ML19343B860

Forwards Request for Addl Info Re OL Application Review. Outstanding Areas Include Radiological Assessment,Matls Engineering & Seismic & Dynamic Load Qualification

ML19343B860
Person / Time
Site:	Shoreham File:Long Island Lighting Company icon.png
Issue date:	01/28/1981
From:	Tedesco R Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:	Pollock M LONG ISLAND LIGHTING CO.
References
NUDOCS 8102170524
Download: ML19343B860 (11)

Text

.

o 1

n h

hY QF y;}

2:a O

y) y Dist.

6 LB41 Rdg ME8 8

n ood JWilson MRushbrook recket tio. E0-322 RVollmer TMurley Lcrg Island Lightirg Correry SHanauer bec: TERA ATTN:

Pr. P. S. Polleck Dross NRC/PDR Vice President - Nuclear RTedesco L/PDR 17E East Cid Countr~

RHartfield, MPA NSIC Hicksville, i:ew Ycrx 11P01 0 ELD TIC OIE (3)

ACRS (16)

Subject:

Recuest fcr Additieral Infer-ation - Shorebar Fucleer Pcwer Station As a result of cur review cf ycur application fer an eratine license 'cr the Sherehan Fuclear Pcwer Station, we find that v.e need.,aditional informaticn in the areas of radiolecical assessn,t, raterials ergireerinc, seisric ard dyraric lead cualification. TFe specific recuests fer inferraticr. are enclosed.

We have scheduled cur review of the St arebar seismic and dyraric icad nualifica-tien prcgran for the week of Parch 30,1.'SI.

In order to reet this scredule, you rust crevided adecuate responses tc the enclosed infortation recuests en ycur cualificatien progran by February 13, 1981. We will review ycur equirrent list and select certain itens for cur detailed review by Parch 2, ICP1. Ycu rust fill cut the enclosed forts for the selected ecu1prent and sutrit this inferration by ;' arch 16, 1081.

Since we are conducting the raview of ycur sef sric and dynaric lead cualification crograr with the assistance cf Breckbaven National Laboratcry, we recuest that ene ccpy of all ycur respenses he sent to:

mm o

g-Dr. Forris Reich

.S..

a Ocpartment of !!ucicar Erercy wo o

Building 129 Ernokhaven National Laboratory Uptnn,few York 11973 If ycu desire any discussicn er clarificatien of the inferraticn recrested, clease contact J. N. k'ilson, Licensing Project Panacer, (301) 492-P408.

e~

Sincerely, p

y h

[_\\

original signed by

( 1 't,.V i

Robert L Tedesco

- E_

_-r7,'.M " h Retert L. Tedesco, Assistant Director H

f,L

~

J for Licensinc 5

9.s. %%55#.g #*" h,.

Divisien of Licensing e

~,

A w

m

.i Ercicsure. V;u ~ s q

., 7i

~.,,_y Fecuest for 1t@na -

M1 DL L$#.lli DL:A9/L

~o

. Info.rmation JW 1 on/ys BJYo ugblood RLTede.sdo m3

}; ace.

1

/81 1/. L /hl.

1#.

81.

-cc w/cocls.

~E

.;.

-; ;

3 c c. 7 81023vo5ff

i Mr. M. S. Pollock Vice President-Nuclear Long Island Lighting Company 175 East Old Country Road Hicksville, New York 11801 ccs:

Howard L. Blau, Esq.

Honorable Peter Cohalan i

Blau and Cchn, P.C.

Suffolk County Executive 217 Newbridge Road County Executive / Legislative Building i

l Hicksville, New York 11801 Veteran's Memorial Highway Hauppauge, New York 11738 Jeffrey Cohen, Esq.

Deputy Commissioner arH Counsel David Gilmartin, Esq.

New York State Energy Offics Suffolk County Attorney Agency Building 2 County Executive / Legislative Building Empire State Plaza Veteran's Memorial Highway Albany, New York 12223 Hauppauge, New York 11788 Energy Research Group, Inc.

MHB Technical Associates 400-1 Totten Pond Road 1723 Hamilton Avenue - Suite K Waltham, Massachusetts 02154 San Jose, California 95125 Irving Like, Esq.

Stephen Latham, Esq.

Reilly, Like and Schnieder Twomey, Latham & Schmitt 200 West Main Street P. O. Box 398 Babylon, New York 11702 33 West Second Street Riverhead, New York 11901 J. P. Novarro Project Manager Joel Blau, Esquire Shoreham Nuclear Power Station New York Public Service Commission i

P. O. Box 618 The Governor Nelson A. Rockefeller Bldg.

Wading River, New York 11792 Empire State Plaza Albany, New York 12223 W. Taylor Reveley, III, Esq.

Hunton & Williams Ezra I. Bialik i

P. O. Box 1535.

Assistant Attorney General Richmond, Virginia 23212 Environmental Protection Bureau New York State Department of Law Ralph Shapiro, Esq.

2 World Trade Center Cammer & Shapiro New York, New York 10047 i

9 East 40th Street New York, New York 10016

'<h'"{d)

~

Edward J. Walsh, Esq.

cn cv cN General Attorney D

'y' g

Long Island Lightir4g Company

. uu e9 RS 250 Old Country Road Mineola, New York 11501 Resident Inspector /Shoreham NPS c/o U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission P. O. Box B Rocky Point, New York 11778 i

e

+., - +

,y-

--c,

• L yy-

,-+-,e----g

-w-,

,e - e-

+

-e-en, g-

-y~,

^

g-y-',.-rg,

--g

-<v-.ee r+=,w-w+

121.39 The applicant's response to Q 121.21 (FSAR Rev.18-June 1980) states that main steam line piping was pre ured to the requirements of 1967 ANSI B 31.1 which did not require t ughness testing. Because portions of the main steam line are part of.he reactor coolant boundary, the applicant must provide information o demonstrate compliance with the fracture toughness requirements of.ppendix G, 10 CFR Part 50 for the main stet.:n line piping, including t e process piping within the main steam penetrations.

121.40 The applicant's response to Q 121.2 (FSAR Rev.18-June 1980) did not address compliance with the fractur: toughness requirements of Appendix G,10 CFR Part 50 for the feedwater system materials which are classified Quality Group A/ASME Code Class 1 a:d are part of the reactor coolant pressure boundary. The applicant m.st provide information to demonstrate that the fracture toughness of thos materials in the feedwater system that are part of the reactor coolan. pressure boundary is in compliance with the requirements of Appendix G to 10 CFR Part 50.

l l

i l

e

,. 271,he aTnd' Yomp, neVity%re"tb3Pufsuant to General Design Cri:erion 2, safety-re 1.

i b'e dehic ted for appropFiafe"los' "coiii$initions aris9g o

d from accidents and severe natt. al phenomena. With regard to the vibratory loads attributed to the feedbc :k of hydrodyhamic loads from the pressure suppression pool of the contai' ment, the staff requires that safety-related mechanical, electrical, instru entation and control equipment be designed and qualified to withstand eff cts of hydrodynamic vibratory loads associated with either safety relief valv (SRV) discharge or LOCA blowdown into the pressure suppression containme.t combined with the effects of dynamic loads arising from earthquakes.

The criteria to be used by the staff to determine the acceptability of your equipment qualification progra for seismic and dynamic loads are IEEE Std. 344-1975 as supplemented by Rc 21atory Guides 1.100 and 1.92, and Standard Review Plan Sections 3.3.2 anc 3.10.

State the extent to which the equipment in your plant meets these req f rements and the above requirements to combine seismic and hydrodynamic vibra 3ry loads. For equipment that does not meet these requirements provide just fication for the use of other criteria.

271. 2.

Provide the following informa ion:

(i) Two summary equipment lis s (one for NSSS supplied equipment and one for B0P supplied i luipment). These lists should include all safety relate mechanical components, electrical, instrumentation, and cont, al equipment, including valve actuators and other appur:anances of active pumps and valves.

In the lists, the followir ; information should be specified fer each item of equipment.

(1) Method of qualificat an used:

a) Analysis or test ' indicate the company that prepared the report, the refei ance report number and date of the publication).

b) If by test, describe whether it was a single or multi-frequency test ud whether input was single axis or multi-axis.

c) If by analysis, c: scribe whether static or dynamic, single or multiple-axis 2nalysis was used. Provide natural frequency (or fre ;uencies) of equipment.

(2) Indicate whether the 2quipment has met the qualification requi rements.

(3) Indicate the system ii which the equipment is located and whether the equipment is required for:

a) hot stand-by b) cold shutdown

%-.3 c) both M

D 0 ', d d d) neither

2 g.

(4) location of equipme t, i.e., building, elevation.

(5) Availability for inaection (Is the equipment already installed at the plant s te?)

(ii)

An Acceptabile scenario. ' how to maintain hot stand-by and cold shutdown based on tte folowing assumptions:

(1) SSE or OBE (2) Loss of offsite pownr (3) Any single failure (iii) A compilation of the recifred response spectra (RRS) for all applicable vibratory-loa < ; (individual and combined if required) for each floor ofsther nut learuitation under consideration.

3.9.2 ar,.

.10.

a.

s.,

271.3.

Identify those items of w eleartst: Im supply system and balance-of-plant equipmentJrequiring meeva.11)atidrtiar 1 specify..whyireeva.luation :is. necessary (i.e. 'becauteuth' ' original"qualific ation used the single frequency, single e

axis methodology, because equipment is affected by hydrodynamic loads, or because both of the above conditf or ; were present) for each item of equip-ment.

271,4. Describe the methods and criteria t;ed to determine the acceptability of the original equipment qualificatici to meet the required response spectra of item 2. (iii).

271.5. Describe the methods and criteria L ;ed to address the vibration fatique cycle effects on the affected equir:ent due to required loading conditions.

271.6. Based on the methods and criteria c 3 scribed in items 4 and 5, provide the results of the review of the origir :1 equipment qualification with identification of (1) equipment whi:5 has failed to meet the required response spectra and required requa'ification, and (2) equipment which was found acceptable, together with the necessary information to justify the adequacy of the original qualif' cation.

271.7. Describe procedures and schedule fc completion of each item identified in item 6.(1) that requires requalificition.

t 271,8. Describe plans for a confirmatory ii-situ impedance test and an in-plant SRV test program or other alternati.es to characterize the ability of equipment to accommodate hydrodynarr c leading.

o @ CD '3 k h l

f,e o J\\\\ w AL 11truo 1

1

.271.9.

To confirm the extent to which :ie safety related equipment meets the requirements of General Desi;n Criterion 2, the Seismic Quali-fication Review Team (SQRT) will conduct a plant site review. For selected equipment, SQRT will re iew the combined required response spectra (RRS) or d.: combined d)iamic response, examine the equipment configuratir.n and mounting, and. hen determine whether the test or analysis chich has been conducte i demonstrates compliance with the RRS if the equipment was qualified t./ test, or the acceptable analytical criteria if qualified by analysi..

The staff requires that a "Quali 'ication Summary of Equipment" as shown on the attached pages be prepare : for each selected piece of equipment and submitted to the staff two w eks prior to the plant site visit.

The applicant should make availa le at the plant site for SQRT review all the pertinent documents and eports of the qualification for the selected equipment. After the v sit, the applicant should be prepared to submit certain selected docur nts and reports for further staff review.

4 9

4 d

n

=--

Oualification St7 nary of Equipment I.

Plant Name:

Type:

1.

Utility:

PWR 2.

NSSS:

3.

A/E:

BWR II. Component Name 1.

Scope:

[ ] NSSS

[ ] BOP 2.

Model Number:

Quantity:

3.

Vendor:

4.

If the component is a.abinet or panel, name and model No. of the devices included:

5.

Physical Description Appearance b.

Dimensions c.

Weight 6.

Location: Building: _

Elevation: _

7.

Field Mounting Conditi as [ ] Bolt (No.

, Size

)

[] Weld (Length

)

~

[]

8.

a.

System in which lo ated:

b.

Functional Descrip ion:

l c.

Is the equip:ent rt quired for [] Hot Standby [] Cold Shutdown

[] Both

[] Neither 9.

Pertinent Reference De:ign Specifications:

l 12/80 D

" 3 D)

~ T ] [

.lo o Ju o

J\\1 2..'\\ t&

III. Is Equipment Available for Inspe tion in the Plant: [] Yes

[] No IV. Equipment Qualification Method:

[ ] Test

[

Analysis

[ ] Combination of Test and Analysis Qualification Report *:

(No., Title and Date)

Co@=ny that Prepared Report:

Co@any that Reviewed Report:

V.

Vibration Input:

1.

Loads considered:

a. [ ] Se ;mic only

b. [ ] Hy.codynamic only

c. [ ] Cor >ination of (a) and (b) 2.

Method of Cor:bining RRS: [ ] Wsolute Sum [ ] SRSS

[]

76UiiM spiciTyT-3.

Required Response Spectra (at.ach the graphs):

4.

Da@ing Corresponding to RRS: O B E_ _ _ __

SSE _ _ _ _ _ _ _,

5.

Required Acceleration in Each Direction:

[ ] ZPA

[ ] Other (ipi~ciTj T -

OBE S/S =

F/B =

V=

SSE S / S ='-~ ~ ~ - ~ ~- '. F/B =~~~ ~~~~~~ ~ V =~~ ~~~~~~

6.

Were fatigue effects or other vibration loacs considered?

[]Yes

[ ] No If yes, describe loads considered and !.ow they were treated in overall qualification program:

-.:=-...-...-..-

• NOTE:

If more than one report cogle e items IV thn; VII for each report.

12/80 0

, VI.

.I.f..Qu.a.l i.f.i.c.at.i o.n by Te.s.t., t.he.n..C mpl.e.te* :

3 1.

[ ] Single Frequency

[ ] Multi-Frequency: [ ] sine beat

[]

2.

[ ] Single Axis

[] Multi-Axis

~ ~ - ~ ~ " ~ ~ ~ ~

3.

No. of Qualification Tests:

OBE.. _.

SSE Other 4.

Frequency Range:

5.

Natural Frequencies in Each irection (Side / Side, Front /Back, Vertical):

S/S =

F/

V=

=

6.

Method of Determining Natura Frequencies

[ ] Lab Test

] In-Situ Test

[ ] An6 ysis 7.

TRS enveloping RRS using Mul i-Frequency Test [ ] Yes (Attach TRS & RRS graphs)

[ ] No 8.

Input g-level Test: OBE S/S =

F/B =

V=

SSE S/S =

F/B =

V=

9.

Laboratory Mounting:

1.

[ ] Bolt (No.

Si: a

)

[ ] Weld (Length

) [

10. Functional operability verif 2d: [ ] Yes [ ] No

[ ] Not Applicable

11. Test Results including modif :ations made: _

12. Other test' performed (such at aging or fragility test, including results):

l

• Note:

If qualification by a cor aination of test and analysis also contjlete item V11.

12/80 l

t wem

.Au o

4-VII. If Qualification by Analysis, t en complete:

1.

Method of Analysis:

[ ] Static Analysis

[ ] Equivalent Static Analysis

[ ] Oynamic Analysis:

[ ] Time. History

[ ] Response Spectrum 2.

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

S/S =

F'=

V=

3.

Model Type:

[ ] 3D

[ ] 20

[ ] 10

[ ] Finite Elerant

[ ] Beam

[ ] Closed Form Solution 4.

[ ] Corputer Codes:

Frequency Range and No. of n 3 des considered:

[ ] Hand Calculations 5.

Method of Coccining Dynamic esponses:

[ ] Absolute Sum [ ] SRSS

[ ] Other:

6.

Damping: OBE,,,,,,,,, SSE,,,,,,

Basis for the damping used:

7.

Support Considerations in th. model:

8.

Critical Structural Elements-Gc erning Load or Response Seismic Total Stress A.

Identification Location Ce bination Stress Stress Allowable i

Maximum Allowable Deflection B.

Max. Critical to Assure Functional Opera-Daflection Location bility l

12/B0 t

1. 9 Wsj]D

]D

' Q

' }\\Db D

{

o Ju 1.

u i

' 331.32 Section 12.5.2.2.2, " Portable Ra iiation Survey Instrumentation" shows quantities of instrumentation nc; adequate to meet the anticipated needs of a single unit plant. The stc 'f position is that suff'cient numbers of instrumentation be available 'n operating condition to accomodate the need to monitor such large numbt s of operations that may be required in radiation areas and high radiati.n areas throughout the plant during major maintenance and refueling futages and/or accidents.

In arriving at a total number, consideratior should also be given to the survey instruments that may be in a cal bration, maintenance or inoperative-on-the-shelf status during the c tage and/or accident. Additionally the inventory should include the requirements for selected ranges, sensitivities, types of radiatic-to be monitored, accuracy required, and types of monitoring to be pt formed.* Therefore this section of the FSAR should be revised to re lect these needs.

• For example, it appears that 2 :eletectors and one neutron survey meter are inadequate numbers of these types of instruments taking into account the above consider :tions.

m.

5 i

L 2

u_

e

-.