ML22292A072
Text
NMP Unit 2 USAR 3.9 MECHANICAL SYSTEMS AND COMPONENTS This section is divided as follows: Section 3.9A applies to systems and components within SWEC scope of supply and Section 3.9B applies to systems and components within GE scope of supply.
3.9A MECHANICAL SYSTEMS AND COMPONENTS (SWEC SCOPE OF SUPPLY) 3.9A.1 Special Topics for Mechanical Components 3.9A.1.1 Design Transients Table 3.9A-1 lists the plant events that were used for the design and analysis of ASME Section III Safety Class 1 components and supports. The table also shows the number of cycles per event and event classification. Application of these transients is discussed under load combinations in Section 3.9A.3.1.
3.9A.1.2 Computer Programs Used in Analyses The computer programs used in analyses are described, and their applicability and validity are demonstrated in Appendix 3A.
3.9A.1.3 Experimental Stress Analysis Experimental stress analysis for the design of balance-of-plant (BOP) equipment was not used.
3.9A.1.4 Consideration for the Evaluation of the Faulted Condition 3.9A.1.4.1 Equipment and Components The elastic analysis techniques described in Section 3.7A.3 are utilized in the qualification of Category I ASME Code and non-Code equipment. Stress limits utilized for the faulted plant condition are outlined in Section 3.9A.3.1. Design conditions and stress limits defined are applicable for an elastic system (and equipment) analysis. Stress limits for inelastic system (and/or component) analysis are in accordance with ASME Section III, Appendix F.
3.9A.1.4.1.1 ASME III Compliance Category I ASME Safety Class 1, 2, and 3 components are designed, analyzed, and certified in accordance with the appropriate ASME III Code edition and addenda as defined in their design specifications. However, if Code nameplates are removed from installed equipment, traceability is provided in accordance with ASME III 1980 Edition, Winter 1981 Addendum, Subsection NCA, Subarticle 8240(b).
Chapter 03 3.9A-1 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR 3.9A.1.4.2 Piping Systems Category I ASME Safety Class 1, 2, and 3 piping and pipe supports are analyzed and designed in accordance with requirements of ASME Section III, Subsections NB, NC, ND, and NF, respectively. The analyses also comply with Appendix F of ASME Section III. The 1974 Edition is used with the following exceptions:
- 1. Building settlements, not applicable to the faulted condition, are analyzed according to the 1977 Edition.
- 2. The number of OBE load cycles is based on Appendix N of the 1977 Edition, Winter 1978 Addenda.
- 3. For pipe supports, the 1974 Edition is used with the additional requirements described in Section 3.9A.3.4.1.
- 4. The boundary of jurisdiction of ASME Code Section III, Class 1, 2, or 3 process piping extends to and includes the seat of the root valve to the instrument.
The appropriate quality group extends from the root valve to the instrument and shall be designed to ASME Section III. Seismic Category I supports shall be installed with a 10CFR50 Appendix B program described in Section 3.9A.3.4.1.
- 5. Material upgraded by material manufacturer will meet the provisions of ASME III, 1977 Edition, Summer 1977 Addenda, Subsection NCA.
- 6. Installation of attachments to Category I ASME Safety Class 1, 2, and 3 piping systems after testing is to be accomplished in accordance with ASME Section III, 1980 Edition, Winter 1981 Addenda, Subarticle 4436, Subsections NB, NC, and ND.
- 7. The selection of the type and certification of penetrometers required for nondestructive examination is governed by ASME Section V as invoked by ASME Section III. The 1974 Edition, including Summer 1974 Addenda, is used.
- 8. The inside corner radius in Note 6d of Figures NC and ND 3673.2(b)-1 is as defined in ASME III, 1980 Edition, Winter 1980 Addendum. This radius is required on the inside wall of the run pipe at welded branch connections greater than 4 in. The radius is not required for nominal branch pipe size smaller than 4 in.
- 9. The requirements for the stamping of N-type nameplates are as defined in the subparagraphs NCA-8220 and Chapter 03 3.9A-2 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR NCA-8320 of the 1980 Edition of ASME III. The arrangement shall be substantially as shown on Figure NCA-8321-1 of the 1980 ASME III Code.
- 10. Nondestructive examination is governed by ASME Section V as invoked by ASME Section III, 1980 Edition of ASME Section V including Summer 1980 Addenda, is used for evaluation criteria of scattered radiation.
- 11. To establish acceptable criteria for venting during system fill operation, ASME Section III, 1981 Summer Addenda, Subarticles NB-6211, NC-6211, and ND-6211 are used.
- 12. The requirements for examination of socket weld components during in-process repair prior to reuse are defined in ASME III, 1980 Edition, NB-4121.3.
- 13. The requirements for the elimination of surface defects are as defined in Subparagraph NC-4452 of ASME Section III, 1983 Edition, Summer 1984 Addenda.
- 14. ASME III, Subsections NB-6211, NC-6211, and ND-6211, Summer 1980 Addenda, may be used for hydrostatic testing.
- 15. ASME III, paragraph NCA-1273, Summer 1980 Addenda, is used when defining fluid conditioner and flow control devices other than valves.
- 16. ASME III Appendices Figure I-9.2 of the 1983 Edition is used for determination of acceptable stress limits for stainless steel piping during the preoperation and power ascension phases of the piping vibration test program.
- 17. Use of ASME Subparagraph NB-3630(d)(2) of ASME Section III, Division 1, Summer 1975 Addenda, is permitted for stress analysis of Class 1 piping in accordance with requirements of Subsection NC.
- 18. Residual heat removal (RHS) supply and discharge lines connected to the recirculation piping in primary containment are analyzed in accordance with the applicable ASME III Code governing the recirculation piping.
The stress limits and techniques specified in ASME Section III, Appendix F, Summer 1983 Addenda, may be used in evaluating faulted loaded conditions for Class 1, 2 and 3 valves.
Loadings considered in the faulted condition include the following:
Chapter 03 3.9A-3 Rev. 25, October 2022
- 1. Loading associated with normal plant conditions, including hydrodynamic loads associated with suppression pool phenomena.
- 2. Loading associated with the postulated SSE.
- 3. Dynamic system loading associated with faulted plant conditions, i.e., DBA, break of a MSL, or recirculation line.
- 4. Dynamic system loading associated with the intermediate break accident (IBA) and small break accident (SBA).
Procedures for developing the loading functions in Items 1 and 2 above are described in Sections 3.9A.1.5 and 3.7A.3.8. Loading functions in Items 3 and 4 are described in Section 3.6A.2.
Loads associated with the suppression pool phenomena are described in the DAR (Appendix 6A).
3.9A.1.5 Analysis of Piping Systems Category I piping systems (ASME Safety Class 1, 2, 3) are analyzed in accordance with ASME Section III, 1974 Edition, Subarticles NB-3600, NC-3600, and ND-3600 unless otherwise noted as an exception in Section 3.9A.1.4.2. ANSI B31.1 seismically supported and nonseismic piping systems are analyzed in accordance with ANSI B31.1 Code, 1973 Edition, including Addendum C, dated December 18, 1973. In addition, high-energy piping systems are analyzed for pipe rupture criteria.
All seismically supported and nonseismically supported ANSI B31.1 systems may be hydrostatically tested in accordance with a later Code edition than previously specified.
Later editions of ANSI B31.1 are considered when defining minimum welding dimensions required for socket welding components other than flanges.
Analytical modeling and seismic analysis are described in Section 3.7A.3.8. Static analysis and other dynamic analyses that contribute the remaining stresses in the Code stress criteria are described in the following sections.
Piping engineering and design specifications for Unit 2 allow the use of various types of branch connections, including pipe-to-pipe. Unless a specific branch connection is indicated in the specification or on the piping drawings, an unreinforced pipe-to-pipe connection is used in the pipe stress analysis. No further action is required if the allowable stresses are met.
If the allowable stresses are not met, then the piping stress calculation identifies the reinforcement of the branch connection that is required.
Chapter 03 3.9A-4 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR For cases where the branch line is decoupled from the run piping, the proper stress intensification factor is used in the analysis of both the branch line and the main run piping. If reinforcement for mechanical loads is required, it is so identified in the piping stress calculation and drawings.
Reinforcement requirements for mechanical loads, identified by the pipe stress calculations, are incorporated on the piping drawings. Pressure reinforcement calculations required by ASME III, paragraph NB-3643, and ANSI B31.1, paragraph 104.3, are performed by the piping fabricator, and additional reinforcement, if required, is identified and added to the fabricated pipe.
3.9A.1.5.1 Static Analysis The static equation of equilibrium for the idealized system may be written in matrix form, as follows:
KU = P-Q (3.9A-1)
Where:
K = Stiffness matrix for assembled system U = Nodal displacement vector P = External forces, weights, etc.
L Q = Equivalent thermal forces = AE T d O
A = Cross-section area E = Young's Modulus
= Thermal expansion coefficient T = Average wall temperature less 70°F installation temperature
= Coordinate along pipe axis L = Length of pipe The unknown nodal displacements are obtained from one of the piping analysis computer programs (Appendix 3A) by solving this equation using the Gaussian method. The nodal displacements are then applied to the individual members, and member stiffnesses are used to find internal forces. The nodal displacements at support locations can be used along with the support stiffness to determine support reactions.
Dead Loads (Weight, Pressure) and Live Loads The effect of pressure, and the combined effects of weight, Chapter 03 3.9A-5 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR contents, and insulation, are calculated using one of the piping analysis computer programs (Appendix 3A). The analysis for deadweight assumes all flexible restraints, such as spring hangers, to be rigid. If a pipe has different contents (medium) and therefore different weights in various flow modes, this is taken into consideration. Other details are discussed in Section 3.7A.3.8.3. Live loads are considered if they are expected to constitute a significant component of the total mechanical load.
The filling of MSLs with water during vessel flooding and alternate shutdown events is indicated on the main steam thermal transients and considered in pipe stress analysis in accordance with NB-3600. Spring hangers are designed to carry the full water-filled piping load during hydrotest. Additional deadweight stress as a result of filling the piping with water is considered in the NB-3600 analysis of the system.
The main steam SRV discharge piping has been designed and qualified for the steam hammer load due to steam blowdown. The results of the BWR Owners' Group (BWROG) Safety Relief Valve Test Program, in which Unit 2 has been a participant, show that the measured spring and support response was significantly less for water than steam. The test report, as documented in NEDE-24988-P, stated that "the maximum pipe response due to liquid discharge was generally less than 30 percent of that due to steam discharge." The test program was established to measure the SRV discharge line (SRVDL) response for alternate shutdown cooling conditions and to compare these loads with steam loads.
Additional deadweight stress resulting from water-filled main steam safety relief is considered in the ND-3600 analysis of the main steam relief valve lines.
Initial Displacements (Anchor Movements)
The piping analysis computer programs (Appendix 3A) permit calculation of the thermal initial support displacements combined with the thermal response due to the average pipe wall temperature change.
Earthquake anchor movements are considered (Section 3.7A.3.8.3).
In ASME Safety Class I analysis the loads due to OBE anchor movements are combined with the OBE inertia loads via absolute summation. In ASME Safety Class 2 and 3 analysis the Code permits their exclusion from occasional loads if they are included with the thermal expansion loads.
Thermal Loads A piping system may experience various operating modes. All operating modes are modeled as follows: Portions of piping with flowing medium have the temperature of the medium, while Chapter 03 3.9A-6 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR inactive branches have ambient temperature. Nonuniform temperature distributions along the pipe near branch connections of active and inactive legs are considered.
In Safety Class I analysis, stresses due to temperature distribution across the thickness of the pipe wall and geometric and material discontinuities during thermal transients must be considered. These are represented in ASME Section III, Subarticle NB-3600, by:
E T1 , E T2 , and Eab ( aTa bTb ) (3.9A-2)
Based on geometry, fluid type, insulation, thermal transients, environmental data:
T1 , T2 , and Eab ( aTa bTb ) (3.9A-3) are obtained from the HTLOAD program (Appendix 3A), or hand calculations.
3.9A.1.5.2 Occasional Dynamic Loads Excluding Seismic and Hydrodynamic Inertia Loads Occasional loads are also analyzed using one of the piping analysis computer programs (Appendix 3A). In the matrix equation of motion:
MU + CU + KU = F (t ) (3.9A-4)
Where:
M = Mass matrix C = Damping matrix K = Stiffness matrix U = Displacement vector the forcing function F(t) is applied as a set of force time histories, one for each mass degree-of-freedom that experiences a dynamic load.
Fluid Transients Fluid transients are considered in the following systems:
- 1. Main steam and main steam bypass systems.
- 2. Main steam SRV discharge system.
- 3. Moisture separator/reheater safety relief system.
- 4. Feedwater system.
Chapter 03 3.9A-7 Rev. 25, October 2022
- 6. SWP system.
- 7. RHR system.
- 8. RCIC system.
- 9. RWCU system.
- 10. SLCS system.
- 11. CRD system.
The computer programs (Appendix 3A) used to calculate these force time histories due to water hammer, steam hammer, and pipe with air trapped in water lines, are WATHAM, STEHAM, and WATAIR, respectively.
Jet Impingement The effects of direct jet impingement on piping are evaluated after all other piping analyses are completed and targets from all postulated breaks have been identified.
Relief Valve Reactions (Other Than Main Steam SRVs)
Valves that are subjected to jet reaction forces are either supported by static restraints adjacent to the valve body, in such a manner that the effects on the piping outside these restraints can be neglected, or the piping system is analyzed for relief valve discharge load case.
Suppression Pool Induced Dynamic Loads in the Reactor Building These loads are described and assessed in the DAR (Appendix 6A).
3.9A.1.5.3 Field-Run Piping There is no field-run ASME safety class piping in Unit 2.
3.9A.1.5.4 Load Combinations and Stress Criteria In detailed analyses of ASME safety class piping systems, the individual load cases are combined as shown in Table 3.9A-2.
In the simplified analysis for small bore piping (Section 3.7A.3.8) the same principle is followed; however, the resulting seismic spans, thermal offsets, and support loads are bounding values determined from several fundamental configurations.
The classification for ASME Safety Class 1, 2, and 3 piping systems according to type of analysis is given in Table 3.9A-3.
Chapter 03 3.9A-8 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR 3.9A.1.6 Safety-Related HVAC Ductwork and Supports Safety-related duct systems are designed for internal pressure, deadweight, and dynamic loads which result from seismic events and plant operating conditions. Dynamic loads are applied statically as 'g' forces taken from building ARS curves. The
'g' values are taken as either maximum or the 'g' corresponding to the system natural frequency. Ductwork is qualified to the SMACNA Duct Construction Standards and the AISI Code; duct supports are qualified to the AISC Code.
3.9A.2 Dynamic Testing and Analysis 3.9A.2.1 Piping Vibration, Thermal Expansion, and Dynamic Effects A detailed preoperational test program was submitted 60 days before the start of the tests, as required by RG 1.68.
3.9A.2.1.1 Flow Modes Tabulated flow modes for various systems are provided as part of the above test program.
3.9A.2.1.2 Preoperational Vibration Testing Safety-related piping systems designated as Safety Class 1, 2, or 3 are designed in accordance with ASME Section III. Each system is designed to withstand dynamic loadings from operational transient conditions that are encountered during expected service as required by Paragraphs NB-3622, NC-3622, and ND-3622 of the ASME Code.
To verify that piping systems would withstand operational vibration conditions, a vibration monitoring program was implemented which included both safety-related and nonsafety-related process piping and instrument lines. A vibration monitoring test specification was prepared to categorize the requirements for the test program.
Safety-related systems are categorized as follows:
- a. Systems With Flow - Accessible lines (including attached instrument lines) were monitored visually or with hand-held instruments, and inaccessible lines and lines with transient vibrations were monitored by remote instrumentation.
- b. Other Systems - No testing was required.
Instrument lines connected to inaccessible process lines were not individually monitored. Instrument lines were considered acceptable from a steady-state vibration point of view if the vibration of the process pipe to which the instrument lines are connected was within the acceptance test limits. If the Chapter 03 3.9A-9 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR vibration levels in the process pipe were above the acceptable test limits, consideration was given to the connected instrument lines.
During the vibration monitoring program, vibration testing was performed either during the preoperation or power ascension testing phases on the systems identified below.
Power Preoperation Ascension System Phase Phase*
Low-Pressure Core Spray (CSL) X High-Pressure Core Spray (CSH) X Reactor Water Cleanup (WCS) X Feedwater (FWS) X X Spent Fuel Pool Cooling (SFC) X Service Water (SWP) X Residual Heat Removal (RHS) X X Main Steam (MSS) X Main Steam Safety Relief (SVV) X Air Startup Standby Diesel Generator (EGA) X Service Air (SAS) X Reactor Core Isolation Cooling (ICS) X Condensate (CNM) X Standby Liquid Control (SLS) X Control Building Chilled Water (HVK) X Instrument Air (IAS) X Reactor Building Closed Loop Cooling Water (CCP) X Nitrogen System (GSN) X Standby Gas Treatment (GTS) X Containment Purge System (CPS) X Reactor Coolant Recirculation (RCS) X Control Rod Drive (RDS) X Nuclear Boiler Instrumentation (ISC) X See Section 3.9B.2.1 for vibration testing of GE-supplied systems.
Vibration measurements were conducted for steady-state and transient conditions such as pump starts and valve operation.
Also, visual inspections to determine vibration response were performed, with emphasis placed on vents, drains, and branch piping.
- Testing on these systems is accomplished during the startup test phase as described in Table 14.2-303.
3.9A.2.1.3 Preoperational Thermal Expansion Testing Preoperational tests for BWRs are conducted at near ambient conditions; therefore, thermal expansion testing during the Chapter 03 3.9A-10 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR preoperational test phase is very limited. For the systems delineated in Section 3.9A.2.1.2 that are operated at other than ambient conditions during the preoperational test phase, pipe deflections are observed or measured at selected locations. The startup expansion testing program is discussed in further detail in Section 3.9B.2.1.2.
3.9A.2.1.4 Measurement Locations The exact locations of measuring devices and identification of visual inspection points are supplied in the test program.
Measurements taken at points with dynamic instrumentation show whether the stress and fatigue limits are within acceptable levels, and measurements taken at points with expansion instrumentation in an expansion test, excluding dynamic effects, are checked against displacement criteria.
3.9A.2.1.5 Acceptance Criteria Acceptance criteria for vibrations were dependent upon whether steady-state or transient vibration was measured.
For steady-state vibrations, acceptance criteria were based on ANSI/ASME OM3-1982 rules. The majority of the piping was tested by a two-phase process. Phase 1 consisted of visually observing the pipe to determine if a vibration was perceived. If vibration was not observed, that portion of the pipe was acceptable. If vibration was observed, Phase 2 was implemented.
This consisted of taking local measurements using hand-held instruments at points where steady-state vibration was observed.
Vibration velocity was measured and, if it was less than 0.5 in/sec, the piping was acceptable. At velocities equal to or greater than 0.5 in/sec, displacement measurements were taken and forwarded to engineering for resolution.
For the remaining piping, where significant steady-state vibration was anticipated, or where inaccessible for normal viewing, vibration was monitored by fixed displacement transducers (lanyard potentiometers) with remote readouts. The recorded displacements were compared to the acceptance criteria as determined by ANSI/ASME OM3-1982. If the acceptance criteria were exceeded, the recorded displacements were evaluated by engineering to determine a resolution.
For all steady-state vibration, OM3-1982 guidelines were used; however, displacements for carbon steel were based on 80 percent of stress endurance limits divided by a factor of 1.3.
Displacements for stainless steel piping were based on stress allowables for 10E11 cycles, as shown on Figure I-9-2 of ASME III of the 1983 Code. Curve C of the figure was used for initial screening. If detailed analysis was required, Curve B was used in accordance with Code requirements.
Chapter 03 3.9A-11 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR For transient vibration testing, vibration also was measured by fixed displacement transducers (lanyard potentiometers) with remote readouts, and two levels of acceptance criteria were used.
- 1. Level 1 criteria establish the maximum limits for the level of pipe motion which, if exceeded, mandates a test hold or termination. Level 1 criteria ensure that the pipe stress level will not exceed 1.2Sh, the applicable Code allowable.
The displacement limits for Level 1 criteria were determined from those predicted for loading conditions that were used to evaluate the applicable Code equation for an occasional load. If any Level 1 criteria were exceeded, an engineering evaluation was performed to develop corrective action or show that the measured results were acceptable.
- 2. Level 2 criteria are based on pipe stresses as analyzed and predicted for the fluid transient for the particular event. If any Level 2 limits were exceeded, a detailed engineering evaluation was performed to develop corrective action or show that the measured results were acceptable.
Acceptance criteria for vibration on systems listed in Section 3.9A.2.1.2 are specified in the vibration test program. The stress calculated based on measured displacements represents the combined stress of pressure, deadweight, and fluid transient loads, and was combined with the analytical stress of the load cases not simulated, such as the OBE, and then compared with the combined analytical result. The allowable stresses are listed in Table 3.9A-2.
The limits for thermal displacements depend on the equipment design parameters. Under all plant conditions the piping is not permitted to touch another object that may interfere with the operation of the piping system or equipment.
3.9A.2.1.6 Corrective Actions If during the vibration test it should be noted that the vibrations are beyond the acceptable design level, additional supports and restraints may be provided. The possibility of piping rerouting would also be considered, and a reanalysis or retest would be performed to assure that the design meets the acceptance criteria.
Similarly, if the design tolerances for thermal displacements are not satisfied at a point along the piping, the equipment affected can usually be realigned. Otherwise, supports and restraints would be rearranged, and pipe rerouting would also be considered.
Chapter 03 3.9A-12 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR 3.9A.2.2 Seismic Qualification of Safety-Related Mechanical Equipment This section provides the qualification criteria and methods for equipment affected by seismic loads. The methods for the qualification of equipment affected by hydrodynamic loads associated with SRV discharge and the postulated LOCA are provided in the DAR, Appendix 6A, Subsection 6A.9.
3.9A.2.2.1 Seismic Qualification Criteria The purpose of qualifying Category I mechanical equipment is to demonstrate its ability to perform a safety-related function during and after a postulated seismic occurrence of a magnitude up to and including the SSE. Equipment that does not perform any safety-related function, but whose failure could jeopardize the function of Category I equipment, is required only to maintain its structural integrity.
Seismic qualification of equipment is accomplished by one of the four methods discussed in Section 3.7A.3.1. Analysis is used to demonstrate structural integrity of the equipment. When mechanical equipment is qualified by analysis, the calculated stresses are maintained within the specified allowables that contain the required margins of safety described in Section 3.9A.2.2.2. Where the equipment is classified as active, additional deflection analysis and/or testing is performed.
Details of qualification methods for specific equipment are contained in Table 3.9A-4.
These methods are applied to mechanical equipment as follows.
Analysis The listing below is for equipment where the maintenance of structural integrity only is required to assure performance of the design-intended function. This equipment is qualified by analysis:
- 1. Piping.
- 2. Ductwork.
- 3. Tanks and vessels.
- 4. Heat exchangers.
- 5. HVAC - passive components.
- 6. Pump and valve pressure boundary parts that are not required to operate and perform a safety function.
Chapter 03 3.9A-13 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR Analysis is also used to qualify rotating machinery items where verification must be obtained to demonstrate that deformations resulting from seismic loadings do not cause binding of the rotating element, to the extent that the component cannot perform its design-intended function. Components in this category include:
- 1. Active pumps and valves.
- 2. Fans and dampers.
The large size and weight of some of these components, together with the difficulties encountered in applying operating loads during dynamic testing, serve to make analysis the most viable qualification method for the rotating machine elements.
Dynamic Testing The following equipment whose functional capability cannot be adequately demonstrated by analysis is qualified by dynamic testing:
- 1. Standby diesel generator components.
- 2. Hydrogen recombiner control panels.
- 3. Electric motor valve actuators, including limit switches.
- 4. Pneumatic and hydraulic valve limit switches and solenoid valves.
- 5. Electrical control panels, relay boards, switchgear and MCCs, and radiation monitoring equipment.
- 6. Control instrumentation such as flow switches, thermocouples, and transmitters.
- 7. Batteries, battery chargers, and inverters.
- 8. Electrical penetrations.
Combination of Analysis with Testing A combination of analysis with static or dynamic testing is used for seismic qualification of active valves as follows:
- 1. The natural frequencies of the valve assembly are determined by analysis or test.
- 2. A static deflection test is performed to verify that deformation due to seismic loadings does not cause binding of internal valve parts, which prevents valve operations within specified time limits.
Chapter 03 3.9A-14 Rev. 25, October 2022
- 3. The electric motor-driven, pneumatic, and hydraulic valve actuator and other electrical appurtenances are qualified by dynamic testing.
For those active valves that are simple in design or do not have significant extended structures or electrical appurtenances, seismic qualification is achieved by analysis alone to ensure that the valve can perform its design-intended function.
Equipment that is qualified by testing is mounted and operated in a manner similar to that of the actual system. For testing procedures refer to Section 3.7A.3.
3.9A.2.2.2 Acceptance Criteria The acceptance criteria used are as follows:
- 1. Tests, when used, demonstrate that the component performs its required safety function during and after the test. The TRS envelop the applicable frequency range of the RRS with the required 10-percent margin in accordance with IEEE-323-1974. Where the TRS does not envelop the RRS with the suggested margins of IEEE-323-1974, a justification is provided.
- 2. Analysis, when used, verifies that stresses do not exceed the specified allowable stress limits for the loading conditions shown in Tables 3.9A-5 and 3.9A-6 and that deformations do not exceed those which will not permit the component to perform its design-intended function.
For ASME components, the specified allowable stress limits are those shown in Tables 3.9A-7 and 3.9A-8.
For non-ASME components, the Design Condition I loading has allowable stresses limited to 75 percent of the minimum yield strength at the design temperature of the material, in accordance with applicable ASTM specification. For the Design Condition II loading the stresses do not exceed the smaller of:
- 1. 100 percent of the minimum yield strength, or
- 2. 70 percent of the minimum ultimate tensile strength of the material (at temperature), in accordance with the ASTM or equivalent specification for the material.
For definitions of Design Conditions I and II, see Section 3.9A.3.1.2.
3.9A.2.2.3 Seismic Qualification of Specific Non-NSSS Mechanical Chapter 03 3.9A-15 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR Equipment Piping All safety-related piping, including piping in pipe tunnels, is seismically analyzed in accordance with Section 3.7A.3.8.
Tanks The safety-related tanks have been seismically qualified as follows.
The seismic analysis on the buried standby diesel generator fuel oil storage tank consisted of the following:
- 1. Selection of the applicable seismic acceleration factors at the elevation in the diesel generator building at which the tank is installed.
- 2. Calculation of the lowest natural frequency of the filled tank in its buried environment taking into account both the mass and spring rate of this environment. This frequency occurs in the rigid range.
- 3. Choice of the correct seismic factors by combining analysis parameters 1 and 2.
- 4. Determination of loads on both the tank and support rings by static analysis with seismic g-factors applied to all tank and sand masses.
- 5. ASME Code methods for the design of the tank shell, heads, stiffening, and support rings were used. Local stress analysis, by BIJLAARD or other methods, as appropriate, was used in determining stresses at nozzles and support rings.
- 6. Analyses were performed for both normal and upset conditions (including live and dead loads, thermal and pressure stresses, and OBE seismic factors) and faulted conditions composed of live and dead loads plus full SSE inertial loads.
- 7. Adequacy of the tank at design pressure was determined. The tank was hydrotested at 1.5 times design pressure in compliance with ASME Code.
The seismic analysis for the air damper/accumulators, the chilled water expansion tanks, the skimmer surge tanks, and the standby diesel generator fuel oil day tanks, consisted of the following:
Chapter 03 3.9A-16 Rev. 25, October 2022
- 1. An analysis of the vessel was performed to prove that it has rigid characteristics, i.e., the natural frequency of vibration of the predominant mode of the supported vessel is in the flat portion of the applicable response spectrum curves. The applicable seismic acceleration coefficients were chosen according to the location of each vessel.
- 2. The seismic acceleration coefficients were applied statically, and a static analysis was performed on the equipment and supports. The vertical and horizontal seismic effects were applied simultaneously to the subject vessel at its gravitational center for the seismic load calculation and design.
- 3. Determination of loads for both the tanks and supports by static analysis with seismic coefficients applied to all tank masses.
- 4. The remainder of the analysis was performed according to preceding steps 5 through 7 for safety-related tanks.
Since the ADS and main steam SRV accumulators are located inside the reactor building, seismic as well as hydrodynamic effects were considered in their analysis. The preceding Steps 1 and 2 were therefore performed with the applicable acceleration coefficients.
Pumps Qualification of pumps is shown in Table 3.9A-9 and further discussed in Section 3.9A.3.2. The results of tests and analyses are described in Table 3.9A-4 for pumps listed in Table 3.9A-9.
Valves The qualification of active valves is discussed in Section 3.9A.3.2. The results of tests and analyses are described in Table 3.9A-4 for the valves listed in Table 3.9A-12.
There are no manually-operated valves which must change position for any safety system to perform its function in the short term following any event. The operation of certain manual valves may be required in the long term. These valves include those necessary to replenish fuel oil to the diesel generator fuel oil storage tanks and nitrogen to the ADS valve accumulator receiving tanks, and to accomplish boron replenishment in the SLCS following an anticipated transient without scram (ATWS) event. The only other valves which may be required to change position to accomplish a safety function are those RHR valves located in the SFC/RHR interties. As discussed in Section Chapter 03 3.9A-17 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR 9.1.3.3, these interties may be used to provide additional fuel pool cooling following a full core offload.
Other Mechanical Equipment The qualification method for mechanical equipment other than the above is discussed in Section 3.7A.3. The qualification results are described in Table 3.9A-4.
Electrical Equipment and Instrumentation The seismic qualification criteria and methods of qualification of Category I electrical equipment and instrumentation, other than those items discussed in this section, are described in Section 3.10.
Cranes Cranes are seismically qualified in accordance with the following criteria:
- 1. The possibility of the crane being dislodged by a seismic disturbance is precluded.
- 2. No part of the crane becomes detached and falls during an earthquake.
- 3. The crane load will not lower in an uncontrolled manner during, or as the result of, an earthquake.
3.9A.3 ASME Code Class 1, 2, and 3 Components, Component Supports, and Core Support Structures 3.9A.3.1 Loading Combinations, Design Transients, and Stress Limits The design basis for all safety-related piping, components, equipment, and supports considers all applied loads such as pressure temperature, deadweight, external mechanical, thermal, fluid transient, seismic, and hydrodynamic loads. Operability requirements are described in Technical Requirements Manual (TRM) Section 3.4.2.
Hydrodynamic loads are unique to the Mark II containment of Unit 2 and other similar suppression pool-type containments. The design basis for all safety-related piping, components, and equipment subjected to hydrodynamic loads meets the requirements of the following NRC documents:
- 1. NUREG-0487, Supplements 1 and 2, Mark II Containment Lead Plant Program Load Evaluation and Acceptance Criteria.
Chapter 03 3.9A-18 Rev. 25, October 2022
- 2. NUREG-0808, Mark II Containment Program Load Evaluation and Acceptance Criteria.
- 3. NUREG-0802, Safety/Relief Valve - Quencher Loads Evaluation Reports - BWR Mark II and III Containments.
- 4. NUREG-0783, Suppression Pool Temperature Limits for BWR Containments.
- 5. NUREG-0763, Guidelines for Confirmatory Inplant Tests of Safety-Relief Valve Discharges for BWR Plants.
All safety-related equipment, piping, and components and their supports located in the reactor building are evaluated using hydrodynamic loads. All other structures are not affected by hydrodynamic loads.
See Appendix 6A, Design Assessment Report, for further details.
3.9A.3.1.1 ASME Section III, Class 1 Components Equipment ASME III, Class 1 mechanical equipment, i.e., valves, pumps, and cooling coils, is designed in accordance with ASME Section III, Subsection NB. Loading combinations and service conditions are outlined in Table 3.9A-5. Corresponding stress limits in accordance with Article NB-3000 are listed in Table 3.9A-7.
This equipment is listed in Table 3.9A-4.
These load descriptions include Dynamic Load 1, Dynamic Load 2, and Dynamic Load 3 notations, which are load combinations for equipment in the reactor building only, resulting from consideration of hydrodynamic loading conditions; for equipment outside the reactor building, these reduce to OBE, SSE, and OBE, respectively.
For the conditions specified, the allowable stress limits defined in Table 3.9A-7 are applicable to stress results obtained by elastic analysis techniques. The analysis methods described in Section 3.7A.3 are used in implementing this criterion. Computer programs used in these analyses are discussed in Appendix 3A.
Piping The pipe stress analysis load combinations and stress limits for ASME Class 1 piping are given in Table 3.9A-2. The design transients and number of associated stress cycles for the various plant conditions are given in Table 3.9A-1, which includes the dynamic load events OBE, SSE, LOCA-related load cases, and SRV discharge cases. The suppression pool events are discussed in Appendix 6A. There are several SRV cases. In Table 3.9A-2 SRV refers to the envelope of the response of all Chapter 03 3.9A-19 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR SRV cases applicable to a particular load combination. The number of load cycles used for different SRV cases is given in Table 3.9A-1. Under emergency and faulted conditions no fatigue analysis need be performed.
Figures 3.9A-6 through 3.9A-67 are typical examples of response spectra for the load conditions of:
- 1. Seismic OBE
- 2. Seismic SSE
- 3. SRV loads
- 4. LOCA-related loads
- a. Chugging
- b. Basic CO
- c. ADS CO
- 5. Seismic OBE 2-5 percent damping in accordance with Code Case N-411
- 6. Seismic SSE 2-5 percent damping in accordance with Code Case N-411 These response spectras are provided at the following locations:
- 1. Top of RPV
- 2. Top of BSW
- 3. Primary containment at the suppression pool water level
- 4. Reactor building mat (only hydrodynamic loads are provided)
The provided response spectra have been broadened in accordance with RG 1.122. Both vertical and horizontal spectra are provided for each location.
In order to ensure their continued operation during emergency and faulted events, ECCS and other essential systems are required to meet the functional capability criteria of NEDO-21985, Functional Capability Criteria of Essential Mark II Piping, September 1978.
ASME Class 1 piping meets the criteria of ASME Section III, 1974 Edition, and 10CFR50.55a, Section (d).
Analysis of the individual load cases is described or referred to in Section 3.9A.1.5.
Chapter 03 3.9A-20 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR ASME Code Class 1 piping fatigue evaluation was performed for the SRV piping in the suppression pool area. All of the thermal and dynamic loads and respective operating cycle data were used for evaluation of the SRV line. The CUF obtained from the analysis is less than 1.0; hence, no fatigue crack is anticipated due to all of the prescribed loads.
ASME Code Class 1 piping fatigue evaluation was performed for the downcomers. The CUF obtained from the analysis is less than 1.0;hence, no fatigue crack is anticipated due to all of the prescribed loads.
3.9A.3.1.2 ASME Class 2 and 3 Components Equipment Tables 3.9A-6 and 3.9A-8 list loading conditions and stress limits for ASME Section III, Class 2 and 3 components of the Category I fluid systems constructed in accordance with ASME Section III, Subsections NC and ND. These conditions are:
- 1. Design Condition I Includes the specified design loads (temperature, pressure, etc.), plus Dynamic Load 1 loads.
- 2. Design Condition II Includes the specified design loads (as above), plus Dynamic Load 2 loads, plus pipe rupture loads (if applicable).
The design load combinations are analogous to either the Code Class 1 normal or upset conditions for Design Condition I and to the faulted condition for Design Condition II. See Table 3.9A-5 for the definitions of Dynamic Load 1 and Dynamic Load 2.
These requirements, which supplement the present scope of ASME Section III, Subsections NC and ND, are consistent with the present Code format and philosophy. Further extension of terminology (normal, upset, etc.) is not required, since Code Class 2 and 3 systems are not generally evaluated for such varieties of operating conditions and transients, but rather to design conditions which conservatively envelop all operating conditions.
Generally, only design conditions of pressure and temperature are necessary to satisfy ASME Code requirements. These conditions envelop all service level conditions for the component such as normal, upset, emergency, and faulted plant conditions. Use of design conditions plus seismic loading is therefore a conservative criterion.
The stress limits and design conditions presented in Table 3.9A-8 are intended to ensure that no gross deformation of the component occurs. These limits are applicable for an elastic system (and component) analysis. Stress limits for inelastic Chapter 03 3.9A-21 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR system (and/or component) analysis are in accordance with ASME Section III, Appendix F.
Piping Systems The load combinations and stress limits for ASME Class 2 and 3 piping are given in Table 3.9A-2. They conform to the criteria of ASME Section III, which imply elastic analysis. Under faulted condition, with primary stress limit 2.4 SH, gross inelastic deformations that may occur are permitted by the Code.
Analysis of the individual load cases is described or referred to in Section 3.9A.1.5. The application of detailed or simplified analysis depends on criteria stated in Table 3.9A-3.
Typical examples of ARS used in the design of piping systems are described in Section 3.9A.3.1.1.
3.9A.3.1.3 Compliance with Regulatory Guide 1.48 Unit 2 compliance to the regulatory guide is documented in Table 1.8-1.
3.9A.3.2 Pump and Valve Operability Assurance This section provides the operability assurance programs for pumps and valves affected by seismic loads. The operability assurance programs for pumps and valves affected by hydrodynamic loads associated with SRV discharge and the postulated LOCA are provided in the DAR, Appendix 6A, Subsection 6A.9.
Active pumps and valves are those whose operability is relied upon to perform a safety function such as safe shutdown of the reactor, or mitigation of the consequences of a postulated accident. Pumps and valves installed in seismic Category I piping systems are designed in accordance with the requirement of ASME Section III, Subsections NB, NC, and ND. Active pumps and valves are listed in Tables 3.9A-9 and 3.9A-12, respectively.
Active valves are qualified by testing and analysis, and active pumps by testing and analysis with appropriate stress limits and nozzle loads. The content of these programs is detailed in the following sections.
3.9A.3.2.1 Pump Operability Program All active pumps are qualified for operability by being subjected to tests both prior to installation in the plant and after installation in the plant. The in-shop tests include:
- 1. Hydrostatic tests to ASME Section III requirements.
Chapter 03 3.9A-22 Rev. 25, October 2022
- 2. Performance tests while the pump is operated with flow to determine total developed head, minimum and maximum head, net positive suction head (NPSH) requirements, and other pump/motor parameters. As a result of these tests, a certified pump curve is developed for each pump that may be used to verify continued satisfactory operation subsequent to pump installation. Proper seal function is verified during the performance test.
Also monitored during these operational tests are bearing temperatures and vibration levels that are shown to be below appropriate limits specified to the manufacturer for design of each active pump.
After the pump is installed in the plant, it undergoes cold hydro tests, preoperational tests, and the required periodic inservice inspections and inservice tests as applicable.
These tests demonstrate reliability of the pump for the design life of the plant.
In addition to these tests, active pumps are qualified for operability during a SSE condition to assure that 1) the pump is not damaged during the seismic event, and 2) the pump continues operating when subjected to the SSE loads.
The pump manufacturer is required to show that the pump operates normally when subjected to the maximum applicable amplified seismic (floor) accelerations, attached piping nozzle loads, and dynamic system loads associated with the faulted plant operating condition. Analysis procedures are utilized in accordance with those outlined in Section 3.7A.3. Natural frequencies are determined in order to obtain maximum seismic accelerations based on applicable amplified (floor) response spectra.
In order to avoid damage during the faulted plant condition, the stresses caused by the combination of normal operating loads, SSE, and dynamic system loads are limited to the values indicated in Table 3.9A-8. The maximum seismic nozzle loads are also considered in an analysis of the pump supports to assure that a system misalignment cannot occur. A static shaft deflection analysis of the rotor is performed with horizontal and vertical accelerations based on floor response levels. The deflections determined from the static shaft analysis are compared to allowable rotor clearances. The results of the pump stress/deflection analyses are summarized in Table 3.9A-10.
Performing these analyses with the conservative loads stated, and with the restrictive stress limits of Table 3.9A-8 as allowables, assures that critical parts of the pump are not damaged during the short duration of the faulted condition; therefore, the reliability of the pump for post-faulted condition operation is not impaired by the seismic event.
Chapter 03 3.9A-23 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR In addition to the post-faulted condition operation, it is necessary to assure that the pump functions throughout the SSE.
The pump/motor combination is designed to rotate at a constant speed under all conditions unless the rotor becomes completely seized, i.e., no rotation. Typically, the rotor can be seized 5 full seconds before a circuit breaker trip shuts down the pump to prevent damage to the motor. However, the high rotary inertia in the operating pump rotor, and the random nature and short duration loading characteristics of the seismic event prevent the rotor from becoming seized. In actuality, the seismic loadings cause only a slight increase, if any, in the torque (i.e., motor current) necessary to drive the pump at the constant design speed. Therefore, the pump does not shut down during the SSE and operates at the design speed despite the SSE loads.
When seismic testing of the pump assembly is impractical, a seismic analysis is performed on the pump assembly to ensure operability. The analysis considers the pump, motor, and supporting structures together. In addition, the pump motor is independently qualified for operation during the maximum seismic event. Any auxiliary equipment that is identified to be vital to the operation of the pump or pump motor, and that is not qualified for operation during the pump analysis or motor qualifications, is separately qualified for operation at the accelerations that it would experience at its mounting. The pump motor and vital auxiliary equipment are qualified by meeting the requirements of IEEE-344-1975.
The functional ability of active pumps after a faulted condition is assured since only normal operating loads and steady-state nozzle loads exist. Since it is demonstrated that the pumps would not be damaged during the faulted condition, the postfaulted condition operating loads are identical to the normal plant operating loads. This is assured by requiring that the imposed nozzle loads (steady-state loads) for normal conditions and postfaulted conditions are limited by the magnitudes of the normal condition nozzle loads. The postfaulted condition ability of the pumps to function under these applied loads is proven during the normal operating plant conditions for active pumps. The active pump motors are qualified to operate satisfactorily when subjected to their surrounding environmental conditions for both normal operation and post-accident operation by meeting the requirements of IEEE-323-1974 (Section 3.11).
3.9A.3.2.2 Valve Operability Program Safety-related active valves are required to perform their mechanical function during and/or after the course of a postulated accident. Assurance must be supplied that these valves can operate during and/or after a seismic event.
Qualification tests accompanied by analyses are conducted for all active valves.
Chapter 03 3.9A-24 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR Valves without significant extended structures are considered seismically adequate as a result of piping seismic adequacy.
For valves with operators having significantly extended structures, an analysis is performed for static equivalent seismic SSE loads applied at the center of gravity of the extended structure. The maximum stress limits allowed in these analyses ensure the maintenance of structural integrity. The limits used for valves are shown in Tables 3.9A-7 and 3.9A-8, depending upon the class.
The safety-related valves are also subjected to a series of tests prior to service and during the plant life. Prior to installation, the following tests are performed: shell hydrostatic test to ASME Section III requirements; back seat and main seat leakage tests; disc hydrostatic test; and functional tests to verify that the valve opens and closes within the specified time limits, when subjected to the design differential pressure and operability qualification of motor operators for the environmental conditions over the installed life (i.e.,
aging, radiation, accident environment simulation, etc.)
according to IEEE-323-1974. The pre-4.3 percent stretch power uprate (SPU) design differential pressure is applied to those valves whose design differential pressure increased slightly as a result of the 4.3 percent SPU. Cold hydro qualification tests, preoperational tests, periodic inservice inspections and inservice tests are performed to verify and assure the functional ability of the valve.
In addition to these tests and analyses, representative active valves of each design type, pressure, and size group are tested for verification of operability during a simulated seismic event, by demonstrating operational capabilities within the specified limits. The basic criteria used in selecting the representative value for qualification testing is based on an evaluation of the following parameters:
- 1. Assembly weight
- 2. Size, type, and pressure ratings
- 3. Actuator type and performance characteristics
- 4. Mounting arrangement and appurtenances The methodology utilized in assessing the degree of similarity of evaluating the differences follows generally the guidelines of ANSI Standard B16.41-1983, Functional Qualification Requirements for Power Operated Active Valve Assemblies for Nuclear Power Plants.
The proposed testing procedures are as follows. The valve is mounted in a manner that conservatively represents the actual Chapter 03 3.9A-25 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR valve installation. The valve assembly includes the operator and all appurtenances normally attached to the valve in service.
The operability of the valve during a SSE is demonstrated by satisfying the following criteria:
- 1. All the active valves are required to have a fundamental natural frequency that is generally greater than 33 Hz. This is shown by suitable test or analysis.
- 2. The valve is operated in the normal unloaded position for baseline data. The actuator and yoke of the valve system are then statically loaded by an amount equal to that determined from an analysis as representing SSE accelerations applied at the center of gravity of the operator about the weaker axis of the yoke. The design differential pressure of the valve is simultaneously applied to the valve during the static deflection tests. The pre-4.3 percent SPU design differential pressure is applied to those valves whose design differential pressure increased slightly as a result of the 4.3 percent SPU.
- 3. The valve is then operated while in the deflected position, i.e., from the normal operating mode to the faulted operating mode. The valve is again operated in the normal position after the static load is removed. The valve is required to perform its safety-related function within the specified operating time limits in both the deflected and the normal position.
- 4. Electric motor operators and other electrical appurtenances necessary for operation are qualified in accordance with IEEE-323-1974 and IEEE-344-1975.
- 5. Environmental qualification of nonmetallic components in accordance with the Environmental Qualification Program.
The accelerations used for the valve qualification are generally 3.0 g horizontal and 3.0 g vertical. The piping design maintains the motor operator accelerations to these levels with an adequate margin of safety.
Selection of parent valve operators for testing generally follows the methodology outlined in Appendix A of IEEE-382-1980, IEEE Standard for Qualification of Safety-Related Valve Actuators. This standard provides a comprehensive method of analyzing all the relevant parameters of valve operators such as: type, size, weight, electrical characteristics (ac/dc, voltage, current), performance characteristics (speed, motor torque), and materials for the selection of a valve operator for qualification testing.
Chapter 03 3.9A-26 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR Consideration is also given to the effects of thermal and vibration aging, in conjunction with applicable margins, by utilizing the worst-case parameters in qualification.
Testing is conducted on a representative number of valves from each of the primary safety-related design types. Selected valve sizes are qualified by the tests and the results used to qualify that group of valves which the tested valve represents. Stress and deformation analyses are used to support the interpolation.
An assessment of the stresses at the pipe/valve interface generally indicates that distortion, if any, due to seismic loads will not cause binding of internal components. Therefore, additions of piping and loads during the operability tests is unnecessary.
For valves where stresses in the valve body could be significant, the piping and loads were imposed during the operability tests. Examples include solenoid valves and air-operated control valves.
For selected "active" valve categories, specific qualification programs are conducted to demonstrate operability. The method of qualification for these valves is detailed as follows:
- 1. Butterfly Valves The containment and drywell vent/pipe isolation valves are evaluated for operability during and after a postulated accident by both analyses and testing methods.
- a. The valve assembly is analytically evaluated and shown to perform its safety-related function (i.e., to close within the required response time). Valve analysis considers seismic, hydrodynamic, operating, air flow, and LOCA loads.
- b. The valve assembly is statically loaded by an amount equal in magnitude to the dynamic force and applied at the actuator C.G. The design pressure of the valve is simultaneously applied and the valve is operated while in the deflected position.
- c. Electrical appurtenances (limit switches and solenoid-operated valves [SOV]) are qualified according to the requirements of IEEE-323-1974 and IEEE-344-1975.
- d. In addition, assurance of operability is demonstrated by the following tests:
Chapter 03 3.9A-27 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR (1) In-shop shell hydrostatic tests (2) Cold cyclic tests (3) Seat leakage tests (4) Pre/postinstallation functional tests
- 2. Check Valves Check valves are characteristically simple in design, and their operation is not affected by seismic accelerations or the applied piping end loads. Check valve design is compact, and there are no extended structures or masses whose motion could cause distortions or restrict operation of the valve. The piping end loads due to maximum seismic excitation do not affect the functional ability of the valve since clearance is provided between the valve disc and the casing wall. This clearance around the disc prevents the disc from becoming bound or restricted due to any casing distortions caused by piping end loads.
Therefore, the design of these valves is such that when the structural integrity of the valve is assured, using standard design or analysis methods, the ability of the valve to operate is assured by the design features. In addition to these design considerations, the valves are also subjected to the following tests and analysis:
- a. Stress analysis, including the SSE loads.
- b. In-shop hydrostatic test.
- c. In-shop seat leakage test.
- d. Periodic in situ valve exercising and inspection to assure the functional ability of the valve.
For the feedwater check valve, the operability following a postulated feedwater line break is also demonstrated. The maximum disc impact velocity and the pressure differential across the disc are determined. A stress analysis of the valve, which considers the impact and the seismic inertia loads, demonstrates valve design adequacy.
- 3. Safety Relief Valves SRVs are evaluated for operability during and after a postulated accident of both analyses and testing methods.
Chapter 03 3.9A-28 Rev. 25, October 2022
- a. The valve is analytically evaluated for seismic/hydrodynamic and operating loads and shown to perform its safety-related functions.
- b. The valve is statically loaded by an amount equal in magnitude to the dynamic force. A pressure, representative of the design pressure, is simultaneously applied and the valve is operated while in the deflected positions.
- c. In addition, assurance of operability is demonstrated by the following tests:
(1) In-shop hydrostatic seat leakage tests.
(2) In-shop hydrostatic body leakage tests.
(3) Performance tests.
(4) Periodic in situ valve inspections and an applicable periodic valve removal, refurbishment, and performance testing.
Using the methods described, all the safety-related valves in the system are qualified for operability during a seismic event. These methods conservatively simulate the seismic event and ensure that the active valves can perform their safety-related function when necessary.
3.9A.3.3 Design and Installation Details for Mounting of Pressure-Relief Devices Pressure-relieving devices for ASME Safety Class 1 and 2 system components are:
- 1. Main steam SRVs.
The design and installation of main steam SRVs is described in Section 3.9B.3.3.
The design and installation of SRVs for protecting the RHR system heat exchangers (Section 5.4.7.2.3) is in accordance with ASME Section III, Article NC-7000, and RG 1.67.
Piping to and from SRVs is designed in accordance with ASME Section III, Paragraph NC-3677.
The STEHAM computer program (Appendix 3A) is used to calculate fluid transient forces in each piping segment (straight pipe piece between two elbows, an elbow and a tee, or an elbow and a terminal end) downstream of the SRVs. A conservatively low value of valve opening time is used in this calculation. Water Chapter 03 3.9A-29 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR slugs in pipe segments ending in the suppression pool are taken into account.
Dynamic stresses in the piping are computed by time-history integration or the equivalent static methods using one of the piping analysis computer programs described in Appendix 3A.
These stresses are combined with those due to other mechanical loads, in accordance with load combinations described in Section 3.9A.3.1. Both SRVs protecting a heat exchanger are assumed to discharge concurrently. These loads meet design allowables provided by the vendor.
3.9A.3.4 Component Supports Expansion anchor bolts, used in supporting the mechanical components from concrete structures, are drilled-in wedge-type uniform hole anchors. Drilled-in, bearing-type, flared hole anchors are also used in supporting the mechanical components from concrete structures.
Drilled-in, wedge-type, uniform hole expansion anchors are designed for a minimum safety factor of four, as determined by the ultimate load tests performed by the manufacturer. The setting torque has been determined by in situ tests. Most recently, the setting torque is as prescribed by the manufacturer.
Drilled-in, bearing-type, flared hole anchors are designed for a minimum safety factor of three, as determined by field testing.
The loads are transferred into concrete by direct bearing against concrete. The bolt material is capable of reaching full ductility prior to failure. Due to these reasons, the anchors afford greater reliability, and a lower safety factor is justified.
The design, procurement, and installation of building steel comply with requirements of the AISC specification for the design, fabrication, and erection of structural steel for buildings, as described in Sections 3.8.4.2 and 3.8.4.6.3. The examination and inspection of building steel comply with the requirements of NRC RG 1.94, as described in Table 1.8-1.
3.9A.3.4.1 Pipe Supports The pipe support designs, using base plates and concrete expansion anchor bolts, are performed using the flexibility criteria of NRC IE Bulletin 79-02 before they are released for fabrication. Verification of as-built conditions, in accordance with NRC IE Bulletin 79-14, is described in Section 3.7A.3.8.1.
The bases for design and construction of ASME and non-ASME piping supports are given in Table 3.9A-16.
Nonnuclear Piping Chapter 03 3.9A-30 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR Nonnuclear piping supports satisfy the requirements of the American National Standard Code for Pressure Piping, ANSI B31.1-1973, up to and including the Winter 1973 Addenda, paragraph 120 and 121. An exception is taken to paragraph 120.2.4 of this edition by invoking the same paragraph of ANSI B31.1-1980, permitting the use of the 8th Edition - 1980 Edition of the AISC Manual for Steel Construction for the design of partial penetration groove welds in accordance with Table 1.17.5.
Nuclear Piping Pipe supports for nuclear piping are designed and fabricated in accordance with the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code,Section III, Division 1, Subsection NF, 1974 Edition, no Addenda dated July 1, 1974, subject to the exceptions and additions listed below. Code stamping of pipe supports is not a requirement of the 1974 Edition. All pipe supports applicable to the RCPB piping or other piping are considered either linear or component standard, with portions of component standard supports designed to plate and shell rules.
The pipe support jurisdictional boundaries are in accordance with NF-1000 (see examples on Figure 3.9A-5). Portions of supports that are integrally attached to piping are designed, including local pipe stresses, in accordance with ASME III, Subsection NB, NC, or ND as applicable. The applicable dimensional standards of Table NB-3691-1 apply.
See Appendix 3E for a discussion of the criteria in the 1974 Edition of ASME Subsection NF regarding stresses in supports due to thermal growth in piping and seismic anchor motion as it compares to similar criteria in the 1983 Edition.
As permitted by NA-1140, the portions of the 1974 Edition of the ASME Code for which specific provisions of later ASME Code addenda or editions are substituted are listed below.
NA-3256 Filing of Design Specifications The Summer 1978 Addenda dated June 30, 1978, is invoked for the new subparagraph NCA-3256(b) to permit design specifications for component standard supports to be provided by the manufacturer and to permit/facilitate the implementation of ASME III Code Case N-247. See Table 5.2-1.
NA-3352 Stress Reports The Summer 1978 Addenda dated June 30, 1978, is invoked for paragraph NCA-3351 to permit the use of the term design report in lieu of stress report and to permit/facilitate Chapter 03 3.9A-31 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR the implementation of ASME III Code Case N-247. See Table 5.2-1.
NF-1214 Component Standard Supports The Summer 1976 Addenda dated June 20, 1976, is invoked to delete the specific reference to hydraulic snubbers.
NF-2121 Permitted Material Specifications The Summer 1974 Addenda dated June 30, 1974, is invoked to permit the use of SA672 material.
NF-2121 Permitted Material Specifications The Winter 1974 Addenda dated December 31, 1974, is invoked to permit the use of increased allowable stress for SA515 G65.
NF-2121 Permitted Material Specifications The Summer 1976 Addenda dated June 30, 1976, is invoked to include the new subparagraph NF-2121(c) to permit the exclusion of certain shim stock from the requirements of Article NF-2120.
NF-2121 Permitted Material Specifications The 1977 Edition dated July 1, 1977, is invoked to permit the use of SA36 material.
NF-2121 Permitted Material Specifications The 1980 Edition dated July 1, 1980, is invoked to permit the use of SA564, Type 630 material.
NF-2121 Permitted Material Specifications The Winter 1981 Addenda dated December 31, 1981, is invoked to permit the use of SA-194-2H nuts.
NF-2130 Certification by Material Manufacturer The Summer 1982 Addenda dated June 30, 1982, is invoked for material certification.
NF-2610 Documentation and Maintenance of Quality Systems Programs The 1977 Edition dated July 1, 1977, is invoked to revise the material manufacturers and material suppliers responsibilities for materials defined as small products or materials permitted to be supplied with Certificates of Compliance.
Chapter 03 3.9A-32 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR NF-3274 Snubbers The Summer 1976 Addenda dated June 30, 1976, is invoked for NF-3134.6 to permit the use of mechanical snubbers.
NF-3226.5 Special Stress Limits NF-3321.1 Design Conditions XVII-2211 Stress in Tension The Winter 1978 Addenda dated December 31, 1978, is invoked for these paragraph sections which in effect delete the code methods for consideration of through thickness stresses in plates and elements of rolled shapes.
NF-3391.1 Allowable Stress Limits NF-3392.1 Allowable Stress Limits The Winter 1979 Addenda dated December 31, 1979, is invoked for these paragraph sections which in effect delete the code methods for consideration of through thickness stresses in plates and elements of rolled shapes.
XVII-2454 Butt and Groove Welds The 1980 Edition dated July 1, 1980, is invoked to redefine the throat thickness of partial penetration groove welds in accordance with Table XVII-2452.1-1.
In the case that material cannot be purchased to meet the specified ASME III Code, then material that meets subsequent ASME III Code Editions/Addenda up to and including the 1980 Edition/Summer 1982 Addenda may be substituted after a review and reconciliation of related requirements of the ASME III Code are performed and documented.
Table 3.9A-14 lists the load conditions, load combinations, and allowable stresses. Loads are applied in whatever manner is necessary to attain the worst possible stress levels for all support elements. Component standard supports are qualified either by analysis or by a combination of analysis and load rating. All other supports are qualified by analysis.
No specific deformation limits are required; however, pipe support deformations are consistent with pipe stress analysis.
The pipe support buckling criteria are consistent with the requirements of ASME III, Appendix XVII.
The design criteria and dynamic testing requirements for component and pipe supports listed in the following paragraphs are applicable under all plant operating conditions.
Chapter 03 3.9A-33 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR Instrument Lines The requirements for instrument lines are listed in Table 3.9A-15.
Component Supports All component supports are designed, fabricated, and assembled so they cannot become disengaged by the movement of the supported pipe or equipment during operation. All component supports are designed in accordance with the rules of ASME Section III, Subsection NF.
Spring Hangers (Variable and Constant Support) The design load on spring hangers is the load caused by deadweight alone.
Variable spring hangers are calibrated to ensure that they support the deadweight at both their hot and cold load settings.
For constant support spring hangers, the deadweight is always supported as a constant load, not subject to separate hot and cold loads. Spring hangers also allow for a down-travel and up-travel in excess of the specified thermal movement to account for dynamic movement.
Rod Hangers Rod hangers are only used as a rigid restraint when there is no possibility of compression.
Struts The design loads on struts include those loads caused by deadweight, thermal expansion, primary seismic (OBE and SSE),
system anchor displacements, and reaction forces caused by relief valve discharge and turbine stop valve closure, etc.
Struts are designed in accordance with Article NF-3000.
Snubbers The design loads on snubbers include all dynamic loads such as seismic forces (OBE and SSE), system dynamic anchor movements, and reaction forces caused by short duration relief valve discharge and turbine stop valve closure, produced by suppression pool phenomena. The snubbers are designed and load-rated in accordance with Article NF-3000 to be capable of carrying the design load for all dynamic operating conditions.
Faulted condition design uses the criteria outlined in Appendix F of the ASME Code. The prototype snubbers have been tested dynamically to ensure that they can perform as required in the following manner:
- 1. The snubber was subjected to a force that varied approximately as the sine wave.
- 2. The frequency (Hz) of the input force was varied by small increments within the specified range.
- 3. The resulting relative displacements and corresponding loads across the working components, including end attachments, were recorded.
- 4. The test was conducted with the snubber at various temperatures.
Chapter 03 3.9A-34 Rev. 25, October 2022
- 5. The peak load in both static tension and compression tests was higher than the rated load.
- 6. The duration of the tests at each frequency was specified.
- 7. Snubbers were tested for applicable abnormal environmental conditions, followed by operational tests. The environmental test results are filed at the snubber manufacturer's location. The other test results are forwarded with the shipment of each snubber and are incorporated into the permanent plant file.
Anchors Anchors are designed to restrain all rotations and translations of piping. Terminal anchors are those which are common to two independently analyzed piping subsystems, one on each side of the anchor. For each load type, loads from both sides of the anchor are combined to form a total anchor load.
For vibratory loads the total anchor load is +/- (the SRSS of two loads from both sides of the anchor). For static loads the total anchor load is the algebraic sum of loads from both sides of the anchor. Design transient cyclic data are not applicable to piping supports, since no fatigue evaluation is necessary to meet the code requirements, unless the design specification identifies more than 20,000 load cycles. Design of anchors separating seismically designed and nonseismic piping is discussed in Section 3.7A.3.1.3.1.
3.9A.3.4.2 Pump Supports The pump pedestal and pedestal bolt analysis includes consideration of loads from operating and seismic events, connecting pipes, temperature, and deadweight. The stress limits of ASME Section III, Subsection NF are met. The analysis includes deflection of the pedestal.
3.9A.3.4.3 Other Components Supports Equipment supports and their connections to building structures that are governed by ASME are in accordance with ASME Section III, Subsection NF. ASME classifies these supports as either plate and shell- or linear-type supports.
Plate and Shell-Type Supports These supports, e.g., vessel skirts and saddles, are fabricated from plate and shell elements and have the same ASME Code classification as the vessel.
Jurisdictional Boundaries Figures 3.9A-2 and 3.9A-3 show the boundaries for different subsections of the ASME Code and building structures. As shown, Chapter 03 3.9A-35 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR the NF jurisdiction typically includes the connection between the component support and the building, with the exception of concrete anchorages.
Basis for Design and Construction These supports are designed, fabricated, and installed in accordance with ASME Section III, Subsection NF.
Loads, Load Combinations, and Stress Limits The combination of design loadings for these supports is categorized with respect to plant operating conditions. These conditions are identified as service levels A through D (Table 3.9A-13). Stress limits for the corresponding service levels also are given in Table 3.9A-13.
Deformation Limits Deformations are considered so there is no interference with adjacent equipment, piping, or structures. If support deformations are determined to be critical, they become an integral part of the design and are held within the required limits; otherwise, deformations are consistent with support stress analysis.
Buckling Criteria Analysis is performed to determine critical buckling strength, including local instabilities. Actual loads are compared to critical buckling loads in accordance with ASME Section III, Appendix F.
Linear-Type Supports These supports, e.g., structural elements such as beams, columns, and frames, have the same ASME Code classification as the component.
Jurisdictional Boundaries A typical linear equipment support for a HVR unit cooler is illustrated on Figure 3.9A-4. The jurisdictional boundary on the typical support is the connection between the supporting beams and the framing structure. The bolted or welded connection is NF-designed.
Basics for Design and Construction These supports are designed, fabricated, and installed in accordance with ASME Section III, Subsection NF.
Loads, Load Combinations, and Stress Limits Chapter 03 3.9A-36 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR The combination of design loading for these supports is categorized with respect to plant operating conditions. These conditions are identified as service levels A through D (Table 3.9A-13). Stress limits are also in accordance with ASME Section III, Subsection NF.
Deformation Limits Deformations are considered so there are no interferences with adjacent equipment, piping, or structures. If support deformations are determined to be critical, they become an integral part of the design and are held within the required limits; otherwise, deformations are consistent with support stress analysis.
Buckling Criteria Support buckling criteria is consistent with the requirements of ASME Section III, Appendix XVII.
Bolting The allowable stress limits used for bolts in equipment anchorage, component supports, and flanged connections are given by the following:
- 1. Anchor Bolts Used in Equipment Anchorage -
Appendix B of ACI 349, Code Requirements for Nuclear Safety-Related Concrete Structures.
- 2. Bolts Used in Component Supports - ASME Section III, Division I, Subsection NF, and Appendix XVII, paragraph 2460. For service levels C and D,
XVII-2460 with factors indicated under XVII-2110 is applicable to the design requirements of bolting. The calculated stresses under these categories do not exceed the specified minimum yield stresses at temperature.
- 3. Bolts Used in Flanged Connections - ASME III.
Equipment mounted with high-strength bolts include vessels, unit coolers, and heat exchangers. The material for high-strength bolts used for the mounting of component supports to building structures conforms to the assigned jurisdictional boundary. Concrete high-strength anchor bolts used at component supports include A193, A325, and A490 steel. ASME Section III, NF high-strength bolts include SA-193 and SA-325 material.
High-strength bolts and low-strength bolts are used in pipe and duct support designs.
Chapter 03 3.9A-37 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR 3.9A.4 Control Rod Drive Systems See Section 3.9B.4.
3.9A.5 Reactor Pressure Vessel Internals See Section 3.9B.5.
3.9A.6 Inservice Testing of Pumps and Valves An IST program was prepared in conformance with the applicable portions of GDC 37, 40, 43, and 46. This program, submitted in November 1985, included baseline preservice testing and a periodic IST program for pumps and valves and is based on the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code,Section XI, 1980 Edition, through the Winter 1980 Addenda. Revision 0 of the First Ten-Year Interval IST Program was submitted to the NRC on March 31, 1988. Additional information was provided by letter dated September 30, 1988, and February 8, 1989. The NRC approved the IST program by letter dated October 29, 1990 (TAC No. 63429). The First Ten-Year Interval Program became effective on April 5, 1988, and was based on the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code,Section XI, 1983 Edition through the Summer 1983 Addenda. The purpose of the IST program is to ensure that certain ASME Class 1, 2, and 3 pumps provided with an emergency power source, and ASME Class 1, 2, and 3 valves required to perform a specific function in bringing the reactor to a cold shutdown condition or in mitigating the consequences of an accident, are in a state of operational readiness throughout the life of the plant. This inservice pump and valve test program is based on the Code of record in accordance with 10CFR50.55a.
The IST program plan will be periodically updated in accordance with 10CFR50.55a.
3.9A.6.1 Inservice Testing of Pumps The IST program for certain ASME Class 1, 2, and 3 pumps that have an emergency power source is in accordance with the requirements of 10CFR50.55a and the Code of record for the IST program plan. The basis of the test program is to detect changes in the hydraulic and mechanical condition of the pump relative to a reference set of parameters. Reference values will be established in accordance with the IST program plan and its implementing documents.
Pumps are tested periodically during plant operation and during shutdown periods, in accordance with the IST program plan.
3.9A.6.2 Inservice Testing of Valves The IST program for all ASME Class 1, 2, and 3 valves that are required to perform a safety function will be in accordance with the requirements of 10CFR50.55a. All valves requiring inservice Chapter 03 3.9A-38 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR testing will be listed in the valve testing section of the Unit 2 IST program plan. Each valve in the plan is categorized in accordance with the requirements of the approved Code Edition (i.e., the Edition and Addenda that are incorporated by reference in 10CFR50.55a, or that may be specifically approved for use at Unit 2 by the NRC). Test methods for each valve tested under the IST program plan will be described in the valve test procedures.
The valves which separate the RCPB, identified in Table 3.4.6-1 of the Technical Requirements Manual, Section 3.4.6, from interfacing low-pressure systems shall be leak tested in accordance with Technical Specifications.
These pressure isolation valves (PIV) are included in the Unit 2 IST program. The Unit 2 leak testing requirements for these valves are specified in the IST program plan and described by valve testing procedures.
- 1. For those check and globe valves which require a 10CFR50 Appendix J Type C test, the air leak rate data may be converted to a water leakage rate at 1,020 20 psig and compared to the acceptance criteria for compliance with the Technical Specification requirement.
- 2. The periodic leak test will be performed during refueling outages.
- 3. After maintenance which can affect leak-tightness of the valve, leak testing will be performed in accordance with the IST program plan and the Technical Specification, prior to returning the valve to service.
P&IDs were supplied with the FSAR and Preservice and Inservice Inspection Plans which described inservice testing of the RCS pressure isolation valves. Procedures to support Technical Specification testing were generated in accordance with the startup schedule. During the Second Ten-Year Interval and successive intervals, the P&IDs are incorporated by reference into the IST program plan. The pump and valve testing procedures required to implement the IST program plan are part of the overall IST program and, like the P&IDs, they are separately controlled and maintained.
3.9A.6.3 Relief Requests Proposed alternatives and requests for relief from the requirements of the ASME Code for IST of pumps and valves will be processed and submitted to the NRC, as required by 10CFR50.55a and the Unit 2 Technical Specifications.
Implementation of relief requests and NRC-approved alternatives Chapter 03 3.9A-39 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR will be in accordance with Technical Specifications and 10CFR50.55a.
3.9A.6.4 Pipe Welds Within Break Exclusion Area During each inspection interval, as defined in IWA-2400, an ISI is performed on all nonexempt ASME Code Section XI circumferential and longitudinal welds within the break exclusion region for high-energy fluid system piping. These inspections consist of augmented volumetric examinations (nominal pipe size greater than or equal to 4 in) and augmented surface examinations (nominal pipe size less than 4 in) such that 100 percent of the previously defined welds are inspected at each interval, or as required per the risk-informed process for piping outlined in EPRI Topical Report TR-1006937 and Nuclear Engineering Report NER-2A-025, NMP2 RI-ISI BER Evaluation. The break exclusion zone consists of those portions of high-energy fluid system piping between the moment limiting restraint(s) outside the outboard containment isolation valve and the moment limiting restraint(s) beyond the inboard containment isolation valve. The choice of the restraint(s) that define the limits of the break exclusion zone is based upon those restraint(s) which are necessary to ensure the operability of the primary containment isolation valves.
Chapter 03 3.9A-40 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.9A-1 (Sheet 1 of 3)
TRANSIENTS AND THE NUMBER OF ASSOCIATED CYCLES CONSIDERED IN THE DESIGN AND FATIGUE ANALYSES OF CLASS 1 PIPING No. of Transients Cycles Normal, Upset, and Testing Conditions Dynamic loads caused by SRV discharge events(3)
- a. Piping 5,200
- b. Equipment 6,000 OBE at rated operating conditions(4) 50
- 1. Boltup 123
- 2. Design hydrotest 130
- 3. Startup (100°F/hr heatup rate)(1) 120
- 4. Turbine roll and increase to rated power 120
- 5. Daily power reduction to 75% 10,000
- 6. Weekly power reduction to 50% 2,000
- 7. Rod pattern change 400 8,10. Scram - turbine generator trip, feedwater on, isolation valves stay open 50
- 9. Partial feedwater heater bypass 70
- 11. Other scrams 140
- 12. Rated power normal operation - inadvertent actuation 10
- 13. Reduction to 0% power 111
- 14. Hot standby 111
- 15. Shutdown prior to vessel flooding 111
- 16. Vessel flooding 111
- 17. Shutdown 111
- 18. Vessel unbolt 123
- 19. Refueling 0
- 20. Loss of feedwater pumps - isolation valves closed 10
- 21. Single relief or safety valve blowdown 8
- 29. Inadvertent/accidental vessel overfilling(7) 4 Emergency
- 22. Reactor overpressure with delayed scram(2) 1
- 23. Automatic blowdown(2) 1
- 24. Improper start of cold recirc loop(2) 1
- 25. Sudden start of pump in cold recirc loop(2) 1
- 26. Hot standby-drain shutoff pump restart(2) 1
Chapter 03 3.9A-41 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.9A-1 (Sheet 2 of 3)
TRANSIENTS AND THE NUMBER OF ASSOCIATED CYCLES CONSIDERED IN THE DESIGN AND FATIGUE ANALYSES OF CLASS 1 PIPING No. of Transients Cycles Faulted
- 28. Pipe rupture and blowdown(2) 1 SSE at rated operating conditions(2,5) 10 Dynamic loads caused by suppression pool events during DBA(2) 1,500 Note:
Updates to the Fatigue Monitoring Program (FMP) will require reevaluation as Nine Mile Point Unit 2 continues to operate and will eventually enter its extended period of operation. In order to calculate acceptable, yet conservative Cumulative Usage Factors (CUF) of FMP monitored components, it will be necessary to remove unnecessary conservatism from the assumed transients the unit was anticipated to experience. For example, this table made the assumption of 10,000 daily power reductions to 75% and 2,000 weekly power reductions to 50%.
Nine Mile Point Unit 2 has never been operated as a load-following unit, and only experienced a fraction of those down powers since initial startup in 1986. It is acceptable to change the number of transients the unit has experienced to be more aligned with the actual number of specific transients Nine Mile Point Unit 2 has experienced.
(1) Bulk average vessel coolant temperature change in any 1-hr period.
(2) The probability of event to occur in 40-yr plant life, P40, is:
Emergency conditions: 10-1 > P40 10-3 Faulted conditions: 10-3 > P40 10-6 (3) The SRV discharge events used for analysis are given in Table 3.9A-2.
(4) In some cases, considered as an emergency event.
(5) Includes 10 maximum load cycles per event.
(6) Fatigue analysis is not required for emergency and faulted conditions.
(7) Number of cycles is based on maximum temperature differential ( T) of 141°F between the main steam pipe wall temperature and the incoming fluid temperature, and it includes one cycle for vessel overfilling which occurred in January 1988 during power ascension testing.
Chapter 03 3.9A-42 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.9A-2 (Sheet 1 of 7)
LOAD COMBINATIONS AND STRESS LIMITS FOR PIPE STRESS ANALYSIS PART I ASME Code Class 1 Systems (1,2)
DBA Max of SBA Bubble ASME III IBA Form (1974) Max of or RHR RHR ASME III NB-3600 Fluid Chug Chug DBA Jet Chug CO Allow-Equations OBEI OBEA SSEI Trans SRV or COa or COb AP Imp Ta- RHRB (3,4, (3,4 Plant ables (Class 1) P DW (3) (3) (3) (3) (3-5) (3,4) (3,4) COb (3) (3,6 Th T1 T2 Tb (3,4) 14) , Conditions (7,8)
) 14)
Eq. 9 X X X X X Normal & 1.5 Sm NB-3652 (8) (8) upset (5) X X X X X X X Emergency 2.25 Sm (SBA, IBA)
X X X X X X X Emergency 2.25 Sm (SBA, IBA)
X X X X X Emergency 2.25 Sm X X X X Emergency 2.25 Sm X X X X Emergency 2.25 Sm X X X X X X X Faulted 3.0 Sm (SBA, IBA)
X X X X X X Faulted 3.0 Sm (SBA, IBA)
X X X X X X Faulted 3.0 Sm (AP)
X X X X X X Faulted 3.0 Sm (DBA)
Eq. 10 X X X(10) X(10) X(10) X(10) X X X Normal & 3.0 Sm NB-3653.1 upset Eq. 11 X X X(10) X(10) X(10) X(10) X X X X Normal &
NB-3653.2 upset Chapter 03 3.9A-43 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.9A-2 (Sheet 2 of 7)
LOAD COMBINATIONS AND STRESS LIMITS FOR PIPE STRESS ANALYSIS PART I (Contd)
ASME Code Class 1 Systems (1,2)
DBA Max of SBA Bubble ASME III IBA Form (1974) Max of or ASME III NB-3600 Fluid Max Chug Chug DBA Jet RHR RHR Allow-Equations OBEI OBEA SSEI Trans SRV or COa or COb AP Imp Ta- RHRB Chug CO Plant ables (Class 1) P DW (3) (3) (3) (3) (3-5) (3,4) (3,4) COb (3) (3,6 Th Tb (3,4) (3,4) (3,4 Conditions (7)
T1 T2
) )
Eq. 12 X Normal & 3.0 Sm NB-3653.6 upset (a)
Eq. 13 X X X X X X Normal & 3.0 Sm NB-3653.6 upset (b)
Eq. 14 X X X(10) X(10) X(10) X(10) X X X X Normal & CUF 1 NB-3653.6 upset (c)
Eq. 10a Any single nonrepeated anchor movement All 3.0 Sc NC-3652.3 (11)
Chapter 03 3.9A-44 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.9A-2 (Sheet 3 of 7)
LOAD COMBINATIONS AND STRESS LIMITS FOR PIPE STRESS ANALYSIS PART II ASME Code Class 2 and 3 Systems (1,2)
DBA ASME III Max of (1974) SBA Bubble NC-3600 IBA Form ND-3600 Max of or Anch RHR RHR ASME III Equations Fluid Chug Chug DBA Jet Move Chug CO Allow-(Class 2 OBEI OBEA SSEI Trans SRV or COa or COb AP Imp Non- RHRB (3,4, (3,4, Plant ables
& Class P DW (3) (3) (3) (3) (3-5) (3,4) (3,4) COb (3) (3,6 Th repeated (3,4) 14) 14) Conditions (7,12,15)
- 3) )
Eq. 8 X(12) X(12 Normal 1.0 Sh NC-3652.1 )
ND-3652.1 Eq. 9 X X X X X Upset 1.2 Sh XNC-3652.2 ND-3652.2 X X X X X X X Emergency 1.8 Sh (5,9) (SBA, IBA)
X X X X X X Emergency 1.8 Sh (SBA, IBA)
X X X X X Emergency 1.8 Sh X X X X Emergency 1.8 Sh X X X X Emergency 1.8 Sh X X X X X X X Faulted 2.4 Sh (SBA, IBA)
X X X X X X Faulted 2.4 Sh (SBA, IBA)
X X X X X X Faulted 2.4 Sh (AP)
X X X X X X Faulted 2.4 Sh (DBA)
Eq. 10 X X Normal & SA NC-3652.3 upset ND-3652.3 Chapter 03 3.9A-45 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.9A-2 (Sheet 4 of 7)
LOAD COMBINATIONS AND STRESS LIMITS FOR PIPE STRESS ANALYSIS PART II (Contd)
ASME Code Class 2 and 3 Systems (1,2)
DBA ASME III Max of (1974) SBA Bubble NC-3600 IBA Form ND-3600 Max of or Anch RHR RHR ASME III Equations Fluid Chug Chug DBA Jet Move Chug CO Allow-(Class 2 OBEI OBEA SSE Trans SRV or COa or COb AP Imp Non- RHRB (3,4, (3,4, Plant ables
& Class P DW (3) (3) I (3) (3-5) (3,4) (3,4) COb (3) (3,6 Th repeated (3,4) 14) 14) Conditions (7,15)
- 3) (3) )
Eq. 10a X Normal, 3.0 Sc NC-3652.3 upset, ND-3652.3 emergency, (11) faulted Eq. 11 X X X X Normal & Sh + SA NC-3652.3 upset ND-3652.3 Chapter 03 3.9A-46 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.9A-2 (Sheet 5 of 7)
LOAD COMBINATIONS AND STRESS LIMITS FOR PIPE STRESS ANALYSIS PART III ANSI B31.1 Code Class(13)
ANSI B31.1 Fluid Anch ANSI B31.1 Code Trans Move Plant Code Equations P DW (3) Th Nonrepeated Conditions Allowables(12)
Eq. 11 X(12) X(12) Normal 1.0 Sh Eq. 12(5) X X X Normal & upset 1.2 Sh Eq. 13 X Normal & upset SA Eq. 13a(11) X Normal upset, emergency, 3.0 Sc faulted Eq. 14 X X X Normal & upset SA+Sh Chapter 03 3.9A-47 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.9A-2 (Sheet 6 of 7)
LOAD COMBINATIONS AND STRESS LIMITS FOR PIPE STRESS ANALYSIS KEY:
P = Longitudinal pressure stress. For ASME Section III Class 1 piping, the design pressure is used for Equation 9 and operating pressure for Equations 10, 11, and
- 13. For ASME Section III Class 2 and 3 piping and ANSI B31.1, design pressure is used in all equations containing a pressure term.
DW = Load due to the weight of pipe, contents, insulation, and in-line components.
OBEI = Inertia load due to operating basis earthquake (OBE).
OBEA = Operating basis earthquake anchor and support differential displacement load.
SSEI = Inertia load due to safe shutdown earthquake (SSE).
Fluid = Internal piping loads due to fluid transient effects such as water hammer, steam hammer, SRV blowdown, or pump startup loads.
transient Th = Thermal expansion, thermal stratification (experienced by feedwater piping) and thermal anchor and support differential displacement load.
T1 = Local thermal transient stress across pipe wall due to linear temperature distribution.
T2 = Local thermal transient stress across pipe wall due to nonlinear component of temperature distribution.
Ta-Tb = Local thermal transient stress due to average temperature difference of geometric and/or material discontinuity.
Anchor = Load due to any single nonrepeated anchor movement.
movement nonrepeated SRV = All applicable SRV inertia load cases. These cases single (1-valve actuation),
asymmetric (simultaneous actuation of 3 valves), symmetric (simultaneous actuation of all valves), and ADS (simultaneous actuation of 7 ADS valves). SRV inertia load cases applicable to a particular load combination depend upon their postulated occurrence with other dynamic loads in the combination.
COa = Condensation oscillation structural vibrations with ADS.
COb = Basic condensation oscillation structural vibrations.
SBA, IBA = Maximum inertia load of either chugging or condensation oscillation structural max of vibrations that occur during a small or intermediate break accident.
chug or Coa DBA max = Maximum inertia load of either bubble formation or chugging or condensation of bubble oscillation structural vibrations that occur during a DBA.
form or chug or COa RHRB = RHR bubble drag load.
RHR Chug = RHR chugging drag load.
DBA AP = Inertia load due to annulus pressurization structural vibration effects occurring during a DBA. Annulus refers to the space between the RPV and the biological shield wall.
Chapter 03 3.9A-48 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.9A-2 (Sheet 7 of 7)
LOAD COMBINATIONS AND STRESS LIMITS FOR PIPE STRESS ANALYSIS NOTES:
(1) The SRV, SBA, IBA, and DBA load cases (the columns between Fluid Trans and Jet Imp) occur in the reactor building only. Except for AP, they are suppression pool-related dynamic events. Piping inside or attached to the reactor building is affected by the reactor building vibrations up to the first anchor outside the building.
(2) References used to develop table:
- a. ASME III issued 1974 dated July 1, 1974, and Code Case 1606-1.
- b. Mark II Containment Dynamic Forcing Functions Information Report (DFFR) Rev. 4, November 1981.
(3) The amplitudes of events characterized by random vibration are determined with conservatism in such a way that the load combinations are in accordance with NRC NUREG-0484, Rev. 1.
Only OBEI and OBEA are combined by absolute summation. All other combinations of dynamic loads are by the SRSS method. Both OBEI and (OBEI + OBEA) are considered dynamic loads.
(4) In addition to inertia loads, piping submerged in the suppression pool experiences:
Water drag loads during SRV and RHR relief valve discharge, CO, bubble formation, DBA pool swell and fallback, and acoustic pressure loads during chugging. Piping above the water level of the suppression pool experiences pool swell impact loads or froth loads, and fallback loads, in the DBA case.
(5) The damping values used for dynamic analysis are based on Regulatory Guide 1.61 (Table 3.7A-1), with OBE values applicable to normal and upset loads and SSE values applicable to emergency and faulted loads. Alternate damping values for seismic analysis will be those described in ASME Code Case N-411.
(6) Jet impingement from water or steam jets emanating from postulated breaks of piping of other systems applies only to areas identified as targets.
(7) Allowables given are based on the ASME Section III, 1974 edition. In addition, all ASME III Safety Class 1, 2, and 3 piping systems that are required to function for safe shutdown under the postulated events are designed to meet the functional capability criteria of NEDO-21985.
(8) For systems that require hydrotesting, repeat Equation 9 without occasional loads, using test pressure and deadweight for water-filled pipe. The allowables for the hydrotest case are given in NB-3226.
(9) OBEA load can be included in Equation 9 instead of Equation 10 in Class 2 and 3 systems (in accordance with ASME III, Paragraphs NC-3652 and ND-3652, respectively) and in Equation 12 instead of Equation 13 in Class 4 systems (in accordance with ANSI B31.1).
Option is used in a few cases only.
(10) Due to the nature of dynamic cyclic loads, the inertia effects of dynamic loads including OBE displacements are considered in fatigue evaluation of ASME Code Class 1 piping. The cycles are consumed in a manner consistent with the example given in ASME Section III, Subsection NB, Subparagraph NB-3653.1.
(11) Equation 10a is adapted from the 1977 edition of ASME Section III, Subsections NC and ND.
(12) For systems that require hydrotesting, repeat Equation 8, using test pressure and deadweight for water-filled pipe. The allowable for the hydrotest case is 90 percent of the yield stress at temperature.
(13) Reference used to develop table: ANSI B31.1 dated 1973 and all addenda thereto up to and including Addendum C (issued December 31, 1973).
(14) A T-quencher of the same design as the main steam SRVDL has been installed to the RHR relief valve discharge piping to mitigate the relief valve actuation loads. As a result, the RHR Chugging and RHR CO loads are negligible.
(15) The faulted stress limits and analysis techniques specified in ASME Section III, Appendix F, can be applied. Inelastic methods can be used as allowed by the Code.
Chapter 03 3.9A-49 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.9A-3 (Sheet 1 of 1)
PIPE STRESS ANALYSIS CLASSIFICATIONS FOR ASME CODE CLASSES 1, 2, 3 Piping Class Analysis Classification Class 1 Nominal pipe size D>1" D 1" Type of analysis Class 1 Class 2(1)
Class 2,3 Nominal pipe size D>6" D 6" or tubing OD Type of analysis Computer Noncomputer analysis analysis(2)
(1) Section 3.7A.3.8.2 for acceptance criteria.
(2) Piping or instrumentation tubing is qualified by placing the supports in accordance with a generic procedure or by hand calculations of stress and support loads.
Chapter 03 3.9A-50 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.9A-4 (Sheet 1 of 6)
BOP SEISMIC/DYNAMIC QUALIFICATION RESULTS - MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT Equipment Methods Results Motor-operated rotary A static analysis and test were performed. The motor-operated rotary gates are affected by seismic loads only. The gates The applicable standards and guidelines analysis indicated that the stress levels are within the allowable limits of are IEEE-323-1974 and IEEE-344-1975 and RG 3.9A.2.2.2.
1.61, 1.89, 1.92, and 1.100.
Refer to Table 3.10A-1 for the qualification of the Limitorque actuators.
Special air filter A static analysis and test were performed. The filter assemblies are affected by seismic loads only. The results of the assemblies The applicable standards, codes, and analysis of structural and functional elements of the equipment indicate that guidelines are IEEE-344-1975, ASME Section the stresses are within the allowable limits of 3.9A.2.2.2.
III, and RG 1.61, 1.92, 1.84, 1.85, 1.89, and 1.100. Refer to Table 3.10A-1 for the qualification of the heater/flow switches.
Spent fuel pool A static analysis was performed. The The heat exchangers are affected by seismic loads. The analysis indicates cooling water heat applicable standards, codes, and that the stress levels are within the allowable limits of 3.9A.2.2.2.
exchangers guidelines are IEEE-344-1975, ASME Section III, and RG 1.61, 1.92, 1.89, and 1.100.
Self-cleaning The strainers are qualified by static The strainers are subjected to seismic loads. The analysis indicates that the strainers analysis and test. The applicable stress intensity for the strainer components is within the allowable stress standards, codes, and guidelines are limits of 3.9A.2.2.2. The deflections do not affect the operability of the IEEE-323-1974, IEEE-334-1974, strainer.
IEEE-344-1975, ASME Section III, and RG 1.61, 1.84, 1.85, 1.89, 1.92, and 1.100. Refer to Table 3.10A-1 for the qualification of the motors.
Simplex strainers The strainers are qualified by static The strainers are subjected to seismic loads. The structural integrity of the analysis. The applicable standards are strainers is demonstrated since the analysis indicates the stress levels are ASME Code Section III and RG 1.61 and within the allowable limits of 3.9A.2.2.2.
1.92.
ECCS suppression pool The strainers are qualified by static The strainers are subjected to seismic, hydrodynamic, and suppression pool strainers analysis. The applicable standards are drag loads. The analysis indicates that the stress intensity for the strainer ASME Code Section III and RG 1.61 and components is within the allowable stress limits of 3.9A.2.2.2.
1.92.
RCIC suppression pool The strainer is qualified by static The strainer is subjected to seismic, hydrodynamic, and suppression pool drag strainer analysis. The applicable standards are loads. The analysis indicates that the stress intensity for the strainer ASME Code Section III and RG 1.61 and components is within the allowable stress limits of 3.9A.2.2.2.
1.92.
Active pumps Pumps are qualified by dynamic and static The pumps are affected by seismic loads only. The structural integrity and horizontal analysis and operability tests. The functional capability of the pumps have been demonstrated by static and centrifugal applicable standards and guidelines are dynamic analysis. The centrifugal pumps have been determined to be rigid.
Diesel generator fuel IEEE-344-1975, IEEE-334-1974, RG 1.48, The fundamental frequency of the fuel oil transfer pumps was 6 Hz.
oil transfer Chapter 03 3.9A-51 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.9A-4 (Sheet 2 of 6)
BOP SEISMIC/DYNAMIC QUALIFICATION RESULTS - MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT Equipment Methods Results 1.61, 1.89, 1.92, and 1.100, and ASME Code Stresses are maintained within the allowable limits of Table 3.9A-8. All of Section III. the deflections are within the normal clearances. The lowest margin of safety with respect to both the stresses and deflections is approximately 1 percent.
In addition to the seismic analysis, the operability of the pumps is ensured through the program described in Paragraph 3.9A.3.2.1.
The qualification of the motors conforms to IEEE-334-1974. See Table 3.10A-1 for the qualification results of the pump motors and for the qualification summary of the electric motors.
Local instrument The instrument racks are qualified by The racks are affected by seismic loads only. The analysis was performed racks analysis. The applicable standards and using a finite element model. The equipment was determined to be rigid and, guidelines are IEEE-323-1974, therefore, static analysis was utilized. Results of the analysis indicate IEEE-344-1975, and RG 1.61 and 1.100. that the stresses are within the allowable stresses of 3.9A.2.2.2.
Flexible metal hoses Flexible metal hoses are qualified by Flexible hoses are affected by both seismic and hydrodynamic loads. Design analysis. Applicable standards and adequacy was verified by analysis in accordance with the EJMA Standard. This guidelines are EJMA, ASME Code Section analysis takes into account design temperature, pressure, dynamic loads, III, ASME Code Case N-192-3, differential displacements, and the number of cycles of displacement. In IEEE-344-1975, and RG 1.61, 1.84, 1.85, addition, representative hoses are qualified by two separate dynamic test 1.92, and 1.100. programs.
In the first dynamic test, hoses are subjected to a total of 1 million cycles of vibrations in the frequency range of 5 to 100 Hz, at accelerations ranging from 3 g to 51 g. In the second test, the hoses are subjected to six biaxial, random, multifrequency input motions of 30-sec durations each. The six tests are repeated in the other horizontal orientations. The TRS envelops the applicable portion of RRS with at least a 10 percent margin.
Hoses were pressurized at the start of each test series to at least the design pressure. During and following the dynamic tests the hoses maintained their pressure integrity.
Miscellaneous HVAC The HVAC equipment listed was qualified by This equipment is affected by seismic loads only. The results of the analysis Axial fans analysis and test. Applicable codes, of structural and functional elements of the equipment indicate that the Centrifugal fans standards, and guidelines include RG 1.60, stresses are within the allowable limits of 3.9A.2.2.2. The deflection of Air conditioning 1.61, 1.89, 1.92, 1.84, 1.85, and 1.100, rotating members was determined to be within the clearances.
units IEEE-323-1974, IEEE-334-1974, Backdraft dampers IEEE-334-1975, and ASME Section III. Refer to Table 3.10A-1 for the qualification results of the fan motors and the Bubble-tight dampers pneumatic actuators or the electrohydraulic actuators used on the dampers.
Butterfly damper Tornado damper Fire damper Chapter 03 3.9A-52 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.9A-4 (Sheet 3 of 6)
BOP SEISMIC/DYNAMIC QUALIFICATION RESULTS - MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT Equipment Methods Results Multileaf damper Single-bladed Dampers Centrifugal liquid Seismic qualification is by static This equipment is affected by seismic loads only. The analysis of the chiller chillers analysis and testing. Applicable assembly and structural components is performed using a detailed finite standards and guidelines include ASME Code element model. Results of the analysis indicate that the stresses are within Section III, RG 1.61, 1.89, 1.92, and the allowable stresses of 3.9A.2.2.2 and deflections of critical components 1.100, IEEE-323-1974, IEEE-334-1974, and are within limits required to maintain functional capability.
The electronic control panel and the System Class 1E components were qualified by dynamic testing. See Table 3.10A-1 for test results.
Unit space cooler The unit space coolers and air The unit space coolers and air conditioning units are affected by seismic conditioning units were qualified by both loads only.
test and analysis. The applicable standards and guidelines include The unit coolers are composed of three parts: the fan-motor section, coil IEEE-344-1975, IEEE-323-1974, and section, and filter section. The units have either a propeller-type fan IEEE-334-1974, ASME Section III, and RG (Industrial Air) or a vaneaxial fan (Joy Manufacturing). They all have 1.61, 1.89, 1.92, and 1.100. electric motors (Reliance) and motor control panels. (The air conditioning units are essentially the same as the unit coolers, except that they have no motor control panels.) All but two units have air filters (American Air Filters) and each has one or two ASME Section III cooling coils.
A propeller fan space cooler and a vaneaxial fan space cooler were chosen for dynamic testing, since they were representative of the dimensions and characteristics of the other coolers. The dynamic testing is performed as follows: The units were mounted on the vibration test table so that the in-service condition is simulated. The units were instrumented to record accelerations. A resonance search was performed from 1 to 35 Hz for each of the 3 orthogonal axes. The seismic simulation vibration testing consisted of biaxial random multifrequency tests, 5 OBEs and 1 SSE in each of 2 test orientations, 90 deg apart. The units were pressurized and operational during the tests. The TRS enveloped the RRS.
The cooling coils for the unit coolers were qualified by analysis. The results of the analysis indicate that the stress levels are within the allowable limits of 3.9A.2.2.2.
The fan and coil sections of the air conditioning unit were qualified by dynamic testing. The units were mounted on the vibration test table to simulate plant installation. They were instrumented to record accelerations.
A resonance search was performed from 1 to 33 Hz for each of the 3 orthogonal axes. The seismic simulation vibration testing consisted of biaxial random multifrequency test of 4 SSEs in each of the two test orientations, 90 deg apart. The equipment remained operational during the tests and the TRS enveloped the RRS.
Chapter 03 3.9A-53 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.9A-4 (Sheet 4 of 6)
BOP SEISMIC/DYNAMIC QUALIFICATION RESULTS - MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT Equipment Methods Results Nonactive valves Nonactive valves are qualified by Valves affected by seismic loads only are qualified for 3 g horizontal and 3 g Motor-operated analysis. Applicable standards and vertical loadings. Those valves affected by seismic and hydrodynamic loadings Air-operated guidelines are ASME Section III and RG have been qualified for up to 20 g horizontal and 20 g vertical loadings.
Manual 1.61 and 1.92. Piping design acceptance criteria ensure actual loadings to be within the Solenoid qualified levels for each valve.
All valves were determined to have a natural frequency that is generally greater than 33 Hz. Structural and pressure integrity of the valve assemblies has been demonstrated by static analysis or through their similarity to active valves. Stresses are maintained within the limits of Tables 3.9A-7 and 3.9A-8. For ASME Class 1 valves, design reports are also prepared in accordance with ASME Section III, Subsection NB-3500.
For valves affected by hydrodynamic loads, fatigue analyses of the critical components were also performed, and the CUFs are maintained below one.
Active valves Active valves are qualified by analysis Valves affected by seismic loads only are generally qualified for 3 g Motor-operated and test. Applicable standards and horizontal and 3 g vertical loadings. The valves affected by seismic and Air-operated guidelines are ASME Section III, RG 1.48, hydrodynamic loads were qualified for up to 11 g horizontal and 11 g vertical Solenoid 1.61, 1.89, 1.92, and 1.100, and loadings. Piping design acceptance criteria ensures actual loadings to be Relief valves IEEE-323-1974, IEEE-344-1975 and within the qualified levels for each valve.
Electrohydraulic IEEE-382.
All valves were determined to have natural frequencies that are generally greater than 33 Hz. For valves with a fundamental natural frequency below 33 Hz, the appropriate valve mass and stiffness properties were included in piping models, and the valve acceleration responses obtained from the piping analyses were maintained below the qualification levels. Structural and pressure integrity of the valve assemblies are demonstrated by analysis.
Stresses are maintained within the limits of Tables 3.9A-7 and 3.9A-8.
Deflection of critical components is well within the allowable limits. Design stress analyses were performed for ASME Class 1 valves in accordance with ASME Section III, Subsection NB-3500. For valves affected by hydrodynamic loads, fatigue analyses of the critical components were also performed, and CUFs are maintained below one.
Actuators for AOVs are qualified by dynamic testing. With the exception of the RCIC pressure control valve (2ICS*PCV115), each tested actuator was mounted on the shake table as it normally would be in service, and biaxial, random multifrequency tests of 30-sec duration were performed for each of the five OBE and one SSE conditions. The tests were repeated in the second horizontal and vertical orientation. The actuator was operated through one complete cycle for each OBE and SSE test. The actuator performed its safety function and successfully completed the test.
Piping design acceptance criteria ensure that actual dynamic loading is to be within the qualified levels for each valve. In the case where the TRS does not fully envelop the RRS, the general requirement for a retest may be exempted if the following criteria are met: 1) A point of the TRS may fall below the RRS by 10 percent or less, provided the adjacent 1/6 octave points are at least equal to the RRS and the adjacent 1/3 octave points are at least Chapter 03 3.9A-54 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.9A-4 (Sheet 5 of 6)
BOP SEISMIC/DYNAMIC QUALIFICATION RESULTS - MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT Equipment Methods Results 10 percent above; 2) A maximum of 5 of the 1/6 octave analysis points, as in
- 1) above, may be below the RRS, provided they are at least one octave apart.
For valve 2ICS*PCV115, an entire valve assembly with a similar actuator was qualified. (The tested assembly did not include the CONOFLOW I/P converter and filter regulator. Those are addressed in Table 3.10A-1). The assembly was subjected to biaxial, random multifrequency tests for each of the five OBE and SSE conditions. The tests were repeated in the second horizontal and vertical orientation. The valve assembly functioned as required before, during and after the tests.
For valves affected by combined seismic and hydrodynamic loads, the OBE and SSE test spectra enveloped the upset and faulted RRS, respectively, by a minimum margin of 10 percent, except for one direction, where the margin at one frequency is below 10 percent. However, the adjacent 1/6 octave points are above the 10 percent margin, and the adjacent 1/3 octave points are above a 20 percent margin. Additionally, test margins adequately envelope the stress cycles and durations required for the hydrodynamic loads.
For the SOVs (Target Rock and Valcor) and the electric components of the valves, such as solenoid valves, electrohydraulic operators, motor operators, limit switches, etc., qualification is achieved through comprehensive environmental and dynamic test programs. Detailed results are provided in Table 3.10A-1.
Operability of the valve assemblies is demonstrated by both dynamic and static load tests. Selected valves were subjected to dynamic tests to simulate the seismic and hydrodynamic loads. Other valves were qualified through static deflection tests of parent valve assemblies. The test programs conform to Paragraph 3.9A.3.2.2. Functional adequacy was verified during and after these tests.
Feedwater check The feedwater check valves are qualified The feedwater check valves are affected by both seismic and hydrodynamic valves by analysis. The Class 1E components of loads. The valves are qualified by dynamic analysis for the worst transient the air-operated check valves are condition following a pipe break, together with the seismic/hydrodynamic qualified by testing. Applicable loads. Stresses are maintained within the limits of Table 3.9A-7. Design standards and guidelines are ASME Section analysis of the valves is also prepared in accordance with ASME Section III, III, NRC RG 1.48, 1.61, 1.89, 1.92, and Subsection NB-3500.
1.100, and IEEE-323-1974 and IEEE-344-1975. The electrical appurtenances of the air operators (limit switch, solenoid valves) are qualified by testing. Detailed results are provided in Table 3.10A-1.
Vacuum relief valves The vacuum relief valves are qualified by The vacuum relief valves are affected by both seismic and hydrodynamic loads.
analysis. The applicable standards and The valves are rigid (natural frequency >100 Hz) and are analyzed for up to 16 guidelines are ASME Section III and NRC RG g horizontal and 14 g vertical loadings together with the operating loads 1.48, 1.61, and 1.92. (opening and/or closing pressure transients). The design analysis met the ASME III, Subsection NC-3500, requirements. The stresses in all the critical valve components are maintained within the limits of Table 3.9A-8, and the calculated deflections do not affect the operability of the valves.
Chapter 03 3.9A-55 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.9A-4 (Sheet 6 of 6)
BOP SEISMIC/DYNAMIC QUALIFICATION RESULTS - MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT Equipment Methods Results Polar crane Dynamic analysis is performed utilizing The polar crane is affected by seismic loads.
the time-history technique. Applicable standards and guidelines are CMAA-70, the A finite element lumped mass mathematical model is developed to simulate the AISC Code, and NRC RG 1.61 and 1.92. mass and stiffness characteristics of the crane, including the trucks, trolleys, and hoist rope. Dynamic responses due to seismic loadings are evaluated for several trolley positions and load lift heights, as appropriate, in order to determine the maximum stress levels in all critical members and connections. The analysis indicates that the stresses are within the allowable limits.
Chapter 03 3.9A-56 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.9A-5 (Sheet 1 of 3)
LOAD COMBINATIONS FOR ASME SECTION III CLASS 1 VALVES(1)
Classification Combination Design Design pressure Design temperature(2)
Deadweight Piping reactions OBE Normal Normal condition pressure Normal condition metal temperature Deadweight Piping reactions Upset Upset condition pressure Upset condition metal temperature Deadweight Dynamic load 1(3)
Piping reactions Emergency Emergency condition pressure Emergency condition metal temperature Deadweight Dynamic load 3(3)
Piping reactions Faulted Faulted condition pressure Faulted condition metal temperature Deadweight Dynamic load 2(3)
Piping reactions (1)
The only ASME Class 1 components within the BOP scope are valves.
(2)
Temperature is used to determine allowable stress only.
(3) The definitions of these loads are given on page 2 of this table.
Chapter 03 3.9A-57 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.9A-5 (Sheet 2 of 3)
LOAD COMBINATIONS FOR ASME SECTION III CLASS 1 VALVES(1)
Load Definitions Dynamic Load 1 Location a = [(OBE)2+(SRVALL)2]1/2 Location b = OBE Dynamic Load 2 Location a; the envelope of (i) = [(SSE)2 + (AP)2]1/2 (ii) = [(SSE)2 + (SRVONE)2 + (CO1)2]1/2 (iii) = [(SSE)2 + (SRVADS)2 + (CO2)2]1/2 and (iv) = [(SSE)2 + (SRVALL)2 + (CHUG)2]1/2 Location b = SSE Dynamic Load 3 Location a; the envelope of (i) = [(OBE)2 + (AP)2]1/2 (ii) = [(OBE)2 + (SRVONE)2 + (CO1)2]1/2 (iii) = [(OBE)2 + (SRVADS)2 + (CO2)2]1/2 and (iv) = [(OBE)2 + (SRVALL)2 + (CHUG)2]1/2 Location b = OBE Where:
Location a = Equipment inside the reactor building Location b = Equipment outside the reactor building OBE = Operating basis earthquake SSE = Safe shutdown earthquake SRVALL = Envelope of all safety relief valve actuation cases, including symmetric, asymmetric, ADS, and single subsequent actuations SRVONE = One stuck open safety relief valve actuation case SRVADS = ADS safety relief valves actuation case CO1 = Basic condensation oscillation phase of LOCA CO2 = Condensation oscillation phase of LOCA, concurrent with actuation of ADS valves AP = Annulus pressurization due to LOCA CHUG = Envelope of symmetric and asymmetric chugging phases of LOCA Chapter 03 3.9A-58 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.9A-5 (Sheet 3 of 3)
LOAD COMBINATIONS FOR ASME SECTION III CLASS 1 VALVES(1)
LOCA = Envelope of CO chugging and annulus pressurization due to LOCA NOTE: For a detailed discussion of these loads, see the Design Assessment Report (Appendix 6A).
Chapter 03 3.9A-59 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.9A-6 (Sheet 1 of 1)
LOAD COMBINATIONS FOR ASME SECTION III CLASS 2 AND 3 AND NON-ASME COMPONENTS Design Conditions I and II are defined as:
Design Condition I = Specified design loads (temperature, pressure, etc.) + Dynamic Load 1 Design Condition II = Specified design loads (as above) +
Dynamic Load 2 pipe rupture loads (if applicable)
Dynamic Load 1*
Location a = [(OBE)2 + (SRVALL)2]1/2 Location b = OBE Dynamic Load 2*
Location a; the envelope of (i) = [(SSE)2 + (AP)2]1/2 (ii) = [(SSE)2 + (SRVONE)2 + (CO1)2]1/2 (iii) = [(SSE)2 + (SRVADS)2 + (CO2)2]1/2 and (iv) = [(SSE)2 + (SRVALL)2 (CHUG)2]1/2 Location b = SSE
- See Table 3.9A-5 for hydrodynamic load nomenclature.
Chapter 03 3.9A-59 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.9A-7 (Sheet 1 of 1)
STRESS LIMITS FOR ASME SECTION III CLASS 1 (NB)
SEISMIC CATEGORY I COMPONENTS (ELASTIC ANALYSIS)
PRESSURE BOUNDARY-DESIGNED BY ANALYSIS Primary Stress Limits Expansion Primary plus Reference Stress Secondary Peak Stress Condition Paragraph Limits Stress Limits Limits of Design(1) ASME III Pm PL PL+Pb Pe PL+Pb+Pe+Q PL+Pb+Pe+Q+F Upset(2) NB-3223 (4) (4) (4) 3Sm 3Sm Sa Emergency (2) NB-3224 Greater of Greater of Greater of Not required Not required 1.2Sm or 1.8Sm or 1.8Sm or 1.0Sy 1.5Sy 1.5Sy Faulted(2,3) NB-3225, Lesser of Lesser of Lesser of Not required Not required NB-3221, 2.4Sm or 3.6Sm or 3.6Sm or App. F 0.7Su 1.05Su 1.05Su F 1323.1 (1) Since design loads are used in the actual analysis, only the conditions shown require evaluation.
(2) Use design loads.
(3) Use above limits for materials of Table I-1.2 (ASME Section III). Use 0.7S for materials of Table I-1.1 (ASME Section III).
(4) Primary stresses are evaluated and combined with secondary effects as appropriate.
NOTE: The nomenclature, conditions, and applications of the above allowables are in accordance with ASME Section III. Stress limits apply to design by elastic analysis. Limit and plastic analysis is allowed in accordance with ASME Section III criteria. Special stress limits of Paragraph NB-3227 apply as applicable.
Chapter 03 3.9A-61 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.9A-8 (Sheet 1 of 2)
STRESS LIMITS FOR ASME SECTION III CLASS 2 AND 3 COMPONENTS (ELASTIC ANALYSIS)
Primary Stress Limits Membrane +
Design ASME III Membrane Bending Condition(1) Code Class (Pm) (Pm + Pb)
Pressure Vessels I 2(NC-3300) or 1.1 S 1.65 S II 3(ND-3300) 2.0 S 2.40 S I(2) 2(NC-3200) 1.1 Sm 1.65 Sm II(3) 2.0 Sm 2.40 Sm Pumps Nonactive(4,5)
I 2(NC-3400) or 1.1 S 1.65 S II 3(ND-3400) 2.0 S 2.40 S Pumps Active(4,5)
I 2(NC-3400) or 1.0 S 1.50 S II 3(ND-3400) 1.2 S 1.80 S Valves Active and Nonactive(5,6)
I 2(NC-3500) or 1.1 S 1.65 S II 3(ND-3500) 2.0 S 2.40 S Tanks (Steel)(5)
I 2(NC38-3900) or 1.1 S 1.65 S II 3(ND38-3900) 2.0 S 2.40 S KEY: S = Allowable stress values at design temperature from ASME Section III, Appendix I, as allowed by class Sm = Design stress intensity values at design temperature from ASME Section III, Appendix I, as allowed by class (1) Refer to Table 3.9A-7 for the definitions of Design Conditions I and II.
(2) Fatigue analysis may be required with operating conditions; see Paragraph NC-3219 and Appendix XIV of ASME Section III.
Chapter 03 3.9A-62 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.9A-8 (Sheet 2 of 2)
STRESS LIMITS FOR ASME SECTION III CLASS 2 AND 3 COMPONENTS (ELASTIC ANALYSIS)
(3) When a complete analysis is performed in accordance with Subparagraph NC-3211.1(c), the faulted stress limits of Appendix F apply.
(4) In accordance with Subarticles NC-3400 and ND-3400, any design method that has been demonstrated to be satisfactory for the specified design conditions may be used.
(5) Stress limits of ASME Section III, Subsection NF, are used for the design of supports as applicable (Table 3.9A-14).
(6) The standard or alternative design rules of Subarticles NC-3500 and ND-3500 may be used in conjunction with the stress limits specified.
Valve nozzle (piping load) stress analysis is not required when both the following conditions are satisfied by calculation:
- a. Section modulus and area at the plane normal to the flow passage through the region at the valve body crotch is at least 110 percent of that for the piping connected (or joined) to the valve body inlet and outlet nozzles; and,
- b. Code allowable stress, S, for valve body material, is equal to or greater than code allowable stress, S, of connected piping material. If valve body material allowable stress is less than that of the connected piping, the valve section modulus and area as calculated in Item a is multiplied by the ratio of the allowable stress for the pipe divided by the allowable stress of the valve.
The design by analysis procedure of Subparagraph NB-3545.2 is an acceptable alternative method if these requirements cannot be met. A casting quality factor of 1.0 is used.
Design requirements listed in this table are not applicable to stems, cast rings, or other nonpressure-retaining parts of valves which are contained within the confines of the body and bonnet.
Chapter 03 3.9A-63 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.9A-9 (Sheet 1 of 1)
SUMMARY
OF ACTIVE PUMPS SWEC SCOPE OF SUPPLY)
ASME Identification Section III Equipment No. System Equipment Code Class Size (hp) Manufacturer Active Function 2SWP*P1A-F Service Service 3 600 Goulds Pumps, Inc. To provide cooling water to water water pumps all safety-related components 2SWP*P2A&B Service Condensing 3 10 Goulds Pumps, Inc. To maintain service water water water pumps inlet temperature to the control and relay room chiller 2SFC*P1A&B Spent fuel Spent fuel 3 450 Goulds Pumps, Inc. To provide cooling water for pool cooling pool cooling the spent fuel pool and cleanup and cleanup pumps 2HVK*P1A&B Control Chilled water 3 15 Goulds Pumps, Inc. To provide cooling water to building pumps safety-related coolers in chilled the control building water 2EGF*P1A-D Standby Transfer pumps 3 1.5 Crane Co., Deming Div. To transfer diesel fuel from 2EGF*P2A&B diesel (industrial pumps) storage tanks to day tanks generator fuel oil Chapter 03 3.9A-64 Rev. 25 October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.9A-10 (Sheet 1 of 4)
SUMMARY
OF SEISMIC STRESS ANALYSIS RESULTS(1)
Service Water Pumps Spent Fuel Pumps (2SWP*P1A,B,C,D,E,F) (2SFC*P1A,B)
Components Actual Allowable Actual Allowable Motor holddown bolt stress - shear, psi 2,503 15,000 6,558 10,000
- tensile, psi 5,567 40,000 7,815 17,507 Pump holddown bolt stress - shear, psi 14,101 15,390(2) 12,271 12,320
- tensile, psi 30,711 40,500(2) 27,675 30,366 Anchor bolt stress - shear, psi 6,792 12,500 18,551 18,900
- tensile, psi 7,065 25,000 17,758 45,150 Shaft stress, psi 20,153 26,250 16,789 26,250 Frame stress, psi 19,125 21,600 Thrust retainer bolt stress - tensile, psi 3,251 21,960 2,284 20,000 Pump bearing bolt stress - shear, psi 2,450 10,800 2,267 10,000
- tensile, psi 6,332 21,960 4,894 20,000 Pump pedestal stress, psi 10,838 21,600 3,479 21,600 Nozzle stress - discharge, psi 15,209 26,250 8,634 20,400
- suction, psi 2,180 26,250 4,291 20,400 Nozzle flange stress - discharge, psi 21,841 26,250 18,493 20,400
- suction, psi 17,095 26,250 20,296 20,400 Pedestal weld stress, psi 3,989 10,800 4,870 10,800 Pump bearing load - inboard, lb 54 200 104 200
- outboard, lb 11,410 38,123 7,930 25,943 Flexible coupling misalignment, radians 0.0007 0.0178 0.00043 0.017 Impeller key stress - shear, psi 4,042 10,500 2,624 10,500 Impeller relative deflection, in 0.005 0.007 0.005 0.0105 Chapter 03 3.9A-65 Rev. 25 October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.9A-10 (Sheet 2 of 4)
SUMMARY
OF SEISMIC STRESS ANALYSIS RESULTS(1)
Chilled Water Pumps Condensing Water Pumps (2HVK*P1A,B) (2SWP*P2A,B)
Components Actual Allowable Actual Allowable Motor holddown bolts stress - shear, psi 1,726(5) 10,000 8,521 10,000
- tensile, psi 3,447 20,000 13,754 14,366 Pump holddown bolts stress - shear, psi 12,336 16,800 10,794 16,800
- tensile, psi 24,551 45,150 43,702 46,200 Anchor bolt stress - shear, psi 6,475 10,000 2,830 10,000
- tensile, psi 14,224 17,640 4,468 20,000 Shaft stress, psi 6,760 17,500 5,917 17,500 Frame stress, psi 5,868 21,600 5,043 21,600 Thrust retainer bolt stress, psi 390 20,000 816 20,000 Upper pump frame bolt stress - shear, psi 14,714 22,800 5,205 10,000
- tensile, psi 81 55,200 2,019 19,672 Lower pump frame bolt stress - shear, psi 61 10,000 2,213 10,000
- tensile, psi 9,505 20,000 7,113 20,000 Stuffing box cover bolt stress - tensile, psi 8,636 25,000 - -
Stuffing box cover flange stress, psi 19,915 21,000 - -
Maximum nozzle stress - discharge, psi 6,456 21,000 9,159 20,640
- suction, psi 15,586 21,000 16,603 20,640 Nozzle flange stress - discharge, psi 14,926 21,000 10,335 20,640
- suction, psi 18,493 21,000 16,176 20,640 Adapter/frame bolting stress - tensile, psi - - 16,050 20,000 Pump bearing loads - inboard, lb 450 10,688 480 9,104
- outboard, lb 1,342 17,865 2,594 15,037 Frame adapter bolt stress, psi - - 14,291 15,000 Frame adapter flange stress, psi - - 14,508 21,000 Frame/stuffing box bolt stress, psi 18,528 46,200 - -
Chapter 03 3.9A-66 Rev. 25 October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.9A-10 (Sheet 3 of 4)
SUMMARY
OF SEISMIC STRESS ANALYSIS RESULTS(1)
Standby Diesel Generator Fuel Oil Transfer Pump Chilled Water Pumps Condensing Water Pumps (2EGF*P1A,B,C,D, (2HVK*P1A,B) (2SWP*P2A,B) 2EGF*P2A,B)
Components Actual Allowable Actual Allowable Actual Allowable Flexible coupling misalignment, radians 0.0008 0.017 0.006 0.017 Impeller connection stress - tensile, psi 863 17,500 2,438 17,500
- shear, psi 1,933 8,750 2,368 8,750 Impeller relative deflection, in 0.0052 0.010 0.0065 0.012 Maximum column stress, psi 19,250 22,500 Maximum column flange stress, psi 17,295 26,250 bolt stress, psi 29,946 45,000 Maximum pump casing stress, psi 11,061 21,000 Maximum shaft stress, psi 16,515 17,500 Motor holddown bolt stress, psi
- tensile 2,427 20,000
- shear 782.5 10,000 Shaft key stress, psi 705.6 10,000 Shaft deflection, in 0.0279 0.05 Impeller deflection (clearance), in 0.000093 0.015 Nozzle stress, psi 17,257 21,000 Nozzle flange stress, psi 25,671 26,250 bolt stress, psi 33,319 62,500 Support plate/cover bolt stress, psi
- tensile 2,531 22,500
- shear 2,397 9,300 Discharge head holddown bolts, psi
- tensile 25,587 40,000
- shear 1,607 12,320 Discharge head stress, psi 4,711 21,000 Chapter 03 3.9A-67 Rev. 25 October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.9A-10 (Sheet 4 of 4)
SUMMARY
OF SEISMIC STRESS ANALYSIS RESULTS(1)
Standby Diesel Generator Fuel Oil Transfer Pump Chilled Water Pumps Condensing Water Pumps (2EGF*P1A,B,C,D, (2HVK*P1A,B) (2SWP*P2A,B) 2EGF*P2A,B)
Components Actual Allowable Actual Allowable Actual Allowable Motor adapter bolts, psi - tensile 5,696 20,000
- shear 1,211 10,000 (1) Values given represent the SSE + maximum nozzle + normal actual values compared to the normal (OBE) allowables.
(2) Both OBE and SSE allowables were used when calculating the pump holddown bolt interaction factors.
(3) Not applicable for this pump.
(4) Deleted.
(5) The installation of shear block to motor skid removes shear loading from the bolt. The value shown does not consider the addition of shear block and envelopes both the with and without shear block conditions.
Chapter 03 3.9A-68 Rev. 25 October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.9A-11 (Sheet 1 of 1)
THIS TABLE HAS BEEN DELETED Chapter 03 3.9A-69 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.9A-12 (Sheet 1 of 16)
ACTIVE VALVES (BOP)
System Mark Valve Pressure ASME Valve Operator Active Name Number Size Type Rating(*) Class Mfg. Model (Mfg.) Function Reactor Plant 2CCP*MOV14A,B 12 Gate 150 3 1 SMB-0-25(1) 63 Component Cooling 2CCP*MOV15A,B 4 Gate 150 2 1 SMB-000-5(1) 9 (CCP) 2CCP*MOV16A,B 4 Gate 150 2 1 SMB-000-5(1) 9 2CCP*MOV17A,B 4 Gate 150 2 1 SMB-000-5(1) 9 2CCP*MOV18A,B 12 Gate 150 3 1 SMB-0-25(1) 63 2CCP*MOV122 8 Gate 150 2 1 SMB-00-15(1) 9 2CCP*MOV124 8 Gate 150 2 1 SMB-00-15(1) 9 2CCP*MOV265 8 Gate 150 2 1 SMB-00-15(1) 9 2CCP*MOV273 8 Gate 150 2 1 SMB-00-15(1) 9 2CCP*RV64A,B 2 x 3 SRV 150/150 3 8 None 4 2CCP*RV170 3/4 x 1 SRV 300/150 2 8 None 4 2CCP*RV171 3/4 x 1 SRV 300/150 2 8 None 4 2CCP*MOV94A,B 4 Gate 150 2 1 SMB-000-5(1) 9 2CCP*AOV37A 1 1/2 Plug 150 3 4 NCB520-SR80(2) 64 2CCP*AOV37B 2 Plug 150 3 4 NCB725-SR80(2) 64 2CCP*AOV38A 1 1/2 Plug 150 3 4 NCB520-SR80(2) 64 2CCP*AOV38B 2 Plug 150 3 4 NCB725-SR80(2) 64 2CCP*V996, 997, 4 Check 150 3 17 None 84 998, 999 2CCP*RV1019A, 3/4 x 1 SRV 150/150 2 8 None 56,9 1020A, 1021A, 1022A Containment 2CMS*SOV23A-F 3/4 Globe 1500 2 6 76P-001(7) 18 Atmosphere 2CMS*SOV24A-D 3/4 Globe 1500 2 6 76P-001(7) 16,83 Monitoring 2CMS*SOV26A-D 3/4 Globe 1500 2 6 76P-001(7) 16,83 (CMS) 2CMS*SOV32A,B 3/4 Globe 1500 2 6 76P-002(7) 16,83 2CMS*SOV33A,B 3/4 Globe 1500 2 6 76P-002(7) 16,83 2CMS*SOV34A,B 3/4 Globe 1500 2 6 76P-002(7) 16,83 2CMS*SOV35A,B 3/4 Globe 1500 2 6 76P-002(7) 16,83 2CMS*SOV60A,B 3/4 Globe 1500 2 6 76P-001(7) 16 2CMS*SOV61A,B 3/4 Globe 1500 2 6 76P-002(7) 16 2CMS*SOV62A,B 3/4 Globe 1500 2 6 76P-002(7) 16 2CMS*SOV63A,B 3/4 Globe 1500 2 6 76P-002(7) 16 2CMS*SOV64A,B 3/4 Globe 1500 2 6 76P-001(7) 62 2CMS*SOV65A,B 3/4 Globe 1500 2 6 76P-001(7) 62 2CMS*EFV1A,B 3/4 Check 45 2 13 None 16 2CMS*EFV3A,B 3/4 Check 45 2 13 None 16 2CMS*EFV5A,B 3/4 Check 45 2 13 None 16 2CMS*EFV6 3/4 Check 45 2 13 None 16 Chapter 03 3.9A-70 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.9A-12 (Sheet 2 of 16)
ACTIVE VALVES (BOP)
System Mark Valve Pressure ASME Valve Operator Active Name Number Size Type Rating(*) Class Mfg. Model (Mfg.) Function Containment 2CMS*EFV8A,B 3/4 Check 45 2 13 None 16 Atmosphere 2CMS*EFV9A,B 3/4 Check 45 2 13 None 16 Monitoring 2CMS*EFV10 3/4 Check 45 2 13 None 16 (CMS) (cont'd.)
Primary 2CPS*AOV104 14 Butterfly 150 2 2 N721C-SR80-M3HW(2) 9 Containment Purge 2CPS*AOV105 12 Butterfly 150 2 2 N721C-SR80-M3HW(2) 9 (CPS) 2CPS*AOV106 14 Butterfly 150 2 2 N721C-SR80-M3HW(2) 9 2CPS*AOV107 12 Butterfly 150 2 2 N721C-SR80-M3HW(2) 9 2CPS*AOV108 14 Butterfly 150 2 2 N721C-SR80-M3HW(2) 9 2CPS*AOV109 12 Butterfly 150 2 21 NG3012-SR4(CW)-M3(2) 9 2CPS*AOV110 14 Butterfly 150 2 2 N721C-SR80-M3HW(2) 9 2CPS*AOV111 12 Butterfly 150 2 21 NG3012-SR4(CW)-M3(2) 9 2CPS*SOV119 2 Globe 1500 2 6 76P-020(7) 9 2CPS*SOV120 2 Globe 1500 2 6 76P-027(7) 9 2CPS*SOV121 2 Globe 1500 2 6 76P-020(7) 9 2CPS*SOV122 2 Globe 1500 2 6 76P-027(7) 9 2CPS*SOV132 1 Globe 1500 2 6 76P-035(7) 9 2CPS*V50 1 1/2 Check 600 2 1 None 9 High Pressure Core 2CSH*V7 4 Check 150 2 1 None 78 Spray (CSH) 2CSH*V16 20 Check 150 2 1 None 77,78,30 2CSH*V108 12 Check 900 1 3 None 9,16 2CSH*RV113 3/4 x 1 SRV 150/150 2 8 None 4,56 2CSH*RV114 3/4 x 1 SRV 150/150 2 8 None 4,56 2CSH*V9 16 Check 900 2 3 None 23 2CSH*V17 3 Check 900 2 1 None 30 2CSH*V55 3 Check 900 2 1 None 30 2CSH*V59 14 Check 150 2 1 None 22 2CSH*EFV1 2 Check 100 2 13 None 9,16 2CSH*EFV2 2 Check 100 2 13 None 9,16 2CSH*EFV3 3/4 Check 1575 2 13 None 9,16 Low Pressure Core 2CSL*V101 12 Check 900 1 3 9,16 Spray (CSL) 2CSL*FV114 10 Globe 300 3 5 SMB-00-5(1) 27 2CSL*MOV104 12 Gate 600 1 1 SB-2-60(1) 28 2CSL*MOV107 4 Gate 300 2 1 SMB-00S-15(1) 31 2CSL*MOV112 20 Butterfly 150 2 9 SMB-0-10/H4BC(1) 32 2CSL*RV105 1 1/2 x 2 SRV 300/150 2 8 None 4,9,56 2CSL*RV123 3/4 x 1 SRV 150/150 2 8 None 4,9,56 Chapter 03 3.9A-71 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.9A-12 (Sheet 3 of 16)
ACTIVE VALVES (BOP)
System Mark Valve Pressure ASME Valve Operator Active Name Number Size Type Rating(*) Class Mfg. Model (Mfg.) Function Low Pressure Core 2CSL*V4 16 Check 300 2 1 None 74 Spray (CSL) 2CSL*V14 2 Check 600 2 1 None 30 (cont'd.) 2CSL*EFV1 3/4 Check 1250 2 13 None 16 2CSL*V9 12 Check 150 2 1 None 22,78 2CSL*V21 2 Check 600 2 1 None 22 Reactor Building 2DER*MOV119 4 Gate 150 2 1 SMB-000-5(1) 9 Equipment Drains 2DER*MOV120 4 Gate 150 2 1 SMB-000-5(1) 9 (DER) 2DER*MOV130 2 Globe 1500 2 1 SMB-000-5(1) 9 2DER*MOV131 2 Globe 1500 2 1 SMB-000-5(1) 9 2DER*EFV31 3/4 Check 1250 2 13 None 16 2DER*RV344 3/4 x 1 SRV 150/150 2 8 None 56,9 Reactor Building 2DFR*MOV120 6 Gate 150 2 1 SMB-00-10(1) 17 Floor Drains (DFR) 2DFR*MOV121 6 Gate 150 2 1 SMB-00-10(1) 17 2DFR*MOV139 3 Gate 150 2 1 SMB-000-5(1) 17 2DFR*MOV140 3 Gate 150 2 1 SMB-000-5(1) 17 2DFR*RV228 3/4 x 1 SRV 150/150 2 8 None 56,9 Standby Diesel 2EGA*RV125 30 SRV 150 3 10 None 56 Generator Air 2EGA*RV126 30 SRV 150 3 10 None 56 Startup (EGA) 2EGA*RV127 22 SRV 150 3 10 None 56 Feedwater (FWS) 2FWS*V23A,B 24 Check 900 1 3 None 9 2FWS*MOV21A,B 24 Gate 900 1 1 SMB-4-200(1) 17 2FWS*V12A,B 24 Check 900 1 3 None 9 Standby Diesel 2EGF*V12 1 Check 600 3 1 None 22,88,78 Generator Fuel 2EGF*V13 1 Check 600 3 1 None 22,88,78 (EGF) 2EGF*V32 1 Check 600 3 1 None 22,88,78 2EGF*V33 1 Check 600 3 1 None 22,88,78 2EGF*V52 1 Check 600 3 1 None 22,88,78 2EGF*V53 1 Check 600 3 1 None 22,88,78 Nitrogen Tanks 2GSN*V70A,B 1 Check 600 3 18 None 22,75 (GSN) 2GSN*V75A,B 1 Check 600 3 1 None 76 Standby Gas 2GTS*MOV1A,B 20 Butterfly 150 2 9 SMB-00-10/H3BC(1) 10 Treatment (GTS) 2GTS*AOV2A 20 Butterfly 150 2 9 85430(3) 11 2GTS*AOV3A 20 Butterfly 150 2 9 85430(3) 11 2GTS*MOV4A,B 8 Gate 150 2 1 SMB-00-15(1) 11 2GTS*AOV28A 8 Butterfly 150 2 9 86040(3) 12 Chapter 03 3.9A-72 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.9A-12 (Sheet 4 of 16)
ACTIVE VALVES (BOP)
System Mark Valve Pressure ASME Valve Operator Active Name Number Size Type Rating(*) Class Mfg. Model (Mfg.) Function Standby Gas 2GTS*PV5A 14 Butterfly 150 2 9 86060(3) 13 Treatment (GTS) 2GTS*AOV2B 20 Butterfly 150 2 9 NT420-SR3(2) 11 (cont'd.) 2GTS*AOV3B 20 Butterfly 150 2 9 NT420-SR3(2) 11 2GTS*AOV28B 8 Butterfly 150 2 9 NHD732-SR60(2) 12 2GTS*PV5B 14 Butterfly 150 2 9 NHD732(2) 13 2GTS*V68B 3/4 Check 2735 1 3 None 22 2GTS*V74B 1 Check 2735 1 3 None 78 2GTS*RV78B 1x2 Relief 600x150 3 8 None 4 Hydrogen 2HCS*MOV1A,B 3 Gate 150 2 15 SMB-00-10(1) 3,9 Recombiner (HCS) 2HCS*MOV2A,B 3 Globe 150 2 1 SMB-000-5(1) 3,9 2HCS*MOV3A,B 3 Gate 150 2 15 SMB-00-10(1) 3,9 2HCS*MOV4A,B 3 Gate 150 2 15 SMB-000-5(1) 3,9 2HCS*MOV5A,B 3 Globe 150 2 1 SMB-000-5(1) 3,9 2HCS*MOV6A,B 3 Gate 150 2 15 SMB-000-5(1) 3,9 2HCS*MOV25A,B 3 Globe 1500 2 18 SMB-000-2(1) 3 2HCS*MOV26A,B 3/4 Globe 1500 2 18 SMB-000-2(1) 3 2HCS*SOV10A,B 1 Globe 1500 2 6 76P-024(7) 3 2HCS*SOV11A,B 1 Globe 1500 2 6 76P-024(7) 3 Control Building 2HVC*MOV1A,B 18 Butterfly 150 3 2 SMB-000-2/H1BC(1) 8 Air Conditioner (HVC)
Control Building 2HVK*RV1,2 3/4 x 1 SRV 150/150 4 8 None 4,97 Chilled Water 2HVK*SOV36A,B 3 Globe 1500 3 6 76P-034(7) 5 (HVK) 2HVK*TV21A,B 4 Globe 150 3 5 (12) 6 2HVK*TV22A,B 4 Globe 150 3 5 (12) 7 Instrument Air 2IAS*V448 1 1/2 Check 600 3 1 None 16,22,59 (IAS) 2IAS*V449 1 1/2 Check 600 3 1 None 16,22,59 2IAS*V450 1 1/2 Check 600 2 1 None 16,22,59 2IAS*SOV164 1 1/2 Globe 1500 2 6 76P-019(7) 16,59 2IAS*SOV165 1 1/2 Globe 1500 2 6 76P-019(7) 16,59 2IAS*SOV166 1 1/2 Globe 1500 2 6 76P-019(7) 16 2IAS*SOV167 1 1/2 Globe 1500 2 6 76P-019(7) 16 2IAS*SOV168 1 1/2 Globe 1500 2 6 76P-019(7) 16 2IAS*SOV180 1 1/2 Globe 1500 2 6 76P-019(7) 16 2IAS*SOV185 1 1/2 Globe 1500 2 6 76P-019-1(7) 16 2IAS*SV19A,B 3/4 x 1 SRV 600/150 3 8 None 56,59 2IAS*SV20A,B 3/4 x 1 SRV 150/150 3 8 None 56,59 2IAS*SOVY181 3/4 Globe 1500 3 6 76P-036 59 Chapter 03 3.9A-73 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.9A-12 (Sheet 5 of 16)
ACTIVE VALVES (BOP)
System Mark Valve Pressure ASME Valve Operator Active Name Number Size Type Rating(*) Class Mfg. Model (Mfg.) Function Instrument Air 2IAS*SOVY186 3/4 Globe 1500 3 6 76P-036 59 (IAS) (cont'd.) 2IAS*SOVX181 1 1/2 Globe 1500 3 6 76P-037 59 2IAS*SOVX186 1 1/2 Globe 1500 3 6 76P-037 59 2IAS*V571 1 1/4 Check 600 3 1 None 22,59,78 2IAS*V471 1 1/4 Check 600 3 1 None 22,59,78 2IAS*V421 1 1/4 Check 600 3 1 None 22,59,78 2IAS*V431 1 1/4 Check 600 3 1 None 22,59,78 2IAS*V526 1 1/4 Check 600 3 1 None 22,59,78 2IAS*V546 1 1/4 Check 600 3 1 None 22,59,78 2IAS*V581 1 1/4 Check 600 3 1 None 22,59,78 2IAS*EFV200 3/4 Check 350 2 13 None 59,60 2IAS*EFV201 3/4 Check 350 2 13 None 59,60 2IAS*EFV202 3/4 Check 350 2 13 None 59,60 2IAS*EFV203 3/4 Check 350 2 13 None 59,60 2IAS*EFV204 3/4 Check 350 2 13 None 59,60 2IAS*EFV205 3/4 Check 350 2 13 None 59,60 2IAS*EFV206 3/4 Check 350 2 13 None 59,60 Reactor Core 2ICS*AOV109 2 Globe 150 2 5 None 38 Isolation Cooling 2ICS*AOV110 2 Globe 150 2 5 None 38 (ICS) 2ICS*AOV130 2 Globe 900 2 5 None 38 2ICS*AOV131 2 Globe 900 2 5 None 38 2ICS*V156 6 Check 900 1 4 None 40 2ICS*V157 6 Check 900 1 4 None 40 2ICS*MOV116 2 Globe 1500 2 1 SMB-00-5(1) 42 2ICS*MOV120 4 Globe 900 2 3 SMB-0-25(1) 43 2ICS*MOV121 10 Gate 900 1 1 SB-2-60(1) 17,94 2ICS*MOV122 12 Gate 150 2 1 SMB-0-25(1) 44 2ICS*MOV124 4 Gate 900 2 1 SB-00-10(1) 41 2ICS*MOV126 6 Gate 900 1 1 SMB-1-60(1) 9,87 2ICS*MOV128 10 Gate 900 1 1 SB-2-60(1) 17,94 2ICS*MOV129 6 Gate 150 2 1 SMB-00-10(1) 46 2ICS*MOV136 6 Gate 150 2 1 SMB-00-10(1) 47,16 2ICS*MOV143 2 Globe 1500 2 1 SMB-00-5(1) 31 2ICS*MOV148 1 1/2 Globe 1500 2 1 SMB-000-2(1) 16,48 2ICS*MOV164 1 1/2 Globe 1500 2 1 SMB-000-2(1) 16,48 2ICS*MOV170 1 Globe 1500 2 1 SMB-000-2(1) 9 2ICS*RV112 3/4 x 1 SRV 150/150 2 8 None 4 2ICS*RV114 3/4 x 1 SRV 150 2 8 None 4 2ICS*V28 6 Check 150 2 1 None 82,78,22 2ICS*V29 12 Check 150 2 1 None 80,78 2ICS*V38 2 Check 1500 2 1 None 78 Chapter 03 3.9A-74 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.9A-12 (Sheet 6 of 16)
ACTIVE VALVES (BOP)
System Mark Valve Pressure ASME Valve Operator Active Name Number Size Type Rating(*) Class Mfg. Model (Mfg.) Function Reactor Core 2ICS*V39 1 1/2 Check 600 2 1 None 22,48,78 Isolation Cooling 2ICS*V40 1 1/2 Check 600 2 1 None 22,48,78 (ICS) (cont'd.) 2ICS*V249 6 Check 150 2 1 None 22 2ICS*PCV115 2 Globe 900 2 5/19 (10) 42 2ICS*EFV1 3/4 Check 1250 2 13 None 9 2ICS*EFV2 3/4 Check 1250 2 13 None 9 2ICS*EFV3 3/4 Check 1250 2 13 None 9 2ICS*EFV4 3/4 Check 1250 2 13 None 9 2ICS*EFV5 3/4 Check 1250 2 13 None 9 Reactor Vessel 2ISC*RV33A,B 24 Vac Brkr 150 2 10 (4) 1 Instrumentation 2ISC*RV34A,B 24 Vac Brkr 150 2 10 (4) 1 (ISC) 2ISC*RV35A,B 24 Vac Brkr 150 2 10 (4) 1 2ISC*RV36A,B 24 Vac Brkr 150 2 10 (4) 1 2ISC*EFV1 3/4 Check 1250 2 13 None 60 2ISC*EFV2 3/4 Check 1250 2 13 None 60 2ISC*EFV3 3/4 Check 1250 2 13 None 60 2ISC*EFV4 3/4 Check 1250 2 13 None 60 2ISC*EFV5 3/4 Check 1250 2 13 None 60 2ISC*EFV6 3/4 Check 1250 2 13 None 60 2ISC*EFV7 3/4 Check 1250 2 13 None 60 2ISC*EFV8 3/4 Check 1250 2 13 None 60 2ISC*EFV9 3/4 Check 1250 2 13 None 60 2ISC*EFV10 3/4 Check 1250 2 13 None 60 2ISC*EFV11 3/4 Check 1250 2 13 None 60 2ISC*EFV12 3/4 Check 1250 2 13 None 60 2ISC*EFV13 3/4 Check 1250 2 13 None 60 2ISC*EFV14 3/4 Check 1250 2 13 None 60 2ISC*EFV15 3/4 Check 1250 2 13 None 60 2ISC*EFV16 3/4 Check 1250 2 13 None 60 2ISC*EFV17 3/4 Check 1250 2 13 None 60 2ISC*EFV18 3/4 Check 1250 2 13 None 60 2ISC*EFV19 3/4 Check 1250 2 13 None 60 2ISC*EFV20 3/4 Check 1250 2 13 None 60 2ISC*EFV21 3/4 Check 1250 2 13 None 60 2ISC*EFV22 3/4 Check 1250 2 13 None 60 2ISC*EFV23 3/4 Check 1250 2 13 None 60 2ISC*EFV24 3/4 Check 1250 2 13 None 60 2ISC*EFV25 3/4 Check 1250 2 13 None 60 2ISC*EFV26 3/4 Check 1250 2 13 None 60 2ISC*EFV27 3/4 Check 1250 2 13 None 60 2ISC*EFV28 3/4 Check 1250 2 13 None 60 Chapter 03 3.9A-75 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.9A-12 (Sheet 7 of 16)
ACTIVE VALVES (BOP)
System Mark Valve Pressure ASME Valve Operator Active Name Number Size Type Rating(*) Class Mfg. Model (Mfg.) Function Reactor Vessel 2ISC*EFV29 3/4 Check 1250 2 13 None 60 Instrumentation 2ISC*EFV30 3/4 Check 1250 2 13 None 60 (ISC) (cont'd.) 2ISC*EFV31 3/4 Check 1250 2 13 None 60 2ISC*EFV32 3/4 Check 1250 2 13 None 60 2ISC*EFV33 3/4 Check 1250 2 13 None 60 2ISC*EFV34 3/4 Check 1250 2 13 None 60 2ISC*EFV35 3/4 Check 1250 2 13 None 60 2ISC*EFV36 3/4 Check 1250 2 13 None 60 2ISC*EFV37 3/4 Check 1250 2 13 None 60 2ISC*EFV38 3/4 Check 1250 2 13 None 60 2ISC*EFV39 3/4 Check 1250 2 13 None 60 2ISC*EFV40 3/4 Check 1250 2 13 None 60 2ISC*EFV41 3/4 Check 1250 2 13 None 60 2ISC*EFV42 3/4 Check 1250 2 13 None 60 Containment 2LMS*SOV152 3/4 Globe 1500 2 6 76P-001(7) 16 Leakage Monitoring 2LMS*SOV153 3/4 Globe 1500 2 6 76P-001(7) 16 (LMS) 2LMS*SOV157 3/4 Globe 1500 2 6 76P-001(7) 16 2LMS*SOV156 3/4 Globe 1500 2 6 76P-001(7) 16 Main Steam System 2MSS*MOV111 6 Globe 600 1 1 SMB-2-25(1) 8,9,16 (MSS) 2MSS*MOV112 6 Globe 600 1 1 SMB-2-25(1) 8,9,16,45 2MSS*MOV208 2 Globe 1500 1 1 SMB-000-5(1) 16,8,9 2MSS*PSV120 8 x 10 SRV 1500/300 1 14 None 56 2MSS*PSV121 8 x 10 SRV 1500/300 1 14 None 56 2MSS*PSV122 8 x 10 SRV 1500/300 1 14 None 56,59 2MSS*PSV123 8 x 10 SRV 1500/300 1 14 None 56 2MSS*PSV124 8 x 10 SRV 1500/300 1 14 None 56 2MSS*PSV125 8 x 10 SRV 1500/300 1 14 None 56 2MSS*PSV126 8 x 10 SRV 1500/300 1 14 None 56,59 2MSS*PSV127 8 x 10 SRV 1500/300 1 14 None 56,59 2MSS*PSV128 8 x 10 SRV 1500/300 1 14 None 56 2MSS*PSV129 8 x 10 SRV 1500/300 1 14 None 56,59 2MSS*PSV130 8 x 10 SRV 1500/300 1 14 None 56,59 2MSS*PSV131 8 x 10 SRV 1500/300 1 14 None 56 2MSS*PSV132 8 x 10 SRV 1500/300 1 14 None 56 2MSS*PSV133 8 x 10 SRV 1500/300 1 14 None 56 2MSS*PSV134 8 x 10 SRV 1500/300 1 14 None 56,59 2MSS*PSV135 8 x 10 SRV 1500/300 1 14 None 56 2MSS*PSV136 8 x 10 SRV 1500/300 1 14 None 56 2MSS*PSV137 8 x 10 SRV 1500/300 1 14 None 56,59 2MSS*EFV1A-D 3/4 Check 1250 2 13 None 60,16 Chapter 03 3.9A-76 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.9A-12 (Sheet 8 of 16)
ACTIVE VALVES (BOP)
System Mark Valve Pressure ASME Valve Operator Active Name Number Size Type Rating(*) Class Mfg. Model (Mfg.) Function Main Steam System 2MSS*EFV2A-D 3/4 Check 1250 2 13 None 60,16 (MSS) (cont'd.) 2MSS*EFV3A-D 3/4 Check 1250 2 13 None 60,16 2MSS*EFV4A-D 3/4 Check 1250 2 13 None 60,16 Reactor Coolant 2RCS*SOV68A,B 3/4 Globe 2500 2 6 76P-040(7) 9 Recirculation (RCS) 2RCS*SOV65A,B 2 Globe 1500 2 6 76P-038(7) 9 2RCS*SOV66A,B 1 Globe 2500 2 6 76P-039(7) 9 2RCS*SOV67A,B 2 Globe 1500 2 6 76P-038(7) 9 2RCS*SOV79A,B 2 Globe 1500 2 6 76P-038(7) 9 2RCS*SOV80A,B 1 Globe 2500 2 6 76P-039(7) 9 2RCS*SOV81A,B 2 Globe 1500 2 6 76P-038(7) 9 2RCS*SOV82A,B 3/4 Globe 2500 2 6 76P-040(7) 9 2RCS*SOV104 3/4 Globe 1500 2 20 V526-5688-19(11) 9 2RSC*SOV105 3/4 Globe 1500 2 20 V526-5688-19(11) 9 2RCS*V59A,B 3/4 Check 1500 2 1 None 9 2RCS*V60A,B 3/4 Check 1500 2 1 None 9 2RCS*V90A,B 3/4 Check 1500 2 1 None 9 2RCS*EFV44A,B 3/4 Check 1250 2 13 None 16 2RCS*EFV45A,B 3/4 Check 1250 2 13 None 16 2RCS*EFV46A,B 3/4 Check 1250 2 13 None 16 2RCS*EFV47A,B 3/4 Check 1250 2 13 None 16 2RCS*EFV48A,B 3/4 Check 1250 2 13 None 16 2RCS*EFV52A,B 3/4 Check 1250 2 13 None 16 2RCS*EFV53A,B 3/4 Check 1250 2 13 None 16 2RCS*EFV62A,B 3/4 Check 1250 2 13 None 16 2RCS*EFV63A,B 3/4 Check 1250 2 13 None 16 Residual Heat 2RHS*MOV1A,B 24 Butterfly 300 2 9 SMB-2-60(1) 16,49,52, Removal (RHS) 53,55 2RHS*MOV1C 24 Butterfly 300 2 9 SMB-0-25(1) 16,49 2RHS*MOV2A,B 18 Butterfly 300 2 9 SMB-0-25(1) 50,52 2RHS*MOV9A,B 18 Butterfly 300 2 2 SMB-00-10(1) 50,53,55 2RHS*V3 18 Check 300 2 1 None 49,50,53, 55,78 2RHS*V16A,B,C 12 Check 900 1 3 None 40 2RHS*V39A,B 12 Check 900 1 3 None 50,16 2RHS*AOV126 3/4 Ball 150 3 17 NCB315-SR80(2) 51,52 2RHS*AOV150 16 Check 300 2 3 4-A-FFX-8-3/4-Y(5) 51 2RHS*FV38A,B 14 Globe 300 2 5 SMB-00-5(1) 52,53 2RHS*FV38C 14 Globe 300 2 5 SMB-00-5(1) 52 2RHS*MOV4A-C 6 Gate 300 2 1 SMB-00S-15(1) 54,52 Chapter 03 3.9A-77 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.9A-12 (Sheet 9 of 16)
ACTIVE VALVES (BOP)
System Mark Valve Pressure ASME Valve Operator Active Name Number Size Type Rating(*) Class Mfg. Model (Mfg.) Function Residual Heat 2RHS*MOV15A,B 16 Gate 300 2 1 SMB-2-80(1) 52,55,16 Removal (RHS) 2RHS*MOV24A,B,C 12 Gate 900 1 1 SMB-3-100(1) 49,52,16 (cont'd.) 2RHS*MOV25A,B 16 Gate 300 2 1 SMB-2-80(1) 52,55,16 2RHS*MOV26A,B 1 Globe 1500 2 1 SMB-000-2(1) 52,16 2RHS*MOV27A,B 1 Globe 1500 2 1 SMB-000-2(1) 52,16 2RHS*MOV30A,B 18 Butterfly 300 2 9 SMBO-25/H4BC(1) 53,54,16 2RHS*MOV8A,B 18 Butterfly 300 2 9 SMB-1-25/H5BC(1) 49,50,52 2RHS*V60 2 Check 600 2 None 22 2RHS*V143 6 Check 900 1 1 None 50,78 2RHS*MOV33A,B 4 Globe 300 2 1 SMB-000-5(1) 52,55,16 2RHS*MOV37A,B 4 Globe 300 2 1 SMB-000-5(1) 52 2RHS*MOV40A,B 12 Globe 900 1 1 SMB-3-80(1) 50,52,16, 95 2RHS*MOV67A,B 2 Globe 1500 1 1 SMB-000-5(1) 16 2RHS*MOV104 6 Globe 900 1 1 SMB-0-10(1) 50,52,16 2RHS*MOV112(1) 20 Gate 900 1 1 SB-3-150(1) 16 2RHS*MOV113(1) 20 Gate 900 1 1 SB-3-150(1) 16 2RHS*MOV115 16 Gate 300 2 1 SMB-0-25(1) 51,89 2RHS*MOV116 16 Gate 150 3 1 SMB-0-25(1) 51,89 2RHS*MOV142(1) 3 Globe 300 2 1 SMB-000-5(1) 52 2RHS*MOV149(1) 3 Gate 300 2 1 SMB-000-5(1) 52 2RHS*RV20A-C 3/4 x 1 SRV 300/150 2 8 None 56 2RHS*RV110 3/4 x 1 SRV 300/150 2 8 None 56 2RHS*RV152 3/4 x 1 SRV 900/150 1 8 None 56 2RHS*SOV35A,B 3/4 Globe 1500 2 6 76P-032(7) 52,34 2RHS*SOV36A,B 3/4 Globe 1500 2 6 76P-030(7) 52,34 2RHS*RVV35A,B 10 Vac Brkr 150 2 10 None 57 2RHS*RVV36A,B 10 Vac Brkr 150 2 10 None 57 2RHS*MOV12A 18 Butterfly 300 2 2 SMB-00-10(1) 50,53,55 Chapter 03 3.9A-78 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.9A-12 (Sheet 10 of 16)
ACTIVE VALVES (BOP)
System Mark Valve Pressure ASME Valve Operator Active Name Number Size Type Rating(*) Class Mfg. Model (Mfg.) Function Residual Heat 2RHS*MOV12B 18 Butterfly 300 2 2 SMB-00-10(1) 50,51,53, Removal (RHS) 55 (cont'd.) 2RHS*V17 2 Stop Chk 600 2 1 None 22 2RHS*V47 2 Stop Chk 600 2 1 None 22 2RHS*V61 2 Stop Chk 600 2 1 None 22 2RHS*V18 2 Check 600 2 1 None 22 2RHS*V48 2 Check 600 2 1 None 22 2RHS*V1 18 Check 300 2 1 None 49,50,53, 55 2RHS*V2 18 Check 300 2 1 None 49,50,53, 55 2RHS*EFV5 3/4 Check 1250 2 13 None 16 2RHS*EFV6 3/4 Check 1250 2 13 None 16 2RHS*EFV7 3/4 Check 1250 2 13 None 16 2RHS*RV57A,B 3/4 x 1 SRV 300/300 2 8 None 4 Spent Fuel Pool 2SFC*AOV153 8 Butterfly 300 3 2 N721C-SR80-M3HW(2) 45 Cooling and Cleanup 2SFC*AOV154 8 Butterfly 300 3 2 N721C-SR80-M3HW(2) 45 (SFC) 2SFC*AOV19A,B 8 Butterfly 300 3 2 N721C-SR80-M3HW(2) 45 2SFC*HV6A,B 10 Butterfly 150 3 2 N721C-SR80-M3HW(2) 35,98 2SFC*HV17A,B 8 Butterfly 300 3 2 N721C-SR80-M3HW(2) 36 2SFC*HV18A,B 8 Butterfly 300 3 2 N721C-SR80-M3HW(2) 35,36 2SFC*HV37A,B 8 Butterfly 300 3 2 N721C-SR80-M3HW(2) 35,98 2SFC*V11 8 Check 150 3 1 None 78 2SFC*V20A,B 8 Check 300 3 1 None 22,78 2SFC*V9 8 Check 150 3 1 None 78 Standby Liquid 2SLS*MOV1A,B 3 Globe 150 2 1 SB-00-5(1) 66 Control System 2SLS*MOV5A,B 2 Stop Chk 1600 1 1 SMB-00-10(1) 66,16 (SLS) 2SLS*RV2A,B 3/4 x 1 SRV 1600/150 2 8 None 56 2SLS*V10 2 Check 1600 1 1 None 16,22,78 2SLS*V12 1 1/2 Check 1600 2 1 None 66,78,22 2SLS*V14 1 1/2 Check 1600 2 1 None 66,78,22 Main Steam Safety/ 2SVV*RVV101 10 Check 600 3 10 None 21 Relief Valves, 2SVV*RVV102 10 Check 600 3 10 None 21 Vents and Drains 2SVV*RVV103 10 Check 600 3 10 None 21 (SVV) 2SVV*RVV104 10 Check 600 3 10 None 21 2SVV*RVV105 10 Check 600 3 10 None 21 2SVV*RVV106 10 Check 600 3 10 None 21 2SVV*RVV107 10 Check 600 3 10 None 21 2SVV*RVV108 10 Check 600 3 10 None 21 Chapter 03 3.9A-79 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.9A-12 (Sheet 11 of 16)
ACTIVE VALVES (BOP)
System Mark Valve Pressure ASME Valve Operator Active Name Number Size Type Rating(*) Class Mfg. Model (Mfg.) Function Main Steam Safety/ 2SVV*RVV109 10 Check 600 3 10 None 21 Relief Valves, 2SVV*RVV110 10 Check 600 3 10 None 21 Vents and Drains 2SVV*RVV111 10 Check 600 3 10 None 21 (SVV) (cont'd.) 2SVV*RVV112 10 Check 600 3 10 None 21 2SVV*RVV113 10 Check 600 3 10 None 21 2SVV*RVV114 10 Check 600 3 10 None 21 2SVV*RVV115 10 Check 600 3 10 None 21 2SVV*RVV116 10 Check 600 3 10 None 21 2SVV*RVV117 10 Check 600 3 10 None 21 2SVV*RVV118 10 Check 600 3 10 None 21 2SVV*RVV201 10 Check 600 3 10 None 21 2SVV*RVV202 10 Check 600 3 10 None 21 2SVV*RVV203 10 Check 600 3 10 None 21 2SVV*RVV204 10 Check 600 3 10 None 21 2SVV*RVV205 10 Check 600 3 10 None 21 2SVV*RVV206 10 Check 600 3 10 None 21 2SVV*RVV207 10 Check 600 3 10 None 21 2SVV*RVV208 10 Check 600 3 10 None 21 2SVV*RVV209 10 Check 600 3 10 None 21 2SVV*RVV210 10 Check 600 3 10 None 21 2SVV*RVV211 10 Check 600 3 10 None 21 2SVV*RVV212 10 Check 600 3 10 None 21 2SVV*RVV213 10 Check 600 3 10 None 21 2SVV*RVV214 10 Check 600 3 10 None 21 2SVV*RVV215 10 Check 600 3 10 None 21 2SVV*RVV216 10 Check 600 3 10 None 21 2SVV*RVV217 10 Check 600 3 10 None 21 2SVV*RVV218 10 Check 600 3 10 None 21 2SVV*RVV301 2 1/2 Check 150 3 10 None 21 2SVV*RVV302 2 1/2 Check 150 3 10 None 21 2SVV*RVV303 2 1/2 Check 150 3 10 None 21 2SVV*RVV304 2 1/2 Check 150 3 10 None 21 2SVV*RVV305 2 1/2 Check 150 3 10 None 21 2SVV*RVV306 2 1/2 Check 150 3 10 None 21 2SVV*RVV307 2 1/2 Check 150 3 10 None 21 2SVV*RVV308 2 1/2 Check 150 3 10 None 21 2SVV*RVV309 2 1/2 Check 150 3 10 None 21 2SVV*RVV310 2 1/2 Check 150 3 10 None 21 2SVV*RVV311 2 1/2 Check 150 3 10 None 21 2SVV*RVV312 2 1/2 Check 150 3 10 None 21 2SVV*RVV313 2 1/2 Check 150 3 10 None 21 Chapter 03 3.9A-80 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.9A-12 (Sheet 12 of 16)
ACTIVE VALVES (BOP)
System Mark Valve Pressure ASME Valve Operator Active Name Number Size Type Rating(*) Class Mfg. Model (Mfg.) Function Main Steam Safety/ 2SVV*RVV314 2 1/2 Check 150 3 10 None 21 Relief Valves, 2SVV*RVV315 2 1/2 Check 150 3 10 None 21 Vents and Drains 2SVV*RVV316 2 1/2 Check 150 3 10 None 21 (SVV) (cont'd.) 2SVV*RVV317 2 1/2 Check 150 3 10 None 21 2SVV*RVV318 2 1/2 Check 150 3 10 None 21 Service Water (SWP) 2SWP*AOV20A,22A 1 1/2 Plug 150 3 4 NCB520-SR80(2) 64 2SWP*AOV20B,22B 2 Plug 150 3 4 NCB725-SR80(2) 64 2SWP*AOV97A,B 6 Plug 150 3 4 NTB12-SR3-M3HW(2) 68 2SWP*AOV572 2 1/2 Plug 150 3 4 NCB725-SR80(2) 68 2SWP*AOV78A,B 2 Plug 150 3 4 NCB725-SR80(2) 68 2SWP*FV54A,B 30 Butterfly 150 3 21 G5028-SRI(CW)*SEIS*(2) 71 2SWP*MOV1A-F 4 Ball 150 3 11 SMB-000-2/H1BC(1) 2 2SWP*MOV3A,B 30 Butterfly 150 3 9 SMB-2-60/H6BC(1) 45 2SWP*MOV19A,B 20 Butterfly 150 3 21 SMB-1-15/H4BC(1) 45 2SWP*MOV33A,B 18 Butterfly 150 3 9 SMB-0-25/H4BC(1) 67 2SWP*FV47A,B 30 Butterfly 150 3 21 G5028-SRI(CW)*SEIS*(2) 71 2SWP*MOV50A,B 36 Butterfly 150 3 9 SMB-3-150/H6BC(1) 71 2SWP*MOV74A,C,E 18 Butterfly 150 3 21 SMB-0-40/H4BC(1) 69 2SWP*MOV74B,D,F 18 Butterfly 150 3 9 SMB-0-40/H4BC(1) 69 2SWP*MOV90A,B 18 Butterfly 150 3 9 SMB-0-25/H4BC(1) 67 2SWP*MOV17A,B 12 Gate 150 3 1 SMB-0-25(1) 91 2SWP*MOV18A,B 12 Gate 150 3 1 SMB-0-25(1) 91 2SWP*MOV21A,B 3 Gate 150 3 1 SMB-000-5(1) 36 2SWP*MOV66A,B 8 Gate 150 3 1 SMB-00-15(1) 65 2SWP*MOV67A,B 4 Gate 150 3 1 SMB-000-5(1) 68 2SWP*MOV94A,B 8 Gate 150 3 1 SMB-00-15(1) 65 2SWP*MOV95A,B 8 Gate 150 3 1 SMB-00-15(1) 92 2SWP*MOV599 30 Butterfly 150 3 9 SMB-1-25/H5BC(1) 45 2SWP*MOV93A,B 24 Butterfly 150 3 21 SMB-1-15/H4BC(1) 45 2SWP*MOV30A,B 48 x 72 Rotary Gte 150 3 12 SMB-0-15/H4BC(1) 72 2SWP*MOV77A,B 54 x 54 Rotary Gte 150 3 12 SMB-00-10/H3BC(1) 73 (overall) 48 x 48 (nominal) 2SWP*RV34A,B 4 x 6 SRV 300/150 3 8 None 56 2SWP*TV35A,B 4 Globe 150 3 5 (9) 93 2SWP*V1A-F 18 Check 150 3 9 None 22,78 2SWP*V202A 30 Check 150 3 9 None 22,78 2SWP*V202B 30 Check 150 3 9 None 22 2SWP*V219A,B 4 Check 150 3 1 None 78 2SWP*V240A 4 Check 150 3 16 None 22,78 Chapter 03 3.9A-81 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.9A-12 (Sheet 13 of 16)
ACTIVE VALVES (BOP)
System Mark Valve Pressure ASME Valve Operator Active Name Number Size Type Rating(*) Class Mfg. Model (Mfg.) Function Service Water (SWP) 2SWP*V240B 4 Check 150 3 16 None 22,78 (cont'd.) 2SWP*V259 8 Check 150 3 1 None 22,78 2SWP*V260 8 Check 150 3 1 None 22,78 2SWP*V1002A,B 3 Check 150 3 1 None 78,90 2SWP*V1027 30 Check 150 3 9 None 22,78 2SWP*V1024 6 Check 150 3 1 None 22,78 2SWP*V1025 6 Check 150 3 1 None 22,78 2SWP*AOV154A,B 1 1/2 Plug 150 3 4 NCB520-SR80(2) 68 2SWP*AOV571 1 1/2 Plug 150 3 4 NCB520-SR80(2) 68 2SWP*AOV581 1 1/2 Plug 150 3 4 NCB520-SR80(2) 68 2SWP*AOV573 2 Plug 150 3 4 NCB725-SR80(2) 68 2SWP*AOV574 2 Plug 150 3 4 NCB725-SR80(2) 68 2SWP*V1194,1195, 6 Check 150 3 17 None 85 1196,1197 Reactor Water 2WCS*MOV102 8 Globe 600 1 1 SB-2-60(1) 16 Cleanup (WCS) 2WCS*MOV112 8 Globe 600 1 1 SB-2-60(1) 16 2WCS*MOV200 8 Globe 900 1 1 SMB-1-25(1) 16 2WCS*EFV221 3/4 Check 1250 2 13 None 16 2WCS*EFV222 3/4 Check 1250 2 13 None 16 2WCS*EFV223 3/4 Check 1250 2 13 None 16 2WCS*EFV224 3/4 Check 1250 2 13 None 16 2WCS*EFV300 3/4 Check 1250 2 13 None 16 (1) Normally de-energized in the closed position and the power source removed for main control room fire concerns.
(*) Pressure Rating - Inlet/Outlet Key to Manufacturer 1 = Velan Corp. 12 = Henry Pratt Co.
2 = Posi-Seal 13 = Dragon 3 = Anchor-Darling 14 = Dikkers 4 = Atwood & Morill 15 = Westinghouse 5 = Copes-Vulcan 16 = Enertech 6 = Target Rock 17 = BNL Industries, Inc.
7 = Gulf & Western 18 = Edward 8 = Crosby 19 = Control Components, Inc.
9 = Clow 20 = Valcor 10 = GPE Controls 21 = Weir 11 = Contromatics Chapter 03 3.9A-82 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.9A-12 (Sheet 14 of 16)
ACTIVE VALVES (BOP)
Key to Valve Operator/Manufacturer 1 = Motor/Limitorque 2 = Air/Bettis 3 = Electrohydraulic/Borg-Warner 4 = Pneumatic/Parker-Hannifin (cylinder) 5 = Air/Anchor-Darling 6 = Air/Parker-Hannifin (piston) 7 = Target Rock 8 = (Deleted) 9 = Electrohydraulic/Paul Monroe/Enertech 10 = Air/Control Components 11 = Valcor 12 = Air/Copes-Vulcan Key to Active Functions 1 = Relieve pressure from suppression chamber to drywell.
2 = Pressure control (open and close) for self-cleaning strainers for service water pumps.
3 = Hydrogen recombiner isolation (active function to open required only after approximately 2 days following a LOCA).
4 = Pressure relief.
5 = Computer room isolation (safety class change).
6 = Temperature control of control room air-conditioning unit.
7 = Temperature control of relay room air-conditioning unit.
8 = High radiation isolation valve.
9 = Containment isolation during LOCA.
10 = Open to provide flow path to GTS from reactor building ventilation system.
11 = GTS filter train operation.
12 = GTS filter train isolation upon high temperature of one of the GTS trains.
13 = Modulate to maintain the required reactor building pressure differential. (Following design basis accidents and transients.)
14 = Isolation between GTS and CPS.
15 = (Deleted) 16 = Primary containment isolation.
17 = Isolation valves for penetrations through primary containment wall.
18 = Drywell sample selector valves.
19 = (Deleted) 20 = (Deleted) 21 = Vacuum breaker, water hammer mitigation for main steam SRV discharge piping.
22 = Prevent reverse flow.
23 = HPCS system injection valve.
24 = HPCS suction from 2CNS-TK1B, isolates on low level in tank.
25 = HPCS suction from suppression pool, opens on low level in 2CNS-TK1B.
26 = HPCS system test valve to be closed to ensure maximum flow is injected into the vessel. Valve is opened to allow flow to return to suppression pool during full flow.
27 = LPCS system test valve to be closed on LOCA signal to ensure maximum flow is injected into the vessel.
28 = Open for LPCS system injection and close for containment isolation when LPCS service is terminated.
29 = LPCS system test valve to be closed to ensure maximum flow is injected into condensate tank.
30 = Prevent reverse flow and provide pressure boundary.
Chapter 03 3.9A-83 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.9A-12 (Sheet 15 of 16)
ACTIVE VALVES (BOP)
Key to Active Functions (contd.)
31 = Minimum flow bypass to protect pump. Close on discharge line flow signal. A vent hole was drilled in the disc of 2CSL*MOV107 to prevent pressure locking.
32 = Containment isolation on low suppression pool level, and open to provide suction flow path.
33 = Reactor vessel drain line isolation and class break (ASME III to ANSI B31.1).
34 = Sample isolation.
35 = SFC loop isolation.
36 = Open to provide makeup for spent fuel pool.
37 = Cask handling area isolation.
38 = RCIC turbine drain pot drain isolation.
39 = Cooling loop shutoff valve.
40 = Containment isolation, open for injection.
41 = Isolates RCIC test return.
42 = Open to allow lube oil cooling.
43 = RCIC turbine steam supply valve.
44 = RCIC turbine exhaust - containment isolation.
45 = Safety class change isolation.
46 = Isolates on low CST level.
47 = Opens on low CST level.
48 = Turbine exhaust vacuum relief.
49 = LPCI injection.
50 = Shutdown cooling.
51 = RHR/SWP cross-connect isolation for post-LOCA containment flooding; they are modified to meet the requirements of Generic Letter 95-07.
52 = System boundary isolation.
53 = Suppression pool cooling.
54 = RHR pump miniflow.
55 = Containment spray.
56 = Overpressure protection.
57 = Vacuum breaker/water hammer mitigation.
58 = (Deleted) 59 = Automatic depressurization system.
60 = Prevent excess flow.
61 = (Deleted) 62 = Hydrogen/oxygen analyzer isolation valves to open on loss of offsite power.
63 = SWP/CCP crosstie isolation for SFC heat exchanger.
64 = SWP/CCP crosstie for RHR pump seal coolers.
65 = SWP supply to/from diesel generators.
66 = Standby liquid control injection.
67 = SWP supply to/from RHR heat exchangers.
68 = SWP supply to/from safety-related unit coolers/chillers.
69 = SWP pump discharge valves. Open and close with pump start and stop.
70 = SWP makeup to CWS.
71 = SWP divisional cross-connect isolation.
72 = Intake bay cross-connect isolation.
Chapter 03 3.9A-84 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.9A-12 (Sheet 16 of 16)
ACTIVE VALVES (BOP)
Key to Active Functions (contd.)
73 = Intake bay traveling screen bypass.
74 = LPCS injection.
75 = Allow flow to ADS accumulator tanks.
76 = Allow emergency nitrogen flow.
77 = HPCS system suppression pool supply line.
78 = Allow flow in the forward direction.
79 = (Deleted) 80 = RCIC turbine exhaust.
81 = (Deleted) 82 = RCIC system suppression pool supply line.
83 = CMS atmosphere sample valves.
84 = Maintain secondary containment integrity during operation of alternate drywell cooling system.
85 = Maintain secondary containment integrity during SWP chemical cleaning. Note: During normal plant operation, valve/piping assemblies (2SWP*V1194/V1195 and 2SWP*V1196/V1197) will be removed and penetrations will be secured with blind flanges.
86 = Provides secondary containment integrity.
87 = Open for RCIC injection and close for containment/reactor isolation.
88 = Fuel oil day tank transfer line.
89 = Opens for containment flooding; they are modified to meet the requirements of Generic Letter 95-07.
90 = Emergency makeup to spent fuel pool.
91 = SWP/CCP crosstie for SFC heat exchanger. Open to provide service water flow to SFC heat exchanger.
92 = Close on low header pressure to isolate SWP supply line to diesel generator.
93 = Flow/temperature modulation only.
94 = Close to isolate steam line break.
95 = Open for pseudo LPCI mode of RHR.
96 = (Deleted) 97 = The pressure relief valve is not required to maintain pressure boundary. It provides overpressure protection for the HVK system. It meets the requirements of ASME Section VIII.
98 = Local Manual Operation Chapter 03 3.9A-85 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.9A-13 (Sheet 1 of 3)
LOAD COMBINATIONS FOR COMPONENT SUPPORTS AND STRESS LIMITS FOR PLATE AND SHELL-TYPE SUPPORTS A. Load Combinations for Component Supports Plant Condition Loading Combination Service Level Normal DL+S+D+R+A+E A Upset DL+S+D1+R+A+E+D B Emergency Not Applicable C Faulted DL+S+D2+E+D D KEY:
To Loading Combinations DL = Dead load S = Superimposed loads D1,D2 = Dynamic Loads 1 and 2, respectively (for definitions, see Table 3.9A-6)
R = Restrained thermal expansion A = Anchor and support movement E = Environmental loads D = Other external dynamic loads NOTES: For each operating condition, the loadings as given in the table are to be considered simultaneously. Symbols used are defined in the key.
The specific loads of each type which are applied during the applicable operating condition are dependent on the particular system conditions. The following listing identifies some of these specific loads which are used as a general checklist when determining loading conditions as related to plant operating conditions.
Dead Load Component maximum operating weight (with appurtenances)
Hydrostatic test weight Operational test weight Component support weight Chapter 03 3.9A-86 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.9A-13 (Sheet 2 of 3)
LOAD COMBINATIONS FOR COMPONENT SUPPORTS AND STRESS LIMITS FOR PLATE AND SHELL-TYPE SUPPORTS Superimposed Pressure Temperature Piping system reactions LOCA building deflections Dynamic OBE SSE Pipe rupture Hydrodynamic loads Jet impingement Missile impact Vibrations Handling loads (construction, installation, servicing)
Thermal transients Water hammer Steam hammer Valve trips Anchor and Support Movement OBE/SSE effects Thermal growth LOCA Environmental Radiation Moisture Chemicals Chapter 03 3.9A-87 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.9A-13 (Sheet 3 of 3)
LOAD COMBINATIONS FOR COMPONENT SUPPORTS AND STRESS LIMITS FOR PLATE AND SHELL-TYPE SUPPORTS B. Stress Limits for Plate and Shell-Type Supports Service Level 1 (1 + 2) 3 A 1.0S 1.5S 0.5S B 1.0S 1.5S 0.5S C 1.2S 1.8S 0.5S D lesser of lesser of 0.5S 1.5S or 2.25S or 0.4Su 0.6Su KEY:
To Stress Limits 1 = Membrane stress 2 = Bending stress 3 = Maximum tensile stress at the contact surface of a weld producing a tensile load in a direction through the thickness of a plate S = ASME Section III allowable stress Su = ASME Section III minimum ultimate tensile strength Chapter 03 3.9A-88 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.9A-14 (Sheet 1 of 1)
LOAD CONDITIONS FOR PIPE SUPPORTS Load Condition Plant Number Condition Loads Description Allowable Stress 1 Normal Primary sustained DL ASME III (1974, including Summer 1974 Addenda), Subsection NF; and Subsection NA, App. XVII, Article XVII-2000 2 Upset Primary sustained and occasional DL+SRSS (OBEI,OCCU) associated with upset 3 Upset All primary and secondary DL+THER+SRSS (OBET,OCCU) 4 Emergency Primary sustained and occasional DL+SRSS (OBEI,OCCE) ASME III (1974, including Summer 1974 associated with emergency Addenda), Subsection NA, App. XVII, Article XVII-2110 5 Faulted Primary sustained and occasional DL+SRSS (SSEI,OCCF) ASME III (1974, including Summer 1974 associated with faulted Addenda), App. F, Paragraph F-1370 KEY: DL = Dead load OBEI = Operating basis earthquake inertia load of piping OBET = Operating basis earthquake total, i.e., the absolute sum of the amplitudes of OBE inertia load and load due to OBE anchor movements OCC(U,E,F) = Primary occasional mechanical operating loads associated with upset, emergency, and faulted operating conditions, respectively, but excluding earthquake loads. Occasional loads may be vibratory or nonvibratory for load combination purposes. They are combined with each other and with other load types in the same way as in the associated piping analysis. (See notes to load combinations for piping, Table 3.9A-2.) The maximum and the minimum response from each time history is used with the associated sign in the combination.
SSE = Safe shutdown earthquake inertia load of piping THER* = Thermal load; a secondary load THER 1 = Selecting the three moments from that thermal load whose three moments represent the maximum square root of the sum of the squares of the moments. The forces selected are the most (+) of each force component along with its proper sign (each force component chosen may come from a different thermal load).
THER 2 = Same as for THER 1, except that the most (-) of each force component with signs is chosen.
THER 3 = Forces and moments are those for the normal operating condition.
- For feedwater piping, includes applicable thermal stratification load.
Chapter 03 3.9A-89 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.9A-15 (Sheet 1 of 3)
REQUIREMENTS FOR SAFETY CLASSES 2 AND 3 INSTRUMENT AND PNEUMATIC TUBING AND SUPPORTS (TUBING SIZES UP TO AND INCLUDING 1/2 IN O.D.)*
- 1. Design loads and limits are calculated in accordance with ASME III.
- 2. Procurement of material is in accordance with ASME III except that alternate QA Category I materials may be used for supports. See Figure 3.9A-1.
- 3. Fabrication and installation control utilizes QA Category I material marking of exclusive purchase of QA Category I materials with control to point of use.
- 4. Automatic Class 2 welding follows the requirements of ASME III Code Case N-127 except that Category I documentation is used in lieu of N-127 and the Authorized Nuclear Inspector (ANI) involvement as noted in 5.a below.
- 5. Fabrication, installation, NDE, and hydrostatic inspections are as follows:
- a. Pressure boundary welds (1) Welders and welding procedures are qualified to ASME Section IX.
(2) 100% documentation of completion of all construction steps by Contractor's construction prior to release to Contractor's QA Program.
(3) 100% liquid penetrant check of Class 2 field welds (automatic and manual) and visual inspection of all Class 3 field welds by Contractor FQC documented by the Contractor's QA Program.
(4) Contractor FQC in-process inspection documented by the Contractor's QA Program.
- This program also applies to safety-related instrument tubing for radiation protection process monitoring up to 1 in when the process piping, equipment, or component is not ASME Section III construction (e.g., HVAC duct).
Chapter 03 3.9A-90 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.9A-15 (Sheet 2 of 3)
REQUIREMENTS FOR SAFETY CLASSES 2 AND 3 INSTRUMENT AND PNEUMATIC TUBING AND SUPPORTS (5) Pressure test to be performed in accordance with ASME Section III pressure test requirements and document via pressure test reports.
(6) Surveillance inspections by the ANI of approximately 10 percent of in-process activities (welding and hydro) documented by SIS report.
(7) Compression fittings are an acceptable substitute for welded fittings.
- b. Compression Fittings (1) Compression fittings which meet ASME material requirements and the following installation requirements shall be used. The specific design criteria used in the application of compression fittings at Unit 2 are ASME Section III, Subsections NC/ND, Paragraphs 3671.4 and 3673.2.
(2) 100-percent visual inspection of compression fitting makeup is performed by construction prior to release to Contractor's QA Program.
(3) Documentation of the completion of all construction is required.
(4) 100-percent inspection of fitting makeup is performed by FQC using vendor-supplied tools and procedures.
(5) Documentation of the FQC inspection is required.
(6) Pressure test to be performed in accordance with ASME Section III pressure test requirements and document via pressure test reports.
- c. Supports (1) Welders and welding procedures are qualified to Category I specification requirements invoking ASME Section IX or AWS standards as appropriate to the support type.
(2) 100-percent documentation of completion of all construction steps by Contractor's construction prior to release to Contractor's QA Program.
Chapter 03 3.9A-91 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.9A-15 (Sheet 3 of 3)
REQUIREMENTS FOR SAFETY CLASSES 2 AND 3 INSTRUMENT AND PNEUMATIC TUBING AND SUPPORTS (3) 100-percent Contractor FQC visual inspection of all field welds using ASME, ANSI, or AWS acceptance criteria as required in accordance with the installation specification (except undercut not exceeding 1/32-in deep is acceptable in lieu of AWS D1.1 requirements).
These inspections shall be documented by the Contractor's QA Program. For alternate weld inspection, refer to Section 3.8.4.6.
(4) ASTM A515, Gr 65, may be considered an AWS D1.1 prequalified group no. 1 material.
- 6. Visual examination acceptance for pressure-retaining field welds.
All weld surfaces are sufficiently free from coarse ripples, grooves, overlaps, abrupt ridges, and valleys to allow examination. The following indications are unacceptable:
- a. Cracks, external surface.
- b. Fillet weld dimension not meeting Figure NC/ND 4427-1 or butt weld reinforcement greater than specified in Figure NC/ND 4427-1.
- c. Lack of fusion on the surface.
- 7. Unsatisfactory conditions noted by the SWEC FQC on SIS reports are to be addressed and resolved via existing Engineering and QA procedures.
Chapter 03 3.9A-92 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.9A-16 (Sheet 1 of 1)
BASIS FOR DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION OF ASME AND NON-ASME PIPING SUPPORTS Criteria ASME III Program AISC Program Design Per ASME a) Per AISC b) Load combinations and allowable stresses per Section 3.8.4.3 Material Weld filler metal Procured - ASME III Procured - ASME II Standard components Procured - ASME III Procured - AISC Bulk material Procured - ASME III Procured - AISC Traceability Class 1 - Heat number to Certified Material Cat. I - A-36 steel traceable until Test Report Class 2, 3 - To Certificate of delivery and placed in segregated storage Compliance Cat. I - High-strength steel traceable at all times to its locations in structure Welding Welders Qualified to ASME IX Qualified to AWS D1.1 or ASME IX Procedures/weld techniques Qualified to ASME IX Qualified or prequalified to AWS D1.1 or qualified to ASME IX Inspectors Qualified to ASME III Welding inspectors qualified to ANSI N45.2.6 Inspection criteria Per ASME III Per RG 1.94 (and ANSI N45.2.5) as described in Table 1.8-1 Welding inspection per AWS D1.1 Examination Per ASME III Visual examination per AWS D1.1, followed by RT, UT, or MT examination of full-penetration welds Authorized nuclear inspector Surveillance inspection based on hold points NA per SWEC QA requirements; 100% review of documentation per SWEC QA Program In-service inspection ASME Section XI NA Chapter 03 3.9A-93 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR 3.9B MECHANICAL SYSTEMS AND COMPONENTS (GE SCOPE OF SUPPLY) 3.9B.1 Special Topics for Mechanical Components 3.9B.1.1 Design Transients This section describes the transients that are used in the design of major NSSS ASME Section III, Safety Class 1 core support, reactor internals, and CRD components. The number of cycles or events for each transient is included. These transients are included in the design specifications and/or stress reports for components.
Transients or combinations of transients are classified with respect to the component operating condition categories identified as Normal, Upset, Emergency, Faulted, or Testing in ASME Section III as applicable. (The first four conditions correspond to Service Levels A, B, C, and D, respectively.)
3.9B.1.1.1 Control Rod Drive Transients The normal and test service load cycles used for the design and fatigue analysis for the 40-yr life of the CRD are as follows:
Transient Category Cycles
- 1. Reactor startup/shutdown Normal/upset 120
- 2. Vessel pressure tests Normal/upset 130
- 3. Vessel overpressure Normal/upset 10
- 5. Operational scrams Normal/upset 300
- 6. Jog cycles Normal/upset 30,000
- 7. Shim/drive cycles Normal/upset 1,000 In addition to the above cycles, the following have been considered in the design of the CRD.
Transient Category Cycles
- 8. Scram with inoperative Normal/upset 10 buffer
- 9. Scram with stuck control Normal/upset 1 blade
- 10. Operating basis earthquake Normal/upset 10 (OBE)*
- 11. Safe shutdown earthquake Faulted 1 (SSE)**
Chapter 03 3.9B-1 Rev. 25, October 2022
- 12. Control rod ejection Faulted 1 accident All ASME Section III, Class 1 components of the CRD have been evaluated according to the requirements of the Code. The capacity of the CRD system to withstand emergency and faulted conditions is verified by tests rather than analysis.
3.9B.1.1.2 Control Rod Drive Housing and In-core Housing Transients The number of transients, their cycles, and classification as considered in the design and fatigue analysis of the CRD housing and in-core housing are as follows:
Transient Category Cycles
- 1. Normal startup and Normal/upset 120 shutdown
- 2. Vessel pressure tests Normal/upset 130
- 3. Vessel overpressure tests Normal/upset 10
- 4. Interruption of feedwater Normal/upset 80 flow
- 5. Scrams Normal/upset 200
- 6. OBE Normal/upset 10
- 7. SSE Faulted 1
- 8. Stuck rod scram Normal/upset 1
- 9. Scram with inoperative Normal/upset 10 buffer
- The frequency of occurrence of this transient would indicate emergency category. However, for conservatism the OBE condition is analyzed as an upset condition. Ten peak OBE cycles are postulated.
- SSE is a faulted condition; however, in the stress analysis it was treated as emergency with lower stress limits.
3.9B.1.1.3 Hydraulic Control Unit Transients The transients used in the design and analysis of the HCU and its components are:
Chapter 03 3.9B-2 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR Transient Category Cycles
- 1. Reactor startup/shutdown Normal/upset 120
- 2. Scram tests Normal/upset 300
- 3. Operational scrams Normal/upset 300
- 4. Jog cycles Normal/upset 30,000
- 6. OBE Normal/upset 10
- 7. SSE Faulted 1 3.9B.1.1.4 Core Support and Reactor Internals Transients The cycles listed in Table 3.9B-1 were considered in the design and fatigue analysis for the reactor internals.
3.9B.1.1.5 Main Steam System Transients See Section 3.9A.1.
3.9B.1.1.6 Recirculation System Transients The following transients are considered in the stress analysis of the recirculation piping:
Transient Category Cycles
- 1. Startup Normal 120
- 2. Turbine roll and increase Normal 120 to power
- 3. Loss of feedwater heater Upset 10
- 4. Partial feedwater heater Upset 70 bypass
- 5. Scrams Upset 180
- 6. Shutdown Normal 111
- 8. Single SRV blowdown Upset 8
- 9. Hydrotest Test 130 Chapter 03 3.9B-3 Rev. 25, October 2022
- 10. OBE Upset 50 3.9B.1.1.7 Reactor Assembly Transients The reactor assembly includes the RPV, support skirt, shroud support, and shroud plate. The cycles listed in Table 3.9B-1 were specified in the reactor assembly design and fatigue analysis.
3.9B.1.1.8 Main Steam Isolation Valve Transients The transients considered in the analysis of the MSIVs are as follows:
Transient Category Cycles
- 1. Heatup from 70°F to 552°F Normal/upset 300 (100°F/hr)
- 2. Cooldown from 552°F to Normal/upset 300 70°F (100°F/hr)
- 3. Small temperature changes Normal/upset 600 of 29°F (either increase or decrease) at any temperature between 70°F and 552°F
- 4. Temperature changes of Normal/upset 200 50°F (either increase or decrease) at any temperature between 70°F and 552°F
- 5. Loss of feedwater pumps in - 10 which the temperature jumps from 552°F to 573°F in 3 sec, drops down to 525°F in 9 min, rises to 573°F in 6 min, drops down to 485°F in 7 min, rises to 573°F again in 8 min, and drops down to 485°F in 7 min
- 6. Turbine bypass, single - 8 relief or safety valve blowdown in which the temperature drops from 552°F to 375°F in 10 min
- 7. Reactor overpressure with Emergency 1 delay scram in which the temperature rises from 552°F to 586°F in 2 sec, Chapter 03 3.9B-4 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR and the pressure rises from 1050 to 1375 psig immediately followed by cooling transient in which the temperature drops from 586°F to 561°F in 30 sec.
The pressure drops down to 1125 psig.
- 8. Automatic blowdown in Emergency 1 which the temperature changes from 552°F to 375°F in 3.3 min immediately followed by a change from 375°F to 259°F in 19 min (300°F/hr)
- 9. Pipe rupture and blowdown Faulted 1 in which the temperature changes from 552°F to 259°F in 15 sec
- 10. Installed hydrotests at 100°F
- a. 1250 psig Testing 130
- b. 1575 psig Testing 3 3.9B.1.1.9 Safety/Relief Valve Transients The transients considered in the analysis of the SRVs are as follows:
Transient Category Cycles
- 1. Preoperational and Normal/upset 150 in-service testing (100°F/hr)
- 2. Startup (100°F/hr) and Normal/upset 120 pressure increase (0 psig to 1,000 psig)
- 3. Shutdown (100°F/hr, Normal/upset 120 pressure decrease to 0 psig)
- 4. Scram Normal/upset 180
- 5. System pressure and Emergency/ 1 temperature decay from faulted 1,000 psig and 546°F to 35 psig and 281°F within 15 sec
- 6. System temperature change Emergency/ 1 from 546° to 375°F within faulted Chapter 03 3.9B-5 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR 3.3 min and from 375° to 281°F at 300°F/hr.
Pressure change from 1,000 to 35 psig.
- 7. System temperature change Emergency/ 8 from 546° to 375°F within faulted 10 min and from 375° to 281°F at 100°F/hr.
Pressure change from 1,000 to 35 psig.
- 8. System temperature change Emergency/ 1 from 546° to 583°F within faulted 2 sec, from 583° to 538°F within 30 sec, and from 538° to 400°F and return to 546°F at 100°F/hr.
Pressure change from 1,000 to 1,350 psig, then to 240 psig and return to 1,000 psig.
- 9. System temperature Emergency/ 10 changes, greater than faulted 30°F, from 561° to 500°F within 7 min and from 500° to 400°F and return to normal operating temperature of 546°F at 100°F/hr. Pressure change from 1,000 to 1,180 to 240 psig and return to normal operating of 1,000 psig.
Paragraph NB-3552 of ASME Section III excludes various transients and provides a means for combining those that are not excluded. Review and approval of the equipment supplier's certified calculations provides assurance of proper accounting of the specified transients.
The SRVs used for Unit 2 are those normally supplied for BWR 6 projects. The stress (including fatigue) analysis of this SRV model is performed on the basis of BWR 6 plant conditions. These include transients that are anticipated to be more numerous and more severe than the transients shown above for Unit 2. The SRV is, therefore, qualified for the above transients.
3.9B.1.1.10 Recirculation Flow Control Valve Transients The following pressure and temperature transients were considered in the design of the recirculation system flow control valve (FCV):
Chapter 03 3.9B-6 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR Transient Category Cycles
- 1. Startup (100°F/hr heatup Normal/upset 300 rate 70°F to design temperature)
- 2. Small temperature step Normal/upset 600 changes (29°F step)
- 3. 50°F step changes Normal/upset 200
- 4. SRV blowdowns (single Normal/upset 8 valve) 522° to 375°F in 10 min)
- 5. Safety valve transient Normal/upset 1 (110% of design pressure)
- 6. Installed hydrostatic tests
- a. 1,300 psig Testing 130
- b. 1,670 psig Testing 3
- 7. Automatic blowdown 552° to Emergency 1 375°F in 3.3 min, followed by a change from 375° to 281°F in 19 min
- 8. Improper start of pump Emergency 1 in cold loop over a period of 15 sec 3.9B.1.1.11 Recirculation Pump Transients The following pressure transients were considered in the design of the recirculation pumps:
Transient Category Cycles
- 1. Startup (100°F/hr heatup Normal/upset 300 rate 70°F to design temperature)
- 2. Small temperature changes Normal/upset 600 (29°F step)
- 3. 50°F step changes Normal/upset 200
- 4. SRV blowdowns (single Normal/upset 8 valve) (552° to 375°F in 10 min)
- 5. Safety valve transient Normal/upset 1 (110% of design pressure)
Chapter 03 3.9B-7 Rev. 25, October 2022
- 6. Installed hydrotests
- a. 1,300 psig Testing 130
- b. 1,670 psig Testing 3
- 7. Automatic blowdown (552° Emergency 1 to 375°F in 3.3 min and 375° to 281°F in 19 min)
- 8. Improper start of pump Emergency 1 in cold loop (100° to 552°F over a period of 15 sec)
- 9. Cooling transient, 552° to Faulted 1 281°F in 15 sec 3.9B.1.1.12 Recirculation Gate Valve Transients The following transients are considered in the design of the recirculation gate valves:
Transient Cycles
- 1. 50° to 575° to 50°F at a rate of 100°F/hr 300
- 2. 29°F between limits of 50° and 575°F, 600 instantaneous
- 3. 50°F between limits of 50° and 546°F, 200 instantaneous
- 4. 552° to 375°F, instantaneous 9
- 5. 546° to 281°F, instantaneous 1
- 6. 130° to 546°F, instantaneous 1
- 7. 110% of design pressure at 575°F 1
- 8. 1,300 psi at 100°F installed hydrostatic 130 test
- 9. 1,670 psi at 100°F installed hydrostatic 3 test 3.9B.1.2 Computer Programs Used in Analysis The following sections discuss computer programs used in the analysis of specific components. (Computer programs were not used in the analysis of all components, thus, not all components are listed.)
The NSSS programs can be divided into two categories, GE programs and vendor programs.
GE Programs Chapter 03 3.9B-8 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR Verification of the following GE programs has been performed in accordance with the requirements of 10CFR50 Appendix B. Evidence of the verification of input, output, and methodology is documented in GE Design Record Files.
SEISM FTFLGO1 MASS ANSYS SNAP (MULTISHELL) POSUM HEATER PDA BILRD ANSI7 EZPYP DYSEA PISYS SAP4G SPECA COSMOS/M Vendor Programs Verification of the following vendor (CB&I) programs is assured by contractual requirements between GE and the vendor. In accordance with the requirements, the QA procedure of these proprietary programs used in the design of N-stamped equipment is in full compliance with 10CFR50 Appendix B.
711 GENOZZ 9-28 TGRV 953 948 NAPALM 962 E0962A 1666 1027 984 1684 846 992 GASP E1702A 781 KALNINS 1037 DUNHAM'S 955 MESHPLOT 979 ASFAST 1335 1028 7-66 TEMAPR 1606 & 1657 HAP 1038 7-67 PRINCESS 1635 3.9B.1.2.1 Reactor Pressure Vessel and Internals Reactor Pressure Vessel CB&I Program 7 GENOZZ The GENOZZ computer program is used to proportion barrel and double taper-type nozzles to comply with the specifications of ASME Section III and contract documents. The program will either design such a configuration or analyze the configuration input into it. If the input configuration does not comply with the specifications, the program modifies the design and redesigns it to yield an acceptable result.
CB&I Program 9 NAPALM The basis for the program NAPALM (Nozzle Analysis Program - All Loads Mechanical) is to analyze nozzles for mechanical loads and find the maximum stress intensity and location.
The program analyzes at specified locations from the point of application of the mechanical loads. At each location, the program calculates the maximum stress intensity for both the inside and outside surfaces of the nozzle, and its angular location around the circumference of the nozzle from the reference location. The principal stresses are also printed. The stresses resulting from each component of loading (bending, axial, shear, and torsion) are printed, as well as the loads that caused these stresses.
Chapter 03 3.9B-9 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR CB&I Program 1027 This program is a computerized version of the analysis method contained in the Welding Research Council Bulletin No. 107, August 1965. Part of the program provides for the determination of the shell stress intensities (S) at each of four cardinal points at both the upper and lower shell plate surfaces (ordinarily considered outside and inside surfaces) around the perimeter of a loaded attachment on a cylindrical or spherical vessel. With the determination of each S, the components of that S (two normal stresses, x and z , and one shear stress ) are also determined. This program provides the same information as the manual calculation, and the input data are essentially the geometry of the vessel and attachment.
CB&I Program 846 This program computes the required thickness of a hemispherical head with a large number of circular parallel penetrations by means of the area replacement method in accordance with the ASME Section III. In cases where the penetration has a counterbore, the thickness is determined so that the counterbore does not penetrate the outside surface of the head.
CB&I Program 781 - KALNINS This program is a thin elastic shell program for shells of revolution. The basic method of analysis was developed and published by Dr. A. Kalnins of Lehigh University(1).
Extensive revisions and improvements have been made by Dr. J.
Endicott to yield the CB&I version of this program. The program is used to establish the shell influence coefficient and to perform detail stress analysis of the vessel.
The stresses and the deformations of the vessel can be computed for any combination of the following axisymmetric loading:
- 1. Preload condition.
- 2. Internal pressure.
- 3. Thermal load.
CB&I Program 979 - ASFAST The ASFAST program performs stress analysis of axisymmetric, bolted closure flanges between head and cylindrical shell.
CB&I Program 7 TEMAPR This program reduces any arbitrary temperature gradient through the wall thickness to an equivalent linear gradient. The resulting equivalent gradient has the same average temperature and the same temperature-moment as the given temperature distribution. Input consists of plate thickness and actual temperature distribution. Output contains average temperature and total gradient through the wall thickness. The program is written in FORTRAN IV language.
CB&I Program 7 PRINCESS The PRINCESS program calculates the maximum alternating stress amplitudes from a series of stress values by the method in ASME Section III.
Chapter 03 3.9B-10 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR CB&I Program 9 TGRV The TGRV program is used to calculate temperature distributions in structures or vessels. Although it is primarily a program for solving the heat conduction equations, some provisions have been made for including radiation and convection effects at the surfaces of the vessel.
The TGRV program is a greatly modified version of the TIGER heat transfer program written about 1958 at Knolls Atomic Power Laboratory by A. P. Bray. There have been many versions of TIGER in existence including TIGER II, TIGER II B, TIGER IV, and TIGER V, in addition to TGRV.
The program uses an electrical network analogy to obtain the temperature distribution of any given system as a function of time.
The finite difference representation of the three-dimensional equations of heat transfer are repeatedly solved for small time increments and continually summed. Linear mathematics are used to solve the mesh network for every time interval. Included in the analysis are the three basic forms of heat transfer; i.e.,
conduction, radiation, and convection, as well as internal heat generation.
Given any odd-shaped structure, which is represented by a three-dimensional field, its geometry and physical properties, boundary conditions, and internal heat generation rates, TGRV calculates and gives as output the steady-state or transient temperature distributions in the structure as a function of time.
CB&I Program 962 - E0962A Program E0962A is one of a group of programs (E0953A, E1606A, E0962A, E0992N, E1037N, and E0984N) used together to determine the temperature distribution and stresses in pressure vessel components by the finite element method.
Program E0962A is primarily a plotting program. Using the nodal temperatures calculated by program E1606A or program E0928A, and the node and element cards for the finite element model, it calculates and plots lines of constant temperature (isotherms). These isotherm plots are used as part of the stress report to present the results of the thermal analysis. They are also very useful in determining at which points in time the thermal stresses should be determined.
In addition to its plotting capability, the program can determine the temperatures of some of the nodal points by interpolation. This feature of the program is intended primarily for use with the compatible TGRV and finite element models generated by program E0953A.
CB&I Program 984 Program 984 is used to calculate the stress intensity of the stress differences, on a component level, between two different stress conditions. The calculation of the stress intensity of stress component differences (the range of stress intensity) is required by ASME Section III.
CB&I Program 992 - GASP The GASP program, originated by Prof. E. L.
Wilson of the University of California at Berkeley, uses the finite Chapter 03 3.9B-11 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR element method to determine the stresses and displacements of plane or axisymmetric structures of arbitrary geometry and is written in FORTRAN IV(2). The structures may have arbitrary geometry and linear or nonlinear material properties. The loadings may be thermal, mechanical, accelerational, or a combination of these.
The structure to be analyzed is broken up into a finite number of discrete elements or finite elements which are interconnected at a finite number of nodal points or nodes. The actual loads on the structure are simulated by statically equivalent loads acting at the appropriate nodes. The basic input to the program consists of the geometry of the stress model and the boundary conditions. The program then gives the stress components at the center of each element and the displacements at the nodes, consistent with the prescribed boundary conditions.
CB&I Program 1037 - DUNHAM'S DUNHAM'S program is a finite ring element stress analysis program. It determines the stresses and displacements of axisymmetric structures of arbitrary geometry subjected to either axisymmetric loads or nonaxisymmetric loads represented by Fourier series. This program is similar to the GASP program (CB&I 992). The major differences are that DUNHAM'S can handle nonaxisymmetric loads (which requires that each node have 3 degrees of freedom) and the material properties for DUNHAM'S must be constant. As in GASP, the loadings may be thermal, mechanical, and accelerational.
CB&I Program 1335 To obtain stresses in the shroud support, the baffle plate must be considered as a continuous circular plate. This program makes this modification and allows the baffle plate to be included in CB&I Program 781 as two isotropic parts and an orthotropic portion at the middle (where the diffuser holes are located).
CB&I Programs 1606 and 1657 - HAP The HAP program is an axisymmetric nonlinear heat analysis program. It is a finite element program and is used to determine nodal temperatures in a two-dimensional or axisymmetric body subjected to transient disturbances. Programs 1606 and 1657 are identical except that 1606 has a larger storage area allocated and can thus be used to solve larger problems. The model for Program 1606 is compatible with CB&I stress Programs 992 and 1037.
CB&I Program 1635 Program 1635 offers three features to aid the stress analyst in preparing a stress report:
- 1. Generates punched card input for Program 7-67 (PRINCESS) from the stress output of Program 781 (KALNINS).
- 2. Writes a stress table in a format that can be incorporated into a final stress report.
Chapter 03 3.9B-12 Rev. 25, October 2022
- 3. Has the option to remove through-wall thermal bending stress and report these results in a stress table similar to the one mentioned in Item 2.
CB&I Program 953 The program is a general purpose program which does the following:
- 1. Prepares input cards for the thermal model.
- 2. Prepares the node and element cards for the finite element model.
- 3. Sets up the model in such a way that the nodal points in the TGRV model correspond to points in the finite element model. They have the same number so that there is no possibility of confusion in transferring temperature data from one program to the other.
CB&I Program 1666 This program is primarily written to calculate the temperature differences at selected critical sections of the nuclear reactor vessel components at different time points of thermal transients during its life of operation and to list them all in a tabular form. Since there is no involved calculation applicable particularly to nuclear components, this program can be used with any other kind of model that is subjected to thermal transients over a period of time. This program helps ascertain the time points in thermal transients when the thermal stresses may be critical.
CB&I Program 1684 This program, an expansion of Program 984, is written to expedite the fatigue analysis of nuclear reactor components as required by ASME Section III. The features of this program allow the user to easily perform the complete secondary stress and fatigue evaluation including partial fatigue usage calculation of a component in one run. An additional option allows the user to completely document the input stress values in a format suitable for a stress analysis report. The program is written to allow for a minimum amount of data handling by the user once the initial deck is established.
CB&I Program E1702A This program evaluates the stress-intensity factor KI due to pressure, temperature, and mechanical load stresses for a number of different stress conditions (times) and at a number of different locations (elements). It then calculates the maximum reference temperature nil ductility transition (RTNDT) the actual material can have based on a 1/4T flaw size and compares it with the ordered RTNDT. If the ordered RTNDT is larger than the maximum RTNDT, the maximum allowable flaw size is calculated. The rules of ASME Code Appendix G are used except that Welding Research Council (WRC) 175 can be used to calculate KI due to pressure in a nozzle-to-shell junction.
For a more thorough description of the fracture problem, see WRC Bulletin No. 175(3).
Chapter 03 3.9B-13 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR CB&I Program 955 - MESHPLOT This program plots input data used for finite element analysis. The program plots the finite element mesh in one of three ways: without labels, with node labels, or with element labels. The output consists of a listing and a plot. The listing gives all node points with their coordinates and all elements with their node points. The plot is a finite element model with the requested labels.
CB&I Program 1028 This program calculates the necessary form factors for the nodes of the model that simulates heat transfer by radiation.
Inputs are shape and dimensions of the head-to-skirt knuckle junction. The program is limited to junctions with a toroidal knuckle part.
CB&I Program 1038 This program calculates the loads required to satisfy the compatibility between the shroud baffle plate and the jet pump adaptors for a GE BWR vessel.
Vessel Internals Fuel Support Loads Program - SEISM SEISM computes the vertical fuel support loads using the component element methods in dynamics(4).
Other Programs The following programs are also used in the analysis of core support structures and other safety-related reactor internals: MASS, SNAP (MULTISHELL), and HEATER. These programs are described in detail in Section 4.1.
pc-Crack Program The pc-Crack program performs linear elastic fracture mechanics, elastic-plastic fracture mechanics, and limit load, in accordance with applicable codes and standards, to establish crack growth and weld overlay design. Verification of this program has been performed in accordance with the requirements of 10CFR50 Appendix B.
3.9B.1.2.2 Piping Piping Analysis Program - PISYS PISYS is a specialized computer code for piping load calculations. It utilizes selected stiffness matrices representing standard piping components, which are assembled to form a finite element model of a piping system. The technique relies on dividing the pipe model into several discrete substructures, called pipe elements, which are connected to each other via nodes called pipe joints. It is through these joints that the model interacts with the environment, and loading of the structure becomes possible. PISYS is based on linear classical elasticity in which the resultant deformation and stresses are proportional to the loading, and the superposition of loading is valid.
PISYS has a full range of static and dynamic analysis options that include distributed weight, thermal expansion, differential support motion modal extraction, response spectra, and time-history analysis by modal or direct integration. The PISYS program has been benchmarked against five NRC piping models for the option-of-Chapter 03 3.9B-14 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR response-spectrum analysis, and the results are documented in a report to the NRC, NEDO-24210(5).
Component Analysis - ANSI 7 The ANSI 7 program determines stress and accumulative usage factors in accordance with Subarticle NB-3600 of ASME Section III. The program was written to perform stress analysis in accordance with the ASME sample problem, and has been verified by reproducing the results of the sample problem analysis.
SUPERPIPE Computer Program The SUPERPIPE computer program is described in Appendix 3A.
Piping Dynamic Analysis Program - PDA The pipe whip analysis was performed using the PDA program to determine the response of a pipe subjected to the thrust force occurring after a pipe break. The program treats the situation in terms of a generic pipe break configuration, which involves a straight, uniform pipe fixed at one end and subjected to a time-dependent thrust force at the other end.
A typical restraint used to reduce the resulting deformation is also included at a location between the two ends.
Nonlinear and time-dependent stress-strain relations are used to model the pipe and the restraint. Similar to the popular elastic hinge concept, bending of the pipe is assumed to occur only at the fixed end and at the location supported by the restraint.
Shear deformation is neglected. The pipe bending moment-deflection (or rotation) relation used for these locations is obtained from a static nonlinear cantilever beam analysis.
Using moment-rotation relations, nonlinear equations of motion are formulated using energy considerations and the equations are numerically integrated in small time steps to yield the time-history of the pipe motion.
Piping Analysis Program - EZPYP EZPYP links the ANSI-7 and SAP programs. The EZPYP program can be used to run several SAP cases by making user-specified changes to a basic SAP pipe model. By controlling files and SAP runs, the EZPYP program gives the analyst the capability to perform a complete piping analysis in one computer run.
3.9B.1.2.3 Recirculation Pump The ANSYS code is used in the analysis of the recirculation pump casing for various thermal and mechanical loads during plant operating and postulated conditions.
In general, the finite element techniques are used to solve temperature distribution in heat transfer transient problems, and to perform stress analysis for various thermal and mechanical loadings by using the same finite element model representing the pump body.
The output of these programs is in the form of temperature profiles, Chapter 03 3.9B-15 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR deflections, and stresses at the nodal points of the finite element idealization of the pump structure.
3.9B.1.2.4 Emergency Core Cooling System Pumps and Motors Structural Analysis Program - SAP4G SAP4G is used to analyze the structural and functional integrity of the ECCS pump and motor systems. This is a general structural analysis program for static and dynamic analysis of linear elastic complex structures. The finite element displacement method is used to solve the displacements and stresses of each element of the structure. The structure can be composed of an unlimited number of three-dimensional truss, beam, plate, shell, solid, plate strain-plane stress and spring elements that are axisymmetric. The program can treat thermal and various forms of mechanical loading. The dynamic analysis includes mode superposition, time-history, and response spectrum analysis. Seismic loading and time-dependent pressure can be treated. The program is versatile and efficient in analyzing large and complex structural systems. The output contains displacements of each nodal point as well as stresses at the surface of each element.
Effects of Flange Joint Connections - FTFLGO1 The flange joints connecting the pump bowl castings are analyzed using FTFLGO1. This program uses the local forces and moments determined by SAP4G to perform flat flange calculations in accordance with the rules set forth in Appendix II and ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III.
Structural Analysis of Discharge Head - ANSYS ANSYS is used to analyze the pump discharge head flange and bolting taking into account the prying action developed by the flat face contact surface.
The program is described in detail in Section 4.1.
Beam Element Data Processing - POSUM POSUM is a computer code designed to process SAP-generated beam element data for pump or heat exchanger models. The purpose is to determine the load combination that would produce the maximum stress in a selected beam element. It is intended to be used on RHR heat exchangers with four nozzles or ECCS pumps with two nozzles.
3.9B.1.2.5 RHR Heat Exchangers Structural Analysis Program - SAP4G SAP4G is used to evaluate the structural and functional integrity of the RHR heat exchangers. A description of this program is provided in Section 3.9B.1.2.4.
Calculation of Shell Attachment Parameters and Coefficients/BILRD BILRD is used to calculate the shell attachment parameters and coefficients used in the stress analysis of the support-to-shell junction. The method, in accordance with WRC Bulletin No. 107, is implemented in BILRD to calculate local membrane stress due to the support reaction loads on the heat exchanger shell.
Chapter 03 3.9B-16 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR Beam Element Data Processing/POSUM POSUM is used to process SAP-generated beam element data. The description of this program is provided in Section 3.9B.1.2.4.
3.9B.1.2.6 Dynamic Load Analysis Dynamic Analysis Program - DYSEA DYSEA simulates a beam model in the annulus pressurization dynamic analysis. A description of DYSEA is provided in Section 4.1. DYSEA employs a preprocessor program named GEAPL. GEAPL converts pressure time-histories into time-varying loads and forcing functions for DYSEA. The overall resultant forces and moments time-histories at specified points of resolution can also be obtained from GEAPL.
Acceleration Response Spectrum Program - SPECA SPECA generates acceleration response spectra for an arbitrary input time-history of piece-wise linear accelerations, i.e., to compute maximum acceleration responses for a series of single degree-of-freedom systems subjected to the same input. It can accept acceleration time-histories from a random file. It also can generate the broadened/enveloped spectra when the spectral points are generated equally spaced on a logarithmic scale axis of period/frequency. This program is also used in seismic and SRV transient analyses.
3.9B.1.3 Experimental Stress Analysis The following sections list those NSSS components for which experimental stress analysis was used and provide a discussion of the analysis.
3.9B.1.3.1 Experimental Stress Analysis of Piping Components The following components have been tested to verify their design adequacy:
- 1. Snubbers
- 2. Pipe whip restraints Descriptions of the snubbers and pipe whip restraint tests are contained in Sections 3.9B.3.4 and 3.6B.2.2.2, respectively.
3.9B.1.3.2 Orificed Fuel Support, Vertical and Horizontal Load Tests A series of horizontal and vertical load tests were performed on the orificed fuel support (OFS) in order to verify the design. Results from these tests indicate that the seismic and hydrodynamic loading of the OFS are below allowable load limits, with a safety margin of at least 2.0 for normal, upset and faulted conditions. (The allowable load limits were arrived at by applying a 0.75 quality factor to the ASME Code allowables of 0.44 x test load for upset and 0.80 x test load for faulted condition.)
3.9B.1.4 Considerations for the Evaluation of Faulted Conditions Chapter 03 3.9B-17 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR Each item of Category I equipment is evaluated for faulted loading conditions. In all cases, calculated stresses are within the allowable limits. This section provides examples of the treatment of faulted conditions for the major components on a component-by-component basis. Additional discussion of faulted analysis is found in Sections 3.9B.3 and 3.9B.5, and Table 3.9B-2.
Sections 3.9B.2.2 and 3.7B discuss the treatment of dynamic loads resulting from the postulated faulted condition. Section 3.9B.2.5 discusses the dynamic analysis of loads on reactor internals resulting from blowdown. Deformations under faulted conditions have been evaluated in critical areas, and no cases have been identified where design limits, such as clearance limits, are exceeded.
3.9B.1.4.1 Control Rod Drive System Components Control Rod Drives The major CRD components that have been analyzed for the faulted conditions are the ring flange, main flange, and indicator tube. The maximum stresses for these components and for various plant operating conditions including the faulted condition are given in Table 3.9B-2a.
The ASME Section III Code components of the CRD have been analyzed for conditions in Section 3.9B.1.1.1. The loads and stresses are within the elastic limits of the material.
The design adequacy of noncode components of the CRD has been verified by extensive testing programs on both (Code and non-Code) component parts, specially instrumented prototype drives, and production drives. The testing has included postulated abnormal events as well as the service life cycle listed in Section 3.9B.1.1.1.
Hydraulic Control Unit The seismic and hydrodynamic loads adequacy of the HCU is demonstrated by tests. Section 3.9B.2.2.2 discusses the dynamic qualification of the HCU.
3.9B.1.4.2 Standard Reactor Internal Components Control Rod Guide Tube The maximum calculated stress on the control rod guide tube occurs in its base during the faulted condition. Under the combination of primary membrane (general or local) plus bending stresses, the faulted limit is 3.6 Sm or 57,600 psi at the design temperature in accordance with ASME Section III, Table F 1322.2-1. According to ASME Section III, Appendix I, Table I-1.2, Sm = 16,000 psi at 575°F.
The analysis and limiting stresses for various plant operating conditions are given in Table 3.9B-2b.
Chapter 03 3.9B-18 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR In-core Housing The maximum calculated stress on the in-core housing occurs at the outer surface of the vessel penetration during the faulted condition.
The allowable stress for the elastic analysis used is 2.4 Sm = 40,000 psi. The analysis for various operating conditions is summarized in Table 3.9B-2c which shows that the calculated stresses are within the allowables.
Jet Pump The elastic analysis for the jet pump faulted conditions shows that the maximum stress is due to impulse loading of the diffuser during a pipe rupture and blowdown. The maximum allowable for this condition, in accordance with ASME Section III Appendix F is 3.6 Sm or 60,000 psi. Table 3.9B-2d summarizes the results of the stress analysis.
LPCI Coupling The calculated stress at the highest stressed location is bounded by the allowable stress which is 3.6 Sm. Table 3.9B-2e summarizes the criteria, loading conditions, the calculated and allowable stresses.
Orificed Fuel Support OFS is analyzed for the faulted condition. The analysis and testing are described in Section 3.9B.1.3.2. Results of the analysis are provided in Table 3.9B-2f.
CRD Housing The CRD housing is analyzed for the faulted condition, considering SSE and hydrodynamic loads.
Table 3.9B-2g shows that the calculated stress values for the highly stressed areas of the CRD housing are within the allowable limits.
3.9B.1.4.3 Reactor Pressure Vessel Assembly For the faulted condition, the RPV and the shroud support were evaluated using elastic analysis methods. For the support skirt and shroud support, an elastic analysis was performed, and buckling was evaluated for the compressive load.
The support skirt is designed in compliance with ASME III requirements for the Class 1 pressure-retaining portion of the vessel.
A generic BWR 4/5 study was conducted on the Limerick 1 and 2 cylindrical support skirt, which has the smallest ratio of thickness to radius. The study examined the skirt buckling under axial compression, hoop stress, and transverse shear (Section 3.9.6-13) and showed that, in each case, the critical buckling stress was much greater than the yield stress.
Chapter 03 3.9B-19 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR Since this study showed that inelastic stability limits the skirt integrity, the permissible compressive load is limited to 90 percent of the load which produces yield stress, divided by a safety factor of 1.125 for faulted conditions to account for the effects of fabrication or any eccentricity.
For faulted conditions, the RPV support skirt design can meet the allowable limit of two-thirds of the critical buckling stress in accordance with ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code,Section III, paragraph F-1370(c). An analysis of the RPV support skirt shows that the design has the capability to meet this allowable stress at temperature.
Table 3.9B-2h lists the calculated and allowable stresses for the various load combinations.
3.9B.1.4.4 Core Support Structure The core support structure is evaluated for the faulted condition.
The bases for determining the faulted loads due to seismic and hydrodynamic events are discussed in Sections 3.7B and 3.9B.5, respectively. The calculated stresses and allowables are summarized in Table 3.9B-2i.
3.9B.1.4.5 Recirculation Gate, Safety/Relief Valves, and Main Steam Isolation Valves Tables 3.9B-2j, 3.9B-2k, and 3.9B-2z provide a summary of the analysis of the SRV, recirculation gate valve, and MSIV, respectively.
Standard design rules, as defined in ASME Section III, are used in the analysis of pressure boundary components of Category I valves.
Conventional, elastic stress analysis is used to evaluate components not defined in the Code. The Code allowable stresses are applied to determine acceptability of the structure under applicable loading conditions including the faulted condition.
3.9B.1.4.6 Recirculation System Flow Control Valve The recirculation system FCV is analyzed for faulted conditions using the elastic analysis methods from ASME Section III. The analysis is summarized in Table 3.9B-2l.
3.9B.1.4.7 Recirculation Piping For recirculation system piping, elastic analysis methods are used for evaluating faulted loading conditions. The equivalent allowable stresses using elastic techniques are obtained from the ASME Section III, Appendix F, and the calculated stresses are within these elastic limits. Additional information on the recirculation piping is in Table 3.9B-2m.
3.9B.1.4.8 Nuclear Steam Supply System Pumps, Heat Exchanger, and Turbine Chapter 03 3.9B-20 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR The recirculation, ECCS, RCIC, and SLC pumps, RHR heat exchangers, and RCIC turbine have been analyzed for the faulted loading conditions identified in Section 3.9B.1.1. In all cases, stresses were within the elastic limits. The analytical methods, stress limits, and allowable stresses are summarized in Table 3.9B-2 in the respective equipment table.
3.9B.1.4.9 Control Rod Drive Housing Supports The calculated stresses and the allowable stress limits for faulted conditions for the CRD housing supports are shown in Table 3.9B-2y.
3.9B.1.4.10 Fuel Storage Racks Examples of the calculated stresses and stress limits for the faulted conditions for the new fuel storage racks are shown in Table 3.9B-2n.
3.9B.1.4.11 Fuel Assembly (Including Channels)
GE BWR fuel assembly design bases, analytical methods, and evaluation results, including those applicable to the faulted conditions, are contained in NEDE-24011(6), NEDE-24011-US(7), NEDE-21175-3-P(13), and NEDE-31152(20); for GE 11 fuel, NEDE-31917P(17), for GE 14 fuel, NEDC-32868P(19) and GE-NE-0000-0016-5640-00(18); for GNF2 fuel, 003N2003(22) and NEDC-33270P(23), and for GNF3 fuel, 006N6601(24) and NEDC-33879P(25)
Maximum fuel horizontal and vertical acceleration values are summarized in Table 3.9B-2o.
3.9B.1.4.12 Refueling Equipment Refueling equipment and servicing equipment that are important to safety are classified as essential components in accordance with the requirements of 10CFR50 Appendix A. This equipment and other equipment whose failure would degrade an essential component are defined in Section 3.9B.1 and are classified as Category I. These components are subjected to an elastic dynamic finite element analysis to generate loadings. This analysis utilizes appropriate seismic floor response spectra and combines loads at frequencies up to 33 Hz for seismic and up to 80 Hz for hydrodynamic loads in three directions. Imposed stresses are generated and combined for normal, upset, and faulted conditions. Stresses are compared, depending on the specific safety class of the equipment, to those allowed by Industrial Codes, ASME, ANSI, AISC, or Industrial Standards allowables.
The calculated stresses and allowable limits for the faulted condition for the fuel storage rack, fuel preparation machine, and refueling platform are documented in Table 3.9B-2n.
3.9B.2 Dynamic Testing and Analysis 3.9B.2.1 Piping Vibration, Thermal Expansion, and Dynamic Effects Chapter 03 3.9B-21 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR The test program is divided into three phases: piping vibration, thermal expansion, and dynamic effects.
3.9B.2.1.1 Piping Vibration Preoperational and Startup Vibration Testing of Recirculation Piping The purpose of the preoperational vibration test phase is to verify that operating vibrations in the recirculation piping are within acceptable limits. This phase of the test uses visual observation to supplement remote measurements. If, during steady-state operation, visual observation indicates that vibration is significant, measurements are made with a hand-held vibrograph. Visual observations and manual and remote measurements are made during the following steady-state conditions:
- 1. Recirculation pumps at minimum flow.
- 2. Recirculation pumps at 50 percent of rated flow.
- 3. Recirculation pumps at 75 percent of rated flow.
- 4. Recirculation pumps at 100 percent of rated flow.
- 5. RHR suction piping at 100 percent of rated flow in the shutdown cooling mode.
Preoperational Vibration Testing of Small Attached Piping During visual observation of test conditions 1 through 5, special attention will be given to small attached piping and instrument connections to ensure that they are not in resonance with the recirculation pump motors or flow-induced vibrations. If the operating vibrations acceptance criteria are not met, corrective action such as modification of supports will be undertaken.
Operating Transient Loads on Recirculation Piping The purpose of the operating transient test phase is to verify that pipe stresses are within code limits. The amplitude of displacements and number of cycles per transient of the recirculation piping are measured and the displacements compared with acceptance criteria.
The deflections are correlated with stresses to verify that the pipe stresses remain within Code limits. Remote vibration and deflection measurements are taken during the following transients:
- 1. Recirculation pump starts.
- 2. Recirculation pump trip at 100 percent of rated flow.
- 3. Turbine stop valve closure at 100 percent power.
- 4. Manual discharge of each SRV at 1,000 psig and at planned transient tests that result in SRV discharge.
Chapter 03 3.9B-22 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR 3.9B.2.1.2 Thermal Expansion Testing of Recirculation Piping A thermal expansion, preoperational and startup testing program, performed through the use of potentiometer sensors, has been established to verify that normal thermal movement occurs in the piping systems. The main purpose of this program is to ensure the following:
- 1. The piping system during system heatup and cooldown is free to expand, contract, and move without unplanned obstruction or restraint in the x, y, and z directions.
- 2. The piping system is working in a manner consistent with the assumption of the NSSS stress analysis.
- 3. There is adequate agreement between calculated values of displacements and measured value of displacement.
- 4. There is consistency and repeatability in thermal displacements during heatup and cooldown of the NSSS systems.
Limits of thermal expansion displacements are established prior to the start of piping testing to which the actual measured displacements are compared, to determine acceptability of the actual motion. If the measured displacement does not vary from the acceptance limits values by more than the specified tolerances, the piping system is responding in a manner consistent with predictions and is, therefore, acceptable. Two levels of displacement limits are established to check the systems as explained in Section 3.9B.2.1.4.
3.9B.2.1.3 Dynamic Effects Testing of Recirculation Piping To verify that snubbers are adequately performing their intended function during plant operation, a program for dynamic testing, as a part of the normal startup operation testing, is planned. The main purpose of this program is to ensure the following:
- 1. The vibration levels from the various dynamic loadings during transient and steady-state conditions are below the predetermined acceptable limits.
- 2. Long-term fatigue failure does not occur due to underestimating the dynamic effects caused by cyclic loading during plant transient operations.
This dynamic testing is to account for the acoustic wave due to the SRV lifts (RV1), SRV load resulting from air clearing (RV2), and turbine stop valve closure (TSVC) load. The maximum stresses developed in the piping by the RV1, RV2, and TSVC transient analyses are used as a basis for establishing criteria that assure proper functioning of the snubbers. If field measurements exceed criteria limits, the snubbers are not operating properly. Sample production snubbers of each size (i.e., 10, 20, 50 kips) are qualified and tested for design and faulted condition loadings prior to shipment to Chapter 03 3.9B-23 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR the field. Snubbers are tested to allow free piping movements at low velocity. During plant startup, the snubbers are checked for proper settings.
The criteria for vibration displacements are based on assumed linear relationship between displacements, snubber loads, and the magnitude of applied loads for any function and response of system. Thus, the magnitude of limits of displacements, snubber loads, and nozzle loads are all proportional. Maximum displacements (Level 1 limits) are established to prevent the maximum stress in the piping systems from exceeding the normal and upset primary stress limits and/or the maximum snubber load from exceeding the maximum load to which the snubber has been tested.
Based on the above criteria, Level 1 displacement limits are established for all instrumented points in the piping system. These limits are compared with the field measured piping displacements.
The method of acceptance is explained in the following section.
3.9B.2.1.4 Test Evaluation and Acceptance Criteria for Recirculation Piping The piping response to test conditions is considered acceptable if the test results verify that the piping responded in a manner consistent with the predictions of the stress report and/or that piping stresses are within code limits (ASME Section III, Subarticle NB-3600). Acceptable deflection and acceleration limits are determined after the completion of piping system stress analysis and are provided in the startup test specifications. To ensure test data integrity and test safety, criteria have been established to facilitate assessment of the test while it is in progress. These criteria, designated Levels 1 and 2, are described in the following sections.
3.9B.2.1.4.1 Level 1 Criterion Level 1 establishes the maximum limits for the level of pipe motion which, if exceeded, makes a test hold or termination mandatory. If the Level 1 limit is exceeded, the plant will be placed in a satisfactory hold condition, and the responsible piping design engineer will be advised. Following resolution, applicable tests must be repeated to verify that the requirements of the Level 1 limits are satisfied.
3.9B.2.1.4.2 Level 2 Criteria If the Level 2 criteria are satisfied for both steady-state and operating transient vibrations, there will be no fatigue damage to the piping system due to steady-state vibration, and all operating transient vibrations are bounded by the values in the stress report.
Exceeding the Level 2 specified pipe motion requires that the responsible piping design engineer be advised. Plant operating and startup testing plans would not necessarily be altered.
Investigations of the measurements, criteria, and calculations used Chapter 03 3.9B-24 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR to generate the pipe motion limits would be initiated. An acceptable resolution must be reached by all appropriate and involved parties, including the responsible piping design engineer. Detailed evaluation is needed to develop corrective action or show that the measurements are acceptable. Depending upon the nature of such resolution, the applicable tests may or may not have to be repeated.
3.9B.2.1.4.3 Acceptance Limits For steady-state vibration, the piping peak stress due to vibration only (neglecting pressure) will not exceed 10,000 psi for Level 1 criteria and 5,000 psi for Level 2 criteria. These limits are below the piping material fatigue endurance limits defined in Design Fatigue Curves in Appendix I of the ASME Code for 106 cycles.
For operating transient vibration, the piping bending stress (zero to peak) will not exceed 1.2 Sm or pipe support loads will not exceed service Level D ratings for Level 1 criteria. The 1.2 Sm limit ensures that the total primary stress, including pressure and deadweight, will not exceed 1.8 Sm, the Code service Level B limit.
Level 2 criteria are based on pipe stresses and support loads not exceeding design basis predictions. Design basis criteria require that operating transient stresses and loads not exceed any service Level B limits, including primary stress limits, fatigue usage factor limits, and allowable loads on snubbers.
3.9B.2.1.5 Corrective Actions for Recirculation Piping During the course of the tests, the remote measurements are regularly checked to determine compliance with Level 1 criteria. If trends indicate that Level 1 criteria may be violated, the measurements are monitored at more frequent intervals. The test is interrupted as soon as Level 1 criteria are violated. As soon as possible after the test hold or termination, the following corrective actions are taken:
- 1. Installation Inspection A walkdown of the piping and suspension is made to identify any obstruction or improperly operating suspension components. If vibration exceeds criteria, the source of the excitation must be identified to determine if it is related to equipment failure. Action is taken to correct any discrepancies before repeating the test.
- 2. Instrumentation Inspection The instrumentation installation and calibration are checked, and any discrepancies are corrected. Additional instrumentation is added, if necessary.
- 3. Repeat Test If actions 1 and 2 identify discrepancies that could account for failure to meet the Level 1 criteria, the test will be repeated.
- 4. Resolution of Findings If the Level 1 criteria are violated on the repeat test, or no relevant discrepancies are identified as described in actions 1 and 2, the test Chapter 03 3.9B-25 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR results and criteria are reviewed to ensure that the test can be safely continued.
If the test measurements indicate failure to meet the Level 2 criteria, the following corrective actions are taken after completion of the test:
- 1. Installation Inspection A walkdown of the piping and suspension is made to identify any obstruction or improperly operating suspension components.
Snubbers are installed at about the midpoint of the total range at operating temperature. Hangers are installed in their operating range between the hot and cold settings.
If vibration exceeds limits, the source of the vibration is identified. Action is taken to correct any discrepancies.
- 2. Instrumentation Inspection The instrumentation installation and calibration are checked and any discrepancies are corrected.
- 3. Repeat Test If inspections described in actions 1 and 2 above identify a malfunction or discrepancy that could account for failure to comply with Level 2 criteria and appropriate corrective action has been taken, the test is repeated.
- 4. Documentation of Discrepancies If the test is not repeated, the discrepancies found under actions 1 and 2 are documented in the test evaluation report and correlated with the test condition. The test is not complete until the test results are reconciled with the acceptance criteria.
3.9B.2.1.6 Measurement Locations for Recirculation Piping Remote shock and vibration measurements are made in the three orthogonal directions on the piping between the recirculation pump discharge and the first downstream valve. During preoperational testing prior to fuel load, visual inspection of the piping is made, and any visible vibration is measured with a hand-held instrument.
For each of the selected remote measurement locations, Level 1 and 2 deflection and acceleration limits are prescribed in the startup test specification.
3.9B.2.2 Seismic and Hydrodynamic Qualification of Safety-Related Mechanical Equipment This section describes the criteria for dynamic qualification of safety-related mechanical equipment and the qualification testing and/or analysis applicable to this plant for all the major components on a component-by-component basis. In some cases, a module or assembly consisting of mechanical and electrical equipment is qualified as a unit (e.g., ECCS pumps). These modules are generally Chapter 03 3.9B-26 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR discussed in this section rather than in Sections 3.10B and 3.11.
Dynamic load qualification testing for pumps and valves is also discussed in Section 3.9B.3.2. Electrical supporting equipment such as control consoles, cabinets, and panels that are part of the NSSS are discussed in Section 3.10B.
3.9B.2.2.1 Tests and Analysis Criteria and Methods The ability of equipment to perform its safety-related function during and after the application of dynamic loads (earthquake) is demonstrated by tests and/or analysis. Selection of testing, analysis, or a combination of the two is determined by the type, size, shape, and complexity of the equipment being considered. When practical, equipment operability is demonstrated by testing.
Otherwise, operability is demonstrated by mathematical analysis.
Equipment that is large, simple, and/or consumes large amounts of power is usually qualified by analysis or test to show that the loads, stresses, and deflections are less than the allowable maximum.
Analysis testing is also used to show that there are no natural frequencies below 33 Hz for seismic loads and 60 Hz for hydrodynamic loads. If a lower natural frequency is discovered, dynamic tests may be conducted and, in conjunction with mathematical analysis, used to verify operability and structural integrity at the required dynamic input conditions. A similar dynamic test and/or analysis is performed for hydrodynamic loads over a frequency range to include contributions from all significant modes in the total response. When the equipment is qualified by dynamic test, the response spectrum or time-history of the attachment point is used in determining input motion.
Natural frequency may be determined by running a continuous sweep frequency search using a sinusoidal steady-state input of low magnitude. Seismic conditions are simulated by testing using random vibration input or single frequency input (within equipment capability) over the frequency range of interest. Whichever method is used, the input amplitude during testing envelops the actual input amplitude expected during hydrodynamic load conditions.
Equipment being dynamically tested is mounted on a fixture that simulates the intended service mounting and causes no dynamic coupling to the equipment.
Equipment having an extended structure, such as a valve operator, is analyzed by applying static equivalent dynamic loads at the center of gravity of the extended structure. In cases where the equipment structural complexity makes mathematical analysis impractical, a static bend test is used to determine operational capability at maximum equivalent dynamic load conditions. Pipe-mounted equipment is analyzed in the piping system dynamic analysis.
Random Vibration Input When random vibration input is used, the actual input motion envelops the appropriate floor input motion at the individual modes. However, Chapter 03 3.9B-27 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR single frequency input such as sine waves can be used provided one of the following conditions is met:
- 1. The characteristics of the required input motion are dominated by one frequency.
- 2. The anticipated response of the equipment is adequately represented by one mode.
- 3. The input has sufficient intensity and duration to excite all modes to the required magnitude, in such a way that the testing response spectra envelop the corresponding response spectra of the individual modes.
Application of Input Motion When dynamic tests are performed, the input motion is applied to one vertical and one horizontal axis simultaneously. However, if the equipment response along the vertical direction is not sensitive to the vibratory motion along the horizontal direction, and vice versa, then the input motion is applied to one direction at a time. In the case of single frequency input, the time phasing of the inputs in the vertical and horizontal directions are such that a purely rectilinear resultant input is avoided.
Fixture Design The fixture design simulates the actual service mounting and causes no dynamic coupling to the equipment.
Prototype Testing Equipment testing is conducted on prototypes of the equipment installed in this plant.
3.9B.2.2.2 Seismic and Hydrodynamic Load Qualification of Specific NSSS Mechanical Components The following sections discuss the testing or analytical qualification of NSSS equipment. Seismic qualification is also described in Sections 3.9B.1.4, 3.9B.3.1, and 3.9B.3.2.
Jet Pumps A dynamic analysis of the jet pumps is performed and stresses from the analysis are below the design allowables.
CRD and CRD Housing The dynamic qualification of the CRD housing (with enclosed CRD) is done analytically, and the stress results of their analysis established the structural integrity of these components.
Preliminary dynamic tests have been conducted to verify the operability of the CRD during a dynamic event. A simulated test, Chapter 03 3.9B-28 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR imposing a static bow in the fuel channels, is performed with the CRD functioning satisfactorily.
Core Support (Fuel Support and Control Rod Guide Tube)
A detailed analysis imposing dynamic effects due to seismic and hydrodynamic events showed that the maximum stresses developed during these events are much lower than the maximum allowed for the component material.
Hydraulic Control Unit The seismic and hydrodynamic load adequacy of the HCU has been demonstrated by tests. A complete HCU assembly was qualified by multiaxis/multifrequency testing in the frequency range from 1 to 100 Hz. The required safety function of initiating reactor scram was demonstrated successfully.
Fuel Assembly (Including Channels)
GE BWR fuel channel design bases, analytical methods, and evaluation results, including seismic and hydrodynamic considerations, are contained in NEDE-24011(6), NEDE-24011-US(7), NEDE-21175-3-P(13), and NEDE-31152(20); for GE 11 fuel, NEDE-31917P(17); for GE14 fuel, NEDC-32868P(19) and GE-NE-0000-0016-5640-00(18); for GNF2 fuel, 003N2003(22) and NEDC-33270P(23); and for GNF3 fuel, 00N6601(24) and NEDC-33879P(25).
Recirculation Pump and Motor Assembly Calculations were made to assure that the recirculation pump and motor assembly is designed to withstand the specific static equivalent seismic and hydrodynamic loads. The flooded assembly was analyzed as a free body supported by constant support hangers from the brackets on the motor mounting member with snubbers attached to brackets located on the pump case and the top of the motor frame.
Primary stresses due to horizontal and vertical seismic (including hydrodynamic) forces are considered to act simultaneously and are conservatively added directly. Horizontal and vertical dynamic forces are applied to mass centers, and equilibrium reactions are determined for motor and pump brackets.
ECCS Pump and Motor Assembly The qualification of the ECCS pump and motor assemblies as a unit while operating under faulted conditions was provided in the form of a static earthquake-acceleration analysis. The maximum specified vertical and horizontal accelerations were constantly applied simultaneously in the worst-case combination and the results of the analysis indicate the pump is capable of sustaining these loadings without overstressing the pump components.
Analysis is used for qualification when motors are similar in design features and insulation to previously qualified motors. Differences in design features and insulation are identified in a comparison Chapter 03 3.9B-29 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR study or similarity analysis. Also included in this comparison study are data showing that the differences have no impact on qualification. In addition to the comparison study, motor unique seismic analysis is required to assure that the motors can handle the design loads.
A motor of similar design has been seismically qualified via a combination of static analysis and dynamic testing. The complete motor assembly has been seismically qualified via dynamic testing, in accordance with IEEE-344-1975. The qualification test program included demonstration of startup and shutdown capabilities, as well as no-load operability during seismic and hydrodynamic loading conditions.
RCIC Pump Assembly The RCIC pump construction is a barrel-type on a large cross-section pedestal. The RCIC pump assembly is analytically qualified by static analysis for seismic and hydrodynamic loading as well as the design operating loads of pressure, temperature, and external piping loads.
The results of this analysis confirm that the stresses are substantially less than the allowables.
Because of their large size and weight, pumps are not included in the test list. Analysis is the most viable qualification method.
RCIC Turbine Assembly The RCIC turbine is qualified for seismic and hydrodynamic loads via a combination of static analysis and dynamic testing. The turbine assembly consists of rigid masses, wherein static analysis has been utilized, interconnected with control levers and electronic control systems, necessitating final qualification by dynamic testing.
Static loading analysis has been employed to verify the structural integrity of the turbine assembly and the adequacy of bolting under operating and seismic loading conditions. The RCIC electrohydraulic system integrated with the turbine governing valve is of a safety-grade design. The entire turbine assembly has been tested for seismic qualification in accordance with IEEE-344-1975. The electrohydraulic system was in its operational modes during the test program. The qualification test program included demonstration of startup and shutdown capabilities, as well as no-load operability during seismic loading conditions.
The specification for seismic qualification of the RCIC turbine and its accessories states that they shall be capable of withstanding the specified seismic accelerations at all frequencies within the range of 0.25 to 33 Hz. Proper performance may be demonstrated by tests, analysis, or a combination of both. If all natural frequencies of the turbine, the component parts, and the accessories are greater than 33 Hz (as defined by test and/or analysis), a static load analysis may be performed. The seismic forces of each component or assembly are obtained by concentrating its mass at the center of mass and multiplying by the seismic acceleration (earthquake coefficient).
The magnitude of the earthquake coefficients is 1.5 g for both Chapter 03 3.9B-30 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR horizontal and vertical. If component parts and/or accessories have natural frequencies below 33 Hz, these parts must be dynamically analyzed or tested, demonstrating satisfaction of the floor response spectra.
Standby Liquid Control Pump and Motor Assembly Each of the two SLC pumps is a positive displacement pump and motor mounted on a common base plate that is qualified by static analysis.
The SLC pump and motor assembly is analytically qualified by static analysis for seismic and hydrodynamic loads as well as the design operating loads of pressure, temperature, and external piping loads.
The results of this analysis confirm that the stresses are substantially less than 90 percent of allowable.
RHR Heat Exchangers A dynamic analysis is performed to verify that the RHR heat exchanger can withstand seismic and hydrodynamic loads. Seismic testing is an impractical method to verify the seismic adequacy of passive equipment.
Standby Liquid Control Tank The SLC storage tank is a cylindrical tank, 9 ft in diameter and 12 ft high, bolted to the concrete floor. The SLC tank is qualified for seismic and hydrodynamic loads by analysis for:
- 1. Stresses in the tank bearing plate.
- 2. Bolt stresses.
- 3. Sloshing loads imposed at natural frequency of sloshing =
0.58 Hz.
- 4. Minimum wall thickness.
- 5. Buckling.
The results of the analysis confirm that stresses are less than the allowables.
Main Steam Isolation Valves The MSIVs are qualified for seismic and hydrodynamic loads by analysis and test.
The fundamental requirement of the MSIV following a SSE or other faulted hydrodynamic loading is to close and remain closed after the event. This is demonstrated by the test and analysis as outlined in Section 3.9B.3.2.3.
Main Steam Safety/Relief Valves Chapter 03 3.9B-31 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR Due to the complexity of the structure and the performance requirements of the valve, the total assembly of the SRV (including electrical, pneumatic devices) is dynamically tested at seismic acceleration equal to or greater than the combined SSE and hydrodynamic loading determined for this plant. Satisfactory operation of the valves was demonstrated during and after the test.
3.9B.2.3 Dynamic Response of Reactor Internals Under Operational The major reactor internal components are subjected to extensive testing coupled with dynamic system analyses to properly describe the resulting flow-induced vibration phenomena incurred from normal reactor operation and anticipated operational transients.
In general, the vibration forcing functions for operational flow transients and steady-state conditions are not predetermined by detailed analysis. Special analysis of the response signals measured for reactor internals of many similar designs are performed to obtain the parameters that determine the amplitudes and modal contributions in the vibration responses. These studies provide useful predictive information for extrapolating the results from tests of components with similar designs to components of different designs. This vibration prediction method is appropriate where standard hydrodynamic theory cannot be applied due to the complexity of the structure and flow conditions. Elements of the vibration prediction method are outlined as follows:
- 1. Dynamic analysis of major components and subassemblies is performed to identify vibration modes and frequencies. The analysis models used for Category I structures are similar to those outlined in Section 3.7B.2.
- 2. Data from previous plant vibration measurements are assembled and examined to identify predominant vibration response modes of major components. In general, response modes are similar, but response amplitudes vary among BWRs of differing size and design.
- 3. Parameters are identified that are expected to influence vibration response amplitudes among the several reference plants. These include hydraulic parameters such as velocity and steam flow rates and structural parameters such as natural frequency and significant dimensions.
- 4. Correlation functions of the variable parameters are developed which, multiplied by response amplitudes, tend to minimize the statistical variability between plants. A correlation function is obtained for each major component and response mode.
- 5. Predicted vibration amplitudes for components of the prototype plant are obtained from these correlation functions, based on applicable values of the parameters for the prototype plant. The predicted amplitude for each dominant response mode is stated in terms of a range, Chapter 03 3.9B-32 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR taking into account the degree of statistical variability in each of the correlations. The predicted mode and frequency are obtained from the dynamic analyses of Item 1 above.
The dynamic modal analysis also forms the basis for interpretation of the preoperational and initial startup test results (Section 3.9B.2.4). Modal stresses are calculated, and relationships are obtained between sensor response amplitudes and peak component stresses for each of the lower normal modes. The allowable amplitude in each mode is that which produces a peak stress amplitude of
+/-10,000 psi.
3.9B.2.4 Preoperational Flow-Induced Vibration Testing of Reactor Internals Vibration testing of reactor internals is performed on all GE BWR plants. At the time of the original issue of AEC RG 1.20, test programs for compliance were instituted. The first BWR 5 plant of each size is considered a prototype and is instrumented and subjected to preoperational and startup flow testing to demonstrate that flow-induced vibrations similar to those expected during operation cause no damage. Subsequent plants that have internals similar to those of the prototypes are also tested in compliance with the requirements of RG 1.20.
Unit 2 reactor internals will be tested in accordance with RG 1.20, Revision 2, for nonprototype, Category IV plants using Tokai-2 as the limited valid prototype. The test procedure will require vibration measurements to determine the vibration characteristics of vessel internals during the initial power ascension. Vibratory responses at various power levels and recirculation flow rates are recorded using accelerometers on the shroud head assembly and strain gauges on two selected jet pump riser pipe braces.
Reactor internals for Unit 2 are substantially the same as the internals design configurations that have been tested in prototype BWR 4 plants. Exceptions are the jet pumps, which are of the BWR 5 design. A vibration measurement and inspection program has been conducted at Tokai-2 to verify the design of the jet pumps with respect to vibration. Results of the prototype tests are presented in NEDE-24057-P (Class III) and NEDO-24057 (Class I)(8).
3.9B.2.5 Dynamic System Analysis of Reactor Internals Under Faulted Conditions To ensure that no significant dynamic amplification of load occurs as a result of the oscillatory nature of the blowdown forces, a comparison is made of the periods of the applied forces and the natural periods of the core support structures being acted upon by the applied forces. These periods are determined from a 12-node vertical dynamic model of the RPV and internals. In addition to the real masses of the RPV and core support structures, hydrodynamic masses including fluid-structure interaction effects are accounted for.
Chapter 03 3.9B-33 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR Time-varying pressures are applied to the dynamic model of the reactor internals described above. Except for the nature and locations of the forcing functions and the dynamic model, the dynamic analysis method is identical to that described for seismic analysis and is detailed in Section 3.7B.2.1. The dynamic components of forces from these loads are combined with dynamic force components from other dynamic loads (including seismic and hydrodynamic), all acting in the same direction, by the SRSS method. This resultant force is then combined with other steady-state and static loads on an absolute sum basis to determine the design load in a given direction.
Results of the dynamic analysis are summarized in Table 3.9B-2i.
3.9B.2.6 Correlations of Reactor Internals Vibration Tests With Analytical Results Prior to initiation of the instrumented vibration test program for the prototype plant, extensive dynamic analyses of the reactor and internals were performed. The results of these analyses were used to generate the allowable vibration levels during the vibration test.
The vibration data obtained during the test were analyzed in detail.
The results of the data analysis, vibration amplitudes, natural frequencies, and mode shapes were then compared to those obtained from the theoretical analysis.
Such comparisons provided insight into the dynamic behavior of the reactor internals. The additional knowledge gained was utilized in the generation of the dynamic models for seismic and LOCA analyses for this plant. The models used for this plant are similar to those used for the vibration analysis of the prototype plant, Tokai-2.
3.9B.3 ASME Section III, Safety Class 1, 2, and 3 Components, Component Supports, and Core Support Structures 3.9B.3.1 Load Combinations, Design Transients, and Stress Limits This section delineates criteria for selection and definition of design limits and load combinations associated with normal operation, postulated accidents, and specified seismic and hydrodynamic events for the design of safety-related ASME Code NSSS components.
This section also lists the major ASME Section III, Safety Class 1, 2, and 3, NSSS pressure parts and associated equipment on a component-by-component basis and identifies the applicable loadings, calculation methods, calculated stresses, and allowable stresses.
Design transients for ASME Section III, Safety Class 1 equipment are addressed in Section 3.9B.1.1. Seismic-related loads are discussed in Section 3.7B. The hydrodynamic loads are described in the Mark II Containment Dynamic Forcing Functions Information Report (DFFR)(9).
Table 3.9B-2 is the major part of this section; it presents the load combinations, analytical methods (by reference or example), and calculated stress or other design values for the most critical areas in the design of each component. These values are also compared to applicable Code allowables. Table 3.9B-2 presents the generic load Chapter 03 3.9B-34 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR combinations required to be considered for the design and analysis of a plant, and is applicable to all ASME Safety Class 1, 2, and 3 component supports and core support structures.
3.9B.3.1.1 Plant Conditions All events that the plant might credibly experience during a reactor year are evaluated to establish a design basis for plant equipment.
These events are divided into four plant conditions. The plant conditions described in the following sections are based on event probability (i.e., frequency of occurrence) and correlated design conditions defined in the ASME Section III.
Normal Condition Normal conditions are any conditions in the course of system startup, operation in the design power range, normal hot standby (with condenser available), and system shutdown other than upset, emergency, faulted, or testing.
Upset Condition Upset conditions are any deviations from normal conditions anticipated to occur often enough that design should include a capability to withstand the conditions without operational impairment. The upset conditions include transients that result from any single Operator error or control malfunction, transients caused by a fault in a system component requiring its isolation from the system, and transients due to loss of load or power. Vibrations due to OBE are conservatively treated as upset. Hot standby with the main condenser isolated is an upset condition.
Emergency Condition Emergency conditions are deviations from normal conditions that require shutdown for correction of the conditions or repair of damage in the RCPB. These conditions have a low probability of occurrence, but are included to provide assurance that no gross loss of structural integrity results as a concomitant effect of any damage developed in the system. Emergency condition events include, but are not limited to, transients caused by one of the following: a multiple valve safety/relief blowdown of the reactor vessel; loss of reactor coolant from a small break or crack that does not depressurize the reactor system or result in leakage beyond normal makeup system capacity, but which requires the safety functions of isolation of containment and reactor shutdown; improper assembly of the core during refueling; and vibration of an OBE in combination with associated system transients.
Faulted Condition These are combinations of conditions associated with extremely low probability, postulated events whose consequences are such that the integrity and operability of the system may be impaired to the extent that considerations of public health and safety are involved.
Chapter 03 3.9B-35 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR Faulted conditions encompass events that are postulated because their consequences would include the potential for the release of significant amounts of radioactive material. These postulated events are the most drastic that must be designed against and thus represent limiting design bases. Faulted condition events include, but are not limited to, one of the following: a control rod drop accident (CRDA), a fuel handling accident, a MSL break, a recirculation loop break, the combination of any pipe break plus the seismic motion associated with a SSE and hydrodynamic loads plus a LOOP, or the SSE.
Correlation of Plant Conditions with Event Probability The probability of an event occurring per reactor year associated with the plant conditions is listed below. This correlation can be used to identify the appropriate plant condition for any hypothesized event or sequence of events.
Event Encounter Probability Per Plant Condition Reactor Year Normal (planned) 1.0 Upset (moderate probability) 1.0 >P >10-2 Emergency (low probability) 10-2 >P >10-4 Faulted (extremely low 10-4 >P >10-6 probability)
Safety Class Functional Criteria For any normal or upset design condition event, Safety Class 1, 2, and 3 equipment is capable of accomplishing its safety functions as required by the event and incurs no permanent changes that adversely affect its ability to accomplish its safety functions as required by any subsequent design condition event.
For any emergency or faulted design condition event, Safety Class 1, 2, and 3 equipment is capable of accomplishing its safety functions as required by the event, but repairs could be required to ensure its ability to accomplish its safety functions as required by any subsequent design condition event.
Compliance with Regulatory Guide 1.48 RG 1.48 was issued after the design of this plant was established and was therefore not used as a design basis requirement. However, GE design basis was representative of good industry practices at the time of design, procurement, and manufacture and is shown to be in general agreement with the requirement of RG 1.48 through the use of the alternate approach cited in Table 3.9B-3.
RG 1.48 delineates acceptable design limits and appropriate combinations of loadings associated with normal operation, postulated accidents, and specified seismic events for the design of the Category I fluid system components.
Chapter 03 3.9B-36 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR For a comparison of NSSS compliance with RG 1.48 refer to Table 3.9B-3. This comparison reflects general GE practice on BWR 5 plants and therefore is applicable to this plant.
3.9B.3.1.2 Reactor Pressure Vessel Assembly The RPV assembly consists of the RPV support structure and shroud support. The RPV support structure and shroud support are constructed in accordance with ASME Section III. The shroud support consists of the shroud support plate and the shroud support cylinder and its legs. The RPV assembly components are classified as ASME Safety Class 1. Complete stress reports on these components have been prepared in accordance with ASME requirements. Table 3.9B-2h summarizes the loading conditions, calculated stresses, and allowables. The stress analyses performed for the reactor vessel assembly, including the faulted conditions, were completed using elastic methods. Except as noted in Section 3.9B.1.4.3, the load combinations and stress analyses for the core support structure and other reactor internals are discussed in Section 3.9B.5.
3.9B.3.1.3 Main Steam Piping The main steam piping is discussed in Section 3.9A.
3.9B.3.1.4 Recirculation Loop Piping The recirculation system piping bounded by the RPV nozzles is designed in accordance with ASME Section III, Subarticle NB-3600. The load conditions, stress criteria, calculated stresses, and allowables are shown in Table 3.9B-2m. The rules contained in Appendix F of ASME Section III are used in evaluating faulted loading conditions independently of all other design and operating conditions. Stresses calculated on an elastic basis are evaluated in accordance with Appendix F.
3.9B.3.1.5 Recirculation System Valves The recirculation system flow control and suction and discharge gate valves are designed in accordance with ASME Section III, Safety Class 1, Subarticle NB-3500. These valves are not required to operate under the SSE. Load combinations and other stress analysis information are presented in Tables 3.9B-2l (FCVs) and 3.9B-2k (gate valves).
3.9B.3.1.6 Recirculation Pump In the design of the recirculation pumps, the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code,Section VIII, Division 1, 1971 Edition with latest addenda was used as a guide in calculations made for determining the thickness of pressure-retaining parts and in sizing the pressure-retaining bolting.
The pump vendor made calculations for the design of the pressure-containing components to include the determination of Chapter 03 3.9B-37 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR minimum wall thickness, allowable stress, and pressures. The loading conditions and other stress analysis information are presented in Table 3.9B-2p.
Load, shear, and moment diagrams were constructed to scale, using live loads, dead loads, and calculated snubber reactions. Combined bending, tension, and shear stresses were determined for each major component of the assembly, including the pump driver mount, motor flange bolting, and pump case. The maximum combined tensile stress in the cover bolting was calculated using tensile stress from design pressure. Combined primary stresses did not exceed 150 percent of the Code allowable stress shown in Section VIII of the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code, 1971 Edition. These methods and calculations demonstrate that the pump will maintain pressure integrity at all times.
3.9B.3.1.7 Standby Liquid Control Tank The SLC tank is designed in accordance with ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code,Section III. The loading conditions, stress criteria, calculated stresses, and allowables are summarized in Table 3.9B-2q.
3.9B.3.1.8 Residual Heat Removal Heat Exchangers The RHR heat exchangers are designed in accordance with the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III. The calculated stresses and allowables are shown in Table 3.9B-2r.
3.9B.3.1.9 RCIC Turbine Although not under the jurisdiction of the ASME Code, the RCIC turbine is designed and fabricated following the basic guidelines for an ASME Section III, Safety Class 2 component.
Design conditions for the RCIC turbine include:
- 1. Turbine inlet - 1,250 psig at saturated temperature.
- 2. Turbine exhaust - 165 psig at saturated temperature.
Table 3.9B-2s summarizes the criteria, calculated stresses, and allowables for the RCIC turbine components.
3.9B.3.1.10 RCIC Pump The RCIC pump is designed and fabricated to the requirements for an ASME Section III Safety Class 2 component. Operating conditions for the RCIC pump are tested under surveillance together with the RCIC turbine. A 92-day operation test is performed where the RCIC pump takes condensate from the CST and at design flow discharges condensate back to the CST via a closed test loop.
Design conditions for the RCIC pump include:
- 1. Available NPSH minimum 23 ft Chapter 03 3.9B-38 Rev. 25, October 2022
- 2. Total head High speed 3,080 ft Low speed 610 ft at 165 psia reactor pressure
- 3. Constant flow rate 660 gpm
- 4. Normal ambient operating 60° to 100°F temperature
- 5. Normal plus upset conditions which control the pump design include:
Design pressure 1,525 psig Design temperature 40° min - 140°F max OBE 2/3 of SSE Table 3.9B-2t contains a summary of the design calculations for the RCIC pump components.
3.9B.3.1.11 ECCS Pumps The RHR, LPCS, and HPCS pumps are designed and fabricated to the requirements of ASME Section III.
Table 3.9B-2u summarizes the design calculations for the ECCS pumps.
3.9B.3.1.12 Standby Liquid Control Pump The SLC pump is designed and fabricated following the requirements for an ASME Section III, Safety Class 2 component. Operating conditions for the SLC pump and motor are functionally tested by pumping demineralized water through a closed test loop. The SLC pump is capable of injecting the net contents of the storage tank into the reactor in 50 to 125 min. The pump is capable of injecting flow into the reactor against zero psig up to the initial setpoint of the reactor relief valves.
Design conditions for the SLC pump include:
- 1. Flow rate 45 gpm
- 2. Available NPSH, maximum 12.9 psi
- 3. Maximum operating 1,355.8 psig discharge pressure
- 4. Ambient conditions:
Temperature 70° - 104°F Relative humidity 20 - 95%
Chapter 03 3.9B-39 Rev. 25, October 2022
- 5. Normal plus upset conditions that control the pump design include:
Design pressure 1,600 psig Design temperature 150°F OBE 2/3 of SSE A summary of the design calculations for the SLC pump components is provided in Table 3.9B-2v.
3.9B.3.1.13 Main Steam Isolation and Safety/Relief Valves The MSIVs and SRVs are designed in accordance with the requirements of ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code,Section III, Subarticle NB-3500, Safety Class 1 components. Load combination, analytical methods, calculated stresses, and allowable limits for the SRVs and MSIVs are shown in Tables 3.9B-2j and 3.9B-2z.
3.9B.3.1.14 Reactor Water Cleanup System Pump and Heat Exchangers The RWCU pump and regenerative and nonregenerative heat exchangers are not part of a safety system and are not designed to Category I requirements.
The requirements of ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code,Section III, Safety Class 3 components are used as guidelines in evaluating the RWCU system pump and heat exchanger components. The loading conditions, stress criteria, and calculated and allowable stresses for heat exchanger components are summarized in Table 3.9B-2x.
3.9B.3.2 Pump and Valve Operability Assurance The active pumps and valves are listed in Table 3.9B-4. Active mechanical equipment classified as Category I is designed to perform its functions during the life of the plant under postulated plant conditions. Equipment with faulted condition functional requirements includes active pumps and valves in fluid systems such as the ECCS and MSS system. (Active equipment must perform a mechanical motion during the course of accomplishing a safety function.)
Safety-related valves are qualified by testing and analysis, and satisfy stress and deformation criteria at critical locations.
Operability is assured by satisfying the requirements of the programs detailed in the following sections.
3.9B.3.2.1 ECCS Pumps and Motors All active pumps and motors are qualified for operability by first being subjected to rigorous tests before and after installation in the plant. The in-shop tests include 1) hydrostatic tests of pressure-retaining parts to 125 percent of the design pressure (multiplied by the ratio of material allowable stress at room temperature to the allowable stress value at the design temperature),
- 2) seal leakage tests, and 3) performance tests, while the pump is Chapter 03 3.9B-40 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR operated with flow, to determine total developed head, minimum and maximum head, and NPSH requirements. Also monitored during these operating tests are bearing temperatures (except water-cooled bearings) and vibration levels. Both are shown to be below specified limits. After the pump is installed in the plant, it undergoes preservice tests, functional tests, and the required periodic inservice inspections and inservice tests. These tests demonstrate reliability of the pump for the design life of the plant.
In addition to these tests, the safety-related active pumps are analyzed for operability during a faulted condition by imposing the following criteria: 1) the pump is not damaged during the faulted event, and 2) the pump continues operating despite the faulted loads.
Analysis of Loading, Stress, and Acceleration Conditions To avoid damage during the faulted plant condition, the stresses caused by the combination of normal operating loads, SSE, hydrodynamic, and dynamic system loads are limited to the material elastic limit, as indicated in Section 3.9B.3.1 and Table 3.9B-2.
A three-dimensional finite element model of the pump/motor and its support was developed and dynamically analyzed using the response spectrum analysis method. The same model was analyzed for static nozzle loads, pump thrust loads, and deadweight. Critical location stresses were evaluated and compared with the allowable stress criteria. Critical location deflection and acceleration were evaluated to assure operability. The maximum seismic nozzle loads from the attached piping system are also considered in an analysis of the pump support to assure that there will be no geometric/dimensional deformation of the pump components.
Since the pumps and motors are structurally coupled, the dynamic acceleration values at the motor were obtained by performing a pump/motor response spectrum dynamic analysis to transfer the floor RRS to the motor and determine the peak vibration acceleration amplitude at the point of highest acceleration in the motor. This analysis showed that the maximum acceleration was less than the values used in the detailed motor analyses.
Pump Operation During and Following SSE Loading Active pump/motor rotor combinations are designed to rotate at a constant speed under all conditions. Motors are designed to withstand short periods of severe overload. The high rotary inertia in the operating pump rotor and the nature of the random, short duration loading characteristics of the seismic event prevent the rotor from becoming seized. In actuality, the seismic and hydrodynamic loadings cause only a slight increase, if any, in the torque (i.e., motor current) necessary to drive the pump at the constant design speed. Therefore, the pump does not shut down during the faulted load and continues to operate at the design speed.
The functional ability of the active pumps after a faulted condition is assured since only normal operating loads and steady-state nozzle Chapter 03 3.9B-41 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR loads exist. For the active pumps, the faulted condition is greater than the normal condition only due to seismic SSE and hydrodynamic loads on the equipment. These events are infrequent and of relatively short duration compared to the design life of the equipment.
Since it is demonstrated that the pumps are not damaged during the faulted event, the postfaulted condition operating loads are no worse than the normal plant operating limits. This is ensured by requiring that the imposed nozzle loads (steady-state loads) for normal conditions and postfaulted conditions are limited by the magnitudes of the normal condition nozzle loads. The postfaulted condition ability of the pumps to function under these applied loads is proven during the normal operating plant conditions for active pumps.
ECCS Motors The analysis of the ECCS motors is performed by a computer program that consists of the mechanical analysis of the motor rotor assembly when acted upon by external forces including magnetic and centrifugal forces at any point along the shaft. The calculation for the seismic and hydrodynamic condition assumes that the motor is operating and the seismic, hydrodynamic, magnetic, and centrifugal forces all act simultaneously and in phase on the rotor shaft assembly. Other components of the motor, such as stator frame, lower-end shield, stator supports, base fasteners, top cap, and conduit box, are checked for the combined effects of seismic, self-weight, hydrodynamic, and operational loads, including consideration of bending, shear, torsion, and direct bearing loads.
The analysis and tests that are used for qualifications of ECCS pump motors were performed on an ECCS test motor of very similar mechanical construction.
The type test has been performed on a 1,250-hp vertical motor in accordance with IEEE-323-1974, by first simulating normal operation during the design life, then with the motor being subjected to a number of seismic and hydrodynamic events, and to the abnormal environmental conditions possible during and after a LOCA.
The test plan for the type test was as follows:
- 1. Thermal aging of the motor electrical insulation system (which is a part of the stator only) was based on extrapolation in accordance with the temperature life characteristic curve to satisfy the requirements of IEEE-275-1966 and from test data for the insulation type used on the ECCS motors. The amount of aging was equivalent to the total estimated days at maximum insulation temperature.
- 2. Radiation aging of the motor electrical insulation equals the maximum estimated integrated dose of gamma during normal and abnormal conditions.
Chapter 03 3.9B-42 Rev. 25, October 2022
- 3. The dynamic deflection analysis on the rotor shaft, performed to ensure adequate rotation clearance, has been verified by static loading and deflection of the rotor for the type test motor.
- 4. Dynamic load aging and testing has been performed on a biaxial test table in accordance with IEEE-344-1975.
During this type test the shake table input simulated the maximum design limit of the SSE and hydrodynamic loads, combined with motor starts and operational combinations that may possibly occur during plant life. The acceleration values of the motor in the type test were significantly higher than those found in the structurally-coupled motor and pump dynamic analyses.
- 5. An environmental test simulating a LOCA condition with 100-days duration time has been performed with the test motor fully loaded, simulating pump operation. The test consisted of startup and 6-hr operation at 212°F ambient temperature and 100-percent steam environment. Another startup and operation of the test motor after 1-hr standstill in the same environment was followed by sufficient operation at high humidity and temperature, based on extrapolation in accordance with the temperature life characteristic curve to satisfy the requirements of IEEE-275-1966 for the insulation type used on the ECCS motors.
3.9B.3.2.2 SLC Pump and Motor Assembly and RCIC Pump Assembly These equipment assemblies are small, compact, rigid assemblies, with natural frequencies well above 33 Hz. With this fact verified, each equipment assembly has been seismically qualified by static analysis.
This static qualification verifies operability under seismic conditions, and assures structural loading stresses within Code limitations.
3.9B.3.2.3 NSSS Valves 3.9B.3.2.3.1 Safety Class 1 Active Valves The Safety Class 1 active valves are the MSIVs, SRVs, SLC valves, and HPCS injection valves. Each of these valves is designed to perform its mechanical function in conjunction with a DBA including hydrodynamic loads. Qualification for operability is unique for each valve type. The method of qualification is described below.
Main Steam Isolation Valves The MSIVs are evaluated for operability during seismic and hydrodynamic load events by both analysis and test.
- 1. The valve body is designed in accordance with ASME Code Section III, Subsection NB (Table 3.9B-2z), which limits deformation to within the elastic limit of the material by Chapter 03 3.9B-43 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR limiting pressure and pipe reaction input loads (including seismic and hydrodynamic loads). This ensures that only small deformations are allowed in the operating area of the valve body, hence, no interference with valve operability.
- 2. The entire topworks assembly was dynamically qualified by a bidirectional, random-frequency shake test. The loadings include SRV aging, OBE and SSE motions, and chugging motions. The SRV aging lasted 15 min for each pair of vertical axes and one of the two major horizontal axes.
The motion simulation involved 5 intervals of 30 sec each for the 2 bidirectional combinations. The SSE simulation involved 1 interval of 30 sec each for the two bidirectional combinations. The chugging motion involved 15 min of bidirectional loadings lasting 15 min for each pair of major orthogonal axes. The testing covered seismic and hydrodynamic loads. The TRS exceeded the RRS by 10 percent. During each test interval, the MSIV topworks was cycled from full open to full closed to demonstrate operability. After the complete dynamic test program, the MSIV topworks was again cycled to ensure operability.
Pipe anchors and restraints are provided in such a way as to limit the dynamic response and amplified accelerations to within design limits for the MSIVs. The mathematical modeling of the assembly accounts for the natural frequencies of the assembly as determined by the analysis and confirmed by a generic test.
The actuator solenoid valve cluster assemblies for the MSIVs have been changed from the original design. The cluster assembly was evaluated for operability during seismic and hydrodynamic load events using the same test intervals and combinations as addressed above. The RRS used for testing were generated at the MSIV/actuator solenoid valve cluster assembly interface. In certain low-frequency ranges, the TRS did not envelop the corresponding RRS. However, in the frequency range of interest (above 0.85 times the replacement cluster's fundamental frequency), the TRS does envelop the corresponding RRS.
- 3. MSIV operability following a downstream line break was demonstrated by the "state line test," as defined in the report APED-5750 (March 1969)(14). The test specimen was a 20-in valve of a design representative of the MSIVs.
Main Steam Safety/Relief Valves SRVs are qualified by test for operability during a seismic and hydrodynamic loading event. Each valve is designed for maximum moments that may be imposed when installed in service. These moments are resultants due to deadweight plus seismic and hydrodynamic loading of both the valve and the connecting pipe, the thermal expansion of the connecting pipe, and the reaction forces from valve discharge.
Chapter 03 3.9B-44 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR The SRVs were qualified by testing for seismic and hydrodynamic loads. The natural frequencies were determined to be greater than 33 Hz for seismic and 60 Hz for hydrodynamic loading.
The SRV design has been upgraded to NUREG-0588 Category 1 requirements. The SRV qualification program consists of:
- 1. Radiation aging of electropneumatic actuator assembly for a 5-yr (minimum) period.
- 2. Thermal aging of the SRV assembly for a 5-yr (minimum) period at 300°F.
- 3. Thermal cycling of the SRV from 135°F to 220°F back to 135°F 80 times and simultaneously actuating the SRV assembly approximately 130 times during the environmental transient condition.
- 4. Mechanical cycling of the SRV assembly 1,250 times in a 150°F ambient environment before subjecting the actuator assembly to a series of external pressurization tests.
The dynamic tests for SRV assembly envelope the Unit 2 RRS and hydrodynamic loading condition. The dynamic testing consists of vibration aging in accordance with IEEE-382-1980, 40-yr equivalent hydrodynamic aging, and upset and faulted loading conditions. SRV operability was demonstrated by periodically actuating (opening and closing) the valve successfully without malfunction.
Standby Liquid Control (Explosive) Valve The SLC valve has been qualified by test in compliance with NUREG-0588, Category 1 requirements. The qualification includes compliance with IEEE-323-1974, IEEE-344-1975, and IEEE-382-1980.
Prior to seismic and hydrodynamic testing, the explosive valve was subjected to radiation and thermal aging. No mechanical cycling was performed since this valve is designed for one-time use and, therefore, not subjected to operational cycles. Fatigue testing due to pipe-induced vibration, however, was performed by simulating SRV, OBE, and SSE loads to demonstrate functional operability.
HPCS Gate Valve There is one Class 1 HPCS valve. This valve is a motor-operated gate valve. The valve body design, analysis, and testing is in accordance with the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code,Section III, Class 1 requirements. The environmental testing (radiation, thermal, and mechanical aging) in accordance with IEEE-382-1980 and dynamic testing per IEEE-344-1975 of a specimen motor actuator will be performed for the equivalent of 40-yr normal environment and 100-day post-LOCA environment to demonstrate functional operability.
3.9B.3.2.3.2 Safety Class 2 and 3 Active Valves Chapter 03 3.9B-45 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR There are six HPCS gate valves and four CRD globe valves in this category. There is no Class 3 active valve in the NSSS scope of supply.
HPCS Gate Valves These MOVs are qualified by testing valves that are generally typical of the valves supplied by GE. Operability is ensured by testing at the static design basis load. The actuators are qualified to IEEE-382-1980 to levels that exceed the design loadings.
CRD Globe Valves These four CRD SDV vent and drain valves are air-operated globe valves. They were dynamically qualified by test, in accordance with IEEE-344-1975, to demonstrate operational and structural integrity under seismic and hydrodynamic load conditions.
3.9B.3.3 Design and Installation of Pressure Relief Devices 3.9B.3.3.1 Main Steam Safety/Relief Valves SRV valve opening results in a transient that produces momentary unbalanced forces acting on the discharge piping system for the period from opening of the SRV until a steady discharge flow from the RPV to the suppression pool is established. This period includes clearing of the water slug from the end of the discharge piping submerged in the suppression pool. Pressure waves traveling through the discharge piping following the relatively rapid opening of the SRV cause the SRV discharge piping to vibrate. This in turn produces forces that act on the main steam piping.
The analysis of the relief valve discharge transient consists of a stepwise time-history solution of the fluid flow equation to generate a time-history of the fluid properties at numerous locations along the pipe. The fluid transient properties are calculated based on the maximum SRV set pressure specified in the steam system specification, and the value of the ASME flow rating increased by a factor to account for the conservative method of establishing the rating.
Simultaneous discharge of all valves is assumed in the analysis as this is considered to induce maximum stress in the piping. Reaction loads on the pipe are determined at each elbow location. These loads are composed of pressure times area, momentum change, and fluid friction terms. The method of analysis to determine piping system response to relief valve operation is time-history integration. The forces are applied at locations on the piping system where fluid flow changes direction, thus causing momentary reactions. The resulting loads on the SRV, the MSL, and the discharge piping are combined with loads due to other effects as specified in Section 3.9B.3.1. The Code stress limits corresponding to load combination classifications of normal, upset, emergency, and faulted are applied to the steam and discharge pipe.
3.9B.3.4 Component Supports Chapter 03 3.9B-46 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR 3.9B.3.4.1 Piping Piping supports are designed in accordance with Subsection NF of ASME Section III. Supports are either designed by load rating in accordance with Subsubarticle NF-3260 or to the stress limits for linear supports in accordance with Subsubarticle NF-3231. To avoid buckling in the component supports, Appendixes F and XVII of ASME Section III require that the allowable loads be limited to two-thirds of the critical buckling loads. The critical buckling loads for ASME Safety Class 1 component supports in the NSSS scope subjected to faulted loads that are more severe than normal, upset, and emergency loads, are determined by the vendor using the methods discussed in Appendix F of the ASME Code. In general, the load combinations for the conditions correspond to those used to design the supported pipe.
Design transient cyclic data are not applicable to piping supports as no fatigue evaluation is necessary to meet the Code requirements.
See Appendix 3E for a discussion of stresses in supports due to thermal growth of piping and seismic anchor motion.
The design criteria and dynamic testing requirements for component supports are as follows:
Stiff Pipe Clamps Stiff pipe clamps are used on the recirculation piping system. There are 3 E-system pipe clamps on each recirculation loop. This is the only use of stiff pipe clamps.
The clamps were not used to meet stiffness criteria; they were designed to meet the requirements for strength and load distribution using a minimum of space.
The clamp design utilizes a double nut arrangement to prevent the nuts from backing off. The low temperature (<600°) and stresses in the bolt from preloads will not cause a relaxation of the material; consequently, no lift-off from the piping will occur.
Although bolt preloads are not addressable under ASME III rules for piping, preload could result in damage to the pipe if a clamp is poorly designed. Calculations have been made to ensure that bolt preload will not result in plastic deformation of recirculation pipe walls.
Equation 9 (of ASME III, Subsection NB) is aimed at preventing collapse of the piping system due to loads that produce primary stresses. Collapse is prevented by keeping the stresses due to pressure, deadweight, and inertia effects of dynamic loads less than prescribed values. The existence of clamps on piping systems does not adversely affect the moment carrying capability or reduce the ability of the piping system to resist collapse under combined loadings that produce primary stresses.
The only concern is the loading transmitted from the snubber through the clamp pads to the pipe. This bearing load will result in local stress in the pipe wall. These stresses are conservatively Chapter 03 3.9B-47 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR calculated using the indices method and added to the membrane and overall bending stresses computed by Equation 9 of the Code.
Clamp-induced stresses caused by the constraint of pipe expansion due to internal pressure have been added to other operating secondary and peak stresses by calculating effective increases in local bending stresses.
Clamp-induced stresses due to differential temperatures and material expansion coefficients have been accounted for by computing effective increases in local bending stresses. These stresses have been added to other operating secondary and peak stresses.
The fatigue usage at each clamp location has been conservatively computed, taking into consideration clamp-induced stresses from internal pressure, differential thermal expansion, and snubber loads.
The clamp-induced stresses were added to the stresses computed for each load set using Equations 10 and 11 of NB-3650. Cumulative fatigue usage was computed by the rules of the Code.
The stresses induced at each clamp location were calculated and compared to Code acceptance criteria. The primary stresses computed by Equation 9 were shown to be nongoverning. The thermal expansion stresses computed by Equation 12 were also shown to be nongoverning.
The stress ratchet criteria of Equation 13 and the fatigue usage criteria of Equation 14 meet Code criteria, with significant margins.
Component Supports All component supports, which include piping clamps, hangers, snubbers, struts, and attachments (e.g., clevis) to the building structure are designed, fabricated, and assembled so they cannot become disengaged by the movement of the supported pipe or equipment after they have been installed. All component supports are designed in accordance with the rules of Subsection NF of the Code. For the NSSS scope of supply, valve operators mounted on Safety Class 1 piping are not used as component supports.
Table 3.9B-2 includes loads and load combinations which are used also for the NSSS piping supports. The stress limits are in accordance with ASME III, Subsection NF.
No specific deformation limit is required. Deformation is limited by requiring proper stress limits.
Hangers The design load on hangers is the load caused by deadweight. The hangers are calibrated to ensure that they support the design load at both their hot and cold load settings. Hangers provide a specified down travel and up travel in excess of the specified thermal movement.
Snubbers Chapter 03 3.9B-48 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR Required Load Capacity and Snubber Location The entire piping system, including valves and suspension system between anchor points, is mathematically modeled for complete structural analysis. In the mathematical model, the snubbers are modeled as springs with a given spring stiffness depending on the snubber size. The analysis determines the forces and moments acting on each component and the forces acting on the snubbers due to all dynamic loading conditions defined in the piping design specification. The design load on snubbers includes those loads caused by seismic forces (OBE and SSE),
hydrodynamic forces, system anchor movements, and reaction forces caused by relief valve discharge, turbine stop valve closure, and others.
The snubber location and loading direction are first decided by estimation to confine the stresses in the piping system to acceptable values. The snubber locations and direction are refined by performing the computer analysis on the piping system as described above.
The spring constant required by the suspension design specification for a given load capacity snubber is compared against the spring constant used in the piping system model. If the spring constants are the same, then the snubber location and load direction have been confirmed. If the spring constants are not in agreement, they are brought into agreement, and the system analysis is redone to confirm the snubber loads. This iteration is continued until all snubber load capacities and spring constants are compatible.
Design Specification Requirements To assure that the required structural and mechanical performance characteristics and product quality are achieved, the following requirements for design and testing are imposed on the manufacturer:
- 1. The snubbers are required by the suspension design specification to be designed in accordance with all rules and regulations of ASME Section III, Subsection NF. This design requirement includes analysis wherein the stresses in the snubber component parts are calculated under normal, upset, emergency, and faulted loads. These calculated stresses are then compared against the allowable stresses of the material as given in ASME Section III to ensure that they are below the allowable limit.
- 2. The snubbers are tested to ensure that they can perform as required during the OBE, the SSE, and hydrodynamic events under anticipated operational transient loads or other mechanical loads associated with the design requirements for the plant. Operability requirements are described in TRM Section 3.7.3. The test requirements include:
- a. Snubbers are subjected to force or displacement versus time loading at frequencies within the range of significant modes of the piping system.
Chapter 03 3.9B-49 Rev. 25, October 2022
- b. Displacements are measured to determine the performance characteristics specified.
- c. Tests are conducted at various temperatures to ensure operability over the specified range.
- d. Peak test loads in both tension and compression are equal to or higher than the rated load requirements.
- e. Tests are conducted for various abnormal environmental conditions. Upon completion of the above abnormal environmental transient test, the snubber is tested dynamically at a frequency with a specified frequency range. The snubber must operate as designed during the dynamic test.
Snubber Installation Requirements An installation instruction manual is required by the suspension design specification. This manual is required to contain instructions for storage, handling, erection, and adjustments (if necessary) of snubbers. Each snubber has an installation location drawing, which contains the installation location of the snubber on the pipe and structure, the hot and cold settings, and additional information needed to install the particular snubber.
The suspension design specification requires that snubbers be provided with position indicators to identify the rod position. This indicator facilitates the checking of hot and cold settings of the snubber, as specified in the installation manual, during plant preoperational and startup testing.
Inspection, Testing, Repair, and/or Replacement of Snubbers The suspension design specification requires that the snubber supplier prepare an installation instruction manual. This manual is required to contain complete instructions for the testing, maintenance, and repair of the snubber. It also contains inspection points and the period for inspection.
Struts The design load on struts includes those loads caused by deadweight, thermal expansion, primary seismic forces (OBE and SSE), hydrodynamic loads, system anchor displacements, and reaction forces caused by relief valve discharge, turbine stop valve closure, etc. Struts are designed in accordance with ASME Section III, Article NF-3000 to be capable of carrying the design load for all operating conditions.
3.9B.3.4.2 Reactor Pressure Vessel Stabilizer The RPV stabilizer, which is massive and well supported, is designed as a Safety Class 1 linear-type component support in accordance with the requirements of ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Subsection NF. The RPV stabilizers attach to the ring girder/star truss structure. The ring girder/star truss structure, which is the top extension of the shield wall, is considered building steel and is Chapter 03 3.9B-50 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR designed to AISC criteria (see Section 3.8.3.2). The stabilizer provides a reaction point near the upper end of the RPV to resist horizontal loads due to effects such as earthquake and pipe rupture.
The design loads and load combinations, stress criteria, calculated stresses, and allowable stresses in the critical areas are summarized in Table 3.9B-2f.
Deformation is limited by requiring proper stress limits.
3.9B.3.4.3 NSSS Floor-Mounted Equipment (Pumps, Heat Exchanger, and RCIC Turbine)
The NSSS floor-mounted equipment is analyzed to verify the adequacy of its support structures under various plant operating conditions.
In all cases the stress loads in the critical support areas are within the ASME Code allowables. The loading conditions, stress criteria, and the allowable stresses in the critical support areas are given in Table 3.9B-2 in the respective equipment table.
3.9B.3.4.4 Supports for ASME Safety Class 1, 2, and 3 Active Components ASME Safety Class 1, 2, and 3 active components are either pumps or valves. Since valves are supported by piping and not tied to building structures, pipe design criteria govern.
Category I active pump supports are qualified for seismic and hydrodynamic loads by testing when the pump supports and the pumps fulfill the following conditions:
- 1. Simulate actual mounting conditions.
- 2. Simulate all static and dynamic loadings on the pump.
- 3. Monitor pump operability during testing.
- 4. Normal operation of the pump during and after the test indicates that the supports are adequate. Any deflection or deformation of the pump supports that precludes the operability of the pump is not accepted.
- 5. Supports are inspected for structural integrity after the test. Any cracking or permanent deformation is not accepted.
Seismic and hydrodynamic qualification of component supports by analysis is generally accomplished as follows:
- 1. Stresses at all support elements and parts such as pump holddowns, and baseplate holddown bolts, pump support pads, pump pedestal, and foundation are checked to be within the allowable limits as specified in ASME Subsection NF.
- 2. For normal and upset plant conditions, the deflections and deformations of the support are assured to be within the Chapter 03 3.9B-51 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR elastic limits and must not exceed the values permitted by the designer based on his design verification tests to ensure the operability of the pumps.
- 3. For emergency and faulted plant conditions, the deformations must not exceed the values permitted by the designer to ensure the operability of the pumps.
3.9B.3.4.5 Bolting Support Component Support Bolting The support bolting of the RWCU pump is designed for the effects of pipe and SSE loads to the requirements of ASME Section III, Appendix XVII. The stress limits of 0.25Sy for tension and 0.20Sy for shear are used.
The equipment-to-base plate bolting of RCIC/SLC pumps and RCIC turbine satisfies the following design criteria: For normal and upset conditions, 1.0S is used for primary membrane and 1.5S for primary membrane plus bending, where S is the allowable stress limit from ASME Section III, Appendix I, Table I-7.3. For emergency and faulted conditions, stresses shall be less than 1.2 times the allowable limits for normal and upset conditions.
Piping Supports and Pipe-Mounted Equipment Supports The allowable stresses for bolts meet the criteria of ASME Section III, Subsection NF. For service levels A and B, the bolts meet the criteria of NF-3280. For service levels C and D, XVII-2460 with factors indicated under XVII-2110 is applicable to the design requirements of bolting. The calculated stresses under these categories do not exceed the specified minimum yield stresses at temperature.
High-Strength Bolts Bolts SA-193, Gr B7, and ASTM A-490-76a are used on Bergen-Patterson riser clamps for hanger attachments and E-systems clamps for snubber attachments, respectively.
The RWCU pump and driver motor holddown bolts are SA-193, Gr B7, and SAE Gr 8, respectively.
The RCIC pump and holddown bolts are SA-449.
The SLC pump and driver motor holddown bolts are SA-193, Gr B7, and SAE Gr 8, respectively.
3.9B.4 Control Rod Drive System Unit 2 is equipped with a hydraulic CRD system that includes the CRD mechanism, the HCU, the condensate supply system, and the SDV, and extends to the coupling interface with the control rods.
Chapter 03 3.9B-52 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR 3.9B.4.1 Descriptive Information on CRD System Descriptive information on the CRDs and the entire drive and control system is contained in Section 4.6.
3.9B.4.2 Applicable CRD System Design Specifications The CRD system is designed to meet the functional design criteria outlined in Section 4.6 and consists of the following:
- 1. Locking piston CRD.
- 2. Hydraulic control unit.
- 3. Hydraulic power supply (pumps).
- 4. Interconnecting piping.
- 5. Flow, and pressure and isolation valves.
- 6. Instrumentation and electrical controls.
Quality group classification is not applicable to the CRD.
Those components of the CRD forming part of the primary pressure boundary are designed according to ASME Section III.
The quality group classification of the CRD hydraulic system is outlined in Table 3.2-1, and the components are designed according to the codes and standards governing the individual quality groups.
Pertinent aspects of the design and qualification of the CRD system components are discussed in the following sections: transients in Section 3.9B.1.1, faulted conditions in Section 3.9B.1.4, seismic testing in Section 3.9B.2.2, load combinations and stress limits in Table 3.9B-2a.
Tables 3.9B-2g and 3.9B-2y show the load combinations, analytical methods, and allowable and calculated stress values for the highly stressed areas of the CRD housing and supports.
3.9B.4.3 Design Loads, Stress Limits, and Allowable Deformation The ASME Code components of the CRD system have been evaluated analytically, and the design load combinations and stress limits are listed in Table 3.9B-2a. For the non-Code components, experimental testing was used to determine the CRD performance under all possible conditions as described in Section 3.9B.4.4. Deformation has been compared with the allowables and is not a limiting factor in the analysis of the CRD components.
3.9B.4.4 CRD Performance Assurance Program The CRD test program consists of the following tests:
Chapter 03 3.9B-53 Rev. 25, October 2022
- 1. Development tests.
- 2. Factory quality control tests.
- 3. 5-yr maintenance life tests.
- 4. 1.5 x design life tests.
- 5. Operational tests.
- 6. Acceptance tests.
- 7. Surveillance tests.
All the above tests except 3 and 4 are discussed in Sections 4.6.3 through 4.6.3.1.1.5. Tests 3 and 4 are discussed as follows:
Test 3 Yr Maintenance Life Tests Four CRDs are normally picked at random from the production stock each year and subjected to various tests under simulated reactor conditions and more than one-eighth of the cycles specified in Section 3.9B.1.1. Upon completion of the test program, CRDs must meet or surpass the minimum specified performance requirements. This sample size is based on the large production volume during the manufacturing of CRDs through and including Model 7RDB144C.
The practice of testing the CRDs continues for Model 7RDB144EG001.
However, due to the lower production volume expected for this model, fewer drives per year are tested.
Test 4 - 1.5 x Design Life Tests When a significant design change is made to the components of the drive, the drive is subjected to a series of tests equivalent to 1.5 times the life test cycles specified in Section 3.9B.1.1. Two CRDs underwent such testing in 1976. Upon completion of the test program, these CRDs met or exceeded the minimum specified performance requirements.
3.9B.5 Reactor Core Support Structures and Pressure Vessel Internals 3.9B.5.1 Design Arrangements The core support structures and reactor vessel internals (exclusive of fuel, control rods, CRDs, and in-core nuclear instrumentation) are identified below:
- 1. Core support structures:
- a. Shroud.
- b. Shroud support.
- c. Core plate and holddown bolts.
- d. Top guide.
Chapter 03 3.9B-54 Rev. 25, October 2022
- e. Fuel supports.
- f. CRD housing.
- g. Control rod guide tubes.
- 2. Reactor internals:
- a. Jet pump assemblies and instrumentation penetration seal, instrumentation lines.*
- b. Feedwater spargers.*
- c. Vessel head spray nozzle.
- d. Differential pressure and liquid control lines.
- e. In-core flux monitor guide tubes.
- f. Initial startup neutron sources.*
- g. Surveillance sample holders.*
- h. Core spray lines and spargers.
- i. In-core instrument housings.
- k. Steam dryer.*
- l. Shroud head and steam separator assembly.*
- m. Guide rods.*
- Nonsafety-class equipment.
A general assembly drawing of the important reactor components is shown on Figure 5.3-4.
The floodable inner volume of the RPV inside the core shroud up to the level of the jet pump suction inlet and internal flow path following a postulated recirculation line break are depicted in Figure 3.9B-2.
The design arrangement of the reactor internals such as the jet pumps, steam separators, and guide tube, is such that one end is unrestricted and thus free to expand.
3.9B.5.1.1 Core Support Structures Chapter 03 3.9B-55 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR These structures form partitions within the reactor vessel to sustain pressure differentials across the partitions, direct the flow of the coolant water, and laterally locate and support the fuel assemblies.
Shroud The shroud support, shroud, and top guide make up a stainless steel cylindrical assembly. The first two structures provide a partition to separate the upward flow of coolant through the core from the downward recirculation flow. This partition separates the core region from the downcomer annulus, providing a floodable region following a recirculation line break. The volume enclosed by this assembly is characterized by three regions. The upper portion surrounds the core discharge plenum, which is bounded by the shroud head on top and the top guide grid plate below. The central portion of the shroud surrounds the active fuel and forms the longest section of the assembly. This section is bounded at the top by the grid plate and at the bottom by the core plate. The lower portion, surrounding part of the lower plenum, is welded to the RPV shroud support.
Shroud Support The shroud support is designed to support the shroud and to support and locate the jet pumps. The shroud support provides an annular baffle between the RPV and the shroud. The jet pump discharge diffusers penetrate the shroud support to introduce the coolant to the inlet plenum below the core.
Shroud Head and Steam Separator Assembly This component is not a core support structure or safety class component. It is discussed here to describe the coolant flow paths in the RPV. The shroud head and steam separator assembly is bolted to the top of the top guide to form the top of the core discharge plenum. This plenum provides a mixing chamber for the steam-water mixture before it enters the steam separators. Individual stainless steel axial flow steam separators are attached to the top of standpipes that are welded into the shroud head. The steam separators have no moving parts. In each separator, the steam-water mixture rising through the standpipe passes vanes that impart a spin to establish a vortex, separating the water from the steam. The separated water flows from the lower portion of the steam separator into the downcomer annulus.
Core Plate The core plate consists of a circular stainless steel plate with bored holes stiffened with a rim-and-beam structure. The plate provides lateral support and guidance for the control rod guide tubes, in-core flux monitor guide tubes, peripheral fuel supports, and startup neutron sources. The last two items are also supported vertically by the core support plate. The entire assembly is bolted to a support ledge on the lower portions of the shroud.
Chapter 03 3.9B-56 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR Top Guide The top guide is formed by a series of stainless steel beams joined at right angles to form square openings and fastened to a peripheral rim. Each opening provides lateral support and guidance for four fuel assemblies or, in the case of peripheral fuel, less than four fuel assemblies. Sockets are provided in the bottom of the beam intersections to anchor the in-core flux monitors and startup neutron sources. The rim of the top guide rests on a ledge between the upper and central portions of the shroud. The top guide has alignment pins that engage and bear against slots in the shroud that are used to position the assembly correctly before it is secured. Lateral restraint is provided by wedge blocks between the top guide and the shroud wall.
Fuel Support The fuel supports shown on Figure 3.9B-3 are of two basic types:
peripheral supports and four-lobed orificed fuel supports. The peripheral fuel support is located at the outer edge of the active core and is not adjacent to control rods. Each peripheral fuel support supports one fuel assembly and contains a single orifice assembly designed to ensure proper coolant flow to the peripheral fuel assembly. Each four-lobed orificed fuel support supports four fuel assemblies and has four orifice plates to ensure proper coolant flow distribution to each rod-controlled fuel assembly. The four-lobed orificed fuel supports rest in the top of the control rod guide tubes which are supported laterally by the core plate. The control rods pass through slots in the center of the four-lobed orificed fuel support. A control rod and the four adjacent fuel assemblies represent a core cell described in Section 4.4.2.
Control Rod Guide Tubes The control rod guide tubes, located inside the vessel, extend from the top of the CRD housings up through holes in the core plate. Each tube is designed as the guide for a control rod and as the vertical support for a four-lobed orificed fuel support piece and the four fuel assemblies surrounding the control rod. The bottom of the guide tube is supported by the CRD housing, which in turn transmits the weight of the guide tube, fuel support, and fuel assemblies to the reactor vessel bottom head. A thermal sleeve is inserted into the CRD housing from below and is rotated to lock the control rod guide tube in place. A key is inserted into a locking slot in the bottom of the CRD housing to hold the thermal sleeve in position.
3.9B.5.1.2 Reactor Vessel Internals Jet Pump Assemblies The jet pump assemblies are not core support structures but are discussed here to describe coolant flow paths in the RPV. The jet pump assemblies are located in two semicircular groups in the downcomer annulus between the core shroud and the RPV wall. The design and performance of the jet pump are covered in detail in APED-Chapter 03 3.9B-57 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR 5460(10) and NEDO-10602(11). Each stainless steel jet pump consists of driving nozzles, suction inlet, throat or mixing section, and diffuser (Figure 3.9B-4). The driving nozzle, suction inlet, and throat are joined together as a removable unit, and the diffuser is permanently installed. High-pressure water from the recirculation pumps is supplied to each pair of jet pumps through a riser pipe welded to the recirculation inlet nozzle thermal sleeve. A riser brace consists of cantilever beams welded to a riser pipe and to pads on the RPV wall.
The nozzle entry section is connected to the riser by a metal-to-metal, spherical-to-conical seal joint. Firm contact is maintained by a holddown clamp. The throat section is supported laterally by a bracket attached to the riser. There is a slip-fit joint between the throat and diffuser. The diffuser is a gradual conical section changing to a straight cylindrical section at the lower end.
Unit 2 will reduce the preload on the beams from 30 to 25 kips in accordance with GE's recommendations. The expected life of these beams without cracking is 19 to 40 yr for Group 2 beams and 240 yr for Group 3 beams. ISI of the jet pump holddown beam will be performed to detect cracking. Inspection frequencies will be based on BWRVIP-41(21) requirements.
Steam Dryers The steam dryer assembly is neither a core support structure nor a safety class component. It is discussed here to describe coolant flow paths in the vessel. The steam dryers remove moisture from the wet steam leaving the steam separators. The extracted moisture flows down the dryer vanes to the collecting troughs, then flows through tubes into the downcomer annulus. A skirt extends from the bottom of the dryer vane housing to the steam separator standpipe below the water level. This skirt forms a seal between the wet steam plenum and the dry steam flowing from the top of the dryers to the steam outlet nozzles.
The steam dryer and shroud head are positioned in the vessel during installation with the aid of vertical guide rods. The dryer assembly rests on steam dryer support brackets attached to the RPV wall.
Upward movement of the dryer assembly, which may occur under accident conditions, is restricted by steam dryer holddown brackets attached to the RPV top head.
Feedwater Spargers These components are not core support structures nor safety class components. They are discussed here to describe flow paths in the vessel. The feedwater spargers are stainless steel headers located in the mixing plenum above the downcomer annulus. A separate sparger is fitted to each feedwater nozzle and is shaped to conform to the curve of the vessel wall. Sparger end brackets are pinned to vessel brackets to support the spargers. Feedwater flow enters the center of the spargers and is discharged radially inward to mix the cooler feedwater with the downcomer flow from the steam separators and steam dryer before it contacts the vessel wall. The feedwater also serves Chapter 03 3.9B-58 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR to condense the steam in the region above the downcomer annulus and to subcool the water flowing to the jet pumps and recirculation pumps.
Core Spray Lines This component is not a core support structure. It is discussed here to describe a safety class feature inside the RPV. The core spray lines are the means for directing flow to the core spray nozzles, which distribute coolant during accident conditions.
Two core spray lines enter the RPV through the two core spray nozzles (Section 5.4). The lines divide immediately inside the RPV. The two halves are routed to opposite sides of the RPV and are supported by clamps attached to the vessel wall. The lines are then routed downward into the downcomer annulus and pass through the top guide cylinder immediately below the flange. The flow divides again as it enters the center of the semicircular sparger, which is routed halfway around the inside of the top guide cylinder. The two spargers are supported by brackets designed to accommodate thermal expansion. The line routing and supports are designed to accommodate differential movement between the top guide and vessel. The other core spray line is identical except that it enters the opposite side of the vessel and the spargers are at a slightly different elevation inside the top guide cylinder. The correct spray distribution pattern is provided by a combination of distribution nozzles pointed radially inward and downward from the spargers (Section 6.3).
Vessel Head Spray Nozzle This component is not a core support structure. It is included here to describe a safety class feature in the RPV. When reactor coolant is returned to the RPV, part of the flow can be diverted to a spray nozzle in the reactor head. This spray maintains saturated conditions in the RPV head volume by condensing steam being generated by the hot RPV walls and internals. The spray also decreases thermal stratification in the RPV coolant. This ensures that the water level in the RPV can rise. The higher water level provides conduction cooling to more of the mass of metal of the RPV and, therefore, helps to maintain the cooldown rate. The vessel head spray nozzle is mounted to a short length of pipe and a flange, which is bolted to a mating flange on the RPV head nozzle (Section 5.4.7).
Core Differential Pressure Line This component is not a core support structure. It is included here to describe a safety class component in the RPV. The core differential pressure line enters the vessel through a bottom head penetration and serves to sense the differential pressure across the core support plate (Section 5.4). One part of the line terminates near the lower shroud below the core support plate. It is used to sense the pressure below the core support plate during normal operation. The other line terminates immediately above the core support plate and senses the pressure in the region outside the fuel assemblies.
Chapter 03 3.9B-59 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR In-core Flux Monitor Guide Tubes These components are not core support structures. They are a safety class feature and provide a means of positioning fixed detectors in the core, as well as provide a path for calibration monitors (TIP system).
The in-core flux monitor guide tubes extend from the top of the in-core flux monitor housing (Section 5.3.3.1.4) in the lower plenum to the top of the core support plate. The power range detectors for the power range monitoring units and the dry tubes for the SRM and IRM detectors are inserted through the guide tubes. A latticework of clamps, tie bars, and spacers give lateral support and rigidity to the guide tubes. The bolts and clamps are welded, after assembly, to prevent loosening during reactor operation.
Surveillance Sample Holders This component is not a core support structure or a safety class component. The surveillance sample holders are welded baskets containing impact and tensile specimen capsules (Section 5.3.1.6.4).
The baskets hang from the brackets that are attached to the inside wall of the RPV and extend to mid-height of the active core. The radial positions are chosen to expose the specimens to the same environment and maximum neutron fluxes experienced by the RPV itself, while avoiding jet pump removal interference or damage.
Low-Pressure Coolant Injection Lines Penetrations This component is a safety class feature, not a core support structure, but is discussed here to describe the coolant flow paths in the RPV. Three LPCI lines penetrate the core shroud through separate LPCI nozzles. Coolant is discharged inside the core shroud immediately below the top guide to restore and maintain the water level in the vessel required after a LOCA.
3.9B.5.2 Design Loading Conditions 3.9B.5.2.1 Events to Be Evaluated Examination of the spectrum of conditions for which the safety design basis must be satisfied by core support structures and ESF components reveals the following significant faulted events:
- 1. Recirculation Line Break A break in a recirculation line between the RPV and the recirculation pump suction.
- 2. Steam Line Break Accident A break in one MSL between the RPV and the flow restrictor. The accident results in significant pressure differentials across some of the structures within the reactor.
Chapter 03 3.9B-60 Rev. 25, October 2022
- 3. Earthquake Subjects the core support structures and reactor internals to significant forces as a result of ground motion.
Analysis of other conditions existing during normal operation, abnormal operational transients, and accidents shows that the loads affecting the core support structures and other ESF reactor internals are less severe than these four postulated events. The faulted conditions for the RPV internals are discussed in Section 3.9B.1.4.
Load combinations and analysis for the RPV internals are discussed in Section 3.9B.3.1 and Tables 3.9B-2h and 3.9B-2i. The stress deformation and fatigue limits are discussed in Sections 3.9B.5.3.5 and 3.9B.5.3.6.
3.9B.5.2.2 Pressure Differential During Rapid Depressurization A digital computer code is used to analyze the transient conditions within the RPV following the recirculation line break accident and the steam line break accident. The analytical model of the vessel consists of nine nodes that are connected to the necessary adjoining nodes by flow paths having the required resistance and inertial characteristics. The program solves the energy and mass conservation equations for each node to give the depressurization rates and pressure in the various regions of the reactor. Figure 3.9B-5 shows the nine reactor nodes. The computer code used is the GE Short-Term Thermal-Hydraulic Model(12). This model has been approved for use in ECCS conformance evaluation under 10CFR50 Appendix K. In order to adequately describe the blowdown pressure effect on the individual assembly components, three features are included in the model that are not applicable to the ECCS analysis and are therefore not described in NEDE-20566(12).
These additional features are discussed as follows:
- 1. The liquid level in the steam separator region and in the annulus between the dryer skirt and the pressure vessel is tracked to more accurately determine the flow and mixture quality in the steam dryer and in the steam line.
- 2. The flow path between the bypass region and the shroud head is more accurately modeled since the fuel assembly pressure differential P is influenced by flashing in the guide tubes and bypass region for a steam line break. In the ECCS analysis, the momentum equation is solved in this flow path, but its irreversible loss coefficient is conservatively set at an arbitrary low value.
- 3. The enthalpies in the guide tubes and the bypass are calculated separately, since the fuel assembly P is influenced by flashing in these regions. In the ECCS analysis, these regions are lumped.
3.9B.5.2.3 Recirculation Line and Steam Line Break Chapter 03 3.9B-61 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR Accident Definition Both a recirculation line break (the largest liquid break) and a steam line break inside containment (the largest steam break) are considered in determining the DBA for the ESF reactor internals. The recirculation line break is the same as the design basis LOCA (Section 6.3). A sudden, complete circumferential break is assumed to occur in one recirculation loop. The pressure differentials on the reactor internals and core support structures are in all cases lower than those for the MSL break.
The analysis of the steam line break assumes a sudden, complete circumferential break of one MSL between the RPV and the MSL restrictor. A steam line break upstream of the flow restrictors produces a larger blowdown area and thus a faster depressurization rate than a break downstream of the restrictors. The larger blowdown area results in greater pressure differentials across the reactor internal structures.
The steam line break accident produces significantly higher pressure differentials across the reactor internal structures than does the recirculation line break. This results from the higher reactor depressurization rate associated with the steam line break.
Therefore, the steam line break is the DBA for internal pressure differentials.
Effects of Initial Reactor Power and Core Flow The maximum internal pressure loads can be considered to be composed of two parts: steady-state and transient pressure differentials.
For a given plant, the core flow and power are the two major factors that influence the reactor internal pressure differentials. The core flow essentially affects only the steady-state differential pressure.
For a fixed power, the greater the core flow, the larger will be the steady-state pressure differentials. The core power affects both the steady-state and the transient differential pressure. As the power is decreased, there is less voiding in the core and, consequently, the steady-state core pressure differential is less. However, less voiding in the core also means that less steam is generated in the RPV and thus the depressurization rate and the transient part of the maximum pressure load is increased. As a result, the total loads on some components are higher at low power.
To ensure that the calculated pressure differences bound those that could be expected if a steam line break should occur, an analysis is conducted at a low power, high recirculation flow condition in addition to the standard safety analysis condition at high power, rated recirculation flow. The power chosen for analysis is the minimum value permitted by the recirculation system controls at rated recirculation drive flow (rated recirculation drive flow is the drive flow used to achieve rated core flow. This condition maximizes those loads that are inversely proportional to power.
Seismic and Hydrodynamic Events Chapter 03 3.9B-62 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR The seismic and hydrodynamic loads acting on the structures within the RPV are based on a dynamic analysis as described in Sections 3.9B and 3.9B.2.5. Dynamic analysis is performed by coupling the lumped mass model of the RPV and internals with the building model to determine the forces, acceleration, and moment time-history in the reactor vessel and internals. This is done using the modal superposition method. ARS are also generated for subsystem analyses of selected components.
3.9B.5.3 Design Bases 3.9B.5.3.1 Safety Design Bases The reactor core support structures and internals meet the following safety design bases:
- 1. They are arranged to provide a floodable volume in which the core can be adequately cooled in the event of a breach in the nuclear system process barrier external to the RPV.
- 2. Deformation is limited to assure that the control rods and core standby cooling systems can perform their safety functions.
- 3. Mechanical design of applicable structures assures that safety design bases 1 and 2 are satisfied so that the safe shutdown of the plant and removal of decay heat are not impaired.
3.9B.5.3.2 Power Generation Design Bases The reactor core support structures and internals are designed to the following power generation design bases:
- 1. They provide the proper coolant distribution during all anticipated normal operating conditions up to full power operation of the core without fuel damage.
- 2. They are arranged to facilitate refueling operations.
- 3. They are designed to facilitate inspection.
3.9B.5.3.3 Design Loading Categories The basis for determining faulted loads on the reactor internals is shown for seismic and hydrodynamic loads in Sections 3.7B, 3.8B, and 3.9B.2.5, and for pipe rupture loads in Sections 3.9B.5.2.3 and 3.9B.5.3.4. Loading conditions for shroud support, core support structures, CRD housing, jet pumps, LPCI coupling, and control rod guide tubes are given in Table 3.9B-2 under the respective equipment table.
Core support structure and safety class internals stress limits are consistent with ASME Section III, Paragraph NA-2140, and associated Chapter 03 3.9B-63 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR stress limits contained in Addenda dated through Summer 1976. Level A, B, C, and D service limits defined in Winter 1976 Addenda which replace normal, upset, emergency, and faulted condition limits are not reflected in design documents for core support structures and other safety class internals for this reactor. However, for these components, Level A, B, C, and D service limits are judged to be equivalent to the normal, upset, emergency, and faulted loading condition limits and, therefore, for clarity, both sets of nomenclature are retained herein.
Stress intensity and other design limits are discussed in Section 3.9B.5.3.5. The core support structures that are fabricated as part of the RPV assembly are discussed in Section 3.9B.1.3.
The design requirements for equipment classified as "other internals" (e.g., steam dryers and shroud heads) were specified by the designer with appropriate consideration of the intended service of the equipment and expected plant and environmental conditions under which it is to operate. Where possible, design requirements are based on applicable industry codes and standards. If these are not available, the designer relies on accepted industry or engineering practices.
Core Shroud IGSCC Cracking The core shroud welds are susceptible to intergranular stress corrosion cracking (IGSCC) as discussed in BWRVIP-01 (Reference 15) and NRC Generic Letter 94-03. The core shroud welds have been inspected and some of the welds have been determined to have IGSCC cracking in and near the HAZ. The structural evaluation methodology used in the evaluation of the cracked shroud is consistent with methodologies described in ASME Section XI and BWRVIP-01 documents.
The analysis demonstrates that shroud structural margins and all design basis requirements are satisfied. The required ISI inspection interval for the cracked welds is defined based on the guidance provided in BWRVIP Core Shroud Inspection and Evaluation Guidelines (BWRVIP-01) and the Guidelines for Reinspection of BWR Core Shrouds (BWRVIP-07). The specific interval is defined by engineering analysis of the as-found cracking and consideration for potential crack growth and inspection uncertainty.
3.9B.5.3.4 Response of Internals Due to Inside Steam Break Accident The maximum pressure loads acting on the reactor internal components result from an inside steam line break, and on some components the loads are maximum when operating at the minimum power associated with the maximum core flow. This has been substantiated by the analytical comparison of liquid versus steam breaks and by the investigation of the effects of core power and core flow.
It has also been pointed out that it is possible but not probable that the reactor would be operating at the rather abnormal condition of minimum power and maximum core flow. More realistically, the reactor would be at or near a full power condition and thus the maximum pressure loads would act on the internal components.
Chapter 03 3.9B-64 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR 3.9B.5.3.5 Stress, Deformation, and Fatigue Limits for Engineered Safety Feature Reactor Internals (Except Core Support Structure)
The stress deformation and fatigue criteria listed in Tables 3.9B-5 through 3.9B-8 are used, or the criteria are based on the criteria established in applicable codes and standards for similar equipment, by manufacturers' standards, or by empirical methods based on field experience and testing. For the quantity SFmin (minimum safety factor) appearing in those tables, the following values were used.
Service Design Level Condition SFmin A Normal 2.25 B Upset 2.25 C Emergency 1.5 D Faulted 1.125 Components inside the RPV, such as control rods that must move during accident conditions, have been examined for adequate clearances during emergency and faulted conditions. No mechanical clearance problems have been identified. The forcing functions applicable to the reactor internals are discussed in Section 3.9B.2.5.
3.9B.5.3.6 Stress, Deformation, and Fatigue Limits for Core Support Structures The stress, deformation, and fatigue criteria presented in Tables 3.9B-9 through 3.9B-11 are used. These criteria are supplemented, where applicable, by the criteria for the reactor internals in the previous section.
3.9B.6 References
- 1. Kalnins, A. Analysis of Shells of Revolution subjected to Symmetrical and Non-Symmetrical Loads, in Journal of Applied Mechanics, Vol. 31, September 1964, pp 467-476.
- 2. Wilson, E. L. A Digital Computer Program for the Finite Element Analysis of Solids with Non-Linear Material Properties. Aerojet General Corporation, Sacramento, CA, Technical Memorandum No.
23, July 1965.
- 3. PVRC Recommendations on Toughness Requirements for Ferritic Materials. Welding Research Council Bulletin No. 175, (date later).
- 4. Levy, S. and Wilkinson, J. D. P. The Component Element Methods in Dynamics, McGraw Hill Co., New York, NY, 1976.
Chapter 03 3.9B-65 Rev. 25, October 2022
- 5. PISYS Analysis of NRC Problem, NEDO-24210, August 1979.
- 6. General Electric Standard Application for Reactor Fuel, NEDE-24011-P-A (latest approved revision).
- 7. General Electric Standard Application for Reactor Fuel-United States Supplement, NEDE-24011-P-A-US, (latest approved revision).
- 8. NEDE-24057-P (Class III) and NEDO-24057 (Class I). Assessment of Reactor Internals Vibration in BWR/4 and BWR/5 Plants, November 1977. Also NEDO-24075-1-P (Amendment No. 1 dated December 1978) and NEDE-2-P-24075 (Amendment No. 2 dated June 1979).
- 9. Mark II Containment Dynamic Forcing Functions Information Report, NEDO-21061, Revision 3, June 1978.
- 10. Design and Performance of G.E. BWR Jet Pumps. General Electric Company, Atomic Power Equipment Department, APED-5460, July 1968.
- 11. Moen, H. H. Testing of Improved Jet Pumps for the BWR/6 Nuclear System. General Electric Company, Atomic Power Equipment Department, NEDO-10602, June 1972.
- 12. Analytical Model for Loss-of-Coolant Analysis in Accordance with 10CFR50, Appendix K. Proprietary Document, General Electric Company, NEDE-20566.
- 13. BWR Fuel Assembly Evaluation of Combined Safe Shutdown Earthquake (SSE) and Loss-of-Coolant Accident (LOCA) Loadings, NEDE-21175-3-P-A, General Electric Company, October 1984.
- 14. Design and Performance of General Electric Boiling Water Reactor Main Steam Isolation Valves, APED-5750, General Electric Company, March 1969.
- 15. BWRVIP-01 Rev. 1 (GENE-523-113-0894), "BWR Core Shroud Inspection and Flaw Evaluation Guidelines," March 1995.
Guidelines for Reinspection of BWR Core Shrouds," February 1996.
- 17. GE 11 Compliance with Amendment 22 of NEDE-24011-P-A (GESTAR II), NEDE-31917P, General Electric Company, April 1991.
- 18. GE-NE-0000-0016-5640-00, "GE 14 Fuel Design Cycle - Independent Analysis for Nine Mile Point Unit 2."
- 19. GE 14 Compliance with Amendment 22 of NEDE-24011-P-A (GESTAR II), NEDC-32868P, Global Nuclear Fuel (GNF), September 2000.
- 20. NEDE-31152P Revision 8, "General Electric Fuel Bundle Designs,"
General Electric Company, April 2001.
Chapter 03 3.9B-66 Rev. 25, October 2022
- 21. BWRVIP-41 Revision 1, "BWR Vessel and Internals Project - BWR Jet Pump Assembly Inspection and Flaw Evaluation Guidelines,"
August 2005.
- 22. GNF2 Fuel Design Cycle-Independent Analyses for Exelon Nine Mile Point Nuclear Station Unit 2, 003N2003, Revision 1, GE Hitachi Nuclear Energy, February 2016.
- 23. GNF2 Advantage Generic Compliance with NEDE-24011-P-A (GESTAR II), NEDC-33270P, Revision 5, Global Nuclear Fuel, May 2013.
- 24. GNF3 Fuel Design Cycle-Independent Analyses for Exelon Nine Mile Point Nuclear Station Unit 2, 006N6601P, Revision 1, GE Hitachi Nuclear Energy, January 2022.
- 25. GNF3 Generic Compliance with NEDE-24011-P-A (GESTAR II), NEDC-33879P, Revision 4, Global Nuclear Fuel, August 2020.
Chapter 03 3.9B-67 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.9B-1 (Sheet 1 of 2)
PLANT EVENTS No. of Normal, Upset, and Testing Condition Cycles
- 1. Boltup(1) 123
- 2. Design hydrostatic test(5) 130
- 3. Startup (100°F/hr heatup rate)(2) and 120 cooldown (100°F/hr cooldown rate)(2)(5)
- 4. Daily reduction to 75% power(1) 10,000
- 5. Weekly reduction 50% power(1) 2,000
- 6. Control rod pattern change(1) 400
- 7. Loss of feedwater heaters (80 cycles total)(5) 80
- 9. Scram:(5)
- a. Turbine generator trip, feedwater on, isolation valves stay open 40
- b. Other scrams 140
- c. Loss of feedwater pumps, isolation valves closed 10
- d. Single safety or relief valve blowdown 8
- 10. Reduction to 0% power, hot standby, shutdown (100°F/hr cooldown rate)(2) 111
- 11. Unbolt 123 Emergency Condition
- 12. Scram:
Chapter 03 3.9B-68 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.9B-1 (Sheet 2 of 2)
PLANT EVENTS No. of Emergency Condition Cycles
- b. Automatic blowdown 1(4)
- 13. Improper start of cold recirculation loop 1(4)
- 14. Sudden start of pump in cold recirculation loop 1(4)
- 15. Hot standby, RPV drain shutoff, recirculation pumps restart 1(4)
Faulted Condition
- 16. Pipe rupture and blowdown 1(4)
- 17. Safe shutdown earthquake at rated operating conditions 1(4)
(1) Applies to reactor pressure vessel only.
(2) Bulk average vessel coolant temperature change in any 1-hr period.
(3) 50 peak OBE cycles for NSSS piping; 10 peak OBE cycles for other NSSS equipment and components.
(4) Annual encounter probability of the one-cycle events is
<10-2 for emergency and <10-4 for faulted events.
(5) Monitor these events per Technical Specifications Section 5.5.5. Item 2 has a design cycle pressurization of 930 psig and 1250 psig; item 3 has a design cycle of 70°F to 565°F to 70°F; and item 9 has a transient of 100% to 0% of rated thermal power.
Chapter 03 3.9B-69 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.9B-2 (Sheet 1 of 4)
LOAD COMBINATIONS, STRESS LIMITS,AND ALLOWABLE STRESSES Load Combinations for ASME Safety Class 1, 2, and 3 NSSS Components INTRODUCTION This table lists the major safety-related and selected non-safety related (NSR) components in the plant, and both calculated and allowable stresses. Various parts of the table are referenced in Section 3.9B. The formats in various parts of the table are not consistent since variation in analytical method and depth of detail, necessary to demonstrate the safety aspects of various components, differs.
INDEX
- a. Control Rod Drive
- b. Control Rod Guide Tube
- c. In-core Housing
- d. Jet Pumps
- f. Reactor Vessel Support Equipment
- g. Control Rod Drive Housing
- h. Reactor Pressure Vessel and Shroud Support Assembly
- i. Reactor Vessel Internals and Associated Equipment
- j. Acting Type Safety/Relief Valves Spring-Loaded Direct
- k. Reactor Recirculation System Gate Valves
- l. Recirculation Flow Control Valve Chapter 03 3.9B-70 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.9B-2 (Sheet 2 of 4)
LOAD COMBINATIONS, STRESS LIMITS,AND ALLOWABLE STRESSES Load Combinations for ASME Safety Class 1, 2, and 3 NSSS Components
- m. ASME Safety Class 1 Recirculation Loop Piping and Pipe-Mounted Equipment (Class 1)
- n. Reactor Refueling and Servicing Equipment
- o. Fuel Assembly (including Channel)
- p. Recirculation Pump
- q. Standby Liquid Control Tank
- r. Residual Heat Removal Heat Exchanger
- s. RCIC Turbine
- t. RCIC Pump
- u. ECCS Pumps
- v. Standby Liquid Control Pump
- w. DELETE
- x. Reactor Water Cleanup Heat Exchangers
- y. Control Rod Drive Housing Supports
- z. Main Steam Isolation Valve Chapter 03 3.9B-71 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.9B-2 (Sheet 3 of 4)
LOAD COMBINATIONS AND ACCEPTANCE CRITERIA FOR ASME SAFETY CLASS 1, 2, AND 3 NSSS PIPING AND EQUIPMENT Design Evaluation Service Load Combination Basis Basis Level N + SRVALL Upset Upset B N + OBE Upset Upset B N + OBE + SRVALL Emergency Upset B N + SSE + SRVALL Faulted Faulted(1) D N + SBA + SRV Emergency Emergency(1) C N + IBA + SRV Faulted Faulted(1) D N + SBA + SRVADS Emergency Emergency(1) C N + SBA + OBE + SRVADS Faulted Faulted(1) D N + IBA + OBE + SRVADS Faulted Faulted(1) D N + SBA/IBA + SSE + SRVADS Faulted Faulted(1) D N + LOCA(2) + SSE Faulted Faulted(1) D LOAD DEFINITION KEY:
N = Normal and/or abnormal loads depending on acceptance criteria OBE = Operating basis earthquake loads SSE = Safe shutdown earthquake loads SRV = Safety/relief valve discharge-induced loads from two adjacent valves (one valve actuated when adjacent valve is cycling)
SRVALL = Loads induced by actuation of all safety/relief valves that activate within milliseconds of each other (e.g., turbine trip operational transient)
SRVADS = Loads induced by actuation of safety/relief valves associated with the automatic depressurization system that actuate within milliseconds of each other during the postulated small or intermediate size pipe rupture Chapter 03 3.9B-72 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.9B-2 (Sheet 4 of 4)
LOAD COMBINATIONS AND ACCEPTANCE CRITERIA FOR ASME SAFETY CLASS 1, 2, AND 3 NSSS PIPING AND EQUIPMENT LOCA = Loss-of-coolant accident associated with the postulated pipe rupture of large pipes (e.g., main steam, feedwater, recirculation piping)
LOCA1 = Pool swell drag/fallout loads on piping and components located between the main vent discharge outlet and the suppression pool water upper surface LOCA2 = Pool swell impact loads on piping and components located above the suppression pool water upper surface LOCA3 = Oscillating pressure-induced loads on submerged piping and components during condensation oscillations LOCA4 = Building motion-induced loads from chugging LOCA5 = Building motion-induced loads from main vent air clearing LOCA6 = Vertical and horizontal loads on main vent piping LOCA7 = Annulus pressurization loads SBA = Abnormal transients associated with small break accident IBA = Abnormal transients associated with intermediate break accident (1) All ASME Safety Class 1, 2, and 3 piping systems that are required to function for safe shutdown under the postulated events are designed to meet the functional capability criteria in accordance with NEDO-21985.
(2) The most limiting case of load combination among LOCA1 through LOCA7.
Chapter 03 3.9B-73 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.9B-2a (Sheet 1 of 2)
CONTROL ROD DRIVE Allowable Calculated**
Primary Stress Stress Criteria Loading Stress Type (psi) (psi)
Main Flange Allowable primary membrane stress plus bending stress is based on ASME Section III for Type F304 stainless steel @
575°F Sm = 16,700 psi For normal and upset condition: For normal and upset condition:
Sallow = 1.5 x Sm 1. Normal loads* General membrane plus 25,000 5,813
- 3. Scram with no buffer For emergency condition: For emergency condition:
Sallow = 1.8 x Sm 1. Normal loads* General membrane plus 30,000 4,283
- 2. Scram at emergency bending
- 3. Scram with accumulator at overpressure For faulted condition: For faulted condition:
Sallow = 3.6 x Sm 1. Normal loads* General membrane plus 60,000 7,186
- 3. Scram with stuck rod Indicator Tube Allowable primary membrane stress plus bending stress is based on ASME Section III for Type 316 stainless steel @ 250°F Sm = 20,000 psi For normal and upset condition: For normal and upset condition:
Sallow = 1.5 x Sm 1. Normal loads* General membrane plus 30,000 15,242
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.9B-2a (Sheet 2 of 2)
CONTROL ROD DRIVE Allowable Calculated**
Primary Stress Stress Criteria Loading Stress Type (psi) (psi)
For emergency condition: For emergency condition:
Sallow = 1.8 x Sm 1. Normal loads* General membrane plus 31,028 20,795
- 2. Failure of pressure - bending regulating system
- 3. Scram with accumulator at overpressure For faulted condition: For faulted condition:
Sallow = 2.4 x Sm 1. Normal loads* General membrane plus 48,000 25,700
- 3. LOCA
- 4. SRV Ring Flange Allowable primary membrane stress plus bending stress is based on ASME Section III for Type F304 stainless steel @
250°F Sm = 20,000 psi For normal and upset condition: For normal and upset condition:
Sallow = 1.5 x Sm 1. Normal loads* General membrane plus 30,000 8,285
Sallow = 1.8 x Sm 1. Normal loads* General membrane plus 36,000 1,370
- 2. Scram at emergency bending
- 3. Scram with accumulator at overpressure For faulted condition: For faulted condition:
Sallow = 3.6 x Sm 1. Normal loads* General membrane plus 71,925 3,563
- 3. Scram with stuck rod
- Normal loads include pressure, temperature, weight, and mechanical loads.
- The New Loads Adequacy Evaluation has concluded that the listed limiting design basis loads envelope new loads.
Chapter 03 3.9B-75 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.9B-2b (Sheet 1 of 1)
CONTROL ROD GUIDE TUBE Allowable* Calculated*
Primary Stress Stress Criteria Loading Stress Type (psi) (psi)
Primary Stress Limit The allowable primary membrane stress plus bending stress is based on ASME Section III for Type 304 stainless steel tubing and SA351 Type CF8 casting (base)
For Service Levels A & B (normal and 1. Deadweight Primary membrane plus 24,000 15,056 upset) conditions: 2. External pressure bending
= 24,000 psi For Service Level C (emergency) 1. Deadweight Primary membrane plus 36,000 15,056 condition: 2. External pressure bending
= 2.25 x 16,000
= 36,000 psi For Service Level D (faulted) condition: 1. Deadweight Primary membrane plus 57,600 27,770
- 2. External pressure bending Slimit = 3.6 Sm 3. Lateral flow impingement
= 3.6 x 16,000 4. SSE
= 57,600 psi 5. Annulus pressurization
- For extended power uprate (EPU) conditions, see GEH 0000-0072-9332; for GE 14 fuel introduction, see GE-NE-0000-0016-5640-00; for GNF2 fuel introduction, see 003N2003 and for GNF3 fuel introduction, see 006N6601.
Chapter 03 3.9B-76 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.9B-2c (Sheet 1 of 1)
IN-CORE HOUSING Allowable Calculated Primary Stress Stress Criteria Loading Stress Type (psi) (psi)*
Primary Stress Limit The allowable primary membrane stress is based on ASME Section III for Class I vessels for Type 304 stainless steel For Service Levels A, B & C* (normal, 1. Pressure Primary membrane 16,660 16,575 upset, and emergency) conditions: 2. OBE
- 3. SRV Slimit = Sm = 16,660 psi Faulted condition: 1. Pressure Maximum membrane stress 39,984 24,972
= 39,984 psi 4. SSE vessel penetration
- Service Level C (emergency) allowables are less than Service Level A and B (normal and upset) allowables, and Service Level A and B loads (normal and upset) calculated are less than Service Level C (emergency) calculated loads, so no additional information is presented.
Chapter 03 3.9B-77 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.9B-2d (Sheet 1 of 1)
JET PUMPS Allowable* Calculated*
Stress Stress Criteria Load Combinations Stress Type (psi) (psi)
Primary membrane plus bending stress based on ASME Section III For Service Levels A and B (normal and 1. Deadweight Primary membrane plus 25,350 19,346 upset) condition: 2. Pressure bending
- 3. OBE For Type 304 @ 550°F 4. SRV Sm = 16,900 psi Slimit = 1.5 Sm psi For Service Level C (emergency) 1. Deadweight Primary membrane plus 30,420 19,346 condition: 2. Pressure bending
- 3. OBE For Type 304 @ 550°F 4. SRV Sm = 16,900 psi Slimit = 1.8 Sm psi For Service Level D (faulted) condition: 1. Deadweight Primary membrane plus 60,840 34,417
- 2. Pressure bending For Type 304 @ 550°F 3. Chugging Sm = 16,900 psi 4. SRV Slimit = 3.6 Sm psi 5. SSE
- The New Loads Adequacy Evaluation has concluded that the listed limiting design basis loads envelope new loads. For EPU conditions, see GEH 0000-0072-9332; for GE 14 fuel introduction, see GE-NE-0000-0016-5640-00; and for GNF2 fuel introduction, see 003N2003 and for GNF3 fuel introduction, see 006N6601. For the replacement inlet mixers and main wedges installed in year 2012, LTR-MODS-11-4 analyzes the stresses on the jet pump components and concludes that the content of this table is unaffected by this modification. Both the original GE inlet mixers and the replacement mixers are installed and considered interchangeable.
Chapter 03 3.9B-78 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.9B-2e (Sheet 1 of 1)
HIGHEST STRESSED REGION ON THE LPCI COUPLING (ATTACHMENT RING)
(Bellow-Type Design)
Allowable Calculated*
Stress Stress Criteria Load Combinations Stress Type (psi) (psi)
Primary membrane plus bending stress based on ASME Section III for Type 304L For Service Levels A and B (normal and 1. Normal loads Primary membrane plus 20,925 18,900 upset) condition: 2. Pressure bending
- 3. OBE Slimit = 1.5 4. SRV Sm = 20,925 psi For Service Level C (emergency) 1. Normal loads Primary membrane plus 31,400 18,900 condition: 2. Pressure bending
- 3. OBE Slimit = 2.25 4. SRV Sm = 31,400 psi For Service Level D (faulted) condition: 1. Normal Loads Primary membrane plus 50,220 35,700
- The New Loads Adequacy Evaluation has concluded that the listed design basis loads envelope new loads.
Chapter 03 3.9B-79 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.9B-2f (Sheet 1 of 4)
REACTOR PRESSURE VESSEL SUPPORT EQUIPMENT RPV Support (Bearing Plate)
Allowable Calculated(4)
Stress Stress Criteria Loading Location (psi) (psi)
Primary Stress Limit:
AISC specification for the design, fabrication, and erection of structural steel for buildings For normal and upset condition: AISC Normal and upset condition: Bearing plate Fb (bearing) fb = 3,680 allowable stresses, but without the 1. Deadweight 22,000 usual increases for earthquake loads 2. OBE
- 3. Scram For emergency condition: 1.5 x AISC Emergency condition: Bearing plate Fb (bearing) fb = 7,360 allowable stresses 1. Deadweight 33,000
- 2. OBE
- 3. Scram For faulted condition: 1.67 x AISC Faulted condition: Bearing plate Fb (bearing) fb = 9,080 allowable stresses for structural steel 1. Deadweight 36,000 members 2. SSE
- 3. Jet reaction load Chapter 03 3.9B-80 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.9B-2f (Sheet 2 of 4)
REACTOR PRESSURE VESSEL SUPPORT EQUIPMENT RPV Stabilizer Allowable Calculated(4)
Stress Stress Criteria Loading Location(1) (psi) (psi)
Primary Stress Limit:
ASME Section III, Subsection NF-Linear type support Material:
Bracket and yoke:
SA-516, Gr. 70 Rod: SA-540, B24, C1.2 For normal and upset conditions: Upset condition: Bracket (2) (2)
Subsection NF allowables 1. Spring preload Yoke
- 2. OBE Rod For emergency conditions: Emergency condition: Bracket Fb = 29,000 fb = 16,430 1.33 x normal/upset allowables 1. Spring preload Bracket Fv = 19,300 fv = 4,390
- 2. SSE Yoke Fb = 34,600 fb = 26,550 Yoke Ft = 27,610 ft = 19,000 For faulted conditions: Faulted condition: Rod Ft = 104,490 ft = 84,220 (0.7 S/ft) x normal/upset allowables 1. Spring preload
- 2. SSE
- 3. Jet reaction load Chapter 03 3.9B-81 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.9B-2f (Sheet 3 of 4)
REACTOR PRESSURE VESSEL SUPPORT EQUIPMENT Stabilizer Bracket-Adjacent Shell Allowable Calculated(4)
Stress Stress Criteria Loading Location (psi) (psi)
ASME Section III primary local membrane plus primary bending limit for SA 533 Grade B, Class I:
For normal and upset condition: Normal and upset condition Local membrane plus 40,050 38,895 loads: bending Slimit = 1.5 x Sm 1. OBE
- 2. Pressure For emergency condition: Emergency condition loads: Local membrane plus (3) (3)
- 1. SSE bending Slimit = 1.5 x Sy 2. Pressure For faulted condition: Faulted condition loads: Local membrane plus 63,450 56,604
- 1. SSE bending Slimit = 1.5 x Sy 2. Jet reaction
- 3. Pressure Chapter 03 3.9B-82 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.9B-2f (Sheet 4 of 4)
REACTOR PRESSURE VESSEL SUPPORT EQUIPMENT Orificed Fuel Supports Allowable Calculated Loads Loads Criteria Loading Direction (LBF) (LBF)
Based on ASME Subsection NG-3228.4 For normal, upset, and emergency Normal, upset, and emergency loads:
conditions:
Llimit = 0.44 Lu (5) Horizontal: Normal operating loads: Horizontal 4,495 2,109 OBE SRV Vertical: Normal operating loads: Vertical 49,632 4,028 SRV SCRAM For faulted condition: Faulted loads:
Llimit = 0.80 Lu (5) Horizontal: Normal operating loads Horizontal 8,172 3,075 Jet Reaction AP SSE Vertical: Normal operating loads: Vertical 90,240 8,044 SRV SSE SCRAM Cumulative usage factor Limit = 0.047 (1) Bracket and yoke have least stress margin in emergency condition, and rod in faulted condition.
(2) For the three locations, normal and upset condition has higher stress margins as compared to other conditions.
(3) Faulted category loads are evaluated with emergency allowable stresses; hence, emergency condition is not evaluated.
(4) The New Loads Adequacy Evaluation has concluded that the listed design basis loads envelope the new loads.
(5) Ultimate test load.
Chapter 03 3.9B-83 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.9B-2g (Sheet 1 of 1)
CONTROL ROD DRIVE HOUSING Allowable Calculated Primary Stress Stress Criteria Loading Stress Type (psi) (psi)
Primary Stress Limit The allowable primary membrane stress is based on ASME Section III for Safety Class 1 vessels for Type 304 stainless steel For normal and upset condition: Normal and upset condition: Maximum membrane stress 16,660 13,993 intensity occurs at the Slimit = 1.0 Sm = 16,660 psi @ 575°F 1. Pressure tube-to-tube weld near the
- 2. Stuck rod scram center of the housing for
- 3. OBE normal, upset, emergency,
- 4. SRV and faulted conditions
- 5. Hydraulic line loads For faulted conditions: Faulted conditions: 20,000* 15,419 Slimit = 1.2 Sm 1. Pressure
- 2. Stuck rod scram
- 3. SSE
- 4. Annulus pressurization
- 5. LOCA
- 6. Hydraulic line loads
- Faulted category loads are evaluated with emergency allowable stresses; hence, the emergency condition is not evaluated.
Chapter 03 3.9B-84 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.9B-2h (Sheet 1 of 4)
REACTOR PRESSURE VESSEL AND SHROUD SUPPORT ASSEMBLY I. Vessel Support Skirt Allowable Calculated ASME Section III Primary Primary Stress Stress*
Stress Limit Criteria Loading Stress Type (psi) (psi)
Material: SA-533 Gr. B Class I A. Normal and Upset Conditions:
Pm Sm 1. Deadweight Primary membrane 26,700 21,900 Sm = 26,700 @ 575°F 2. Pressure loads PL + Pb 1.5 Sm 3. OBE Primary membrane 40,050 30,910 Sm = 26,700 @ 575°F 4. SRV plus bending B. Emergency Condition:
Pm 1.2 Sm 1. Deadweight Primary membrane 32,040 26,930 Sm = 26,700 @ 575°F 2. Pressure loads PL + Pb 1.8 Sm 3. OBE Primary membrane 48,060 47,960 Sm = 26,700 @ 575°F 4. SRV plus bending C. Faulted Condition:
Pm 0.7 Sm 1. Deadweight Primary membrane 56,000 26,930 Sy = 80,000 @ 575°F 2. Pressure PL + Pb 1.05 Sy 3. Jet reaction Primary membrane 84,000 47,960 Sy = 80,000 @ 575°F 4. Annulus pressurization plus bending
- 5. SSE D. Maximum Cumulative Usage Factor: 0.248 at knuckle Chapter 03 3.9B-85 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.9B-2h (Sheet 2 of 4)
REACTOR PRESSURE VESSEL AND SHROUD SUPPORT ASSEMBLY II. Shroud Support Allowable Calculated ASME Section III Primary Primary Stress*,** Stress*,**
Stress Limit Criteria Loading Stress Type (psi) (psi)
Material: SB-168 A. Normal and Upset Conditions:
Pm Sm 1. Deadweight Primary membrane 23,300 11,820 Sm = 23,300 psi @ 575°F 2. Pressure PL + Pb Sy 3. OBE Primary membrane 28,125 28,030 Sy = 28,125 psi @ 575°F 4. SRV plus bending B. Emergency Condition:
Pm Sy 1. Deadweight Primary membrane 28,548 17,990 Sy = 28,548 @ 528°F 2. Pressure PL + Pb 1.5 Sy 3. Chugging Primary membrane 42,822 40,040 Sy = 28,548 psi @ 528°F 4. SRV plus bending C. Faulted Condition:
Pm Sy 1. Deadweight Primary membrane 28,548 21,420 Sy = 28,548 psi @ 528°F 2. Pressure PL + Pb 1.5 Sy 3. Chugging Primary membrane 42,822 40,040 Sy = 28,548 @ 528°F 4. SRV plus bending
- 5. SSE D. Maximum Cumulative Usage Factor: 0.047 at Inconel section 0.053 at low alloy steel section Chapter 03 3.9B-86 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.9B-2h (Sheet 3 of 4)
REACTOR PRESSURE VESSEL AND SHROUD SUPPORT ASSEMBLY III. RPV Feedwater Nozzle Allowable Calculated ASME Section III Primary Primary Stress Stress*
Stress Limit Criteria Loading Stress Type (psi) (psi)
Material: SA-508 Class I safe end SRSS values only A. Normal and Upset Conditions:
Pm 17,700 psi 1. Deadweight Primary membrane 17,700 16,220 Sm = 17,700 @ 575°F 2. Pressure loads PL + Pb 26,550 psi 3. OBE Primary membrane 26,550 22,930 1.5 Sm = 26,550 @ 575°F 4. SRV plus bending B. Emergency Condition:
Pm 25,900 psi 1. Deadweight Primary membrane 25,900 21,420 Sy = 25,900 @ 594°F 2. Pressure loads PL + Pb 38,850 psi 3. SRV Primary membrane 38,850 22,400 1.5 Sy = 38,850 @ 594°F 4. SBA plus bending C. Faulted Condition:
Pm 53,100 psi 1. Deadweight Primary membrane 53,100 28,300 3 Sm = 53,100 @ 575°F 2. Pressure loads PL + Pb 38,850 psi 3. SSE Primary membrane 38,850 33,740 1.5 Sm = 38,850 @ 594°F 4. SRV plus bending
- 5. IBA D. Maximum Cumulative Usage Factor: 0.965 at safe end Chapter 03 3.9B-87 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.9B-2h (Sheet 4 of 4)
REACTOR PRESSURE VESSEL AND SHROUD SUPPORT ASSEMBLY IV. CRD Penetration Allowable Calculated ASME Section III Primary Primary Stress* Stress*
Stress Limit Criteria Loading Stress Type (psi) (psi)
Material: SB 167 (Inconel stub tube)
A. Normal and Upset Conditions:
Pm Sm 1. Normal loads Primary membrane 20,000 8,250 Sm = 20,000 @ 575°F 2. Pressure PL + Pb 1.5 Sm 3. OBE Primary membrane 30,000 27,051 Sm = 20,000 @ 575°F 4. SRV plus bending B. Emergency Condition:
Pm Sy 1. Normal loads Primary membrane 24,100 8,250 Sy = 24,100 @ 575°F 2. Pressure PL + Pb 1.5 Sy 3. OBE Primary membrane 36,150 27,051 Sy = 24,100 @ 575°F 4. SRV plus bending C. Faulted Condition:
Pm 2.4 Sm 1. Normal loads Primary membrane 48,000 9,760 Sm = 20,000 @ 575°F 2. Pressure PL + Pb 3.6 Sm 3. Jet reaction Primary membrane 72,000 31,900 Sm = 20,000 @ 575°F 4. Vent clearing plus bending
- 5. SSE
- 6. Scram D. Maximum Cumulative Usage Factor: 0.645 at stub tube
- The New Loads Adequacy Evaluation has concluded that the listed design basis loads envelope new loads.
Chapter 03 3.9B-88 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.9B-2i (Sheet 1 of 5)
REACTOR VESSEL INTERNALS AND ASSOCIATED EQUIPMENT Maximum Allowable Calculated ASME Section III Primary Primary Stress Stress Stress Limit Criteria Loading Stress Type (psi) (psi)
I. Top Guide - Beam with Highest Stress(2)
Material: 304 stainless steel A. Normal and Upset Conditions:
Pm Sm 1. Normal loads Primary membrane 16,900 2,416 Sm = 16,900 @ 550°F 2. Pressure PL + Pb 1.5 Sm 3. OBE Primary membrane plus bending 25,350 23,724 Sm = 16,900 @ 550°F 4. SRV B. Emergency Condition:
Pm 1.5 Sm 1. Normal loads Primary membrane 25,350 2,416 Sm = 16,900 @ 550°F 2. Pressure PL + Pb 2.25 Sm 3. OBE Primary membrane plus bending 38,030 23,724 Sm = 16,900 @ 550°F 4. SRV C. Faulted Condition:
Pm 2.4 Sm 1. Normal loads Primary membrane 40,560 3,550 Sm = 16,900 @ 550°F 2. Pressure PL + Pb 3.0 Sm 3. SSE Primary membrane plus bending 50,700 42,806 Sm = 16,900 @ 550°F 4. SRV D. Maximum Cumulative Usage Factor:
0.17 at beam slot Chapter 03 3.9B-89 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.9B-2i (Sheet 2 of 5)
REACTOR VESSEL INTERNALS AND ASSOCIATED EQUIPMENT Maximum Allowable Calculated ASME Section III Primary Primary Stress Stress Stress Limit Criteria Loading Stress Type (psi) (psi)
II. Core Plate (Ligament in Top Plate)(2)
Material: 304 stainless steel A. Normal and Upset Conditions:
Pm Sm 1. Normal loads Primary membrane 16,900 9,400 Sm = 16,900 @ 550°F 2. Pressure
- 3. OBE
- 4. SRV PL + Pb 1.5 Sm 1. Normal loads Primary membrane plus bending 25,350 18,550 Sm = 16,900 @ 550°F 2. Pressure
- 3. OBE
- 4. SRV B. Emergency Condition:
- 1. Normal loads Primary membrane 25,350 380 Pm 1.5 Sm
- 2. Pressure Sm = 16,900 @ 550°F
- 3. Chugging
- 1. Normal loads Primary membrane plus bending 38,030 9,540 Pm + Pb 2.25 Sm
- 2. Pressure Sm = 16,900 @ 550°F
- 3. Chugging
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.9B-2i (Sheet 3 of 5)
REACTOR VESSEL INTERNALS AND ASSOCIATED EQUIPMENT Maximum Allowable Calculated ASME Section III Primary Primary Stress Stress Stress Limit Criteria Loading Stress Type (psi) (psi)
C. Faulted Condition:
Pm 2.4 Sm 1. Normal loads Primary membrane 40,560 14,370 Sm = 16,900 @ 550°F 2. Pressure
- 3. Annulus pressurization
- 4. SSE
- 5. Jet reaction PL + Pb 3.0 Sm 1. Normal loads Primary membrane plus bending 50,700 26,960 Sm = 16,900 @ 550°F 2. Pressure
- 3. Jet reaction
- 5. SSE D. Maximum Cumulative Usage Factor:
0.93 at core plate studs III. Differential Pressure Line(1)
Material: 304 stainless steel A. Normal and Upset Conditions:
PL + Pb 3 Sm 1. Deadweight Primary membrane plus bending 49,200 <46,320 Sm = 16,400 @ 600°F 2. Pressure
- 3. SRVALL B. Emergency Condition:
PL + Pb 2.25 Sm 1. Deadweight Primary membrane plus bending 36,900 <13,570 Sm = 16,400 @ 600°F 2. Pressure
- 3. OBE
- 4. SRV Chapter 03 3.9B-91 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.9B-2i (Sheet 4 of 5)
REACTOR VESSEL INTERNALS AND ASSOCIATED EQUIPMENT Maximum Allowable Calculated ASME Section III Primary Primary Stress Stress Stress Limit Criteria Loading Stress Type (psi) (psi)
C. Faulted Condition:
PL + Pb 3.6 Sm 1. Deadweight Primary membrane plus bending 59,040 <35,750 Sm = 16,400 @ 600°F 2. Pressure
- 3. Jet reaction
- 4. Vent clearing
- 5. SSE D. Maximum Cumulative Usage Factor:
u < 0.02 maximum IV. Head Cooling Spray Nozzle Material: Pipe, carbon steel SA-106B A. Normal and Upset Conditions:
PL + Pb 1. Pressure Primary membrane plus bending 53,100 31,360 Sm = 17,700 psi @ 575°F 2. Weight plus secondary membrane 3.0 Sm = 53,100 psi 3. Thermal
- 4. OBE B. Emergency Condition:
PL + Pb 1. Pressure Primary membrane plus bending 31,900 17,710 Sm = 17,700 psi @ 575°F 2. Weight 1.8 Sm = 31,900 psi 3. OBE
- 4. SRV C. Faulted Condition:
PL + Pb 1. Pressure Primary membrane plus bending 63,000 27,870 Su = 60,000 psi @ 575°F 2. Weight 1.5 (0.7 Su = 63,000 psi 3. Annulus pressurization
- 4. SSE Chapter 03 3.9B-92 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.9B-2i (Sheet 5 of 5)
REACTOR VESSEL INTERNALS AND ASSOCIATED EQUIPMENT Maximum Allowable Calculated ASME Section III Primary Primary Stress Stress Stress Limit Criteria Loading Stress Type (psi) (psi)
D. Maximum Fatigue Usage Factor:
0.91 at pipe-to-flange weld (1) Calculated stresses envelop current configuration without the standby liquid control loadings applied.
(2) For EPU conditions, see GEH 0000-0072-9332; for GE 14 fuel introduction, see GE-NE-0000-0016-5640-00; and for GNF2 fuel introduction, see 003N2003.
Chapter 03 3.9B-93 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.9B-2j (Sheet 1 of 6)
SAFETY/RELIEF VALVES SPRING-LOADED DIRECT-ACTING TYPE(1)
Topic Method of Analysis Dikkers Analysis Allowable Value Calculated Value
- 1. Body inlet and outlet 1.5 Sm = 26,310 psi Inlet:
fMo PB flange stresses(2) SH = + 1.5 S m (inlet) and SH = 1.15 Sm = 0.77 2 4g o = 28,350 psi (allowable)
Lg B (outlet) SR = 0.25 Sm = 0.17 1 (allowable)
(Uses same ST = 1.08 Sm = 0.72
( 4te / 3 + 1) Mo notation (allowable)
SR =
2 1.5 S m Outlet:
Lt B as codes) SH = 1.21 Sm = 0.81 (allowable)
SR = 0.79 Sm = 0.53 YMo (allowable)
ST = ZS R 1.5 S m 2 ST = 0.49 Sm = 0.33 t B (allowable)
Where: Body material: ASME SA352 SH = Longitudinal "hub" LCB wall stress, psi Inlet: Sm at 585°F =
SR = Radial "flange" (body 17,540 psi base, inlet) stress, Outlet: Sm at 500°F =
psi 18,900 psi ST = Tangential "flange" stress, psi
- 2. Inlet and outlet stud Total cross-sectional area Inlet: Inlet:
area requirements(2) shall exceed the greater Am1(>Am2) = 12.45 in2 Ab(actual area) = 1.52 Am of: (required min)
Outlet: Outlet:
W m1 Am1 = Am1(>Am2) = 4.65 in2 Am(actual area) = 1.84 Am Sb (Uses same (required min) or notation W m2 as codes)
Am2 =
Sa Chapter 03 3.9B-94 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.9B-2j (Sheet 2 of 6)
SAFETY/RELIEF VALVES SPRING-LOADED DIRECT-ACTING TYPE(1)
Topic Method of Analysis Dikkers Analysis Allowable Value Calculated Value Where: Bolting material: ASME SA193 Gr. B7 Am1 = Total required bolt (stud) area for condition Am2 = Total required bolt (stud) area for gasket seating
- 3. Nozzle wall thickness 1. Minimum wall thickness Section near nozzle base:
criterion:
t me < t me ( actual) t me = 0.84 inch t me ( actual)= 1.58 t me tmin<t (3)
Nozzle midsection:
Where:
t mc < t mc ( actual) t mc = 0.81inch t mc ( actual)= 1.54 t mc tmin = Minimum calculated thickness Thin section near valve requirement, seat:
including corrosion t mb < t mb ( actual) t mb = 0.79 inch t mb ( actual)= 1.012 t mb allowance tA = Actual nozzle Thinnest section at nozzle wall thickness tip - just below valve seat:
t m a < t m a ( actual) t m a = 0.206 inch t m a ( actual)= 1.68 t m a Nozzle Material: ASME Actual thickness greater SA350 LF2 than tm at the section under consideration Chapter 03 3.9B-95 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.9B-2j (Sheet 3 of 6)
SAFETY/RELIEF VALVES SPRING-LOADED DIRECT-ACTING TYPE(1)
Topic Method of Analysis Dikkers Analysis Allowable Value Calculated Value (Refer to Section 2. Cyclic Rating:
3.9B.1.1.9 for thermal Thermal:
transients information.)
Nri Nri It = It = (i = 1,2,3,4,5) It (max) 1.0 It=0.0014 Ni Ni Fatigue:
Na 2,000 cycles, as based Na 2,000 cycles, as based Na 2,000 cycles Na (based on Sa=Sp2) = 400,000 on Sa, where Sa is defined on Sa, where Sa=Sp1(>Sp2) cycles, therefore satisfies as the larger of: criterion P eb Sp1 = ( 2/3)Qp + + Q T3 2
+ 1.3 Q ( Usessame T1 notation or as codes)
Sp2 = 0.4 Q p K
+ ( P eb + 2 Q )
T3 2
Where:
Sp1 = Fatigue stress intensity at inside surface of crotch, psi Sp2 = Fatigue stress intensity at inside surface of crotch, psi Chapter 03 3.9B-96 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.9B-2j (Sheet 4 of 6)
SAFETY/RELIEF VALVES SPRING-LOADED DIRECT-ACTING TYPE(1)
Topic Method of Analysis Dikkers Analysis Allowable Value Calculated Value
- 4. Bonnet flange strength Flange treated as a loose 1.5 Sm (for max SH, SR, and SR = .6 Sm = .4 (allowable) type flange without hub: ST), = 28,350 psi ST = .14 Sm = .09 (allowable)
(max ST at back face of 6 MP flange)
SR= 2 t ( 3.14C - nD)
(Uses same ST =
5.46 M P 0.318 notation BT 2 as codes)
C - B 2 hc
+
C + B C + A
+rB - E At B
Where: Bonnet Material:
SR = Radial "flange" ASME SA-352LCB stress, psi ST = Tangential "flange" Sm at 500°F = 18,900 psi stress, psi
- 5. Bonnet bolting area Total cross-sectional area Am1(>Am2) = 7.995 in2 Ab (actual area) = 1.34 Am requirements shall exceed the greater (required min) of:
W m1 W m1 AM 1 = Am1 =
Sb Sb or W m2 W m2 Am2 = Am2 =
Sa Sa Where: Where:
Am1= Total required bolt Am (required minimum) is (stud) area for the greater of Am1 and Am2; operating condition and Chapter 03 3.9B-97 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.9B-2j (Sheet 6 of 6)
SAFETY/RELIEF VALVES SPRING-LOADED DIRECT-ACTING TYPE(1)
Topic Method of Analysis Dikkers Analysis Allowable Value Calculated Value Am2 = Total required bolt Ab (actual bolt area) must (stud) area for exceed Am.
gasket seating Body to bonnet bolting material: ASME SA-193 Gr.
B7
- 6. Disc The disc stress is calculated by treating the disc as a flat circular plate, edges supported, uniform load over area with radius ro; reference Bach's Formulas, Machinery's Handbook, 15th Ed., p 414.
From the reference:
1/ 2 w = 27,432 lb t (min allowable) = 1.067 Actual tmin t = 1.2 W ro = 0.785 in in = 1.068 in 1 2ro R = 2.48 in = 1.0009 (required min) 3R S
Disc material:
ASME SA351 CF3A Temperature: 585°F Sm (585°F) = 18,235 psi.
W is based on p=1,375 psi Allowable stress is 1.5 under the disc Sm. This is the value S in the above formula.
(1.5 Sm = 27,353 psi)
- 7. Seismic capability Stress analysis uses Fvertical = (mass of valve) x (4.5 g), and Fhorizontal = (mass of valve) x (6.5 g), with 800,000 in-lb and 300,000 in-lb applied at the inlet and outlet, respectively. Actual capability verifiable by test (with the moments concurrently applied) and exceeds these values.
(1) ASME Section III, July 1974, including addenda through summer 1976.
(2) Design pressures:
Pb = 1,375 psig (inlet)
Pb = 625 psig (outlet)
These are the maximum anticipated pressures under all operating conditions. Analyses include applied moments of: M=800,000 in-lb (inlet) and M=300,000 in-lb (outlet). The analyses also include consideration of seismic, operational, and flow reaction forces. Since these SRVs are pipe-mounted equipment, refer to the piping analysis for verification that the moments are not exceeded.
(3) This tmin is tm in accordance with notation of the codes.
Chapter 03 3.9B-98 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.9B-2k (Sheet 1 of 7)
REACTOR RECIRCULATION SYSTEM GATE VALVES Suction Valves Design/ Ratio Item Calculated Calculated/
No. Component/Load/Stress Type Design Procedure Allowable Limit Value Allowed 1.0 Body and Bonnet
1.1 Loads
Design pressure System requirement 1,250 psi 1,250 psi N/A Design temperature System requirement 575°F 575°F N/A 1.2 Pressure rating ASME Section III(1), Pr = 734.96 psi Pr = 734.96 psi N/A Figure NB-3545.1-2 1.3 Minimum wall thickness ASME Section III(1), tmin = 1.931 in tmin = 1.931 min N/A Paragraph NB-3542 1.4 Primary membrane stress ASME Section III(1), Pm S (500°F) = 19,600 psi Pm = 8,087 psi 0.54 Paragraph NB-3545.1 1.5 Secondary stress due to pipe ASME Section III(1), Pe = greatest value of p Ped = 6,300 psi 0.21 reaction Paragraph NB-3545.2(b)(i) Ped = 19,643 psi 0.67 Peb and Pet 1.5 S (500°F) Pet = 19,643 psi 0.67 (1.5) (19,600) = 29,400 psi 1.6 Primary plus secondary stress ASME Section III(1), See Paragraph 1.8 Qp = 20,632 psi due to internal pressure Paragraph NB-3545.2(a)(1) 1.7 Thermal secondary stress ASME Section III(1), See Paragraph 1.8 QT = 998 psi Paragraph NB-3545.2(c) 2 1.8 Range of primary plus ASME Section III(1), Sn 3 Sm (500°F) = 58,800 Sn = Qp + Pe + 2Qt = 36,970 0.63 secondary stress at crotch Paragraph NB-3545.2 psi psi region 1.9 Cycle requirements for ASME Section III(1), Na 2,000 cycles N = 1 x 106 cycles N/A fatigue analysis Paragraph NB-3545.3 1.10 Usage factor requirements for ASME Section III(1), It 1.0 It = 0.0025 fatigue analysis Paragraph NB-3550 Chapter 03 3.9B-99 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.9B-2k (Sheet 2 of 7)
REACTOR RECIRCULATION SYSTEM GATE VALVES Suction Valves Design/ Ratio Item Calculated Calculated/
No. Component/Load/Stress Type Design Procedure Allowable Limit Value Allowed 2.0 Body to Bonnet Bolting
2.1 Loads
design pressure and temperature, gasket loads, stem operational load, seismic load (SSE) 2.2 Bolt area ASME Section III(1), Ab 28.96 in2 Ab = 29.70 in2 N/A Paragraph NB-3647.1 Sb = 28.675 psi Sb = 28.675 psi N/A 2.3 Body Flange Stresses ASME Section III(1), -- -- --
Paragraph NB-3647.1 2.3.1 Operating condition ASME Section III(1), Sh 1.5 S (575°F) = 28,832 Sh = 14,293 psi 0.50 Paragraph NB-3647.1 psi Sr 1.5 Sm (575°F) = 28,837 Sr = 11,568 psi 0.40 psi St 1.5 Sm (575°F) = 28,837 St = 3,914 psi 0.14 psi 2.3.2 Gasket seating condition ASME Section III(1), Sh 1.5 Sm (100°F) = 30,000 Sh = 18,437 psi 0.61 Paragraph NB-3647.1 psi Sr 1.5 Sm (100°F) = 30,000 Sr = 16,242 psi 0.54 psi St 1.5 Sm (100°F) = 30,000 St = 5,498 psi 0.18 psi 2.4 Bonnet Flange Stresses ASME Section III(1), -- -- --
Paragraph NB-3647.1 2.4.1 Operating condition ASME Section III(1), Sh 1.5 Sm (575°F) = 28,837 Sh = 18,783 psi 0.65 Paragraph NB-3647.1 psi Sr 1.5 Sm (575°F) = 28,837 Sr = 14,968 psi 0.52 psi St 1.5 Sm (575°F) = 28,837 St = 4,691 psi 0.16 psi Chapter 03 3.9B-100 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.9B-2k (Sheet 3 of 7)
REACTOR RECIRCULATION SYSTEM GATE VALVES Suction Valves Design/ Ratio Item Calculated Calculated/
No. Component/Load/Stress Type Design Procedure Allowable Limit Value Allowed 2.4.2 Gasket seating condition ASME Section III(1), Sh 1.5 Sm (100°F) = 30,000 Sh = 18,214 psi 0.61 Paragraph NB-3647.1 psi Sr 1.5 Sm (100°F) = 30,000 Sr = 14,391 psi 0.48 psi St 1.5 Sm (100°F) = 30,000 St = 4,507 psi 0.15 psi 3.0 Stresses in Stem
3.1 Loads
operator thrust and -- -- -- --
torque 3.2 Stem thrust stress Calculate stress due to St Sm = 42,275 psi St = 3,347 psi 0.08 operator thrust in critical cross section 3.3 Stem shear stress Calculate shear stress Ss 0.6 Sm = 25,365 psi Ss = 2,288 psi 0.09 due to operator torque in critical cross section 3.4 Buckling on stem Calculate slenderness Max. allowable load = Slenderness ratio = 115 N/A ratio. If greater than 30 34,284 lb calculate allowable load Actual load on stem = 15,115 0.44 from Rankine's formula lb (therefore, no buckling) using safety factor of 4.
4.0 Disc Analysis
4.1 Loads
maximum differential -- -- -- --
pressure(2) 4.2 Maximum stress in disc ASME Section III(1), Smax 1.5 Sm (575°F) = Max stress = 20,225 psi 0.74 Paragraphs NB-3215 and 27,487 psi NB-3221.3 Chapter 03 3.9B-101 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.9B-2k (Sheet 4 of 7)
REACTOR RECIRCULATION SYSTEM GATE VALVES Suction Valves Design/ Ratio Item Calculated Calculated/
No. Component/Load/Stress Type Design Procedure Allowable Limit Value Allowed 5.0 Yoke and Yoke Connections
5.1 Loads
stem operational Calculate stresses in the -- -- --
loads yoke and yoke connections to acceptable structural analysis methods 5.2 Tensile stress in yoke leg -- Smax Sm (100°F) = 35,000 psi Smax = 8,718 psi 0.25 bolts 5.3 Bending stress of yoke legs -- Sb 1.5 Sm (185°F) = 33,165 Sb = 14,011 psi 0.42 psi Chapter 03 3.9B-102 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.9B-2k (Sheet 5 of 7)
REACTOR RECIRCULATION SYSTEM GATE VALVES Discharge Valves Design/ Ratio Item Calculated Calculated/
No. Component/Load/Stress Type Design Procedure Allowable Limit Value Allowed 1.0 Body and Bonnet
1.1 Loads
Design pressure System requirement 1,650 psi N/A N/A Design temperature System requirement 575°F N/A N/A Pipe reaction Not specified N/A N/A N/A Thermal effects Not specified N/A N/A N/A 1.2 Pressure rating ASME Section III(1), Pr = 969.68 psi Pr = 969.68 psi N/A Figure NB-3545.1-2 1.3 Minimum wall thickness ASME Section III(1), t (nominal) = 2.432 in tm = 2.432 min, in N/A Paragraph NB-3542 1.4 Primary membrane stress ASME Section III(1), Pm Sm (500°F) = 19,600 psi Pm = 9,831 psi 0.50 Paragraph NB-3545.1 1.5 Secondary stress due to pipe ASME Section III(1), Pe = greatest value of Ped Ped = 5,917 psi 0.20 reaction Paragraph NB-3545.2 Ped = 19,643 psi 0.67 Peb and Pet 1.5 Sm (500°F) Pet = 19,643 psi 0.67 1.5 (19,600) = 29,400 psi Pe = Pet = 19,643 psi 1.6 Primary plus secondary stress ASME Section III(1), Sh 3 Sm (500°F) = 58,800 Qp = 23,264 psi --
due to internal pressure Paragraph NB-3545.2(a)(1) psi 1.7 Thermal secondary stress ASME Section III(1), Sh 3 Sm (500°F) = 58,800 Qt = 1,020 psi --
Paragraph NB-3545.2(c) psi 1.8 Sum of primary plus secondary ASME Section III(1), Sh 3 Sm (500°F) = 58,800 Sh = Q + Pe + 2Qt = 36,970 0.63 stress Paragraph NB-3545.2 psi psi 1.9 Fatigue requirements ASME Section III(1), Na 2,000 cycles N = 4 x 105 cycles N/A Paragraph NB-3545.3 1.10 Cyclic rating ASME Section III(1), It 1.0 It = 0.0032 N/A Paragraph NB-3550 Chapter 03 3.9B-103 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.9B-2k (Sheet 6 of 7)
REACTOR RECIRCULATION SYSTEM GATE VALVES Discharge Valves Design/ Ratio Item Calculated Calculated/
No. Component/Load/Stress Type Design Procedure Allowable Limit Value Allowed 2.0 Body to Bonnet Bolting
2.1 Loads
design pressure and ASME Section III(1), -- -- --
temperature, gasket loads, Paragraph NB-3647.1 stem operational load, seismic load (design basis earthquake) 2.2 Bolt area ASME Section III(1), Ab 41.23 in2 Ab 47.52 in2 N/A Paragraph NB-3647.1 Sb 28,675 psi Sb = 28,675 psi N/A 2.3 Body Flange Stresses ASME Section III(1), -- -- --
Paragraph NB-3647.1 2.3.1 Operating conditions ASME Section III(1), Sh 1.5 Sm (575°F) = 28,837 Sh = 14,682 psi 0.51 Paragraph NB-3647.1 psi Sr 1.5 Sm (575°F) = 28,837 Sr = 18,889 psi 0.65 psi 0.17 St 1.5 Sm (575°F) = 28,837 St = 4,815 psi psi 2.3.2 Gasket seating condition ASME Section III(1), Sh 1.5 Sm (100°F) = 30,000 Sh = 19,884 psi 0.66 Paragraph NB-3647.1 psi Sr 1.5 Sm (100°F) = 30,000 Sr = 28,378 psi 0.94 psi 0.24 St 1.5 Sm (100°F) = 30,000 St = 7,235 psi psi 2.4 Bonnet Flange Stresses 2.4.1 Operating condition ASME Section III(1), Sh 1.5 Sm (575°F) = 28,837 Sh = 18,352 psi 0.64 Paragraph NB-3647.1 psi Sr 1.5 Sm (575°F) = 28,837 Sr = 24,546 psi 0.85 psi 0.22 St 1.5 Sm (575°F) = 28,837 St = 6,400 psi psi 2.4.2 Gasket seating condition ASME Section III(1), Sh 1.5 Sm (100°F) = 30,000 Sh = 18,540 psi 0.62 Paragraph NB-3647.1 psi Sr 1.5 Sm (100°F) = 30,000 Sr = 24,875 psi 0.83 psi 0.22 St 1.5 Sm (100°F) = 30,000 St = 6,485 psi psi Chapter 03 3.9B-104 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.9B-2k (Sheet 7 of 7)
REACTOR RECIRCULATION SYSTEM GATE VALVES Discharge Valves Design/ Ratio Item Calculated Calculated/
No. Component/Load/Stress Type Design Procedure Allowable Limit Value Allowed 3.0 Stresses in Stem 3.1 Load: operator thrust and -- -- -- --
torque 3.2 Stem thrust stress Calculate stress due to St Sm = 42,275 psi St = 7,295 psi 0.17 operator thrust in critical cross section 3.3 Stem torque stress Calculate shear stress due Ss 0.6 Sm = 25,365 psi Ss = 4,986 psi 0.20 to operator torque in critical cross section 3.4 Buckling on stem Calculate slenderness Max allowable load = 44,322 Slenderness ratio = 96.5 N/A ratio. If greater than lb Actual load on stem = 32,944 0.74 30, calculate allowable lb (therefore, no buckling) load from Rankine's formula using safety factor of 4.
4.0 Disc Analysis
4.1 Loads
maximum differential -- -- -- --
pressure(3) 4.2 Maximum stress in disc ASME Section III(1), Smax 1.5 Sm (575°F) = 27,487 Max stress = 26,179 psi 0.95 Paragraphs NB-3215 and psi NB-3221.3 5.0 Yoke and Yoke Connections
5.1 Loads
stem operational load Calculate stresses in yoke -- -- --
and yoke connections to acceptable structural analysis methods 5.2 Tensile stress in yoke leg -- Smax Sm (100°F) = 35,000 psi Smax = 14,654 psi 0.42 bolts 5.3 Bending stress of yoke legs -- sb 1.5 S (185°F) = 33,165 Sb = 19,988 psi 0.60 psi (1) ASME Section III, 1971 Edition.
(2) Valve differential pressure is 50 psig.
(3) Valve differential pressure is 450 psig.
Chapter 03 3.9B-105 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.9B-2 (Sheet 1 of 2)
RECIRCULATION FLOW CONTROL VALVE 24-IN SIZE (FISHER)
(ASME Section III 1971 Edition, with Winter 1973 Addenda)
Calculated or Ratio Calc/
Item Component/Stress/Loading Design Procedure Allowable Limit Actual Value Allowed No.
1.0 Body, housing, bonnet and covers 1.1 Loads - Design pressure System requirement 1675 psi Design temperature System requirement 575°F 1.2 Body pressure rating ASME Section III 985 psi NB-3545.1-2 1.3 Body minimum wall thickness ASME Section III tm = 2.614 in tm = 2.710 in 1.036 NB-3541 1.4 Maximum primary body membrane ASME Section III Pm Sm (575°) = 19,600 psi Pm = 10,265 psi 0.523 stress NB-3545.1 1.5 Maximum primary plus secondary ASME Section III Sm 3 Sm 58,800 psi Sm = 25,315 psi 0.43 body stress NB-3545.2 1.6 Housing minimum wall thickness ASME Section III tm = 2.549 in tm = 2.710 in 1.063 NB-3541 1.7 Maximum primary housing membrane ASME Section III Pm Sm (575°) 19,600 psi Pm = 8,400 psi 0.428 stress NB-3545.1 1.8 Maximum primary plus secondary ASME Section III Sm 3 Sm (575°) 58,800 Sm = 23,100 psi 0.392 housing stress NB-3545.2 psi 1.9 Cyclic requirements ASME Section III Na 2,000 cyc Na = 106 cyc NB-3545.3 1.10 Fatigue analysis usage factor ASME Section III It 1.0 It = 0.0006 NB-3550 1.11 Body-to-housing flange maximum ASME Section III Sm = 29,400 psi Sm = 28,832 psi 0.981 stress NB-3647.1 (1.5 x 19,600) 1.12 Body-to-housing studs - area ASME Section III A6 31.67 in2 A6 = 31.68 in2 1.0 Body-to-housing primary stress NB-3647.1 Sm = 27,000 psi S6 = 26,992 psi 0.999 Body-to-housing maximum stress 3 Sm = 81,000 psi S6 = 68,100 psi 0.841 1.13 Top housing cover - thickness ASME Section III tm 3.23 in tm = 4.63 in 1.433 NB-3646 and ASME Section VIII, UG-34 Chapter 03 3.9B-106 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.9B-2 (Sheet 2 of 2)
RECIRCULATION FLOW CONTROL VALVE 24-IN SIZE (FISHER)
(ASME Section III 1971 Edition, with Winter 1973 Addenda)
Item Calculated or Ratio Calc/
No. Component/Stress/Loading Design Procedure Allowable Limit Actual Value Allowed 1.14 Top housing cover studs - area ASME Section III A6 31.75 in2 A6 = 33.60 in2 1.058 Top housing primary stud stress NB-3647.1 Sm = 27,000 psi S6 = 25,900 psi 0.959 Top housing maximum stud stress 3 Sm = 81,000 psi S6 = 45,100 psi 0.556 1.15 Bottom cover - thickness NB-3646 and Section tm 1.85 in tm = 3.56 in 1.924 VIII, UG-34 1.16 Bottom cover primary stud stress ASME Section III Sm = 27,000 psi S6 = 22,277 psi 0.825 Bottom cover maximum stud stress NB-3647.1 3 Sm = 81,000 psi S6 = 52,400 psi 0.647 Bottom cover studs - area A6 11.09 in2 A6 = 13.44 in2 1.211 1.17 Bonnet cartridge - thickness NB-3646 and Section tm 1.82 in tm = 3.125 in 1.717 VIII, UG-34 1.18 Bonnet cartridge studs - area ASME Section III A6 12.07 in2 A6 = 18.48 in2 1.531 Bonnet cartridge primary stud NB-3647.1 Sm = 27,000 psi S6 = 17,630 psi 0.652 stress Bonnet cartridge maximum stud 3 Sm = 81,000 psi S6 = 56,500 psi 0.698 stress NOTE: The recirculation flow control valves are passive components and therefore are not required to operate in emergency or faulted conditions.
The valves have been designed for 6 g vertical and 9 g horizontal, which exceeds any load condition from Table 3.9B-2h. The valves will maintain pressure integrity during and after events imposing these accelerations. The valve internals (ball shaft, linkage, bearings, etc.)
have also been designed for faulted, large pipe break conditions. Qualification method is by analysis only.
Chapter 03 3.9B-107 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.9B-2m (Sheet 1 of 2)
ASME SAFETY CLASS 1 RECIRCULATION PIPING AND PIPE MOUNTED EQUIPMENT HIGHEST STRESS
SUMMARY
Identification(2)
Calculated Ratio of Locations Limiting Stress(1) or Allowable Actual/ of Highest Acceptance Criteria Stress Type Usage Factor Limits Allowable Loading Stress Points ASME Section III, NB-3600 Design Condition: 1. Pressure Hanger lug
- 2. Weight (Loop B)
Eq. 9 1.5 Sm Primary 15,846 psi 25,875 psi 0.61 Service Levels A and B 1. Thermal Header sweepolet (normal & upset) condition: (Loop B)
Eq. 12 3.0 Sm Secondary 30,015 psi 51,750 psi 0.58 Service Levels A and B Primary plus 40,978 psi 51,750 psi 0.79 1. Pressure RHS return sweepolet (normal & upset) condition: secondary 2. Weight (Loop B)
(except thermal 3. OBE Eq. 13 3.0 Sm expansion) 4. Operating transients
- 5. SRV Service Levels A and B (normal and upset) condition:
Cumulative usage factor N/A 0.56 1.0 0.56 Header sweepolet (Loop B)
Service Level B (upset) 1. Pressure RHS return sweepolet condition: 2. Weight (Loop B)
- 3. OBE Eq. 9 1.8 Sm & 1.5 Sy Primary 29,239 psi 29,388 psi 0.99 4. SRV Service Level C (emergency) 1. Pressure Hanger lug condition: 2. Weight (Loop B)
- 3. Chugging Eq. 9 < 2.25 Sm & 1.8 Sy Primary 18,540 psi 35,266 psi 0.53 4. SRV Service Level D (faulted) 1. Pressure RHS return sweepolet condition: 2. Weight (Loop B)
- 3. SSE Eq. 9 < 3.0 Sm + 2.0 Sy Primary 34,058 psi 39,184 psi 0.87 4. AP Chapter 03 3.9B-108 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.9B-2m (Sheet 2 of 2)
ASME SAFETY CLASS 1 RECIRCULATION PIPING AND PIPE MOUNTED EQUIPMENT HIGHEST STRESS
SUMMARY
Highest Ratio Identification of Calculated Allowable Calculated/ Equipment with Component/Load Type Load Load Allowable Loading Highest Loads Snubber Load (lb)
Service Level B 53,924 100,000 0.54 1. OBE Snubber SB10
Level B 1,164,538 1,527,140 0.76 1. Weight Discharge valve (Loop B)
- 2. Thermal
- 3. OBE
- 4. SRV Level C 471,382 1,527,140 0.31 1. Weight Discharge valve (Loop B)
- 2. Thermal
- 3. Chugging
- 4. SRV Level D 1,374,232 1,527,140 0.90 1. Weight Discharge valve (Loop B)
- 2. Thermal
- 3. SSE
- 4. AP Acceleration (g)
Horizontal 1.58 9.0 0.18 1. SSE Flow control valve
- 2. Chugging (Loop A)
- 2. AP (Loop B)
Chapter 03 3.9B-109 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.9B-2n (Sheet 1 of 3)
REACTOR REFUELING AND SERVICING EQUIPMENT Equipment Storage Racks Primary Allowable Calculated Stress Stress Stress Acceptance Criteria Loading Type (psi) (psi)
The allowable primary bending stress is based on ASME Section III for type ASTM B221 or 308 6061T6 aluminum alloy Fu = 38,000 psi Fy = 35,000 psi For normal condition: For normal condition: Bending 23,100 16,887 Slimit = 0.66 Fy 1. Normal operating loads For emergency condition: For emergency condition: Bending 30,800 26,130 Slimit = 0.88 Fy 1. Normal operating loads
- 2. OBE
- 3. SRV discharge
- 4. LOCA*
For faulted condition: For faulted condition: Bending 30,800 26,415 Slimit = 0.88 Fy 1. Normal operating loads
- 2. SSE
- 3. SRV discharge
- 4. LOCA
- Used for conservatism.
Chapter 03 3.9B-110 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.9B-2n (Sheet 2 of 3)
REACTOR REFUELING AND SERVICING EQUIPMENT Fuel Preparation Machine Primary Allowable Calculated Stress Stress Stress Acceptance Criteria Loading Type (psi) (psi)
Material: Aluminum 6061-T6, T651 welded using ASTM 5356 filler wire Fy = 20,000 psi Fu = 24,000 psi For normal condition: For normal condition: Pm + Pb 13,100 4,500 Slimit = 0.65 Fy 1. Static For upset condition: For upset condition: Pm + Pb 17,600 14,800 Slimit = 0.88 Fy 1. Normal operating loads
- 2. OBE
- 3. SRV For faulted condition: For faulted condition: Pm + Pb 24,000 22,400 Slimit = Fu 1. Normal operating loads
- 2. SSE
- 3. SRV
- 4. LOCA Chapter 03 3.9B-111 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.9B-2n (Sheet 3 of 3)
REACTOR REFUELING AND SERVICING EQUIPMENT Refueling Platform With Service Pole Caddy, NF500 Round Mast, Gleason Dual Air Hose and Reels Allowable Calculated Load Stress Stress Acceptance Criteria Loading Type (psi) (psi)
The allowable stresses are based on AISC Part 5, Sections 1.5 and 1.6 For normal condition: 1. Operating Axial load 30,360 15,813 and bending For upset condition: 1. Operating Shear load 16,000 15,075
- 2. OBE (weld)
- 3. SRV
- 4. LOCA*
For faulted condition: 1. Operating Shear load 16,000 15,857
- 2. SSE (weld)
- 3. SRV
- 4. LOCA
- Used for conservatism.
Chapter 03 3.9B-112 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.9B-2o (Sheet 1 of 1)
FUEL ASSEMBLY (INCLUDING CHANNEL)(2)(3)
Calculated Evaluation Acceptance Primary Peak Basis Criteria Loading Load Type Acceleration Acceleration Acceleration envelope Horizontal direction Horizontal acceleration 2.5 G (1)
Peak pressure Safe shutdown earthquake Annulus pressurization Vertical direction Vertical accelerations 3.1 G(4) (1)
Peak pressure Safe shutdown earthquake Safety relief valve Chugging (1) Evaluation basis accelerations and evaluations are contained in NEDE-21175-3-P-A; for GE 11 fuel, NEDE-31917P; for GE 14 fuel, NEDC-32868P, NEDE-31152P, and GE-NE-0000-0016-5640-00; and for GNF2 fuel, 003N2003 and NEDC-33270P.
(2) The calculated maximum fuel assembly gap opening for the most limiting load combination is 0.01 in based on the methodology contained in NEDE-21175-3-P. This is much less than the gap required to start the disengagement of the lower tie-plate from the fuel support casting.
(3) The fatigue analysis indicates that the fuel assembly has adequate fatigue capability to withstand loadings resulting from multiple SRV actuations and the OBE + SRV event.
(4) These values are determined using methodology contained in NEDE-21175-3-P-A.
Chapter 03 3.9B-113 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.9B-2p (Sheet 1 of 1)
RECIRCULATION PUMP Summary of Load Classification High Stress Locations and Limit Criteria Pump Case Load Combination Loading Criteria Highest Calc. Ratio Condition ASME Pressure Mechanical (ASME Section III Stress (psi)/ Allowable Act./
Section III (psig) Loads NB-3220) Location Usage Factor Value All.
Design Design pressure = 1. OBE Figure NB-3221-1 Pump case 28,449 psi 28,838 psi 0.99 (NB-3112) 1,650 2. Pump thrust Pm 1.0 Sm
- 3. Deadweight PL + Pb 1.5 Sm
- 4. Nozzle loads
- 5. Gasket seating Normal Most severe normal/ 1. Deadweight Figure NB-3222-1 Discharge 48,449 psi 58,020 psi 0.84 (NB-3113.1) and upset pressure = 2. Nozzle loads PL + Pb + Pe + Q transition upset 1,313 3. Thermal transient 3.0 Sm (NB-3113.2) 4. OBE Pe 3.0 Sm
- 5. Upset Bolts u=0.29 1.0 0.29 Emergency Most severe 1. Deadweight Figure NB-3224-1 Crotch 32,317 psi 34,812 psi 0.93 (NB-3113.3) emergency pressure = 2. Nozzle loads Pm (1.2 Sm or Sy) 1,796 3. Pump thrust PL (1.8 Sm or 1.5
- 4. Gasket seating Sy)
- 5. OBE PL + Pb (1.8 Sm or 1.5 Sy)
Faulted Most severe faulted 1. Deadweight Table F-1322.2-1 Discharge 52,563 psi 66,845 psi 0.79 (NB-3113.4) pressure = 1,313 2. Nozzle loads Pm 2.4 Sm or 0.7 Su transition
- 3. SSE + P 1.5 (2.4 Sm
- 4. Pump thrust or 0.7 Su)
- 5. Gasket seating PL + Pb 1.5 (2.4 Sm or 0.75 Su)
Chapter 03 3.9B-114 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.9B-2q (Sheet 1 of 1)
STANDBY LIQUID CONTROL TANK Allowable Stress or Actual Stress Minimum Thickness or Thickness Criteria Method of Analysis Required or Load or Load
- 1. Shell thickness Loads: Normal and upset Brownell & Young 0.010 in 0.25 in design pressure and "Process Equipment Design" temperature Stress limit ASME Section III 30,000 psi 1,203 psi
- 2. Nozzle loads Loads: Normal and upset The maximum moments due to pipe design pressure and reaction and maximum forces shall temperature not exceed the allowable limits.
Overflow nozzle Fo = 450 lb 98 lb Mo = 310 ft-lb 195 ft-lb Nozzle 1 Nozzle 2 Discharge nozzle Fo = 450 lb 287 lb 350 lb Mo = 310 ft-lb 289 ft-lb 191 ft-lb Loads: Faulted deadweight, The maximum moments due to pipe thermal expansion, and SSE reaction and maximum forces shall not exceed the allowable limits.
Overflow nozzle Fo = 540 lb 109 lb Mo = 372 ft-lb 209 ft-lb Nozzle 1 Nozzle 2 Discharge nozzle Fo = 540 lb 298 lb 441 lb Mo = 372 ft-lb 315 ft-lb 234 ft-lb
- 3. Anchor bolts ASME Section III 10,000 psi 8,104 psi
- 4. Dynamic loads Equivalent static 1.75 g horizontal 1.046 g horizontal
- a. SSE 1.75 g vertical 0.71 g vertical
- b. SRV all
- c. LOCA Chapter 03 3.9B-115 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.9B-2r (Sheet 1 of 4)
RESIDUAL HEAT REMOVAL HEAT EXCHANGER Allowable Stress or Minimum Calculated Stress Loading Criteria/Location Thickness Required or Actual Thickness
- 1. Closure Bolting Bolting loads and stresses calculated in accordance with Rules for Bolted Flange Connections, ASME Section III, Loads: Normal Appendix XI Design pressure and temperature Design gasket load a. Shell-to-tube sheet bolts 25,000 psi 22,009 psi
- b. Channel cover bolts 25,000 psi 18,626 psi
- 2. Wall Thickness Shell side ASME Section III, Safety Class 2 and TEMA, Class C Loads: Normal Design pressure and temperature Tube side ASME Section III, Safety Class 3 and TEMA, Class C
- a. Shell 0.78 in 0.875 in
- b. Shell cover 0.77 in 0.81 in min
- c. Channel 0.808 in 0.875 in
- d. Tubes 0.0515 in 0.054 in min
- e. Channel cover 6.77 in 6.82 in
- f. Tube sheet 6.22 in 6.25 in Chapter 03 3.9B-116 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.9B-2r (Sheet 2 of 4)
RESIDUAL HEAT REMOVAL HEAT EXCHANGER Allowable Nozzle Calculated Nozzle Loading Criteria Forces and Moments Loads
- 3. Nozzle The maximum moments due to pipe reaction and the maximum (1,2) (3) forces shall not exceed the allowable limits.
Loads: Faulted Design pressure and temperature Primary stress smaller of 0.7 Su or 2.4 S in accordance Deadweight with ASME Section III allowable.
- 4. Support Brackets and Attachment Stress allowables in accordance with ASME Section III, Welds Subsection NT (upset condition).
Loads: Faulted a. Lower bracket welds Design pressure and temperature Bending stress 14,438 2,169 Deadweight Shear stress 21,000 3,646 Nozzle loads SSE b. Upper bracket welds SRV LOCA Bending stress 14,438 1,983 Shear stress 21,000 853
- 5. Anchor Bolts Stress allowable in accordance with ASME Section III, Appendix XVII Loads: Faulted Lower support bolting Design pressure and temperature Deadweight Tension 29,000 6,919 Nozzle loads Shear 11,990 3,771 SSE SRV LOCA Chapter 03 3.9B-117 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.9B-2r (Sheet 3 of 4)
RESIDUAL HEAT REMOVAL HEAT EXCHANGER Allowable Stress (psi) or Minimum Calculated Stress Loading Criteria/Location Thickness Required or Actual Thickness
- 6. Shell Adjacent to Support Shell stress allowables in accordance with ASME Section Brackets III Subsection NC (upset condition)
Loads: Faulted
- a. Maximum principal stress adjacent to upper support 28,875 18,864 Design pressure and temperature
- b. Maximum principal stress adjacent to lower support 28,875 23,097 Deadweight Nozzle loads SSE SRV LOCA
- 7. Shell Away from Discontinuities Stress allowable in accordance with ASME Section III Subsection NC (upset condition)
Loads: Faulted Principal stress 19,250 17,838 Design pressure and temperature Deadweight Nozzle loads SSE SRV LOCA (1) Maximum allowable piping load combinations for faulted conditions (including DBE) shall not exceed the following relationship for each nozzle:
lFil + lMil 1 Fo lFol lMol Fi Mi Mo Where:
Fi = Largest of the three actual external orthogonal forces (Fx, Fy, and Fz)
Mi = Largest of the three actual external orthogonal moments (Mx, My, and Mz) for the same reference coordinates Fo = Allowable value of Fi when all moments are zero Mo = Allowable value of Mi when all forces are zero One coordinate axis must be the nozzle centerline. Another coordinate axis must be parallel to the heat exchanger centerline except where the heat exchanger centerline is parallel to the nozzle centerline. In this case, the coordinate axis must be orthogonal to the nozzle centerline and at 0°-180° or 90°-270° azimuths.
Chapter 03 3.9B-118 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.9B-2r (Sheet 4 of 4)
RESIDUAL HEAT REMOVAL HEAT EXCHANGER (2) Allowable limits (design basis):
N1 N2 N3 N4 Fx = 13,000 lb 13,000 lb 15,500 lb 15,500 lb Fy = 13,000 lb 13,000 lb 15,500 lb 15,500 lb Fz = 13,000 lb 13,000 lb 15,500 lb 15,500 lb Mx = 46,000 ft-lb 46,000 ft-lb 60,000 ft-lb 60,000 ft-lb My = 46,000 ft-lb 46,000 ft-lb 60,000 ft-lb 60,000 ft-lb Mz = 46,000 ft-lb 46,000 ft-lb 60,000 ft-lb 60,000 ft-lb (3) See as shown:
Faulted Heat Nozzle lFil lMil Exch No. Fi Mi Fo Mo lFol + lMol 2RMS N1 6,520 20,611 13,000 46,000 0.95
- E1A N2 3,751 10,622 13,000 46,000 0.52 N3 NA NA NA NA NA N4 NA NA NA NA NA 2RMS N1 4,444 10,976 13,000 46,000 0.58
- E1B N2 3,517 13,437 13,000 46,000 0.563 N3 7,179 31,363 15,500 60,000 0.986 N4 3,987 18,051 15,500 60,000 0.56 Chapter 03 3.9B-119 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.9B-2s (Sheet 1 of 2)
RCIC TURBINE Allowable Calculated Limiting Stress Stress Criteria/Loading Component Stress Type (psi) (psi)
The highest stressed sections of the various components of the RCIC turbine assembly are identified. Allowable stresses are based on ASME Section III for normal conditions:
Pressure boundary castings SA-216-WCB:
S = 17,500 psi Pressure boundary boltings, SA-193-B7:
S = 25,000 psi Alignment dowel pins: AISI4037, Rc28-35 a = 61,000 psi Sy = 106,000 psi Normal Condition Loads:
Castings: a. Stop valve General membrane 17,500
- b. Governor valve General membrane 17,500
- 1. Design pressure
- c. Turbine inlet Local bending 21,000
- 2. Design temperature
- d. Turbine case Local bending 21,000 (1)
- 3. Inlet nozzle loads Pressure-containing bolts Tensile 25,000
- 4. Exhaust nozzle loads Structure alignment pins Shear 61,000 Upset, Emergency, or Faulted Condition(2): Castings: a. Stop valve General membrane 19,250 13,860
- 1. Design pressure b. Governor valve General membrane 19,250 15,300
- 2. Design temperature c. Turbine inlet Local bending 25,200 15,300
- 3. SSE or OBE (horizontal and vertical, see d. Turbine case Local bending 25,200 18,000 Figures 3.9-1 and 3.9-2) Pressure-containing bolts Tensile 25,000 20,100
- 4. Inlet nozzle loads Structure alignment pins Shear 61,000 53,080
- 5. Exhaust nozzle loads
- 6. SRV
- 7. LOCA Chapter 03 3.9B-120 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.9B-2s (Sheet 2 of 2)
RCIC TURBINE Limiting Allowable Load Criteria/Loading Component Stress Type Load Criteria Calculated Nozzle Load Definition: Inlet:
Turbine vendor has defined allowable nozzle loads F (2,620-M) FR = 590.0 lb for the turbine assembly. The above calculated 3 MR = 837.0 ft-lb stresses assume these allowable nozzle loads have been satisfied. Exhaust:
F (6,000-M) FR = 1085.0 lb 3 MR = 2503.0 ft-lb Normal Condition Loads: F = Resultant force (lb)
- 1. Design pressure M = Resultant moment
- 2. Design temperature (ft-lb)
- 3. Weight of structure
- 4. Thermal expansion Upset, Emergency, and Faulted Condition Loads: Inlet:
- 1. Design pressure F (7,000-M) FR = 605.0 lb
- 2. Design temperature 7 MR = 893.0 ft-lb
- 3. Weight of structure
- 4. Thermal expansion Exhaust:
- 7. LOCA but <7,000 F = resultant force (lb)
M = resultant moment (ft-lb)
(1) Calculated stresses for the upset, emergency, or faulted condition are lower than the allowable stresses for the normal condition; therefore, normal condition does not need to be evaluated.
(2) Analysis indicates that shaft deflection with faulted loads is 0.014 in, which is fully acceptable, and maximum bearing load with faulted condition is 80% of allowable.
Chapter 03 3.9B-121 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.9B-2t (Sheet 1 of 3)
RCIC PUMP Allowable Calculated Limiting Stress Stress Criteria/Loading Component Stress Type (psi) (psi)
Pressure boundary stress limits of the various components for the RCIC pump assembly are based on ASME Section III for pressure boundary parts at 140°F.
- 1. Forged barrel Sy = 36,000 psi SA-105 Gr. II
- 2. End cover plates Sy = 36,000 psi SA-105 Gr. II
- 3. Nozzle connections Sy = 36,000 psi SA-105 Gr. II
- 4. Aligning pin Sy = 36,000 psi SA-515 Gr. 60
- 5. Closure bolting Sy = 105,000 psi SA-193-87
- 6. Pump holddown bolting Sy = 77,000 psi SA-325
- 7. Taper pins Sy = 75,000 psi SA-108 Gr. B1112 Normal and Upset Condition Loads:
- 1. Design pressure 1. Forged barrel General membrane 17,500
- 2. Design temperature 2. Nozzle reinforcement General membrane 17,500
- 3. OBE 3. Alignment pin Shear 15,000
- 4. Suction nozzle loads 4. Taper pins Shear 15,000
- 5. Discharge nozzle loads 5. Pump holddown bolts Tensile 40,000 Emergency or Faulted Condition Loads(1):
- 1. Design pressure 1. Forged barrel General membrane 17,500 7,052
- 2. Design temperature 2. Nozzle reinforcement General membrane 26,250 7,855
- 3. SSE at barrel discharge
- 4. Suction nozzle loads 3. Alignment pin Shear 18,000 2,230
- 5. Discharge nozzle loads 4. Taper pins (bearing 15,000 2,280 housing)
- 5. Pump holddown bolts Tension 48,000 33,662 Chapter 03 3.9B-122 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.9B-2t (Sheet 2 of 3)
RCIC PUMP Allowable Calculated Limiting Stress Stress Criteria/Loading Component Stress Type (psi) (psi)
Nozzle Load Definition:
Units: Forces - lb Moments - ft-lb The allowable combinations of forces and moments are as follows:
Fo Fi + Mi 1 Fo Mo Fi Mi Mo Where:
Fi = Largest absolute value of the three actual external orthogonal forces (Fx, Fy, Fz) that may be imposed by the interface pipe.
Mi = Largest absolute value of the three actual external orthogonal moments (Mx, My, Mz) permitted from the interface pipe when they are combined simultaneously for a specific condition.
Chapter 03 3.9B-123 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.9B-2t (Sheet 3 of 3)
RCIC PUMP Allowable Calculated Limiting Loads Loads Criteria/Loading Component Stress Type (Ft-ft/lb) (Ft-ft/lb)
Normal and Upset Condition Loads:
- 1. Design pressure Fo - Allowable value of Suction:
- 2. Design temperature Fi when all
- 3. Weight of structure moments are zero Fo 1,940 Fi = 842
- 4. Thermal expansion Mo - Allowable value of Mo 2,460 Mi = 1,224
- 5. OBE Mi when all forces are zero Discharge:
Fi = 1,767 Fo 3,715 Mi = 2,012 Mo 4,330 Emergency or Faulted Condition Loads: Suction:
- 1. Design pressure Fo 2,325 Fi = 860
- 2. Design temperature Mo 2,950 Mi = 1,248
- 3. Weight of structure (emergency)
- 4. Thermal expansion
- 5. SSE Discharge:
Fi = 1,799 Fo 4,450 Mi = 2,126 Mo 5,200 (faulted)
(1) Operability: state analysis for emergency or faulted condition shows that the maximum shaft deflection is 0.004 in (with 0.0055 in allowable),
shaft stresses are 5,975 psi with 32,000 psi allowable, and bearing loads of, drive end 376 lb, with 7,670 lb allowable and thrust end 1,323 lb with 17,200 lb allowable.
Chapter 03 3.9B-124 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.9B-2u (Sheet 1 of 2)
ECCS PUMPS Calculated Stress Allowable Stress or or Location Loading Condition Criterion Actual Thickness Min Thickness (i) Residual Heat Removal Pump Discharge head shell Design pressure, Nozzle loads, ASME Section VIII, Division 1, Para. 24,253 psi 34,650 psi SRV, Seismic loads, LOCA UG-27 Discharge head cover Design pressure ASME Section VIII, Division 1, Para. 3.00 in 2.63 in UG-34, UG-39, UG-40 Nozzle shell intersection Faulted Condition ASME Section VIII, Division 1, Para. 34,518 psi (suction) 34,650 psi Design pressure, Nozzle loads, UG-37 28,905 psi (discharge)
SRV, Seismic load, LOCA Discharge pipe Faulted Condition ASME Section VIII, Division 1, Para. 14,791 psi 18,000 psi Design pressure, Nozzle loads UG-27 Discharge head bolting Faulted Condition Bolting loads and stresses in Rules 35,030 psi 45,000 psi Design pressure, Nozzle loads, for Bolted Flange Connections, ASME Seismic, LOCA, SRV Section VIII, App. II Motor bolting Faulted Condition Bolting loads and stresses in Rules 10,741 psi 25,000 psi Seismic load, SRV, LOCA for Bolted Flange Connections, ASME Section VIII, App. II (ii) Low-Pressure Core Spray Pump Discharge head shell Faulted Condition ASME Section VIII, Division 1, Para. 9,173 psi 34,650 psi Design pressure, Nozzle loads, UG-27 SRV, Seismic, LOCA Discharge head cover Design pressure ASME Section VIII, Division 1, Para. 3.0 in 2.37 in UG-34, UG-39, UG-40 Nozzle shell intersection Faulted Condition ASME Section VIII, Division 1, Para. 14,794 psi (suction) 34,650 psi Design pressure, Nozzle loads, UG-37 16,929 psi (discharge)
SRV, Seismic, LOCA Discharge pipe Faulted Condition ASME Section VIII, Division 1, Para. 17,920 psi 18,000 psi Design pressure, Nozzle loads UG-27 Discharge head bolting Faulted Condition Bolting loads and stresses in Rules 17,281 psi 45,000 psi Design pressure, Nozzle loads, for Bolted Flange Connections, ASME SRV, Seismic, LOCA Section VIII, App. II Chapter 03 3.9B-125 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.9B-2u (Sheet 2 of 2)
ECCS PUMPS Calculated Stress Allowable Stress or or Location Loading Condition Criterion Actual Thickness Min Thickness Motor bolting Faulted Condition Bolting loads and stresses in Rules 3,159 psi 25,000 psi Seismic load, SRV, LOCA for Bolted Flange Connections, ASME Section VIII, App. II (iii) High-Pressure Core Spray Pump Discharge head shell Faulted Condition ASME Section VIII, Division 1, Para. 8,904 psi 34,650 psi Design pressure, Nozzle loads, UG-27 Seismic load Discharge head cover Design pressure ASME Section VIII, Division 1, Para. 3.25 in 2.75 in UG-34, UG-39, UG-40 Nozzle shell intersection Faulted Condition ASME Section VIII, Division 1, Para. 10,534 psi (suction) 34,650 psi Design pressure, Nozzle loads, UG-37 15,611 psi (discharge)
Seismic load Discharge pipe Faulted Condition ASME Section VIII, Division 1, Para. 10,175 psi 21,000 psi Design pressure, Nozzle loads UG-27 Discharge head bolting Faulted Condition Bolting loads and stresses in Rules 18,796 psi 45,000 psi Design pressure, Nozzle loads, for Bolted Flange Connections, ASME Seismic load Section VIII, App. II Motor bolting Faulted Condition Bolting loads and stresses in Rules 5,878 psi 25,000 psi Seismic load for Bolted Flange Connections, ASME Section VIII, App. II Chapter 03 3.9B-126 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.9B-2v (Sheet 1 of 4)
STANDBY LIQUID CONTROL PUMP Allowable Calculated Limiting Stress Stress Criteria/Loading Component Stress Type (psi) (psi)
Pressure boundary parts(1):
- 1. Fluid cylinder - SA-182-F304 Sy = 30,000 psi
- 2. Discharge valve stop and cylinder Sy = 30,000 psi head extension SA-479-304
- 3. Discharge valve cover, cylinder Sy = 30,000 psi head SA-240-304 Stuffing box flange plate Sy = 115,000 psi SA-564-630 cond H-1100
- 4. Stuffing box gland, SA-564-630 Sy = 115,000 psi
- 5. Studs, SA-540-B22 Cl. 1 Sy = 150,000 psi
- 7. Studs, cylinder tie, SA-193-B7 SA = 25,000 psi
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.9B-2v (Sheet 2 of 4)
STANDBY LIQUID CONTROL PUMP Allowable Calculated Limiting Stress Stress Criteria/Loading Component Stress Type (psi) (psi)
Normal and Upset Condition Loads:
- 1. Design pressure 1. Fluid cylinder General membrane 17,800
- 2. Design temperature 2. Discharge valve stop General membrane 17,800 (4)
- 3. OBE 3. Cylinder head extension General membrane 17,800
- 4. Nozzle loads(3) 4. Discharge valve cover General membrane 17,800
- 5. SRV discharge 5. Cylinder head General membrane 17,800
- 6. Deadweight 6. Stuffing box flange General membrane 17,800 plate
- 7. Thermal expansion 7. Stuffing box gland General membrane 35,000 Emergency Condition:
- 1. Design pressure 1. Fluid cylinder General membrane 21,360 4,450
- 2. Design temperature 2. Discharge valve stop General membrane 21,360 13,600
- 3. Deadweight 3. Cylinder head extension General membrane 21,360 13,600
- 4. Thermal expansion 4. Discharge valve cover General membrane 21,360 8,150
- 5. Nozzle loads 5. Cylinder head General membrane 21,360 8,150
- 6. Safety relief valve discharge 6. Stuffing box flange General membrane 21,360 10,390 plate
- 7. LOCA 7. Stuffing box gland General membrane 42,000 11,420 Faulted Condition:
- 1. Design pressure 1. Cylinder head studs Tensile 25,000 18,820
- 2. Design temperature 2. Stuffing box studs Tensile 25,000 24,750
- 3. Nozzle loads 3. Dowel pins(2) Shear only(2) 23,400 19,430
- 4. Safety relief valve discharge 4. Studs, cylinder tie Tensile(2) 25,000 8,685
- 5. LOCA 5. Pump holddown bolts Shear 30,000 11,350
- 6. SSE 6. Pump holddown bolts Tensile 37,500 17,680
- 7. Power frame-foot area Shear 15,000 1,850
- 8. Power frame-foot area Tensile 15,000 11,390
- 9. Motor holddown bolts Shear 12,000 3,470
- 10. Motor holddown bolts Tensile 15,000 5,660
- 11. Motor frame-foot area Shear 7,500 2,550
- 12. Motor frame-foot area Tensile 7,500 5,100 Note: Pump stresses have been re-evaluated to account for the increase in design pressure and rated flow of the SLC system. The stresses have been determined to be less than code allowable stresses.
Chapter 03 3.9B-128 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.9B-2v (Sheet 3 of 4)
STANDBY LIQUID CONTROL PUMP Allowable Limiting Stress Actual Criteria/Loading Component Stress Type (psi) Loads Nozzle Load Definition:
Units: Forces - lb Moments - ft-lb Allowable combination of forces and moments is as follows:
Fo Fi + Mi Fo Mo Fi Mi Mo Where:
Fi = The largest absolute value of the three actual external orthogonal forces (Fx, Fy, Fz) that may be imposed by the interface pipe, and M = The largest absolute value of the three actual internal orthogonal moments (Mx, My, Mz) permitted from the pipe when they are combined simultaneously for a specific condition.
Normal and Upset Condition Loads: Suction: Suction:
2SLS*P1A
- 1. Design pressure Fo = Allowable Fo = 750 Fi = 350
- 2. Design temperature value of Fi Mi = 182
- 3. OBE when all moments are 2SLS*P1B
- 4. Nozzle loads zero. Mo = 500 Fi = 390
- 5. SPV discharge Mi - 231
- 6. Deadweight Mo = Allowable value of Mi Discharge: Discharge:
- 7. Thermal expansion when all 2SLS*P1A forces are Fo = 360 Fi = 95 zero. Mi = 70 Mo = 150 2SLS*P1B Fi = 95 Mi = 70 Chapter 03 3.9B-129 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.9B-2v (Sheet 4 of 4)
STANDBY LIQUID CONTROL PUMP Allowable Limiting Stress Actual Criteria/Loading Component Stress Type (psi) Loads Emergency or Faulted Condition Loads: Suction: Suction:
2SLS*P1A
- 1. Design pressure Fo = 750 Fi = 479
- 2. Design temperature Mo = 500 Mi = 249
- 3. Nozzle loads
- 4. SRV discharge 2SLS*P1B
- 5. LOCA
- 6. SSE Fi = 491 Mi = 212 Discharge: Discharge:
2SLS*P1A Fo = 360 Fi = 97 Mo = 150 Mi = 75 2SLS*P1B Fi = 97 Mi = 75 (1) Based on ASME Boiler & Pressure Vessel Code Section III.
(2) Dowel pins take all shear.
(3) Nozzle loads produce shear loads only.
(4) Calculated stresses for emergency or faulted condition are less than the allowable stresses for the normal and upset condition loads; therefore, the normal and upset condition is not evaluated.
(5) Will be provided in a future amendment.
NOTE: Operability: The sum of the plunges and rod assembly (pounds mass times 1.75) acceleration is much less than the thrust loads encountered during normal operation conditions. Therefore, the loads during the faulted condition have no significant effect on pump operability.
Chapter 03 3.9B-130 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.9B-2w (Sheet 1 of 2)
REACTOR WATER CLEANUP SYSTEM PUMP DELETED Chapter 03 3.9B-131 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.9B-2w (Sheet 2 of 2)
REACTOR WATER CLEANUP SYSTEM PUMP DELETED Chapter 03 3.9B-132 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.9B-2x (Sheet 1 of 4)
REACTOR WATER CLEANUP Regenerative Heat Exchanger Minimum Thickness Actual Required Thickness Criteria Loading Component (in) (in)
Closure Bolting Bolting requirements are calculated in Design basis loads consisting Bolting - channel-to-shell 1.25 dia 1.25 dia accordance with rules of ASME Section III. of: flange Primary stress limit for SA-193-B7: 1. Design pressure
- 2. Design temperature S = 25,000 psi 3. Design gasket load Wall Thickness Wall thickness requirements are calculated 1. Design pressure Shell 0.817 1.012 in accordance with rules of ASME Section 2. Design temperature Shell end tee 0.968 1.50 III, Class 3 components and TEMA Class C. Shell end cover 4.46 4.75 Channel shell 0.394 1.012 Primary stress limit for: Channel cover 4.241 4.375 Tube sheet 2.379 3.00 SA-515 Gr 70, SA-516 Gr 70, and SA-105 Tubes (#BWG) 0.044 0.049 carbon steel S = 17,500 psi SA-106 Gr B carbon steel S = 15,000 psi SA-182 F304 austenitic stainless steel S = 15,900 psi SA-249 Type 304L austenitic stainless steel S = 11,900 psi Chapter 03 3.9B-133 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.9B-2x (Sheet 2 of 4)
REACTOR WATER CLEANUP Regenerative Heat Exchanger Allowable Actual Nozzle Nozzle Criteria Loading Component Loads* Loads Nozzle Loads Maximum forces and moments due to pipe 1. Design pressure Nozzle N1 Fo = 4,428 lb Fi = 4,150 lb reactions shall not exceed the allowable 2. Design temperature (tube inlet) Mo = 7,083 ft- Mi = 5,452 ft-lb limits. 3. Deadweight lb
- 4. Thermal expansion Nozzle N2 Fi = 2,333 lb
- 5. Seismic (Class II basis) (tube outlet) Fo = 4,428 lb Mi = 2,477 ft-lb Mo = 7,083 ft-Nozzle N3 lb Fi = 4,038 lb (shell inlet) Mi = 4,345 ft-lb Fo = 6,676 lb Nozzle N4 Mo = 16,386 ft- Fi = 3,210 lb (shell outlet) lb Mi = 6,034 ft-lb Fo = 6,676 lb Mo = 16,386 ft-lb Chapter 03 3.9B-134 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.9B-2x (Sheet 3 of 4)
REACTOR WATER CLEANUP Nonregenerative Heat Exchanger Minimum Thickness Actual Required Thickness Criteria Loading Component (in) (in)
Closure Bolting 1.375 dia 1.375 dia Bolting requirements are calculated in Design basis loads consisting of: Bolting - channel-to-shell accordance with rules of ASME Section III, flange primary stress limit for SA-193-B7 1. Design pressure
- 2. Design temperature S = 25,000 psi 3. Design gasket load Wall Thickness Wall thickness requirements are calculated 1. Design pressure Shell 0.144 0.328 in accordance with rules of ASME Section 2. Design temperature Shell end tee 0.130 0.375 III, Class 3 components and TEMA Class C. Shell end cover 1.552 2.50 Channel shell 0.872 1.125 Primary stress limit for: Channel cover 4.949 5.125 Tube sheet 2.986 3.00 SA-515 Gr 70 and SA-516 Gr 70 carbon steel Tubes (#BWG) 0.027 0.49 S = 17,500 psi SA-106 Gr B carbon steel S = 15,000 psi SA-182 F304 austenitic stainless steel S = 15,900 psi SA-249 Type 304L austenitic stainless steel S = 11,900 psi Chapter 03 3.9B-135 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.9B-2x (Sheet 4 of 4)
REACTOR WATER CLEANUP Nonregenerative Heat Exchanger Allowable Actual Nozzle Nozzle Criteria Loading Components Loads* Loads Nozzle Loads The maximum forces and moments due to pipe 1. Design pressure Nozzle N1 Fo = 4,428 lb Fi = 1,072 lb reactions shall not exceed the allowable 2. Design temperature (tube outlet) Mo = 7,083 ft- Mi = 2,825 ft-lb limits. 3. Deadweight lb
- 4. Thermal expansion Nozzle N2 Fi = 1,510 lb
- 5. Seismic (Class II basis) (tube inlet) Fo = 4,428 lb Mi = 4,694 ft-lb Mo = 7,083 ft-Nozzle N3 lb Fi = 2,080 lb (shell outlet) Mi = 3,337 ft-lb Fo = 5,569 lb Nozzle N4 Mo = 15,375 ft- Fi = 1,657 lb (shell inlet) lb Mi = 6,594 ft-lb Fo = 5,569 lb Mo = 15,325 ft-lb
- Maximum allowable piping loads shall not exceed the following relationship for each nozzle unless analysis is performed to meet the applicable ASME III design requirements for the component.
lFi/Fol + lMi/Mol < 1 Where: Fi (lb)=Maximum of three orthogonal forces (Fx, Fy, Fz)
Mi (ft-lb)=Maximum of three orthogonal moments (Mx, My, Mz)
Fo (lb) = The allowable value of Fi when all moments are zero Mo (ft-lb)=The allowable value of Mi when all forces are zero Chapter 03 3.9B-136 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.9B-2y (Sheet 1 of 2)
CRD HOUSING SUPPORTS Allowable Calculated Criteria Loading Stress (psi) Stress (psi)
Beams Allowable stresses based on AISC specification for the design, fabrication and erection of structural steel for buildings.
Fy @ 150°F = 36,000 psi(1)
For normal and upset conditions: Normal and upset loads:(2)
Fa = 0.60 Fy (tension) (Negligible)
Fb = 0.66 Fy (bending)
Fv = 0.40 Fy (shear)
For emergency condition: Emergency loads:(2)
(Negligible)
For faulted condition: Faulted loads:
Fa = 1.50 x 0.60 x Fy (tension) 1. Deadweight Fb = 33,000 (top chord) fb = 28,700 Fb = 1.5 x 0.60 x Fy (bending) 2. Impact force from blow-out of CRD Fb = 33,000 (bottom fb = 22,000 housing chord)
Fv = 1.5 x 0.40 x Fy (shear)
Grid Structure Allowable stresses based on AISC specification for the design, fabrication and erection of structural steel for buildings.
Fy @ 150°F = 46,000 psi(1)
For normal and upset conditions: Normal and upset loads:(2)
Fa = 0.60 Fy (tension) (Negligible)
Fb = 0.66 Fy (bending)
Fv = 0.40 Fy (shear)
Chapter 03 3.9B-137 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.9B-2y (Sheet 2 of 2)
CRD HOUSING SUPPORTS Allowable Calculated Criteria Loading Stress (psi) Stress (psi)
For emergency condition: Emergency loads:(2)
(Negligible)
For faulted condition: Faulted loads:
Fa = 1.50 x 0.60 x Fy (tension) 1. Deadweight Fb = 41,500 (top chord) fb = 40,700 Fb = 1.5 x 0.60 x Fy (bending) 2. Impact force from blow-out of CRD Fb = 27,500 (bottom fb = 12,500 housing chord)
Fv = 1.5 x 0.40 x Fy (shear)
NOTE: Cumulative usage factor is not significant because only one loading cycle (blow-out of CRD housing) is applied in the design life of the equipment.
(1) Fy = Material yield strength.
(2) Deadweights and earthquake loads are very small compared to impact force.
Chapter 03 3.9B-138 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.9B-2z (Sheet 1 of 3)
MAIN STEAM ISOLATION VALVES Design/
Item Calculated No. Component/Load/Stress Type Design Procedure Allowable Limit Value 1.0 Body and Bonnet
1.1 Loads
Design pressure System requirement 1,375 psig N/A Design temperature System requirement 586°F N/A Pipe reaction Not specified N/A N/A Thermal effects Not specified N/A N/A 1.2 Pressure rating ASME Section III(1) Pr = 575 psig Pr = 575 psig Paragraph NB-3543c 1.3 Minimum wall thickness ASME Section III(1) t (nominal) = 2.05 in tm = 1.76 min, in Paragraph NB-3542.1 1.4 Primary membrane stress ASME Section III(1) Pm Sm (500°F) = 21,600 psi Pm = 7,840 psi Paragraph NB-3545.1 1.5 Secondary stress due to pipe ASME Section III(1) Pe = greatest value of Ped Ped = 4,150 psi reaction Paragraph NB-3545.2 Peb and Pet 1.5 Sm (500°F) Peb = 9,570 psi 1.5 (21,600) = 32,400 psi Pet = 7,040 psi Pe = Peb = 9,570 psi 1.6 Primary plus secondary stress ASME Section III(1) Sn 3 Sm (500°F) = 64,800 psi Qp = 24,700 psi due to internal pressure Paragraph NB-3545.2 (a) (1) 1.7 Thermal secondary stress ASME Section III(1) Sn 3 Sm (500°F) = 64,800 psi Qt = 4,130 psi Paragraph NB-3545.2 (c) 1.8 Sum of primary plus secondary ASME Section III(1) Sn 3 Sm (500°F) = 64,800 psi Sn = Qp + Pe 2Qt = 42,500 psi stress Paragraph NB-3545.2 1.9 Fatigue requirements ASME Section III(1) Na 2,000 cycles N = 30,000 cycles Paragraph NB-3545.3 1.10 Cyclic rating ASME Section III(1) It 1.0 It = 0.0054 Paragraph NB-3550 Chapter 03 3.9B-139 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.9B-2z (Sheet 2 of 3)
MAIN STEAM ISOLATION VALVES Design/
Item Calculated No. Component/Load/Stress Type Design Procedure Allowable Limit Value 2.0 Body to Bonnet Bolting
2.1 Loads
design pressure and ASME Section III(1) -- --
temperature, gasket loads, Paragraph NB-3647.1 stem operational load, seismic load (design basis earthquake) 2.2 Bolt area ASME Section III(1) Ab 53.40 in2 Ab = 53.40 in2 Paragraph NB-3647.1 S 34,700 psi S = Sb + Ste + Stv = 22,700 psi 2.3 Body Flange Stresses 2.3.1 Operating conditions ASME Section III(1) SH 1.5 Sm (500°F) = 26,200 SH = 15,100 psi Paragraph NB-3647.1, psi XI-3240 SR Sm (500°F) = 17,500 psi SR = 9,800 psi ST Sm (500°F) = 17,500 psi ST = 8,900 psi (SH + SR)/2 Sm = 17,500 (SH + SR)/2 = 12,500 psi (SH + ST)/2 Sm = 17,500 (SH + ST)/2 = 12,000 psi 2.3.2 Gasket seating condition ASME Section III(1) SH 1.5 Sm (100°F) = 26,200 SH = 17,600 psi Paragraph NB-3647.1 psi SR Sm (100°F) = 17,500 psi SR = 11,400 psi ST Sm (100°F) = 17,500 psi ST = 10,300 psi (SH + SR)/2 Sm (100°F) = (SH + SR)/2 = 14,500 psi 17,500 psi (SH + ST)/2 Sm (100°F) = (SH + ST)/2 = 14,000 psi 17,500 psi 3.0 Stresses in Stem
3.1 Loads
operator thrust -- -- --
3.2 Stem tensile stress Calculate stress due to St Sm (500°F)(2) = 23,400 psi St = 19,200 psi, max.
operator thrust in critical cross section 3.3 Stem thread stress Calculate shear stress due S 0.6 Sm (500°F)(2) = 14,000 S = 7,500 psi to maximum stem load on psi thread stress area Chapter 03 3.9B-140 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.9B-2z (Sheet 3 of 3)
MAIN STEAM ISOLATION VALVES Design/
Item Calculated No. Component/Load/Stress Type Design Procedure Allowable Limit Value 3.4 Buckling on stem Calculate critical load, Pcr = 99,136 lb Actual stem load = 39,450 Pcr lb; therefore, no buckling Actual stem load should be less than Pcr 4.0 Disk Analysis 4.1 Maximum stress in disk The disk stress intensity Sm (500°F) = 19,400 psi Max. stress = 13,000 psi is calculated using a finite element computer program, which iterates disk thickness until the stress in the plate is less than that allowed by code (1) ASME Section III, 1977 Edition through Summer 1977 Addenda.
(2) Valve stem material ASTM A-182, Gr F6A, Cl 3 in accordance with ASME Section III, 1980 Edition through Summer 1981 Addenda.
Chapter 03 3.9B-141 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.9B-3 (Sheet 1 of 4)
NSSS ASSESSMENT AGAINST REGULATORY GUIDE 1.48(1)
Plant Regulatory Guide Component Condition Load Combination1/ Design Limit Paragraph Class 1 vessels Upset (U) [NPC or UPC] + 0.5 SSE(2) NB-3223} 1.a Emergency (E) EPC NB-3224} 2/ 1.b Faulted (F) NPC + SSE + DSL NB-3225} 1.c Class 1 piping U [NPC + UPC] + 0.5 SSE NB-3654} 1.a E EPC NB-3655} 2/ 1.b F NPC + SSE + DSL NB-3656} 1.c Class 1 pumps U [NPC or UPC] + 0.5 SSE NB-3223 5/} 2.a (inactive) E EPC NB-3224 } 1/ 2.b F NPC + SSE + DSL NB-3225 } 2.c Class 1 pumps U [NPC or UPC] + 0.5 SSE NB-3222 5/ 4.a (active) E EPC NB-3222 6/ 4.a F NPC + SSE + DSL NB-3222 7/, 8/ 4.a 8/
Class 1 valves U [NPC or UPC] + 0.5 SSE NB-3223 5/ 2.a (inactive) by analysis E EPC NB-3224 2.b 2/ 4/
Class 1 valves F NPC + SSE + DSL NB-3225 2.c (inactive) U [NPC or UPC] + 0.5 SSE 1.1 Pr 3.a Designed by either std. E EPC 1.2 Pr 3.b or alternative design F NPC + SSE + DSL 1.5 Pr 3.c rules Class 1 valves (active) U [NPC or UPC] + 0.5 SSE NB-3222} 5/ 4.a by analysis E EPC NB-3222} 6/ 4.b F NPC + SSE + DSL NB-3222} 7/, 8/ 4.c Class 1 valves U [NPC or UPC] + 0.5 SSE 1.0 Pr} 5.a (active) E EPC 1.0 Pr} 6/ 5.b Designed by std. or F NPC + SSE + DSL 1.0 Pr} 5.c alternative design rules Chapter 03 3.9B-142 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.9B-3 (Sheet 2 of 4)
NSSS ASSESSMENT AGAINST REGULATORY GUIDE 1.48(1)
Comparison ASME with NRC Plant Code Allowable Section III Regulatory Component Condition Load Combination1/ Stresses Reference Guide 1.48 Class 1 vessels U [NPC or UPC] + 0.5 SSE(2) 3.0 Sm (includes secondary NB-3223 stresses)
E EPC 1.8 Sm or 1.5 Sy NB-3224 Agree F NPC + SSE + DSL App. F - Sect. III NB-3225 Class 1 piping U [NPC or UPC] + 0.5 SSE 3.0 Sm (includes secondary NB-3654 stresses)
E EPC 2.25 Sm NB-3655 Agree F NPC + SSE + DSL 3.0 Sm NB-3656 Class 1 pumps U [NPC or UPC] + 0.5 SSE 1.65 Sm (excludes secondary NB-3223 (inactive) stresses)
E EPC 1.8 Sm NB-3224 Agree F NPC + SSE + DSL App. F - Sect. III Class 1 pumps U [NPC or UPC] + 0.5 SSE N/A N/A N/A (active) E EPC F NPC + SSE + DSL Class 1 valves U [NPC or UPC] + 0.5 SSE N/A N/A N/A (inactive) by analysis E EPC F NPC + SSE + DSL Class 1 valves U [NPC or UPC] + 0.5 SSE 1.1 Pr NB-3525 (inactive) E EPC 1.2 Pr NB-3526 Agree Designed by either F NPC + SSE + DSL 1.5 Pr NB-3527 std. or alternative design rules Class 1 valves (active) U [NPC or UPC] + 0.5 SSE N/A N/A N/A by analysis E EPC F NPC + SSE + DSL Class 1 valves U [NPC or UPC] + 0.5 SSE 1.0 Pr} NB-3525 (active) E EPC 1.0 Pr} (3) NB-3526 Agree Designed by std. or F NPC + SSE + DSL 1.0 Pr} NB-3527 alternative design rules Chapter 03 3.9B-143 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.9B-3 (Sheet 3 of 4)
NSSS ASSESSMENT AGAINST REGULATORY GUIDE 1.48(1)
Regulatory Plant Guide Component Condition Load Combination1/ Design Limit Paragraph Class 2 & 3 vessels U [NPC or UPC] + 0.5 SSE 1.1 S} 6.a (Division 1) of ASME E EPC 1.1 S} 9/ 6.b Section III F NPC + SSE + DSL 1.5 S} 6.c Class 2 vessels U [NPC or UPC] + 0.5 SSE NB-3223} 7.a (Division 2) of ASME E EPC NB-3224} 2/ 7.b Section VIII F NPC + SSE + DSL NB-3225} 7.c Class 2 & 3 piping U [NPC or UPC] + 0.5 SSE NC-3611.1(b)(4)} 8.a (c)(b)(1) }
E EPC NC-3611.1(b)(4)} 10/ 8.a (c)(b)(1) }
F NPC + SSE + DSL NC-3611.1(b)(4)} 8.b (c)(b)(2) }
Class 2 & 3 pumps U [NPC or UPC] + 0.5 SSE m 1.1 S ( + ) /1.5 9.a (inactive) m b E EPC m 1.1 S ( m + b ) /1.5 9.a F NPC + SSE + DSL m 1.2 S ( m + b ) /1.5 9.b Class 2 & 3 pumps U [NPC or UPC] + 0.5 SSE m 1.0 S ( m + b ) /1.5} 10.a (active)
E EPC m 1.0 S ( m + b ) /1.5} 11/ 10.a m 1.0 S ( m + b ) /1.5)
F NPC + SSE + DSL 10.a Class 2 & 3 valves U [NPC or UPC] + 0.5 SSE 1.1 Pr 11.a (inactive) E EPC 1.1 Pr 11.a F NPC + SSE + DSL 1.2 Pr 11.b Class 2 & 3 valves U [NPC or UPC] + 0.5 SSE 1.0 Pr} 12.a (active) E EPC 1.0 Pr} 11/ 12.a F NPC + SSE + DSL 1.0 Pr} 12.a Chapter 03 3.9B-144 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.9B-3 (Sheet 4 of 4)
NSSS ASSESSMENT AGAINST REGULATORY GUIDE 1.48(1)
Comparison ASME with NRC Plant Code Allowable Section III Regulatory Guide Component Condition Load Combination1/ Stresses Reference 1.48 Class 2 & 3 vessels U [NPC or UPC] + 0.5 SSE m = 1.1 S } (4) Code case 1607, Agree except for (Division 1) of ASME E EPC m = 2.0 S } NC/ND-3300 faulted condition.
Section III F NPC + SSE + DSL NRC more conservative Class 2 vessels U [NPC or UPC] + 0.5 SSE N/A N/A N/A (Division 2) of ASME E EPC Section VIII F NPC + SSE + DSL Class 2 & 3 piping U [NPC or UPC] + 0.5 SSE 1.2 Sh NC/ND-3611.3(b) NRC more E EPC 1.8 Sh NC/ND-3611.3(c) conservative. GE F NPC + SSE + DSL 2.4 Sh Code case 1606 reflects industry position Class 2 & 3 pumps U [NPC or UPC] + 0.5 SSE N/A N/A N/A (inactive) E EPC F NPC + SSE + DSL Class 2 & 3 pumps U [NPC or UPC] + 0.5 SSE m = 1.1 S } (3) Code case 1636, Agree (active) E EPC m = 1.2 S } (4) NC/ND-3423 (3)
F NPC + SSE + DSL Class 2 & 3 valves U [NPC or UPC] + 0.5 SSE m = 1.1 S } (4) Code case 1635, Equally (inactive) E EPC m = 2.0 S } NC/ND-3521 conservative F NPC + SSE + DSL Class 2 & 3 valves U [NPC or UPC] + 0.5 SSE m = 1.1 S } (3) Code case 1635, Equally (active) E EPC m = 1.2 S } (4) NC/ conservative F NPC + SSE + DSL ND-3521 (4)
(1) Numerical indicators (i.e., 1/, 2/, etc.) correspond to the footnotes of Regulatory Guide 1.48.
(2) An OBE or 0.5 SSE intensity is classified as an emergency event. However, for design purposes it is treated as an upset condition as shown in Table 3.9B-2h.
(3) In addition to compliance with the design limits specified, assurance of operability under all design loading combinations shall be in accordance with Section 3.9B.3.2.
(4) The design limit for local intensity or primary membrane plus primary bending stress intensity is 150% of that allowed for general membrane (except as limited to 2.4 S for inactive components under faulted condition). Refer to Section 3.9B.3.1.
Chapter 03 3.9B-145 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.9B-4 (Sheet 1 of 2)
GE-SUPPLIED SEISMIC ACTIVE PUMPS AND VALVES Master Parts Component List No. Standards(1)
Main steam isolation B22-F022 IEEE-323-1974 valve B22-F028 IEEE-344-1975 IEEE-382-1980 NUREG-0588, Cat. 1 ASME Section III, 1977 Edition, S77 Addenda Main steam SRV B22-F013 IEEE-323-1974 IEEE-344-1975 IEEE-382-1980 NUREG-0588, Cat. 1 ASME Section III, 1974 Edition, S76 Addenda Standby liquid control C41-F004 IEEE-323-1974 (explosive) valve IEEE-344-1975 NUREG-0588, Cat. 1 ASME Section III, 1977 Edition, S77 Addenda CRD solenoid valve C12-F009 IEEE-323-1974 C12-F110 IEEE-344-1975 C12-F160 IEEE-382-1980 C12-F162 NUREG-0588, Cat. 1 C12-F163 C12-F182 CRD globe valve C12-F010 IEEE-344-1975 C12-F011 ASME Section III, 1971 Edition, S73 Addenda C12-F180 IEEE-344-1975 C12-F181 IEEE-382-1980 ASME Section III, 1977 Edition, S77 Addenda HPCS gate valves E22-F001 IEEE-323-1974 E22-F004 IEEE-344-1975 E22-F010 IEEE-382-1980 E22-F011 NUREG-0588, Cat. 1 Chapter 03 3.9B-146 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.9B-4 (Sheet 2 of 2)
GE-SUPPLIED SEISMIC ACTIVE PUMPS AND VALVES Master Parts Component List No. Standards(1)
E22-F012 ASME Section III, E22-F015 1971 Edition, E22-F023 W73 Addenda RCIC turbine E51-C002 a, b RCIC pump E51-C001 d,e,f,h,j SLC pump and motor C41-C001 Pump: d,e,f,h,i Motor: a,b,c,d,e, f,g,h,i,j RHR pump and motor E12-C002 Pump: d,e,f,h,i Motor: a,b,c,d,e, f,g,h,i,j LPCS pump and motor E21-C001 Pump: d,e,f,h,i Motor: a,b,c,d,e, f,g,h,i,j HPCS pump and motor E22-C001 Pump: d,e,f,h,i Motor: a,b,c,d,e, f,g,h,i,j (1) a: IEEE-323-74 b: IEEE-344-75 c: IEEE-334-74 d: RG 1.48 e: RG 1.60 f: RG 1.61 g: RG 1.89 h: RG 1.92 i: RG 1.100 j: RG 1.122 Chapter 03 3.9B-147 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.9B-5 (Sheet 1 of 1 DEFORMATION LIMIT (FOR SAFETY CLASS REACTOR INTERNAL STRUCTURES ONLY)
Either one of (not both): General Limit Permissible deformation, DP 0.9
- 1.
Analyzed deformation SFmin Permissible deformation, DP (1) 1.0
- 2. causi ng loss of function, DL Experiment deformation SFmin Where:
causi ng loss of function, DE DP = Permissible deformation under stated conditions of Service Levels A, B, C, or D (normal, upset, emergency, or faulted)
DL = Analyzed deformation that could cause a system loss of function(2)
DE = Experimentally determined deformation that could cause a system loss of function (1) Equation 2 is not used unless supporting data is provided to the NRC by GE.
(2) "Loss of function" can only be defined quite generally until attention is focused on the component of interest.
In cases of interest, where deformation limits can affect the function of equipment and components, they are specifically delineated. From a practical viewpoint, it is convenient to interchange some deformation condition at which function is assured with the loss of function condition if the required safety margins from the functioning conditions can be achieved. Therefore, it is often unnecessary to determine the actual loss of function condition because this interchange procedure produces conservative and safe designs. Examples where deformation limits apply are: CRD alignment and clearances for proper insertion, core support deformation causing fuel disarrangement or excess leakage of any component.
Chapter 03 3.9B-148 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.9B-6 (Sheet 1 of 3)
PRIMARY STRESS LIMIT (FOR SAFETY CLASS REACTOR INTERNAL STRUCTURES ONLY)
General Any one of (no more than one required): Limit
- 1. lElastic evaluated primary stresses, PEl 2.25 l Permissible primary stresses, PN l SFmin
- 2. l Permissible load, LP l 1.5 lLargest lower bound limit load, CLl SFmin
- 3. lElastic evaluated primary stress, PEl 0.75 l Conventional ultimate strength l SFmin l at temperature, US l
- 4. l Elastic-plastic evaluated l 0.9 l nominal primary stress, EP l SFmin lConventional ultimate strengthl l at temperature, US l
- 5. *l Permissible load, LP l 0.9 lPlastic instability load, PLl SFmin
- 6. *l Permissible load, LP l 0.9 lUltimate load from fracturel SFmin l analysis, UF l
- 7. *l Permissible load, LP l 1.0 lUltimate load or loss of functionl SFmin l load from test, LP l Where:
PE = Primary stresses evaluated on an elastic basis. The effective membrane stresses are to be averaged through the load-carrying section of interest. The simplest average bending, shear, or torsion stress distribution that supports the external loading is added to the membrane stresses at the section of interest.
PN = Permissible primary stress levels under Service Levels A or B (normal or upset) conditions under ASME Section III.*
Chapter 03 3.9B-149 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.9B-6 (Sheet 2 of 3)
PRIMARY STRESS LIMIT (FOR SAFETY CLASS REACTOR INTERNAL STRUCTURES ONLY)
LP = Permissible load under stated conditions of Service Levels A, B, C, or D (normal, upset, emergency, or faulted).
CL = Lower bound limit load with yield point equal to 1.5 Sm where Sm is the tabulated value of allowable stress at temperature of ASME Section III or its equivalent. The "lower bound limit load" is here defined as that produced from the analysis of an ideally plastic (nonstrain hardening) material where deformations increase with no further increase in applied load. The lower bound load is one in which the material everywhere satisfies equilibrium and nowhere exceeds the defined material yield strength using either a shear theory or a strain energy of distortion theory to relate multiaxial yield to the uniaxial case.
US = Conventional ultimate strength at temperature or loading that would cause a system malfunction, whichever is more limiting.
EP = Elastic-plastic evaluated nominal primary stress.
Strain hardening of the material may be used for the actual monotonic stress strain curve at the temperature of loading or any approximation to the actual stress strain curve that everywhere has a lower stress for the same strain as the actual monotonic curve may be used. Either the shear or strain energy of distortion flow rule may be used.
PL = Plastic instability load defined here as the load at which any load-bearing section begins to diminish its cross-sectional area at a faster rate than the strain hardening can accommodate the loss in area. This type analysis requires a true stress-true strain curve or a close approximation based on monotonic loading at the temperature of loading.
Chapter 03 3.9B-150 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.9B-6 (Sheet 3 of 3)
PRIMARY STRESS LIMIT (FOR SAFETY CLASS REACTOR INTERNAL STRUCTURES ONLY)
UF = Ultimate load from fracture analyses. For components that involve sharp discontinuities (local theoretical stress concentration <3), the use of a fracture mechanics analysis where applicable utilizing measurements of plane strain fracture toughness may be applied to compute fracture loads. Correction for finite plastic zones and thickness effects as well as gross yielding may be necessary. The methods of linear elastic stress analysis may be used in the fracture analysis where its use is clearly conservative or supported by experimental evidence. Examples where fracture mechanics may be applied are for fillet welds or end-of-fatigue-life crack propagation.
LE = Ultimate load or loss of function load as determined from experiment. In using this method, account will be taken of the dimensional tolerances that may exist between the actual part and the tested part or parts as well as differences that may exist in the ultimate tensile strength of the actual part and the tested parts. The guide to be used in each of these areas is that the experimentally determined load is adjusted to account for material property and dimension variations, each of which has no greater probability than 0.1 of being exceeded in the actual part.
- Not used unless supporting data are provided.
Chapter 03 3.9B-151 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.9B-7 (Sheet 1 of 1)
BUCKLING STABILITY LIMIT (FOR SAFETY CLASS REACTOR INTERNAL STRUCTURES ONLY)
General Any one of (no more than one required): Limit
- 1. l Permissible load, LP l 2.25 lService Level A (normal) permissible load, PNl SFmin
- 2. l Permissible load, LP l 0.9 lStability analysis load, SLl SFmin
- 3. *l Permissible load, LP l *1.0 lUltimate buckling collapse load from test, SEl SFmin Where:
LP = Permissible load under stated conditions of Service Levels A, B, C, or D (normal, upset, emergency, or faulted).
PN = Applicable Service Level A (normal) permissible load.
SL = Stability analysis load. The ideal buckling analysis is often sensitive to otherwise minor deviations from ideal geometry and boundary conditions. These effects will be accounted for in the analysis of the buckling stability loads. Examples of this are ovality in externally pressurized shells or eccentricity on column members.
SE = Ultimate buckling collapse load as determined from experiment. In using this method, account will be taken of the dimensional tolerances that may exist between the actual part and the tested part. The guide to be used in each of these areas is that the experimentally determined load will be adjusted to account for material property and dimension variations, each of which has no greater probability than 0.1 of being exceeded in the actual part.
- Not used unless supporting data are provided.
Chapter 03 3.9B-152 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.9B-8 (Sheet 1 of 1)
FATIGUE LIMIT*
(FOR SAFETY CLASS REACTOR INTERNAL STRUCTURES ONLY)
Limit for Service Levels A and B (normal and upset)
Cumulative Damage in Fatigue Design Conditions Design fatigue cycle usage from analysis using the method of ASME Code 1.0
- Summation of fatigue damage usage with design and operation loads following Miner hypotheses.
SOURCE: Miner, M. A. Cumulative Damage in Fatigue, Journal of Applied Mechanics, Vol. 12, ASME Vol. 67, pp A159-A164, September 1945.
Chapter 03 3.9B-153 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.9B-9 (Sheet 1 of 4)
CORE SUPPORT STRUCTURES STRESS CATEGORIES AND LIMITS OF STRESS INTENSITY FOR SERVICE LEVELS A AND B (NORMAL AND UPSET) CONDITIONS Primary Stresses Secondary Stresses(1) Peak Stresses Stress Membrane Bending Membrane and Bending Category Pm(2-4) Pb(2-4) Secondary, Q(2,5) Peak, F(2,6)
Pm Pm + Pb Pm + Pb + Q Pm + Pb + Q + F l l l l l_____ Sm l l l l l_____ 1.5 Sm l_____ 3 Sm l l l l l l or Elastic l l l l analysis(7) l or Elastic l l Elastic l l analysis(7) l l fatigue(8,9)
Service Levels l l l l A and B (normal l_____ 0.67 LL l l l and upset) l l_____ 0.67 LL l_____ SL(10) l_____ Sa l l l l l or Limit l l l l analysis(11) l or Limit l___ ___ ___ ___ ___ Pm + Pb + Q + F Sa l l analysis(11) l l l_____ 0.44 Lu l For cycles less than Test(12) l_____ 0.44 Lu 1,000, use peak(5) Elastic plastic Test(12) fatigue(5,8,9)
Chapter 03 3.9B-154 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.9B-9 (Sheet 2 of 4)
CORE SUPPORT STRUCTURES STRESS CATEGORIES AND LIMITS OF STRESS INTENSITY FOR SERVICE LEVELS A AND B (NORMAL AND UPSET) CONDITIONS (1) This limitation applies to the range of stress intensity.
When the secondary stress is due to a temperature excursion at the point at which the stresses are being analyzed, the value of Sm will be taken as the average of the Sm values tabulated in Tables I-1.1, I-1.2, and I-1.3 of ASME Section III for the highest and lowest temperature of the metal during the transient. When part of the secondary stress is due to mechanical load, the value of Sm will be taken as the Sm value for the highest temperature of the metal during the transient.
(2)
The symbols Pm, Pb, Q and F do not represent single quantities, but rather sets of six quantities representing the six stress components: t , i , r , tl, lr, rt .
(3) For configurations where compressive stresses occur, the stress limits will be revised to take into account critical buckling stresses (Subparagraph NB-3211(c) of ASME Section III). For external pressure, the permissible equivalent static external pressure will be as specified by the rules of Paragraph NB-3133 of ASME Section III. Where dynamic pressures are involved, the permissible external pressure will be limited to 25 percent of the dynamic instability pressure.
(4) When loads are transiently applied, consideration should be given to the use of dynamic load amplification and possible change in modulus of elasticity.
(5) The allowable value for the maximum range of this stress intensity is 3 Sm, except for cyclic events that occur less than 1,000 times during the design life of the plant. For this exception, in lieu of meeting the 3 Sm limit, an elastic-plastic fatigue analysis, in accordance with ASME Section III, may be performed to demonstrate that the cumulative fatigue usage attributable to the combination of these low events, plus all other cyclic events, does not exceed a fatigue usage value of 1.0.
Chapter 03 3.9B-155 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.9B-9 (Sheet 3 of 4)
CORE SUPPORT STRUCTURES STRESS CATEGORIES AND LIMITS OF STRESS INTENSITY FOR SERVICE LEVELS A AND B (NORMAL AND UPSET) CONDITIONS (6) The stresses in Category Q are those parts of the total stress that are produced by thermal gradients, structural discontinuities, etc., and do not include primary stresses that may also exist at the same point. It should be noted, however, that a detailed stress analysis frequently gives the combination of primary and secondary stresses directly, and when appropriate, this calculated value represents the total of Pm + Pb + Q and not Q alone. Similarly, if the stress in Category F is produced by a stress concentration, the quantity F is the additional stress produced by the notch, over and above the nominal stress. For example, if a plate has a nominal stress intensity, Pm = S, Pb = O, Q =
O and a notch with a stress concentration K is introduced, then F = Pm (K-1) and the peak stress intensity equals Pm +
Pm (K-1) = KPm.
(7) The triaxial stresses represent the algebraic sum of the three primary principal stresses ( 1 + 2 + 3 ) for the combination of stress components. Where uniform tension loading is present, triaxial stresses are limited to 4 Sm.
(8) Sa is obtained from the fatigue curves, Figures I-9.1 and I-9.2 of ASME Section III. The allowable stress intensity for the full range of fluctuation is 2 Sa.
(9) In the fatigue data curves, where the number of operating cycles is less than 10, use the Sa value for 10 cycles; where the number of operating cycles is greater than 106, use the Sa value for 106 cycles.
(10) SL denotes the structural action of shakedown load, as defined in Subparagraph NB-3213.18 of ASME Section III, calculated on a plastic basis as applied to a specific location on the structure.
(11) LL is the lower bound limit load with yield point equal to 1.5 Sm (where Sm is the tabulated value of allowable stress at temperature as contained in ASME Section III). The lower Chapter 03 3.9B-156 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.9B-9 (Sheet 4 of 4)
CORE SUPPORT STRUCTURES STRESS CATEGORIES AND LIMITS OF STRESS INTENSITY FOR SERVICE LEVELS A AND B (NORMAL AND UPSET) CONDITIONS bound limit load is here defined as that produced from the analysis of an ideally plastic (nonstrain hardening) material where deformations increase with no further increase in applied load. The lower bound load is one in which the material everywhere satisfies equilibrium, and nowhere exceeds the defined material yield strength using either a shear theory or a strain energy of distortion theory to relate multiaxial yielding to the uniaxial case.
(12) For Service Levels A and B (normal and upset) conditions, the limits on primary membrane plus primary bending need not be satisfied in a component if it can be shown from the test of a prototype or model that the specified loads (dynamic or static equivalent) do not exceed Lu, where Lu is the ultimate load or the maximum load or load combination used in the test. In using this method, account will be taken of the size effect and dimensional tolerances that may exist between the actual part and the test part, or parts, as well as differences that may exist in the ultimate strength or other governing material properties of the actual part and the tested part to assure that the loads obtained from the test are a conservative representation of the load-carrying capability of the actual component under the postulated loading for Service Levels A and B (normal and upset) conditions.
Chapter 03 3.9B-157 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.9B-10 (Sheet 1 of 3)
CORE SUPPORT STRUCTURES STRESS CATEGORIES AND LIMITS OF STRESS INTENSITY FOR SERVICE LEVEL C (EMERGENCY) CONDITIONS Primary Stresses Secondary Stresses Peak Stresses Stress Membrane Bending Membrane and Bending Category Pb(1-3) Pm(1-3) Secondary, Q Peak, F Pm Pm + Pb l l l l l_____ 1.5 Sm Elastic l_____ 2.25 Sm Elastic l analysis(4) l analysis(4) l l l or l or l l l l l_____ LL Limit l_____ LL Limit l analysis(5) l analysis(5)
Service Level C l l (emergency)(6) l l l or l or l l l l l_____ 1.5 Sm Plastic l_____ 2.25 Sm Plastic Evaluation not required Evaluation not required l analysis(7) l analysis(7,8) l l l or l or l l l l l_____ 0.6 Le Tests(9) l_____ 0.5 Su(8) l l l l l or l or l l l l l_____ SF Stress-ratio l_____ 0.6 Le Test(9) analysis(10) l l
l_____ KSE Stress-ratio analysis(10)
Chapter 03 3.9B-158 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.9B-10 (Sheet 2 of 3)
CORE SUPPORT STRUCTURES STRESS CATEGORIES AND LIMITS OF STRESS INTENSITY FOR SERVICE LEVEL C (EMERGENCY) CONDITIONS (1) The symbols Pm, Pb, Q, and F do not represent single quantities but rather sets of six quantities representing the six stress components: t , i , r , tl, lr, rt .
(2) For configurations where compressive stresses occur, stress limits will be revised to take into account critical buckling stresses. For external pressure, the permissible equivalent static external pressure will be taken as 150% of that permitted by the rules of Paragraph NB-3133 of ASME Section III. Where dynamic pressures are involved, the permissible external pressure will satisfy the preceding requirements or be limited to 50% of the dynamic instability pressure.
(3) When loads are transiently applied, consideration should be given to the use of dynamic load amplification and possible change in modulus of elasticity.
(4) The triaxial stresses represent the algebraic sum of the three primary principal stresses ( 1 + 2 + 3 ) for the combination of stress components. Where uniform tension loading is present, triaxial stresses should be limited to 6 Sm.
(5) LL is the lower bound limit load with yield point equal to 1.5 Sm (where Sm is the tabulated value of allowable stress at temperature as contained in ASME Section III). The lower bound limit load is here defined as that produced from the analysis of an ideally plastic (nonstrain hardening) material where deformations increase with no further increase in applied load.
The lower bound load is one in which the material everywhere satisfies equilibrium and nowhere exceeds the defined material yield strength using either a shear theory or a strain energy of distortion theory to relate multiaxial yielding to the uniaxial case.
(6) Where deformation is of concern in a component, the deformation will be limited to two-thirds the value given for Service Level C (emergency) conditions in the design specification.
Chapater 03 3.9B-159 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.9B-10 (Sheet 3 of 3)
CORE SUPPORT STRUCTURES STRESS CATEGORIES AND LIMITS OF STRESS INTENSITY FOR SERVICE LEVEL C (EMERGENCY) CONDITIONS (7) This plastic analysis uses an elastic-plastic evaluated nominal primary stress. Strain hardening of the material may be used for the actual monotonic stress-strain curve at the temperature of loading, or any approximation to the actual stress-strain curve which everywhere has a lower stress for the same strain as the actual monotonic curve may be used. Either the shear or strain energy of distortion flow rule will be used to account for multiaxial effects.
(8) Su is the ultimate strength at temperature. Multiaxial effects on ultimate strength will be considered.
(9) For Service Level C (emergency) conditions, the stress limits need not be satisfied if it can be shown from the test of a prototype or model that the specified loads (dynamic or static equivalent) do not exceed 60% of Le, where Le is the ultimate load or the maximum load or load combination used in the test.
In using this method, account will be taken of the size effect and dimensional tolerances that may exist between the actual part and the tested part or parts, as well as differences that may exist in the ultimate strength or other governing material properties of the actual part and the tested parts, to assure that the loads obtained from the test are a conservative representation of the load carrying capability of the actual component under postulated loading for Service Level C (emergency) conditions.
(10) Stress ratio is a method of plastic analysis that uses the stress ratio combinations (combination of stresses that consider the ratio of the actual stress to be the allowable plastic or elastic stress) to compute the maximum load a strain hardening material can carry. K is defined as the section factor (SF 2 Sm) for primary membrane loading.
Chapater 03 3.9B-160 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.9B-11 (Sheet 1 of 3)
CORE SUPPORT STRUCTURES STRESS CATEGORIES AND LIMITS OF STRESS INTENSITY FOR SERVICE LEVEL D (FAULT) CONDITION Primary Stresses Secondary Stresses Peak Stress Stress Membrane Bending Membrane and Bending Category Pm(4,7,8) Pb(4,7,8) Secondary, Q(2,4) Peak, F(2,4)
Pm Pm + Pb l l l l l_____ 2.4 Sm Elastic l_____ 3.0 Sm Elastic l analysis l analysis l l l or l or l l l l l_____ 0.75 Su(5) l_____ 1.33 LL Limit l l analysis(4) l l l or l or l l l l Service Level D (fault)(9) l_____ 1.33 LL Limit l_____ 0.75 Su Plastic Evaluation not Evaluation not l analysis(4) l analysis(5,6) required required l l l or l or l l l l l_____ 0.67 Su Plastic l_____ 0.8 LF Test(7) l analysis(5,6) l l l l or l or l l l l l_____ 0.8 LF Test(7) l_____ KSF Stress-ratio l analysis(3) l l or l
l_____ SF Stress-ratio analysis(8)
Chapater 03 3.9B-161 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.9B-11 (Sheet 2 of 3)
CORE SUPPORT STRUCTURES STRESS CATEGORIES AND LIMITS OF STRESS INTENSITY FOR SERVICE LEVEL D (FAULT) CONDITION (1) The symbols Pm, Pb, Q, and F do not represent single quantities but rather sets of six quantities representing the six stress components: t , i , r , tl, lr, rt .
(2)
When loads are transiently applied, consideration should be given to the use of dynamic load amplification and possible changes in modulus of elasticity.
(3) For configurations where compressive stresses occur, stress limits take into account critical buckling stresses. For external pressure, the permissible equivalent static external pressure will be taken as 2.5 times that given by the rules of Paragraph NB-3133 of ASME Section III. Where dynamic pressures are involved, the permissible external pressure will satisfy the preceding requirements or be limited to 75% of the dynamic instability pressure.
(4) LL is the lower bound limit load with yield point equal to 1.5 Sm (where Sm is the tabulated value of allowable stress at temperature as contained in ASME Section III). The lower bound limit load is here defined as that produced from the analysis of an ideally plastic (nonstrain hardening) material where deformations increase with no further increase in applied load. The lower bound load is one in which the material everywhere satisfies equilibrium and nowhere exceeds the defined material yield strength using either a shear theory or a strain energy of distortion theory to relate multiaxial yielding to the uniaxial case.
(5) Su is the ultimate strength at temperature. Multiaxial effects on ultimate strength will be considered.
(6) This plastic analysis uses an elastic-plastic evaluated nominal primary stress. Strain hardening of the material may be used for the actual monotonic stress-strain curve at the temperature of loading, or any approximation to the Chapter 03 3.9B-162 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.9B-11 (Sheet 3 of 3)
CORE SUPPORT STRUCTURES STRESS CATEGORIES AND LIMITS OF STRESS INTENSITY FOR SERVICE LEVEL D (FAULT) CONDITION actual stress-strain curve which everywhere has a lower stress for the same strain as the actual monotonic curve may be used. Either the maximum stress or strain energy of distortion flow rule will be used to account for multiaxial effects.
(7) For Service Level D (faulted) conditions, the stress limits need not be satisfied if it can be shown from the test of a prototype or model that the specified loads (dynamic or static equivalent) do not exceed 80% of LF, where LF is the ultimate load or load combination used in the test. In using this method, account will be taken of the size effect and dimensional tolerances, as well as differences that may exist in the ultimate strength or other governing material properties of the actual part and the tested parts, to assure that the loads obtained from the test are a conservative representation of the load carrying capability of the actual component under postulated loading for Service Level D (faulted) condition.
(8)
Stress ratio is a method of plastic analysis that uses the stress ratio combinations (combination of stresses that consider the ratio of the actual stress to the allowable plastic or elastic stress) to compute the maximum load a strain hardening material can carry. K is defined as the section factor; SF is the lesser of 2.4 Sm or 0.75 Su for primary membrane loading.
(9) Where deformation is of concern in a component, the deformation will be limited to 80% of the value given for Service Level D (faulted) conditions in the Design Specifications.
Chapter 03 3.9B-163 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR 3.10 SEISMIC QUALIFICATION OF CATEGORY I INSTRUMENTATION AND ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT Two inputs are provided for Section 3.10: Section 3.10A applies to the SWEC scope of supply, and Section 3.10B applies to the GE scope of supply.
3.10A SEISMIC QUALIFICATION OF CATEGORY I INSTRUMENTATION AND ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT (SWEC SCOPE OF SUPPLY)
This section provides the qualification methods for equipment affected by seismic loads. The methods for the qualification of equipment affected by hydrodynamic loads associated with SRV discharge and the postulated LOCA are provided in the DAR, Appendix 6A, Subsection 6A.9.
3.10A.1 Seismic Qualification Criteria Table 3.10A-1 provides a listing of Category I instrumentation and electrical equipment requiring seismic qualification.
Parameters used to develop seismic loadings and criteria for Category I structures, systems, and components are described in Section 3.7A. From the ground input data, a series of response spectrum curves at various building elevations was developed.
The magnitude and frequency of the SSE loadings for which each component is qualified vary, depending on their locations within the plant. These seismic data were included in the purchase specifications for Category I equipment and systems. For equipment located at various areas throughout the plant, the purchase specification includes response spectrum curves that envelop the response spectra at all locations where the equipment is used.
For equipment subject to hydrodynamic loads, see the DAR for Hydrodynamic Loads (Appendix 6A) for details.
Seismic qualification and documentation procedures used for Class 1E equipment and/or systems meet the provisions of IEEE-344-1975, as supplemented by RG 1.100.
Category I equipment is divided into two classifications: 1) equipment designed to maintain its functional capability during and after a SSE, and 2) equipment that, although not required to maintain its functional capability, is designed to maintain the pressure boundary integrity of the system of which it is a part, during and after a SSE. The requirements for instrumentation, equipment, and systems required to maintain pressure boundary Chapter 03 3.10A-1 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR integrity are in accordance with ASME Section III, 1974 or later, depending on time of purchase of equipment. The performance requirements of Category I electrical and instrumentation items and their respective supports may be structural as well as functional. The structural design is in accordance with applicable codes, as listed in the equipment specification.
It should be noted that certain non-Category I equipment is reviewed for maintenance of structural integrity to ensure that failure of these items or their supports will not jeopardize adjacent Category I equipment.
If no codes are applicable, the stress level for the OBE combined with operating loads is limited to 75 percent of the minimum yield for the material in accordance with the ASTM specification. For the SSE combined with operating loads, the stress level does not exceed the smaller of:
- 1. 100 percent of the minimum yield strength, or
- 2. 70 percent of the minimum ultimate tensile strength of the material (at design temperature), in accordance with the ASTM specification.
Seismic analysis, without testing, is performed on equipment whose functional operability is assured by its structural integrity alone. When complete seismic testing is impractical, a combination of tests and analyses is performed. See Table 3.10A-1 for the seismic qualification methods applicable to specific equipment.
3.10A.2 Methods and Procedures for Qualifying Electrical Equipment and Instrumentation The methods by which the supplier can qualify equipment for compliance with seismic requirements are as follows:
- 1. Testing.
- 2. Type-testing (prototype).
- 3. Analysis.
- 4. Combination of 1 or 2 and 3.
Chapter 03 3.10A-2 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR These methods, including the factors for selection of an analytical or test option, test objectives, and acceptability criteria, are described in Section 3.7A.3.1.1. Qualification and documentation procedures used for Category I equipment and/or systems meet the provisions of IEEE-344-1975, as supplemented by the requirements of RG 1.100.
3.10A.2.1 Testing Seismic tests are performed by subjecting equipment to vibratory motion that conservatively simulates the seismic loading at the equipment mounting. Such tests are conducted over the range of 1 to 33 Hz. For components susceptible to environmental aging (temperature, humidity, radiation, etc.), seismic testing is performed on environmentally preaged components, following the requirements of IEEE-323-1974.
For equipment subject to hydrodynamic loads, see the DAR for Hydrodynamic Loads (Appendix 6A) for details.
Whenever feasible, seismic qualification tests on equipment are performed while the equipment is subjected to normal operating loads. However, occasionally an operational configuration is difficult to simulate correctly, and where it can be demonstrated that operating loads such as pressure, torque, flow, voltage, current, or temperature do not cause significant stress loads within the equipment, or where such operating loads are not significant to a determination of equipment operability, operation under load is not specified. The equipment is monitored and evaluated during and after the test for malfunction or failure and, upon completion of the test, is tested for proper operation.
In seismic qualification testing, equipment auxiliary components such as relays, switches, and instruments necessary for proper operation are mounted similarly to the manner in which they are to be installed, and then tested and qualified along with the equipment. For multicabinet assemblies, the tested prototype unit occasionally consists of a smaller number of frames than the frames in the assembly being provided. In such cases, an evaluation of the responses due to the front-to-back, side-to-side, vertical, and torsional modes of the multicabinet assemblies, with respect to those of the tested unit, are made.
This evaluation ensures the adequacy of the qualification of the multicabinet assemblies and of the electrical components located within them.
Chapter 03 3.10A-3 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR The input motion is applied to the vertical axis, combined with each one of the principal horizontal axes, unless it can be demonstrated that the equipment response along the vertical direction is not sensitive (coupled) to the vibration motion along the horizontal direction and vice versa. Refer to Section 3.7A.3.1.1 for complete details of testing. The maximum input motion acceleration is equal to, or is in excess of, the maximum seismic acceleration expected at the equipment mounting location. Following the requirements of RG 1.100, it is specified that the TRS closely envelop applicable portions of the RRS in verifying the adequacy of test input motion.
3.10A.2.2 Prototype Testing In some cases where groups of equipment have similar characteristics, the test program is based upon testing of a prototype item of equipment. The test reports furnished by the equipment supplier are reviewed for assurance that the group of components qualified by the prototype is dynamically similar.
If any extrapolation as to dimension or mass is used, the vendor is required to justify similarity of the dynamic characteristics.
3.10A.2.3 Analysis Analysis without testing is acceptable only if structural integrity alone could assure the design-intended function.
Responses are calculated for the three-directional seismic loadings individually and combined by the SRSS method. The seismic response is added to the operating load response on an absolute basis to establish the combined effects, and compared with allowable stress, strain, or deflections, as the basis for acceptable qualification.
3.10A.2.4 Combined Analysis and Testing When the equipment cannot be practically qualified by analysis or testing alone because of its complexity or size, combined analysis and testing is used. When this procedure is employed, the major component is qualified by analysis, and the motors, operators, and appurtenances necessary for operation are qualified by testing. The auxiliary equipment is tested and qualified to the acceleration level at its mounted location, and its equivalent seismic loading is applied to the major component being analyzed.
3.10A.3 Methods and Procedures of Analysis or Testing of Chapter 03 3.10A-4 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR Supports of Electrical Equipment and Instrumentation A design objective, when feasible, is to provide supports for electrical equipment, instrumentation, and control systems with fundamental natural frequencies above the cutoff frequency of the relevant ARS curves. This ensures that amplification of floor accelerations through supporting members to mounted equipment is minimized.
The response of racks, panels, cabinets, and consoles is considered in assessing the capability of instrumentation and electrical equipment. Items of electrical equipment and instrumentation are tested, wherever feasible, with their supporting structures in their installed configurations.
Intermediate support structures are designed to be rigid to preclude dynamic interaction. When it is impractical to design rigid structures, qualification analysis will include the mass and stiffness characteristics of the support. Mounted components are therefore qualified to acceleration levels consistent with those transmitted by their supporting structures.
Determination of amplification and seismic adequacy of instrumentation and electrical equipment is implemented by the analysis and testing methods outlined in Section 3.7A.3.
The Category I cable tray support systems are analyzed using a modal analysis/response spectra method. Mathematical models include both two- and three-dimensional lumped mass models that are subjected to a support excitation generated by applying the ARS for that structure for the seismic and/or the hydrodynamic loads events. These conditions were considered in designing the cable tray support system in accordance with the applicable loading combinations described in Section 3.8.4. The boundary conditions used in the analysis assume that the system is fixed (i.e., rigidly attached) or pinned depending on the connection to the main structural steel and concrete members at its support points. The procurement and testing requirements for structural steel tray supports are discussed in Section 3.8.4.2.
3.10A.4 Operating License Review The results of all seismic tests and analyses performed by outside vendors are reviewed and approved. These results become a permanent onsite record. A summary of seismic test and/or analysis results is given in Table 3.10A-1.
Chapter 03 3.10A-5 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.10A-1 (Sheet 1 of 19)
CLASS 1E ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT QUALIFICATION RESULTS Equipment Methods Results Hydrogen/Oxygen Gas The equipment, which consists of two sets of two The equipment is affected by seismic loads only. Each analyzer set is Analyzers panels, was qualified by a combination of analysis comprised of one remote control panel and one analyzer panel.
and test. The applicable code, standards, and Vibration tests of the panels used to house the remote control modules guidelines are the AISC Code, IEEE-323-1974, demonstrated that the cabinets have a natural frequency of 26 Hz in IEEE-344-1975, and RG 1.61, 1.89, 1.92, and 1.100. the horizontal direction and are rigid (i.e., greater than 33 Hz) in the vertical direction. Static analysis verified that stresses in the panels are below the allowable limits. The internal subassemblies in the remote cabinets were qualified separately by a combination of dynamic testing and analysis. The tested components were mounted on a rigid fixture, or to a test panel, to simulate the normal installation, and subjected to biaxial random multifrequency seismic input. The tests were performed in two orientations to subject the equipment to loading in all three axes. The duration of each test was 30 sec and the TRS enveloped the RRS in the applicable frequency range by a minimum margin of 10 percent.
The analyzer panels were qualified by similarity to a prototype assembly that was qualified by dynamic testing. The test panel was mounted on a rigid fixture and subjected to random multifrequency biaxial input. Differences in the method of attachment were reconciled by analysis. The specimens were instrumented to record accelerations and monitor equipment operability. A resonance search was performed at specified locations in all three axes in the range from 1 to 50 Hz. The resonance search provided transmissibility curves at component locations. The tests were performed in two orientations to subject the equipment to loading in all three axes.
The duration of each test was 30 sec and the TRS enveloped the RRS in the applicable frequency range by a minimum margin of 10 percent.
Internal subassemblies not addressed in the prototype test were qualified separately by a combination of dynamic testing and analysis.
The components were generally mounted on rigid fixtures to simulate the normal installation and subjected to random multifrequency seismic input. The dynamic input accounted for amplification in the analyzer panel structure, and the TRS enveloped the RRS in the applicable frequency range by a minimum margin of 10 percent.
Ac and Dc Panelboards The ac and dc panelboards are qualified by dynamic The panelboards are affected by seismic loads only. The dynamic testing. The applicable standards and guidelines testing was performed as follows: Representative test specimens were are IEEE-323-1974, IEEE-344-1975, and RG 1.89 and mounted on the vibration test table using specially designed test 1.100. fixtures such that actual in-service conditions were simulated. The specimens were instrumented to record accelerations and monitor operability. A resonance search was performed from 1 to 35 Hz in each of the three orthogonal axes. The seismic simulation vibration tests consisted of triaxial random multifrequency tests for five OBEs and one SSE. The TRS enveloped the RRS within the applicable frequency range with at least a 10-percent margin. The test specimens did not exhibit any malfunction as a result of the seismic simulation tests.
Chapter 03 3.10A-6 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.10A-1 (Sheet 2 of 19)
CLASS 1E ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT QUALIFICATION RESULTS Equipment Methods Results Motor Operators The motor operators are qualified by dynamic Some of the motor operators are affected by seismic loads only.
Limitorque Model testing. The applicable standards and guidelines Others are affected by both seismic and hydrodynamic loads.
SMB-000 are IEEE-323-1974, IEEE-344-1975, IEEE-382-1972, SMB-00 and NRC RG 1.73, 1.89, and 1.100. The test program for the motor operators consists of testing a SMB-0 selected group of parent actuators, which are then used to dynamically SMB-1 qualify the entire line of Limitorque motor operators in the plant SMB-2 using direct comparison and similarity.
SMB-3 SMB-4 For motor operators affected by seismic loads, dynamic testing is SB-00 performed as follows: A number of representative test specimens are SB-0 selected which envelope the entire family of motor operators. A SB-1 resonance search test is performed from 1 to 33 Hz in each of the SB-2 three orthogonal axes. The specimens are then subjected to a series SB-3 of single axis, sine dwell tests. Since no resonant frequencies are identified below 33 Hz, dwell tests are performed at a frequency of 33 Hz. These tests consist of 150-sec duration sine dwell at 3 g, and a 30-sec dwell test at 6 g. For selected operators, biaxial, random multifrequency tests are also performed. The operators performed their safety functions, i.e., stroked within the required durations and torqued out at the preset load with no indication of malfunction, and are considered qualified to a seismic level of 6 g.
The generic test program for motor operators affected by the combined seismic and hydrodynamic loads is as follows: The actuators are tested on shake tables capable of providing acceleration levels which encompass the requirements of the dynamic events. The tests consist of a resonance search up to 100 Hz in each of the three orthogonal axes, followed by vibration aging using swept sine motion in the 5-200 Hz frequency range to a 0.75 g level. The actuators then are subjected to a series of sine beat tests in each axis. These sine beat tests are performed at a minimum of one-third octave intervals in the frequency range of 5 to 100 Hz and account for the forcing function frequencies. A large number of beats is used at each test frequency to simulate the fatigue effects of the hydrodynamic loading.
The beat tests are performed at various magnitudes which correspond to the individual seismic and hydrodynamic loading events and loading combinations. In addition, random, multifrequency, multiaxis tests are performed, when necessary, to address the rigidly mounted valves.
The operators performed their safety function, i.e., stroked within the required durations and torqued out at the preset loads. The operators are qualified for up to 14 g loadings. Piping design acceptance criteria ensure that as-built loadings are within qualified levels for each motor operator.
Chapter 03 3.10A-7 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.10A-1 (Sheet 3 of 19)
CLASS 1E ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT QUALIFICATION RESULTS (PRIVATE)
Equipment Methods Results HVAC Instruments The temperature-indicating controller which The equipment is affected by seismic loads only. The equipment was
- Temperature- consists of a temperature sensing element, mounted during the test to simulate the plant installation, and indicating controller mechanism and snap switches is instrumented to record accelerations and to monitor operability. The controllers qualified by dynamic testing. The RTDs which test consisted of a resonance search in three axes, followed by a
- Resistance contain platinum resistance elements are also biaxial, random multifrequency series of five OBE and one SSE tests.
temperature dynamically tested. The applicable guidelines and The biaxial tests were repeated in a second orientation to consider detectors standards are IEEE-323-1974, IEEE-344-1975, and RG all three axes of loading. The TRS enveloped the RRS within the 1.89 and 1.100. applicable frequency range with at least a 10 percent margin.
The resistance temperature detectors and the temperature-indicating controllers successfully completed these tests and performed their intended functions.
HVAC Instruments The flow switches were qualified by dynamic The switches are affected by seismic loads only. Two different types
- Flow Switches testing. The applicable guidelines and standards of tests were used to qualify the switches: A sinusoidal dwell test are IEEE-344-1975, IEEE-323-1974, and RG 1.89 and and a biaxial, random multifrequency test. For both tests the 1.100. switches were mounted to simulate the plant installation and instrumented to record accelerations and to monitor operability. One test consisted of a biaxial, random multifrequency series of five OBE and one SSE tests which was repeated in two orientations to consider all three axes of loading. A sinusoidal dwell test was performed over the range of 1 to 40 Hz, reaching peaks of 4.5 g in the vertical and horizontal directions. After a 90-deg rotation, the dwell test was repeated.
The flow switches successfully performed their intended functions during the complete test program.
600-V Load Centers The equipment was qualified by dynamic testing. The equipment is affected by seismic loads only. The equipment was 125-V dc Switchgear The applicable guidelines and standards are mounted for the testing in a manner that would simulate the plant 13.8-kV Switchgear IEEE-344-1975, IEEE-323-1974, IEEE-308-1971, and installation and was instrumented to record accelerations. The RG 1.89 and 1.100. equipment was operated during the biaxial, random multifrequency tests which consisted of a series of five OBE level tests followed by one SSE level test. The biaxial test series was repeated in two orientations to consider all three axes of loading. The TRS enveloped the RRS within the applicable frequency range with a margin of at least 10 percent. The test specimen did not exhibit any malfunction as a result of the seismic simulation tests.
Electric Bar Rack The equipment was qualified by static and dynamic The equipment is affected by seismic loads only. The analyses Heating Elements analyses. The applicable guidelines and standards demonstrated that the bar rack heater would remain operational during are RG 1.61, 1.89, 1.92, and 1.100, and a seismic event. The maximum deflections were calculated to verify IEEE-344-1975, IEEE-323-1974, and AISC. that the heating element would not contact the structural tubing. The stresses in the heating element have been found to be within the allowable stress limits. The lowest margin of safety for the stresses is approximately 25 percent.
Chapter 03 3.10A-8 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.10A-1 (Sheet 4 of 19)
CLASS 1E ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT QUALIFICATION RESULTS Equipment Methods Results Level Switches Level switches are qualified by dynamic testing. The equipment is affected by seismic loads only. There are four The applicable standards and guidelines are models of level switches: FLS, A103F, 291, and A153. For these IEEE-344-1975, IEEE-323-1974, and RG 1.89 and models, the switches were mounted to simulate the plant installation 1.100. and instrumented to record accelerations. Models FLS, 291, and A153 were subjected to a biaxial, random multifrequency test series of five OBEs and one SSE while pressurized. The biaxial test series was repeated in two orientations to consider all three axes of loading.
These three switch models were also subjected to a resonance search in the three axes.
Model A103F was subjected to a biaxial, random multifrequency test equivalent to one SSE in two orientations while pressurized. It was also subjected to two sine sweeps in each orthogonal axis, equivalent to five OBEs. In all of the random multifrequency tests, the TRS enveloped the RRS within the applicable frequency range by a margin of at least 10 percent.
The test specimens functioned satisfactorily before, during, and after the tests, and no anomalies occurred.
Hydrogen Recombiner The hydrogen recombiner is qualified by a The hydrogen recombiner is affected by seismic loads only.
combination of analysis and tests. The applicable codes, standards, and guidelines are ASME Code The skid base and heater compartment, heating coil and reaction Section III-1974, AISC Code - 1971, IEEE-323-1974, chamber, inlet and outlet piping system, and pipe supports are IEEE-344-1975, and RG 1.61, 1.89, 1.92, and 1.100. qualified by dynamic analyses. Stresses in these components are within the allowable limits of Section 3.9A.2.2.2.
The motor/blower assembly is qualified by a combination of tests and analysis. A generic motor/blower was seismically tested. The test includes a resonance search in three axes, followed by five OBE and one SSE phase incoherent, random, multifrequency biaxial excitations.
The TRS enveloped the RRS within the applicable frequency range with a margin of at least 10 percent. The motor/blower also performed its intended function. Similarity of the generic motor/blower and Unit 2 motor/blower was developed by finite element analysis.
Components of the recombiner skid such as the valve actuator, heater assembly, thermocouple and pressure transmitter are qualified by seismic testing. The valve actuator, Limitorque Model SMB-000, is qualified as stated on page 1. For the rest of the components, the testing includes the application of random multifrequency input motion and/or sine beat input motions. The test levels exceed the Unit 2 seismic levels, in the applicable frequency range, by a margin of at least 10 percent. The test results indicate that each component successfully performed its function during and after the tests.
Chapter 03 3.10A-9 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.10A-1 (Sheet 5 of 19)
CLASS 1E ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT QUALIFICATION RESULTS Equipment Methods Results The power cabinet was qualified by similarity to a unit that was seismically tested. The power cabinet was mounted on the test table to simulate the plant installation and instrumented to record accelerations and monitor operability. The test consisted of a resonance search from 1 to 100 Hz in three axes, followed by a biaxial, random multifrequency testing of five OBE and one SSE tests.
The amplitude was controlled in one-sixth octave bandwidths over a frequency range of 1 to 40 Hz. These tests were repeated in the second orientation to consider all three axes of loading. The TRS enveloped the RRS within the applicable frequency range by a minimum margin of 10 percent. The cabinet successfully completed the test and performed its intended function.
General Purpose The transformers are qualified by dynamic testing. The transformers are affected by seismic loads only. The dynamic Dry-Type Transformers The applicable guidelines and standards are testing was performed as follows: The transformers were mounted to IEEE-323-1974, IEEE-344-1975, and RG 1.61, 1.89, simulate the plant installation and instrumented to record and 1.100. accelerations and to monitor operability. A resonance search was performed from 1 to 33 Hz, with fundamental frequencies of 7.0 Hz and 6.5 Hz for the base- and floor-mounted units, respectively, being observed.
The transformers were subjected to biaxial, random multifrequency test series of five OBEs and one SSE while energized. The biaxial test series was repeated in two orientations to consider all three axes of loading. The TRS enveloped the RRS within the applicable frequency range with a margin of at least 10 percent. The transformers successfully completed the test, and units performed their intended function.
Relief Valve Position The equipment, which includes a preamplifier, The position sensors are affected by seismic and hydrodynamic loads; Monitoring System sensor, monitor, and panel, were qualified by the preamplifiers and indicating instruments are subject to seismic dynamic testing. The applicable standards and loads only.
guidelines are IEEE-381-1977, IEEE-344-1975, IEEE-323-1974, and RG 1.89 and 1.100. The dynamic test program for the preamplifier and monitor was performed as follows: The equipment was mounted to simulate plant installations and instrumented to record accelerations and monitor operability. The test consists of a resonance search in three axes with 0.2-g amplitude sine sweeps followed by a biaxial, random multifrequency series of five OBE and one SSE tests. The TRS enveloped the RRS in the applicable frequency range with a margin of at least 10 percent. The equipment did not exhibit any malfunction as a result of the seismic simulation tests.
The position sensors are precision accelerometers with acceleration limits of 1,000 g in any direction.
Chapter 03 3.10A-10 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.10A-1 (Sheet 6 of 19)
CLASS 1E ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT QUALIFICATION RESULTS Equipment Methods Results Limit Switches The limit switches are qualified by dynamic The limit switches are affected by both seismic and hydrodynamic (NAMCO) testing. The applicable standards and guidelines loads. Dynamic testing is performed as follows: Representative limit are IEEE-323-1974, IEEE-344-1975, IEEE-382-1972, switches are mounted on a rigid test fixture attached to the vibration and RG 1.89 and 1.100. test table with instrumentation provided to record accelerations and monitor operability. A resonance search is performed from 1 to 35 Hz in each of the three orthogonal axes. Sine dwell fragility tests are performed at one-third octave intervals between 1 and 35 Hz in each of the three orthogonal axes. A 9.5 g qualification level at all test frequencies is established as a result of these tests. These qualification levels exceed the required levels from all of the dynamic loads. For the limit switches affected by hydrodynamic loads, results of the above testing and additional single frequency dwell testing in the frequency range of 4-100 Hz are utilized. The combined test data show adequacy with respect to the frequency content of the dynamic load and indicate that the switches remain operable to a level of 7.2 g. In addition, the test motions contain equivalent stress cycles greater than those imposed by the postulated dynamic loads.
Thermowells and RTDs Thermowells and RTDs are qualified by dynamic Some of these items of equipment are affected by seismic loads only.
testing or by combination of test and analysis. Others are affected by both seismic and hydrodynamic loads. The Applicable standards and guidelines are dynamic testing for equipment affected by seismic load is as follows:
IEEE-323-1974, IEEE-344-1975, RG 1.89 and 1.100, The equipment is mounted on the test table in a manner that simulates and the AISC Code. the intended service mounting. The tests consist of a resonance frequency search from 1 to 175 Hz, followed by biaxial, random multifrequency testing for five OBEs followed by one SSE. Each of these tests consists of phase coherent input motions in four orientations. The TRS envelops the RRS in the applicable frequency range by a margin of at least 10 percent. The equipment does not exhibit any malfunction as a result of the multifrequency tests.
For equipment affected by both seismic and hydrodynamic loads, additional dynamic testing is performed on the same units which were previously tested with multifrequency test motions. The additional tests utilize sine beat test input motions up to a frequency of 100 Hz. Equipment remains functional during and after the tests.
Supplemental analyses are performed on some RTDs located inside the drywell and suppression chamber air and suppression pool. All stresses are within Code allowable limits. In addition, the calculated allowable stress cycles of the equipment are greater than those imposed by the postulated dynamic loads.
Chapter 03 3.10A-11 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.10A-1 (Sheet 7 of 19)
CLASS 1E ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT QUALIFICATION RESULTS Equipment Methods Results Electronic Electronic transmitters are qualified by dynamic The electronic transmitters are affected by seismic loads only. The Transmitter test. The applicable standards and guidelines are generic test program was performed as follows: The transmitters were IEEE-323-1974, IEEE-344-1975, and RG 1.89 and mounted during the test to simulate the plant installations and 1.100. instrumented to record accelerations and to monitor operability. The test consists of a resonance search in three axes, followed by a biaxial, random multifrequency series of five OBE and one SSE tests repeated in the second orientation to consider all three axes of loading. The TRS enveloped the RRS in the applicable frequency range by a margin of at least 10 percent. The electronic transmitter successfully completed these tests and performed its intended function.
Electrical The electrical penetration assemblies are The electrical penetrations are affected by both seismic and Penetrations qualified by a combination of dynamic testing and hydrodynamic loads. Dynamic testing is performed on prototype units static analyses. The applicable standards, codes, in accordance with IEEE-317-1976 for each of the following assemblies:
and guidelines are IEEE-317-1976, IEEE-344-1975, medium voltage, low voltage power, control and instrumentation ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, penetration assemblies. Six random multifrequency tests of 30-sec 1977 Edition, and RG 1.89, 1.92, and 1.100. durations each are performed using independent biaxial motions. The six tests are repeated in the other horizontal orientation to consider all three axes of loading. The natural frequency results indicate that the penetration assemblies are rigid, i.e., natural frequency is greater than 100 Hz. The TRS envelops the RRS in the rigid range with more than 250 percent margin. The complete system is energized, and no electrical discontinuities occur during the test. The assemblies remain functional before, during, and after the test.
To address the hydrodynamic loading durations and the associated stress cycles, which are considerably higher than those of the seismic loads, an analysis of the test input motions was performed. It was demonstrated that the test motions contained many more stress cycles than those postulated for the combined seismic and hydrodynamic loads.
Thus, no further testing was necessary.
Design adequacy is also demonstrated through a design stress report in accordance with ASME III, paragraph NCA-3550.
The storage batteries and racks are affected by seismic loads only.
Storage Batteries and Batteries and racks are qualified by a combination Rack of analysis and tests. The applicable standards The rack was qualified by static analysis. The calculated natural and guidelines are IEEE-323-1974, IEEE-344-1975, frequency indicates that the rack is rigid and that the floor motion and RG 1.61, 1.89, 1.92, and 1.100. is not amplified at the battery locations. Stresses in the rack are well within the allowable limits of paragraph 3.9A.2.2.2.
The batteries are qualified by dynamic testing, performed as follows:
The batteries were mounted on rigid racks, simulating the plant installation. They were instrumented to record accelerations and to monitor operability. The test consisted of a resonance search from 0.5 to 35 Hz in three axes, followed by a biaxial, random multifrequency excitation for five OBE and one SSE tests. The amplitude was controlled in one-third octave over a frequency range Chapter 03 3.10A-12 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.10A-1 (Sheet 8 of 19)
CLASS 1E ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT QUALIFICATION RESULTS Equipment Methods Results of 0.5 to 40 Hz. These biaxial tests were repeated in the alternate horizontal orientation to include all three axes of loading. The TRS enveloped the RRS within the applicable frequency range with a margin of at least 10 percent. All the batteries successfully completed these tests and performed their intended functions.
Battery Chargers The battery chargers are qualified by dynamic The battery chargers are affected by seismic loads only. They were test. The applicable standards and guidelines are qualified by similarity to a unit which was dynamically tested. The IEEE-323-1974, IEEE-334-1975, and RG 1.89 and chargers were mounted during the test to simulate the plant 1.100. installation, and instrumented to record accelerations and to monitor operability. The test consisted of a resonance search from 1 to 50 Hz in three axes, followed by a biaxial, random multifrequency series of five OBE and one SSE tests. The amplitude was controlled in one-third octave bandwidths over a frequency range of 1 to 40 Hz.
These tests were repeated in the second orientation to consider all three axes of loading. The TRS enveloped the RRS within the applicable frequency range with a margin of at least 10 percent. The test specimen did not exhibit any malfunction as a result of the seismic simulation tests.
Uninterruptible The UPS systems were qualified by dynamic testing. The UPS systems are affected by seismic loads only. The dynamic Power Supplies (UPS) The applicable standards and guidelines are testing for qualification of UPS 2VBA*UPS2A and 2B was performed as IEEE-323-1974, IEEE-344-1975, IEEE-650-1979, and follows: A representative test specimen was mounted on the vibration RG 1.61, 1.89, and 1.100. test table such that the in-service condition is simulated. The specimen was instrumented to record accelerations and monitor operability. A resonance search was performed from 1 to 35 Hz in each of the three orthogonal axes. Biaxial, random multifrequency tests of five OBEs and one SSE in each of two test orientations were performed. The TRS enveloped the RRS within the applicable frequency range with a margin of at least 10 percent. The specimen did not exhibit any malfunction as a result of the seismic simulation tests.
Redundant UPS units 2VBA*UPS2C and 2D were qualified by similarity to a previously tested assembly. The test specimen was mounted on a vibration test table using a bolted connection. The difference between the bolted connection applied in the test and the welded installation used in the plant was reconciled by analysis. The test methods and test monitoring applied in the qualification of this equipment were similar to that described for 2VBA*UPS2A and 2B above.
The test specimen was qualified for use in seismic environments that exceed that associated with the installed location.
Chapter 03 3.10A-13 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.10A-1 (Sheet 9 of 19)
CLASS 1E ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT QUALIFICATION RESULTS Equipment Methods Results Miscellaneous Qualification of electrical motors is by a The motors are affected by seismic loads only. The Reliance motors Electrical Motors: combination of tests and analyses. The applicable are qualified by analysis and/or testing. Some motors were standards and guidelines are IEEE-323-1974, dynamically tested as follows: The motor was installed in the unit Application: IEEE-334-1974, IEEE-344-1975, RG 1.61, 1.92, and cooler, which was mounted on the vibration test table such that the Fans 1.100, and the AISC Code. service condition was simulated.
Pumps Strainers A resonance search was performed from 1 to 35 Hz, followed by Unit Coolers biaxial, random multifrequency tests of five OBEs and one SSE.
Air Conditioners Manufacturers: The motor remained operational during the tests, and the TRS Westinghouse enveloped the RRS by a margin of at least 10 percent in the applicable frequency range.
Reliance The natural frequency of the other Reliance motors was determined by analysis. Since it was determined that these motors were rigid, static analysis was used to demonstrate the structural and functional qualification of the individual motors. Stresses in all critical components were within the allowable limits of paragraph 3.9A.2.2.
Deflection of the rotor was within the allowable clearance, and bearing life corresponding to the loads was in excess of the qualified life of the motors.
The natural frequency of the Westinghouse motors was determined either by analysis or shaker tests. Since it was determined that all of the motors were rigid, static analysis was used to demonstrate the structural and functional qualification of the individual motors.
Stresses in all critical components were within the allowable limit of paragraph 3.9A.2.2. Deflection of the rotor was within the allowable clearance, and bearing lives corresponding to the loads were in excess of the qualified life of the motors.
Motor Control Center MCCs are qualified by dynamic testing. The The MCCs are affected by seismic loads only. The dynamic testing was 600-V ac applicable standards and guidelines are performed as follows: Representative test specimens were mounted on 125-V dc IEEE-344-1975, IEEE-323-1974, and RG 1.89 and the vibration test table such that in-service conditions were 1.100. simulated. The specimens were instrumented to record accelerations and monitor operability. A resonance search was performed from 1 to 35 Hz for each of the three orthogonal axes. The seismic simulation vibration tests consisted of triaxial, random multifrequency tests for five OBEs and one SSE. The TRS enveloped the RRS within the applicable frequency range with a margin of at least 10 percent. The test specimens did not exhibit any malfunction as a result of the seismic simulation tests.
Chapter 03 3.10A-14 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.10A-1 (Sheet 10 of 19)
CLASS 1E ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT QUALIFICATION RESULTS Equipment Methods Results Solenoid Valves Solenoid valves are qualified by a combination of Some of the solenoid valves are affected by seismic loads only; Target Rock tests and analysis. The applicable standards and others are affected by both seismic and hydrodynamic loads. An guidelines are ASME Section III-1974, analysis of the valves was performed, which meets the ASME Section IEEE-323-1974, IEEE-344-1975, IEEE-382-1980, and III requirements.
RG 1.61, 1.89, 1.92, and 1.100.
For valves affected by seismic loads only, the dynamic testing was performed as follows: A resonance search was conducted in the range of 1 to 35 Hz. No structural resonances were found. This was followed by biaxial sinusoidal dwell tests at a 4.5-g input level to account for the OBE and SSE loadings. Twelve tests of 30-sec duration each were performed in the frequency range of 1 to 35 Hz.
The tests were repeated with the input between horizontal and vertical axes 180 deg out of phase. At the completion of dwell testing in the first biaxial pair of axes, the above tests were repeated for the remaining horizontal and vertical axis combinations.
The test valve was pressurized to 2,485 psig with water at the inlet and was cycled during the testing. Piping end loads of 285 ft-lb were applied. The valve functioned satisfactorily during and after the test.
Valves affected by the combined seismic and hydrodynamic loads are qualified by a combination of random multifrequency and single frequency sine sweep and sine beat test motions. The sine beat tests were performed at test frequencies in the range of 1 to 100 Hz at one-third octave intervals at an input level of 6.0 g, except in low frequencies where the input levels were limited by 5.0-in double displacement. The test valve was pressurized at 1,250 psig. The valve functioned satisfactorily during and after the test.
Piping design acceptance criteria ensure that actual dynamic loadings are within the qualified levels for each valve.
Solenoid Valves Solenoid valves are qualified by a combination of These valves are affected by both seismic and hydrodynamic loads. An Valcor Engineering tests and analysis. The applicable standards and analysis of the valves was performed, which meets the ASME Section guidelines are ASME Section III-1977, III requirements. Two test valves were subjected to a resonance IEEE-323-1974, IEEE-344-1975, IEEE-382-1985, and search in the range of 1 to 100 Hz. No structural resonances were RG 1.61, 1.89, 1.92, and 1.100. found. The valves were then qualified by a combination of single frequency sine sweep and sine beat test motions. The sine beat tests were performed at test frequencies in the range of 1 to 100 Hz at one-third octave intervals at an input level of 5.0 g, except in low frequencies where the input level was limited by the test equipment.
The test valves were pressurized with water at 1,250 psig. The valves functioned satisfactorily during and after the test.
Piping design acceptance criteria ensure that actual dynamic loadings are within the qualified levels for each valve.
Chapter 03 3.10A-15 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.10A-1 (Sheet 11 of 19)
CLASS 1E ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT QUALIFICATION RESULTS Equipment Methods Results Solenoid Valves - Solenoid valves are qualified by dynamic testing. The valves are affected by seismic loads only.
AVCO The applicable standards and guidelines are IEEE-323-1974, IEEE-344-1975, IEEE-382-1980, The testing consists of two single-axis sine sweep tests, from 2 Hz IEEE-382-1985, and RG 1.89 and 1.100. to 35 Hz to 2 Hz, followed by single-axis sine beat tests at each one-third octave frequency from 2 Hz to 32 Hz. The required safety function of the valves to shift position is demonstrated during and after the testing. Piping design acceptance criteria ensure that actual dynamic loading is within the qualified levels for each valve.
Pressure Switches - Pressure switches are qualified by dynamic The pressure switches are affected by seismic loads only.
Static O-Ring testing. The applicable standards and guidelines Switches are IEEE-323-1974, IEEE-344-1975, and RG 1.89 and The pressure switches are qualified by biaxial, random multifrequency 1.100. tests of 30-sec duration each for each of the five OBE and one SSE conditions. The tests were repeated in the second horizontal and vertical orientation. The pressure switches successfully completed the seismic testing by performing their intended safety functions during and after all tests. The TRS enveloped the RRS within the applicable frequency range with a margin of at least 10 percent.
Positioner - Pressure switches are qualified by dynamic The positioner is affected by seismic loads only.
Wyle/Virginia Valve testing. The applicable standards and guidelines are IEEE-323-1974, IEEE-344-1975, and RG 1.89 and The positioner is qualified by triaxial, random multifrequency tests 1.100. of 30-sec duration each for each of the five OBE and one SSE conditions. The positioner successfully completed the seismic testing by performing its intended safety functions after all tests.
The TRS enveloped the RRS within the applicable frequency range with a margin of at least 10 percent.
Control Panels and Control panels, instrument racks, and mounted Control panels and racks are affected by seismic loads only. The Instrument Racks devices are qualified by a combination of dynamic panels and racks are qualified by a finite element analysis. The testing and analysis. Applicable code, standards, natural frequency results indicate that the panel and racks are rigid and guidelines are the AISC Code, IEEE-323-1974, and that the floor motion was not amplified at the various component IEEE-344-1975, and NRC RG 1.61, 1.89, 1.92, and mounting locations. Results of the static analysis indicate that the 1.100. stresses are well within the allowable limits of paragraph 3.9A.2.2.2, and the margin of safety is over 15 percent.
All of the active components, including Foxboro racks, are qualified by dynamic testing. The dynamic test is performed as follows: The test items are mounted during the test to simulate plant installation and are instrumented to record accelerations and monitor operability.
The test consists of a resonance search from 1 to 35 Hz in three axes, followed by a biaxial, random multifrequency series of five OBE and one SSE tests with amplitude controlled in one-third octave bandwidths over a frequency range of 1 to 40 Hz. These tests are repeated in the second horizontal orientation to consider all three axes of loading. The TRS envelops the RRS within the applicable frequency range with at least a 10 percent margin. All of the tested items successfully completed these tests and performed their intended functions.
Chapter 03 3.10A-16 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.10A-1 (Sheet 12 of 19)
CLASS 1E ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT QUALIFICATION RESULTS Equipment Methods Results Radiation Monitoring The radiation monitoring system is qualified by a All components are affected by seismic loads, with the ion chamber System combination of analysis and dynamic testing. The detectors additionally subjected to hydrodynamic loads. All devices following is a list of essential components and are identical or similar to parent items, which are qualified by the corresponding methods of qualifications: dynamic testing, with the exception of the isokinetic nozzles and the control room cabinets. In addition, all radiation monitor skids are Component Method analyzed for structural integrity using ANSYS modal finite elementand static analysis options to determine frequencies, stresses, and
- Liquid monitor Static analysis, dynamic test deflections. The control room cabinets are qualified by use of the assembly dynamic finite element analysis option of the same program. The
- Gas monitor assembly Static analysis, dynamic test isokinetic probes, being simple collector tubes, are analyzed by with process monitor conventional manual methods, as are the pump/motor assemblies (with microcomputer the exception of the liquid monitor sample pumps in 2SWP*CAB23A and
- Gas monitor assembly Static analysis, dynamic test 2SWP*CAB23B, and 2SWP*CAB146A and 2SWP*CAB146B), since these items without have natural frequencies higher than 33 Hz.
microcomputer
- Particulate and gas Static analysis, dynamic test The dynamic testing is performed as follows: A resonance search in monitor assembly three axes is performed from 1 to at least 33 Hz. Five OBE and one
- Remotely mounted Dynamic test SSE random multifrequency tests of 30-sec duration each, using microcomputer biaxial/triaxial motions, with amplitude controlled in one-third
- Control room Dynamic analysis octave bandwidths over a frequency range of 1 to at least 33 Hz, are cabinet, including: performed and, in the case of biaxial motions, repeated in the
- Interface modules Dynamic test alternate horizontal orientation to consider all three axes of
- Safety isolation Dynamic test loading. The TRS envelopes the RRS by at least a 10 percent margin modules in the frequency range of interest. The components are instrumented
- Remote indication Dynamic test to record accelerations and monitor operability before, during, and and control units after the vibration tests. Equipment remained functional, and no
- Analog and digital Dynamic test structural damage was noted.
isolation modules
- Strip chart Dynamic test For ion chamber detectors affected by hydrodynamic loads, testing recorders includes high frequency and long duration characteristics of the
- Ion chamber detector Dynamic test loading as follows: The resonance search is extended to a frequency
- Remote indicator and Dynamic test of 200 Hz. The input motions for the random testing contain alarm module frequencies between 1 and 100 Hz. The TRS envelopes the RRS by at
- Electric motor for Static analysis least a 10 percent margin in the applicable frequency range. The gas monitor sample random testing consists of several additional tests with a frequency pumps range to 200 Hz, at various amplitudes, in addition to the six tests
- Isokinetic probes Static analysis of 30-sec duration and for 30-min duration in each axis. An analysis
- Pump/motor for Static analysis (with exception of 2SWP*CAB23A and to compare the test equivalent stress cycles with those from the liquid monitor 2SWP*CAB23B, and 2SWP*CAB146A and 2SWP*CAB146B, postulated dynamic loads is also performed. This analysis shows that sample pumps pumps originally qualified by static analysis; the test motions contain equivalent stress cycles greater than those later replaced and qualified by dynamic testing). from the postulated dynamic loads.
Non-Class 1E components are qualified through their similarity to the Class 1E components or by static analysis. The applicable standards and guidelines are IEEE-323-1974, IEEE-344-1975, and NRC RG 1.89, 1.92, 1.97, and 1.100.
Chapter 03 3.10A-17 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.10A-1 (Sheet 13 of 19)
CLASS 1E ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT QUALIFICATION RESULTS Equipment Methods Results Loose Parts The equipment was qualified by a combination of The loose parts monitoring system equipment is affected by seismic Monitoring System test and dynamic analysis, utilizing the response loads and is qualified to withstand five OBE events only.
(Category II) spectrum modal analysis technique. Applicable code, guidelines, and standards are the AISC Code, A dynamic response spectrum modal analysis was performed on a model NRC RG 1.100, 1.133 and IEEE-344-1975. simulating the cabinet and masses of the large instruments. The lowest natural frequency of the cabinet was 24 Hz. The maximum stress margin of safety is greater than 75 percent. The devices in the cabinet were qualified by testing a generic unit. The test consisted of a resonance search followed by a biaxial, random multifrequency series of five OBE tests. The biaxial tests were repeated in a second orientation to consider all three axes of loading. The TRS enveloped the RRS within the applicable frequency range with at least a 10 percent margin.
Centrifugal Liquid Centrifugal liquid chillers are qualified by a Centrifugal liquid chillers are affected by seismic loads only. The Chillers combination of analysis and tests. The control control panel and Class 1E electrical components of the chillers are panel and Class 1E electrical components of the qualified by dynamic testing. Representative test specimens were centrifugal liquid chillers are qualified by mounted on the vibration test table such that in-service conditions dynamic testing. The skid, main shell, and pipes were simulated. The specimens were instrumented to record are qualified by finite element analysis. The accelerations and monitor operability. A resonance search from 1 to applicable standards, guidelines, and codes are 35 Hz was performed in each of three orthogonal axes. The seismic IEEE-323-1974, IEEE-334-1974, IEEE-344-1975, RG simulation vibration tests consisted of biaxial, random 1.89 and 1.100, and ASME Section III, Subsections multifrequency tests of five OBEs and one SSE in each of two test ND and NF, including Addenda, 1974 Edition. orientations 90 deg apart. The TRS enveloped the RRS within the applicable frequency range with a margin of at least 10 percent. The test specimens did not exhibit any malfunctions as a result of the seismic simulation tests. The skid, main shell, and pipes are qualified by finite element analysis. A local shell analysis of all major pipe-to-shell attachments was also performed. The stresses and deflections were found to be within the acceptable limits of Table 3.9A-8.
Electric Heat Tracing Electric heat tracing control panels are qualified The heat tracing control panels are affected by seismic loads only.
Control Panels by dynamic testing. The applicable standards and A test specimen of identical construction was mounted on the guidelines are IEEE-323-1974, IEEE-344-1975, and vibration test table such that in-service conditions were simulated.
RG 1.89 and 1.100. The specimen was instrumented to record accelerations and monitor operability. A resonance search from 1 to 35 Hz was performed in each of three orthogonal axes. The seismic simulation tests consisted of biaxial, random multifrequency tests, five OBEs and one SSE in each of two test orientations 90 deg apart. The TRS enveloped the RRS within the applicable frequency range with a margin of at least 10 percent. The test specimen did not exhibit any malfunction as a result of the seismic simulation tests.
Chapter 03 3.10A-18 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.10A-1 (Sheet 14 of 19)
CLASS 1E ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT QUALIFICATION RESULTS Equipment Methods Results Electrical Air Duct Qualification of air duct heaters is by analysis The air duct heaters are affected by seismic loads only. Analysis of Heaters and test. Applicable guidelines, codes, and the enclosures for the heater and remote control panel is performed standards are NRC RG 1.61, 1.89, 1.92, 1.100, the using a finite element model. The natural frequencies are AISC Code, and IEEE-323-1974 and IEEE-344-1975. determined. Static and dynamic analysis is performed to calculate stresses and deflections.
The results show that stresses are within the allowables of paragraph 3.9A.2.2.2 and that deflections are negligible. For qualification of devices, a test program consisting of resonance search and random multiaxial and multifrequency tests shows that the TRS envelopes the RRS in the applicable frequency range by a margin of at least 10 percent.
Diesel Generator This system is qualified by a combination of The diesel generator system is affected by seismic loads only. The System analysis and dynamic testing programs. The main unit is qualified seismically by response spectrum finite following is a list of essential components and element modal analysis. The model consists of major mass and systems and the corresponding methods of structural items, including the engine itself, the flywheel, qualification. generator rotor, outboard bearing, pedestal, and base. Items too small to affect the dynamic characteristics of the system are Component/System Method excluded.
- Engine mounted Static analysis Results of the dynamic analysis indicate that the stresses in the systems (including analyzed components are well within the allowable limits of paragraph combustion air 3.9A.2.2.2 with substantial margin.
manifold, exhaust manifold, shutdown Amplified response spectra are also generated (by analysis) at butterfly valve, different points of the diesel generator where various equipment is jacket water mounted. The tested components are subjected to sine sweeps from 1 headers, governor to 40 Hz in three axes, followed by a biaxial, random multifrequency linkages, fuel oil series of at least five OBE and one SSE tests. The TRS envelopes the and lube oil RRS within the frequency range of interest with at least a 10 percent systems, and margin. Each component is mounted during the test to simulate the starting air system plant installation and instrumented to record acceleration and
- Air intake filter Static analysis monitor operability.
- Air intake silencer Static analysis
- Exhaust silencer Static analysis Static analysis The lube oil thermostatic valve is qualified through analysis and
- Engine-driven lube single frequency testing. It is subjected to a series of oil pump increasingly severe sine sweeps at the rate of two octaves/min from 1
- Jacket water Dynamic analysis to 50 Hz at a level of 2.0 g, increased to 16.0 g.
standpipe
- Jacket water Static analysis Auxiliary skid piping, jacket water standpipe, fuel oil filter and circulating pump strainer, turbocharger lube oil filter, jacket water cooler, lube oil
- Fuel oil filter and Dynamic analysis heat exchanger, and generator stator and brush mounting structures strainer are all analyzed by the modal response spectrum analysis method using
- Turbocharger lube Dynamic analysis floor response spectrum.
oil filter Chapter 03 3.10A-19 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.10A-1 (Sheet 15 of 19)
CLASS 1E ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT QUALIFICATION RESULTS Equipment Methods Results Torsional frequencies of the crankshaft system are determined by Component/System Method analysis. Torsional stresses are also determined at several locations of the crankshaft due to the stimulation torques at the
- 3-in check valve Static analysis potentially significant critical speeds. There is no conceivable
- 6-in check valve Static analysis operating condition in which the system torsional vibration can
- Lube oil and jacket Static analysis damage or adversely affect operation of the unit.
water heater
- Auxiliary skid Static & dynamic analysis The remaining components are qualified through static analysis.
piping
- Exhaust expansion Static analysis The results of all analyses and tests show substantial margins joint compared to the maximum required acceleration level, ensuring the
- Intake expansion Static analysis ability of the diesel generator to function under all operating and joint postulated loadings.
- Governor actuator Dynamic analysis and overspeed governor
- Intercooler water Static analysis piping
- Starting air tank Static analysis
- Lube oil filter Static analysis
- Outboard bearing Static analysis
- Jacket water cooler Dynamic analysis
- Lube oil heat Dynamic analysis exchanger
- Generator stator and Dynamic analysis brush mounting structure
- Ac outlet box Dynamic test
- Starting air Static analysis separator
- Lube oil strainer Static analysis
- Jacket water Static analysis & dynamic test thermostatic valve
- Lube oil Static analysis & dynamic test thermostatic valve
- Standby fuel oil Static analysis booster pump
- Lube oil circulating Static analysis pump
- Starting air relief Static analysis valve on compressor
- Air compressor Static analysis
- Engine-driven water Static analysis pump
- Intercooler Static analysis
- Engine-driven fuel oil booster pump Static analysis
- Jacket water thermo Static analysis regulating valve Chapter 03 3.10A-20 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.10A-1 (Sheet 16 of 19)
CLASS 1E ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT QUALIFICATION RESULTS Equipment Methods Results Component/System Method
- Various control Dynamic test system components:
control valves, check valve, pressure switch, relay, temperature switch, solenoid valve, diaphragm valve, shuttle valve, etc.
- Jacket water level Dynamic test switches
- Lube oil relief Static analysis valve
- Fuel oil relief Static analysis valve
- Starting air relief Static analysis valve
- Fuel oil cooler Static analysis
- Entronic control Dynamic test panel
- High-voltage panels Dynamic test The applicable standards and guidelines are IEEE-323-1974, IEEE-344-1975, and NRC RG 1.61, 1.89, 1.92, and 1.100.
Electrohydraulic The Borg-Warner and Paul Munroe electrohydraulic The Borg-Warner electrohydraulic operators and remote electronic Valve Operators - valve operators and electronic controllers are controllers are affected by seismic loads only. The operators are Borg-Warner and Paul qualified by dynamic testing. The applicable line (valve) mounted, whereas the electronic controllers are wall Munroe standards and guidelines are IEEE-323-1974, mounted. Therefore, the operators and controllers are seismically IEEE-344-1975, IEEE-382-1972, and NRC RG 1.89 and qualified to different parameters.
1.100.
The Borg-Warner electrohydraulic operator seismic qualifications are based on dynamic testing. A representative test specimen was mounted to the vibration test table using a specially designed test fixture specimen was instrumented to record accelerations and monitor operability. The specimen was then subjected to three orthogonal,single axis, vibration aging tests over the frequency range of 5 to 200 to 5 Hz at the rate of two octaves per minute with an acceleration level of 0.75 g. Each uniaxial test was for a 90-min duration, and the operator assembly was continuously functionally stroked at a rate of approximately five cycles per minute. A resonance search in each orthogonal axis was performed over the frequency range of 1 to 100 Hz using an input acceleration of 0.2 g.
The specimen was then subjected to biaxial, random multifrequency vibration tests for five OBEs followed by one SSE in each of two orthogonal axes. The TRS enveloped the generic OBE (2.3 g zpa) and Chapter 03 3.10A-21 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.10A-1 (Sheet 17 of 19)
CLASS 1E ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT QUALIFICATION RESULTS Equipment Methods Results SSE (4.6 g zpa) spectra. The specimen was then subjected to required input motion (RIM) OBE tests that consisted of two sinusoidal sweeps from 2 to 35 to 2 Hz with an acceleration input of 3.3 g. The testsingle axis, vibration aging tests over the frequency range of 5 to 200 to 5 Hz at the rate of two octaves per minute with an acceleration level of 0.75 g. Each uniaxial test was for a 90-min duration, and the operator assembly was continuously functionally stroked at a rate of approximately five cycles per minute. A resonance search in each orthogonal axis was performed over the frequency range of 1 to 100 Hz using an input acceleration of 0.2 g.
The specimen was then subjected to biaxial, random multifrequency vibration tests for five OBEs followed by one SSE in each of two orthogonal axes. The TRS enveloped the generic OBE (2.3 g zpa) and SSE (4.6 g zpa) spectra. The specimen was then subjected to required input motion (RIM) OBE tests that consisted of two sinusoidal sweeps from 2 to 35 to 2 Hz with an acceleration input of 3.3 g. The test was performed in each of three orthogonal axes. The first sweep was performed with the operator assembly in the open position and the second sweep with the operator in the closed position. Each OBE RIM test was followed by a SSE RIM test which consisted of a series of sine beats at each one-third octave frequency from 2 to 32 Hz with an input acceleration of 4.95 g. The input at each frequency was a continuous series of sine beats of 15 oscillations per beat for a duration of 15 sec. The operator assembly was cycled under load during each test. The operator assembly did not exhibit any malfunctions or loss of structural integrity.
The remote electronic controller seismic qualifications are also based on dynamic testing. Representative test specimens were attached to the vibration test table such that the in-service mounting conditions were simulated. The specimens were instrumented to record acceleration levels and monitor operability. A resonance search from 1 to 100 Hz was performed in each of three orthogonal axes with an input acceleration of 0.2 g. The specimens were then subjected to biaxial, random multifrequency vibration tests for five OBEs followed by one SSE in each of two orthogonal axes. The TRS enveloped the RRS over the frequency range of interest by a minimum margin of 10 percent. The specimens did not exhibit any malfunction or loss of structural integrity.
The Paul Munroe electrohydraulic valve operators are affected by seismic loads only. The operator seismic qualification is based on dynamic testing. The test specimen was mounted to the vibration test Chapter 03 3.10A-22 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.10A-1 (Sheet 18 of 19)
CLASS 1E ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT QUALIFICATION RESULTS Equipment Methods Results table using a specially designed test fixture such that the in-service mounting conditions were duplicated. The specimen was instrumented to record accelerations and monitor operability. A resonance search in each of the three orthogonal axes was performed over the frequency range of 1 to 40 Hz using an input acceleration of 0.2 g. The results of the resonance search test indicated no frequencies below 35 Hz.
The specimen was then subjected to single-axis sine beat tests at 32 Hz in each of its orthogonal specimen axes to satisfy the OBE level requirements. Tests in each axis consisted of a string of beats (35 beats) of 15 oscillations (a sinusoid of the test frequency) per beat, with a 2-sec pause between beats for the total test time duration of 75 sec. The horizontal and vertical input accelerations were 1.6 g.
These tests were performed with the valve actuator in the open position. After the OBE RIM test, the specimen was subjected to SSE level single-axis sine beat tests at 32 Hz along each of its orthogonal axes. Tests in each axis consisted of a string of beats (a minimum of five beats) and 15 oscillations (a sinusoid of the test frequency) per beat with a 2-sec pause between beats for a total duration of 15 sec. The horizontal and vertical input accelerations were 2.4 g. The specimen was operated under loaded conditions during each test and did not exhibit any malfunctions or loss of structural integrity.
Piping as-built analyses ensure that the OBE and SSE acceleration levels are smaller than the qualified levels for each electrohydraulic valve actuator.
Electrohydraulic The PMT electrohydraulic damper actuators are The PMT electrohydraulic operators are affected by seismic loads only.
Damper Operators - qualified by dynamic testing. The applicable The operators are equipment (damper) mounted and qualified as follows:
Preferred Metal standards and guidelines are IEEE-344-1975, A representative specimen was mounted on a vibration test table and Technologies, Inc. IEEE-323-1974, IEEE-382-1972, and RG 1.61 and RG subjected to vibration aging tests over the frequency range of 5 to (PMT) 1.100. 100 to 5 Hz at a rate of two octaves per minute, with an acceleration level of 0.75 g in each of the orthogonal axis for a duration of 90 min. A resonant search in each of the orthogonal axis was performed with the results indicating no resonant frequencies less than 18 Hz.
The specimen was then subjected to triaxial, random multifrequency input motions, with 30-sec duration for five OBEs followed by one SSE.
The TRS envelops the applicable portion of the RRS by a minimum of 10 percent. The specimens were monitored and did not exhibit any malfunction or loss of structural integrity during and after dynamic testing.
Chapter 03 3.10A-23 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.10A-1 (Sheet 19 of 19)
CLASS 1E ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT QUALIFICATION RESULTS Equipment Methods Results I/P Converters - The I/P converters are qualified by dynamic The I/P converters are affected by seismic loads only. The testing CONOFLOW testing. Applicable standards and guidelines are consisted of a resonance search testing and sine beat testing.
IEEE-323-1974 and IEEE-344-1975.
The resonance search testing consisted of a sinusoidal vibration at an acceleration of 0.5 g from 5 to 50 Hz. No resonant frequencies are identified below 33 Hz.
Pressure (Filter) The pressure (filter) regulators are qualified by The pressure (filter) regulators are affected by seismic loads only.
Regulators - CONOFLOW dynamic testing. Applicable standards and The testing consisted of a resonance search testing and sine beat guidelines are IEEE-323-1974 and IEEE-344-1975. testing.
The resonance search testing consisted of a sinusoidal vibration at an acceleration of 0.5 g from 5 to 50 Hz. No structural resonant frequencies less than 33 Hz are found.
The sine beat testing consisted of applying a series of continuous sine beats over a frequency range of 5 to 50 Hz. The accelerations used for excitation were 4.5 g horizontal and 3.0 g vertical. The units operated satisfactorily both during and after the tests.
Chapter 03 3.10A-24 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR 3.10B SEISMIC AND HYDRODYNAMIC QUALIFICATIONS OF SEISMIC CATEGORY I INSTRUMENTATION AND ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT (GE SCOPE OF SUPPLY) 3.10B.1 Dynamic Qualification Criteria 3.10B.1.1 Seismic Category I Equipment Identification Seismic Category I instrumentation and electrical equipment is listed in Table 3.2-1. "Active" NSSS pumps, motors, valves, and valve-mounted equipment are listed in Table 3.9B-4.
Seismic Category I instrumentation and electrical equipment are designed to withstand the faulted event without functional impairment.
The Class 1E instrumentation electrical equipment and support structures supplied by GE requiring seismic qualification are identified in Table 3.10B-1. The seismic qualification of these instrumentation, equipment, and supports is described in the following subsections.
Section 3.9B.2.2 of this FSAR addresses the dynamic qualification testing and analysis of the Category I mechanical components, equipment, and their supports, including the integral or associated electrical components such as valve-mounted components and pump motors.
3.10B.1.2 Dynamic Design Criteria 3.10B.1.2.1 NSSS Equipment The seismic criterion used in the design and subsequent qualification of all Class 1E instrumentation and electrical equipment supplied by GE is described in the following paragraph.
The Class 1E equipment is capable of performing its safety-related functions during 1) normal plant operation, 2) anticipated transients, 3) design basis accidents, and 4) post-accident operation while being subjected to, and after the cessation of, the accelerations resulting from the seismic and hydrodynamic loads at the point of attachment of the equipment to the building or supporting structure.
The criteria for each of the devices used in the Class 1E systems depend on the use in a given system, e.g., a relay in Chapter 03 3.10B-25 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR one system may have as its safety function to de-energize and open its contacts within a certain time, while in another system it must energize and close its contacts. Since GE supplies many devices for many applications, the approach taken was to test the device in the worst-case configuration. In this way, the capability of protective action initiation and the proper operation of fail-safe circuits is ensured.
From the basic input ground motion data, a series of response curves at various building elevations is developed after the building layout is completed. Standard requirement levels that meet or exceed the maximum expected unique plant information are included in the design specifications for seismic Category I equipment. Equipment is qualified dynamically either by GE or by the supplier; in either case, test data, operating experience, and/or calculations substantiate that the components, systems, etc., do not suffer loss of function during or after exposure to seismic and hydrodynamic loads. The magnitude and frequency of the SSE loadings which each component may experience are determined by its specific location within the plant.
3.10B.2 Methods and Procedures for Qualifying Electrical Equipment and Instrumentation 3.10B.2.1 Methods of Showing NSSS Equipment Compliance with IEEE-344-1975 and Regulatory Guide 1.100 RG 1.100 is not the Unit 2 licensing basis for the GE scope of supply. However, GE dynamically reevaluates the equipment to the requirements of IEEE-344-1975. This is accomplished through the GE Seismic Qualification Review Team (SQRT) program.
Under the GE SQRT program, the qualification of recently qualified equipment or equipment yet to be qualified complies with RG 1.100 and IEEE-344-1975. For equipment originally qualified to IEEE-344-1971, the SQRT methodology is applied to the original test data to demonstrate that requirements of IEEE-344-1975 are satisfied also.
If the SQRT requirements are not satisfied for a specific piece of equipment, the equipment is requalified to IEEE-344-1975 or replaced with a component that is qualified to IEEE-344-1975.
Procedures Chapter 03 3.10B-26 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR GE-supplied Class 1E equipment meets the requirement that the dynamic qualification should demonstrate the capability to perform the required safety function during and after the seismic and hydrodynamic loads. Both analysis and testing were used, but most equipment was tested. Analysis was primarily used to determine the adequacy of mechanical strength, such as mounting bolts and pressure boundaries.
Analysis - GE-supplied Class 1E equipment performing primarily a mechanical safety function (pressure boundary devices, etc.) was analyzed since the passive nature of their critical safety role usually made testing unnecessary. Analytical methods outlined in IEEE-344-1975 were utilized in such cases. (See Table 3.10B-1 for indication of which items were qualified by analysis.)
Testing - GE-supplied Class 1E equipment having an active electrical safety function was tested in compliance with IEEE-344-1975.
Documentation Available documentation verifies the seismic qualification of GE-supplied Class 1E equipment.
3.10B.2.2 Testing Procedures for Qualifying Electrical Equipment and Instrumentation The test procedure required that the device be mounted on the table of the vibration machine in a manner similar to its normal, installed configuration. The device was tested in the operating states as if it were performing its Class 1E functions; these states were monitored before, during, and after the test to ensure proper function and absence of spurious function. In the case of the relay example, both energized and de-energized states and normally open and normally closed contact configurations were tested if the relay is used in those configurations in its Class 1E functions.
The dynamic excitation was a random multiple frequency test in which the applied vibration was a sinusoidal table motion at a fixed peak acceleration and a discrete frequency at any given time. The vibratory excitation was applied in two orthogonal axes, horizontal and vertical simultaneously, with the axes chosen as those coincident with the most probable mounting configuration. The device was then rotated 90 deg in the Chapter 03 3.10B-27 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR horizontal plane, and the test was repeated. Each device, therefore, has been tested in the three major orthogonal axes.
The first step was usually a search for resonances in each axis since resonances cause amplification of the input vibration and are the most likely cause of malfunction. The resonance search was usually run at low acceleration levels to avoid damaging the test sample if a severe resonance was encountered. The resonance search was performed for the applicable frequency range in accordance with IEEE-344; if the device was large enough, the vibrations were monitored by accelerometers placed at critical locations from which resonances were determined by comparing the acceleration level with that at the table of the vibration machine. Sometimes the devices either were too small for an accelerometer, with their critical parts in an inaccessible location, or had critical parts that will be adversely affected by the mounting of an accelerometer. The vibrations were monitored at the closest location.
Following the frequency scan and resonance determination, the devices were tested to determine their dynamic capability limit.
For multifrequency testing, five OBE and one SSE tests were run at the appropriate TRS. In some cases, the TRS was increased gradually until device malfunction occurred or the shake table limit was reached. For single frequency testing, a malfunction limit test was run at each resonant frequency as determined by the frequency scan. In this test, the acceleration level was gradually increased until either the device malfunctioned or the limit of the vibration machine was reached. If no resonances were detected (as was usually the case), the device was considered to be rigid (all parts move in unison) and the malfunction limit was therefore independent of frequency. To achieve maximum acceleration from the vibration machine, rigid devices were malfunction tested at the upper test frequency since that allowed the maximum acceleration to be obtained from deflection-limited machines.
The summary of the tests on the devices used in Class 1E applications is given in Table 3.10B-1.
The above procedures were required of purchased devices as well as those made by GE. Vendor test results were reviewed and, if unacceptable, the tests were repeated either by GE or the vendor. If the vendor tests were adequate, the device was considered qualified to the limits of the test.
3.10B.2.3 Qualification of Valve Operators Chapter 03 3.10B-28 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR The qualification of valve operators is discussed in Section 3.9B.2.2.
3.10B.2.4 Qualification of NSSS Motors Seismic qualification of NSSS motors is discussed in Section 3.9B.2.2 in conjunction with the ECCS pump and motor assembly.
Seismic qualification of the standby liquid control (SLC) pump motor is discussed in Section 3.9B.2.2.2 in conjunction with the SLC pump motor assembly.
3.10B.3 Methods and Procedure of Analysis or Testing of Supports of Electrical Equipment and Instrumentation 3.10B.3.1 Dynamic Analysis and Testing Procedures 3.10B.3.1.1 Panel-Mounted Equipment The Class 1E equipment supplied by GE is used in many systems on many different plants and is subjected to widely varying dynamic loads. The qualification tests were performed to envelop the applicable frequency range. For supports subjected to seismic loads only, the tested frequencies range from 1 to 33 Hz. Where testing below 5 Hz was limited by capability of the test facility, a combination of test and analysis was used to ensure that there were no untested resonances.
For multicabinet assemblies that are too large for the test table, one or two bays of the assembly are tested, giving representative results in the front-to-back and vertical directions. The side-to-side results are evaluated and generally found to be conservative due to the increased flexibility of the narrower section. If conservatism cannot be established, the panel is modeled accurately and a computer analysis of its structural response is performed.
Some GE-supplied Class 1E devices were qualified by analysis only. Analysis was used for passive mechanical devices and was sometimes used in combination with testing for larger assemblies containing Class 1E devices. For example, a test might have been run to determine natural frequencies in the equipment within the critical frequency range. If the equipment was determined to be free of natural frequencies, it was assumed to be rigid. If it had natural frequencies in the critical frequency range, then calculations of transmissibility and Chapter 03 3.10B-29 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR responses to varying input accelerations were determined to see if Class 1E devices mounted in the assembly would operate without malfunctioning. Generally, the testing of Class 1E equipment was accomplished using the following procedure.
Assemblies (i.e., control panels and local racks) containing devices with established seismic and hydrodynamic malfunction limits were either analyzed or mounted on the table of a vibration machine in the manner it was to be mounted when in use. All control panel and local rack tests have been performed according to the requirements of IEEE-344. The initial vibration test in each case was a low-level resonance search.
As with the devices, the assemblies were tested in the three major orthogonal axes. The resonance search was run in the same manner as described for devices. Alternately, control panel assemblies (such as the nuclear management analysis and control power range neutron monitor [NUMAC PRNM] panel assembly) were modeled accurately and a computer analysis of their structural response was performed. If resonances were present, the transmissibility between the input and the location of Class 1E devices was determined by measuring or computing the accelerations at the device locations and calculating the magnification between them and the input. Once known, the transmissibilities could be used analytically to determine conservatively the input motion at any Class 1E device location for any given input to the base of the assembly.
The described full acceleration level tests or analysis showed that the panel types had more than adequate mechanical strength and that acceptability was just a function of its amplification factor and the malfunction levels of the devices mounted in it.
Many devices were mounted in the test panel or rack and qualified as an assembly. Other devices were tested individually as previously described. Sometimes panels were tested at lower acceleration levels and the transmissibilities measured to the various devices. By dividing the device's malfunction levels by the panel transmissibility between the device and the panel input, the panel seismic qualification level could be determined. Several high-level tests have been run on selected generic panel designs to ensure the conservatism in using the transmissibility analysis described.
3.10B.4 Operating License Review The dynamic test results for safety-related panels and control equipment within the NSSS scope are maintained in a permanent file by GE and can be readily audited in all cases. The Chapter 03 3.10B-30 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR equipment used in Class 1E applications at Unit 2 passed the prescribed tests.
A summary of the test results for the devices used in Class 1E applications is given in Table 3.10B-1.
Chapter 03 3.10B-31 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.10B-1 (Sheet 1 of 4)
ESSENTIAL CLASS 1E ELECTRICAL COMPONENTS AND INSTRUMENTS SEISMIC QUALIFICATION TEST
SUMMARY
Equipment Method Results Temperature elements The temperature elements are qualified by both The temperature elements that have been designated as having an active dynamic testing and analysis. The applicable safety function have been dynamically tested demonstrating standard is IEEE-344-1975. qualification. Mounted similar to field conditions, they have been subjected to SRV vibration aging, chugging, seismic, and hydrodynamic loads. Biaxial testing, over the frequency range of 1 to 100 Hz, was accomplished in three mutually perpendicular axes with TRS enveloping the RRS. The temperature elements maintained their functional and structural integrity during testing.
Those elements having a passive safety function were analyzed to show structural integrity when subjected to process pressures and loads in excess of the requirement for their location.
Temperature switch The temperature switch is qualified by an The safety function of the temperature switch is passive. Analysis analysis of its structural capability. shows that it exceeds its structural requirements when subjected to required seismic and hydrodynamic loads. Calculations indicate a high natural frequency making it a rigid body in the range of interest and its capability far exceeds its stress requirements.
Pressure transmitters, The transmitters are qualified by dynamic The transmitters can be subjected to both seismic and hydrodynamic differential, absolute, testing meeting the guidelines of IEEE-344-1975. loads during their installed life. Testing in an as-installed and gauge condition included random frequency excitation to meet SRV aging, upset and faulted seismic, and chugging requirements. Tests were performed in three mutually perpendicular axes. During testing, the transmitters maintained structural integrity and met functional requirements.
Pressure transmitters The transmitters are qualified by dynamic The transmitters can be subjected to both seismic and hydrodynamic testing meeting the guidelines of IEEE-344-1975. loads during their installed life. Testing in as-installed condition included biaxial random frequency excitation to meet upset and faulted seismic and chugging requirements. During testing, the transmitters maintained structural integrity and met functional requirements.
Level transmitters Level transmitters are qualified for their The level transmitters have an active or passive safety function application by both analysis and testing. depending on their application. Those transmitters with a passive Testing was performed to meet the guidelines of safety function have been shown to meet structural requirement by IEEE-344-1975. analysis. They have natural frequencies higher than the range of interest and have been shown to have structural integrity to withstand the required seismic and dynamic conditions.
Those transmitted whose safety function is active were tested in their safety-related operating mode and were continuously monitored. They maintained their structural integrity and met accuracy requirements during testing. Five OBE and one SSE tests were performed in three mutually perpendicular axes. Excitation was applied biaxially over a frequency range of 1-100 Hz.
Chapter 03 3.10B-32 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.10B-1 (Sheet 2 of 4)
ESSENTIAL CLASS 1E ELECTRICAL COMPONENTS AND INSTRUMENTS SEISMIC QUALIFICATION TEST
SUMMARY
Equipment Method Results Level switch The switches are qualified for their application The level switches have an active or passive safety function depending by test performed to meet the guidelines of on their application. Those switches with a passive safety function IEEE-344-1971 for a passive safety function and have been shown to meet structural requirements by test, and have been IEEE-344-1975 for an active safety function. shown to have structural integrity to withstand the required seismic and dynamic conditions.
Those switches with an active safety function can be subjected to seismic and hydrodynamic loads during their plant life. Vibration aging, SRV, OBE, SSE and sine beat testing were performed in three mutually perpendicular axes to levels greater than required for their Unit 2-installed location. During testing, the switches met structural and functional requirements.
Pressure indicators The pressure indicators have been qualified by Indicators can have an active or passive safety function. The dynamic testing, meeting the guidelines of indicators mounted in an as-installed condition were subjected to IEEE-344-1975. biaxial random testing over a frequency range of 1-250 Hz. Five OBEs and one SSE were applied in three mutually perpendicular axes. TRS that included both seismic and hydrodynamic loads enveloped the RRS.
The indicator maintained structural integrity throughout testing.
Insulated detectors The detectors have been qualified by dynamic Detectors have an active safety function and met structural and testing to meet the guidelines of IEEE-344-1975. functional requirements when subjected to seismic testing at amplitudes greater than required. Five OBE and one SSE biaxial random tests were performed in three mutually perpendicular axes over a frequency range of 1-100 Hz. Functional performance was demonstrated before, during, and after seismic excitation.
IRM detector A combination of test and analysis demonstrates The IRM detector movement during a seismic event is controlled by the qualification of the detectors for their fuel bundle and maximum excitation occurs at the natural frequency of installed location. the bundle. The detector was tested at discrete frequencies in the horizontal axes and analyzed for vertical loads. Capabilities, both tested and analyzed, exceed the qualification requirements.
Conductivity element The conductivity cell was analyzed to withstand The safety function of the cell is passive; however, it must maintain seismic loads significantly greater than its structural integrity. Analysis indicates no resonances in any required. axis below 100 Hz and the ability to withstand loads more than fifteen times greater than required.
Condensing chamber This equipment is qualified by analysis to meet Stress analysis indicates that the condensing chamber meets the the Unit 2 seismic requirement applying the ASME requirements of the ASME Code and that the lowest calculated allowable Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III. moment reaction exceeds the maximum moment of any Unit 2 condensing chamber installation.
Chapter 03 3.10B-33 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.10B-1 (Sheet 3 of 4)
ESSENTIAL CLASS 1E ELECTRICAL COMPONENTS AND INSTRUMENTS SEISMIC QUALIFICATION TEST
SUMMARY
Equipment Method Results Local panels All panel qualification is by test of equivalent All panels were installed in an equivalent manner to those tested.
panels and devices. The applicable standard is Multifrequency, biaxial testing was performed by applying five OBE and IEEE-344-1975. two SSE level tests in each of three mutually perpendicular axes.
Functional performance and structural integrity were monitored throughout the test series. In instances where instruments were not tested on the panel, the response at the device location was determined by multiplying the RRS and ZPA by the amplification factor for that device location on the panel and comparing the result with individual instrument test data. Qualification of panels is assured since the TRS enveloped the TRS, and functional and structural requirements were met.
Control room panels The control room panels were qualified by test Control room panels and essential devices are seismically qualified to to the specified requirements IEEE-344-1975, the IEEE-344-1975 criteria by comparing these panels to similar panels except for the NUMAC PRNM system equipment that have been qualified by test. The control room panels are steel control panel (PNL608) which was qualified by a structures that can be compared to other seismically similar combination of analysis and testing. structures, and the instruments can be considered separately.
After the comparison panel is selected, the panel "g" fields are obtained by multiplying transmissibilities at each location by the ZPA in the respective axis.
If the tested panel is identical to the Unit 2 panel, then the panel is qualified using the panel test data rather than the "ZPA times transmissibility" method. In these cases, the TRS must envelope the RRS and electrical operability of devices must be verified.
Qualification by similarity of Class 1E mounted equipment when the tested panel is not identical to the Unit 2 panel is based on the current seismic capability of the device with the peak acceleration predicted at or near with the device's mounting location on a control room panel. The expected peak acceleration for the control room panel is obtained using the comparison panel transmissibility field.
In the case of the NUMAC PRNM panel assembly, its structure is qualified by finite element analysis that demonstrates that all member stresses are below material allowables. The bounding in-panel RRS are then generated using multisupport input motion and the applicable floor response spectra (FRS) input at the base of the panel. Its Class 1E mounted equipment are generically qualified by testing to the requirements of IEEE-344-1975. The tested equipment is either identical or similar to the equipment installed at Unit 2. The TRS used in the generic tests envelope the bounding in-panel RRS.
Chapter 03 3.10B-34 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.10B-1 (Sheet 4 of 4)
ESSENTIAL CLASS 1E ELECTRICAL COMPONENTS AND INSTRUMENTS SEISMIC QUALIFICATION TEST
SUMMARY
Unit 2 Ship Loose Temperature element 145C3224 A Pyco Temperature element 159C4520 P Rosemount Temperature element 133D9679 P Pyco Temperature element 117C3485 P California alloy Temperature switch 157C4629 P Weed Temperature indicator 169C8974 P Weed Differential pressure transmitter 163C1560 P Rosemount Pressure transmitter 188C7360 A Rosemount Level transmitter 188C4775 A Gould Level transmitter 145C3156 P Barton Level switch 184C4776 A Magnetrol Level switch 159C4361 P Magnetrol Pressure indicator 163C1184 P Robertshaw/Sycon DD188C8915 Insulated detectors 237X731 A GE IRM detector 112C3144 A GE Conductivity element 163C1544 P Balsbaugh Condensing chamber 204B7269 P GE Chapter 03 3.10B-35 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR TABLE 3.10B-2 (Sheet 1 of 1)
THIS TABLE HAS BEEN DELETED Chapter 03 3.10B-36 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR 3.11 ENVIRONMENTAL QUALIFICATION OF ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT Safety-related equipment and components are qualified to meet performance requirements under normal, abnormal, accident, and post-accident environmental conditions for the length of time they are required to function and to remain in a safe mode after their safety function is performed. The environmental conditions for those portions of the plant containing safety-related equipment have been established and are contained in the Environmental Qualification Program.
Environmental qualification for electrical equipment located in harsh environments is addressed in the Environmental Qualification Program. The Maintenance Program addresses equipment located in mild environments.
Equipment qualification documentation described herein, including the Environmental Qualification Program configuration bases documents, and including the Unit 2 Environmental Qualification Master List (EQML), is maintained as part of the Unit 2 Environmental Qualification Program. These documents are maintained separately from the FSAR and are not considered part of the FSAR.
3.11.1 Equipment Identification and Environmental Conditions Environmentally qualified electrical equipment includes all three categories of 10CFR50.49(b)(1).
A list of all environmentally qualified electrical equipment that is located in a harsh environment area is provided in the Unit 2 MEL.
Environmental conditions for the zones where the equipment is located have been established for normal, abnormal, and accident conditions. Environmental conditions are listed by zones, each zone defining a specific area in the plant. Environmental parameters include temperature, pressure, relative humidity, beta and gamma radiation dose, dose rate and neutron dose.
Where applicable, these parameters are given in terms of a time-based profile. A summary presentation of environmental conditions and qualified conditions for the environmentally qualified equipment located in a harsh environment zone is contained in the configuration bases documents.
3.11.2 Qualification Tests and Analyses Chapter 03 3.11-1 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR 3.11.2.1 Qualification Original environmentally qualified electrical equipment located in a harsh environment was qualified by test or other methods as described in IEEE-323 and permitted by 10CFR50.49(f)(1).
Equipment type test was the preferred method of qualification.
The methodology for the qualification of electrical equipment is contained in the Environmental Qualification Program.
The requirements of GDC 1, 4, 23, and 50 of Appendix A to 10CFR50 and Criterion III of Appendix B to 10CFR50 are met as outlined below:
GDC 1 of 10CFR50, Appendix A, requirements are achieved by incorporating performance, design, construction, and testing requirements into equipment specifications and by the establishment of a system of reviews to ensure conformance with these specified requirements. Appropriate auditable records are maintained in a permanent file.
Refer to Chapter 17 for a further definition of how Criterion III of Appendix B to 10CFR50 is met.
GDC 4 requirements are met for harsh environment equipment by designing and qualifying the equipment for satisfactory operation and proper safety function performance during normal, abnormal, test, and DBA environments.
The protection system meets GDC 23. FMEAs have been performed to prove that no single failure results in a loss of the capability of a system to perform its safety function. Both electrical and mechanical failures have been considered from causes such as loss of power supply, loss of control signal, and failures induced by normal, abnormal, accident, and seismic events. Harsh environment equipment has been environmentally qualified to preclude common mode failures.
GDC 50 requirements are achieved by analysis and testing of pressure boundary components to ensure containment integrity.
The recommendations provided in RGs 1.9, 1.30, 1.40, 1.63, 1.73, 1.89, and 1.131 have been utilized by including these recommendations in appropriate equipment specifications. A discussion of compliance with these regulatory guides is provided in Section 1.8.
Chapter 03 3.11-2 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR 3.11.2.2 Method of Qualification of Class 1E Equipment and Components The date of the construction permit Safety Evaluation Report for Unit 2 is prior to July 1, 1974; therefore, Unit 2, classified as a Category II plant under the guidance of NUREG-0588, July 1981, Interim Staff Position on Environmental Qualification of Safety-Related Electrical Equipment; and the environmental qualification of Class 1E equipment located in harsh environments, met or exceeded the requirements for Category II qualification in accordance with NUREG-0588, including the guidance provided for incorporation of IEEE-323. The environments for which Class 1E equipment must perform its safety function have been specified and used as the basis for environmental qualification.
The methodology and acceptance criteria are addressed in the Environmental Qualification Program.
3.11.3 Qualification Test Results The results of qualification tests for environmentally qualified equipment are maintained in an auditable file. A summary presentation of qualification test results for environmentally qualified electric equipment that is located in a harsh environment is contained in the configuration bases documents.
3.11.4 Loss of Heating, Ventilating, and Air Conditioning To ensure that loss of HVAC systems does not adversely affect the operability of safety-related controls and electrical equipment in buildings and areas served by safety-related HVAC systems, the HVAC systems serving these areas meet the single-failure criterion.
The HVAC systems and the respective sections where specific safety evaluation details may be found are as follows:
- 1. Main control room, relay room, standby switchgear rooms, and electrical tunnels (Section 9.4.1.3).
- 2. Reactor building and standby gas treatment filter rooms (Section 9.4.2).
- 3. Diesel generator building (Section 9.4.6.3).
- 4. Service water pump bays (Section 9.4.7.3).
Chapter 03 3.11-3 Rev. 25, October 2022
NMP Unit 2 USAR 3.11.5 Estimated Chemical and Radiation Environment 3.11.5.1 Chemical Environment The environmental parameters, including chemical environments, are included in the Environmental Qualification Program documents.
Sampling stations are provided for periodic analysis of reactor water, refueling and fuel storage pool water, and suppression pool water to assure compliance with operation limits of the plant Technical Specifications.
3.11.5.2 Radiation Environment Safety-related systems and components are designed to perform their safety-related function when exposed to normal operational radiation levels and accident radiation levels. The normal operational exposure is based on the radiation sources provided in Chapters 11 and 12.
Radiation sources associated with the DBA and developed in accordance with NUREG-0588 Revision 1 are provided in Chapter 15.
Integrated doses associated with normal plant operation and the DBA condition for various plant compartments have been established and included in the Environmental Qualification Program documents.
The qualification methodology for safety-related equipment is described in the Environmental Qualification Program.
3.11.6 Submergence The Environmental Qualification Program includes any safety-related equipment which may be submerged due to a LOCA.
3.11.7 References
- 1. Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations, Paragraph 50.49, Environmental Qualification of Electric Equipment Important to Safety for Nuclear Power Plants. Federal Register Vol.
48, No. 15, January 21, 1983.
Chapter 03 3.11-4 Rev. 25, October 2022
- 2. A. J. Szukiewicz, et al. Interim Staff Position on Environmental Qualification of Safety-Related Electrical Equipment, NUREG-0588, Revision 1, July 1981.
- 3. NRC Regulatory Guide 1.89, Environmental Qualification of Electrical Equipment Information to Safety for Nuclear Power Plants. Proposed Revision 1, November 1983.
- 4. NRC Regulatory Guide 1.7, Control of Combustible Gas Concentrations in Containment Following a Loss-of-Coolant Accident, Revision 2, November 1978.
- 5. NRC Regulatory Guide 1.97, Revision 3, Instrumentation for Light-Water-Cooled Nuclear Power Plants to Assess Plant and Environs Conditions During and Following an Accident.
- 6. IEEE-323-74, Qualifying Class I Electric Equipment for Nuclear Power Generating Stations.
Chapter 03 3.11-5 Rev. 25, October 2022