabinet etc.

Equipment type should be described by indicating for example, motor driven

pump,

.urbine driven pump, motor operated valve, air operated

valve, 18" valve, etc.

Following abbreviations can be used where appropriate.

II Valves:-

BV - Rail valve, BFV - Butter fly valve, CV - check valve, DV - Diaphragm valve, GV - Gato valve, GLV - Glove valve, SV - Safety Valve, RV - Relief Valve Pumps:

CP - Centrifugal

pump, PDP -'ositive displacement

pump, DDP -

De p draft pump, JP - Jet pump.

JW P

~

h e

gvantity refers to the nvmber of the same'equipment used in the pl an+.

Under mounting condition indicate the following as applicable:

CF for Gl for DM for Ht2 for RM for CM for EM for concrete -floor mountina concrete wall mounting direct mounting hanger mounting rack mounting cabinet mounting equipment mounting (10)

Mounting details such as number of bolts, weld length, etc.

need not be indicated here.

The columns "SEISMIC" and "OTHER DYNAMIC" need only be checked (X) if applicable; In the case of BWRs indicate "H" under "OTHER DYNAMIC" column where qualification includes hydrodynamic loads.

Under "RE('D INPUT (ZPA)," the applicable "g" level should be p rovided.

Under gualification Method under analysis, indicate "S" for static, and "D" for dynamic; under test freauency, indicate "SF" for single, and "MF" for multiple; and under text direction, indicate "SD" for

single, "MD" for multiple.

Equipment status is to be addressed separately to qualification and to instal 1 ati on.~

The applicable letter shauld be provi'ded under the column headed "EQUAL," according to the following code:

A The qualification and associated documentation are conplete.

The qual'ification testing is finished bvt associated docvmentation is not yet submitted or still in review.

The qualification plan/procedure is documented, but testing has not yet begun.

D Equipment to be qvalifie'd.

E Equipment is judged not qualifiable and will be replaced with qualified'quipment.

F For BAR plants only:

Equipment is qual'ified for seismic loading only.

Requalification will be performed to accovnt for the suppression pool hydrodynamic loading effects.

~ J-

'I ll I

t 1'

The applicable letter should be provided under the column headed

" hSTALLATIOh," according to the following code:

A Installation is ccnpleted.

Eouipment

'.s ready for service.

B Equipment mounting/hookup is co-depleted, bu significant parts of the equipment are not yet installed.

C Equipment is located at its intended service location, but mounting and/or hookup is not ccmpleted.

0 The equipment, is not installed and is not available for inspection.

(11) The Required

Response

Spectra (RRS) package should be provided along wi,th the Naster Listing.

Only response spectra. applicable to the listed equipment should'e

included, each numbered for. reference

'under the column headed "RRS REF."

In many cases,,

several equipment will reference the same RRS.

'(12)

Codes and Standards Applicable codes, standards and Regulatory Guides should be indicated here, for example, ASHE Section III Class 2; IEEE-344,

1975, 323-1974, 382-1972; ANSI N278-1., Regulatory Guide 1.100, 1.148 etc.

C I

I 1

4 I

Seismic and D namic uglification Summa of E ui ment I.

Plant Name:

~Toe:

PMR'.

NSSS:

3.

A/E:

BWR:

Other II.

Component Name,.

1.

Scope:

[

] NSSS 2.

Hodel Number:

3.

Size or Range:

4.

Yendor

] BOP

[

] Other Quantity:

5. If the component is a cabinet or panel, name'and model Number of the devices included:

6.

Physical

==

Description:==

a.

Appearance:

b.

Dimensions:

c.

Meight:

7.

Location:

, Building:

Elevation:

,8.

Field Hounting Conditions

] Bolt No., Size

)

]

9.

Hounting Orientation [e.g.,

on floor, cantilevered, suspended, etc,]

10.

a.

System in which located:

b.

Functional

==

Description:==

c.

fs the equipment required for [

] Hot Standby f

] Cold Shutdown g

] Both

[

] Neither

[

] Other

0 f

ll I

i,< I I

I

~--.-.r~rcTrrem-w"ererence }Uesign'p'ecifications for equal

> +cation Requirements:

a.

Seismic Input b.

Hydrodynamic Load Input d.

Service Conditions e.

qualified Life'..

Fatigue Cons iderations III.

Is E ui ment Available for Inspection in the Plant:

f

] Yes L

] Ho Parti al or 1 imited ava i 1 ah i 1 ity e

M IV.

E uioment Oualification Method:

t.'] Test

] Analysis gualification Report*:

(No., Title and Date):

t,

] Combination of Test and Analysis Company that Prepared Report:

Company that Reviewed Report:

Where Report is filed or available:

Applicable Codes And/Or Standards:

V.

Vibration In ut:

1.

Loads considered:

a t:

3 Seismic only b.

-t.

) Hydrodynamic only c.

t'.

Method of Combining RRS:

3 Vibration from normal operation 3 Combination of (a), (b),

and (c)

[

3 Absolute Sum

] SRSS

[

3

+other, specify) 3.

Required

Response

Spectra** (attach the graphs):

NOTE:

"If more than one report complete items IV thru VII for each report.

• If other than RRS is used, describe method.

L~

0

'il

. II II g

k I'I C ~'I

4.

Damping Corresponding to RRS:

OBE SSE 5,

Required Acceleration in Each Direct:

[

7 ZPA

[

] Other OBE S/S

=

SSE S/S,

=

specify F/B

=

F/B

=

6..

Mere fatigue effects considered:

f

]Yes

'f

] No If yes, describe how they were trea ed in overall qualification program:

VI.

If valification b

Test, then Complete:

1;

['

Single Frequency

~ ~

2.

[

] Single Axis

[

] Independent Axis

[

] Multi-Frequency

[

] Multi-Frequency

[

] In-phase motions f

[f

] random

] sine beat

]

3.

Numbe", of gualifications Tests:

OBE 4;

Frequency Range:

SSE Other speci fy 5.

Natural Frequencies in Each Direction (Side/Side, Front/Back, lertical):

S/S

=

F/B

=

6.

Method of Determining Natural Frequencies f

] Lab Test

] In-Situ Test 7.

TRS enveloping RRS using Multi-Frequency Test

[

Yes (Attach TRS 8

RRS graphs) f

]No

] Analysis

~

-+

Plf >>>>

C

.,8.

Maximum Input g Level Test:

9.

OBE S/S

=

OBE S/S

=

Laboratory Mounting:

F/B

=

F/B

=

A.

[

] Bolt (No.

, Size

)

[

] Weld (Length

)

[

B.

Orien.ation and Fixturing:

10.

Functional operability verified:

[

] Yest

[

] No

[

] Not Applicable ll.

Test Results including modifications made:

12.

Other tests performed (such as aging or fragility test, including results):

13.

Failure Modes. (If appro pr iate i,

- - 14.

Margins Available:

[

] Input Spectrum

[

] Fragility VII. If gualification by Analysis, then complete:

1.

Method of Analysis:

] Static-Analysis

. [

] Equivalent Static Analysis

[ ] Dynamic Analysis:

] Time-History

] Response Sp c.rum 2.

Natural Frequencies in Each Direction (Sid'e/S:.de, Front/Back, Vertical):

S/S

=

F/B

=

V =

3.

Model Type:

[

] 30

[

] 20

[

] 1D

] Finite Element

[

] Beam

] Closed Form Solution

[

] Other

dj

~

~

~

~

~

~

~

~

~

~

~

~

~

~

~

~

~

~

I ~

~

t

~

0

~

~

~

~

~

~

~

~

~

~

~

~ ~

~

~

~

~

~

~

~

~

~

~

~

~

~

~

4 1

lg

~ g

• I l

I

~ ),'I[ I l

l I

I I

Attachment 3

EQUIPMENT,QUALIFICATION BRANCH PUMP AND VALVE OPERABILITY REVIEW TEAM REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION In light of increased emphasis on mechanical equipment qualification, the Pump and Valve Operability Review Team (PVORT) has been formed to review the pump and valve operability assurance program for those utilities applying for their operating license.

The PVORT will review these programs by selecting various pumps and valves that are important to safety and then verifying that these components are qualified to perform their necessary functions when subjected to those loads associated with normal, upset, emergency, and faulted plant conditions.

The findings of the team's review will then be included in the staff's safety evaluation report (SER).

The basic criteria used by the PVORT to determine he acceptability of the applicant's pump and valve operability assurance program are stated in SRP 3.9.3.

Two other documents are also used for basic guidance:

1 SRP 3.10, and IEEE-627.

Specific references are provided within the 2

3 first two documents.

All of these references, as well as good engineering judgement, will aid the PVORT in making recommendations concerning the adequacy of the applicant's pump and valve operability assurance program.

To aid the PVORT in this review, the staff.requires that a

"Pump and Valve Operability Assurance Review" form be prepared by the applicant for each selected component and submitted to the staff two weeks prior to the team's plant-s'ite visit.

The applicant should also make available for review all pertinent documents and reports concerning the qualification of the selected components.

.Specifically, the documentation package for each of the selected components should include documents that will provide the type of information listed in SRP 3.10, page 3.10-9, a-l, as well as purchase specifications and plant test procedures, (applicable sections).

The PVORT is particularly interested in insuring that sequential testing and failure mode determination (aging) at"e addressed; and that analyses are supported by test documents, whenever possible.

Another topic of discussion during the audit will be the applicant's maintenance/surveilhnce

.program and how that program interfaces with the applicant's operability assurance program.

' It should be noted that it is beyond the charter of the'VORT to make assessments involving the applicant's overall seismic and environmental qualification programs even though seismic and environmental qualification are addressed and included in the pump and valve operability assurance Pl Ogl cUll.

REFERENCES 2.

3.

U.'S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Standard Review Plan, Section 3.9.3, NUREG-75/087.

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Standard Review Plan, Section 3.10, NUREG-0800 (Formerly NUREG-75/087)..

IEEE Standard ior Oesign gualification of Safety Systems Equipment Used in Nuclear Power Generating Stations, IEEE Std. 627-1980.

~

~

P UMP AND VALVE OPERABILITY ASSURANCE REVIEW PLANT INFORMATION 1.

Name:

3.

Utility:

4.

NSSS:

5.

A/E:

6.

C.P.

Docket Date:

Unit No.

2; Docket No.:

C.P.

SER Date:

[] P WR [] BWR II.

GENERAL COMPONENT* INFORMATION 1.

Supplier:

[] NSSS [] BOP 2.

Location:

a.

Building/Room b.

Elevation c.

System 3.

. Component I.D. No. on PEID dwg:

4.

If component is a (j Pump complete II.5.

If component is a [3 Valve complete II.6.

5.

General Pump Data Mfg.

Model S/N Type a.

Pump b.

Prime-mover Name Mfg.

Model S/N Type The component, whether pump or valve, is considered to be an assembl

~

composed of the body, internals, prime-mover (or act'uator). and unc rona accessories.

a.

Pump (continued)

Overall Dimensions Weight b.

Prime-mover (continued)

Overall Dimensions Weight Mounting Method Mounting Method Required B.H.P.

H.P.

Component System System Parameters:

~Oesi n

Normal Accident Press Temp Flow prime-mover requirements:

(include normal, maximum and minimum).

MotorI (voltage)

Head Turbine (pressur e)

Media Required HPSH at maximum flow Avai 1 able NPSH Operating Speed Critical Speed If MOTOR list:

Duty cycle Stal l. current Class.of insulation List functional accessories:*

Functional accessories are those additional sub-components that are required to-'make the pump assembly operational, (e.g., coupling, lubricating oil system, speed control system,'eedback, etc.)

Include manufacturer and model number.

~

~

6.

General Yalve Data a.

Valve b.

Actuator (if not an integral unit)

N ernie

Nfg, Model S/N Type Size Nfg.

Model S/N Type Size Weight Mounting Method Weight Mounting Method Maximum Required Operating Torque Maximum Delivered Torque Component System System Parameters:.

Desion Normal Accident power requirements:

( include normal maximum and minimum).

Press

~ INII Electrical Temp Flow Media

'Nax aP across valve'neumatic/Hydraulic Closing time 9 max hP Opening time 9 max aP List functional accessories:*

III.. FUNCTION 1.

Describe components normal and safety functions (include accident initiatino signals, if applicable):

Normal:

Safety:

~

~

2.

The components normal state is:

3.

Safety function:

a.

[] Emergency reactor shutdown

'c. 'j Containment isolation e-.

[] Reactor core cooling

[] Operating

[] Standby b.

$] Containment heat removal d.

[] Reactor heat removal f.

[] Prevent significant release of radio-active material to environment g.

[] Does the component function to mitigate the consequences of one or more of the following'vents'?

[] Yes [j No If "Yes", identify.

[] LOCA

[]Othe']

HELB

[] HSLB Functional accessories are those additional sub-components that are

. reauired to make the valve assembly operational, (e.g., limit switches, solenoid valves, accumulators, etc.)

Include manufacturer and model number.

4.

Safety requirements:

[] Intermitteqt Operation

[] During postulated event

[] Continuous Operation

[] Following postulated event If component operation is required following an event, give approximate lenoth of time component must remain operational.

(e.g., hours,'days, etc.)

5.

For VALVES:

Does the component

[] Fail open

[] Fail closed

[] 'Fail as is Is this the fail safe position?

[] Yes

[] No Is the valve used for throttling purposes?

[] Yes

[] No

~ What is the maximum acceptable interna'1 and external leakrate?

I V.

QUALIFICATION 1.

Reference by specific number the design codes and standards used as a guide to qualify the component:

2.

Have acceptance criterias been established and documented in the test plan(s) for the component?

[] Yes

[] No 3.

Are the margins* identified in the qualification documentation?

[] Yes

[] No 4.

Was the component that was qualified a model or an actual assemb ly?

If a model, what was its scale?

If an actual

assembly, was it qualifieo as an assemo or oy sub-assemblies?

(i.e., valve,

actuator, pump, or>ver I

Margin is the difference between design basis parameters and the test parameters used for equipment qualification.

List a11 component tests performed or to be performed that demonstrate qualification:

6.

List all component analyses performed that demonstrate qual ification:

7.

As a result of any of the tests (or analysis),

were any deviations from design requirements identified'?

[] Yes [j No If "Yes", br iefly describe any changes made in tests (or analysis) or to the component to correct the deviation.

~

~

8.

Was the tested component precisely identical (as to model, size, etc.) to the in-plant component? '[] Yes [] No If "No", is installed component [] oversized or [] undersized?

a Is component orientation sensitive?

[] Yes [] No [] ~Jnknown If "Yes", does installed orientation coincide wi.h test/analysis orientation~

[] Yes [] No 10.

List all plant loading conditions. considered during tests or, analysis; (e.g.,

normal, upset, emergency, faulted).

ll.

What is the fundamental frequency of the component?

12.

Does the component have a unique design or utilize unique material in its construction?

(Examples are spe'cial gaskets or

packing, one of a kind components, limitations on nonferrous materials, special coatings or surfaces, etc.)

[ ]Yes

[ ]No If "Yes" identify:

13.

What is the design (qualified) life of the component, exclusive of normal maintenance items such as packing, bearings,

seals, diaphragm,

gaskets, and other el.astomers?

14.

Which of the components normal maintenance items requires the most frequent.replacement/repair?

What's the normal time interval between replacements/repairs?

\\

15.

List the harshest environmental conditions that the component could be exposed to during or following an accident, [e.g.,

temp.,

pressure, humidity, submergence; radiation (type and dose), etc.]:

Information Concerning Qualification Documents for the Component:

'eport Humlmr eport Title Date Company/Organ>zat on Pre arin Re ort Company/Organ zat on Reviewin Re ort

~

~

<<(

~

'perabMity Qualification of Purge and Vent Valves Attachment

"4 Demonstration bf operability of the containment purge and vent valves and the ability of these valves to close during a design basis accident is necessary to assure containment isola ion.

This demonstration of oper ability is required by Branch Techni'cal Position (BTP)

~

CSB 6-4 and S.R.

p. 3.1G

,for containment purge and vent valves which are not sealed closed during operational conditions 1, 2, 3 and 4.

I T. -For each purge and vent valve covered in the scope of this review, the following documentation demonstrating compliance with the "Guidelines f'r Deeonstration of Operability of Purge and Vent Valves" (attached, Attachment

-.',5) is to be submitted for staff review:

.A.

Dynamic Torque Coefficient Test Reports (Butterfly valves only) - including a description of the test setup.

B.

Operability Demonstration or In-situ Test Reports (when used)

C, Stress Reports

'I D.

'Seismic Reports for Valve Assembly (valve and operator) and associated parts.

E.

Sketch or description of each valve installation showing the following (Butterfly valves only):

1.

direction of flow 2.

disc closure direction 3.

curved side of disc, upstream or downstream (asymetric discs) 4.

orientation and distance of elbows, tees, bends, e.c.

within.20 pipe diameters of valve 5.

shaft orientation 6.

distance between val ves F.

Demonstration that the maximum combined tor'que developed by the valve is below the actuator rating.

2.

The applicant should respond to the "Specific Valve Type Questions" (attached) which relate to his valve.

I r

l

3.

Analysis, if used, should be supported by tests which establish torque coefficients of the valve at various angles.

As torqu coef ic<ents in butterflv valves are dependent on disc shape aspect ra.io, angle of closure flow direction and approach flow, these things should be accurately represented during tests.

Specifically, piping.'nstallations (upstream and 'downstream of the valve) during the test should be repre-sentative of actual field installations.

For example, non-symetric approach flow from an elbow upstream of a valve can result in fluid dynamic torques of double the magnitude of those found for a valve with straight piping upstream and downstream.

4.

In-situ tests, when performed on a representative valve, should be performed on a valve of each sinze/type which is determined to represent the worst case load.

Worst case flow direction, for example, should be considered.

For two valves in series where the second valve is a butterfly valve, the effect. of non-symetric flow from the first valve should be'considered if the valves are within 15 pipe diameters of each other.

5.. If the applicant takes credit for closure time vs. the buildup of contain-s ment pressure, he must demonstrate that the method is conservative with respect to the actual valve clo"ure rate.

Actual valve closure rate is to be determined under both loaded and unloaded conditions and periodic inspection under tech.

spec.

requirements should be performed to assure closure rate does not increase with time or use.

c k

l

) ~

s

~

Attachme,

, P sa. e g>> +V~g GUIDELINES FOR DEMONSTRATION OF OPERABILITY OF PURGE AND VENT VALVES OPERABILITY In order to establish operability it must be shown that the valve actuator's

'orque capabi 1>ty has suffici'ent margin to overcome or resist the torques and/or forces (i.e., fluid dynamic, bearing, seating, friction) that resist cIosure when stroking from the initial open position to full seated (bubble tight) irr. the time limit specified.

This should be predicted on the pressure(s)

.. established in the containment following a design basis LOCA.

Considerations which should be addressed in assuring valve design adequacy include:

l.

Valve closure rate versus time - i.e.', constant rate or other.

2.

Flow direction through valve; BP across valve.

3.

Single valve closure (inside containment or outside containment valve)

. or simultaneous closure.

Establish worst case.

l 4.- Containment back pressure effect on closing torque margins of air operated v'alve which vent pilot air inside containment.

5.

Adequacy of accumulator (when used) sizing and initial charge for valve closure requirements.

G.

For valve operators using torque limiting devices - are the settings of the devices compatible with the torques required to operate the valve during the design basis condition.

The effect of the piping system (turns, branches) upstream and downstream of all valve installations.

8.

The effect of butterfly valve disc and shaft orientation to the fluid mixture egressing from the containment.

DEMONSTRATION Demonstration of the various aspects of operability of purge and vent valves may be by analysis, bench testing, insitu testing or a combination of these means.

Purge and vent valve structural elements (valve/actuator assembly) must be evaluated to have sufficient stress margins to withstand loads imposed while valve closes during a design basis accident.

Torsional shear, shear,,

bending, tension and compression loads/stresses should be cons',dered.

Seismic loading should be addressed.

Once valve closure and structural integrity are assured by analysis, testing or a suitable combination, a determination of the sealing integrity after

'losure and long term exposure to the containment environment.shoul'd be evaluated:

Emphasis should be dir ected at the effect of radiation and of the containment spray chemical solutions on seal material.

Other aspects such as the effect'n sealing from outside ambient temperatures and d bris should be considered.

I

J 4

t 1

4 I

7 t"

I A'I C

J The following considerations apply'when testing is chosen as g means for demonstra;ing valve operability:.

Bench. Testina A.

Bench testing can be used to demonst. ate suitability of the in-service valve by reason of its traceabi lity in design to a test valve.

The following factors should be considered when quali ying valves through bench testing.

~ 1.

Whether a valve.was qualified by testing of an identical valve assembly or by extrapolation of data from a similarly designed valve.

2.

Whether measures were taken to assure that piping upstream and down-stream and valve orientation are simulated.

3.

Whether the following load and environmental factors were considered

\\

a.

Simulation of LOCA b.

Seismic loading c.

Temperature soak d.

Radiation exposure

~

-.. e.

Chemical exposure

~

~

~

~

~

~

~

d.

Oebris B.,

Bench testing of installed valves to demonstrate the suitability of the specific valve to perform its required function during the postulated design basi's accident is acceptable.

,1." The factors listed in items A.2 and A.3 should be considered when taking this approach.

In-Situ Testin ln-situ testing of purge and vent valves may be performed to confirm the suitability of the valve under actual condi anions.

When performing such tests, the conditions (loading, environment) to which the valve(s) will be subjected during.he test should simulate the design basis accident.

~

~

NOTE:

Post test valve examination should be performed to establish structural integrity of the key valve/actuator components,.

0

(

I' 4

r ll I

I lI 1,

I t

r

.li3 r

5.0 Information on Valve Type The following questions

'apply to specific valve types only and need to be answered only where applicable.

If not applicable, state so.

A response is expected for each item.

5.1 Torque Due to Containment Backpressure Effect (TCB)

For those air.operated valves located inside containment, is the operator design of a type that can be affected by the containment pressure rise (backpressure effect), i.e., where the containment pressure acts to reduce the operator torque capability due to TCB.

Discuss the operator design with respect to the air vent and bleeds.

Explain in detail how TCB was calculated (if applicable).

5.2 Where air operated valve assemblies use accumulators as the fail safe

feature, describe the accumulator air system confirguration and its opera-tion.

Discuss active electrical components in the accumulator

system, and

'he basis used to determine their qualification for the environmental con-I ditions experienced.

Is this system seismically deisgned?

How is the a'llowable leakage from the accumulators determined and monitored?

Is the accumulator size and initial charge adequate for valve closure.

5.3 For valve assemblies requiring a seal pressurization system (inflatable main seal),

describe the air pressurization system configuration and opera-tion including means used to determine their qualification for the environ-mental condition experienced.

Is this system seismically designed.

5.4 Where electric motor operators are used to close the valve has the minimum available voltage to the electric operator under both normal or emergency modes been determined and specified to the operator manufacturer to assure the adequacy of the operator to stroke the valve at accident conditions with these lower limit voltages available?

Does this reduce voltage opera-tion result in any significant change in stroke timing?

Describe the emergency mode power source used.

CONTAINMENT PURGE 5 VENT VALVE

1 0

I

,4

'I h

'(

P

~~~,

~

p s~ ~~~@

'I 4

5.5 O.

Mhere electric motor and air operator units are equipped with handwheels, does their design provide for automatic re-engagement of the motor operator following the handwheel mode of operation?

If not, what steps are taken to preclude'the possibility of the valve being left in the handwheel mode fol,lowing some maintenance, test etc.

type operation?

5.6 For electric motor operated valves have the torques developed during operation been found to be less than the torque limiting settings?

0 h v

(

• h V

4 V

j II