ML20083Q535

Forwards Mark II Hydrodynamic Loads Confirmatory Program Pipe Mounted Equipment Evaluation - Phase I.Rept Presents Current Qualification Levels for All Motor Operated Valves on 30 Piping Subsystems,In Response to Supplemental SER

ML20083Q535
Person / Time
Site:	Shoreham File:Long Island Lighting Company icon.png
Issue date:	02/18/1983
From:	James Smith LONG ISLAND LIGHTING CO.
To:	Harold Denton Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
SNRC-831, NUDOCS 8302250429
Download: ML20083Q535 (9)

Text

. _ ,

'~,=f

-- ,~.A n 3 LONG ISLAND LIGHTING COM PANY I dE%EP i SHOREHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION g 3 h ooy,w., P.O. BOX 618 NORTH COUNTRY ROAD . WADING RIVER, N.Y.11792 D'm ut Dial Numkr February 18, 1983 SNRC-831 Mr. Harold R. Denton, Director Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 Mark II Hydrodynamic Loads Confirmatory Program Shoreham Nuclear Power Station - Unit 1 Docket No. 50-322 Reference 1) SSER for Seismic and Dynamic Qualification of Safety Related Electrical And Mechanical Equipment, dated December 27, 1982

2) Plant Design Assessment for SRV and LOCA Loads Revision 5, December 1981 Shoreham Nuclear Power Station - Unit 1 m

Dear Mr. Denton:

In response to reference 1, item (3), LILCO hereby submits its l report entitled, " Mark II Hydrodynamic Loads Confirmatory Program, Pipe Mounted Equipment Evaluation, Phase I." This report presents the current qualification levels for all motor operated valves (MOV's), on the 30 piping subsystems discussed in Reference 2, and the acceleration levels calculated for the Generic Long Term Program (LTP) confirmatory loads.

As stated in this report, all MOV's on the 30 piping subsystems have been evaluated and found to be adequately designed to accomodate the final generic (LTP) hydrodynamic loads.

DOl 8302250429 830218 PDR ADOCK 05000322 E PDR FC-8935.1

'Mr.JHarold'R.'Denton SNRC-831 Page.2

.LILCO: believes this information-sufficient to constitute

.closureiof Phase I, Pipe Mounted Equipment. concerns. Should you have any further; questions regarding this matter, please feel free-to contact this office..

Very.truly.yours,

' . L. . Smith '

Manager,?Special Projects Shoreham Nuclear Power ~Statio'n DWD:bc Attachment cc: J. Higgins.

All Parties Listed in Attachment 1 t

t l

l l

L i

l' E

I L

[ '.

l

' l

~

• , 3 ATTACHMENT 1 Lawrence Brenner, Esq. Herbert H. Brown, Esq.

Administrative Judge Atomic Safety and Licensing Lawrence Coe Lanpher, Esq.

Karla J. Letsche, Esq.

Board Panel Kirkpatricke Lockhart, Hill U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Christopher & Phillips Washington, D.C. 20555 8th Floor 1900 M Street, N.W.

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

Twomey, Latham & Shea Daniel F. Brown, Esq.

Attorney 33 West Second Street P.O. Box 398 Atomic Safety and Licensing .

Riverhead, New York 11901 Board Panel U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 Ralph Shapiro,-Esq.

Cammer and Shapiro, P.C.

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

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 Matthew J. Kelly, Esq. ~

State of New York Department of Public Service Three Empire State Plaza Albany, New York 12223 l

t MARK II. HYDRODYNAMIC LOADS CONFIRMATORY. PROGRAM PIPE MOUNTED EQUIPMENT EVALUATION - PHASE I.-

SHOREHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION - UNIT 1 LONG ISLAND LIGHTING COMPANY The - objective . of this report is to present additional .information on

- Shoreham- equipment evaluation results as ' a supplement to the . Shoreham -

Design Assessment Report (DAR) Revision 5 (Reference 1) Appendix L " Mark II '

- Hydrodynamic; Loads Confirmatory Program."

. As stated in the DAR,: the Shoreham Mark II hydrodynamic loads confirmatory

program has evaluated the plant with respect to the final generic Long-Term Program (LTP) hydrodynamic loads. The LTP hydrodynamic loads, . the scope and procedure of the confirmatory program, and the evaluation results have been discussed in Reference 1.: The evaluation concluded that the Shoreham reactor building structures, piping, and ' equipment . had been adequately

' designed to_ accommodate the final generic LTP hydrodynamic loads, with the exception 'of a number of motor-operated valves (MOVs).. These MOVs are ' '-

. generally the same ' valves - that had acceleration values L due to the design bases hydrodynamic loads-which exceeded original qualification levels.

Since the evaluation results became available, analytical efforts as well 4 as a requalification test' program have been completed to demonstrate that the-integrity and operability of the valves can be assured. This report presents the current qualification levels for all MOVs on the 30 piping subsystems discussed in the DAR and the acceleration levels calculated for the LTP confirmatory loads.

As indicated .in Reference 1, the Shoreham reactor building structural dynamic analysis results had clearly shown that the most significant final generic . load is the CO-basic load. The load definition is a direct application of the 4TCO test data on the Shoreham pool boundary with a conservative spatial distribution. NUREG-0808 (Reference 2) has  ;

acknowledged the conservative- nature of the load definition and allows j credit to be taken for the pool size effect and pool temperature range (Reference 3). Shoreham has . performed a plant ' unique assessment and concluded that a CO-basic load reduction ratio of 0.7 can be applied for

- the' pool size effect. Shoreham has conservatively elected not to take '

~ credit for the pool temperature-range effect for results reported to date.

- As it was discussed throughout the DAR, the structural analyses have

- generally employed simplifying assumptions that are conservative in nature.

An example is the treatment of axisymmetric hydrodynamic loads such as the CO-basic load definition. The support excitation to a piping subsystem i

that is attached to the containment wall is a one-directional radial i I excitation. The design analyses generally employed have been conservatively performed with the full amplitude of radial excitation applied in two perpendicular horizontal directions. This substantial conservatism in the CO-basic load analysis has been removed in the piping analyses for the 30 piping subsystem evaluated herein.

l

/

1-t

---

e,,-v,-w-, ,,w-,w,-, sno, ,,.,-,,--.--,-,,,,-,,,,,w,-,rw, ,,---,--,,,-------e-m--,- - - - - , , - , , , -r,,n-- -,-,n,--,c-----~, , --,w -- ,e

r; Thd acceleraLion values at the MCVs have been calculated with the Shoreham pool, size effect taken into account for the .C0 ~1oad definition and the' tangential component of excitation removed for axisymmetric loads. The results - are summarized in Table i for ' the 60- MOVs- on the - 30 piping subsystems evaluated. Also shown'are the qualification levels for both the valve operators and assemblies.

The ; operator qualification levels were arrived at by test. .The assembly' qualification levels reflect the acceleration values used in the original qualification ~ stress analyses.ratioed up-by the faulted condition. factor of-safety.

For the 60' valves evaluated, all calculated accelerations.wer'e found' to be acceptable. For one valve, IE11*MOV-039A, the calculated -horizontal

acceleration exceeds- the valve assembly qualification level,~ -but the combined effect with a lower vertical acceleration results in acceptable calculated stresses.

- Base'd on the . information presented herein, it is concluded that - all

'Shoreham equipment will be proven to be within qualification levels.-- Phase II ' of this program - is ' underway to address all valves on . the . remaining piping subsystems attached to the primary containment at: locations of high amplitude ARS. It is expected that the . program will provide positive confirmation that- the ; qualification of Shoreham MOVs conform with the-

-requirements of the Mark II-LTP hydrodynamic load definitions.

2

References:

- 1. Shoreham Nuclear Power Station Unit 1 Plant Design Assessment Report for SRV and LOCA

. Loads, Revision 5, December 1981

2. Mark II Containment Program Load Evaluation and Acceptance Criteria, NUREG-0808, August 1981

3. Mark II Containment Lead Plant Program Load Evaluation and Acceptance Criteria, NUREG-0487, Supplement 2, February 1981 l

3 1

- ---- ,a

,,n, ,

l 7A84f 1 cowwrow w. wwwunou a w i. s a. m -nriou -

CanG1nsensenW an,lALIGoCAT/0W LEVg L

%Ivt. ^ Ax c oMenrot l'. s. Santi wro roA' Asst a st.Y Mavk No, No. 4w Gw No. (w 6v Gg diy e IEDI* McVo32 e GC-I 4. 9 1.4 89Ah-1 /e. o /o.O 7/0.0 'Plo.o e

!EIht Movo EI A 8 t.' - I la .9 l 2. 89A>-1 /e.o /* o rio.o Pto.o se JEII,v MoVo36A 8 F-l 2.9 l. 9 stab.to 7,o 7, o 7 7.0 p g.o sa iEII

• HovatiA B 9* l 4.4 +. 8 88Ah-9 1. 0 7, o 27.o > 7. 0 IC'IISkovo18 A 8 r-l 4.1 f.o 89A).'L /e.) /e.o yto.c g, z.

/Ella not/oMA 99-) 8.3 o.C sav-14 lo.o /s .o 7.+ 9.5 ce ItlleMoVo 4 04 Sf-l 1.I 4 2. 88V-2.o lo** /*** r/o.o >to.o

= IfIi *Hovo4I A e n'-I 5*.C l. (, 88V-(, lo.* /* o >Io.o rio.o ai

==

lsts+ MoVoetA 8f-l 3. C 2*[ '88Ab-5 /* * /* * >/0 0 >lo.o SS l s*

I E II

• k o v'0 3 f A 94 /. C 1.( 98V-zo to.o /*.* rio.o pr o.o s* IEII* Novc35 A 9G-L z.S I.3 9 8V-to Ia. o 10.0 r/o.c ri o.o s'

IEll+ Movo144 BG-t I. C* t.I 88 Abs /6. * / *.

• fc 2, 9_.

38 16IIS PcVoo3A 84-2. l.8 - 1. 9 3I8 L 3.0 3.0 >3. 0 13.0 iEll# NoV6578 8 M-l C.3 f. 6 98Ah-9 7.o 1,6 27.0 77.o s*

IEll+McVo% 8 B H -l 6.7 3 . 2. 88Ab-to 7. 0 1, o 77.0 7 7.0 l 3s n

37 IE II+ McVo ro BU-l 9..C 3./ 88V1I 1o. 0 /a.o 7I0.0 47 n IGileMo vo+e8 9H-l 9. I - 35* ggV.za / *. o to. o rio. o vio.o n

l IEII+MovoE28 gu l .-

3.8 l. I 8so-t /o.o /o. o .ria.o 52.

• [

• =

IEIl*MoVo248 9 l+ -1 4.J . 3. 8 98v-st to. s to.o 7+ 9. s_

16lI a-MoVos'3 G L.- I 2.C l.4 Be v- II /s. o /s o. 8. C K 4-

.s IEll+MoveC4 8t_-I 17 f. o 98V- 11 /*.o /* o 85 5. 4-i

/ of 3

-w--,-,=-- -

-m wyw e w w-. r--,m---,w-,e--e-rc- ,r--.w,vr,=-y ,,v-,-,- ----r-----w m- --+wmm-<wt w--.e---=-*---g-----e.,me,-+--*- ---e- - - - - =--,v--+---- -

_ 74 ALE .1 (ceunuvo)

_ cow >meros y - Kr. pukincarioM_ <rvt& .*c4144riouJ _

Cantinsaare n.1 avatscocArica LsysT Valv<. Ax 47 preceae.6. . Sets wrenroe Assrmew T Mav* N., No. 4. 4o do. ga sy Ga 4y s itria 8evo42.- 1A-1. l.6 I.2. sev-2. ja,o to,o rio.o +.3 7

It's/vnsvo48 1. A -t I,/ I.6 2 s3-3, /o.0 la.o 7.3 3'. 3 IttisMovo4 I 1. A A I.0 /.3 88v-2. loco /s.e rio.o 43 19 ItSivkove47 th 1.0 3.3 1sa-2 /o.o /o 0 1. 3 3.3 43 ns

/GS/M MeV*EL 2 c -I 2,+ 1.4 88V-6 /0.O /*.O 7/o.o r/o.o aS e

JESIahoVatt 1 C -l 3.t /. C esV-4 /o * * /*** r/o.o > 1 o.o no IE.4.I 4 hovo 42 Il&-1 I, + o.4 99V-I7 lo.o h.o 3,9 g,9 i.

= IEdl

• MeVo +e //4 -/ o7 2.C If3-7 /8 8 /*.* 73 F.3

==

ltel*Hovo4-/ 1.44-l 39 f. 4 teV-/3 /*.o /*,o 5*, L 1.3 23 as iEkl A Movo47 14A-l 6.4 o.3 153-3 /*'O /*'

• 7. 3 3.3 If 16'ti4eMovo85~ 253-1 f.L l. 4- 1.53-I /*** /*** 3.2. +. s*

==

182/4Movo83 1 5 7-1 /.9 l.8 155-1 /*.* /* 0 3.1. 4.C

• • /g2.1 whoVo84 1 TT-l /.6 2. 6 2.53-I /*** /#* O F. 2. 4.7 2*

iP41V Mo vs334 33A -1 07 o.6 147-/ 9.0 8.0 28.o >8.o .

s' IP4/M hoVo33B 23 A -l O.C o,4 19 3 -I $ .0 8.0 :78.0 p 8.0 If4/M-ho%3Y.33A-l . o. 8 o . 4- 19 7-1 8.6 9.0 18.o 18.o se IP4.I:e Hovo350 ggg -l o. 5 o, g j97./ 9.6 8,a p g.o y g, o JP4l+ Moss %2.h 32h-1 1. 0 j, 8 q97-3 84 f, o fl g, f IFA IVMavott s 3FA -I o.8 /.4 197-3 9.o g,o 6. 6 6 , 4, IEIISMovo 3tc S c -/ '). C o. (a ggp y.=) fo . o /o.0 rio,o pio.o

~

IEll4-Hovo11.c_ 8e-I 4. L ,

. L,2. ggay y p.o fo.o y/o.o pjo,o 2 of 3

e TJ84f 1(courwoo) couNmarou vs. 9vamenr!ou irwa sua;urio~s .-

i ..

• Conctnsentenry auALscocATton; Lgvg L Valva. . Ax .o r w a s r a c. 6. Seax optarse aume.Y Mav4 N , No. Gw 4v Nof 4a 6v Ga Gv

'~

s / 2 /1 F H o V o 4 1 GN-l 4.o / E' 88 Ab-t for o /0. 0 yn.o rio. o e IG32 *Nov atIL 404 -I l9 f.L 253- + /*.o lo. o 8.I 8.f _

no IK53*Mo ven e. GaA -l J . (,, 1. 9 zty 4 jo.o /* .o 8.I g.I i.

's /8215HoVo43 t oA -1 1.5 o.4 1 53 -l /a. o Io.o .9.1 4. s' .

ia

/82.f

• Mova484. Go 4 -1 /. 3 o. 4 2r3-1 /o.o /o, o 3. 2. 4 ,5-85 c' IEsttMeVot/D 608-1 1. . A- I . 2- 253 /o. o to.o 8.I 8.s ce IEE1

• Mayo 11D 408-/ 1..I o.7 157 lo. o /o.o 91 8.(

1921 *MovoC4- 609-/ f.8 f.1 253 -l /*.o Io. o 3.1 +. C

• • /A21MMovo49h 606-1 12. o.9 zS3-I fo.o /o,0 ~5.2. 4, (

n* /E31sMeVan A 40E'-l 1. C l. I 153 /o.o /o.o 8. l g.f as IfEZ 4Movo'IA G oE-l 2.8 1.6 153-4 /o o ho 2,I 8.1 se 182.14 MeVo61 G s t -I I.9 c .9 253-l fo. o fo.o E. z 4. C'

s 182.l W Nove48A 6O E-l /.+ 07 2 57-l /ceo /o.O  ?.'t. 4. f ss /8z!$HoVo4&B C 6f-I la 4- 0.9 2.53-1 Mio 10. 0 g, 2. &T ,  ;

33 s*' iE31.S-Novo 213 4bF-l 2.4  ? .I 1r3 /s. o /D.o 9.I e.I j 39 l

s* IE31.SMeVoztB fof-l I. 8 f. 8 253 4 /o. 0 lo. o 9.I 8.( l se 181J:JMcVa41- 605-) /. 3. o.9 2. U- l lo.o to.o 3. L 4. f .

164lu McVo+9 1)(, -l l. T 2.1 153-1 lo. o 10. 0 3.2. 4C 4e 43 44 I 45 44 3 OE 3 I

_ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ , _ _ _ _ _ _ . . . _ _ . _ _ - . _ _ _ _ , _ . _