ML19347F078

Forwards Evaluation of Control Rod Driveline Hydraulic Control Units,In Response to NRC 810320 Ltr.Graphs Comparing 5% Damped Horizontal Response Spectra Encl

ML19347F078
Person / Time
Site:	Oyster Creek
Issue date:	05/07/1981
From:	Finfrock I GENERAL PUBLIC UTILITIES CORP.
To:	Crutchfield D Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
TASK-03-06, TASK-03-11, TASK-3-11, TASK-3-6, TASK-RR NUDOCS 8105150211
Download: ML19347F078 (6)

Text

l 1

l

, ,e s l

l

, GPU Nuclear g g{ 100 Interpace Parkway Parsipoany. New Jersey 07054  ;

l 201 263-6500 TELEX 136-482 Wnter's Direct Dial Number:

May 7, 1981 Dennis M. Crutchfield, Chief Operating Reactors Branch No. 5 Division of Licensing U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D. C. 20555

Subject:

SEP Topics III-6, Seismic Consideration and III-11, Component Integrity Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station Docket No. 50-219-1 The attached is in response to your letter of March 20, 1981 requesting additional information concerning the CRD hydraulic control units at the Oyster Creek Generating Station.

If you should have any questions concerning this information, please contact Mr. J. Knubel (201-299-2264) of my staff.

Very truly yours, M

Ivan R. Finf[dek, Jr.

Vice Presid6nt 1r 4

kt Q i 4

8105150 W

@ GPU Nuclear is a part of the General Public Utilities System

I EVALUATION OF CRD HYDRAULIC CONTROL UNITS OYSTER CREEK NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION

Purpose:

To evaluate the seismic adequacy of the CRD Hydraulic Control units.

Specifically, the predicted peak acceleration level for the SSE at the CRD Hydraulic Control units is compared with the allowable acceleration

. values for both anchorage adequacy and functionality.

Background:

The draft report of the " Seismic Review of the Oyster Creek Nuclear Power Plant as Part of the Systematic Evaluation Program" prepared by the NRC's Senior Seismic Review Team (SSRT) indicated in Sections 2.2 and 6.3.1.7' that the CRD hydraulic control units may not be adequate for SSE loads. Specifically, the SSRT report concludes that:

The qualified capacity of the unit is 0.89g at a frequency of 2.27 !!: based on GE test data (Reference 79 of the SSRT report). This capacity would be. reduced to 0.64g on a very conservative basis if the qualification tests considered only one component of motion (It is not clear from the test report) .

Therefore, the allowable capacity is 0.64 to 0.89g.

The in-structure response acceleration predicted by the SSRT and given in Fig. B-2b of their report is 1.3 g at 2.27 H:.

This value exceeds the " allowable" of 0.64 to 0.89g.

l l

Evaluation:

The basis - for the predicted in-structure acceleration of 1.3g referred to above are the amplified floor response spectra generated by the SSRT and included as Figure B-2 of their report. These spectra were based on a site spectra with 0.22g zero period acceleration (ZS.) and the Reg.

Guide 1.60 spectral shape. The 0.22g ZPA Guide 1.60 spectra is shown in the figure which follows together with other site specific spectra developed by the NRC, JCPSL's consultant, URS/Blume, and the original Oyster Creek licensing basis spectra (0.22g Housner). As can be seen in this figure, the 0.22g Reg. Guide spectra significantly overestimates all' of the site specific spectra. At the frequency range of interest for the CRD units, 2.27 Hz (0.44 sec period), the 0.22g Reg. Guide spectra exceeds the Housner FSAR spectra (PGA=0.22g) by the ratio 0.64/0.3S, or 1.82 (see attached Figure 14).

The predicted floor response at 2.27 H: (0.44 sec) at the 23'-6" elevation (the location of the CRD units) is shown in Figure B-2 of the SSRT report, and is attached. At the specified period and damping (7'4),

the peak acceleration is approximately 1.lg. As noted in paragraph 3.2 of the SSRT report, these results are based on the 0.22g Reg. Guide spectra.

Based on the Housner FSAR site specific spectra, the calculated peak acceleration for the CRD units at 2.27 Hz will be Predicted Peak acceleration = 1.1 1.82

= 0.60g

o ... ..

This value is_less than the allowable acceleration determined by the SSRT-to be 0.64.to 0.89g. In. addition,- as reported in JCPSL letter to the NRC dated Februsry 22, 1980, the anchorage of the CRD units was evaluated during' the 1979-1980 refueling outage and found to be adequate. The peak acceleration level used for this anchorage evaluation .tas 0.72g, which is also greater than the expected peak acceleration of 0.60g. . Based on the latest site specific spectrum reco:enended by the NRC for the Oyster Creek SEP evaluations (the NRC 1000 year Spectrum, 0.16g ZPA) which was not available when the SSRT review was performed, the expected peak acceleration is further reduced to 0.573 Accordingly, it is concluded that the CRD Hydraulic Control Units are adequate for a postulated SSE event.

0

, - 2 m

u "" L r ' A t _ T c N

) e O w

p 8 O 0 0 S Z

I

~= 8 2l - 1 R

/

4

- 8 2 c O l

2 i H

/ 0 f D

N 6 i

( = c E E g g A e

p 6 P' D 3 1 6 G S

~

~~ A l

_ 9 1 Pl - - 1 D 0 e -

h =

0 m u

i S

t T  %

5 h'

= -

C A G A t r

d9 F

O E P G c e7 4 R

P e p

d1 N O

m'. i 1 I r

, S u

%*N t I g r m u R A

x=

x R A

t r t S'Ne0 7._ c t S cA P 2 e c F eG P

_ p e RP 2 O O S p r C

.S e O 1 0 n ,

6 s s,  :

~l "r u )

c E

T d 1 a

/NQ e e I P e Y s S

(

u s

d i 0 0 T u 0 # d I G' 0, 1

o A T y i

r L

P 1

R r " ^ e s o P R

- t E s a R U l

u N 8 .

O q

y g' R

e NN -

N,N 0

i t

n o

P R

A 4

R N

[

3 l

a r

e E

L CA UR HT c .

O 6 f_ e c C

.,^

0 KE

- c EP

_ a ES R .

n CE

_ \ *V\ t 4

M. dou 0 rg RN EO TP S

s ^'!

SS 0 YE k OR a

e p 4 1

=

2 A E R

0 G . U P G I

- F

_ [y  :

e t

}

o

. N

,A 2 1 0 6 5 4 ~

7 ~

0 0 0 0

- 0 0 ,

g E5.$< s" .

C3e

. E.

e r

s . :. . .

4 4

. t$1: 23'6 i

. . 'EI: '1U'3 'I 5 Reactor b!dg. (Hor.) -

3 - Reactor bldg. (Hor.) .

13 ~

'8

~

~ '2% damping 3% dam' ping

!5 - -

5% damping I5 -l3% damping (# '

I ' 0% damping

.51.0-N'*P "9

- 7% damping.

I I'7-5g 1.0

g .

m . r-- .  ;

.o -

- 2 - , t 3 .g .

' g . .

i 5 . .

5 .

' I ' ' O.2 'I ' '

0.2 ' ; ' ' ' 1.0 0.1 ' ' ' ' ' ' 1.0 0.1 -

e.44

- Period (s)

Period (s)

.El: - 19'6'" t i a .

l Reactor bldg. (Hor.)  :

~

2% damping ,

.! t3% damping -

1 15% damping 7% damping \

E 1.0 .

. s.

. s .

m

= -

Y .

g .

'I ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' '

0.2 '1.0 O.1 Period (s) i - .ii... . .,. . .. ..ig . . .. . _

i ~'El: -19'6" to 119'3"

[ .

.T iReactor bldg. (Vert.) .

o-

' $ 1,0 J2% dampin

• 5 _G% dampin .

i$

~'5% damping i *

.7% damping .

3 -

t t;

l E. .

m -

v ' ' '

'g ' '

g 0.2 1.0 O.1 -

t i Period (s)

Fig. B-2. Spectral curves (borizontal component) with selected percentages of damping used in reanalysis of the reactor building at selected elevations from 23'6" to -1.9'6"; vertical spectral curves used at

elevations analyzed.

. - - - - .-- - - - _ - . - --