BSEP-97-0261, Forwards Response to 970312 RAI to Support Staff Review of plant-specific Summary Rept on Resolution of USI A-46 Program for BSEP Units 1 & 2

Forwards Response to 970312 RAI to Support Staff Review of plant-specific Summary Rept on Resolution of USI A-46 Program for BSEP Units 1 & 2

ML20141B923
Person / Time
Site:	Brunswick
Issue date:	06/17/1997
From:	Hinnant C CAROLINA POWER & LIGHT CO.
To:	NRC OFFICE OF INFORMATION RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (IRM)
References
REF-GTECI-A-46, REF-GTECI-SC BSEP-97-0261, BSEP-97-261, TAC-M69433, TAC-M69434, NUDOCS 9706240207
Download: ML20141B923 (45)

Text

. .- . . . -. . - - - - _ _ . . _ _ . - - . - - -_ - _ _

e ,-

CP&L I

Carolina Power & Light Company C. S. Hinnant  !

PO Box 10429 Vice President southport, NC 28481-0429 Brunswick steam Electric Plant June 17,1997 l

SERIAL: BSEP 97-0261 U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission ATTN: Document Control Desk Washington, DC 20555

, BRUNSWICK STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT, UNIT NOS.1 AND 2 DOCKET NOS. 50-325 AND 50-324/ LICENSE NOS. DPR-71 AND DPR-62 )

RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION l l

SEISMIC QUALIFICATION OF MECHANICAL AND ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT l

(NRC TAC NOS. M69433 AND M69434) j Gentlemen- I l

i By letter dated March 12,1997, the NRC requested that Carolina Power & Light (CP&L) l Company provide additional information to support the NRC staffs review of the plant-specific l summary report on resolution of the Unresolved Safety issue (USI) A-46 program for the ,

Brunswick Steam Electric Plant, Unit Nos.1 and 2. CP&L's responses to the NRC staffs  !

questions are provided in Enclosure 1 to this letter. There are no regulatory commitments

contained in this submittal.

Please refer any questions regarding this submittal to Mr. Keith Jury, Manager - Regulatory '

Affairs, at (910) 457-2783.

Sincerely, e

C. S. Hinnant WRM/wrm

Enclosures:

1. Response To Request For Additional information '

\

9706240207 970617'~ l PDR ADOCK 05000324 f

\

p PDR 40004 SUNIIUIIIIIIIIINII

Document Control Desk BSEP 97-0261/ Page 2 C. S. Hinnant, having been first duly swom, did depose and say that the information contained {

herein is true and correct to the best of his information, !mowledge and belief; and the sources of his information are officers, employees, and agents of Carolina Power & Light Company.

db Notary (Seal)

My commission expires: 3p lqq q l

l I

I l

1 l

l l

i r

Y Document Control Desk BSEP 97-0261/ Page 3 pc (with enclosures):

U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Region II ATTN.: Mr. Luis A. Reyes, Regional Administrator Atlanta Federal Center 61 Forsyth Street, SW, Suite 23T85 Atlanta, GA 30303 U. S. Nucleer Regulatory Commission ATTN: Mr. C. A. Patterson, NRC Senior Resident Inspector 8470 River Road Southport, NC 28461 U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission ATTN.: Mr. David C. Trimble, Jr. (Mail Stop OWFN 14H22) 11555 Rockville Pike Rockville, MD 20852-2738 The Honorable J. A. Sanford Chairman - North Carolina Utilities Commission P.O. Box 29510 Raleigh, NC 27626-0510

.y i n

ENCLOSURE 1 l BRUNSWICK STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT, UNIT NOS.1 AND 2 NRC DOCKET NOS. 50-325 AND 50-324 OPERATING LICENSE NOS. DPR-71 AND DPR-62 RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION SEISMIC QUALIFICATION OF MECHANICAL AND ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT (NRC TAC NOS. M69433 AND M69434) l NRC QUESTION #1:

l l ~ Appendix D of Enclosure 1 of the referenced letter provides a summary of instances where the

! intent rather than the letter of certain caveats, as described in Appendix B of the Generic l Implementation Procedure, Revision 2 (GIP-2) was met. Based on the information provided by l the licensee, it is unclear as to how some equipment was determined to meet the intent of the

, stated caveat. Listed below are specific areas that fallin this category for which we are l

requesting additional information: i j a. Provide additional information to demonstrate that the adjacent Cabinets 2-2PA l and 2-2PB would not respond out of phase to one another and impact each other during an earthquake, as described in the Bounding Spectrum Caveat 3 of Appendix B of the l GIP-2.

b. Describe how the referenced CP&L calculation 01534A-281 was performed for ,

Transformers 2-2A-SW-XFMR and 2-2B-SW-XFMR to ensure that the earthquake )

loadings can be transferred to the anchorage, as described in the Bounding Spectrum Caveat 7 of the Appendix B of the GlP-2.

c. For Backup N2 Discharge Valves and Pressure Relief Valves 1-RNA-PCV5247 and 5248, 2-RNA-PCV-5247 and 5248,1-RNA-SV-5482 and 5251, and 1-RNA-PRV-5256,5258, and 5260, are the valve, the operator, and the pipe anchored to the same support structure as described in the Bounding Spectrum Caveat 4 of Appendix B of the GlP-2?

If not, provide additional information to demonstrate that the specific piping system configuration would not cause an overstressed condition.

d. For Moisture Controller / Control Valves 1-VA-MC-1026-1 and 2-VA-MC-1028-1, the licansee identified them as meeting the intent but not the letter of four caveats,1,2,4,

~

and 5. However, based on the information provided by the licensee, it is unclear as to how the intents of Caveats 1,2, and 4 as described in Appendix B of GIP-2 were met.

The staff's specific concerns include applicability of equipment class, seismic stress in the valve body due to piping loads, and piping stress adjacent to the valve. The licensee is requested to provide additionalinformation to address these concerns. In addition, provide additional information to demonstrate that the combination of these four deviations would not reduce the equipment seismic capability to an unacceptable condition even though the intent of each caveat may individually be considered to be met.

l i

E1-1

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

y

_4 l 'e. For Scraw Outlet Isolation Valves 2-C12-CV-127, are the valve, the operator, and the l pipe anchored to the same support structure as described in the Bounding Spectrum l

Caveat 4 of Appendix B of GIP-27 If not, provide additionalinformation to demonstrate that the specific piping system configuration would not cause an overstressed condition.

l f. Describe the details of the unique mechanical linkage of Turbine Control Valve 2-E-41-V9 I. to justify how it meets the intents of Caveats 1 and 5.

g. Provide additional information to justify how Valve 2-MUD-TCV-2193 meets the intent of Caveat 3. Specifically, demonstrate that the yoke stress is low if the yoke is indeed cast iron.

h. Provide additionalinformation or a sketch of the Engineered Safeguards Vertical Board 1-H12-P601 to show how the intent of Caveat 5 was met for this panel, i.e., the adjacent cabinets or panels would not respond out of phase to one another and impact each other during an earthquake. Also, the reference of " Caveat 3"in the report is a typographical error and it should be " Caveat 5" instead.

i Similar to above, provide additional information or sketches of the Relay Boards / Instrument Cabinets 1-H-12-P617,1-XU-53, 2-Hl2-P601, 2-H12-P603, and 2-XU-25 to show how the intent of Caveat 5 was met.

CP&L RESPONSE:

l Part a Motor Control Centers identified in question 1a are GE Model 7700 Units installed on the grade elevation of the Service Water intake Structure. MCC 2-2PA includes 7 adjacent bays divided l into 2 sections of 5 and 2 bays each. MCC 2-2PB includes 8 adjacent bays divided into 2 sections of 5 and 3 bays each. The bays in each section are bolted together, and the sections are anchored at the base and braced to the Service Water ' Building at the tops. The Seismic Review Team judged the bracing adequate to preclude impact as described in the caveat.

Part b Seismic qualification testing was performed for the transformers that accurately included the existing load path. Vibration test levels exceeded design basis requirements. The referenced CP&L calculation verifies that the seismic qualification testing is appropriate for the mounting arrangements in various plant locations.

Part c The valve, operator and pipe are anchored to the same support.

! Part d

_ These components were used to add steam to the Control Room supply duct for humidity control. These components have now been taken out of service and their function eliminated.

E1-2

Revised pages are included in Attachment 1 of this Enclosure for the elimination of 1-VA-MC-1026-1 and 2-VA-MC-1028-1 from Appendix B, C and D of the Seismic Evaluation Report.

Part e The valve, operator and pipe are anchored to the same support structure.

Part f This valve was included by mistake in Appendix D, " Instances of Meeting the Intent but not the Letter of the Caveat." The Unit 2 Turbine Control Valve (2-E41-V9) is an integral part of the Unit 2 High Pressure Coolant injection (HPCI) turbine and is accepted by the " Rule of the Box" like the comparable valve for Unit 1. Further evaluation of the intent of the caveat is not required.

A revised page is included in Attachment 1 of this Enclosure for the elimination of 2-E41-V9 from Appendix D of the Seismic Evaluation Report.

Part g The valve yoke is cast stainless steel, type 18-8 Series 300. Yield strength, tensile strength and elongation are approximately 30 ksi,70 ksi and 35%, respectively. Therefore, caveat 3 is satisfied.

Part h The Control Room Benchboards are typically bolted together at 8 locations. The cabinet sections are bolted near the base,1/4 height,3/4 height and at the top on both faces.

Additionally, the bench section is bolted to the adjacent bench section in 4 places. In this case, one of the top bolts between 1-H12-P601 and the adjacent cabinet,1-H12-P603, was missing.

Based on review of existing bolting, the condition was judged sufficient to preclude impact between adjacent cabinets. It should be noted that missing hardware conditions, such as this, are typically repaired regardless of the analytical results. This particular condition was corrected in the last outage.

l The typographical error has been corrected on the revised page included in Attachment 1 of this Enclosure.

Part i 1

i 1-H12-P617 and 1-XU-53 From south to north,1-H12-P617 and 1-XU-53 are the third and sixth cabinets in a row of 8 cabinets in the Contro: Room. The cabinet on the north end (#8) has a gap of at least 1/4-inch and was judged adequate to preclude pounding due to the stiffness of the cabinets in the line-up. The cabinet on the south end is attached to the line-up by a 6-inch by 6-inch rigid wireway on top of the cabinets via conduit connections.

l

, E1-3 l

I

40 2-H12-P601, P603 Cabinets 2-H12-P601, P603,2-XU-1, XU-2, XU-3, XU-51, and XU-4 are all bolted together.

However, cabinet 2-XU-80 is not bolted to 2-XU-4. 2-XU-80 is located at the extreme opposite end of the cabinet group from 2-H12-P601 and P603, which are the only cabinets in the group containing SSEL relays. The two 2-H12-P601 and P603 are about 40 feet from 2-XU-80 l through the 2-XU-1,2-XU-2,2-XU-51 and 2-XU-4 cabinet group. The cabinet group has a l 90 degree turn at 2-XU-1. All the intervening XU cabinets are well anchored, structurally stiff and heavily loaded with cable. The unbolted condition of 2-XU-80 was judged acceptable as l the response of cabinet 2-XU-4 to any possible pounding from 2-XU-80 will be attenuated through 2-XU-51,2-XU-3,2-XU-2 and 2-XU-1 prior to reaching 2-H12-P603 and P601.

2-XU-25 From south to north,2-XU-25 and 2-CAC-TY-4426-2 are the fourth and fifth in a row of five cabinets. Allinterfaces are bolted together except between 2-XU-25 and 2-CAC-TY-4426-2.

The gap at the top of this interface is at least 3/4 inch. The frequency of these cabinets can be estimated to be at least 8 hertz. Assuming single-degree-of-freedom characteristics and acceleration of 1.2 g, a gap of 3/4 inch is adequate. Note: This acceleration exceeds 1.5 times both the design basis and Seismic Margins in-structure spectra for this frequency.

NRC QUESTION #2:

In Appendix E1 of Enclosure 1, section 4, Certification, it appears that the word "out"is a typographical error and that it should be "our" instead.

CP&L RESPONSE:

The identified typographical error is corrected on the appropriate pages in Attachment 2 of this Enclosure.

NRC QUESTION #3:

Provide a justification to ensure that the proposed schedule for resolving all the identified outliers or open items by the end of Spring 1998, does not lead to a potential safety significant scenario.

CP&L RESPONSE:

All items identified in Appendix E1, E2, F1, F2 and G were evaluated by the Seismic Review Team for safety system functionality as they were identified during the walkdown inspections.

For any condition where functionality was questioned, further evaluation in accordance with plant procedures was performed. All walkdown considerations and subsequent evaluations j included consideration of cumulative effects. Additionally, conditions resulting from corrosion or j similar progressive degradation were evaluated to ensure that appropriate monitoring was l l performed, or the condition was repaired. The only changes that have taken place to the l

identified outliers or open items has been to repair or upgrade the items. Therefore, the walkdown assessments and subsequent evaluations which conclude that the identified E1-4

( conditions do not lead to a potential safety significant scenario remain valid through the Spring i of 1998.

NRC QUESTION #4

Appendix E of Enclosure 2 of the referenced letter provides a summary table for the amplification factors (AFs) for cabinets and panels used for the Brunswick USI A-46 evaluation.

It stated that the AFs used assume that all anchorage, load path, and interaction issue (i.e.,

l unbolted adjacent cabinets and cable tray / conduit and conduit supports) have been resolved.

Confirm that, for those cases for which the AF values listed in Appendix E were used, all anchorage, load path, and interaction issue, if any, were indeed resolved and were not identified as the unresolved outliers or open items in Enclosure 1 of the referenced letter.

CP&L RESPONSE:

The anchorage, load path and interaction issues assumed to be resolved for determination of amplification values in the Relay Evaluation Report are the same issues identified as outliers or open items in the Seismic Evaluation Report. These issues are not completely resolved.

The effects of these outliers and open items are considered to be more significant as seismic interaction issues than as building response amplification issues. However, resolution of these conditions includes consideration of changes to the dynamic characteristics of the cabinet.

Many of these issues have been resolved; however, completion of this activity is scheduled as addressed in Enclosure 1 to Reference 1.

NRC QUESTION #5:

it is noted that in the licensee's relay system consequence reviews, a large number of essential relays were screened out by stating that either chatter or operator action were acceptable. It is also noted that in the Third Party Audit Report, Appendix H of Enclosure 1 of the reference letter, the peer reviewers indicated that in the control room area, the support configurations used for the transition of the top entry conduits or cables into various panels and cabinets have numerous interferences with the overhead distributed systems and commodities. The audit report further recommended that the relay system consequence reviewers should strive to minimize the number of essential relays by showing that chatter is acceptable or that operator actions may be taken to recover from the consequences of inadvertent chatter. The staff agrees with that recommendation. Describe the measures taken to address this finding. In addition, the licensee is requested to confirm that a proceduralized and prioritized operator action procedure exists and it will preclude any conflicting or competing events which could lead the operator to not perform timely actions.

CP&L RESPONSE:

The approach outlined in the Third Party Audit Report for resolution of the Control Room cabinet interaction issue is being pursued. Although the information is still considered l preliminary, the results indicate that relays affected by interaction in the Control Room have no i chatter consequences or can be reset / corrected by use of operator actions contained in E1-5

. _ _ ~ _ _ _ -

v

. multiple, existing procedures. The approach used for evaluation of these relays is as described in the Relay Evaluation Report submitted previously as Enclosure 2 to Reference 1.

1 NRC QUESTION #6: '

Describe any corrective measure taken to address the peer reviewers comments concerning the corrosion problem in the mechanical HVAC room, as described in the Third Party Audit Report.

CP&L RESPONSE:

Condensation accumulation at the floor supports for equipment in this area has been eliminated [

by proper insulation and drainage of HVAC equipment. The floor mounted equipment was -

l clean and painted, and some sheetmetal components located near the floor have been replaced. Replacement anchorage has been provided for the chiller units.

l l NRC QUESTION #7:

l l Referring to the in-structure response spectra provided in your 120-day response to the NRC's i request in Supplement No.1 to Generic Letter (GL) 87-02, dated May 22,1992, the following

information is requested; l

I a. Identify structure (s) that have in-structure response spectra (5% critical damping) for elevations within 40-feet above the effective grade that are higher in amplitude than .

1.5 times the SQUG Bounding Spectrum,

b. With respect to the comparison of equipment seismic capacity and seismic demand, indicate which method in Table 4-1 of GIP-2 was used to evaluate the seismic adequacy for equipment installed on the corresponding floors in the structure (s) identified in item (a) above. If you have elected to use method A in Table 4-1 of the GlP-2, provide a technical justification for not using the in-structure response spectra provide in your 120-day response. it appears that some licensees are making an incorrect comparison between their plant's safe shutdown earthquake (SSE) ground motion response spectrum i

- and the SQUG Bounding Spectrum. The SSE ground motion response spectrum for most nuclear power plants is defined at the plant foundation level. The SQUG Bounding Spectrum is defined at the free field ground surface. For plants founded on deep soil or rock, there may not be a significant difference between the ground motion amplitudes at the foundation level and those at the ground surface. However, for sites where a structure is founded on shallow soil, the amplification of the ground motion from the foundation level to the ground surface may be significant.

l c. For the structure (s) identified in item (a) above, provide the in-structure response spectra j- designated according to the height above the effective grade if the in-structure response spectra identified in the 120-day response to Supplement No.1 to GL 87-02 were not used, provide the response spectra that were actually used to verify the seismic adequacy of equipment within the structures identified in item (a) above. Also, provide a j comparison of these spectra to 1.5 times the Bounding Spectrum.

I E1-6

l .

}

}

l CP&L RESPONSE: I l

i Original design information for Brunswick did not include 5% damped response spectra. In- l i structure spectra used for A-46 walkdown inspections and evaluations was generated for the l

. Diesel Generator Building and the Control Building with a conservative damping conversion l

} routine. This conservatism caused some in-structure spectra to exceed the Reference  !

Spectrum as indicated in Table 5-1 of the Seismic Evaluation Report (Enclosure 1 to j Reference 1). However, the Diesel Generator Building Elevation 23', the Diesel Generator

Pedestal Elevation 23 foot and Elevation 50 foot are the only locations less than 40 feet above

$ effective grade. By converting the damping using the method included in the GIP-2 Part 2

Section 4.4.3, only the in-structure response spectra for elevation 50 foot of the Diesel

- Generator Building is less than 40 feet above grade and exceeds the Reference Spectrum (plot i included below). The shape of the Diesel Generator Building response spectra indicates that the cut-off frequency is more appropriately represented by 33 hertz than 20 hertz as implied in the GlP-2. Therefore,33 hertz was used instead of 20 hertz in the GIP-2 damping conversion.

The frequency range in which the Reference Spectrum is exceeded is less than 8 hertz. Since application of GIP-2 Method A.1 requires the equipment to have natural frequencies of at least 8 hertz, Method B.1 is also applicable using the same restriction. Therefore, all equipment in the Diesel Generator Building at elevation 50'is evaluated to methods other than the GIP-2 Method A.1. The frequency determinations made during the screening walkdowns or those being performed as part of outlier resolutions justify use of Method B.1.

1 E1-7

i

+

l l

l l

i

! Responso Spectra 5% damping l

Desel Generator Stakimg EWyaten SCr j SQUG Reference Spectrum l

18 . , - . - - _ - - l 3

)

i4 -_ _ _ _ .._i. .L _ ,

\!.

i 12 .___

! \

g 1

). (

o8 . -

l VN .

os I

\ d l s

TEN '

o4 . _ _ . _ _. ,1_. . _ _ _ __ _ _ L _.._4_4 .. ..

o.2 __.

L-41. . . - - - . - - . . . - - - . -- - . . -

_+.-

Il I  !

o

...j_dda_ __ _.__fl_..

01 1 10 100 Frequency REFER.ELNrES:

1. CP&L letter Serial: BSEP 95-0485 dated September 15,1995.

l l

4 E1-8 I

t ,

s .

l 1

i

. l I

l l

\

! l 1

l I

1 i

I 1

1 1

l l

l 1

l ENCLOSURE 1 l i

1 1

ATTACHMENT 1 Revised pages for Reference 1 Enclosure 1 Appendices B, C, and D l

I l

l l

l

52213-R-002, Rev. 0 Page 4 APPENDIX B SAFE SHUTDOWN EQUIPMENT UST UNIT 1 AND COMMON

[E.C-3lEtympment ID Numbergyglt3gsf3 lDesenpbonjy( Q3l ogg;3gn fg r nggggfglpggqgfloprJijoyg{ {gggl 10 2-VA-CB-FDMP-82 FIRE DAMPER CB 049 C RM 1 1 0 20 2-XU-29 DG3 ESS LOGIC CABINET CB 049 C RM 1 1 0 20 2-XU-30 DG4 ESS LOGIC CABINET CB 049 C RM 1 1 0 20 2-XU-41 DIV-1 TERM CAB FOR EB & ED SYSTEMS CB 049 C RM 1 1 0 20 2-XU-42 DIV-Il TERM CAB FOR RTGB XU-2 CB 049 C RM 1 1 0 20 EGH TURBINE CONTROLLER CB 049 C RM 1 1 1 14 1-11 A DISTRIBUTION PANEL 11 A CB 053 K*' LC/9C 1 1 A 1 14 1-11B DISTR!BUTION PANEL 11B CB 053 NE NC/;0C 2 2 B 1 14 1-3A DISTRIBUTION PANEL 3A CB 053 NE NC/1DC 1 1 A 1 14 1-3AB DISTRIBUTION PANEL 3AB CB 053 NE NC/1CC 1 1 A/B 1 14 1-3B DISTRIBUTION PANEL 3B CB 053 NW LC/8 2 2 B 1 20 1-VA-TY-1026A C RM THERMOSTAT CB 055 NE NC/10C 1 1 0 20 2-VA-TY-1028A C RM THERMOSTAT CB 055 SE NC/15C 1 1 0 11 1-VA-1 A-CC-CB COOLING COIL - UNIT 1 CB 070 MECH EO RM 1 1 0 10 1-VA-1 A-D-CB AO DAMPER CB 070 MECH EQ RM 1 1 0 0 1-VA-1 A-EHE-CB ELECTRIC HTR COIL - UNIT 1 CB 070 MECH EQ RM 1 1 0 10 1-VA-1 A-SH-CB STEAM HUMIDIFIER CB 070 MECH EQ RM 1 1 0 10 1-VA-1D-CU-CB AIR COOLED CONDENSER CB 070 MECH EQ RM 1 1 0 21 1-VA-1D-HX-CB HX CB 070 MECH EQ RM 1 1 0 11 1-VA-1D-SCDU-CB SUBCOOLING CONDENSER CB 070 MECH EQ RM 1 1 0 09 1-VA-1 D-SF-CB AC SUPPLY FAN - UNIT 1 CB 070 MECH EQ RM 1 1 0 i 10 1-VA-1 H-D-CB AO DAMPER - UNIT 1 CB 070 MECH EQ RM 1 1 0 10 1-VA-ISOL-DMP-CB SUPPLY ISOL DAMPER CB 070 MECH EQ RM 1 1 0 18 1-VA-PS-1026 COOLING UNIT PRESSURE SWITCH CB 070 SW LC/13 1 1 0 08b 1-VA-SV-1026 SUPPLY FAN SOL VALVES CB 070 SW LC/13 1 1 0 08b 1-VA-SV-1026A SOL VALVE FOR KS 1026 CB 070 SW LC/13 1 1 0 0 1-VA-TC-1026 TEMP CONTROLLER CB 070 W.T i C./13 1 1 0 07 1-VA-V023 ISOL VALVE CB 070 MECH EQ RM 1 1 0 11 2-VA-2A-CC-CB COOLING COLL - UNIT 2 CB 070 MECH EQ RM 1 1 0 52213-15/ App _b doc

'e 52213-R-002, Rev. 0

• Page 5 APPENDlX B SAFE SHUTDOWN EQUlPMENT LIST UNIT 1 AND COMMON l;E.,CflEquipmentjD NuptmW-Mgg lDescriptm a gppgggggyp%Qyd:gggq[glg Bidgg;j @oggftl@ lf[dsl[ofq[ggyggj_ jM lM j 10 2-VA-2A-D-CB AO DAMPER CB 070 MECH EQ RM 1 1 0 0 2-VA-2A-EHE-CB ELECTRIC HTR COfL - UNIT 2 CB 070 MECH EO RM 1 1 0 R 2-VA-2A-RAF-CB ROLL TYPE FILTER CB 070 MECH EQ RM 1- 1 0 10 2-VA-2A-SH-CB STEAM HUMIDIFIER CB 070 MECH EQ RM 1 1 0 11 2-VA-28-CC-CB COOLING COIL - UNITS 1 & 2 CB 070 MECH EQ RM 2 2 0 0 2-VA-28-EHE-CB ELECTRIC HTR COLL - UNIT 1 & 2 CB 070 MECH EQ RM 2 2 0 10 2-VA-2D-CU{B AIR COOLED CONDENSER CB 070 MECH EQ RM 1 1 0 21 2-VA-2D-HX-CB HX CB 070 MECH EQ RM 1 1 0 11 2-VA-2D-SCDU-CB SUBCOOLING CONDENSER CB 070 MECH EQ RM 1 1 0 09 2-VA-2D-SF-CB AC SUPPLY FAN - UNIT 2 CB 070 MECH EQ RM 1 1 0 10 2-VA-2E-CU-CB AIR COOLED CONDENSER CB 070 MECH EQ RM 2 2 0 21 2-VA-2E-HX-CB HX CB 070 MECH EQ RM 2 2 0 11 2-VA-2E-SCDU-CB SUBCOOLING CONDENSER CB 070 MECH EQ RM 2 2 0 09 2-VA-2E-SF-CB AC SUPPLY FAN - UNIT 1 & 2 CB 070 MECH EQ RM 2 2 0 10 2-VA-21-D-CB AO DAMPER - UNIT 2 CB 070 MECH EQ RM 1 1 0 10 2-VA-ISOL-SHP-CB SUPPLY ISOL DAMPER CB 070 MECH EQ RM 1 1 0 18 2-VA-M1-CB CONTROL PANEL CB 070 SW LC/13 1 1 0 18 2-VA-PS-1026A COOLING UNIT PRESSURE SWITCH CB 070 SW LC/13 1 1 0 18 2-VA-PS-1027 COOLING UNIT PRESSURE SWITCH CB 070 2-VA-M1-CB 2 2 0 18 2-VA-PS-1027A COOLING UNIT PRESSURE SWITCH CB 070 2-VA-M1-CB 2 2 0 18 2-VA-PS-1028 COOLING UNIT PRESSURE SWITCH CB 070 2-VA-M1-CB 1 1 0 18 2-VA-PS-1028A COOLING UNIT PRESSURE SWITCH CB 070 2-VA-M1-CB 1 1 0 18 2-VA-PS-1632 'A' AIR COMPRESSOR PRESS SWITCH CB 070 MECH EQ RM 1 1 0 18 2-VA-PS-1633 'B' AIR COMPRESSOR PRESS SWITCH CB 070 MECH EQ RM 2 2 0 18 2-VA-PSL-1646 INSTRUMENT AIR LOW PRESS CB 070 MECH EQ RM 1 1 0 08b 2-VA-SV-1027 SUPPLY FAN SOL VALVES CB 070 2-VA-M1-CB 2 2 0 08b 2-VA-SV-1027A SOL VALVE FOR KS 1027 CB 070 SW LC/13 2 2 0 08b 2-VA-SV-1028 SUPPLY FAN SOL VALVES CB 070 2-VA-M1-CB 1 1 0 08b 2-VA-SV-1028A SOL '/ALVE FOR KS 1028 CB 070 SW LC/13 1 1 0 52213-15/ App _b doc

1 APPENIDX C 52213-R-002, Rev. 0 -

SCREENING VERIFICATION DATA SHEETS (SVDS) Page 1 y 2

, - ,47 p,-y is ' , ;g7 @ p;;.( m .;g ; L w-pfgh4N w3 . Below; Seismeq Seismic Bounding

[MfCapactyl W egynyg Equip EkulpmeNIO NNOMN SystsWEquipmeN Desenption d  ? Bldg $ iNody! MNo~r? M.% Mi$

aW %eed %de,$

NbN[

Cayeels ga0eg acunes 101G2 cifgPf %p; W.s W" M ps@;EN T QQM  :%@""p@@Mb y d@ NElevd f  ;

Class M iMAe yl{RowEol7 d 4

• R.%- * < ;44 pyw;j ginput);;- grade? don?A y%g+ on? Demand? ROK?# 10:0 4 .OK?j f$4

. 3 00 1-C11-A001 A-N2 . NITROGEN BOlTLE & REGULATOR RB .. 020 1-C11-A001 N/A N/A N/A N/A No N/A No No No 4 00 1-D12-RE-N006A ;l ON DETECTOR RB/ PIT 050 WW U5R 050 Yes ABS CRS Yes No Yes Yes No ,

4 4 4 w -_

00 1-D12-RE-N006B [lON DETECTOR RB/ PIT 050 WW U5R 050  ; Yes ABS j CRS j Yes No Yes Yes No  !

4 4 _ 4 ___. 4 .. _4 4 4 4 00 1-D12-RE-N006C llON DETECTOR i RB/ PIT ; 050 WW USR ; 050 j Yes l ABS j CRS i Yes ; No ; Yes i Yes No 00 ji-D12-RE-N006D jlON DETECTOR  ; RB/ PIT ; 050 j WW U5R i 050 j Yes

• ABS j CRS j Yes ; No ; Yes Yes No .

00 [1-E11-S1

~

SP STRAINER RB/SP [ -009 ' SU-AZ1357 N/A ! N/A~ N/A N/A Yes ! N/A fYes Yes Yes

~if0 i1-E21-S2A f'CS STRAINER SUCTION LINE i RB/SP -009 SU-AZO 45 i N/A f N/A f'~~N/A N/A e N/A Yes Yes Yes

~~0U 1-E41-PSE-D003 TURBINE EXHAUST RUPTURE RB -017 EE T/4R N/A N/A N/A N/A Yes N/A Yes Yes Yes  !

DIAPHRAM t

^ ' ^ ^ ^ ' ' ^ ^

06 1-E41-PSE-D004 NURBINE EXHAUST RUPTURE RB -017 EE T/4R N/A N/A N/A N/A Yes N/A Yes Yes Yes DIAPHRAM s.

00 1-E41-S2 HPCl/SP STRAINER RB/SP -009 SU-AZ180 N/A  : N/A N/A N/A Yes N/A Yes 4 s i _ _4 1 4 4 4 Yes l Yes .

j N/A N/A i Yes '

00 1-RNA-DIV-t-N2-TANKS jN2 BOTTLES RB j 050 NN N/4R N/A  ; N/A j N/A i N/A j N/A N/A

_- s 4 -___4 4 4 4 4.- 4_._ -4 00 1-RNA-DIV-II-N2-TANKS (DIV ll N2 BACKUP BOTTLE RACK RB  ; 050 N/A j N/A i N/A i N/A j N/A i N!A N/A ' N/A i Yes 4 4 4 & 4 4 4 4 4 00 1-RNA-FLT-103 iBACKUP N2 INLINE FILTER RB j 056 SW M/6R i N/A  : N/A i N/A : N/A Yes : N/A Yes Yes j Yes

~00 h-RNA-FLT-104 fBACKUP N2 IN LINE FILTER } RB i 056 i NN N/4R i N/A fN/A N/A N/A Yes N/A } Yes l Yes Yes

~d0 -RNA-PSE-101 fBACKUP N2 DISCHARGE RB RUPTUFi5'~* f050 SS M/6R N/A N/A N/A N/A Yes N/A Yes Yes Yes iDIAPHRAM i

• * * * * * ^~~

00 TRNA-PSE-102 f61'V I BACKUP N2 HDR RUPTURE RB f050 N/A N/A N/A N/A Yes j N/A Yes Yes Yes i iDIAPHRAM i j 00 '1-SW-1 A-LUBE-PMP-STR !NSW LUBE WATER PUMP 1A SWB -011 NW N/A N/A N/A N/A ' Yes N/A Yes Yes Yes l SUCTION STRAINER 00 1-SW-1 A-NUC-CYC-SEP NSW 1A CYCLONE SEPARATOR SWB 025 NE N/A N/A N/A N/A Yes N/A N/A Yes Yes  !'

4 4 4 4 4 4-00 1-SW-1A-NUC-PMP-STR !NSW PUMP 1A STRAINER SWB 025 NE i N/A N/A N/A N/A ; Yes N/A Yes ! Yes Yes i 4 .i e 4 1 .i 00 1-SW-1B-LUBE-PMP-STR NSW LUBE WATER PUMP 18 SWB -011 NW N/A N/A N/A N/A Yes N/A Yes Yes Yes SUCTION STRAINER

._.__4 4 4 . 4 . 4 4 4 4 4 00 ^ 1-SW-1 B-NUC-CYC-SEP [NSW 1B CYCLONE SEPARATOR i SWB ; 025 NE N/A j N/A j N/A ; N/A j Yes j N/A i Yes j Yes Yes [

00 1-SW-1 B-NUC-PMP-STR jNSW PUMP 1B STRAINER j SWB j 025 l NE N/A i N/A ; N/A i N/A ; Yes j N/A j Yes j Yes i Yes  !

4 4-- 4 -4 4 4 4--- 4 4 4 4 4 4 00 j 1-VA-1 A-BFIV-RB (RB DAMPERS j RB 099 i WW U5R j 99 FT. - 4; No i ABS i CRS i Yes Yes ; N/A Yes ; No

• * ^ * *

• 00 1-VA-1 A-EHE-CB @LECTRIC HTR COIL - UNIT 1 CB 070 MECH N/A N/A N/A N/A No N/A No Yes No l EQRM y . . , , , , , . . ,.

~6071-VA-1B-BFIV-RB iRB DAMPERS 2.

i 2

RB 099 i WW U5R _2i 99 FT.

No I2 ABS } CRS } Yes -

Yes } N/A ] No l.ANo _.

52213-15/ App _c. doc  ;

~

APPENIDX C 52213-R-002, Rev. 0 -

I SCREENING VERIFICATION DATA SHEETS (SVDS) Page 3 - ,

p, w y 29 eM n , Sp;3 jp. - :W ?;y . .. , , NY, rig @%N yg,QGyg Migf Below; Setemic Seismic Capgby Bossiding QM Mg y7 Nb iBldg( IFkNd5 NRodi$ opt jEkm!Loy y @, Sp9gimm Equip EiMIDk k SyhmtEq$ipmerkDescriptum[8N @h g Capac%

j -M Class e ; A n g y n; {ge"rp? 7e%% 4M e

%fh - WSi r 9 J8 6N i M $[I [Elev;E Prow /Colg ISeisenc ginne; a gy; g@W;I Etiend , M ga0 @yac ~ tions soK72 e ly 3 w;p pw,g + dress? ent o msnet gontatoujtgg ,

CD LO-TCV-1463 .DG1 LUBE Ott TCV DG 023 NW V/9D N/A N/A N/A N/A Yes j N/A j N/A Yes Yes i CD 2-LO-TCV-2054 DG2 LUBE OIL TCV (rule of the box DG 023 WW V/10D N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Yes DG2-GEN) 00 2-LO-TCV-2077 }DG3 LUBE OIL TCV DG 023 WW V/11D N/A N!A N/A N/A Yes N/A )Yes Yes 4} Yes ,

4- 4 4 4 4 4 4 4

• C3 j2-LO-TCV-2100 jDG4 LUBE 0:L TCV 4 _ 4 j DG 023 SW V/12D

--. a N/A l N/A 4i N/A i N/A 4 4 4 Yes i N/A ! Yes i 2 4 Yes Yes i

00 2-LO-V446 iDG1 LUBE OIL STRAINER W/XFER DG 023 NW V/9D N/A N/A i N/A N/A Yes N/A Yes Yes Yes j IVALVE I

^ ' ^ ' ^ ^

~60 2-LO-V447 DG 023 WW V/10D N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Yes  ;

fDG2 LUBE OIL STRAINER W/XFER iVALVE (rule of the box DG2-GEN) 6

^ ^ ^ ' ^ ' * ' '

~dd 2-LO-V448 fDG3 LUBE OIL STRAINER W/XFER DG 023 WW V/11D N'A N/A N/A N/A Yes N/A Yes Yes Yes

^

l VALVE ^ * ^ ' * * ~* j i 00 2-LO-V449 'DG4 LUBE OIL STRAINER W/XFER DG 023 SW V/12D N/A N/A f N/A N/A Yes N/A Yes j Yes Yes VALVE l j 00 '2-RNA-DIVI-N2-TANKS 'N2 BOTTLES RB 050 NN N/21R N/A N/A N/A N/A ' N/A N/A N/A N/A Yes 00 2-RNA-DIVil-N2-TANK N2 BOTTLES RB 050 SW M/22R N/A N/A N/A N/A Yes N/A Yes Yes Yes i 5 4 4 4.---- -J 4 .- J 00 2-RNA-FLT103 jBACKUP N2 INLINE FILTER RB  ; 050 SW M122R j N/A j N/A j N/A N/A 4 Yes N/A l N/A---4 l Yes Yes 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 00 2-RNA-FLT104 jBACKUP N2 INLINE FILTER RB  ! -- 050 EE S/22R i N/A ; N/A j N/A j N/A l Yes N/A j N/A j Yes Yes ,

---4-- 4 4 & M 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 - -4 >

00 i2-RNA-PSE-101 iBACKUP N2 DISCHARGE RUPTURE RB 056 SS M/22R N/A N/A N/A N/A Yes N/A ' N/A Yes Yes  ;

! lDIAPHRAM f

^ ' ^^ ^ * ^ * ^ # '

00 iU-RNA-PSE-102 BACKUP N2 DISCHARGE RUPTURE RB 056 EE S/22R N/A N/A N/A N/A Yes N/A N/A Yes Yes

'DIAPHRAM

• ^ ' ^ * ^

• 0512-SW-2A-NUC-PMP-STR NSW 2A SELF CLEANING STRAINER. SWB 025 SE N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Yes

.  ! MOTOR OPERATED

• * ^ * * * ~

^

~UD 2-SW-2B-NUC-PMP-STR fNSW 28 SELF CLEANING STRAINER, SWB 020 SE N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Yes

, iMOTOR OPERATED

' ^ ^ ' ^ ^ ^

00 b-VA-2A-BFIV-RB iRB DAMPERS RB 099 WW L/21R N/A N/A N/A N/A No N/A Yes Yes No 00 2-VA-2A-EHE-CB ELECTRIC HTR COIL - UNIT 2 CB 070 MECH N/A N/A N/A N/A No N/A No Yes No EQ RM I

00 2-VA-28-BFIV-RB iRB DAMPERS RB 099 WW U21R ' N/A N/A N/A i N/A No . N/A Yes i Yes No 4 w i 1 -- 1 00 2-VA-2B-EHE-CB ELECTRIC HTR COIL- UNIT 1 & 2 CB 070 MECH N/A N/A N/A N/A No N/A No Yes No EQUIP

^

00 2-VA-2C-BFIV-RB iRB DAMF5RS 1 --A i RB i- 170 [ WW M/21R 1 3 N/A [ N/A } N/A $ N/A $4 No 4 4 2 2-N/A [2 Yes Yes No 00 2-VA-2D-BFIV-RB jRB DAMPERS j RB ;4 170 i WW M/21R N/A l N/A j N/A j N/A - No i N/A ; Yes Yes No 4 4 a 52213-15/ App _c doc

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ . _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ -_ ________-_m. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ m m_ , . _ _ . -

52213-R-002, R:v 0 -

Page 3 APPENDIX D INSTANCES OF MEETING THE INTENT BUT NOT THE LETI'ER OF THE CAVEAT E.C.;; Equipment ID No.( -Descriptiong 73  ? g q .Q .Deviatlon and Accep,tability ,

. j :,l$ :pg _gc ~de}jggjpgj .31 ';g[jp31._

07 2-C12-CV-127 137 SCRAM OUTLET ISOLATION VALVES Boundino Spectrum Caveat 4 (Pipe size): The valve is supported at the top by a bracket and at the bottom by a stiff pipe.

07 2-C12-CV-F011 CRD DRAIN VALVES Boundino Spectrum Caveat 7 (Independent Bracino): The bumper-type restraint of the actuator is not considered independent bracing.

52213-15/ App _d.wfa

s 52213-R-002, Rnv 0 '

Page5 APPENDIX D INSTANCES OF MEETING THE INTENT BUT NOT THE LETTER OF THE CAVEAT

{C.: Equipment !D,No. _ :Descriptiony6 m ef g ,,4g.;, ;Depatiopgnd Acceptabilityjpg ygggggspry(pfQg ,

10 1-VA-1 A-D-CB AO DAMPER Boundino Spectrum Caveat 1 (Database Representation): The damper is mounted 2-VA-21-D-CB AO DAMPER - UNIT 2 in-line but it is attached to a stiff support and is at least as well supported as it would be if attached to an air handler.

10 2-VA-ISOL-DMP-CB SUPPLY ISOL DAMPER Boundino Spectrum Caveat 1 (Database Representation): The damper is mounted in-line but it is well attached and has a low mass.

18 1-VA-ZS-1026 SUPPLY FAN LIMIT SWITCH Boundino Spectrum Caveat 1 (Database Representation): The switch is mounted 2-VA-ZS-1027-A SUPPLY FAN LIMIT SWITCH on a duct which is rigidly supported within 2 ft. of the attachment.

2-VA-ZS-1027-B SUPPLY FAN LIMIT SWITCH 2-VA-ZS-1028 SUPPLY FAN LIMIT SWITCH 19 2-VA-TT-1299-2 TEMPERATURE TRANSMITTER Boundino Spectrum Caveat 1 (Database Representation): The switch is mounted on a duct which is well supported.

20 1-H12-P601 ENGINEERED SAFEGUARDS VERT BRD Boundino Spectrum Caveat 5 (Adjacent Cabinets Bolted): One top bolt is missing and the panel butts against the control room wa!! but the lateral rigidity of the panel and the location of essential relays within the panel make this acceptable.

20 1-H12-P617 RHR A RELAY VERTICAL BOARD Boundino Spectrum Caveat 5 (Adiacent Cabinets Bolted): The entire line-up is bolted except at the far south, which is attached through the rigid wireway on top, and the far north, which has a large enough gap and enough stiffness to preclude pounding. i 20 1-XU-51 BOP RTG BOARD Boundino Spectrum Caveat 3 (Strip Chart Recorders): All cantilevered devices are 1-XU-75 POST-ACCIDENT intSC INSTRUMENT well supported.

CAB DIV-1 1-XU-79 POST-ACCIDENT MISC INSTRUMENT CABINET 2-XU-51 BOP RTG BOARD 2-XU-75 , POST-ACCIDENT MISC INSTRUMENT CAB, DIV-l 52213-15/ App _,d.wfw

j ..

i 0

l l

ENCLOSURE 1 ATTACHMENT 2 Revised pages for Reference 1 Enclosure 1 Appendices E1 and F1 i

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

• ' 522134002, Rev. O  :

Page 2 Appendix El

" OUTLIER SEISMIC VERIFICATION SHEET (OSVS)

Outlier 01

3. PROPOSED METHOD OF OUTLIER RESOLUTION (OPTICNAL)

&. Define proposed method (s) for. resolving outlier.

Existiner plant documentation and available industrv information will be reviewed for possible accentance of ion detectors as is.

t l

l I

b. Provide information needed to implement proposed method (s) for resolving outlier (e.g., estimate of fundamental frequency).

1

4. CERTIFICATION:

r The information on this OSVS is, to the best of ouf knowledge and belief, correct and accurate, and resolution of the outlier issues listed on the previous page will satisfy the requirements for this item of equipment te be verified for seismic adequacy:

Approved by: (For Equipment Classes #0 - #22, all the Seismic Capability Engineers on the Seismic Review Team (SRT) should sign; there should be at least two on the SRT. One signatory should be a licens d professional engineer. For Relays, the Lead Relay Reviewer should sign.)

/

Leo P M G x Nota fs f/JW 9 7 ' ? '

Print or Type Name Sign'ature Date Qu l. 6*rr Print or Type Name gGl.dC Signature g ,4 -W Date l Print or Type Name Signature Date l

t I

i

l

. 52213 R-002, Rav. O

! Appendix El

{

OUTLIER SEISMIC VERIFICATION SHEET (OSVS)- I Outlier 02 i 3.

PROPOSED METHOD OF OUTLIER RESOLUTION (OPTIONAL) a.

Define proposed method (s) for reso.lving outlier.

! Additional these Butterflv Valves. evaluation is recuired to assess the ruccedness of i

l I

l

b. Provide information needed to implement proposed method (s) for j

resolving outlier (e.g. , estimate of fundamental frequency) . l l

4. CERTIFICATION:

The information on this OSVS is, tothebestofoukknowledgeandbelief, correct and accurate, and resolution of the outlier issues listed on the previous page will satisfy the requirements for this item of equipment to be verified for seismic adequacy:

Approved by: (For Equipment Classes #0 - #22, all the Seismic Capability Engineers on the Seismic Review Team (SRT) should sign; there should be at least two on the SRT. One signatory should be a licensed professional engineer. For Relay,s, the Lead Relay Reviewer should sign.)

& hhA)Ry*h lh s/,'

f. t) 9 V Print or Type Name Signatur(_ / Date -

r2+24 0 l UW

• f dt(5 rY 9 -/$ ')[

Print or Type Name Signature Date Print or Type Name Signature Date

(

l l

. - ._. m _ _ . . _ . - . . _ _ _ . _ _ - - _ , ._ -. _ . . _ . .- .. _ __ __

o 52213 R-002. Rev. O 1

Page 6 Appendix El {

OUTLIER SEISMIC VERIFICATION SHEET (OSVS)

Outlier 03 3.

PROPOSEDMETHODOFOUTLIERRESOLUTIOff (OPTIONAL)

a. Define proposed method (s) for. resolving outlier.

j recuired to censider acceptability of 1

Additional evaluation is edce distance less than four belt diameters.

l

• l i

I l

b. Provide information needed to implement proposed method (s) for 1

resolving outlier (e.g. , estimate of fundamental frequency) .

HELDF calculation 52211-c-045 addresses the anchnrace and operabiliev of these Mccs. Also calculation OSETs-0004 erevides weicht and

, frecuency estimate.

t I

l l

4 CERTIFICATION:

The information on this OSVS is, to the best of or.E knowledge and belief, correct and accurate, and resolution of the ou'. lier issues listed on the previous page will satisfy the requirements for this item of equipment to be verified for seismic adequacy:

Approved by: (For Equipment Classes #0 - #22, all the Seismic Capability Engineers on the Seismic Review Team (SRT) should sign; there should be at least two en the SRT. One signatory should be a licensed professional engineer. For Relays, the Lead Relay Reviewer should sign.)

' /.2o BGAG/9GMOW Print or Type Name cs08 l Si naturu 9,(f. y r Date Sant o l. Urr Print or Type Name f ll- D W 9 -/ 4 *M' Signature Date i Print or Type Name Signature Date 1

I -

l t

l 52213 R-002, Rev. 0 Ippendix El e

OUTLIER SEISMIC VERIFICATION SHEET (OSVS)

Outlier 04

~

3.

PROPOSED METHOD OF OUTLIER RESOLUTION (OPTIONAL)

a. Define proposed method (s) for. resolving outlier.

Additienal analysis is recuired to show that the can is adequata to erevent impact or that the impact will be non-dammoine.

b. Provide information needed to implement proposed method (s) for resolving outlier (e.g., estimate of fundamental frequency).

HELDF calculation 52213-C-045 addresses the anchnrace and operability of the MCC. Alse calculation OSETS-0004 provides weicht and frequency estimate.

4. CERTIFICATION:

The information on this OSVS is, to the best of out knowledge and belief, correct and accurate, and resolution of the outlier issues listed on the previous page will satisfy the requirements for this item of equipment to be verified for seismic adequacy:

Approved by: (For Equipment Classes #0 - #22, all the Seismic Capability Engineers on the Seismic Review Team (SRT) should sign; there should be at least two on the SRT. One signatory should be a licensed professional engineer. For Relays, the Lead Relay Reviewer should sign.)

(40 Eda,fC 94 AwLJ ,ge f f A*fV Print or Type Name S gna7 re Date l

&/no S $7 Print or Type Name Sh/ h(

Signature

• )"/4 %

Date Print or Type Name ,

Signature Date

52213 R-002, Rav. O Page 10 i Appendix El '

e OUTLIER SEISMIC VERIFICATION SHEET (OSVS)

Outlier 05A

3. PROPOSED METHOD OF OUTLIER RESOLUTION (OPTIONAL) <

a. Define proposed method (s) for. resolving outlier.

Further anchorace analysis is recuired.

i 4

1 4

4 1

b. Provide information needed to implement proposed method (s) for '

resolving outlier (e.g. , estimate of fundamental frequency) . <

1 W'T,DF calculatien 52213-C-047 han been nerformed to address anchorace of these nanels.

I

4. CERTIFICATION:

The information on this OSVS is, tothebestofoukknowledgeandbelief, I correct and accurate, and resolution of the outlier issues listed on the previous page will satisfy the requirements for this item of equipment to be i verified for seismic adequacy:

Approved by: (For Equipment Classes #0 - #22, all the Seismic Capability Engineers on the Seismic Review Team (SRT) should sign; there should be at least two on the SRT. One signatory should be a licensed professional engineer. For Relays, the Lead Relay Reviewer should sign.)

l' g p (3//G$& H 'l-*

Print or Type Name hsf Signature V

• l 3 W Date f uALO l. W W Print or Type Name faIl$&

Signature

')-/4 W Date Print or Type Name Signature Date

52213 R-002, Rav. 0 Page 13 Appendix El- ,

I l

.. OUTLIER SEISMIC VERIFICATION SHEET (OSNS)

Outlier 05B

3. PROPOSED METHOD OF OUTLIER RESOLUTIO'N (OPTIONAL)

a. Define proposed method (s) for. resolving outlier.

Further anchorace analysis is required.

b. Provide information needed to implement proposed method (s) for resolving outlier (e.g., estimate of fundamental frequency).

MFLDF calculation 52213-C-049 han been nerformed to address anchorace of these panels.

4. CERTIFICATION:

The information on this OSVS is, tothebestofoubknowledgeandbelief, 1 correct and accurate, and resolution of the outlier issues listed on the previous page will satisfy the requirements for this item of equipment to be verified for seismic adequacy:

Approved by: (For Equipment Classes #0 - #22, all the Seismic Capability Engineers on the Seismic Review Team (SRT) should sign; there should be at least two on the SRT. One signatory should be a licensed professional engineer. For Relays, the Lead Relay Reviewer should sign.)

/~

L20 EcAGAGAir 6 J f. /395' Print or Type Name $igngu%re Date

[lsm.o l.k$o d Print or Type Name

& bll- Y C)-s$ 9f  !

Signature Date f Print or Type Name Signature Dato l

t l

4 52213 R-002. Rav. 0 Appendix El OUTLIER SEISMIC VERIFICATION SHEET (OSVS)

Outlier 06 3.

PROPOSED METHOD OF OUTLIER RESOLUTIO57 (OPTIONAL)

a. Define proposed method (s) for. resolving outlier.

Additional evaluation of load rath is required. Analvsis to include embedded steel. boundina snectra caveats. and boundina snectra exceedences for the DCE 23' (i.e. frecuency determination recuired for t ran s f ormer)

b. Provide information needed to implement proposed method (s) for I l

resolving outlier (e.g. , estimate of fundamental frequer.cy) . i l

See h .*d conv as-built ancherace sketch in A-46 file. Photos are I Polaroid.

See calculation 0480VDS-0002 for additienal informatien. I 1

1 l

1 J

4. CERTIFICATION:

The information on this OSVS is, to the best of ouk knowledge and bslief, corract and accurate, and resolution of the outlier issues listed on the previous page will satisfy the requirements for this item of equipment to be verified for seismic adequacy:

Approved by: (For Equipment Classes #0 - #22, all the Seismic Capability Engineers on the Seismic Review Team (SRT) should sign; there should be at laast two on the SRT. One signatory should be a licensea professional engineer. For Relays, the Lead Relay Reviewer should sign.)

bh0 $YNh5SY Print or Type Name // f f

• b' Sfgnatart Date 0 ALO l. W4) ort * [mhf. e) /4 '*) f Print or Type Name Signature Date Print or Type Name Signature Date . _

.- l l

, 52213 R-002, Rev. O Appendix El '

l ,. OUTLIER SEISMIC VERIFICATION SHEET (OSVS)

Outlier 07

3. PROPOSED METHOD OF OUTLIER RESOLUTIdN (OPTIONAL) l

a. Define proposed method (s) for. resolving outlier.

l A frequency analysis may show that the fundamental frecuency is l outside the rance of boundino seectra exceedances. Otherwise the inherent  !

ruggedness of these items will be assessed.

I

b. Provide information needed to implement proposed method (s) for resolving outlier (e.g., estimate of fundamental frequency).

These are Myterk valves and are duct mounted. These itemn can be ennnidered at least as well surported as when attached to an air handler.

4. CERTIFICATION:

The information on this OSVS is, to the best of ou2 knowledge and belief,  !

correct and accurate, and resolution of the outlier issues listed on the l previous page will satisfy the requirements for this item of equipment to be i verified for seismic adequacy:

Approved by: (For Equipment Classes #0 - #22, all the Seismic Capability Engineers on the Seismic Review Team (SRT) should sign; there should be at least two on the SRT. One signatory should be a licensed professional engineer. For Relays, the Lead Relay Reviewer should sign.)

/

jfg) SCAGk%CLC ss f 1 /5' if Print or Type Name Si ature Date t

02/If,,.h b . YUc rY" SscN/* 0W Q'/Y W Print or Type Name Signature Date Print or Type Name Signature Date l

t l

l l

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

. I 52213 R-002, Rav. 0 Appendix El 4

OUTLIER SEISMIC VERIFICATION SHEET (OSVS)

Outlier 08 3,

PROPOSED METHOD OF OUTLIER RESOLUTI5N (OPTIONAL)

a. Define proposed method (s) for resolving outlier.

Review of existina qualification data is recommended to aucment earthcuake experience data

{

b. Provide information needed to implement proposed method (s) for resolving outlier (e.g., estimate of fundamental frequency).

HELPF Cal. No. 52213-C-049 was eerformed. Calculatien OMSTV-001 demonstrates that the yeke assembly is adequate te resist seismic leads postulated by the niping annivsis (0.6Ea vertical and 2.19a combined horizental).

4. CERTIFICATION:

The information on this OSVS is, to the best of ouE knowledge and belief, correct and accurate, and resolution of the outlier issues listed on the previous page will satisfy the requirements for this item of equipment to be verified for seismic adequacy:

Approved by: (For Equipment Classes #0 - #22, all the Seismic Capability Engineers on the Seismic Review Team (SRT) should sign; there should be at least two on the SRT. One signatory should be a licensed professional engineer. For Relays, the Lead Relay Reviewer should sign.)

s bQ() h&Qsh(5N Old Print or Type Name Yp Sign re

• Y' 0' '

Date

&ks O L. dmY' fnh{ W c) .p$ -9f Print or Type Name Signature Date Print or Type Name ,

Signature Date

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

s l

52213 R-002, Rov,0 Page 21 Appendix E1 t

OUTLIER SEISMIC VERIFICATION SHEET (OSVS)

Outlier 09

3. PROPOSED METHOD OF OUTLIER RESOLUTION (OPTIONAL)

a. Define proposed method (s) for. resolving outlier.

t A frequency analysis may demonstrate the boundine spectra to be envelopine for frequencies of interest.

Otherwise. the inherent ruecedness of these items will__be assessed. stresses on the threaded connections must also be evaluated for the POVs.

b. Provide information needed to implement proposed method (s) for resolving outlier (e.g., estimate of fundamental frequency).

l l

l

4. CERTIFICATION: '

l The information on this OSVS is, to the best of ouE knowledge and belief, correct and accurate, and resolution of the outlier issues listed on the previous page will satisfy the requirements for this item of equipment to be verified for seismic adequacy:

Approved by: (For Equipment Classes #0 - #22, all the seismic Capability l Engineers on the Seismic Review Team (SRT) should sign; there should be at

} 1 east two on the SRT. One signatory should be a licensed professional engineer. For Relays, the Lead Relay Reviewer should, sign.)

Pr' nt Loor Type Signat[eW 4

l lCAEA Na& me n M V 15 17 ~

Date

, f+dh Gb l YW Print or Type Name fwhb *)-// S V Signature Date l

Print or Type Name Signature Date l

._ ._ ~. . __ _ _ . . __

. 52213 R-002, Rev. 0 j Appendix El

" OUTLIER SEISMIC VERIFICATION SHEET (OSVS) ,

Outlier 10 3.

PROPOSED METHOD OF OUTLIER RESOLUTIEN (OPTIONAL) 1

a. Define proposed method (s) for resolving outlier.

Analysis of yoke canacity considerine the as-built information is

required.

Evaluation show that they of the are outside thefrecuenev for the valves mentioned is recuired to rance of exceedances.

b. Provide information needed to implement proposed method (s) for resolving outlier (e.g., estimate of fundamental frequency).

Several of the vekes were as-built to facilitate this annivsis.

See 2-E11-F002A and 1-SW-V20MO as examnlen.

l l l L

4. CERTIFICATION:

The information on this OSVS is, to the best of ouE knowledge and belief, l 1

correct and accurate, and resolution of the outlier issues listed on the '

previous page will satisfy the requirements for this item of equipment to be verified for seismic adequacy:

Approved by: (For Equipment Classes #0 -

1. 22, all the Seismic Capability Engineers on the Seismic Review Team (SRT) should sign; there should be at least two on the SRT. One signatory should be a licensed professional engineer. For Relays, the Lead Relay Reviewer should sign.)

/

Lqo ScA64AicLo Prin or Type Name -6 MM Signatg6 1 ' 3' 'lf Date

& u n L. Yao W Print or Type Name Qw.Nd fe bh Signature c') -/ 4 W Date

Print or Type Name Signature Date e w l

I

52213 R-002, Rev. O Paga 26 Appendix El ,

OUTLIER SEISMIC VERIFICATION SHEET (OSVS)

Outlier 11 '

3. PROPOSED METHOD OF OtNLIER IJ.:.,0LUTION (OPTIONAL)

a. Define proposed method (s) for. resolving outlier.

Static analysis of operator height and weight.

Y

b. Provide information needed to implement proposed method (s) for resolving outlier (e.g., estimate of fundamental frequency).

As-built croperties f3r the valve yoke / operator have been included with walkdown informatiom. several of these valves were evalanted en the walkdown as accentable and aro included in this list because of similarity with others. Reference to walkdown evaluations will resolve some.

4. CERTIFICATION:

The information on this OSVS is, to the best of ouE knowledge and belief, correct and accurate, and resolution of the outlier issues listed on the previous page will satisfy the requirements for this item of equipment to be verified for seismic adequacy: '

Approved by: (For Equipment Classes #0 - #22, all the Seismic Capability Engineers on the' Seismic Review Team (SRT) should sign; there should be at least two on the SRT. One signatory should be a licensed professional engineer. For Relays, the Lead Relay Reviewer .% ould sign.)

lfn? $$6J/0LO 2rint or Type Name WI W-ywl Signat $re ~ Date

$ I$' $ T f

@,0.4 L O b. IY fl C) f &' ~#)

Print or Type Name Signature Date Print or Type Name Signature Date

• 52213-R-OO2, Rav. O Page 29 i Appendix El j

,. OUTLIER SEISMIC VERIFICATION SHEET (OSVS)  !

Outlier 12 3.

PROPosEDMETHODOFOUTLIERRESOLUTIO57 (OPTIONAL) j 3 a. Define proposed method (s) for. resolving outlier.  !'

j Evaluatien of pipe stress due to eccentricity of operater will resolve this outlier.

I a

b.

Provide information needed to implement proposed method (s) for resolving outlier (e.g., estimate of fundamental frequency).

-i l

8 l

t

4. CERTIFICATION

The information on this OSVS is, to the best of cul knowledge and belief, i

correct and accurate, and resolution of the outlier issues listed on the previous page will satisfy the requirements for this item of equipment to be i verified for seismic adequacy:

i l Approved by: (For Equipment Classes #0 - #22, all the Seismic Capability 4

Engineers on the Seismic Review Team (SRT) should sign; there should be at least two on the SRT. One signatory should be a licensed professional engineer. For Relays, the Lead Relay Reviewer should sign.)

1

f. fed h M NOLO Print or Type Name M

Signa re f /3 Y[

4 3

Date i-i &dkcb l. UcTT*

Print or Type Name fa, Signature

• l$' k . k C)= /l DV Date Print or Type Name Signature Date i

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

I

, 52213-R-002, Rsv. O Appendix El

, ,, OUTLIER SEISMIC VERIFICATION SHEET (OSVS)

Outlier 13 3.

PROPOSED METHOD OF OUTLIER RESOLUTIdN (OPTIONAL)

a. Define proposed method (s) for. resolving outlier.

Frecuency evaluations are needed to demnnstrate that thev de net fall within the Boundino spectnim exceedance rance. Otherwise. the inherent ruccedness of these cemnenents will be assessed.

i

b. Provide information needed to implement proposed method (s) for resolving outlier (e.g., estimate of fundamental frSquency).

i l

l

4. CERTIFICATION: i I

The information on this OSVS is, to the best of ou"E knowledge and belief, '

correct and accurate, and resolution of the outlier issues listed on the previous page will satisfy the requirements for this item of equipment to be verified for seismic adequacy:

Approved by: (For Equipment Classes #0 - #22, all the Seismic Capability Engineers on the Seismic Review Team (SRT) should sign; there should be at least two or. the SRT. One signatory shculd be a licensed professional engineer. For Relays, the Lead Relay Reviewer should sign.)

/

PrintorTypeyame[ G s 0f)GMSignature -d+ $A f CGO Date

$ U' W -

$ss As,,O b. W^)OW fwa l$ N%

Print or Type Name Signature Date

• ) - k 0 (

Print or Type Name Signature Date

i

. 52213 R-002, Rev. 0 Page 34 Appendix El OUTLIER SEISMIC VERIFICATION SHEET (OSVS)

Outlier 14

3. PROPOSED METHOD OF OUTLIER RESOLUTION (OPTIONAL)

a. Define proposed nethod(s) for. resolving outlier.

Evaluation for frequency to assess canacity vs. demand and anchnrace evaluaticn should be nerformed. I

b. Provide information needed to implement proposed method (s) for resolving outlier (e.g., estimate of fundamental frequency).

l Anchorage has been as-built in the SEWS forms. Addittenal anchorace information is also available for DG fans in MOD 9R-019_,

specifically sketch SM-S-99-019-77.

4. CERTIFICATION:

The information on this OSVS is, to the best of ouk knowledge and belief, correct and accurate, and resolution of the outlier issues listed on the l previous page vill satisfy the requirements for this item of equipment to be verified for seismic adequacy:

Approved by: (For Equipment Classes #0 - #22, all the Seismic Capability Engineers on the Seismic Review Team (SRT) should sign; there should be at least two on the SRT. One signatory should be a licensed professional engineer. For Relays, the Lead Relay Reviewer should sign.)

bf0 N/\&NNWs' A 'J !? / f * /E $'[

Print or Type Name Signature Date

& W M O l YAJc W [ m Uf-l, c)-/d -9[

Print or Type Name Signature Date Print or Type Name Signature Date

i

(

, 52213 R-002. Rav. O Appendix El

" OUTLIER SEISMIC VERIFICATION SHEET (OSVS)

Outlier 16 3.

PROPOSEDMETHODOFOUTLIERRESOLUTIC5T (OPTIONAL)

a. Define proposed method (s) <or. resolving outlier.

Evaluation of M" bolt and W inch thick ead will resolve outlier.

Also. a frecuency evaluation is remiired to resolve the canacity versus demand ConceMs.

l

b. Provide information needed to implement proposed method (s) for resolving outlier (e.g., estimate of fundamental frequency) .

4. CERTIFICATION:

The information on this OSVS is, tothebestofoukknowledgeandbelief, correct and accurate, and resolution of the outlier issues listed on the previous page will satisfy the requirements for this item of equipment to be verified for seismic adequacy: '

Approved by: (For Equipment Classes #0 - #22, all the Seismic Capability Engineers on the Seismic Review Team (SRT) should sign; there should be at least two on the SRT. One signatory should be a licensed professional engineer. For Relays, the Lead Relay Reviewer shou gn.)

L60 NACA660t-o Print or Type Name 4 e [. A g Signat 9 /F M Date

[ & &ALQl. & rf fn h/*h C)-/4 W j Print or Type Name Signature Date l

i Print or Type Name Signature Date l

? .

l l

l i

f ,. l

,. 52213.R 002, Rav. 0 Appendix El OUTLIER SEISMIC VERIFICATION SHEET (OSVS)

Outlier 17 3.

PROP 0 SED METHOD OF OUTLIER RESOLUTION (OPTIONAL)

a. Define proposed method (s) for. resolving outlier, s

Further anchorage evaluatien is recuired to resolve eutlier.

b.

Provide information needed to implement proposed method (s) for resolving outlier (e.9., estimate of fundamental frequency).

sketches are provided in sews form. Additionally. both rassed a tua test.

4. CERTIFICATION:

The information on this OSVS is, to the best of ouE knowledge and belief, correct and accurate, and resolution of the outlier issues listed on the previous page will satisfy the requirements for this item of equipment to be verified for seismic adequacy:

Approved by: (For Equipment Classes #0 - #22, all the Seismic Capability Engineers on the Seismic Review Team (SRT) should sign; there should be at least two on the SRT. One signatory should be a licensed professional engineer. For Relays, the Lead Relay Reviewer should sign.)

LGG b2hGAGNDLo Print or Type Name - -fp .Q'6l S@natuye

.  ?'I3 O Date -

0dhlD D & Off' e-., h f , & $'/b0 Print or Type Name Sfgnature Date Print or Type Name Signature Date

i . .

i 6 52213-R-002, Rev. 0 Page 40 Appendix El OUTLIER SEISMIC VERIFICATION SEEET (OSVS)

Outlier 18 3.

PROPOSED METHOD OF OUTLIER RESOLUTION (OPTIONAL)

a. Define proposed method (s) for. resolving outlier.

Evaluate the straps for the saddle tanks.

b. Provide information needed to implement proposed method (s) for resolving outlier (e.g., estimate of fundamental frequency).

4. CERTIFICATION:

The information on this OSVS is, the best of ouk knowledge and belief, correct and accurate, and resolution of the outlier issues listed on the previous page will satisfy the requirements for this item of equipment to be verified for seismic adequacy:

Approved by: (For Equipment Classes #0 -

1. 22, all the Seismic Capability I Engineers on the Seismic Review Team (SRT) should sign; there should be at least two on the SRT. One signatory should be a licensed professional ]

engineer. For Relays, the Lead Relay Reviewer should sign.)

/

l&t) (-#~t&hGNOL. 0 A r Print or Type Name f df'l5' Y$

Sihnature Date l 1

bh *

• jf Print or Type Name Signature Date Print or Type Name Signature Date l

l

1 52213-R.002, Rsv. 0 Paga 42 Appendix El C

OUTLIER SEISMIC V2RIFICATION SHEET (OSVS)

Outlier 19

3. PROPOSED METHOD OF OUTLIER RESOLUTION (OPTIONAL)

a. Define proposed method (s) for. resolving outlier.

Outiler' resolution to address the frecuency of the support with respect to the boundine srectra exceedances.

An evaluation of the anchoragg for 1-SW-TY-4790 is also recuired.

b. Provide information needed to implement proposed method (s) for resolving outlier (e.g., estimate of fundamental frequency).

Many of these were iudged to be well supported by the SRT. An anchorage evaluation of 2-SW-PS-1995 through 1999 is included in calculation 52213-C-031.

4. CERTIFICATION:

The information on this OSVS is, to the best of ouE knowledge and belief, correct and accurate, and resolution of the outlier issues listed on the previous page will satisfy the requirements for this item of equipment to be verified for seismic adequacy:

Approved by: (For Equipment Classes #0 - #22, all the Seismic Capability Engineers on the Seismic Review Team (SRT) should sign; there-should be at least two on the SRT. One signatory should be a licensed professional engineer. For Relays, the Lead Relay Reviewer should sign.)

Wo 612AG AGhsc7L.-Q Print or Type Name

/o

/

Sig6a".u" O 9.t3W Date

\

@MhLD /. &W fmh[WA Q-// $(

Print or Type Name Signature Date Print or Type Name Signature Date

l l 52213 R-OO2, Rav. O r o Page 45 Appendix El

{

" OUTLIER SEISMIC VERIFICATION THEE." (OSVS)

! Outlier 21 l

l 3.

PROPOSED METHOD OF OUTLIER RESOLUTIOhi (0.?TIONAL)

a. Define proposed method (s) for. resolving outlier.

i Evaluatien for differential movement is recuired.

1 b.

Provide information needed to implement proposed method (s) for resolving outlier (e.g., estimate of fundamental frequency).

Modification for rack and conduit supnert uperade has been performed. Refer to the evaluation for this modification. Additionally. note that this rack in included in the walkdown as entional equinment.

4. CERTIFICATION:

The information on this OSVS is, to the best of ouk knowledge and belief, correct and accurate, and resolution of the outlier issues listed on the previous page will satisfy the requirements for this item of equipment to be verified for seismic adequacy:

Approved by: (For Equipment Classes #0 - #22, all the Seismic Capability Engineers on the Seismic Review Team (SRT) sbiuld sign; there should be at least two on the SRT. One signatory should a a licensed professional engineer. For Relays, the Lead Relay Reviewer should sign.)

/

lx+0 6PA&MdLa d~ 0 b!%' W Print or Type Name Si@atuf Date h NAl.O b WWC T fwh[- *%

Q-/$ W Print or Type Name Signature Date l

Print or Type Name Signature Date t

i

e m - --W.4 - >A.2J:A. .* ..u4 a 4 4 A.-._ .s.s 4 _.,

l 52213 R 002, Rsv. 0 Page 47 Appendix E1

[

,, OUTLIER SEISMIC VERIFICATION SHEET (OSVS)

Outlier 22/23 i

l .

l 3. PROPosEn METHOD OF OUTLIER RESOLUTION (OPTIONAL) i

a. Define proposed method (s) for. resolving outlier.

Evaluation of conditions addressed above.

l b. Provide-information needed to' implement proposed method (s) for resolving outlier (e.g. , estimate of fundamental frequency) .

HFT,DF calculation 52211-C-050 was performed for anchorace.

4. CERTIFICATION:

The information on this OSVS is, to the best of ouk knowledge and belief, correct and accurate, and resolution of the outlier issues listed on the previous page will satisfy the requirements for this item of equipment to be verified for seismic adequacy:

Approved by: (For Equipment Classes #0 - #22, all the Seismic Capability Engineers on the seismic Review Team (SRT) should sign; there should be at least two on the SRT. One signatory should be a licensed professional engineer. For Relays, the Lead Relay Reviewer should sign.)

/

Ls.o PA2AsMy0.y t /e fg /

/  % /3 'l7 Print or Type Name SfgnatWe Date

& Qt b b lb)cTT* [ jtl $. bE Q-/4-9i Print or Type Name Signature Date Print or Type Name Signature Date O

. - .- - . . - -. ~ . - . . . . - - . . . . . . - . . .

, 52213 R 002, Rev. 0 Appendix El

,, OUTLIER SEISMIC VERIFICATION SHEET (OSVS)

Outlier 24 3.

PROPOSED METHOD OF OUTLIER RESOLUTION (OPTIONAL)

a. Define proposed method (s) for. resolving outlier.

Evaluation of strin chart recorders to satinfv Boundina spectra caveats.

i

b. Provide information needed to implement proposed method (s) for resolving outlier (e.g. , estimate of fundamental frequency) .

8 l

5 I.

4. CERTIFICATION:

The information on this OSVS is, to the best of ouk knowledge and belief, correct and accurate, and resolution of the outlier issues listed on the previous page will satisfy the requirements for this item of equipment to be verified for seismic adequacy:

Approved by: (For Equipment Classes #0 - #22, all the Seismic Capability Engineers on the Seismic Review Team (SRT) should sign; there should be at least two on the SRT. One signatory should be a licensed professional

, engineer. For Relays, the Lead Relay Reviewer should sign.)

s' l4c (2 Ac+

A Asp.nc> A (,W  %<3 fT

Print or Type Name Si atur Date

&dL.c $. YAMW f Yl[' S Q /h N Print or Type Name Signature Date Print or Type Name Signature Date 4

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

O j p 52213 R 002, Rev. O Appendix El

" OUTLIER SEISMIC VERIFICATION SHEET (OSVS)

Outlier 25

3. PROPOSED METHOD OF OUTLIER RESOLUTIObi (OPTIONAL)

a. Define proposed method (s) for. resolving outlier.

l

{

i t

I i I l b. Provide information needed to implement proposed method (s) for resolving outlier (e.g., estimate of fundamental frequency).

1 I

4

4. CERTIFICATION: 1 l

The information on this OSVS is, to the best of ouE knowledge and belief, correct and accurate, and resolution of the outlier issues listed on the J

previous page will satisfy the requirements for this item of equipment to be j verified for seismic adequacy:

Approved by

(For Equipment Classes #0 - #22, all the Se!.smic Capability i

Engineers on the Seismic Review Team (SRT) should sign; there should be at

. least two on the SRT. One signatory should be a licensed professional engineer. For Relays, the Lead Relay Reviewer sho .)

Wo Bt2As/cgret, .

'O W f 12 97 4

Print or Type Name Si atu[e Date l

&so S-doW Print or Type Name

&r~/W/-WA '

Signature 9 -/ $ C) [ l Date i

1: Print or Type Name Signature Date i

i a

M i

j t

'k f 52213 R-002, Rav. O Appendix F1

(

OUTLIER SEISMIC VERIFICATION SHEET (OSVS)

Outlier 26

3. PROPOSED METHOD OF OUTLIER RESOLUTIO i

(OPTIONAL) 1

a. Define proposed method (s) for. resolving outlier.

Evaluation of the accumulator connection to the frama is required.

calc 96-109-01 and -02 should be reviewed to aneure that the top connection of outer McU row framas to the braced inner row *raman haa sufficient capaciev.

addressed.

Additiona11v. the corrosion at the haae of the framaa should be

b. Provide information needed to implement proposed method (s) for resolving outlier (e.g., estimate of fundamental frequency).

The frame bracine han been evaluated eer calculation 84-109-02.

Total HEU weight is 795 lbs ner FP-5096.

4. CERTIFICATION:

r The information on this OSVS is, to the best of out knowledge and belief, correct and accurate, and resolution of the outlier issues listed on the previous page will satisfy the requirements for this item of equipment to be verified for seismic adequacy:

Approved by: (For Equipment Classes #0 - #22, all the Seismic Capability Engineers on the Seismic Review Team (SRT) should sign; there should be at least two on the SRT. One signatory should be a licensed professional engineer. For Relays, the Lead Relay Reviewer should sign.)

/

% 62AGAsupw Print or Type Name 6 I?0W 9. < 3 Sr Signature Date

&nn L. WAdoW Print or Type Name

[uNbWA Signature d)-l4 V T Date Print or Type Name Signature Date l

r l

r _.

3 g

o 52213 R-002, Rev. 0 Page 4 Appendix F1 OUTLIER SEISMIC VERIFICATION SHEET (OSVS)

Outlier 27

3. ~

PROPOSED METHOD OF OUTLIER RESOLUTION (OPTIONAL)

a. Define proposed method (s) for resolving outlier.

b. Provide information needed to implement proposed method (s) for resolving outlier (e.g., estimate of fundamental frequency).

4. CERTIFICATION:

r The informatier on this OSVS is, to the best of out knowledge and belief, correct and accurate, and resolution of the outlier issues listed on the previous page will satisfy the requirements for this item of equipment to be verified for seismic adequacy:

Approved by: (For Equipment Classes #0 -

1. 22, all the Seismic Capability Engineers on the Seismic Review Team (SRT) should sign; there should be at i least two on the SRT. One signatory should be a licensed professional engineer. For Relays, the Lead Relay Reviewer should sign. )

& M/ GNAi&\ LL) / h f. /]. 'lF~

Print or Type Name S a e Date i

2~ *cb L KheW g j/f. Q 974 .c)f Print or Type Name Signature Date Print or Type Name Signature Date

~

4 52213 R-002, Rev. O Appendix F1 OUTLIER SEISMIC VERIFICATION SHEET (OSVS)

Outlier 28 3.

PROPOSED METHOD OF OUTLIER RESOLUTION" (OPTIONAL)

a. Define proposed method (s) for hesolving outlier.

, b. Provide inforaation needed to implement proposed method (s) for i resolving outlier (e.g., estimate of fundamental frequency).

4 MCLDP calculatien 52213-C-053 was nerformed. Anchnrace was being modified at time of inacection. The 2B HY was inapected an optional j egui_e ment.

l

4. CERTIFICATION:

r The information on this OSVS is, to the best of out knowledge and belief, correct and accurate, and resolution of the outlier issues listed on the previous page will satisfy the requirements for this item of equipment to be verified for seismic adequacy:

Approved by: (For Equipment Classes #0 - #22, all the Seismic Capability Engineers on the Seismic Review Team (SRT) should sign; there should be at least two on the SRT. One signatory should be a licensed professional engineer. For Relays, the Lead Relay Reviewer should ~

.)

l.he? U(2A&M-MOGo Print or Type Name Si@atuf 9 ' ?* W Date

[wk.O l. WWf [wN S- W 9-// - W Print or Type Name Signature Date Print or Type Name Signature Date

.