ML20210S947
| ML20210S947 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Satsop |
| Issue date: | 06/16/1975 |
| From: | Maccary R Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Deyoung R Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| CON-WNP-1710 NUDOCS 8605290531 | |
| Download: ML20210S947 (7) | |
Text
Q T
yyt 1 C M5 Docket hos.(50-508 6 509 MS 24-11 b
R. C. DeToung, Assistant Director for Light Water Reactoras, Group 1 Division of Reactor Licensing WASHINGTON PUBLIC POWER SUPPLY SYSTD(, DOCKET NOS. 50-506 & 509 Plant Name: Washington Nuclear Project No. 3 (WNP-3) and No. 5 (WP-5)
Docket hos.: 50-506 & 509 Licensing Stage: PSAR Responsibic Benach and Project Manager: LWR l-3, P. O'Reilly Responsible TR Branch and Technical Reviewers: MEB, F. Cherny, P. Chen Requested Coinpletion Date: 6/16/75 Description of itesponse: Safety Evaluation Report Review Status: Partially Cooplete - Awaiting Information The PSAR submitted by the applicant, including Anandment 17, has been reviewed by the Mechanical Engineering Branch, Division of Technical The Mechanics 1 End neering Branch area of review concerns the i
Review.
design criteria of Sections 3.6, 3.9, 3.10, 4.2, 5.2 and 5.5 of the Standard Format (Re-ulatory Guide 1.70) dated October 1972. Since the WP-3 and 5 PSAn references CESSAR, only non-CESSAR portions of these sections have been reviewed. Accordingly, only non-CESSAR sections of the SER have been prepared.
Attachel to this letter are Srn sections 3.9.1.1, 3.9.1.2, a portion of 3.9.2, 3.10, 5.2.3.7.
Per agreenent with P. O'Reilly, sections of 3.6, 3.9.1.3 and the final portion of 3.9.2 (3.9.2.5) vill te furnished after our review of infornation to be supplied by the applicant in a future amendment. We understand that this informatian is expected at NRC the week of 6/16/75.
l A satisfactory resolution of these items is required prior to issuance I
of these sections.
Original sidied by R. H. Le: rry R..R. Maccary, Assistant Director for Engineering Division of Technical Review 8605290531 750616 PDR ADOCK 05000508
(\\ d i
- "'5'*
TR ME TR:ME TR:MEB7 ME PYChe FCherny,
JBrammer
' ight.
RRMaccary 6//J/75 6//6/75
_6/f/75
_64,/75 6//$ 75 Iv.s ATC 31t IEev. 9 53) AI O! C;40
- u. e. oovenmusm? PRINT 09ee OPPICSS 9974 036948 l
t
,e-I
.cc w/ encl:
S. H. IIanaucr, DRTA F. Schroeder, TR
?. C. Cherny, TR P. Y. Chen, TR cc w/o encl:
A. Giambusso, RL W. C. Mcdonald, MIPC Docket Files 50-508 & 509 NRR Reading File TR:MEB File 3 -.
n I
i i
i I.
i e,.c e
- i
... ~...
- l oata
- r.,
AIC.)!5 (Rev. 9 93) AICM 014J W u. e. novannasant painvi=e or,icas se,..eas. tee i
i
I 3.9 Mechanical System and Components 3.9.1 Dynamic System Analys'is and Testing 3.9.1.1 Vibration Operational Test Program The applicant has agreed to perform a preoperational piping vibrational and dynamic effects test program to confirm that dynamic loadings on piping from operational transient conditions have been properly accounted for in the design and analysis of piping systems and restraints classified as ASME Class 1 and 2 components. This program will provide adequate assurance that the piping and piping restraints of the system have been designed to withstand vibrational dynamic effects due to valve closures, pump trips and operating modes associated with the design operational transients. The tests, as planned, will develop loads similar to those experienced during reactor operation. A commitment to proceed with such a program constitutes an acceptable design basis at the PSAR stage in partial fulfillment of the requirement of NRC General Design Criterion 15.
3.9.1.2 Dynamic Testing and Analysis of Mechanical Equipment The applicant has proposed acceptable dynamic testing and analysis procedures to confirm the adequacy of all Seismic Category 1 mechanical equipment, including their supports, to function during and af ter an earthquake of magnitude up to and including the SSE at the site. Subjecting the equipment and supports to these dynamic testing and analysis procedures provides reasonable
. ' i assurance that in the event of an earthquake at the site, the Seismic Category I mechanical equipment will continue to function during and after a seismic event. Implementation of these dynamic testing and analysis procedures constitutes an acceptable basis for satisfying the requirements of NRC General Design Criteria 2 and 14.
3.9.2 ASME Code Class 2 and 3 Components All Seismic Category I pressure retaining systems, components and equipment outside of the reactor coolant pressure boundary, including active pumps and valves, are designed to sustain normal' loads, anticipated transients, the Design Basis Earthquake, and the Safe Shutdown Earthquake within stresc limits which are comparable to those outlined in Regulatory Guide 1.48, " Design Limits and Loading Combinations." The specified design basis combinations of loading as applied to the design of the safety-related ASME Code Class 2 and 3 pressure-retaining components in systems classified as Seismic Category I provide reasonable assurance that in the event (a) an earthquake should occur at the i
e site, or (b) an upset, emergency or faulted plant transient should occur during normal plant operation, the resulting combined stresses imposed on the system components may be expected not to exceed the t
allowable design stress and strain limits for the materials of construction. Limiting the stresses under such loading combinations provides a conservative basis for the design of the system components i
e 4
_.,. _,,.-,, =.
_...n.
a -
-~.
. (-
to withstand the most adverse combinations of loading events without gross loss of structural integrity. The. design load combinations and associated stress and deformation limits specified for all ASME Code Class 2 and 3 components, including the active pumps and valves, constitute an acceptable basis for design in satiEfying the General Design' Criteria'1, 2 and 4 and are consistent with recent Regulatory positions.
The applicant has agreed to utilize an operability assurance program, in addition to the limits on stress and deformation, to qualify active ASME Class 2 and 3 Seismic Category I pumps and valves. Such a program will include component testing, or a combination of tests and predictive analysis supplemented by seismic qualification testing of motors, operators, and component appendages to provide assurance that such components can withstand postulated seismic loads in combination with other cignificant loads without loss of structural integrity, and can perform the
" active" function (i.e., valve closure or opening or pump operation) when a safe plant shutdosn is to be effected, or the consequences of an accident are to be mitigated. A commitment to develop and l-utilize a component operability assurance program satisfactory to the staff constitutes an acceptable basis for implementing i
the requirements of Ger.eral Design Criterion #1 as related to operability of ASME Code Class 2 and 3 active pumps and valves.
i i
4 i
. (
3.10 Seismic Qualification of Category f Instrumentation and Electrical Equipr,ent Operability of the instrumentaticn and electrical equipment is essential to assure the capability of such equipment to initiate protcetive actions in the event of a safe shutdown earthquake (SSE) necessary for the operation of engineered safety features and a3 standby power systems. The proposed seismic qualification program which will be icplemented for Seismic Category I instrumentation and electr.ical equipment and suppcrts will provide assurance that such equipment may be expected to function properly and that structural integrity cf the supports will be maintained during the excitation and vibratory forces imposed by the safe shutdown earthquake under the conditions of post-accident operation. The applicant referenced IEEE Standard 344, 1971 for the seismic qualification of Category I electrical equipment, and in addition his program contains features which recognize and provide solutions for standard test program inadequacies, consistent with Regulatory Standard Eeview Plan Section 3.10 " Seismic Qualification of Category I Instrumentation and Elcetrical Equipment." This program constitutes an acceptable basis for satisfying the applicable requirements of General Design Criterion 2.
- ~
- p t 5.2.8.7 Inservice Testing of Pumps and Valves To ensure that all ASME Code Class 1,'2 and 3 pumps and valves will be in a state of operational readiness to perform necessary safety-functions throughout the life of the plant,'the applicant has committed to a test program whic'h will-include baseline preservice testing and periodic inservice testing. Such a program will provide for both functional testing of the components in the operating state and for visual inspection for leaks and other signs of distress.
The applicant has stated that the inservice test program for all Code Class 1, 2 and 3 pumps and valves will meet the requirements of the ASME Code, Section X1,1974 edition, Subsections lWP and IWV, respectively. Specific details of the testing program will be evaluated during the review of the Final Safety Analysis Report.
Compliance with the referenced code requirements constitutes an acceptable basis for satisfying the applicable portions of General Design Criteria 37, 40, 43 and 46.
Y l.
l i
,