ML18078A490
| ML18078A490 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Salem  |
| Issue date: | 11/30/1978 |
| From: | Parr O Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Mittl R Public Service Enterprise Group |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 7812120055 | |
| Download: ML18078A490 (13) | |
Text
NOV 3 0 1978 Docket _No.
50-311 I
Mr. R. L. Mittl, General Manager licensing and Envirpnment En'gi neeri ng and Constr-uction Department Public Service Electric and Gas Company 80 Park Place Newark, New Jersey 07101
Dear Mr. Mittl:
Dis tr; butJon NlfC PD1<--
Local PDR Docket File LWR #3 File R. Boyd D. Vassallo-F.
~Ji 11 i ams
- 0. Parr R. Stright M. Ernst R. Denise ELD IE (3)
M.
Rushbroo~ (w/extra copies)
R. Mattso_n D. Ross J. Knight R. Tedesco R. DeYoung-V. Moore
~
R. *vol-lmer BCC:
NSI.C
SUBJECT:
REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION FOR THE REVIHJ OF THE SALEM UNIT 2 FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT (FSAR)
As a result of our conti~uing review of the Salem FSAR, we 1ind that we need additional information to complete our evaluation. The specific information required is listed.in the Enclosure.
In order to maintain our revie1;1 :schedule, this additional information is required promptly.
Please contact us if you de$ire any discussions or clarification of the en9losed.request.
- Sincerely,
Enclosure:
Request for J\\dditional Information cc w/enclosure; See next page 7812120"05.5 Ol'i.g\\iool il&Md 1>1.
Olan Pait
~-
Olan D. Parr, Chief Light Water Reactors Br~nch No. 3 Division of ~roject Management
..,,.,,,.. Lkf.Wctc*h. *o~w,ijt=BC.. *..........
l!IURNAME~
..................................................... A........................................................................
DATE~ '.... :1.i...!.?.~.:.......,;.~.~.'...~.
.'..'..~.... :............................................................. :...........................,.....
i
- U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1978 ~ 2.65
- 7459
Mr. f{. cc:
Richard Fryling, Jr., Esq.
Assistant General Counsel Public Service Electric & Gas Company 80 Park Place Newark, New Jersey 07100 Mark Wetterhahn, Esq.
Conner, Moore & Caber 1747 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.
Suit~ l 050 Washington, O.C.
20006 Mr. Leif J. Norrholm U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Corrrnission Region I Drawer I Hancocks Bridge, New Jersey 08038 e
NUV 3 o 197B
.f1:
ENCLOSURE REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION SALEM NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION, UNIT 2 4.37 Inservice Testing of Pumps and Valves Provide the information requested in our letter dated January 27, 1978 regarding your initial 20 month inservice testing program for pumps and valves.
4.38 Appendix XVII-2461.1 of the ASME Code Section III requires that bolt loads in bolted connections for linear component supports include prying effects due to the flexibility of the connection.*
(1)
Provide confirmation that the loads in bolted connections for linear component supports were determined by considering the d~formation of the connection and tension-shear interaction for the bolts.
For connections of supports which are anchored to a concrete structures provide in addition:
- a.
The typ~ of anchor bolt
- b.
The factors of safety (and their bases) against pullout under static,* repeated and transient loading.
This information should include representative diagrams of the*
connections, material properties and interaction diagrams, the analytical techniques and models used, and the maximum stresses in the bolts and the.connections under both static, repeated, and transient type loading.
(2)
If any connection was assumed to be rigid, provide complete analytical or experimental justification for this assumption.
7.40 Seismic Qualification of SafetyrRelated Mechanical and Electrical Equipment and Instrumentation.
The response in question 7.29 is not entirely satisfactory.
The general program as outlined, referencing IEEE-344, 1971 standard is not completely in accordance with current NRC requirements.
We require that you furnish information as per the attached equipment qualification form for each item of equipment listed in FSAR Table 7.18-1 (copy attached).
Also provide similar information for three typical pumps and three. typical valves whose operability is essential to achieve
- Similar requirements for structural joints *are also stated in the AISC Manual of Steel Construction, 1970 Edition for plant in which support design predates Subsection NF of Section III of the ASME Code.
hot standby and/or cold shutdown after an SSE event.
After receipt of these completed forms, the NRC Seismic Qualification Review Team (SQRT) will make a site visit to inspect the equipment as mounted and
. qualified.
S~mic Qualification SUllllllary of Efllpment I.
Plant Name: [~a*--------------------------------------.
~:
- 1. Utility:
PWR ----
- 2.
NSSS:
BWJ:l __
- 3.
A-E:
II.
Component Name I Model
- 1.
Number Quantity.:.
.2.
Vendor
- 3.
Physical Description
~
- 4.
Location:
Building:
~
(In Plant) Elevation:
- 5.
Natural Frequencies in Each Direction:
-~------------
- 6.
Functional
Description:
- 7.
Pertinent Reference Design Specifications:
III. Is Equipment Available for Inspection in the Plant:[ ) Yes [ )
No Comments~
IV. Seismic Qu~fication Method:
Test:
Analysis: ------
Combination of Test and Analysis: -----
V.
Seismic Input:
- 1. Required Response Spectra {attach the graphs):
Required
- 2.
Acceleration in each Direction:
VI. If qualification by Test, thenComplete:
l.[ ] Single Frequency
[ ]
Multi-Frequency 2.[ ] Single Axis
[ ]
Multi-Axis
- 3.
Frequency Range:
- 4.
TRS enveloping RRS using Multi-Frequency Test [ ]
Yes {at~ach TRS graphs)
[ ]
No
- 5.
- g-level Test at h
1 ----
h
.2 v- ----
- 6.
g-level Required
~---
h IC 2 ----
v - ----
- 7.
Mounting:
- 1.
Seismic Report:
- 2.
Field Check:
- 8. Functional Verification Performed[ ] Yes [ ] No [ ] Not Applicable VII. If Qualification by Analysis or by the*combination of Test and Analysis then, Complete
- 1. Description of Test including Results:
.)
,..... 2. Method of Analysis:
[ ] Static Analysis
[ ] Equivalent Static Analysis [ 1 Dynamic Analysis
[ ] Response Spectrum
[ ] Time-History
- 3.
Model Type (each direction): ----------------------------------------
- 4.
Computer Codes:
- 5.
Damping:
~.
Support Considerations:
- 7.
Critical Structural Elements:
A. Identification Location B.
Max. Deflection Governing Response Combination Seismic Total Stress Stress Stress Allowable Location Effect Upon Functional Operability
Equipment Control Console
- Jfuclear Instrument-ation System Process Control Equipment Cabinets Solid State Protection Actuation R!Lcks Vital In~trument
~ua Static Inverters Auxiliary Control System Terminal and
.Relay Cabinets Location Aux. Bldg.
El. 122 I Aux. Bldg.
El. 122' Aux. Bldg.
El. 122 I Aux, Bldg.
El. 122 I Aux. Bldg.
El. 100 I Aux. Bldg.
El. 100 I TABLE Q7,18-l
SUMMARY
OF SEISMIC QUALIFICATION FOR SAFETY-RELATED EQUIPMENT Seiemicl Design Ba.sis 0.36 g
_o. 36 g 0,36 g 0.36 g 0.25 g 0.25 g Type of
- Quall fica.t ion Teet Teet Test Test Test Teet Remarks Simultaneous Time History Tea~
producing acceletatione greater than design be.sis earthquake (DBE).
Test result11 were acceptable,
,Sine Beat Teet
,with peak ac'celeration of o,7g, Teet results were acceptable.
Sine Beat Test with peak acceleration of 0.7g.
Teet results were acceptable.
Sine Beat Teet with peak acceleration of o,7g, Teet results were acceptable.
Uni axis T:lme History Test2 with peak acceleration of o.7g, Test results were acceptable.
2 Unlaxie Time History Test with peak acceleration of o,7g, Teet results were acceptable,
Equipment Relay Racks 125V and 28V.DC Distribution Cabinets Terminal Racks Diesel Control Cabinets Control Room Recorder Panels Solid State Protection Output Teat and Interface
- Cabinets,
/
.Location Aux. Bldg, El. 100 I Aux*, Bldg, El. 84' and 100' Aux, Bldg, El. 100' Aux, Bldg, El. 100' Aux, Bldg, El. 122 I Aux, Bldg, El. 122 I TABLE Q7.18-l
SUMMARY
OF SEISMIC QUALIFICATION FOR SAFETY-RELATED EQUIPMENT Seismic 1 Design Basis 0.25 g 0.25 g 0,25 g 0.25 g 0.36 g 0.36 g
' 1 Type.of
_Qualification Analysis Test Analys 1a.
Test Analysis Test Remarks A finite element computer analysie was performed, Results ot the analysis were acceptable.
Simultaneous Time History Test2 producing acceleratione greater than DBE.
Test results were acceptable, Calculated reB~nant frequency and determined stresses using m~ximum g level at this frequency from response spectra.
Results of the analysis were acceptable, Simultaneous Time History Teet2 producing accelerations greater than ~BE. *Teet results were acceptable, A finite element computer analy*i*
waE performed, Results ot the analysis were acceptable, 2
Simultaneous Time History Test producing accel~rations greater than DBE. 'Test results were acceptable.
(
i Eauinment
'Radiation Monitoring Cabinets
-Safeguards Equipment Control Control Centers Unit Substations and
- DC Switchgear 5 kV Switchgear Diesel Generator and Accessorie*
Location Aux. Bldg, El, 122'.
Aux. Bldg.
El. 100' Aux. Bldg.
- El. 122' Aux, Bldg,
- El. 100' Aux, Bldg.
El. 100 I TABLE Q.7,18-1
SUMMARY
OF SEISMIC QUALIFICATION
_FOR SAFETY-RELATED EQUIPMENT Se ismic 1 Design Basis 0.36 g 0.25 g 0.25 g 0.25 g Type of-Qualification Test and Analysis Test and' Analysh Test
- Test Analysis Ana.lysis
- ~,
~*
- ~*
'.. f.
I Remarks Sine Beat Test with peak acceleration of 0.7 g, Test results were satisfactory.
An analysis was also performed with satisfactory results, Ih addition selected components will be tested, An analysis was performed on the entire.
assembly to demonstrate its capability to withstand the specified seismic forces,
- z-Electronic subassemblies and components,
were vibration te~ted at natural frequen-cies with comp3rison to data from the anal-
- ysis, Results of the analysis and tests were acceptable, Uniaxis Sine Dwell Test wit~
acceleration of0.5g over the frequency range, Test results were acceptable.
.i The unit was tested at resultant~
accelerations greater than t~e
~-~
design basis earthquake (DBE) at the natural frequencies.
Test results were acceptable, Calculated resonant frequency and.*
determined stresses using maxim~m-g level' at this fre*quency from the response spectr"ll.
Results of the analysis were *acceptable, Calculated etresses 'On !1.11 vital-com~onents using peak acceler-ation of l,Og horizontally and o.67g'Nertic&lly, ReRults of *the analysis were acceptable,
- 1 I' *\\
i I
Equipment Tray and Hangers Battery Charger 125V Batt~ry Charger 2BV Location Aux, Bldg, El. 122' Aux, Bldg,
- El~ 122' Aux, Bldg.
- El. 122' Aux. Bldg, Batteries 28v & l25V
- El. 122' Battery Racks Aux. Bldg,
- El. 122'
(
'\\
TABLE Q7.18-1.
SUMMARY
OF SEISMIC QUALIFICATION FOR SAFETY-RELATED EQUIPMENT
. 1 Seismic Design Basis 0.36 g
- o. 36 g 0.36 g 0.36 g r~
Type of Qualification Analysis Test Test Test Anaiysh t.....
? ~
- 'a. < ~
Remarks Analysis performed by computing the dynamic response parameters utilizing the response spectra.
Results of the analysis were acceptable.
A resonant search was performed.
The unit was then subjected to a resultant acceleration greater than the design basis earthquake (DBE) at the determined nittur11l frequencles.
Test results wete acceptable.
Uniaxis Time History with peak acceleration or G 75g, Test results were acceptable.
- e.
Simultaneous horizontal and ver-tical components applied with peak accelerations greater than ~.
the design be.sis earthquake (DBE)~
at the natural frequencies *. Test results were acceptable.
Calculated resonant frequency an~~
determined stresses using maximu4 g level* at this frequency from the response spectra.
Results or the analysis were acceptable.
,1
' /
r,
lJ1,....
CX>
I N
CX>
Equinment Electrical Penetrations Aux. Bldg. Vent.
Fan !'fotors Service Water Pump Motors Aux. Feedwater Pump Motors Engineered Safeguards Motors I' "
I.'
TABLE Q7.10-l
SUMMARY
OF SEISMIC QUALIFICATION FOR SAFETY-RELATED EQUIPMENT Location Containment El. 78 I Aux. Bldg.
El. 122 I 1
Seismic Dcsi~n Basis 0.23 g 0.36 g Service Water 0.25 g Intake Structure El. 90.9'
. Aux, Bldg.
0,24 g El. 84 I Aux, Bldg, 0,24. g El. 84 1 and 45 1
'Type of Qua.lification Analysis Analysis Analysis Analysis Analya111
/
Remarks Calculated resonant rreque~cy o unit and components.
Stre11se*
were then determined at these frequencies using maximum g lev obtained from response spectra.
Results of the analysis were acceptable.
Calculated stresses using maxi*
g level from response 11pectra.
The analysis substantiates that the motor will function both mechanically and electricall7 under DBE conditions.
11 PUUIJI Motor* Supplied by Ve*tinghoute vi th Seismic QuaHUcation.
i
- I 1..
TABLE Q7.18-l
SUMMARY
OF SBISHIC QUALIFICATION FOR SAFETY-RELATED EQUIPMENT Safety-r~lated instrument panels used in various location~ of the plant were also qualified by testing a standard panel subjecting it to the most severe seismic condition in the plant.
Testing was *lso used to qualify safety-related instruments mounted in the panels.
Uniaxis Time History Test with peak accelerations of o.6 - 1.0 g and a Sine Beat Test with peak acceleration of 0.7g were performed.
Test results were acceptable, lPeak horizonal acceleration of the floor-as a result of the Design Basis Earthquake.
2All time history tests were performed using the time history response spectra.of floor elevation 122' in the Auxiliary Building.
- Equipment was qualified for this elevation although actually located st a lower elevation in the auxiliary b'\\lilding.
(.!\\,
.... Ii*
~*.
o*
. ~'
c I
\\