ML20216A839
| ML20216A839 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | McGuire, Mcguire  |
| Issue date: | 04/03/1998 |
| From: | Barron H DUKE POWER CO. |
| To: | NRC OFFICE OF INFORMATION RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (IRM) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20216A845 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9804130303 | |
| Download: ML20216A839 (22) | |
Text
m. ,
f, 5"4 Duke Power Company
.- . A v ar Eney camp y sGu Nuckar krnon l une-sr c m g9g 12700 Hager Ferry Rd.
Huntersville, NC 280 '8-9340 l H. B. Barron Vice President. McGuire (704) 875-4800 omct Nuclear Generation Departmens (704) 875-4809ax April 3,1998 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commisuun ATTN: Document Control Desk Washington, D.C.
20555
Subject:
McGuire Nuclear Station Docket Numbers 50-369,50-370 Request for Additional Information Grinnell Hydrat lic Snubbers Attached is a response to Requests for Additional Information (RAls) associated with Grinnell Snubbers at McGuire Nuclear Station. This response addresses questions in RAls of June 16,1997 and October 30, 1997. In addition, answers are provided to staff questions from a public meeting with Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Staff on February 4,1998.
There are no regulatory commitments in this correspondence. Please contact Mike Cash (7N) 875-4117 for questions regarding this information.
l H.B. Barron Vice President McGuire Nuclear Station Duke Energy Corporation I
cc: /
L.A. Reyes S.M. Shaffer Regional Administrator Senior Resident Inspector
[N/
/
Regica 11 McGuire Nuclear Station Nuclear Regulatory Commission Nuclear Regulatory Commission F.R. Rinaldi Project Manager U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Mail Stop 14H25 Washington, D.C. 20555 9864130303 980403 PI# ADOCK 05000369 P pop a
c p
bec:
M.S. Kitlan Catawba Nuclear Station J.E. Burchfield Oconee Nuclear Station L.A. Keller Nuclear Regulatory Affairs P.R. Newton Legal P.L Stiles McGuire Nuclear Station
p NRC Questions regarding Snubbers contained in RAl's dated June 16,1997 and October 30,1997 and Duke Responses with cited Supporting References Question 1 Duke Power has not adequately demonstrated the capability of these snubbers to perform their safety functions under the accident environments either by a qualification test or suitable analysis.
NRC Reference RAI I 2nd Paragraph 6th sentence Duke Response A hydraulic snubber is designed to " hydraulically lock" instantaneously when rapidly subjected to high dynamic loads. Loads associated with a steam line break are greatly attenuated with respect to the hydraulic snubbers which are located in lower containment. However, there are hydraulic snubbers located on the main feedwater s ystem th at will " hydraulically lock" seconds into a MSLB transient. During this time period the snubberi bydraulic fluid, lexan reservoir and seal integrity is important for proper operation.
The hydraulic fluid can on?y travel through the flow ports at a limiting vek> city, this limiting velocity causes the snubber to "h>ck" in o position. This occurs with the snubber materials at essentially the pre-accident temperature condition of containment ambient.
Following the " lock up" the hydraulic snubber allows slow movement of the piping systems by allowing a slow movement of hydraulic fluid through the flow ports. During this time period the temperature of the snubber materials are increasing in temperature in response to the MSLB. During this portion of the accident sequence the structural integrity is important because the snubber is only acting as a piping support. Seals failure or other means of hydraulic fluid leakage have no effect on this restraint function.
The structural integrity of the snubber body is relevant to this function. The Grinnell Load Capacity Data Sheets (L,CDS) demonstrates that snubber structural integrity is adequate to 350 le Grinnell analytically determines the acceptable temperature for structural integrity. In addition, testing recently performed (Grinnell PE-9778-1) demonstrates that the seals do not leak when subjected to a temperature transient which bounds the McGuire MSLB profile. Therefore, the question of hydraulic fluid leakage is not a consideration during a MSLB at McGuire.
Temperature Transient During MSLB The steam line break transient is described in detail in the UFSAR section 6.2.1.4.1 " Pipe Break Blowndown Spectra and Assumptions". This section describes a series of steam line breaks that were analyzed to determine the most severe break condition for containment temperature and pressure response.
In addition UFSAR section 6.2.1.4.2 " Break Flow Calculations" describes some on the original Westinghouse temperature and pressure transient modeling assumptions used in generating the currently displayed figwes in the UFSAR.
The review of the qualification requirements and operability of the Grinnell snubbers used updated analytical techniques. This methodology is described in detail in the Duke Energy Corporation Topical Report DPC NE-3004 " Mass and Energy Release and Containmer.t Response Methodology" This topical uses three dimensional modeling of lower containment using the GOTHIC computer code. The thermal-hydraulic metix>dology is described in detail in the Duke Energy Corporation Topical Report DPC-NE-1
j .'
i '.
3000. This methodology uses the RETRAN computer code for detailed modeling of the reactor coolant system in response to a steam line break. These methodologies are included in the current licensing basis for McGuire Nuclear Station. Each method has been approved by the NRC as detailed in associated Safety Evaluation Reports.
The evaluation of a main steam line break temperature profile in lower containment is presented in the figure in Attachment 4. This figure represents the current design basis calculation for McGuire as l documented in Duke Calculations. The initial condition of lower containment temperature for the transient is assumed to be 135 F This temperature bounds the McGuire Technical Specification 3.6.1.5
" Containment Systems Air Temperature" which currently specifies a maximum constant temperature of 125 9.
Following a steam line break the lower containment temperature begins to rapidly increase to approximately 300 9 for the limiting break size. The peak temperature occurs approximately 10 seconds following the initiation of the eccident. The cooling effect of the ice condenser rapidly reverses the temperature transient l returning the temperature to below 260 9 within approximately 25 seconds. The lower containment l temperature approaches a near constant temperature of approximately 240 F approximately 100 seconds after the initiation of the accident.
The time deperdent temperature behavior described above represents the limiting temperature qualification for the Grinnell snubbers. This temperature envelope is referred to as 350 Ffor MSLB in procurement documents. The description of the calculation methodologies and the containment behavior to a steam line break is described in a UFSAR change package that is currently in process for a routine update as per 10 CFR 50.71. l MSLB Loading Transient effects on Grinnell liydraulie Snubbers The MSLB containment response analysis is documented in calculation DPC-1552.08-00-0166, "FSAR Section 6.2.1.4 Steam Line Break Containment Response." The methodology is described in approved Topical DPC-NE-3004-PA, Mass and Energy Release and Containment Response Methodology. The break dynamic event occurs in less than two- hundredths of a second at which point the snubber
" activates." Activation is the point at which the snubber has ceased acting as a dynamic restraint and begins to act as a support. During this time the snubber must maintain structural integrity and allow for slow thermal growth of pipmg systems. The Mainsteam and Feedwater isolation valves receive signals to close following a MSLB. The valves must close in less than ten seconds (reference valve testing and acceptance c.'.teria on drawings MCTC-1593-SM.V001-01 and MCTC-1591-CF.V002-01). Snubbers on these systems will experience a dynamic load during closure of these valves.
The MSLB break location is at the terminal end of the Main Steam piping at the top of the Steam Generator. The break loads are primarily restrained by the Steam Generator support structures. This is documented in calculation MCC-1,17.03-00-0025, " Steam Generator Upper Lateral Support Rings for B&W Generators" The support structure consists of large structural elements within the steam generator enclosures.
The loads applied to the hydraulic snubbers during a MSLB are a result of the translational movement of the steam generator and the attached piping following the pipe break. There are massive structural rupture restraints are designed to take the restrain components under the large rupture loads following the pipe break . The hydraulic snubbers are not an element of thic o straint system.
l-Slow thermal growth of piping systems Engineering judgment of Grinnell and Duke is that there are no credible mechanisms for thermal locking (in the temperature ranges associated with post accident conditions) that would prevent snubbers from allowing 2
I e
,e s
slow temperature induced piping system movement. Operating experience with snubbers at nuclear and fossil units where snubbers have operated at elevated temperature or lost hydraulic fluid supports this engineering judgment.
A test was conducted by Grinnell that validates the engineering judgment on this point. The Grinnell report PE-9778-1, "Grinnell Hydraulic Snubber Freedom of Motion Test Under McGuire Nuclear Station MSLB Accident Temperature Condition" describes the test. The test consisted of an overnight hot soak at 120 9 followed by ten minutes in an oven at 350 9. The snubber was then removed from the oven and was hand stroked demonstrating freedom of movement. No hydraulic fluid leaks occurred and there was only a slight distortion of the hydraulic reservoir. Grinnell also performed a similarity analysis for other snubber bore sizes from 11/2 to 6 inches reaching the conclusion that thermal movement with no interference would be allowed up to 350 9 for similar snubber models.
Duke made revision 8 to MCS-1144.30-00-0001, Design Specification for Pipe Supports and Restraints, dated March 26,1997. This is the controlling requirement document for pipe support design. This document reflects the design requirement that snubbers allow thermal movement during post accident conditions.
References:
UFSAR section 6.2.1.4.1 Grinnell LCDS UFSAR section 6.2.1.4.2 Topical Report DPC NE-3004 Topical Report DPC-NE-3000 Tech Specification 3.6.1.5 Calculation DPC-1552.08-00-0166 MCTC-1593-SM.V001-01 MCTC-1591-CF.V002-01 MCC-I l l7.03-00-0025 MCS-I l44.30-00-0001 Grinnell report PE-9778-1 Question 2 Duke Power is requested to demonstrate how these Grinnell Hydraulic Snubbers comply with the pertinent licensing basis and the GDC requirements for design and qualification for the concurrent loadings (as well as the associated environmental conditions associated with a SSE and postulated pipe ruptures).
Response
The break location is at the terminal end of the Main Steam piping at the top of the Steam Generator. The break loads are for the most part, restrained by the Steam Generator support structures. This is documented in calculation MCC-Ill7.03-00-0025, " Steam Generator Upper Lateral Support Rings for B&W Generators" There are three Grinnell hydraulic snubbers in each of Unit l's Steam Generator compartments (there are none in Unit 2); one each on the 16" Feedwater , 2" Steam Generator Blowdown, and 4" Auxiliary Feedwater piping.. The stress analysis calculations detail the load combinations for these snubbers. The design basis calculations are consistent with FSAR Tables 3-49 and 3-50. The calculations assume a conservatise simultaneous combination of pipe rupture loads and SSE earthquake loads.
A detailed discussion of the containment temperature behavior is provided in the response to question 1. In addition, the snubbers dynamic restraint function is described in that same section. Grinnell has demonstrated overall structural strength of the snubber at temperatures up to 350 9. Grinnell analytically determines the acceptable temperature for structural integrity. This is documented in the LCDS described in response 1.
References MCC-1117.03-00-0025 FSAR Tables 3-49 and 3-50 3
l I .. . . . . .
I l
- e Question 3 It is not clear how Duke Power justi6es the time lag between the peak pipe rupture dynamic load transient l and the peak temperature transient. Duke is requested to provide a detailed comparison of these two transients. ;
Response
The break dynamic event occurs in less than two- hundredths of a second at which point the snubber
" activates". Activation is the point at which the snubber has ceased acting ts a dynamic restraint and begins to act as a support. Therefore, the snubber relies on the integrity of the hydraulic fluid dynamic restraint for less than one second following a MSLB.
Following a steam line break the lower containment temperature begins to rapidly increase to approximately 300 F for the limiting break size. The peak ternperature occurs approximately 10 seconds following the initiation of the accident. The cooling effect of the ice condenser rapidly reverses the temperature transient returning the temperature to below 260 F" within approximatcly 25 seconds. The lower containment temperature approaches a near constant temperature of approximately 240 F" approximately 100 seconds after the initiation of the accident.
Therefore, the temperature transient and relatively slow heat up of the snubber occurs well after the time the hydraulic fluid is needed to perform its dynamic restraint design basis function.
References Topical Report DPC NE-3004 Technical Specification 3.6.1.5 Calculation DPC-1552.08-00-0166 Question 4 Operability Assessment- It is not clear how these snubbers will be able to perform their design safety functions (1) restrain the pipe for dynamic loading and (2) allow for free thermal movement of the pipe.
Duke is requested to demonstrate the functionality of these snubbers under the postulated accident environmental conditions.
NRC Reference RAI 1, item 2 2nd Paragraph
Response
The reasoning to establish Operability is adequately addressed in the response to Question 1,2,3.
Question 5 How do all safety related snubbers at McGuire comply with General Design Criteria 4?
NRC Reference RAI 2, item 1 Paragraph 2 last sentence
Response
General Design Criteria 4 specifies requirements to demonstrate environmental and dynamic effects design basis. The description provided in response to question 1 adequately addressed the reasoning to support conformance with this criteria.
1 i
4
Question 6 l Therefore, how do all safety related snubbers at McGuire comply with 10 CFR 50 Appendix B, Criterion l l XVil?
l l NRC Reference .
RAI 2, item 2,2nd paragraph and last sentence
! Rqmw The hydraulic snubbers have been evaluated in accordance with the Appendix B Criteria XVI " Corrective Action Program". As a result of this corrective action the procurement documents were revised, operability ,
i of installed snubber's was verified and snubbers in conformance with new procurement document were I delivered to McGuire for installation as part of the steam generator replacement. Documemation required under 10 CFR 50 Appendix B Criterion XVII is available.
References I
McGuire PIP 0-M%2408 - MCS-1206.00-04-0003 MCS-1144.30-00-0001 l Question 7 i How do remaining safety related snubbers (inside containment) that are currently installed at McGuire j
! differ from those that were installed for the SG replacement project j NRC Reference !
RAI 2, Item 3. 2nd paragraph first sentence l
Response
There are no significant differences in hydraulic snubbers previously installed at McGuire and the hydraulic snubbers received for the steam generator replacement project. I Reference i MCS-1206.00-(M-0003 Question 8 What are the temperature and radiation limits on the purchase specifications for the remaining installed safety related snubbers?
NRC Reference
. RAI 2. Item 3,2nd paragraph second sentence
Response
All of the hydraulic snubbers meet the revised mquirements of:
350 F" for MSLB 250 I* for LOCA 3 x 10' rads for 40 years l
l References MCS-1206.00-04-0003 McGuire PIP 0-M96-2408 Grinnell LCDS 1 5
I l
Question 9 l Do these remaining snubbers meet their purchase specifications?
NRC Reference RAI 2, item 3,2nd paragraph third sentence
Response
Yes, snubbery that were previously installed were evaluated for operability and the same procurement specification would be applicable to all of the hydraulic snubbers.
References MCS-1206.00-04-0003 McGuire PIP 0-M96-2408 Grinnell LCDS l-Question 10 Are there any qualifying data to demonstrate the environmental qualifications for the remaining snubbers?
NRC Reference RAI 2, Item 3,2nd paragraph fourth sentence
Response
Yes, testing and analysis as performed by Grinnell and previously existing information is relevant to all '
References MCS-1206 00-04-0003 McGuire PIP 0-M96-2408 Grinnell LCDS Question 11 Do the as installed specifications for the remaining safety related snubbets differ from the design basis )
l documents?
l Response No, all design basis documents weie revised to include the specification requirements as necessary.
l References ,
l MCS-1206.00-Ot-0003 McGuire PIP 0-M96-2408 l
, Grinnell LCDS Question 12 If so, was a 10 CFR 50.59 Evaluation performed tojustify the change to the design basis? i NRC Reference RAI 2, Item 3,2nd paragraph sixth sentence
Response
A 50.59 evaluation was performed as part of the corrective action process to revise the procurement specirication during the initial corrective actions taken by Duke.
Reference McGuire PIP 0-M96-2408 6
I Question 13 Do the purchase requirements for the snubbers purchased in 1996 differ from the requirements used for those remaining snubbers inside containment.- (if yes provide the basis why different EQ requirements are used)
NRC Reference RAI 2, item 3,2nd paragraph seventh sentence I
Response
No, this is addressed in 10 and 11 above.
Question 14 it is not clear how the licensee justifies the time lag between the pipe rupture dynamic load transient and the peak temperature transient. Provide a detailed comparison of these two transients?
NRC Reference RAI 2, item 4 last two sentences
Response
This is described in number 3 above Question 15 The licensee is requested to provide an explanation of testing the 1978 snubbers in lieu of the affected snubbers that were purchased in August 1996?
' NRC Reference RAI 2. Item 5,last sentence
Response
The snubber design is the same therefore the testing is appropriate. In addition, the Grinnell testing report presents a similarity analysis to describe any small dimensional differences in snubber models.
References MCS 1206.00-04-0003 Grinnell report PE-9778 Question 16 Explain in detail how the test conditions explained in the Grinnell test report simulate the postulated MSLB at McGuire. The explanation should include the time the snubber is required to operate for the dynamic load transient and for the associated temperature transient.
NRC Reference RAI 2, item 6 Response . _ .
Number 3 and 5 above provide a detailed explanation of the temperature environment that a snubber is exposed to following a MSLB. The temperature increases to approximately 300 IP in approx'imately 10 seconds and then returns back to approximately 240 F in 100 seconds. The Grinnell test involved a 120 If 7
"O overnight temperature soak followed immediately by exposure to 350 F for ten minutes. The snubber was
' then stroked by hand. The Grinnell test temperature profile is far more limiting than the calculated MSLB temperature environment.
The snubber dynamic loading cccurs in less than one second. This time frame is insignificant with respect to the time frames needed for the snubber materials to heat up following a MSLB.
f Question 17 Provide details to justify that snubbers are designed by acceptable engineering methods to be compatible with post accident environmental conditions l NRC Reference RAI 2, Jtem 7 First Paragraph
Response
Specific technical reasoning is provided in responses to questions 1,2 and 3 above. The response to questions 21,22 below provides some of the relevant documentation.
Question 18 Note any damage or leaks that occurred during testing the snubbers by Grinnell NRC Reference l RAI 2, Item 7,2nd paragraph
Response
l No damage was noted to the seals, there was no fluid leakage there was slight distortion of the lexan l reservoir.
1 Reference Grinnell report PE-9778 I l
Question 19 Based on Grinnelfs statements in August 23,1996 letter explain why observed damage would not affect snubbers functionality of restraining pipe movement during a seismic event and the consequential effect on operability?
NRC Reference RAI 2, Item 7,3rd paragraph
Response
The statement in the August 23,1996 was in reference to questions regarding the lexan reservoir on initial discovery of concerns with the qualification requirements specified by Duke. The noted distortion and fluid leakage assumed sustained exposure of the lexan reservoirs to high temperatures. Grinnell has shown analytically that the snubber is structurally . und up to a temperature of 350 9.
In followup to this issue Duke addressed the qualification problem using the corrective action program.
The solution chosen was a revision to the specification that required conformance to the temperatures expected following a MSLB. In addition, snubber testing has demonstrated that the lexan reservoir does not failin response to a MSLB.
Referenee Grinnell LCDS and supporting analysis 8
l l
l s
{
1 Question 20 l Provide a qualification package from Grinnell that supports the Certificate of Compliance issued with the
! lexan snubbers delivered following the identification of the qualification issue?
l .NRC Reference Feb 4 Public Meeting
Response
The requested information is included as attachment 3 to this response.
l l
Question 21 i
Provide more details summarizing the similarity and differences between the tested snubbers and the currently installed snubbers. Characterize why the differences do not invalidate the testing results for the l
installed snubbers NRC Reference Feb4 Public Meeting
Response
l Attachment I provides detailed physical descriptions of snubbers. Grinnell states the physical design has changed little since the initial purchases for McGuire in 1978 and the snubbers used in the test are representative of the design recently purchased. Duke believes the tested snubbers represent the population at McGuire.
Question 22 Describe heat transfer calculations (thermal lag) performed for the snubbers to calculate the effects of the MSLB on the snubber components.
NRC Reference Feb4 Public Meeting Response i The mass of the snubber bodies is detailed in the Attachment I, page 8. Attachment 2 describes a finite f element analysis and a qualitative analysis for thermal tag of electrical components. The snubbers have a l higher mass and as such will increase in temperature less than the results described for the subject electrical components (given relatively similar specific heats and geometry). The results described in attachment 2 although not performed for the snubbers would be conservative with respect to the snubbers.
The Grinnell test included temperature measurements taken on the rod bushing during the exposure to the 350 F" environment. The report states that the nxi bushing temperature did not exceed 224 F wh;le exposed to an oven temperature of 350 F for ten minutes.
l I
l 9
1 i
8 e 4 9
6 4
ATTACHMENT 1 ,
i 1
1 I
l
3 . _ .~. -_;. ., . . . ._. . .:. .-. . .: .- .:. = _ ._ . . ; : ~ - , ~ _
- ~
A7 tac 4(Meegy 1, QA C0<n' ' - e...
,, 2 / ...a . ..
APPENDIX B
~
- SPEC. NO. MCS-1144.30-00-0001
^ '
~l.T.T. GRINNELL' 7.[, ' .: ~ 1.. . .
P'.PE MANGER DIVIS1
/
.i A.S.M.E. SECT 10N 111 .
yV $UBSECTION NF gf r . . .. ,
. h LOAD CAPACITY DATA SHEETS
- " *7"
~{!i
- - g "- ""-) -
~
- 1. GENERAL INFORMATION SUPPORT NAME
- FIG. 200N & FIG. 20lN BYDRAULIC SHOCK AND SWAY JUPPRESSOR i
SUPPCRT TYPE : C2UC!E':7 STANDARD l CCCE CLAS51FICATl0N sCLASS 1.2.3.MC CESIGN PROCEDURES EALYSIS l DE31GN TEMPERATURE G50T(See Sec. 4)
SEE PAGg 2-4 l OtMENS1CN AL DATA SEE PAGE 7 - 8 "
MATERIAL DATA LOAD RATINGS 8 SEE PAGE 5-6 l SERVICE LIMITS : LEVELS A.B.CI ..
- 2. CERTIFICATION DATE: DATE*
DESIGNED BY
. g4 , -
-n-n %J CHECKED BY *W PROFES$10NAL ENGINEER CERTIFICATICM slaht !
\
, LOCATION OF STRESS REPORT AND . '
u g -- DESIGN SPECIFICATION . .
- RESEARCH , DEVELOPMENT AND EN- .
p'r
- GlNEERING , PIPE HANGER DIVISION, RDBERT B. HULCAHEY f.,
- y .
PROVIDENCE , R.1.
e THE LOAD CAPACITY OF THIS COM- -
PONENT SUPPORT IS RATED IN O'
- g"1%3404 .
wiz 0 ACCORDANCE WITH THE REQUIRE- ,
oB.4W*a 6 -l )
W NENTS OF A.S.M.E. S. & P.V. CODE, SECTION til , SUESECTIONS N.C.A.
O > < ,* lz k AND e -4d.N.F. AND ITT GRINNELL DE- Renss7tato d 8>Nwg WI StGN SPECIFICATION PE 188-1 aa #
Paterts:it::w, con:cca
- < u ; f.
> *wI*8 5 REPORT No. 200 -
1 3. REVISION {
o Ql' , z <
- m%p
,) as ojpgM Ag{oE l i LO 4'RT. RECERTIFICATION DATEl
,,,,,7 0.
, RCV. NC. MEV. NO. ACO EN O A R EV. NO. m t ";*,gg u REY. No.
- 12 1 3 l 1 llC77. W'77l 16 IM O3 l68 b '
ga l
- i m n- I L i l~
4d ** u o m j **- l { l oha e6sTn6L DATE { l I I MUmE I _ m ~,
I I 1 1 I du i l l
.l l d y ,
nuxe powtn COMPApY otsici4 yeu.way a l
l l
l I
l I _i l
li l I I _
II O ( W O W \t-P
,w m, 1 9 O. A . (I) 0 - DILI. $ 14
=
_- . .__ ._ i
..--.u. -
.' ..e. ..,.,:. ~
_ . :. . a u : . - - J. . *. . ~:.: : . ~ > .au , :..
Page 2
. . .. .. .. . . . . , . .. -.a_
- n. . . . .s . . -
. . - APPENDIX B SPEC. NO. MCS-1144.30-00-0001 p ggg
__.. - P1PE 14 ANGER . DIVI! '
ASME SECTION 111 . . . . . .
~ 2. v. . . c. . _ . j.2 ..; ,
SUBSECTION NF
'y.T f..
- 4. COMPONENT SUPPORT INFORMATION
. ITEM MATERIAL SPECIFICATION ITEM TYPE
- 1. Rear 3 racket Base Place SA-30 or SA-515 Gr. 65 or 70 Plate & Shell I Linear
- 2. Rear Bracket Lugs SA-36 or SA-315 Cr. 65 or 70 a
- 3. Rear Bracket Fin SA-193 Gr. B 7 Linear
. . )
- 4. Fivot Lug SA-36 or SA-515 Gr. 65 or 70 Linear
- 5. Fivet Lug Base Plate SA-36 or SA-515 Gr. 65 or 70 Flate & Shell
. 6. Cylinder Cap * *
- ASM 'A 108 Gr. 1018* Plate & Shell "hl .
[g .
- Plate & Shell 8(') ,,
- 7. Cylinder narrel ASM A 519 Gr. 1018 CU*
- 8. Tie Rods ASE A-193 Gr. 3 7 Linear
- 9. Tie Rod lluts ASM A 194 Gr. 7 Linear
. . .t ASM A 108'Cr. 1018* Liosar !
{ ,T).'Fiscon (1 1/2 - 6")
- * - 'l
- a. .C
- 3J hk U .4
- 1. Piston (8")
ASM A&34 Class BC** Linear 30 s5g
- Linear
- 12. Piston Rod SA-564 CL 630 so 5 - Si-5i5 cr. 65 or 70 SA-182 Gr. F22, SA-36 Linear
"' @ 13. Cylinder Rod Eye*
O
- 14. Pipe Clamp *** ,- SA-36 or SA-315 Cr. 65 or 70 Lionar SA-307 Gr. 5 or ASM
- 15. Clamping Bolts *** A-307 Gr. A**
Linear fl? 16. Clar.p Load Stud SA-193 Gr. 3 7 Linear S
SA-515 Cr. 65 or 70
- 17. Estension Rod End (Fig. 20b Galy) SA-36, SA-181 CL 70_
Linear
' ~
" INN ""13 D 5 ~ '0- O 43I
.- ;--- .-- ~. ~.....
.gt-- . . . . . .. .~
.;- . - . -. .- = . . . .
- . =-
. . , ; ~.;
.n . .' . '. :_ ... . - - . . - - - .-.
_=_,,n.
i
'j : *
. .. .. ~
p 3 i
. . -. . - ITT GRINNELL APPENDIX B i
.- .P1PE . HANGER _ DIVI.c SPEC. NO. MCS-1144.30-00-1
- ASME SECTION 1 !
., .u . . . .
- ~'a
- i
. SUBSECTION NF 7 4[ . . _
v-y "7- "A }
P' '
- 4. COMPONENT SUPPORT INFORMATION ITEM MATERIAL. SPECIFICATION ITEM TYPE l l4 .
3
- 18. Ext. Piece Pipe (Fis. 201.,0nly) SA-106 Gr. 3 Linear I
\
- 19. Ext. Piece Plate (FiS. 201.;0nly) SA-36 or SA-515 Gr. 65 or 70 Linear (1 1/2 - 8" Only) .
- 20. Ext. flece Nut (Fig. 201w Only) SA-36 Linear l
~
- 21. T1anse Plate (1 1/2 Cyl. Only) ASTM A 108 Gr.*1018* Flate & Shell
- SA-36 or ~
Secondary
- 22. Valve Body ASTM A 108 Gr. 1018* Member i
i .
i
- Secondary Member 1 23. Barrel (1 1/2 - 6" Cyl. Only) ASTM A los Gr. 1018*
\
bb ~ Secondary i I .
ASTM A 108 Gr. 131B* Member -
,; b ?&.. Seat (1 1/2 - 6" Cv1. Cely)
A-36 or secondary I .
member
- 25. Orifice Valve stem ASTM A 108 Gr. 1018*
l ,j .
i
]
SA-36 or SA-515 Gr. 65 or 70 secondary l Member
! j 26. Talve Block (1 1/2" - 6" Cyl. Only) AS'Di A 108 Gr.1018*
1- secondary l
- SA-193 Gr. 3 7 l 27. valve Poppet (8" Cyl. Only) ASTM A 108 Gr. 1018* Member e
Secondary
$ts 28. Valve Seat 1)isc (8" Cyl. Only) SA-515 Gr. 65 or Gr. 70 Member IE 1 secondary i
o E E hk v3 29. Connecting Tube SA-213 TF 304 or SA-249 TF 304 Member g er 0 b .
Secondary l @ oy6 ;; 30. Reservoir End Blocks SA-36 or SA-515 Gr. 65 or 70 Member
- c. O
- secondary
~
- SA-36 or h so % Member
! .gc 31. Reservoir Tie Rods (Lexan Res. Onh ) ASTM A 108 Gr. 1018*
Secondary SA-36 or SA-515 Gr. 65 or 70 Member
- 32. Reservoir 3 racket SA-213 TF 304'or Secondary
(,~5.k.{, 33. Reservoir Tube . SA-249 TF 304 Member X.?
Lexan TM, EA-106 GR 3 secondary (E#e#Pt:per SA-53 GR 3 or ASTN Member
- 34. Reservoir Body NT-2121 (b)) -
s.sto r:n . s oin cW*
~
~
J CJN M ' 12 0 6 -0 0-0 4 3 4
. . . . . . .. ..... . . . ...,u....... . . ;_. . , , . ,
...:... - ~ - - -
. . Page 4-
. j. , '
APPENDIX B ITT GRINNE!.L SPEC. NO. MCS-1144.30-00-0001
'I -
PIPE HANGER DIVl!
k - 1SME SECTION -i ifj j.*j "'?
. p . m . ... . . . . . . m- . .. . .... SUBSECTION NF .
....s- -
- 4. COMPONENT SUPPORT INFORMATION ITEM MATERIAL SPECIFICATION ITEM TYPE Pyrex (Exempt per NT-212 Secondary
- 35. Sight Tube (He' tai Res. Only) (b)) Hember
~
~
Secondary -
- 36. Pipe Clamp Insert *** SA-36
- Member (1 1/2" Only Fig. 201 only)
- 37. Ext. Flece Nut SA-36 Linear SA-307 Cr. A-or .
- 33. Pipe Clamp Nuts & Jam Nut.s*** h A 307 Cr. A** Linear SA-194 Cr.2H or SA-307
- 39. Load Stud Nuts Cr. 5 or ASTM A 307 Cr. A** Linear I . .
- 40. Pipe Clamp Spacer *** SA-53 Cr. B or SA-106 Cr. B Linear
- 41. Spseer Washers SA-36 Linear
\. .
i
- A2. Alternate Clamo Studs *** SA-36* Linear l
DOCUMENT T I
j -
CONTpnr pp
- e l l
SEP 7 1982
- DesiSn Tem = 650'F D JKE POWER COMPA$Y '
E PESIGN ENGifER!NG '
Ites 12 Freviously Used These Additional Materials ASTM A 434 Cr. BC ** . Linear Ites 17 Freviously Used Linear These Additional Materials SA-675 Cr. 50-70 item 20 Freviously Used Linest These Additional Materials ,- SA-675 Cr. 50-70 Item 26 Previously Used Linear These Additional Materials SA-675 Cr. 50-70 Item 36 Freviously Used k.,.7 SA-675 Gr. 50-70 Linear i;. These Additional Materials
!, IC M -
1906.
-_. . n. n _. n, ,A ,t ,i.
I .
c.*:
- s . ='.:.. , . n ., 5=.:~- ;. 7. c ,:
. .*..:.;.'
- a - s : -- ..n ~ .;.
. ; e .. . -
. . :. . . . . . . w + - . . - : . .. . . i . . .!. -
______.-- _ _ _ _ _ . . , _ . 1, --
=. -..
.. . . . ~ . Page 5 i, -
APPENDIX 8 CONT,,( SPEC. NO. MCS-1144.30-00-0001 I
'g g . e a. ~
44 23 ,
v.
_f. * . m ag ygggg -
y i
?IPE MANDER DIVISICK .
CUALIFII3 FR0 DUCT ~
LOAD RATI303
' TINSION is COMPRESSION
- .- Design Loading &
j Level A & 3 Level c Level D 4 D *"
y.sx. Load Ratin- >22. Lead Rat'N 1Jx. Load Rating si,ze No.
(Ibs.)3 350 of (ns.)0 350 9 (ps. )s 350 "7
, Cy
- der 21st
( ,.s. )
F4 200N 1-u2 5000 -
5600 h006 2 1/2 l 10350 l 13730
- 18100 s.yt l l 17600 ?*hto. b SCBM i l- 27300 l 57*00 18000
. , i i ,,,. i m e0 i .. .
- g. g l 69200 l 92900 l 112600 s ! ! 110000 ! 1"Soo K ' ' ' "
- t.
c i No"Te ker! 7'*? 1!T AMM T5 'i A 1@ W 8 ~~#' " " *
- je-;ey [o m ?!?! c A!O b5 Ti".?O7f S??:IA AM0?SAUM-
'} l l .
I L
- l. 1 I
I m ,,.. ~ 1 ~ .
) CONTROL.6MTE R CD. 't inM.9
->. m,,,, _ ..... _ .
---.w- . .s wsvy Art g
. p .
$9 !CNN 1206 00-0434 h
e*.
g.,
-; 7 . ,. n
. , . ]_; . . . . . .
r QA COND T ON 1 Mda SPEC. NO. MCS-1144.30-00-0001 3 . . .
. - - . . . . C O D*iF1 hydraulic shock and sway suppressor ,
~
- 7. , .
- 1. a w , - ..
,[. -
.NOT St,.AB,I = :.m -
3
- , remar ec m s ,ss 5c0v- .o.e m s.
__,_,,. est u stnere. mas WDi7 M '
,,, g q ,
. .. MT0ns . . , ,
ggytwas
. s b' l . g .f,e= $ *'** .
m .
} ,* i lie:Wi l-"
, D 3 og
%'& lj_.2t.3@d%,, l
= r.
- 2*1 L. . . .. .. . . . . . ,,.;
. . . .. . . . . . *. !if D I O {.. I'.
gg,g- - I I sc=to :-x l== "8- 8" "
oc-au asscue.y ue -
C- _g
== A U
=* 0 ==,
, ,- , ..s ,R :
y ,< -. . . - . . .
C" \h f m
{b, pt c,,=_= ;.
- m.
f
- e. - = . .
, e---- w m.
' t e I ' 's y
- W Fl4. 201 N
=-F t 3 t/t.
,w MTAIL A \7
- O' TION 3 Of Mt200N i sta Om me. 20iN CJ J DETAIL A
-(.' >
Y AA "O*' I " a .'. is0TEt arGMT mand END
. , , / A -
t
~
8 O
OF ASSCWstv H'T E l w x ., '- antarco =
l
. A iW = + V E -- -- G q r ei5 0==
"~ A i
A s== posm0ss.
THI- t c b - __ CCN R u; V 4.t. W E D, s .
, DOCUMENT eM A C C O f: D If, WITN ADEFant 4 OECTION III, ARA. NA S260 AND " " * " CONTROL DATE s or uaers,Yac m.iu . .
otslGN PcCIFICATA .04.0001 g. 1" ${p 7 jggg myfE- n a1.s. 10 g 2.
Tv .
DUKE POWER COMPANY a
o DESIGN ENGINEERINC smension's (Inches) ,
.r.m. w e. si as=. s.T.w Ow a si s se a.T.6. om- e. si s :=- s !s.t.i. om r
ei ,si asm.
sw a c ar Sw. sir. tw a sw-evi. tw e4 sw et et sw et . e evt. ew ren I rew et ren Up to 4% 7 %X14 % a 2% 8% % a 2%
=
~ = - = =
444% 7% % a 1% % 2% 8% % s 2%
445% 7% %:1% % : tw 9% %a3
%4 %a5 11% 1 s5 1 s5 12 1% s 7 5"/.e4"/.e 5% %2 %:3 10 4s5 1 a5 12% t s6 1 s7 12% 1% S S4 8"/.. 9% % s 2% %s3 11 %
% a 2's 4x4 12% %s6 1 a5 14 % 1 7 1% a 6 14 % t's a 9 8410'%.e 10%
14 s 9
%:5 13% 1 a5 1 :S 15% 1 s7 1% 4 15 %
19412'% tits % a 2%
15 a10 4s5 1 s5 1 s7 16 1% s 4 1% a 7 15%
12414% 12% % 2% 14 %
%a3 %8 15% 1 s5 1 s7 17% 1% s e 1% : 3 17s. 14 s 9 14%.18'/.e 13%
8 7 18's 1% a 7 tw a 9 ta'e th a to 1 s5 16%
16%.18%e 14% '4s3 1 1 14 it 3 17% 1 a7 1% a 8 19% t% : 8 1% a 6 20
- 18%.20%e 15% %s3 1 s5 1 s7 14 s6 21 4 1% a 9 1% a 9 22's 14 it s
- - 20424%e 10% %sa 1 5 19 %
1% s e 25 tw a 8 14sto 26 4 ,2 s 12 24430% 21 % 4:4 1 at 23 1% s s
~
ks5 ,1 s7 38 % , tis s e a tie s p 20 % tit s ic , ik s 10 o 29 % l2 s 12 30430%. , 24 ,
ONM 1206 00-0434 3
$ N
.a. . .
m -- - . --- - m .... .... .._ '. . . . ..
% e
. . "- M--=
e'.~ s" ~ . - . . .. ..
Page 28 R .- =, - - APPENDIX B
.-..h. . . , . . . . .
, CGAtTEOL 7.A SPEC. NO. MCS-ll44.30-00-0001 g
tweights
- dimenslotts (ifiches) .
gg
. r. ;.****** - . .
E L Q.' J A e , ami. i ses I man, e e. P e #. 8 i
- g. e.,. l.mme ei.
8 88 ,g
'8* "" 8% *'* 3% 2 8% % Wie g% ~ 2% 3% 1%
g g
- 10 49 104 23 % 284
. S 75 13 % 1 15% ' 19%_
- $* *' 2% 2% .% i.= .*} 4% 3 7% % %'14 8% 3% 3* 1%
, . , 24 a er 30 W 38 % '38 % i88 %
4 18 %
s 121 1*1. 17 % 1 1
to 132 W% '2W M 3*/w 8% 1% 1%.12 5% 24 3% 2%
gg ,g 3 5%
> is gag 24% lath 38 %
2pte 139% 49%
to 15s
. m s.= l ,.% ,,,,
10 189 214 i264 31 4 4% 9% 1% 14 12 7% 3% 4 2%
4 3% ,
8%
', 4 , -
. . . m .1% ., % .
, , 23. ,. l ,, .. .
' 8" 8" '" '*' 8 8" 8" '" 8" 5 ",,7 5 4% 35%
as 33 43 ,53 30 ses ith .w !a4%
a see ask tap % a34m
- 10 330 9 9% 11 2% 2%.12 9% SW 5% 3%
6 8% 5%
,, 2W 137% %
20 375 4*kI"k1.#
- 234 its issu 5 -sis ~ '
4- s75 ' ash s~tSan 14 8% is 4 3 $12 '12% 3% 8% 4%
7% 8 O
.,' 8 ,, ,, p g g4g , ,w
'384 !444 !$34
- , q .' ' , 30 1 195 ,
l weights e dimensions (inches)
,, i
'{
.w
- === =c. ** t aus. I 4A es oc
- i. me scom s T U V % sun.
eue pu m. m u e a J .749 F5%
% %' .SSS We 8 48 24 1% 8"/.s ggg I
1% g , t'W % 2% 1% 1 , ,10% l
- , l 1 % .375-2% % 2 1% 1% 12 4 24 1% 10% y 2%
- l. -
't 1.093 "he 44 3% 10% 1%
..' 13 % .
2% 1 2% 2%e t'% ., ,,
8 0 3% ...
y ,.
- us .
se 4 g $ce 5 8
- o 8 =
34 1% 3% 24 2 15% 4% 2% 11 % - g, 1% 1% 1.312 '%s l 4
, i h ,m 5 235
- 5% 3% 11 %
to'%
1% 1% 1.131 %
4% 1% 4 3% 2% 1.747 16 %
ua h 6
15' 377 -
a'.%
j go '
5 att 83 %
L 1% 1% 1.750 1%
4% ,34 2% - 18% 5% 4 11','t g 8 44 3 '[
6.f.t .. m , !
,. 4
- m .
"* 1%
2 2.1s7
- 8g"- e%
34 4 $m s% litu 2%
i s
. {8 ,
2% : s% 4%
3% j,,"1 '
I
~~~' C N.H ' 2 2 0 6 . 0 0 - 0 4'3 4
! J" .
iL 1
g ,. y .,,. .,7 . , j , . . . ,. .
. . ........,7 .
Aw. ._; -. ... ,... 3 ,..
- - - - ~+ . . ~ . . _ . . _ , , . , . ,
1
. \
ATTACHMENT 2 l
l
)
l i
)
i
p .
Attachment Z Page: 1 babcock & WilCOX Y 1
( .
13, 1985 helpQue(DWm a McDermott comEj,ny ~ I 7 g.,
g
! fl*tff,iI b ,![.h}j ) DPC-85-388 15 Old rgst Road
. ['.b N'37Mo^gg24506 0935 j
4' M y g 3 k j
g . g.c.S
\.lll.?%%lSia To: B&W Owners Gfodp~ Analysis Committee
Subject:
Steam Line Break Qualification Evaluation
Reference:
Letter, R. J. Schomaker.to Analysis Committee, "April Equipment 26, Qualification to SLB Environments,"
l 1985, ESC-245 .
Gentlemen:
l Attached is an expanded discussion (of the referenced letter) of Equipment Qualification data available at B&W as it relates to LOCA and SLB environments. This discussion was prepared at the request
! of Florida Power, funded by EPC,
!. Committee with their permission. and offered to the Analysis
( The work performed over the past years support the conclusion that'l the brief high equipment vapor temperature peak during an SLB does not affect performance more severely temperature soak associated with LOCA's.than the long high vapor If you have questions,T,please call.
l Very truly yours, f
R. J. Schomaker
- Project Manager
' Owners Group Engineering Services RJS/fw Analysis ~ Committee Members.
C. Turk -
AP&L P. F. Guill -
DPCo l E. H. Davidson - FPC L. C. Po -
GPU .
R. Little -
SMUD !
A. G. Hosler -
,R. H. Bryan -
TVA I
.F. R. Miller
( -
TED
.MlN DIVISION 9~ 91 52 Rec'd. AUG 2 61985 . l i
1?CYd I
' l
-' ~' '
Attachttlellt
. Page: 2 CONTRACT NO. PLAN T I 5
58 2 - 70 @ City,sM b 5 D0c0HENT RELEASE CHARGE N0 AEbASE DAIE Notice (DRN) j j .
A0YI 01 g- 7, [ .,
PA R T.444 R K / T A S K- B&W DOCUMENT NO. DOCUMENI TITLE COM SF TY/
GROUP-SEQ.
AT17 g p SFTY. STA T.
/ . $@2 fi-il 78880- 00 Sygk yd Q,,{ [yg( k,_ _ p -
[8f-6 5-.ll A<d)
(
( .
lll r.
I REQUIRED DISTRIBUTION N6. COPIES INFORMATION COPIES NO. COPIES ORGANIZATION OR TE = m IN0lylWAL'S NAME W DRN a: m E B
%b- 2 :
t 5 LH Les nm k 8* ( r M- t '
PC- Ho w lu -
s / BT L ud P ' 8 15 6 og w 2o c i TE Lg #c.( t i n e/1 .) 3 ,
RELEASED BY: '
REVIEhED BY:
w E'b((
15 GNATURE) <TJ' (SIGNATURE) .A cqAp DA TE DAIE
[ i J
d os . w ir n w a s,r i P t a Rio g F"W 1 I A a i (PRINTED NAuf) et. A&P A s