ML20069A774
| ML20069A774 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Grand Gulf, 05000000, Shoreham |
| Issue date: | 10/22/1981 |
| From: | Chang T Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Rosztoczy Z Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| Shared Package | |
| ML082480769 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8111170512 | |
| Download: ML20069A774 (57) | |
Text
.
-Q'gp L.i
+r. no j
k UMTED STATES yg g
,7 g NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION wasmwaTom. o. c.acess s
9.
f
%, *"Y/e 'lM*
OCT 2 21981 i
I MEMORANDUM FOR: Zoltan R. Rosztoczy, Chief j
Equipment Qualification Branch
- 1 Division of Engineering i l' i
FROM:
T. Y. Chang Equipment Qualification Branch Division of Engineering
.I' THPU:
Goutam Bagchi, Section Leader Equipment Qualification Branch Division of Engineering
.iUBJECT:
TRIP REPORT FOR SEISMIC CRITERIA IMPLEMENTATION REVIEW MEETING WITH MISSISSIPPI POWER AND LIGHT
,3 COMPANY (MP&L) ON GRAND GULF NUCLEAR POWER STATION UNITS 1 The Seis:nic Qualification Review Team (SQRT), consisting of Engineers from the Equipment Qualification Branch (EQB) and the Idaho National Engineering Laboratory (INEL, EG&G), ccnducted a site visit to Grand Gulf Nuclear Power Station Unit 1 at Port Gibson, Mississippi, on July 28 to 30,1981. The purpose of the visit is two-folded: (1) to perform a plant site review of the seismic and dynamic qualification methods, procedures, and results l:
for selected safety-related mechanical and electrical equipment and their supporting structures, (2) to observe'the field installation of the equip-ment in order to verify and validate equipment modeling employed in the qualification program.
The background, review procedures, findings and the required follow-up A list of attendees at the conference actions are summarized below.
is contained in Attachment I, and a list of the equipment selected for audit is shown in Attachment II.
===1.
Background===
The applicant has described the equipment qualification program in Sections 3.9 and 3.10 of the Final Safety Analysis Report, consisting of dynamic testing and analysis, used to confirm the ability of seisaic Category I mechanical and electrical (includes 1.istrumentation, control and electrical) equipment and their supports, to function properly during
[;
i The and after the safe shutdown earthquake (SSE) specified for the plant.
[
applicant has also described the program for the combin pool.
i
.th7[Eh XA Copy Has Been Sent to PDR f
ja
s-a, Zoltan R. Rosztoczy 2-OCT 2 21981 i
In instances where components have been qualified by testing or analysis i
to other than current standards such as Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers Standard, 344-1975, " Recommended Practices for Seismic Qualification of Class IE Equipment for Nuclear' Power Generating I'
Stations," and Regulatory Guides 1.92, "Cowbining Modal Responses and Spatial Components in Seismic Response Analysis," and 1.100, " Seismic j
Qualification of Electrical Equipment for Nuclear Power Plants," or where
- i equipment is affected by and was not qualified for the suppression pool hydrodynamic loads, the applicant has undertaken a re-evaluation and requalification program.
The plant site review was performed to detemine the extent to which the qualification of equipment, as installed in Grand Gulf, meets the current l
licensing criteria as described in the Standard Review Plan (SRP) Sections 3.9.2 and 3.10.
2.
Review Procedures Prior to the site visit, the SQRT reviewed the ec;uipment seismic quali-i cation information contained in the pertinent FSAR sections and the reports referenced therein. A representative sample of Seismic Category I mechanical l
and electrical equipment, including both NSSS and B0P scopes as shown in Attachment II, were selected for the plant site review. The review consisted of field observations of the actual equipment configuration and its installation, followed by the review of the corresponding test and/or analysis documents.
Brief technical discussions were held during the review sessions to provide l
SQRT's; feedback to the applicant on the equipment qualification. An exit conference was held to summarize and conclude the plant site visit.
~
i 3.
Findings The results of field observations and the review of the qualification reports and pertinent dociments for equipment as listed in Attachment II are summarized in Attactment III for each piece of equipment evaluated.
The plant site review identified the need to provide additional information on certain gu.ar*c issues as well as to clarify.the details of the qualifi-cation for some specific pieces of equipment as described in Attachment III.
The applicant has committed to submit additional infomation and clarification g~
for a follow-up review. Subsequently, on 10/9/81 the applicant sent to NRC a post-audit submittal. The follow-up actions are described in Section 4.
4.
Follow-Up Actions The applicant's post-audit submittal of 10/9/81 is currently under review by the SQRT. Following is a summary of the follow-up on the generic open items as well as specific open items as' stated in Attachment III.
i i
l t
---m-de-
=9m+w
=e-
+-
ex*=.-w.
+m.
-w m mee m e s se saiset e
L
7 _
2 1
~
Zoltan R. Rosztoczy OCT 2 21981
- l Generic Open Items A.
Fatigue effect due to seismic loading was considered in the qualification.
1.
However, when test method is utilized to qualify equipmeat, hydrodynamic effect on fatigue is not fully accounted for. Typical samples should be studied to assist in the review of this generic issue: The comparison ll for NSSS equi;uent is p ovided as attachment 2 in the 10/9/81 submittal.
The comparison for B0P equiprent is currently being evaluated and the
- l applicant is committed to sulmit the result and conclusion of the stud)l for staff's review by November,1981.
B.
Provide assurance that ratesting and redesign on Limitorque Motor Operators.
for the hydrodynamic loading is compluted prior to fuel load. Provide confirmation when retesting, redeisgn, and installation have been completed:
i An evaluation is currently being performed and the applicant is committed to provide response by November,1981.
4 Specific Open Items...
A.
Provide clarifying details as described below:
a) Horizontal Fuel Transfer System containment Closure (NSSS 4).
The applicant is committed to provide documentation describing what means or procedure will be used to assure that the fuel transfer tube closure is closed and latched during reactor operation,
~
b) Control Room Panel (NSSS 7).
- The applicant'is committed to address the cor.cerns described in i
Attachment III.7.
c) ASCO Solenoid Valve (BOP 14).
The applicant is committed to respond to the concen s described in Attachment III. 29.
d) Reactor Core Isolation Coolant Turbine (NSSS 15).
j The applicant is committed to address the concerns described i
in Attachment III.15 by November,1981.
B.
The concerns as described in Attachment III for the following items have been addressed by the applicant in the 10/9/81 submittal. This submittal l
1s currently under review by the SQRT.
a) Horizontal Fuel Transfer System Containment Closure (NSSS 4).
Information concerning verification of computer code "F-1" is l
provided as attachment 1 in the 10/9/81 submittal.
b) 'Hydrualic Control Unit (NSSS 8). Information on HCU fatigue calculation is provided as attachment 2 in the 10/9/81 submittal.
c) Standby Service Water Pressure Indicator Swit.r. (BOP 2).
i'
=
e.
-o,
Zoltan R. Rosztoczy OCT 2 2 19 M f
i d) RHR Solenoid Yalve (80P,4).
The concerns described in i
Attachment III.19 are addressed as attachment 5 in the 10/9/81 submittal.
e)
- Standby Diesel Generator Control Panel (BOP 10). The concerns described in Attachment III.25 are addressed as attachment 6 in the 10/9/81 submittal.
l f) HPCS Service Water Pump (80P 11). The concerns described in Attachment III.26 are addressed as attachment 7 in the 10/9/81 submittal.
I The review of the applicant's implementation of the equipment qualification program is continuing and the applicant is required to resolve all out-standing items as identified in Section 4 above.
/.L ~ yy T. Y. Chang 7
Equipment. Qualification Branch Division of Engine #ng
Enclosure:
As Stated cc:
R. Vollmer, w/o enclosure W. Johnston R. Tedesco A. Schwencer D. Houston G. Bagcht A. Lee M. Haughey R. Riggs R. Wright J. Singh, INEL M. Reich, BNL
.}
.I
-e
e'.
I, ATTACHMENT I SQRT VISIT TO GRAND GULF LIST 0F ATTENDEES r
9 T. M. Johnston MP&L Rufus A. Brown MP&L Ricky L. Patterson MP&L E. S. Slater MP&L l
Danny G. Bost MP&L L. F. Dale MP&L Rahim Munshi MP&L R. Fron MP&L M. F: Haughey NRC i
T. Y. CharJ, NRC W. J. McConaghy Nutech I.
Sudhansu Saha Bechtel Dan Fouts Bechtel Lloyd Schrader Bechtel T. R. Mager Nutech M. P. voutyras Nutech i
A. B. Davy Bechtel J. C. Rawlings Nutech l'
J. E. Sundergill Bechtel N. Luria GE D. Shamis GE W. C. Sherbin GE J. Mokri GE W. C. Eiff MP&L A. Javid Nutech l
D. K. Henrie GE Jim Cleveland GE/SAI G. Bagchi NRC R. W. Hardy GE G. Q. U1pindo GE q
Clarke Kido EG&G Idaho,.Inc' Clyde Nieh GE J. N. Singh EG&G Idaho, Inc.
T. R. Thompson EG&G Idaho, Inc.
I E. Gibo GE ii; D. L. Faulstich GE T. L. Bridges EG8G Idaho, Inc.
+
1
-n
..e
-Me as a
T
,,.----m-.-,
o.
?,
ATTAC) MENT II
.t SQRT VISIT TO GRAND GULF
[
b.
LIST OF EQUIPMENT SELECTED FOR AUDIT a.) NSSS Equipment 1.
Recirculation Ficw Control Valve 2.
Residual Heat Removai Pump and Motor 3.
Relay, Panel Mounted Device 4.
Horizontal Fuel Transfer System Containment Closure 5.
48 Inch Wide Panel (H22-P011) 6.
Standby Liquid Control Pump and Motor 7.
Control Room Panel 8.
Hydraulic Control Unit 9.
Termination Cab.inet j
- 10. Standby Liquid Control System Explosive Valve i
- 11. Head Strongback Carousel
,l
- 12. Recirculation System Sample Probe
- 13. Main Steam Safety' Relief Valve
- 14. Reactor Core Isolation Cooling Pump
- 15. Reactor Core Isolation Coolant Turbine b.) BOP Equipment 1.
6.9 KV Switchgear 2.
Standby Service Water Pressure Indicator Switch 3.
Standby Diesel Generator Jacket Water Standpipe 4.
SRY Air Accumulator 6.
6 Inch CRD Gate Valve and Actuator 77 Load Center Unit Substation 8.
125 V DC Panel Board 9.
Trap Door Fire Damper
- 10. Standby Diesel Generator Control Panel
- 11. HPC3 Service Water Pump
- 12. 40 MW Fan
- 13. Containment Polar Crane i
- 14. ASCO Solenoid Yalve I
e
.. ~
- =*-+e-n
~n e
y
e'.
r*,
ATTACHMENT III Report of SORT visit to Grand Gulf 4
9 6
l
=
r I
i i
i t
l l
t m
=
.. =
7 e'.
f, i
h EScG.
P.O. LJX 1625. loAHO FALLS IDAHO 83415 September 30, 1981 Mr. R. E. Tiller, Director Reactor Operations and Programs Division Idaho Operations Office - 00E Idaho Falls, ID 83401 REVIEW OF DYNAMIC QUALIFICATION OF SAFETY RELATED ELECTRICAL AND MECHANICAL EQUIPtENT FOR GRAND GULF (A6415) - Saff-269-81
Dear Mr. Tiller:
During the week of July 27 to July 31, 1981 EG&G Idaho personnel (J. M.
Singh, T. L. Bridges and T. R. Thompson) assisted NRC in the review of selected seismically qualified equipment. The audit which was performed at the plant, consisted of field inspection of the equipment, detailed review of the qualification reports, and resolution of questions or identi-fication of action items encountered during the review.
The enclosed report covers the initial findings from the review and completes A6415 Pert Chart Ncde JJ-39, Subtask 3, for the Grand Gulf plant. Subtasks 4, 6, and 7 remain to be done for this plant.
Very truly yours, hU 4
B. F. Saffell, Jr., Manager Code Assessment and Applications Division l
BLB:acf l*
Enclosure:
As stated cc: Q NRC-DE G.
NRC-DE R. W. Kieiin, EG&G Idaho (w/o Attach.)
i
.,..a.
. ~ _..,....
-~*= - - - ~ * *
- *~
- d
e-e
+Nww e
m-esm
.mes.w-C.
~
a sm e.
e--
9, i
.I,
.\\
l' GRAND Giltf SQRT VISIT REPORT (Inf tia1) i AWmM l
J. N. Singh T. L. Bridges T. R. Thompson I
e 1
4 4
e I
l' r
~ * *
-+,,,am%
M
c',,
CONTENTS
.(
. _S,., NO._
REFERENCE NO.
TITLE PAGE NS.SS-1 RECIRCULATION FLOWS CONTROL VALVE 1
h 2
NSSS-2 RESIOUAL HEAT REMOVAL PUMP AND MOTOR o
3 NSSS-3 RELAY, PANEL MOUNTED DEVICE 4
NSSS 4 HORIZONTAL FUEL TRANSFER SYSTEM CONTAlte9ENT CLOSURE 5
MSSS-5 48 INCH WIDE PANEL 6
NSSS-6 STANOBY LIQUID CONTROL PUMP AND MOTOR 7
NSS S-7 CONTROL ROOM PANEL 8
NSSS-8 HYORAULIC CONTROL UNlT 9
NSS S-9 TEMINATION CABINET 10 NSSS-10 STANOBY LIQUID CONTROL SYSTEM EXPLGSIVE VALVE 11 NSSS-Il HEAD STRONGBACK CAROUSEL 12 NSSS-12 RECIRCULATION SYSTEM SAwtE PROBE 13 NSSS-13 MAIN STEAM SAFETY RELIEF VALVE 14 NSSS-14 REACTOR CORE ISEATION C0Q.ING PUMP 15 NSSS-IS REACTOR CORE ! SOLATION COOLANT TUR$INE l 'l 16 BT-1 6,9KV SWITCHGEAR l-17 BT-2 PRESSURE INDICATOR SWITCH 18 BT -3 STANOBY DIESEL GENERATOR JACKET
~
WATS STA.NWIPE l
l 19 87 4 RHR.SG.EN0I0 VALVE l
20 BT -5 SRV AIR ACCUMULATOR l
21 BOP-6 6 INCH CR0 GATE W.E AND ACTUATOR 22 B @-7 LOAD CENTS UNIT SUBSTATION I
4 23 B &-8 12.5V DC PANEL BOAAD i
24 ST-9 TRAP 000R FIRE 0#9ER 25 B 7 -10 STAND 8Y DIESEL GENERATOR CCHTROL PANEL l
26 B&-ll HPCS SElafICE WATER PUlf 27 B &-12 40 !4W FAN 23 BW-13 CONTAINNT POLAR CRANE 29 B @-14 SG.ENOID VALVE 4
4 l
t l
i I
I:
l-i-
l t
a I
4 5
1 1
I s
111 i
e b
t 0
I l
I
y, a
l i
l.
RECIRCULATION FLOW CONTROL VALVE me Recirculation Flow Control Valve (Equipment No. 333-F060; Model 3
Ho. SS150) was supplied by Fisher Controls. This straight trimugh ball type 72L X 94H in. valve, weigning about 16000 lbs. (wet) was located in the Drywell at an elevation of 107 feet. It was welde(' to the piping. The referenced qualification report is the design report for 24 inch SS-150 ball valve "TR-2608-1, Design Report, January 1978." This report was prepared by Fisher controls and reviewed by General Electric. Seismic and hydrodynamic loads are considered in the qualification.
a This item was qualified through analysis. The operability of the j
valve is not a required function for safety. Its main purpose is to maintain the pressure Foundary. Structural integrity is the main concern and hence a stangth analysis. A hand calculation indicated a minimum l
frequency of 73Hz in the lateral direction for the overhang and 94Hz for i
the ball shaft. The feedback rod was exempt from the frequency calculation f
because the structural failure of it would not compromise the pressure boundary. This system, thus being mlatively rigid was analyzed statically. A value of 5.0 g in each of the horizontal directions and 3
9.0 g in the vertical direction was 'hosen for the analysis. Housing to c
body studs were analyzed for this load and showed a stress value of 66.S ksi against the allowable of 81.0 ksi (2 Sm = 4/3 Sy). These chosen values of accelerations were found to be much higher than the actually required level of 1.2 g in each of the horizontal directions and 0.6 g in the vertical direction from the piping analysis. The load combination method was SRSS. Rtigue e'fects of consca.it " dither" were considered in the design, and materials and stresses were selected for a 40-year life of components.
The analyses performed are adequate. Sufficient margin for safety is present.
I 1
l.
-~-
e p...,y
,w-E
t ',
I
>q j
Based on our observation of the field installation and review of the analysis reports this equipment is adequately qualified for the prescrioed loads.
4 9
i l
l t
t-4 4
9 e
f 4
5 l
2
-M h %me e 4,
.~-s L
( k, e
2.
RESIDUAL HEAT REMOYAL PUlf AND 110 TOR This.iten (model number 300X-ZOCXXHZ (Pump); SK6339tC186A (motor)] was supplied by Byron Jackson, General Electric letor Plant. It is a vertical deep well pump '443 inches 1ong including the motor. It is mounted with 24-2 inch bolts in the auxiliary building at elevation 93'-0".
This equipment was qualified through analysis. A lumped mass esdel was developed and a response spectrum analysis was performed using SAPM06. Thirty modes were used in determining the response to input from three orthogonal directions. Responses due to inCWual modes were combined by SRSS with closely spaced modes cochim%
caing to Reg.
Guide 1.92.
This equipment is located outside the reactor building so it is not affected Dy high cycle suppression pool loads. Allowable g levels were approximately 7 to 9 times the maximum calculated response values.
Based on our review of the analysis reports, observed field installations, and clarifications provided by the applicant, this piece of equipment is adequately qualified for the seismic loads.
1
=
h 3
m M
- ee w g oe g
w
+
/
3.
HELAY, PANEL MOUNTED DEVICE This item (Equipment MPL Ho. E12A-K408) measuring about 4 x 1 1/2 x 1 inch ('a plug on relay) was supplied by General Electric. It was mountad on panel H13-7618, about 2 feet from tne bottom. The panel is located in the control building at an elevaticn of 166 feet. This device along with its mourt ng on the panel was qualified on the basis of tests done on a similar Confrentes panel with devices. The refennced document was the " Seismic Test Report H13-P618" prepared and reviewed by General Eketric. Seismic load was considered in the qualification.
S The test performed on the Confrentes panel was a multifrequency, multiaxis random input. In the range of 1 to 33Hz it had natural frequencies of 19, 27.4 and 33Hz in S/S, F/B and vertical directions, respectively. TRSs generated enveloped the RRSs for the highest location of this kind of panel (189 feet) for Grand Gulf. A number of devices were mounted on it. The required accelert. tion (peak) level for the device E12-K408 fer its location was determined to be 3.3 g (F/B),1.7 g (S/S) and 0.3 g (V). This particular device had previously been tested (on a similar panel) to a level of 4.0 g (f/b), 3.0 g (s/s) and 1.5 g (v).
An inquiry was made of the applicant about dynamic similarity of the panel and the particular device. He stated that, in general, the two panels had substantially the samt dynamic characteristics and in particular his statement included " Device E12A-K408, on panel H13-P618 has a dual axis seismic capacity of 4 g (f-b), 3g(s-s) and 1.5 g (v). The maximum expected l
acceleration, by similarity to a tested panel is 3.3 g (f-b),1.7 g (s-s),
I f
and 0.3 g (v)."
I Based upon the observation of the field installation, the review of the report and particularly the assurances protided by the applicant this
{
i-device is qualified for the prescribed loading.
L i
4
- wm C
m
2 s
i 4.
HORIZONTAL FUEL TRANSFER SYSTEM CONTAIN!ENT CLOSURE This closure is a 38 inen diameter, hinged, stainless s' teel plate door 13/4 inches thick. It is located on the containment side of the fuel transfer tube at elevation 185 f t 4 in. Sundstrand Energy Systems was the
- nanufacturer of the containment fuel transfer tube closure (model Nc. GE-794E945). It was qualified for saisic and hydrodynamic loadings by analysis performed by Sundstrand Energy Systems (report No. VPF 5520-37-2, dated 9-15-77).
l The design and analysis of this closure was perfomed in ace:vdance with the requirements of the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Division 1, Suosection NE for Class MC Components (winter addenda '.975).
The fundamental naturai frequency was determined to be 188 Hz. This was based on a closed fom solution for circular plates assuming clamped edges. Analysis of the closure for seismic and hydrodynamic loading was perfomed using the static equivalent method. An acceleration value of 1.75 g's was used which is considerably more than the required IP A value of 0.75 g horizontal and 0.40 g vertical for combined SSE and SRY spectra. The mass of the closure and water enclosed in the transfer tube was multiplied by 1.75 g acceleration to obtain a seismic equivalent load. This seismic loading combined with the other required loads (dead weight and pressure) was used to determine the required thickness of the c)osure. The thickness required was determined to be 1.12 inches, which is considerably less than the 1.75 incnes actual, thus, providing additional safety. For quick locking closures, tne ASME Code requires that the closures be analyzed assuming the loss of one of the locking lugs. This was done using the computer Code F-1, a Sundstrand Energy Systems in-house computer program. Evidence that this program has been verified or approved for this type of appitcation was not available.
This infomation i s requested of the applicant. The applicant is also asked to provide documentation describing what means or precedure will be used to assure that the fuel transfer tube closure is closed and latched during reactor operation.
5 m
Based on the field inspectic.: of the closure and a review of its analysis, the closure is adequately qualified for seismic and hydrodynamic loading pending receipt of additional infomation requested.
e
?
5 i
e a
b 6
.(
- 5. 48 INCH WIDE PANEL. (H22-7011)
This. panel i s an open frame work type panel, 48 inches ' wide, 84 inches e
j tall, and 30 inches deep. Electric switches and gauges are mounted to horizontal unistrut messers of the panel. Field mounting af this panel is accomplished with 4 inch long intermittent welds spaced at 12 inches at the panel base. Panel H22-P0lli is located at elevation 184 feet 6 inches of the containment building. This panel was manufactured by GE, (model No. H22-P0ll). The panel and associated devices were qualified for seismic and hydmdynami.. loading by testing perfomed by GE, documented by report No. ORF #H22-13.
f Tests performed on a similar panel were used to, qualify the Grand Gulf i
panel H22-P011. The similar panel (Confantes H22-7005) was of the same design with different devices of the same mass. The first test performed on this panel was a resonixe search. Five OBE and one SSE level multi-frequency, multi-axis tests were al so done. The natural frequencies were determined to be 14 Hz side to side,15.5 and 43 Hz fmnt to back, :.d 53 Hz vertical. The Confrentes test spectra for both tne SSE and OBE tests envelope the Grand Gulf required spectra. Test mounting was accomplished with 5/8 inch bolts and clamps which is conservative in comparison to the welded base of the Grand Gulf panel. The panel maintained its stmetural integrity before, during, and after the tests. The safety devices mounted on the Grand Gulf panel (switches-master parts No's CA1A-50 3A/B) were qualified based on tests performed on these devices cs, another panel. As shown below, the test acceleration values for these devices were gmater than required for the Grand Gulf panel device location.
Test acc.
Required acc.
F/B 7.5 g 7.0 g S/S 10 g 5.0 g Vertical 4g 1.8 g 7
ep e-w.b
<h ei wp-a w.*-e-e
~. _.
._t
- m h,
l-i Based on the field inspection of the 48 inches wide panel and a review' of its testing qualification report, this panel is qualified for seismic and hydmd.ynamie loading.
I G
l
- i
?
?
I O
O 5
I 8
~" '-'
~
_.r_.._.
i 6.
STANDSY LIQUID CONTROL PUt1P AND MOTOR I
i This. item (model number 2X3TD-60, serial number N74226THS16) was supplied by (Mion Pump Company. It is a norizontal, recipmcating action pump 21-7/3 incnes hign, 591nches 1ong, and 43 inches wide. Its function is to inject a neutron absorber into tne reactor vessel in case of control rod failure. It is attaded witn 7-3/4 inch bolts to the floor of the containment building at elevation 185 feet.
This pump and motor assessly is used by General Electric in several nuclear power plants besides Grand Gulf'so the qualification was done based on generic considerations. The pump was qualified by analysis. Several conservative calculations for lowest natural frequency of the pump snow it to be in the range of 100 hertz, thus rigid. The ZPA for the analysis was taken as 1.75 g, more than twice the ZPA of 0.33 g required at Grand Gulf.
The stress levels were 1ess than half the allowables.
The cotor was qualified by test. A sine sweep test from 10 to 80 hertz showed no natural frequencies in that range. A single frequency, multi-axis test was used for qualification of the motor with 4 08E's and 8 SSE's being run. The IPA used in the test was 2.0 g's.
Thi s i s considerably more than the 0.83 g mquirement at Grand Gulf. !!c :notor failure occurred during seismic testing. Upon completion of the test, the motor was coupled to a dynamometer set for 40 HP and ran successfully for 125 minutes continuously.
Based on our observation of the field installation and review of the vendor's reports this piece of equipment is adequately qualified for the seismic loads at Grand Gulf.
9 i
4
=.
A.
ij i
7.
CONTROL ROOM PANEL
[
This panel (fiodel No. H13-P601), measuring ll7.5W X 300' X 84H inches I
was supplied by General Electric Company. It was at an elevation of 166 feet located in the control room. The mounting consisted of 5/8 inch bolts on 6 inch centers utilizing all the holes at the base. The referenced qualification document was " Seismic Test Report H12-P870" prepared and reviewed by General Electric Company. Seismic load was considered in the qualification.
This control panel was qualified based on its similari% to '
I panel H12-P870, which was tested. The test mounting of H12-P870 utilized all the holes provided in its base. There were a nuncer of devices mounted on it during the test and two kinds of tests were perfomed. The first was a 0.5 g sine sweep-input resonance search in the range of 2 to 50 Hz.
The indicated natural frequencies were:
F/B: 17.5, 26.5, 29.5 HZ S/S: 14 Hz V:
none.
The sccond was multifrequency, multiaxis random input. Several tests of this kind were perfomed and spectra generated. The TRSs were compared to
+
generic RRSs developed by GE. It utilized a damping value of three percent. The applicant stated that these RRSs enveloped the RRSs for Grand Gulf with sufficient margin. The TRSs also enveloped the RRSs.
A question was asked of the applicant as to the dynamic similarity of the panel H13-P601 to panel H12-P870, he responded in writing as follows:
i
" Seismic testing was perfomed on a prototype ACR panel (ACR-P870) for the purpose of qualifying Susquehanna benchboards and all otner BWR/6 ACR 10 p
n l
^
}
.i i
panel s with the same cross-section. The prototype was built to simulate the right third of Susquehanna H12-P870 and included Grand Gulf equipment.
Since the G.G. panel 'H13-7601 has a similar cross-section and houses the same type of class lE equipment (inserts) as ACR-P870, the test results are applicable in qualification of 7601 by cicitarity.
P601 is 117.5"W x 30"O x 84'H and P870 is 64"W x 35.5"O (at base) x 86'H. The difference in heignt and deptn are negligible and would not have a significant effect on panel response. P870, which is narrower, would exhibit higher responses, than would be expected of P601, during side-to-side vibration. Therefore, the differences in overall dimensions
~'
' between P601 and P870 are such that the safety margin is increased by application of test results to P601.
Dynamic characteristics of the two panels are essentially the same-even though the dimensions are somewhat different."
However, the test on H12-P820 reported the following anomalies.
1.
Contacts 21 and 22 tripped during test No. 7.
matter detector was reset and no further trips occurred.
2.
Contacts 21 and 22 tripped during test No. 8.
Gatter detector was set to 1 ms and no further trip occurred.
3.
At the completion of test No.12 (during post test), it was noted that Section 3 of the mode switch waaid not activate. This test continued with this anomaly.(contacts affected were 21-22 and 23-24). The switen was disassembled fallowing tne final run. It was noted that some of the sections appeared slightly warped.
This could have been caused (the report states) by overtigntening of the assembly bolts which hold all the segments of the switch together.
11 l
t
-l
.*y k
4.
Several of the controllers and recorders were sliding out of their counting brackets. The movecent was no more than two
. inches at any time and none of the equipment fell out of the cabinet. It is believed that the spring tabs on some of the controllers were not beint into a large enough angle to hold them in place (tne report states). Adjustments made during the test eliminated the problem.
In regard to concerns expressed above, the applicant stated tne following:
" Mode Switch: The mode switch is not located on the Grand Gulf Control Room Panel H13-P601. It is located on panel H13-P680. Themodh switch was tested on prototype panel H12-P870 (protor/pe for panel H13-P601) only as a matter of convenience.
As mentioned in the test report for prototype panel H12-870, several anomalies were observed concerning the made switch. Mditional seismic qualification was reconnended. This additional qualification has been sati sfactorily completed and is documented in GE DRF A00-696.
Controllers and Recorders: Movement of several contro'llers and recorders was observed during the test of prototype panel H12-P870 (prototype for canel H13-PtDl).
\\
These various components were tested on prototype panel H12-870 only as a matter of convenience. Grand Gulf panel H13-P601 has only one of f.hese components, controller 163Cl392. This controller continutd to function during the test of prototype panel H12-F870, in spite of the movements observed. It was concluded that no adoitional requirements need be placed on production panels since nomal procedure following a seismic
~
event requires inspection of all safety related equipment."
i l
- 1 12 em..wwe we-m ga w,
n
i However, the following concarns remain:
1 1 & 2:
Jkiat did the resetting of tne cnatter detector imply (with I
mspect to anomalies 1 and 2). Assurance is required from the applicant that the device safety function was still verified.
3:
With respect to anomaly 3, the concern nemains as follows:
14 at steps are taken to prevent / detect the same overtigntenir.g from taking place for the one in the field? Furtner, the report GE DRF A00-696 was not available during the site visit.
4:
As the applicant states, the controller did function in spite of its sliding. However, is it a singular case or is the functioning of the item reasonably assured? There were some adjustments made during the test (as the report indicated) which eliminated the problem. Were the same adjustments carried out in the fieldr In order to complete our review a satisfactory response to the above mentioned operationa'1/ integrity concerns is needed from the applicant.
l l
8 e
a 13
_a s
~
e 8.
HYORAULIC CONTROL UNIT Hydra,ulic control units (model No. GE-76hE800) were supplied by General Electric. There are 193 units each consisting of an assemoly of valves, tanks, piping and electric controls wnich operate tne control rod drives. Each module measures 22 inches wide,102 inches high, by Field mounting of tnese units was accomplisned using four 20 inches deep.
3/8 inen diameter bolts at the base and two 3/8 inch diameter bolts at tne top of the modular frame work. These hytaulic control units are located at elevation 135 feet 4 incnes of the containment building. These units were qualified for seismic and hyd,'odynamic loading by tests performed by
[
Wyle Lab documented by report No. 58530.
The dynamic tests performed were multi-frequency and multi-axes.
These tests were performed for two mounting conditions (one flexible and one rigid) whicn bound the field installation conditians. The test response spectra enve oped the required response spectrs for botn mounting
~
conditions. The hydraulic control unit successfully performed its function before, during, and after each seismic test. The applicant considered fatigue effects using tne ASIE Section III fatigue curves. It was not clear how the stress value was dete$nined to establish an allowable number of cycles using the fatigue curves. The applicant is requested to supply this infonnation. There were five OBE and one SSE level tests.
Based on the field inspection and review of tne qualification reports, the hydraulic control unit is adequately qualf'ied for seismic and hy&cdynamic loading pending satisfactory resolution to the fatigue concern.
e e
14
~
l
i*
I}
i 9.
TERICMATION CA8INET e
i
.f The termination cabinet (Model No. H13-PM1) was supplied by l
General Electric Company. It was located in the control room of the j
auxiliary building at an olevation of 166 feet. This cabinet measuring 96 x 102 x 36 inches houses temination and temination connector modules and cables. The field mounting consisted of one inen welds on twelve inen centers between the base of the cabinet and the floor. The qualification document referred to was A00-794-5-1 of Oct3or 1,192, prepared by David M. imuble and Associates and reviewed by General Electric Company.
l Seismic 1oad was considred in the qualification.
l~
This cabinet was qualified on the basis of tests carried out on a prototype 700 seies. The test mounting for this was witn 5/8 inca bolts utilizing all the holes provided. This appears to be conservative. A resonance search test indicated natural frequencies of:
S/S:
22.5, 27.5 Hz F/B:
6, 20 Hz Y:
none in tha 5 to 33 Hz range. Subsequently, it was subjected to = series of multiaxis, multi frequency tests with random inputs. Test spect: a were generated and compared to a genric spectra genrated by GE which in turn enveloped the Grand Gulf spectra. There was a sufficient number of tests to fulfill the mechanical fatigue critria.
The tests perfomed on the 700 series cabinet are adequate. But, the report states that upon the completiort of the seismic vibration exposure of the subject temination cabinet it was discovered tnat the doors of the cabinet were disteted due to input motion stimulation and some welds in the cabinet were cracked. lWwever, neither of the st2meturai defomations caused any anomaly as to the functioning of the cabinct during or after the seismic exposure. Therefore, no class IE function of the cabinet was l.
15 w
es m e-
-f...
l.
aborted. A question was asked of the applicant as to the effect of this apparent structural failure on otner adjacent equipment and its margin.
t The applic, ant responded as follows:
"The door iiid not become detached and therefore, could not damage any adjacent equipment during a seismic event. The test input was 16 g to cause this to occur, wnereas the Grand Gulf ZPA is 0.5 g, showing more than adequate margin.'
Based on our observation of the field installation, review of the qualification reports and the applicant's mspense to our questions, the termination cabinet is adequately qualified for the prescribed load.
k 16 ew====
=.
w e
r-ww
--yw w
+-- >
y
.- m
- ^'
7 r
r-'-
,if_
_ 2..,. - -
e,
- 10. STAN08Y LIQUID CCNTROL SYSTEM EXPLOSIVE VALVE i
This, explosive actuated valve is 7 inches in diemeter by 4.5 inches l ong. It was manufacturad by Conax with tedel No. 1832-159-01. It is installed between two 1500 psi rated 1 1/4 pipe flanges with four 1 inch diameter bolts attaching the valve to each flange. This valve is located at elevation 185 feet of the containment building. It was qualified for seismic and %drodynamic loads by tests perfomed by Conax documented by report No. YPF 3394-36-2 dated 12-22-76.
The dynamic qualification consisted of a msonance search and 5 OBE plus 1 SSE biaxial sine beat tests. No natural frequencies of the valve body were found below 35 Hz from tne msonance search test. The fundamental natural frequency of tne actuator was determined to be above 60 Hz based on closed form hand calculations. The bidxial sine beat test inputs were:
Side to Side Front to Back Vertical l
l L
OBE 4.5 g 4.5 g 3g SSE 6.5 g 6.5 9 4.5 g.
The mquired IPA for combined SSE and hydrodynamic loading is:
S/S 2.144 g,
F/S 3.21 g, V
1.363 g.
The valve perfomed satisfactorily before, during and after the dynamic sine beat tests. No structural damage was sustained by the valve from the tests.
l Based on the observed field installation and review of the test qual.ification reports, the SLC system explosive valve is qualified for seisaic and bydrodynamic 1oads.
4 k
17 t.
i lj
- 11. HEAD STRONGBACX CAROUSEL l,
This device is a cruciform shaped lifting strongback whicn provides l.
four point lifting of tne mactor vessel head. The strongoack has a i,
circular nut tray and crane rail attached to it. Suspended from the circular crane rail are eight hydraulic stud tensioners. This camusel was supplied by GE witn model No. 767E572G3. Qualification of tais strongback was accomplished by static analysis perfomed by General Electric (report no. DRF F13-12) and a static load test.
The design and analysis of the head strongbsck was perfomed in accordance with the requirements of Crane Specification CMAA-/0 (Crane Manufacturers Association of Aserica). The stmngback was designed for lifing 125 tons with a minimum safety factor of 5 with respect to the l,
ultimate material strength. The Grand Gulf reactor head weight is l
92 tons. The margin between the actual weight of 92 tons and the design value of 125 tons accounts for impact and seismic loading. The tuo main l
beams of the strongbacx were desiped assuming that only two arms of the l
strongoack cupport the lifting load ratner than all four ams. The four lifting rods are adjustable so that the load in reality is supported by all four. In reviewing the analysis it has noted that in a couple of areas a total safety factor, as a result of two safety factors, was obtained by l
add'ng the two rather tnan by multiplying the two values. Thi s had no eff mt on the outcome of the analysis as adequate safety margin was presen?. In addition to the analysis, the stmngback was qualified by a l
static load t:st of 156 tot. All load carrying welds were inspected (mapetic particle) per GE specificadon E50-YP1 before and after the load test. In addition, load carrying meane s wre inspected for permanent
~
defomation after the load test. No deformation or weld cracks were detected. A storage location with support pads is provided for the stro.ngoach when it i s not in use. The support pads provide adequate support for seismic motion.
/
18 f
w
~. -..
I
I
.A.
Based on the field inspection and a myiew of the analysis and test reports, the head strongback carousel is adequately qualified for seistric i;
loads.
i T
4 t
l
~..
i I
t a
19 p
t.
t,
- 12. RECIiCULATION SYSTEM SAW1.E PROBE l
6 l
This,1 ten was supplied by Associated Piping and Engineer 1ng l
Corporatien, Inc. It is a 3/4 iich pipe welded to the inside of the l
recirculation pipe at elevation 121 feet 41/4 inches in containment. 1he i
model number on the installed ites was not available. This iten is used i
for testing water chemistry.
This item was qualified by analysis. It is a short,, stubby beam with a natural frequency of over 300 hertz, thus it behaves as rigid. The ciaximuu of 1.45 ; from the spectra (not tne ZPA) was conservatively used in the calculations for seismic loading.. The drag force due to fluid flow past the tube was considerably higher than the seismic loading. The-combined load yields a stress level of about 6000 psi, well below the l
17,000 psi allowable. Stress levels are low enough so infinite cycles are I
allowd by the ASME code for fatigue considerations.
f' Sased on our review of the analysis reports and procedures, tnis item l
1s adequately qualified for seismic loads at Grand Gulf.
i!
i Li i
l 0
v 6
iW
s i
- 13. MIN STEAM SAFETY RELIEF VALVE i
The Hain Steam Safety Relief Valve (Model no. G471-6/125.04) was supplied $y Dikkers.
't was located in the drywell on main steamline at an I
elevation of 157 feet. Its mounting consisted of 12-15/8 inch studs on the inlet side and 16-1 ine.h studs on the outlet side. This spring loaded safety relief valve with pneumatic actuator (24 thick ; 36 long x 55 tall, inches) weigns about 3155 lbs wet. It' relieves reactor pmssure at a set value upon automatic signal or operator command. The referenced qualification report was VPF 5529-25-1 of Noveder 18, 1977 prepared by f
Wyle Lab. Huntsville, Alabase and reviewed by General Electric Company.
Seismic and hydrodynamic loads were considered in the analysis. SRSS technique was used for RRS codination.
This piece of equipract Nas qualified through test. The laboratory mounting was similar to tes field counting. A sine sweep of 0.2 g magnitude in the range of 1 to 150 Hz indicated natural frequencies of:
S/S:
57 HZ F/8:
60 HZ V:
59 Hz.
These frequencies are essentially in the ZPA range of the RRS. It was then The subjected to a series of multifrequency, multiaxis random input tests.
input ZPA levels were:
S/S:
6.5 g F/8:
6.5 g
-V:
4.5 g for.08E tests and I
S/S 9.0 g F/B 9.0 g V:
5.0 g l
mm M-p
= ness-em--
4 for SSE level tests. The TRSs for various tests were generated. It did not nave any RRSs to be compared to. These were, however not required as the unit was essentially rigid. Therefore, the FA values were sufficient for compar'i son. These were obtained from the piping analysis and had a resultant value of 7.2 g for horizontal and 2.27 g vertical (both FA). A 3
total of 56 dynamic load tests were run in this proras. The acceleration level vaHed from 0.2 g to 9.0 g horizontally and 0.2 g to 6.5 g vertically over a frequency range of 1 to 150 Hz.
The tests performed are adequate. The accelerometer mountings were satisfactory. In a test the interfacing between the flanges were not exact and the gasket crushed. In response to a question about this, the applicant stated that the gasket problem was corrected and the test repeated satisfactorily. The seat leakage in the test was within the allowaole limit.
Based on our observation of the field installation, review of the test report and tne clarification provided by the appifcant, this item is adequately qualified for the prescribed loadings.
4 0
22 i-l
.._v.
i
- 14. REACTOR CORE ISG.ATION C00.IMG PUPP I
i This item Coodel number 6XCX10.5-(0-CP), serial number 2305203 was supplied by Bingham Willarette Pump Company. It is attached witn four 1 T/2 inch' bolts to the auxiliary building floor at elevation 93 feet.
Its function is to in,1ect cooling water into the reactor during isoittion.
i i
This equipment was qualified througn analysis. A static analysis was performed using hand calculations. The pump was detemined to have a natural frequency of 47 nortz, so no dynamic amplification above the 0,251 g 2PA of the spectra is required. Stress results were all below the al1owabies.
This pump i s located outsid-the reactor building so it is not affected by high cycle suppressw.. pool tydrodynamic loads.
Based on our review of the analysis reports, observed field installations, and clarifications provided by the applicant, this piece of equipment is adequately qualified for the seismic loads at Grand Gulf.
23
~
f
-a-....
mam.m c
4
- 15. IIEACTOR CORE ISOLATION COG. ANT TURBINE i
This, equipment (model nuceer GS-2 No. 38175-A) was supplied by Terry Steam Turnine company. It is attached with six 1 inch bolts to the auxiliary building floor at alwation 93 feet. It is a single stage base mounted turbine wnose function is to dr've the ICIC pump to inject water into the reactor during i solation.
The turbine was qustified by a test performed by Wyle Labs. The test was quite conservative for Grand Gulf since this turbine is used by General Electric for several other nuclear power plants. The~ test was conducted at about 7 g's.
Several problems were encountered during oualification. The mounting studs loosen'ed after several 08E runs. During retesting at a lower g levol a turbine trip occurred due to mounting bolts loosening.
Excessive deflection of the lube oil piping was also observed so additional restraint was provided for tne lube oil piping to complete the test.
It is recocznended that (1) modifications be made to the mounting bolts to prevent their loosening during a seismic event, and (2) that additional lube oil piping support be provided. General Electic has a scheduled in-house requirement to issue a Fiel'd Disposition Instruction (FDI) to
Verification of the installation of this support bracket is required prior to fuel loading. Therefore, seismic qualification of the RCIC turbine is delayed pending resolution of the two items mentioned above.
l i
l 24 I
~~- - - - ~ - -
i
-*k l
- 16. 6.9 KY StETCHGEAR This equipment (FPL No. QlR22S103C-8) was supplied by General Electric Company. Tl}e assembly was a double stack measuring about 72 x 94 x 95 7
i nches. It was located in the auxiliary building at an elevation of 139 feet. The mounting consisted of welds The qualification, documents referred to were G.E. Certified Seismic P.eport-Req. 311-06659 of July 17, 1978 and Wyle Report 43831-4 and-5 for tests done June 21, 1978 at Wyle Laboratories; Huntsville, Alabama. It was reviewed by General Electric Co!
(3sitchgear Business Dept.). Seismic load is considered in the qualification.
4 l
This it<st was qualified based on test. The laboratory mounting was sace as field. The required 2PA were:
S/S
.F/B V
OBE:
0.180 g 0.174 g 0.101 g SSE:
0.3~61 g
' O.349 g 0.202 g.
A resonance search test indicated the following frequencies:
S/S:
5.3-6 Hz; F/B:
13-14 Hz; V:
31-32 Hz in the range of 1 to 40 Hz. It was also subjected to multiaxis,
)
inputs werer.
- ~
S/S F/B 1
i GBE 1.6 g 0.8 g 0.75 g SSE 3.2 g 1.6 g 1.5 g 4
25 f
I i
< t.,
The TRSs enveloped the RRSs. There were five 08E and one SSE level tests e
I performed. Functionally, the power /vac only has to trip upon consand.
This function was successfully deconstrated 24 t mes (8 times for each of d
the 3 breakers) without failure during the double stacx test series and 6 times without' failure during the single stack test series.
Elsed on our observation of the field installation, review of the test report and the clarifications provided by the applicant, this item is adequately qualified for the prescribed loading.
b' e
4 I
l l
r l
{
T 26
~4.~
e,
- 17. PRESSURE INDICATOR SWITCH s
The Pressure Indicator Switch (Madel no. 5100U237028;- equipment no. IP41-PIS-N062A) was supplied by Rosemount, Inc. It measures aboui.
6 31/32 H x 1 'l/16 W x 9 7/8 0 inches and weighs about 1.38 lbs. It was mounted with two captive screws on panel H13-P871 which was located in the, control building at an elevation of 190 feet. The referenced document 3768A/(Malification Test Sumary for the Trip / Calibration System I
was:
Rosemount Model 51000 of March 9,1976. The Seismic test was perforced by Environmental Laboratory, Bloomington, Minnesota. Seismic load was considered in the qualification.
This device was qualified through test. The first series of tests indicated that it did not have any riesonance below 33 Hz in any of the three directions. Then it was subjected to a series of single axis single frequency sine dwell tests of 30 to 40 seconds duration witn input g-level s between 11 to 20. This was a fragility test. It was a nonoperational test conducted to determine if the unit would still be opera:f onal after exposure to g-levels greater than 11 g.
At 15 g, however, the head screw used to hold one of the front bars to tne lef t end bracket sheared and two wirits broke loose. This happened again at 20 g.
Finally the screw was replaced with a screw having a higher yield strength.
The device did not have any natural frequency below 33 Hz. Therefore, single axis, single fequency is adequate. The test results showed a maximum shift in trip point of -0.024 percent of span. This was within the specified shift of,+0.13 percent of span.
However, the raquired g-level at the instrument location from analysis and/or test on panel H13-P871 was not available. Further, the test report from the testing laboratory (Environmental Laboratory) was not availante.
Only a sumary was provided during the review.
27 e
l
1 -
In order to complete the review, the following is mquired:
l 1.
, the g-lwels for tne instrument location, and g
2.
the laboratory report from Environmental Laboratory.
4 L
f 28 i
l y
- 18. STAND 8Y DIESEL. GENERATOR JACKET WATER STAN(PIPE This item is part of tne Staney Diesel Generator Engine and Appendages. Tne standpipe holds a supply of water used for cooling the jacket of the Staney Diesel Generator. It is 1ocated in the 01esel Generator building at elefation 136 feet. It is provided by Det.aval Turbine Inc.
This item was qualified by analysis. It was part of the auxiliary skid analysis. A 3-0 finite element response spectrum analysis was performed using ANSYS. Modal responses were compined by SRSS using absolute sum of closely spaced modes. Two modes of the standpipe were obtained from the system analysis. The stresses are below the allowable values.
Based on our review of the analysis reports, observed field installations, and clarifications provided by the applicant, this piece of equipc:ent i s adeouately qualified for the seismic loads at Grand Gulf.
.I l
29
-~
f
g, N
i
- 19. RHR S(LEN0ID VALVE The. Solenoid Valve with rectifier (Itdel no. 75GG00L) 'was supplied by Target Rock Corp., East Farmingdale, N.Y.
This two-way, in-line valve measuring about 71/2 x 14 3/4 inches was located in the RHR pump room A of the auxiliary building at an elevation of 123 feet. The mounting consisted of in-line socket weld. The intended function is post accident sampling..
The referenced qualification reports were:
1.
Report 1735, Seismic Report for Solenoid Motor Operated Globe Valve Assemblies, Model No's 75GG-001 and 75GG-002, of May 7, 1976 (Target Rock Corp.).
2.
Report 1827. Environmental Test Report on 75GG002 Solenoid Motor Operated Valve, Soft Seated, High Pressure Version of November 4, 1976 (Target Rock Corp.).
3.
Report 1500, Environmental Test Report on 72V Solenoid Yalve (with rectifier) of October 22, 1974.
Seismic 1oad was considered in the qualification.
Thi s equipment was qualified on the basis of test. The laboratory mounting was similar to field. A resonance search test with 0.2 g input indicated the following frequencies:
S/S:
16.5, 20 and 26.5 Hz.
F/S:
9,17.5 and 26.5 Hz.
V:
21 Hz.
The required g-levels (IPA) for the location of the device was S/S = 3 g; F/B = 3 g; y=3g.
E
--_eme w -
., ~.
.e
,e I-
. _v.
.z.
e
- r. '
~!
.i subsequently the following single axis, single frequency tests were performed.
- i q
a.
Major horizontal axis (S/S): Sine dwell for a period of l
?!
10 seconds at 16.5, 20 and 25.5 Hz w1th inputs of 3 and 4.5 g.
j i
b.
Minor horizontal axis (F/B): Sine dwell for a period of 10 seconds at 9,17.5 and 26.5 Hz with inputs of 3 and 4.5 g.
c.
Vertical axis (V): Sine dwell for a period of 10 seconds at i
21 Hz with inputs of 3 and 4.5 g.
The valve operated satisfactorily during' the resonance dwell periods and following the dwell tests.
i The device has several natural frequencies in the range of interest.
Cross coupling may be a factor. l)dar these circumstances, single frequency, single axis tests are not adequate without sufficient justification.
In order to complete the revidw, a satisfactcry resolution of the above concern is required.
i' 4
31 esie,
e.ge O-papis-4 s.m o
e.
vw-
- 20. SRY AIR ACCIMLATOR i
There are 20 Sitf air accumulators (Master. parts 1.1 st No. QlB21A00AA) mancfactured by Buffalo Tank Co. They are vertical tanks 3 feet.2 inches long by 12 3/4 inches in. diamatar. They are supported on four box section legs approximately 3 ft. long. Dese tanks are located at elevation 161 feet-10 inches of the reactor building drywell. The tank legs are welded to a heavy steel floor. Dese tanks were qualified for seisaic and hydrodynamic loadings by static analysis performed by Buffalo Tank Co.
documented by report No. 9645-M-102.0.
The Sitf air accumulators were designed in accordance with the requirements of the ASHE Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code section III, Division 1 for Class 3 components. The fundamental frequency of the tank was determined to be 48.S Hz based on a closed form solution, assuming the entire mass of the tank to be at the top of the support legs. Thisis slightly non-conservative since the center of gravity of the tank is soccwhat above the top of the support legs. The reduction in natural frequency, however, would not be enough to increase the seismic loading significantly considering the margin of safety with these tanks. The maximum stresses for combined seiscite and pressure loading were deteruined to be:
Stress Stress Location calculated allowabl e Shell 3,721 psi 12,000 psi Head 3,914 psi 14,000 psi Support 936 psi 21,600 psi Based on the field inspection and review of the analysis, the SRV air accumulators are adequately qualified for seismic and hydrodynamic loading.
k e
32 e
eg
.-mm
-er a 7
D m
21, 6 INCH CR0 GATE YALVE AND ACTUATOR l
This item is located in the auxiliary building at elevation 119'-0".
j i
It is part of the control rod drive system and is used for isolation of the auxiliary building from containment. The valve (Ho.1523 W.E.) is supplied I
- f by William Powell Company. The actuator (model number SMS-000-5) i s supplied by Limitarque Corporation.
A static dead load test was used to qualify this valve. An8 inch valve was tested to generically qualify this 6 inen valve of identical design. The natural frequency of the valve was calculated to be 61 hertz, thus rigid. Static loads representing 4 g's vertical and 3 g's horizontal were applied simulataneously. These loads are quite conservative when compared to the 0.2 g vertical and 0.3 g horizontal PA of the spectra at the floor near where the valve is located. The valve opened and closed without failure while the test loads were appif ed.
Multi-axis, multi-frequency testing of a generically similar actuator was used to qualify the subject actuator. A resonant search indicated no natural frequencies below 100 hertz. The tested actuator is of tne same cesign as the subject actuator with' the motor (2 ft-lb OC tested vs 5 ft-lb AC ac*ual) being tne only difference. The actuator performed all functions with no malfunctions or physical damage during and after seismic testing at a 6 g level.
The subject actuator was also tested to 6.1 g's input acceleration using single-axis, single-frequency testing. The actuator operated without failure during testing.
The tests were conducted at very conservative inputs of approximately 6 g's compared to the PA floor spectra of appmximately 0.3 g's.
Based on our observation of the field installation and review of the technical reports with clarificatior provided by the applicant, this valve and i
actuator is adequately qualified for tne seismic loads at Grand Gulf.
33
~
em =
e e
b
!j
- 22. LOAD CENTER UNIT SUBSTATION The Load Center (IPL ID No. QlR20S650-8) was supplied by I-T-E Imperial Conoration. This was a fo er cubicle line-up, CUSI-5KVATC,
'I CUB 2-750KVA XFMR, CUB 344, low voltage switchgear and measured about 901 X 580 X 138L inches. This was located in SSMT Basin at an elevation of
~1 133 feet. The mounting consisted of four plug welds per frame to the floor. The refannced qualification nports were:
1.
750 KVA XFMR with primary air teminal cnaccer. Seismic certification report ITE-S.O. No. 33-50481 of June 17, 1976.
Wyle Laboratory tested under I-T-E 0.0. 960-4107.
2.
Indoor low voltage metal clad switchgear seismic certification report I.T.E. S.O. No. 3 3-50 481 of September 3,1976. Wyle Laboratories No. 42686-1.
Seismic 1oad was considered in the qualification.
The transfomer and the switchgear were qualified through test. The transfomer unit was mounted for te' sting with 4-0.75 inch bolts which is conservative. A resonance search test with an input of 0.2 g indicated the following frequencies in the range of 0.5 to 50 Hz:
S/S:
8.5,11,18, 24 and 32 Hz.
F/S:
5.5, 9,11,14,17, 21, 24, 49 Hz.
V:
none.
l It was then sub,jected to multiaxis, multifrequency with random input l
l tests.
I 34 f
l -
The required accelerations (IPA) in each direction were: (Transformer and.
I Switchgear both)
WS F/B V
1 p
OBE 0.175 g 0.180 g 0.107 g SE 0.349 q 0.361 g 0.214 g.
The input g-levels (ZFA) were:
S/S F/B V
OBE 1.5 g 1.25 g 0.75 g SSE 3.0 g 2.5 g 1.5 g TRSs were generated and they enveloped the RRSs adequately. Functional operability was verified. There were five OBE and one SSE level tests.
The switchgear unit indicated natural frequencies of:
S/S:
4.5,13,18, 23, 30, 40 Hz F/B:
6, 8,11,19, 23, 33 Hz.
~
The laboratory mountir.3 was similar to the field mounting. The unit was then subjected to multiaxis, multifmquency randon input tests. The input g-levels were adequate and the TRSs enveloped the RRSs.
x l
The tests perfomed are adequate. The functional operabilities were verified.
l l
Based on our observation of the field installation and review of the test reports, theseunits are adequately qualified' for the,. ascribed loadings.
35
==w
- aei e.=
,e-e
5 '
j fr
..?,
l-i
- 23. 125V cc PANEL BOARD The Panel Board (19L No. QlL21P112A) was supplied by Delta Switchboard f
Company. " This panel measuring 30L x 140 x 90H inches and weighing about 850 lbs. was located in the auxiliary building at an elevation of j
119 feet. The mounting consisted of six 1/2 inch bolts attached to a wall.
i The referenced qualification report was 58339, seismic Test of Panel 10A2, March 9,1976. The test was perfomed by Wyle Laboratories. Seismic load wr.s cor.sidered in the qualification.
This panel board was qualified through test. The laboratory mounting was the same as the field. The mquired g-levels (ZPA) for the location l.~
were:
S/S F/B V
OBE 0.144 g 0.157 g 0.097 g SSE 0.289 g 0.315 g 0.194 g A series of multiaxis, multifmquency randon input tests were perfomed with the following g-levels (2PA)*
- S/S F/B V
o OE 0.21 g 0.30 g 0.28 g
[
SSE 0.40 g 0.52 g 0.50 g i.
l.0 TRSs were generated. The TRSs do not envelope the RRSs in the region below 1.25 Hz. Five OK 'ad two SSE level, tests were perfomed. Functionality was veri fied.
I The test is adequate-The nonenveloping of RRSs in the region below l
1.25 Hz and a resonance search not being perfomed for ascertaining the frequency in this range is a shortcoming. However, nattral frequency too j
close to this range may safely be mied ouw.
p I
36 w.m. mmesme e e.
e t 'c*--~?-
o
.s Based upon our observatio1 of the field installation and review of the i
test reports, this panel board is adequately qualified tcr the prescribed loads.
4 89 i
'I a
f
.e i
e
)
37 i
t
q E
- 24. TRAP 000R FIRE DA WER l
This itea (model number 2217) is 1ocated in the Control Building at el evatiori 177 '-0".
It is a frame t;ype door installed in the Control Room l
HVAC duct whose function is to prevent fire from spreading to different l
areas of the Control Building through the HVAC ducts. The dampar is held open with a fusable link and must remain in the open position during and after OBE and SSE seismic loadings. The damper is provided by American i
Warming and Ventilating, Inc.
This item was qualified by static analysis using seismic j
considerations based on generic plant application using 1.5 times the r.
maximum for Bechtel generic plant application or 5.4 g's.
This is higher than the Grand Gulf requirements. The fusable link was tested to 5 times the maximum rated load. All stresses were witisin the allowable limits.
Bcsed on our review of the analysis reports, observed field installations, and clarifications provided by the applicant, this piece of equipment is adequately qualified for the seismic loads at Grand Gulf.
f.
l
}-
P L
i I
!r, l
38
..-e.
l
^
~
L
h I
- 25. STAND 8Y DIESEL GENElETOR CONTROL PANEL This equipment (equipment nummer lH22Pil3) is located'in the diesel i
generator building at elevation 136'-0".
This control panel is part of the l
Standby Diesel Generator System and houses relays required for operation of i.
the standby diesel generators. It is provided by Delta Switdtboard/Delaval.
i This panel was qualified by test using multi-axis, multi-frequency tasti ng. Five OBE tests with input accelerations of 0.6 g horizontal and 0.S4 g vertical, and three SSE tests with input accelerations of 1.2 g norizontal and 2.3 g vertical were run. These inputs exceed the Grand Gulf requirements.
During the test the ground overcurrent relay calfunctioned due to chttter greater than 10ps. This was an electmmachanical type of relay.
It was to be replaced with a solid state device. This device was then rttested in a fixture which simulated the in-service mounting. The response spectra near the relay for the retest was greater than the response spectra near the relay in the original test and envelopes the RRS by a factor of approximately three. The relay performed satisfactorily during the retest.
Field inspection found the original electromechanical relay installed in the panel. On questioning, ti1e applicant agreed that the solid state ground overcurrent relay should have been installed. Therefore, seismi:
I qualification of this panel is not accepted until the solid state gmund overcurrent relay has been veri fied as being installed.
l h
h l
l i
39 l
l
-4%-.
'L
4 i
- 26. HPCS SEitfICE ATER PUtf The HPG service water pump is a 100 horse power vertical 2 stage pump supplied by Goulds (indel No. VITX-SD-10 x 14 JHC-2). It is powered by a i
I 100 Hp electric motor supplied by General Electric Company (Model f
No. SK 6267XH4012A). The pump. motor assembly is located at elevation 3
~
140 feet of the service water pump house. The pump base is bolted to the floor with four 3/4 inch diameter bolts. This unit was qualified for seismic loads by analysis performed by Mcdonald Engineering Analysis Company. The pump report No. is 4-207 dated 5/25/75 and the motor report no. i s E-292 dated March 9,1976.
The dynamic analysis of the pum was performed using the response spectra method. This was accomplished using the computer code ICES-STRUOL. The maximum critical stresses for ccmbined operating and seismic loading were detennined to be:
Stre ss Stress Location calculated allowable 39,231 psi 42,000 psi Column
}mzzle 29,256 psi 36,000 psi Discharge flange 24,789 psi 30,240 psi.
l2 To demonstrate operability during seismic loading the following critical def1ections were determined:
Calculated Al1owable
?
Location def1ection deflection 4
Shaft
.015 i nche s.
.05 inches i
Impeller
.00001 inches
.012 inenes.
The deflection value for the impeller was obtained by subtracting the SRSS of modal deflections of the impeller and impeller casing. This is not a proper way of detemining relative displacement since relative displacements must be determined for eacn mode.
40 l
+.*,d t
f The analysis of the motor was accomplished using the static equivalenc i
method. The natural frequency of the motor was detemined to be 58 Hz.
This used the computer code ICES-STRUCL. Static loading of_3.0 g lateral and 2.0 g vertical was used to deteristne seismic stresses to be combined with operating stresses. The comoined maximum stress was 18,228 psi compared t:P an allowable of 53,200 psi. The motor rotor deflection was calculated to be 0.00348 incnes which is much less than the allowable of 0.030 inches. This assures the operability of the motor during seismic events.
Based on the field inspection and a review of tne analysis, the HPCS service water pump is adequately qualified for seismic load pending resolution of the relative displacement concern.
O 41 w-m
e ns i
- 27. 40 MW FAN I'i l
The 40 MW fans are horizontal motor, centrifugal fans'with approximate l
dimensions of 34 x 44 x 48 inches with a weight of 846 lbs. There are two of these units located at elevation 133 feet of the control building. The i
i fans were manufactured by Buffalo Forge Co. (Type MW, Size 40). The fans have 20 hp electric motors supplied by Westinghouse. The units were qualified for seismic load by analysis perforced by McMahon Engineering Co.
documented by report No. 76J-li67 dated 6-28-77.
The analysis of the fans was a static equivalent analysis. The acceleration values used for this were 0.323 g horizontal and 0.223 g vertical. The fundamental frequency of the fan was determined to be 66.5 Hz based on hand calculations. From the review it was apparent that the lowest natural frequency had been overlooked. The flexibility of the motor and fan support channels was not considered in the horizontal direction (bending of the channel web section). A preliminary calculation showed that the lowest natural frequency considering this mode of vibration would be considerably less than 33 Hz. The applicant agreed to stiffen these channels witn bracing to eliminate this low frequency. This would make the current analysis valid. T'he critical stmsses from the curmnt analysis are:
Stress Stress i
t.ocation calculated allowabl e Motor shaft 2,189 psi 17,250 psi Inlet stand bottom flange 8,781, psi 24,000 psi Foundation bolts 5,330 psi 27,000 ps!
The maximum displacement for the motor rotor was determined to be 0.00373 inch compared to an allowable value of 0.1406 inch. This assures operability during seismic 1oading.
42 e
.--e.+-
- "Tr"-
~
.'a e
4
.j i Based on the field inspection and review of the analysis, the 40 MW fans are adequately qualified for seismic loading pending confimation of suitable bracing additions to the fans' support channels.
4 1
4
}
e 9
(
O e
t 4
i 43 i
i w
ege 4
r
---e,.
--y--,
A 28. CONTAINlENT PG.AR CRANE This item (model number CM-25035) is located in the containment building at elevation 238 feet. It is part of the Reactor Vessel Servicing Equipment System and is used primarily for lifting tne vessel head and strongback, shroud head and separater, and dryer assembly for maintenance and construction. The crane is p*ovided by Harnischfeger Corporation.
- 7. tis equipment was qualified by analysis. A 3-D finite element
.anaiysis was performed using the Stardyne computer code. Twenty modes were used with modal dynamic responses comoined by SRSS. A few locations were identified as being slightly over the allowable stress values.
Modifications are being made to the structure to reduce the worst of these to below allowable. The other locations are about 2% over allowable.
Because of margin in the load cochinations and margin from yield to ultimate stress, the applicant provided, justification for acceptance of these stress conditions.
Based on our review of the analysis reports, observed field inspection, and clarifications provided by the apulicant, this equipment is adequately qualified for the seismic loads at Grand Gulf.
I e
g
z.
- l
... n.
- 29. SG.EN0ID val.VE The. Solenoid valve (master parts 11st no. Q1Z77-F002AT was supp1td by
- i Mtomatic Switch Company (ASCO) uith Model No. HT8320. This valye is approximately '8 inches long by 2 inches in diameter. There are eight sucn valves located in the control building at elevations til feet and 133 feet. The valves are mounted to a vertical plate using two no.10 i
Qualification of these valves was accomplished by test perfomed screws.
by Isomedix documented by report No. AQS21678/TR dated March 1978.
Qualification consisted of a resonance search and single-axis, single-frequency fragility tests. No natural frequencies were noted below 33 Hz. The fragility test was perfomed iii teth he-izontal and vertical ~
directions with an input level of 10 g's.
This was done in the 1-33 M range at one third octave intervals. Operability of the valves was verified during and after testing. An unacceptable counting of the solenoid valve was noted during the field inspection. The valve was mounted on a ratner flexible motnting plate such that impacting could occur between the plate and a heavy air cylinder behind it. Another piece of safety related equipment is also mounted to this plate. Impact loading could result in seismic loads well 'in excess of that for which the I
l equipment is qualified. The applicant' agreed to eliminate this impacting situation by modifying the mounting plate.
l t
Based on the field inspection and review of the test report, the ASCO Solenoid valve is adequately qualified for seismic loading pending l
confirmation of an adequate modification of the plate to which the solenoid e
valve is mounted.
i i
l t
I t
45 y
j'
r_. _.:.
_1 nP,l%
WP a
LIST OF ATTENDEES IPE Rufus A., Brown Ricky L. Patterson if&L E. S. Stater WE Danny G. Bost 198L j-Rahim Munshi 198L f
M. F. Haughey NIC T. Y. Chang NRC W. J. McConaghy Nutsch Sudhansu Saha Bechtel Dan Fouts Bechtel Lloyd Schrader Bechtel T. R. l4nger Nutech i
it. P. Voutyras Wtech A. B. Davy Bechtel J. C. Rawlings faitech J. E. Sundergill Sechtel GE N. Luria D. manis GE
~
W. C. Sherbin GE W. C. Eiff W&L A. Javid Wtech D. K. Henrie GE Jim Cleveland GE/SAI G. Bagchi NIC R. W. Hardy GE C. Q. U1 pindo GE Clarke Kido EG8G Idaho, Inc.
Clyde nieh GE J. N. Si ngh EG&G Idaiso, Inc.
j I
T. R. Thompson EG&G Idaho, Inc.
[
T. L. Bridges EGaG Idaho, Inc.
46 I
I op e-w ee-,eem,.
.+
=--
w
- -,. -