ML20094M039

Ja FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant USI A-46 Project Summary

ML20094M039
Person / Time
Site:	FitzPatrick
Issue date:	09/30/1995
From:	STEVENSON & ASSOCIATES
To:
Shared Package
ML20094M035	List: ML20094M032 ML20094M039 ML20094M048 ML20094M059
References
REF-GTECI-A-46, REF-GTECI-SC, TASK-A-46, TASK-OR NUDOCS 9511210242
Download: ML20094M039 (8)

Text

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

.o O

New York PowerAuthority t James A. FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant i

USl A-46 Project Summary k

September 1995

~

0(

, NEW YORK POWER AUTHORITY DOCUMENT REVIEW STATUS SIATUS_NO-1 ACCEPTED 2 O ACCEPTED AS NOTED RESUBMITTAL NOT REQUIRED 3 O ACCEPTED AS NOTED RESUBMITTAL REQUIRED 4 O NOT ACCEPTED j Perwssen 2 groceed does not constmate acceptance or approval of desgn details, calculations, analyss, est methods or enatenals developed or selected try the suppher and oaes not releve suppler from full comprena with contractuainegatabons REVIEWED BY:

M TITLE:.Id 2$4[ bG!8-onE: ..w.h7/df...... Prepared By Stevenson & Associates 10 State Street Woburn, Mass. 01801 617-932-9580 t

u 9511210242 951115 PDR P ADOCK 05000333 PDR

3-Purpose The purpose of this report, together with References 1 and 2, is to document the evaluations performed to address Unresolved Safety issue (USI) A-46 at the James A. Fitzpatrick Nuclear Power Plant (JAFNPP) using the Generic Implementation Procedure (GlP, Reference 3) developed by the Seismic Qualification Utility Group (SQUG).

Background

Because of the extent of the changes in the requirements for seismic qualification of equipment over the years, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) initiated USl A-46, " Seismic Qualification of Equipment in Operating Nuclear Plants,"in December 1980. The purpose of USl A-46 is to verify the seismic adequacy of essential equipment in operating plants which had not been qualified in accordance with more recent criteria.

In 1982, SQUG was formed to develop a practical approach for seismic qualification of equipment in operating plants. The approach developed by SQUG was to use experience with the performance of power plant and industrial equipment in actual earthquakes as the primary basis for evaluating the seismic ruggedness and functionality of escential equipment in nuclear power plants. In 1983, the NRC issued NUREG 1018 which includes a general endorsement of the use of experience data for verification of the seismic adequacy of equipment in nuclear plants.

In early 1987, the NRC issued Generic Letter (GL) 87-02 to owners of operating nuclear plants which were licensed prior to development of modem seismic qualification standards. The recipients of GL 87-02 are referred to as A-46 plants and include JAFNPP. Essentially, all owners of A-46 plants, including NYPA, are SQUG members. GL 87-02 requires owners to take action to verify the seismic adequacy of important equipment in their plants. The SQUG approach embodied in the GIP is explicitly recognized by the NRC 1 as the preferred method for accomplishing this objective. l l

In 1992, the NRC issued Supplement No.1 to GL 87-02 (Reference 4) which transmitted Supplemental Safety Evaluation Report No. 2 on SQUG GlP, Revision 2, as corrected on February 14,1992 [ Reference 3). References 3 and 4 are the basis for the evaluations described in this report.

In Reference 5, NYPA described its approach for resolving USl A-46. This approach was accepted by the NRC in Reference 6.

Project Team The project team consisted of New York Power Authority (NYPA) engineering staff and two engineering consulting firms: Stevenson and Associates of Woburn, Massachusetts (S&A), and Engineering and Plant Management (EPM) of Framingham, Massachusetts (EPM). Independent reviews were provided by the JAFNPP Operations Department, Dr. John D. Stevenson, President of S&A, and Dr. Robert J. Budnitz, President of Future Resources Associates, Inc.

Report Organization The complete report consists of this report and References 1 and 2. This report provides a summary of the project. Reference 1 documents the development of the safe shutdown equipment list (SSEL) and the relay evaluations. Reference 2 documents the seismic evaluations.

JAFNPP USI A-46 Project Summary September 1995 page 1/4

, 1 q

s

.I j

Development of the Safe Shutdown Equipment List (SSEL)  !

The GIP's methodology requires a system analysis to select a set of plant systems and equipment . l

-l necessary to achieve and maintain safe shutdown from a normal plant operating condition, and assuming '

a loss of offsite power. The resulting list of equipment compnses the compoa#e SSEL. Based on its type, function, and operational characteristics, each item of equipment on the composite SSEL is j

designated for seismic and/or relay evaluation. The list of equipment requiring a seismic evaluation is the seismic SSEL, and the list of equipment requiring a miay evaluation is the relay SSEL.  ;

JAFNPP's composite SSEL consists of 776 items of equipment (Reference 1, Attachment C). The )

seismic SSEL contains 522 Rems of equipment (Reference 1, Attachment D). The relay SSEL contains 405 items of equipment (Reference 1 Attachment E).

Relay Evaluations The supporting relays for each item of equipment on the relay SSEL are identified (any device with electrical contacts is considered a relay). These relays comprise the assocsafed relay list. Each relay on the associated relay list is then classified as essential or non-essential. Essential relays are those relays for which contact chatter could adversely impact the function of the associated equipment. Non-essential i

. relays are those relays which either are considered sesimically rugged (such as mechanically actuated switches) or whose chatter could not adversely impact the function of the associated equipment.

Essential relays are then reviewed to determine if their seismic capacity (the level of seismic motion that a specific model of relay can experience without exhibiting contact chatter) is greater than their seismic demand (the expected level of seismic motion for a particular relay based on its location in the plant). An essential relay is classified as an outlier if its sesimic capacity does not exceed its seismic demand.

JAFNPP's associated relay list contains 1734 relays (Reference 1 Attachment G). Of these,382 are essential relays (Reference 1, Attachment H). Of the essential relays, EPM classifled 144 (consisting of 13 unique makes) as outliers (Reference 1, Attachment 1). Stevenson & Associates subsequently reviewed the outliers and resolved 14 (5 unique makes); this review is included in Reference 1, Attachment 1. The remaining 130 outliers (8 unique makes) are outliers because, to date, no seismic capacity data is available.

Seismic Evaluations Each item of equipment on the seismic SSEL was evaluated by & Seismic Review Team (SRT) consisting of two or three Seismic Capability Engineers (trained and certified per GlP requirements), and always included at least one licensed professional engineer. The evaluation consisted of a walk-down (visual examination) of the equipment and consideration of three factors: 1) a comparison of the plant equipment to equipment in SQUG's earthquake experience data base,2) an evaluaten of the equipment's anchorage (calculations and bolt tightness checks were performed where required), and 3) an evaluation of any potential seismic interaction hazards (for example, masonry block walls near the equipment). An item of equipment that did not meet GlP criteria was classified as an outlier.

Of the 522 items on JAFNPP's seismic SSEL,62 are classified as outliers. Twenty-two (22) of the outliers have been resolved analytically, the remaining 40 require either corrective action or a modification; some of these have already been completed. The most common modificatim a.r* 1) botting together of adjacent cabinets that contain essential relays, and 2) repair or improvement of equipment anchorages. The equipment seismic evaluations are summartzed in Reference 2, Sections 3 and 4. As required by the GlP, the findings are summarized on Screening Verification Data Sheets j (SVDS, Reference 2, Appendix B), and outliers are documented on Outlier Seismic Verification Sheets (OSVS, Reference 2, Appendix E). The complete evaluations, including check lists, SRT's notes, sketches, photographs, and calculations, are documented on Screening Evaluation Woiksheets (SEWS, Reference 2. Appendix G).

JAFNPP USl A-46 Project Summary l September 1995 l page 2/4

A seismic review of conduit and cabletray raceways was also performed as required by the GIP, Raceway systems were walked-down and checked against GlP criteria. Ten (10) representative, worst-case raceway supports were selected and as-built. These supports then received a Limited Analytical Review per GIP Section 8.3.

Two outliers were identified. Both outliers resulted from the Limited Analytical Reviews. One outlier was )

resolved analytically. This analytical resolution encompasses all hangers that are enveloped by this worst-case support. The second outlier required modification of the support. Several other supports in the immediate area of similar construction were also identified and modified. In addition, an action plan has l been initiated to identify any other supports of similar construction that may require modification. l This raceway review is summarized in Reference 2, Section 5. The walk-down is documented on Plant Area Summary Sheets (PASS, Reference 2, Appendix C). The calculations performed for the Limited Analytical Reviews (LARs) are in Reference 2, Appendix D. Outlier Seismic Verification Sheets (OSVS) are included in Reference 2, Appendix E.

Project Reviews l

The JAFNPP Operations Department performed a review of the SSEL (Reference 7). The review consisted of a " table top" review by a licensed Senior Reactor Operator, and a simulator validation. The j SSEL was found to be acceptable. An additional peer-level review of the methodology used to develop the l SSEL was performed by Dr. Robert J. Budnitz of Future Resources Associates (Reference 8). Dr. Budnitz l found the methodology acceptable. l Dr. John D. Stevenson of Stevenson & Associates performed a peer review of seismic evaluation (References 9 -11). The review consisted of selecting 19 representative items of equipment from the seismic SSEL, an independent walk down of those items, and a review of the SRT's evaluation of tese items. The evaluations were found acceptable. l 4

JAFNPP USl A-46 Project Summary September 1995 page 3/4

(

-- _ _. -- - .- . - - - - . _ _ _ = -. _ . .. --- . . . . . . - . - .

l d

References

1. Engineering and Planning Management, Inc. "New York Power Authority James A. FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant Safe Shutdown Equipment and Relay Evaluation for Unresolved Safety issue (USI) A-46", Final Report, September 1995

2. Stevenson & Associates, Inc. "New York Power Authority James A. FitzPatrick Nuclear Power i Plant USl A-46 Seismic Evaluation Report", September 1995.

3. Seismic Qualification Utility Group (SQUG), " Generic implementation Procedure (GlP) for Seismic Verification of Nuclear Plant Equipment", Revision 2, corrected February 14,1992.

4. USNRC, " Supplement No.1 to Generic Letter (GL) 87-02 that Transmits Supplemental Safety j Evaluation Report No. 2 (SSER No. 2) on SQUG Generic Implementation Procedure, Revision 2, as Corrected on February 14,1992 (GIP-2)," dated May 22,1992.

i G. Letter from R. E. Beedle (NYPA) to USNRC dated 9/22/92, ' Response to Supplement No.1 to Generic Letter 87-02.. " (IPN-92-043 / JAFNPP-92-053)

6. Letter from Brian C. McCabe (USNRC) to R. E. Beedle (NYPA) dated 11/17/92, " Response to Supplement No.1 to Generic Letter 87-02. . James A. Fitzpatrick Nuclear Power Plant"

7. Memorandum from J. Klevom to P. Okas, " Report of JAFNPP Operations Department Review of SSEL Systems for Resolution of USl A-46", JPOS-94-006. Rev.1, January 31,1994.

8. Letter from Robert J. Budnitz (Future Resources Associates) to Thomas J. Tracy (Stevenson

& Associates) dated March 15,1994.

l 9. Letter from John D. Stevenson (S&A) to Priit Okas (NYPA) dated September 26,1994.

10. Letter from John D. Stevenson (S&A) to Stephen Anagnostis (S&A) dated August 25,1995.

11. Letter from Stephen Anagnostis (S&A) to Priit Okas (NYPA) dated September 16,1995.

l l

l l

l I

l l

1

~

JAFNPP USl A-46 Project Summary September 1995 page 4/4

I

~

.- l l

ATTACHMENT 2 to JPN-95-049 Summarv of Commitmenta l 1

Number Commitment Due Date l JPN-95-049-01 Resolve outstanding outliers identified in the USI A-46 Summary Startup from the Report. Refuel 13/ Cycle 14 ,

refueling outage l

JPN-95-049-02 Submit Completion Letter to the NRC when outstanding outliers One month after 1 identified in the USI A-46 Summary Report are resolved. outstanding outlier !

resolution.

]

JPN-95-049-03 Update UFSAR to reflect use of USl A-46 methodology. First UFSAR <

update due more than six months after issuance of final NRC SER.

i j

l l

l

, ENCLOSURE 1 TO JPN-95-049 USI A-46 Safe Shutdown Eauipment and Relay Evaluation Reoort. Volume I i

)

i New York Power Authority JAMES A. FITZPATRICK NUCLEAR POWER PLANT Docket No. 50-333 DPR-59

.. . . .. . . . _ . . _ . . . _ . .. - - . - . . . . . . . . . .. . - - - - . - . - ~ . . _ ~ - . . - - - -

, .~~ .

I

, ENCLOSURE 2 TO JPN-95-049 l

USl A-46 Seismic Evaluation _Baport. Volume 1 l i

l i

i I

1 l

1 l

1 New York Power Authority JAMES A. FITZPATRICK NUCLEAR POWER PLANT Docket No. 50-333 DPR-59 l

.h- qin, 4

p p p- 8. e.-

, c.

...~.~~...*--.. g "d

=

_.._e

-. e 4 e4 -= .k s

. r -

v. s ;. y_- +

l l _

n n. . _:

.-.tn ., s .4 ;:. y . . , 1 ,- ..

M .NewYo.rkPower . .

.~

. 1. . .mc . ' n z_ ._ .

,.s...s. .t'.,

~ T ' .2 % in ,it.&s m .i? n* . " .,U l ' 1 % ? 'i',

. : . r .' m m

, + .

y w ,_ - . . ,-. _ sc. . i.  ; # ~ .. t. #. m

, . . . , . s ._ .

, . . ~ . .- . ,.. . ,.  ;. . ...+ . - .

g. .:-  :

JJAMES A. FITzPATRICK_ NUCLEAR. POWER PLANTi g 4 . ..

4'ame #_4 m...

.. ...r .

_......m,, _ m. ,mA m . mm'

. s - . . . ,. . m. -

s at . e a ss .,e w .

- ,...-.._..u.,.r.s_. r_, _e . ..sr-_. .w r, _s . ! u._._.v.,,. ;r; i ., .

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

<.,o.,.. e'

,s .- -

n.

f ...s .r.

g .

us s . . .

i

? = m . q." ?v.:'.~t~ - ~ -

....~ . .

. :.~.- w - .

, ~. . .?, c .W.:

- - . ~.

- J ' !. *.* .:. . '.'

• a m - *y **. . .. .. ' v d-?-?v=.!:;-

. WwW g . .,n- . :-- m * - ~ . : v . ' .-  :

m .

m??.

> & .:. .- ,, .c.v . -.M .". A,u er C:

c;.:a., .A%:;' :::~% atm e.n.nt,o.a " .J,.%.c.w3 M, a l

=y ,.m. w

.,at.. - d =.f.hw, . .  : - ,. -

- - 1

. r...  % v ---. . r , o v; c. -~ r. .- :,. >, cg .c;. . - o

. s , . . -

SAFE SHUTD.OWN' EQUIPMENT . . .. .. .. .

~

l 1

l j

m. ,

u ..

- "~AND . y n.

RELAYTVALU.ATION"

.. s ._m, _

, s

2. .. _ .

~

r. v.w ,

. ~~,. W m. .

1 l

m. . . . _ . .~ _. . m. . . , .

Tsr ^a,9 E - -..' * *

. . 'M=y - e d.* pw --.T' l

w r* < * . + . . --

. . . . se _

i p'OR.UNRES OLVED. S. AFETY JS S.U. _..E.-_. .w. 5

.,+

.f. _5..s . . .. , , . .

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

a

, . . .m,. .: , .v .m. .f.:, ,.

y,-(USI)'. . . ~ . .. v .A24 m,

,t %, ,,,, ..

6,19"  !

.y . g. u .n, g. , ..

.n. ... ., , ,  ; ,

4 4 , .:  : . ' s ,

8

. s~g . y , ' '%...Me w'.. ,t,; '

.s w s, . ,sw g 4 s _ r 7. ; .v.,.

., ..=- . . . . , . ,

'_% - W -. . -n , . , . . , . . ,

m. .. i..

~ . l

. x, ,, , ,

+ a

. s.. . - a. .. . - - . . . , , .n

, .. .~.._...<.... . ~ . . . . _ ,

, ... m..:. ,. 7 . -, , ... ,- .

i e ,..~w .

, , ~ > .

$ ; ~-~.i- [.t

.'d 'OfE <l '.6.'-t'd.

4 -*i @. w . k,e. [, >

. -4 V.k . . ,

• • =-+< t */ .J.o, - ' +

. . i -

~

.. s . ._ . .

~

.. . s , -

- - #. ., .. . . . m m . , n. ,.

r _. . . . .

. .: . .c : . -- .- .ua a a. . -x ,,=, m e .-- . . ~ -

., . u. a.,. .. . ,w

. 4 . ; .+ . ,

s...._... ,>: . ., =. g n.,. . v . ...

, #.j . . ,

. ..m..... w.. ..w w.1 . g g e; .,.( -

.re v._e.

-.. ,-,,~~.:..,..u.m,#,..~..

.a.*,m,_.u.

.. .. .... . , . =. .,m, _..__ . 7 i r +..~..c..u..~,.u..... .o ., ..,.,....._..m.. ,

~ , , . .. . .-- ,= . . . . _ _ _9 .,

,. . v .. .v . '

3 g Dff _

. ,, [ ,, . '* - . ' ,

.. . ~ . . . . . .

.. , SEPTEMBER 1995_. % ~ ! # ,4a..et f., ,. .. .-

...-.,,.,,.f.

.: - .. .: . : a.

. .s. :.~ . ., m . ....  ; ,s. . w, n: : :. , i. W lp~..:;r. .k B.

., z.,,

. ..,.i . -M-

. . ~

.- ,.r . - 7 ,.  ;-

. u S c+.6 . o m. VOI ,UM E I .O F. XII.. a. . .;.~ 4 1 N, , .6 , a. _ _. a. c+A. . .  ;.<>.

~ .

.e.g .e , 1 M . .i . Aes.. . .. asp ,

I. . . .l

- e af - , . - . . o .s . t

. .~_.

4.. -

. t y .- 4

' ~~'

~~""

ENGINEERING PLANNING ~

~' ~ ~

l '

j ~ ('AND MANAGEMENT,INC. '

OVAlffY PEOPLE FROVIDING EXCELLENCE IN SERVICE 959 CCNCORD STREET + FRAMINGHAM, A% 01701. .

r -

re n , .

J -O -64..a".e.et- -- Y-.- .,.%e6 .e sa e h- f MOW'* w -

. . - .a..geng g..dag.8 bw s j$1846.ph. M meb. 4 m.*-es -

hl.. Mw6 p 4 AdB4 etSg e a " Ahthe.am e.m 4 4m. N ..

. - . - . . . - - - - - - -- --..__. . _ -- .--