ML20071N222

Final Deficiency Rept Re Ghosh & Rocking Acceleration Data Transmittal Discrepancy.Initially Reported on 821029 & 830318,respectively.No Changes to Plant Design Required.Qa Category I Load Transmittals Will Be Reviewed

ML20071N222
Person / Time
Site:	05000000, Shoreham
Issue date:	04/20/1983
From:	Milligan M LONG ISLAND LIGHTING CO.
To:	Allan J NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I)
Shared Package
ML20071N221	List: ML20071N222 ML20071N232
References
10CFR-050.55E, 10CFR-50.55E, SNRC-875, NUDOCS 8306060352
Download: ML20071N222 (4)

Text

-_ _.

o o

^

._ . . - _--_9-i LONG ISLAND LIGHTING COM PANY I

kNI

_ _ __ _ d SHOREHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION P.O. BOX 618, NORTH COUNTRY ROAD e WADING RIVER, N.Y.11702 i.

, ' Direct Dial Number

't

<l>

April 20, 1983 SNRC-575 Mr. James M. Allan, Acting Regional Admipistrator Office of Inspection & Enforcement - Region I U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 631 Park Avenue King of Pruscia,'PA 19406 LONG ISLAND LIGHTING COMPANY Shoreham Nuclear Power Station - Unit 1 Docket No. 50-322

References:

(1) SNRC-785 from M. H. Milligan to R. C. Haynes, dated 10/29/82, GHOSH Program Potential Reportable Condition (2) SNRC-862 from M. H. Milligan to R. C. Haynes, dated 3/18/83, Rocking Acceleration Data Transmittal Discrepancy

Attachment:

Report on the GHOSH Computer Program and Rocking Acceleration Discrepancy, dated April 1983.

Dear Mr. Allan:

The reference 1 and 2 letters addressed two separate conditions affecting the Mark II Confirmatory Program which were determined to be potentially reportable in accordance with 10CFR50.55 (e) .

This letter transmits the results of the assessments which have been conducted by Stone & Webster Engineering Corporation (SWEC) and General Electric Company (G.E.) in these areas, and will serve as our final report.

DESCRIPTION OF DEFICIENCIES The two discrepancies affecting Mark II loads are the GHOSH Program error and.the mislabeling of rocking acceleration data transmitted to G.E. from SWEC.

8306060352 830519 PDR ADOCK 05000 2 7 c.. . ... ,

73_ //6

e o-E

' April-20, 1983 SNRC-875 '

Page 2 The GHOSH Program is a commercially available finite element' program which was used at Shoreham in the development of the building response spectra for Mark II hydrodynamic loads..

(This program was not used for seismic response spectra for our facility.) The discrepancy occurs in an internal subroutine which' calculates stiffness matrices for triangular finite ele-ments. The program internally breaks each. triangular element into three subsections to determine the centroid of the. element

-and the overall stiffness. In doing this, the subroutine.

incorrectly ignored the' stiffness of two subsections, assigning the stiffness of one subsection'to the entire triangular element.

This tends to present a lower relative stiffness than actually exists. These triangular elements were used in combination with rectangular elements in modeling of the soil beneath the Reactor Building. No triangular elements were used in the superstructure.

The discrepancy has been rectified and an assessment of the effects has been completed.

While the assessment of the GHOSH discrepancy was in progress, SWEC discovered a discrepancy in the labeling of the units for

~

the rocking acceleration data and corresponding response spectra transmitted to G.E. This discrepancy was also found to apply to the confirmatory spectra which were transmitted to G.E. in 1981.

In the transmittals to G.E., some of the units were specified in g's (g represents the gravitational acceleration equal to 32.2 ft/

sec.2), whereas some of-the plots of the' rocking' data were labeled in radians /sec2 .The correct units are g/ft. G.E. had utilized the units of radians /sec2 in their Mark II confirmatory analyses.

This discrepancy only affected the G.E. scope of work because the rocking time history was used only in the evaluation of'the Nuclear Steam Supply System (NSSS). G.E. was requested to reassess the

-NSSS with the revised Mark II. loads and the proper rocking accelera-tion units.

Both SWEC and G.E. have completed evaluations of the revised Mark II confirmatory loads which have been corrected for the GHOSH anomoly. In their evaluation, G.E. also considered the rocking data mislabeling. These evaluations show minor differences between the revised confirmatory Amplified Response Spectra (ARS) and the old confirmatory ARS. However, an assessment of the small devia-tions concludes that the revised confirmatory ARS do not affect the qualification of the Shoreham plant design. Since no significant I

e e April 20, 1983 SNRC-875 Page 3 differences in results were found, had both errors remained undetected, there would have been no impact on the plant's capability to operate safely or to achieve safe shutdown.

In view of this, we feel that these anomolies do not constitute deficiencies reportable under 10CFR50.55 (e) .

CORRECTIVE ACTION AND ACTION TO PREVENT RECURRENCE The attached report presents a detailed assessment of the GHOSH and rocking data anomolies including the procedures used for the evaluation. As stated above and in the report, no changes to the Shoreham plant design have resulted from these discrepancies.

Therefore, corrective action to past work completed is not required.

Regarding the transmittal discrepancy, no additional data trans-mittals are expected prior to fuel load. However, to prevent future transmittal discrepancies, SWEC will perform independent review of their QA Category I load transmittals, which are generated from Shoreham building dynamic analyses, for post-fuel load design changes.

If you have any questions concerning this matter, please contact us.

Very truly yours, e s

\ .h.

M. H. Milligan -

Project Engineer Shoreham Nuclear Power Station DJH:mp cc: Mr. Richard DeYoung, Director NRC Office of Inspection & Enforcement Division of Reactor Operator's Inspection Washington, D.C. 20555 Mr. Ralph Caruso, Project Manager U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission

! 7920 Norfolk Avenue l Bethesda, MD 20014 Mr. J. Higgins, Site Inspector "All parcies listed in Attachment 1" l

w .; ~ .

e o ATTisCHMENT 1 Lawrence Dronner, Esq. Herbert'H. B r o'.i n , E s q .

Administrative Judge Lawrence Coe Lanpher, Esq.

Atomic Safety and Licensing Karla J. Letsche, Esq.

Board Panel Kirkpatrick, Lockhart, Hill Christopher & Phillips

-U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comm iss ion Wachington, D.C. 20555 8th Floor 1900 M Street, N.W.

Dr. Peter A. Morris- Washington, D.C. 20036 Administrative Judge Atomic Safety _and Licensing Mr. Marc W. Goldsmith Board Panel Energy Research Group U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Co'mmission 4001 Totten Pond Road Washington, D.C. 20555 Waltham, Massachusetts 02154 Dr. James H. Carpenter MHB Technical Associates Administrative Judge 1723 Hamilton Avenue Atomic Safety and Licensing Suite K San Jose, California 95125 Board Panel U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 -

Stephen B. Latham, Esq.

Twomey, Latham & Shea Daniel F. Brown, Esq 33 West Second Street Attorney P.O. Box 398 Atomic Safety and Licensing Riverhead, New York 11901 Board Panel U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Ralph Shapiro, Esq.

Washington, D.C. 20555 ,

Cammer and Shapiro, P.C. ,

9 East 40th Street Bernard M. Bordcnick, Esq. New York, New York 10016 David.A. Repka, Esq.

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Matthew J. Kelly, Esq.

Washington, D.C. 20555 State of New York Department of Public Service

. James Dougherty Three Empire State Plaza Albany, New York 12223

! 3045 Porter Street i Washington, D.C. 20008 i .

1 i

i e

t k

i