ML20136A550

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Forwards Revised Guidelines for Determining Seismic Margins, W/Additions Addressing ACRS Comments.Discusses Structures, Mechanical & Electrical Components,Piping,Ventilation Ducting,Qualification Summary of Equipment & Review Plans
ML20136A550
Person / Time
Site: Davis Besse, 05000000
Issue date: 01/30/1979
From: Knight J
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To: Fraley R
Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards
Shared Package
ML20136A555 List: ... further results
References
FOIA-85-363 NUDOCS 7902150302
Download: ML20136A550 (9)
v • d • e


Text

.

'. /M M f f UNITED STATES

[a non4e ye / NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION .

.j WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 g .. ADVISORY COMMITTEE Oh g / REACTOR SAFEcGARD3 U.S N.R C JAN 3 0 rg

%,*****f J_

JAN 301979 OISTcIC'Jn.:,70 :cn pgyggg ] ,

q p

~~ e.wm.m - --

7 21 516 MEMORANDUM FOR: Raymond F. Fraley, Executive Director,g3 3 y Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards g -

FROM: James P. Knight, Assistant Director (

for Engineering /qi-b Division of Systems Safety

SUBJECT:

GUIDELINES FOR DETERMINING SEISMIC MARGINS AT DAVIS-BESSE NUCLEAR POWER STATION. UNIT 1 We appreciate receiving the Committee's comments on the subject guide--

lines and have attached the revised guidelines that are being sent to the Toledo Edison Company.

With respect to the first comment, the last two items on Attachment 1 have been added for assessment of safety related instruments in the control room.

As mentioned in the'section of the guidelines entitled " Plant Visit" we intend to determine the extent to which failures of non-safety grade equipment might compromise the performance of safe shutdown and residual heat removal.

The parameter requested in the third coment has been added to item VIII.8.A of Attachment 2. This attachment has been slightly modified to implement the latest qualification sumary from being used by the Mechanical Engineering Branch.

We will keep the Committee advised of the progress of this review.

ames P. Knight, Ass stant Director or Engineering DivisiorLo.f_Sy. stems _ Safety R. Savio, ACRS ,,6.

cc:

G.' V in D0R E. Sullivan, DSS q,s

't'r I

Q Q$ 66*MT i u$:% l jhN /SE kbh N.0th$ Y.N$

9 '

fApQ t

b[ ,._. 7 3JO h:a. 9..,,,.,)b.,(.3.mi no: A u n ua: .l Au by.f*!C8 c r y-. / -;Z.

C/ qr W

(

GUIDELINES FOR DETERMININ5 SEISMIC MARGINS IN DAVIS-SESEE fELEAR POWER STATION UNIT 1 The structures and components of Davis-Besse, Unit 1, were designed for a Safe Shutdown Earthquake (SSE) acceleration of 0.15g at the foundation level. Because of changes in the regulatory approach to selection of seismic design bases, a more appropriate value for the SSE acceleration for the Davis-Besse site would be 0.20g. As a result of the recomendations in the ACRS letter on Davis-Besse. Unit 1, a condition was placed on the operating license requiring an evaluation of the margins in the plant systems needed to accomplish safe shutdown of the reactor and continued heat removal in the event of an SSE at this higher level. As specified in this condition on the license the evaluation will be performed according to guidelines prepared by the staff. These guidelines are contained in g the paragraphs below. A schedule that we recomend for staff review is also included.

Structures The applicant should perform a reanalys'is of the plant structures to the extent necessary to develop floor response spectra necessary to carry out the evaluation described below. This reanalysis should employ Regulatory Guide 1.60, Design Response Spectra anchored at 0.20g and applied at the foundation level of the structures. Currently accepted SSE damping values should be used in these analyses. The floor response spectra which result from the structural analyses will be referred to as the " revised response

. spectra" in subsequent paragraphs.

s., . . y -u... _

-*-m*"*

e - .m,. - , - - - -

. ( .

2 Mechanical Components and Electrical Equipment and Instrumentation For this review the staff has selected various essential mechanical components, electrical equipment and instrumentation from the systems required for safe shutdown and continued shutdown heat removal. This equipment is listed in Attachment 1. For each piece of equipment ;isted the applicant should provide the 'information requested in Attachment 2.

Piping In order to quantify the margins available in piping systems the applicant

. should provide the following information:

- A table of the maximum SSE (0.15g) plus dead weight plus pressure stress and the stress allowables for the Seismic Category I piping systems. .

l

- A table of neximum stress values, as above, revised appropriately for a 0.20g earthquake. Document and justify the methods used to arrive at the stress values in.this table, such as response spectra enveloping, reanalysis, linear scaling, etc.

- Design support loads, support loads calculated using the " revised floor response spectrum", and the loads which each support would experience with the most highly stressed structural element stressed to its allowable value. By structural elements is meant beams, plates, concrete _ anchor fasteners, welds, etc. The most highly stressed structural' element should be identified. This information should be provided for at least 12 supports of various sizes, types and locations in the plant.

i r 3

- For all the types of structv-Il eie ,er.ts, the criteria on which the allowables are used. If the criteria for allowable stress in equipment hold-down bolts are different from that used for bolting in piping supports, the differences should also be provided.

Ventilation Ducting The applicant should provide a description of'the procedure followed ~

to design and seismically qualify Seismic Category I ventilation ducting and the ducting supports. In addition, an assessment should be provided for the adequacy of these systems for the. higher earthquake based upon the margin available in the original design.

Plant Visit The staff will conduct a plant site visit to observe specific systems, I

equipment and their supports. The systems and components will be viewed to determine that there is no interaction between nonseismic systems and systems required to achieve safe shutdown and. continued. shutdown heat removal. This equipment will also be viewed to assess the significance of configuration and supporting structures.

The Equipment Seismic Qualifi-cation Summaries (Attachment 2) completed for the listing in Attachment 1 will .also be discussed at this time.

Review Schedule The following schedule is presently envisioned for this review:

. s 4-Task Date from Issuance of Staff Guidelines Applicant Submittal 3 mo.

Completr Review of Sub- 5 mo.

mi tti. I Conduct Site Visit 6 mo.

Identify any Items Requiring 7 mo.

Additional Information Complete Review of Additional 9 mo.

Information Submit Final Report to ACRS 10 mo.

i 4

0

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

I Attachment 1 Selected Mechanical Components and Electrical Equipment Auxiliary Feedwater Pump Component Cooling Heat Exraanger Diesel Fuel Oil Day Tank Service Water Pumps Auxiliary Feedwater Pump Turbine Borated Water Storage Tank Emergency Diesel Emergency Diesel Generator Emergency Diesel Cooling Water Heat Exchnager Decay Heat Removal Cooler Decay Heat Removal Pumps P-42 Decay Heat Removal Pump P-42 Motor Decay Heat Removal Suction Valves HVDH11 & 12 Decay Heat Removal Suction-Valve HVDil & 12 Motor Operators Auxiliary Feedwater Pump Steam Inlet Valve MS-106 4.16 KV Switchgear D.C. Control Panel 125 V Battery 125 V Battery Racks i 125 V Battery Charger 480 V Transformers i

Hot Shutdown Panel Instruments NI/RPS and SFAS Cabinets NI/RPS and SFAS Cabinet-mounted Modules I'

t i

l l

i Attachment 2 ,

l Quali#ication Summary of Eouipment l \

I. Plant Nane: i Type:

1. Utility: PWR
2. NSSS: 3. A/E: BWR II. Component Name
1. ~ Scope: [ ] NSSS [ ] B0P
2. Model Number: Quantity:
3. Vendor:
4. -If the component is a cabinet or panel, name and model No. of the devices included:
5. Physical Description a. Appearance
b. Dimensions
c. Weight
6. Location: Building:

. Elevation:

, 7. Field Mounting Conditions [ ] Bolt (No. , Size )

1 [] Weld (Length )

i

[]

4

8. Natural Frequencies in Each Direction (Side / Side, Front /Back, Vertical):

S/S: F/B: V:

9. a. Functional

Description:

b. Is the equipment required for [] Hot Standby [] Cold Shutdown

[] Both l 10. Pertinent Reference Design Specifications:

i

. , - . . - . - , . . . - - - - - - -- -- - - .--. -.- . - . . , . , , - - -.n . ~ - - . . - . - ,

. l III. Is Equipment Available for Inspection in the Plant: [] Yes [] No IV. Equipment Qualification Method: Test:

Analysis:

Combination of Test and Ana'ysis:

Test and/or Analysis by (name of Company or Laboratory & Report No.1 V. Vibration Input:

1. " Revised" Required Response Spectra (attach the graphs):
2. Required Acceleration in Each Direction:

S/S = F/B =- V=

VI. If Qualification by Test, then Complete:

[ ] random

1. [ ] Single Frequency [ ] Multi-Frequency: [ ] sine beat

[]

2. [ ] Single Axis [ ] Multi-Axis
3. No. of Qualification Tests: OBE SSE Other I (specify)
4. Frequency Range:
5. TRS enveloping RRS using Multi-Frequency Test [ ] Yes (Attach TRS & RRS graphs

[ ] No

6. Input g-level Test at S/S = F/B = V=
7. Laboratory Mounting:
1. [ ] Bolt (No. , Size ) [ ] Weld (Length ) [ ]_
8. Functional operability verified: [ ] Yes [ ] No [ ] Not Applicable
9. Test Results including modifications made:
10. Other tests performed .(such as fragility test, including results):

-r

,... 1 VII. If Qualification by Analvsis or by the Combination of Test and Analysis, ther Compl ete:

1. Description of Test including Results:

'2. Method of Analysis:

[ ] Static Analysis [ ] Equivalent Static Analysis

[ ] Dynamic Analysis: [ ] Time-History

[ ] Response Spectrum

-3. Model Type: [ ] 3D [ ] 2D []1D

[ ] Finite Element [ ] Beam [ ] Closed Form Solution

4. [ ] Computer Codes:

Frequency Range and No. of modes considered:

[ ] Hand Calculations

5. Method of Combining Dynamic Responses: [ ] Absolute Sum [-] SRSS

[ ]0ther:

(specify)

6. Damping: Basis for the damping used:
7. Support Considerations in the model:
8. Critical Structural Elements:

Governing Load (a) (b) (c) or Response Seismic Total Stress (c) - (b)

A. Identification Location Combination Stress Stress Allowabl e (a)

Effect Upon Functional B. Max. Deflection Location Operability

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=ML20136A550&oldid=2839245"