ST-HL-AE-2146, Forwards Addl Info Re Pneumatic Containment Purge & Vent Valve Operability,Supporting Util 850430,1030,860915 & 0929 Submittals.W/Six Oversize Drawings

Forwards Addl Info Re Pneumatic Containment Purge & Vent Valve Operability,Supporting Util 850430,1030,860915 & 0929 Submittals.W/Six Oversize Drawings

ML20215L032
Person / Time
Site:	South Texas
Issue date:	05/08/1987
From:	Wisenburg M HOUSTON LIGHTING & POWER CO.
To:	NRC OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATION & RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (ARM)
Shared Package
ML20215L035	List: ML20215L079 ML20215L099 ML20215L144 ML20266G817 ML20266G821 ML20266G824 ST-HL-AE-2146, Forwards Addl Info Re Pneumatic Containment Purge & Vent Valve Operability,Supporting Util 850430,1030,860915 & 0929 Submittals.W/Six Oversize Drawings
References
TASK-2.E.4.2, TASK-TM ST-HL-AE-2146, NUDOCS 8705120079
Download: ML20215L032 (10)

Text

P The Light m m P u y iiee,,emL,xs,,em&Pe<, P.o. ,,m ivoo ,,ee,,em. i.exm,27eo, <,is,22s.92,i May 8, 1987 ST-HL-AE-2146 File No.: G3.16, P4.01 10CFR50 U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Attention: Document Control Desk Washington, DC 20555 South Texas Project Units 1 and 2 Docket Nos. STN 50-498, STN 50-499 Additional Information Concerning Pneumatic Containment Purge and Vent Valve Operability

References:

(1) HL&P Letter to the NRC, M. R. Wisenburg to G. W. Knighton, April 30, 1985, ST-HL-AE-1245 (2) HL&P Letter to the NRC, M. R. Wisenburg to G. W. Knighton, October 30, 1985, ST-HL-AE-1467 (3) HL&P Letter to NRC, M. R. Wisenburg to V. S. Noonan, September 15, 1986, ST-HL-AE-1748 (4) HL&P Letter to NRC, M. R. Wisenburg to V. S. Noonan, September 29, 1986, ST-HL-AE-1761 On March 5, 1985 Houston Lighting & Power (HL&P) received a request for additional information regarding Containment Purge and Vent Valve Operability.

HL&P provided that information in Reference 1. As was stated in Reference 1, information was provided for those purge valves which are not sealed closed during operational conditions 1, 2, 3, and 4. This limited the scope to purge valves located in The Supplementary Containment Purge Subsystem (See FSAR, Section 9.5.4.2.7).

By letter dated October 30, 1985 (Reference 2) HL&P informed the NRC that the Supplementary Containment Purge Subsystem was being revised to incorporate a pneumatic quick closure fail closed valve on the cutboard side of both the intake ard exhaust penetrations (subsequently incorporated in FSAR Amendment 53). Attachment A provides information that updates the response in Reference 1 to reflect the pneumatic valves.

By letter dated September 15, 1986 (Reference 3) HL&P transmitted responses to an NRC request for additional information regarding TMI Item II.E.4.2 (6) Purge and Vent Valve Operability. However, as was stated in the L1/NRC/sa 8705120079 E70508 i PDR ADOCK 05000498 A PDR QD%

k\ {

r ST-HL-AE-2146 File No.: G3.16, P4.01 L llouston Lighting & Power Company Page 2

+

letter the valve on the outboard side of both the intake and exhaust penetrations were being revised to incorporate a pneumatic quick closure-fail closed valve. Attachment B provides information that updates the response in reference 3 to reflect the pneumatic valves.

In the 9/16/86 meeting with the NRC staff in preparation for the SQRT and PVORT audits HL&P was asked to submit the qualification test report when completed, Reference (4). This information is contained in Attachments D, E and F.

If you have any questions concerning this submittal, please contact Mr.

Michael E. Powell at (713) 993-1328. -

W M. R. Wis burg Manager, E gineeri and censing PT/yd Attachments:

A. Itemized Responses to the Request for Additional Information Regarding Containment Purge and Vent Valve Operability B. Itemized Responses to NRC Request for Additional Information Concerning TMI Item II.E.4.2(6) - Purge & Vent Valve Operability C. Operability Analysis and Tcat Report Purge Containment Isolation Valve (RMS #14926-4409-00270 VT)

D. STR 33186-1 Qualification Test Report on Valve & Actuator (RMS

1. 14926-4409-0280 VT)

E. Design Report No. 34753/52-48 (RMS #14926-4409-00282 VT)

F. 53640 Seismic Qual Test of One 18" Valve & Actuator (RMS #14926-4409-00281 VT)

Drawirgs

1. Valve Assembly Drawings RMS #14926-4409-00268VT & 00269VT

2. HVAC Rx containment Building, Plan, EL 68'-0" Area 13: 5-V-149-V-0088, Rev 9 and IDCN #2

3. HVAC Mech Auxiliary Bldg, Sections: 5-V-109-V-0445 Rev 6 and IDCN #4 Ll/NRC/sa

r.

<- ST-HL-AE-2146 1 No.: G3.16, P4.01 Ilousto'n Lighting & Power Company p, 4 HVAC Mech Auxiliary Bldg, Partial Plan EL 60'-0", Area 5:

5-V-10-9-V-0116, Rev 10 and IDCN #3

5. HVAC RCB-Dome Partial Plan & Sections, Supplementary Purge Exhaust-System: 8-V-14-9-V-0095, Rev 4 4

4 J

i 1

l L1/NRC/sa

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

ST-HL-AE-2146 File No.: G3.16, P4.01 Houston Lighting & Power Company Page 4 ss CC*

V i,l

= Regional Administrator, Region IV M.B. Lee /J.E. Malaski r Nuclear Regulatory Commission City of Austin

611 Ryan Plaza Drive, Suite 1000 P.O. Box 1088

. Arlington, TX 76011 Austin, TX 78767-8814

(*) N. Prasad Kadambi, Project Manager A. von Rosenberg/M.T. Hardt

.f U.S. Nuclear Regulatory; Commission City Public Service Board 7920 Norfolk Avenue P.O. Box 1771 s Bethesda,-MD. 20814 San Antonio, TX 78296

(*) Robert L. ' Perch, Project Manager Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 7920 Norfolk Avenue 1717 H Street '3 Bethesda, MD 20814 Washington, DC. 20555 O/

((

Dan R. Carpenter Senior Resident Inspector / Operations c/o U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission P.O. Box 910 Bay City, TX 77414- 4 6 p p Claude E. Johnson 1, Senior Resident Inspector / Construction ,8 c/o U.S. Nuclear Regulatory

• Commission 3 P.O. Box 910 Bay City, TX 77414-i M.D. Schwars, Jr. , Esquire Baker & Botts

)(

One Shell Plaza /

Houston, TX 77002 O

J.R. Newman, Esquire Newman & Holtzinger, P.C. t 1615 L Street, N.W.

Washington, DC 20036

i i

T.V. Shockley/R.L. Range Central Power & Light Company P. O. Box 2121 Corpus Christi, TX 78403 H

, (*) Attachments only - all others without attachments L1/NRC/sa Revised 2/3/87

4 j. 4 .

N - .,

i . . , ,*J lJ Att:chment A '

ST-HL-AE-2146-

~

\ --

5 1 File No.: C3.16, P4'.01.

I ,. Page 1 of 2 b, e i i 1 4s .

South Texas Project

-i 0 ,, Units 1 and 2 *

- Docket Nos. STN 50-498, STN 50-499 4

U/ '

Itemized Respo'nse to Request for Additional 1

Information Concerninx Containment Purge and Vent Valve Operability g

(, .

5 lA. Dynamic torque coefficient test results are shown in Figure 1'and Table 1 of Attachment C. The test setup'is..shown in Figure 5 of Attachment C.' #

1 MB.; Operability has been demonstrated by a combination of analysis and bench y' ;

+

g testing as reported in Attachment C, Appendix C. g!

f , t 1, l The ' stress analysis contained in Attachment C shows that the comporients critical to operability have a stress margin of at least 2 to 1. Seidaic

, loading has negligible, effect on the components analyzed in Attachment C, Appendix B. See also comment 1D. n 4 ,

l = Sealing integrity of the valve seat-disk is ensured by the environmental e qualification test.perforne'd on the valve seat. This test includes ',

thermal aging, mechanical aging, irradiation, and IDCA simulation with -

chemical spray. The environmental qualification test is being performed-on a valve of identical size and construction,asithe production valves.

The results of this test are reported in STR 33186-1 Qualification. Test-l Report on' Valve and actuator RMS #14926-4409-0280VT provided ad Attach-

, ment D. f,< .

i q t' 4 0' AC. Stress analysis of the valve and actuator, to show operability, is shown Y s 4 in .Table 3 and Appendix B of Attachment C. '

6 t(n 4 f S ID .' Seismic analysis and testin'5,is included in the valve Design Report RMS

1. 14926 - 4409-00271VT provided, as Attachment E. Note that the

=

environmental qualification test of the valve seat. includes.a static i~

!~

i. , operability test which, wh'11e aot intended specifically to demonstrate '

s

. . operability of the valcre, does' demonstrate the inte'grity of the I-

N, seat-disk seal under seismic loads.

5 /

< 1 , ,

1E. ' Refer to assembly drawings A34753.-48 and Sheets 1 & 2 (RMS #14926-4409- <

00268VT & 00269VT) which are arcached for:

i l

1. Flow direction - normal purge and accident  ;

's .

, 2. Disk closure direction is clockwise viewed from the actuator end of the valve shaft. i

% ' , '),

• ,,' ~s

3. Curved side of disk'i,s away from containment s

i 3

.. 4. The piping arrangement can beineen in, drawings number 5-V-149-V0088 Rev. 9 and 5-V-109V-0445 Rev. 6 which are attached. ,

(.

,[ s 'y t V f;

( ,

! . I c

j i L1/NRC/sa 4

'4 1 y (

Q?t- <>

, :k.

Attachment A ST HL-AE-2146 File No.: C3.16, P4.01 Page 2 of 2

5. Valve shaft is oriented horizontal with actuator mounted on side of valve

6. The distance between the valves can be found on Drawing 5-V-149-0088 Rev 9 1F. The torque tests reported in Attachment C demonstrate that the actuator produces sufficient torque to operate the valve. See Attachment C, Figure 7.

2A. There are no air-operated purge valves located inside the containment

28. The valves do not use accumulators.

2C. Seal pressurization is not used nor required for the valves in question.

2D. Not applicable, question for motor operated valves; this response is for air operated valves.

2h. Not applicable: the actuator used on these valves does not provide for hand wheel operation.

2F. Not applicable, question for motor operated valves; this response is for air operated valves.

3. The torque coefficients were determined by test. Piping did not simulate field installation. However, the ratio of actuator torque to required torque is sufficient to overcome twice the dynamic torque even in the event that piping effects cause the dynamic torque to reverse direction.

4. In-situ tests are not applicable

5. The closure time assumed in the analysis is 10-seconds. This is longer than the actual closure times reported in the operational tests (see test report RMS #14926-4409-00281 VT provided as Attachment F).

These values are to be periodically tested per the technical specifications L1/NRC/sa

Attrchment-B ST-HL-AE-2146 ~

File No.: G3.16, P4.01 Page 1 of 3 South Texas Project Units 1 and 2 Docket Nos. STN 50-498, STN 50-499 Itemized Response to Request for Additional Information Concerning TMI ITEM II.E.4.2(6) - Purge & Vent Valve Operability

1. Clarify piping layout for valves 18-HA-1003-WA2 and 18-HA-1004-WA3, showing piping elements within 20 pipe diameters upstream or downstream of the purge valves, purge valve supports, and valve disk profile.

Response

As was stated in Reference 3 Drawing numbers 8V149V0095, 5149V0088, SV109V0445, and SV109V0116 attached provide the layout of the ducting in the vicinity of the purge valves. A non-proprietary drawing of the pneumatic valve disc profile is shown in the Design Report, Attachment E.

t

2. FSAR Section 9.4.5.2.7-(and 32) and Acceptance Review Question 022.5 do

not clearly describe operation of the Supplementary Purge valves.

a) Describe the flow path through the Supplementary Purge and supply lines.

Describe the worst configuration for which the valves are qualified to operate.

Response

The response to Question 1 describes the flow path through the Supplementary Purge and supply valves. The purge valves are designed to close against the maximum post accident differential pressure across each valve (the calculated maximum containment pressure is 37.5 psig; however, the valve is, as noted in Attachment C, required to be able to close against a differential pressure of 48.4 psig. Thus the valves are capable of operating and providing containment isolation under the worst case DBA conditions, b) Clarify that the submittal demonstrates closure of the valves from the fully open position (90 degrees).

Response

Analysis has been performed to determine the expected dynamic torque as a function of disc position from 0 to 100% open. Operability tests were performed to verify the dynamic, frictional, and seating torque, and to verify that the actuator would produce the torque required to operate the valve, including a 2-1 margin. Attachment C, Table 1 and Figure 3 demonstrate that tests do cover closure of the valves from the fully open position (90 degrees).

Ll/NRC/sa

Attachment B ST-HL-AE-2146 File No.: G3.16, P4.01 Page 2 of 3 3(a) The discussion of hydrodynamic torques in Attachment C does not address the flow effects of. elbows or tees on valve closing torque. Discuss or describe operability of the valves under these conditions and the basis for any conclusions.

Response

See response to question 3 in Attachment A.

3(b) The hydrodynamic torque calculated in ST-HL-AE-1245 Attachment C considered only incompressible flow. The applicant should justify that the Supplementary Purge valves will see only incompressible flow during the accident scenario or provide a basis for applying torque valves for incompressible flow to compressible flow.

Response

, See paragraph titled " Dynamic Torque Prediction in Appendix C of this transmittal.

4. Provide the torque valves versus valve opening angle for the limitorque actuators in tabular or graph form and compare these with the torque i valves with the maximum torque required to operate the valves.

Response

l Actuator torque and required torque to close the valve versus valve opening angle are contained in the Operability Analysis and Test Report, Attachment C, Figure 7.

5. The Rockwell letter dated October 4, 1983 states that the Wyle Test Report 45116-2 did not consider five OBES and one SSE events provide i

justification that this seismic requirement hae been satisfied.

Response

Seismic qualification for the pneumatic valves includes an SSE preceded by Sine sweep testing to simulate aging associated with five OBE's as documented in Report 53640, Attachment F.

Ll/NRC/sa L

-Attachment B~

!~

ST-HL-AE-2146 File No.: G3.16, P4.01 Page 3 of'3

6. Identify the breakaway torque as well as the torque coefficients (ka and kd mentioned in-[ST-HL-AE-1245] Attachment C. Describe the use of those parameters-in the calculation of total shaft torque required-to operate the butterfly valves.

Response

Dynamic torque prediction of the air operated purge valves is contained in Attachment C and uses as a reference - Floyd P. Harthum, ' Effects of Fluid Compressibility on Torque in Butterfly Valves; ISA Transactions Vol. 8, No. 4, p. 281.

7. - FSAR Figure 6.2.4-1, 7.3-16 and 9.4.5-3 indicate that ESF Trains "B" and "A" will be used for valves HA-003 and 006, respectively. However, FSAR Table '7.3-9 indicates that ESF Train "C" will be used for both valves.

Response

As was stated in Ref 1, this inconsistency in Table 7.3-9 has been corrected in Amendment 53 of the FSAR.

8. Acceptance Review Question 022.5 indicates that DEHLG, DECLE, and DEPLC were.found to be the limiting accidents for LOCA pipe breaks. Indicate the margin between the maximum stress and the allowable stress for design conditions used to qualify the valves and the worst' case values calculated for this accident scenario.

Response

Attachment C provides the requested information. Note that as stated in the response to question 2A the valve is designed to be able to close against a differential pressured of 48.4 psig rather than the maximum calculated value of containment pressure of 37.5 psig, i

9. Appendix C [ST-HL-AE-1245) indicates an extrapolation method was used to calculate the flow dynamic torque for the 18" valve.

(a) Describe how Figure 3 in Appendix B and the equation appearing in Figure 3 were used to calculate T f r the 14" valve.

D i

(b) Describe how the flow dynamic torque value of 15,000 in-lb was calculated and used in the static deflection tests of the 18" valve (Attachment D, Appendix D, DR-65407-32 page 9 and PS-3-2.10, Item 4(3), page 4).

Response

Not applicable - specific questions to previous submittals.

Ll/NRC/sa

r~ c EIST218UTION T3: FOM. CEVIE2 IN F@.

• MECHANICAL e SAL AndCE OF PLANT 4 SOILE R/NSS$

PLANT UTILITIES e PL ANY DESIGN /

e CONTROL SYSTE

• E LECTRICAL , .

WIRING CONDuff

. uOs  ;

e P AiNTiNG & COATINGS

• CIVIL /ST RUCTU RAL

1. NUCLE AR eSTRESS e ARCHITECTUR AL oSTARTuP O CONSTRUCTION

• NOT REO D BY ENG AG OpptCEissuED ,,m,,, l N0 ,oE.1,,*i O1,rt,o,rN,,ooCo...,

WF0 gg\03 OW wt5s/1-ss ceee Auws's g 9926 Ae mT har tfw.e co.m 2%ou. vuQ

$ h g-S t5 7 18869-

\ q q 2G- LlQOQ - $278~h VI Sechsel Log No.

l492b- g4o9- oo274-oVT IMPORTANT a e o, oval d age s, s'al's $$oNU, sNted by Yb L""Cif.".f,5.,".*e'!!s'i.

oWegehone

?.'tlll%

CEIVED ~) M fJ

~' / '"

C ENT STATUS i WORK M AY PROCE E D. dew RE VISE AND RESUBMIT.

8YN d

2 WORK M AY PROCEED SuSJECT TO INCORPO g'gg'gyg g RATION OF CH ANGES iN DIC A T E D.

ENERM 30 atvisE ANo aEsusu'T coar.

WORK M AY NOT PROCE E D 40 aEvita NOT aEOuiREo WORK M AY PROCEED O ossTRieutiON aEO o M098012 iM6; j