IR 05000280/1988020
| ML18152B090 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Surry  |
| Issue date: | 08/04/1988 |
| From: | Blake J, Chou R NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML18152B089 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-280-88-20, 50-281-88-20, IEB-79-02, IEB-79-2, IEB-79-24, NUDOCS 8808240267 | |
| Download: ML18152B090 (11) | |
Text
Report Nos.:
UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
REGION II
101 MARIETTA STREET, ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30323 50-280/88-20 and 50-281/88-20 Licensee:
Virginia Electric and Power Company Richmond, VA 23261 Docket Nos.:
50-280 and 50-281 License Nos.: DPR-32 and DPR-37 Facility Name:
Surry 1 and 2 Inspection C 1988 rake, te ials and Processes Section ng*neering Branch Division of Reactor Safety SUMMARY Date Signed Date Signed Scope:
This routine, announced inspection was conducted in the areas of pipe support base plate designs using concrete expansion anchor bolts (!EB 79-02), and seismic analyses for as-built safety-related piping systems (!EB 79-14).
Results:
In the areas inspected, no violations or deviations were identifie PDR ADOCK 05000280 G
PNU
REPORT DETAILS Persons Contacted Licensee Employees
- D. L. Benson, Station Manager
- R. H. Blount, Superintendent of Technical Service
- R. P. Cherry, Corporate Licensing Engineer J. P. Dougherty, Senior Engineer A. R. Fletcher, Staff Engineer
- E. S. Grecheck, Assistant Station Manager
- R. MacManus, Surveillance and Test Supervisor
- H. L. Miller, Assistant Station Manager L. Poage, QC Inspector
- J. A. Rice, QA Manager D. Wang, Senior Engineer
- M. S. Whitt, System Engineer
- C. Whipp, System Engineer - Innsbrook Other licensee employees contacted during this inspection included craftsmen, engineers, operators, mechanics, technicians, and admini-strative personne Other Organizations Stone and Webster Engineering Corporation (SWEC)
C. K. Howland, Structural Engineer P. A. Liakos, Head of Office for SWEC NRC Resident Inspector
- W. E. Holland, Senior Resident Inspector NRC Headquarters
- C. P. Patel, Project Manager for Surry Plant
- Attended exit interview (Closed) Pipe Support Base Plate Designs Using Concrete Expansion Anchor Bolts for Units 1 and 2 (IEB 79-02)(25528) Final Report Reviewed The licensee stated that IEB 79-02 for Surry Nuclear Plant Units 1 and 2 were completed in 1981 and 198 The final report dated April 9, 1981, and detail report dated October 26, 1981, on IEB 79-02 for Surry Nuclear Plant Unit 1 were submitted for review..
The final
report dated August 4, 1980, and detail report Revision 1 dated July 1981, on IEB 79-02 for Surry Nuclear Plant Unit 2, performed by Ebasco Services Incorporated were al so. submitted for revie The reports addressed the licensee performance in meeting the Bulletin requirements. The detail reports include system scope, anchor bolt testing program, base plate analysis method, anchor bolt allowable, anchor bolt factors of safety, concrete testing program, base plate and bolt as-built verification, evaluation, modification and documentatio An inspection and testing program has been performed by licensee to verify that the anchor bolts satisfy the design and installation requirement A reanalysis was conducted of safety-related piping system and their supports per IEB 79-1 All the seismic Category I pipe support plates and their expansion bolt anchorage system inside and outside the containment which were affected by IEB 79-14, see paragraph 3, have been analyzed and evaluated in accordance with IEB 79-02 requirements based on reanalyzed pipe load The plate ana.lysis was based on as-built piping isometrics and support detaiJs in order to ascertain that the base plate stresses and anchor bolt loads were within the allowable limit Field Walkdown Inspection The inspector reinspected 36 supports as stated at Paragraph Most supports reinspected had anchor bolts and base plate Procedure and NRC Information Notices Reviewed Procedure No. STF-16, Inspection and Testing Program for determining Base Plate and Anchor Acceptability for IE Bulletin 79-02, Rev. 4 was reviewe Paragraphs 6.3.A.4 and 6.3.8.2 state that the angularity of the bolt is acceptable, provided the gap between the support plate and any point on the bolt head does not exceed 1/8 inch for bolts greater than 1/2 inch. The bolt head (or washer) must be in contact with the support plate at one location when tightened snugl The licensee was requested to provide calculations to prove that the 1/8 inch gap allowable is adequate. This item is identified as the new open item as Unresolved Item (UNR) 50-280, 281/88-20-0 Hilti anchor bolts were used in both unit !EB 79-02 requires the licensee to determine the anchor bolt allowables based on the testing capacity in field or catalog capacity published by the manufacturer if QA document is availabl NRC Information Notices No. 86-94 and 88-25 require the licensees who use the Hilti anchor bolts to review the allowables used in design calculations since the NRC found that the test capacity in field was 30% - 40% below the catalog capacity due to the various concrete mixture The licensee is requested to review the Hilti anchor bolt allowable per IEB 79-02, NRC Information Notices No. 86-94 and 88-2 This item is identified as a new open item as Inspector Followup Item (IFI) 50-280, 281/88-20-0 *
- Bulletin Closure The NRC Region II Inspection Report Numbers 50-280/79-35, 79-44, 79-53, 79-54, 79-56, 79-58, 80-12, 80-18, 80-26 and 80-32 for Unit 1 and 50-281/79-76, 79-88, 80-13, 80-18, 80-29, and 80-30 for Unit 2 were performed for IEB 79-02 to verify and review the procedures, programs, analytical methods, modifications and documentation The inspector also performed field walkdowns during this inspection to verify the 1 icensee performance and commitments on IEBs 79-02 and 79-14 as stated in Paragraph 3(b).
Based on the previous inspection repor\\s, this inspection and review of final reports as stated above, IEB 79-02 is considered closed except for the new open items as stated in Paragraphs 2(c) and 3(d). (Closed) Seismic Analysis for As-built Safety-Related Piping Systems for Units 1 and 2 (IEB 79-14) (25529) Walkdown Inspection of Installed Piping and Hangers The inspector randomly selected seven piping isometrics which included 36 hangers (pipe hangers and component hangers) that had been QC finally inspected for component cooling water, safety injection loops, and Auxiliary Feedwater System The piping and hangers were reinspected with the assistance of QC inspectors and engineer The piping was reinspected against detail drawings for configuration, dimension, branch location, hanger location, hanger identification, clearance with adjacent structure and/or pipe and valve identificatio The hangers were reinspected against their detail drawings for configurat;'on, identification, dimension, clearance, member size, welding, base plate, fastener/anchor bolt installation, maintenance, and damage protectio Summary of Walkdown Results The results were discussed with the QC inspector and engineer Listed below are the comments and discrepancies identified by the inspector during the walkdow (1)
Piping Isometric Iso 11548-MKS-AFSl-1 Rev. 1 (2)
Pipe Hangers (a)
Unit 1 Comment/Discrepancy About *30 feet of µiping was checked, no discrepancies were foun *
Isometric/Hanger Rev. N Comment/Discrepancies Isa 11448-MKS-112El-1
(Component Cooling Water)
-Hanger 1-Hanger 16-Hanger 18-Hanger 20
1
1 Isa 11448-MKS-118Ll
(Aux Stearn Generator Feedwater)
-Hanger 1, 11, 17-Hanger 2, 12, 18-Hanger 3, 13, 19-Hanger 14-Hanger 15-Hanger 23
1
1
1 Isa 11448-MKS-122A2-2
(Safety Injection Loop 11C 11 )
-Hanger 34
-Hanger 35
- 1-El.3'-71/8 11 is to be 8 1-7-1/2
-Base plate size 1'-2" x 1 1-2 11 (lower plate) was measured and drawing showed 1 1-1
X 1'-1
-Three studs and four bolts were measured 5/8"¢ and drawing showed 3/4"¢.
-None-None-None-None-Based on cross section measured on beam, bottom member is to be W8x28 or W8x24, not W8x31 as shown on drawing-None-None-None-None*
-None
-Hanger 36-Hanger 37-Hanger 38 (b)
Unit 2 Isometric/Hanger Iso 11548-MKS-AF51-1-Hanger 1-Hanger 2-Hanger 3-Hanger 4-Hanger 5
1
f-2-5/8 11 vertical edge distance was measured for top and left bolt and drawing showed 1-3/4 11 at Section A-Spring can is rusty and Load Indication plate is not legibl Check valve and pipe are rusty due to l ea_kage at are None-None Rev. N Comment/Discrepancies
1
1
1-None-Four holes were drilled at top flange of W6 due to the r.emoved U-bo l Top and middle bolt has 5/32 11 gap at right side-Four holes were drilled at top flange of W6 due to the removed U-bol None-3/4 11 front edge distances at front channel of plan view were measured and drawing showed (2-1/2 11 )
-(1-1/4 11 )=1-l/4 11 *
3/4 11 *is less than 1
the minimum edge distance require-ment per AIS *,.
'('*e:.
-Hanger 6-Hanger 7 Iso 11548-MKS-llBAl-Hanger 2-Hanger 3-Hanger 4
1
1
1
Iso 11548-MKS-122-Dl
-Hanger 2A-Hanger 3-Hanger 5
1
Iso 11548-MKS-122-Ll
-Hanger 1
-Hanger 3
-None 1/2 11 rear edge distances at rear channel of plan view were measured and drawing showed (2-1/2 11 )-
(1-3/811) = 1-1/8 11.
1/2 11 is less than 111 the minimum edge distance requirement per AIS None-Base plate size 1/2 11 x 12 11 x 12 11 at left side of Section A-A was measured and drawing showed 1/211 x 10 11 x 12 11.
-Item 5, plate 5/8 11 x 411 x 411 was measured and drawing showed 1/2 11 X 4
X 4 11 *
-None-None-None-Water stays in* cubical formed by wing plates and stiffener plate Item 10, L3x2-1/4xl/2 was
. measured and drawing showed L3xl-5/8xl/ and 6-1/4 11 front edge distance at two center bolts at the front row of Section D were measured and drawing showed 2-1/2 11 and 2-7/8 11.
-Item 2, plate size 1-1/2 11 xl 1-l 11 xl 1-l 11 was not shown on drawin No identification and indication plate for snubbe Calculations Reviewed Seven support design calculations for Unit 2 were reviewed and evaluated for thoroughness, clarity, consistency and accurac In general, the design calculations were of good qualit The seven calculations are Support No. 1 to 6 and H-7, MKS No. AF-51-1, Problem No. 268 The calculation package contains support sketch, support verifications/design calculation and base plate verification/design calculatio * Finding and Result The above discrepancies found between the field and as-built drawings were discussed with the licensee engineers and QC inspecto Pending the licensee review and revisions on the drawings and calculations, the discrepancies such as anchor bolt edge distance, holes on wide flanges, number and plate size differences, bolt diameter difference etc., is identified as a new open item UNR 50-280, 281/88-20-0 The discrepancies or defects which require maintenance, such as spring can rusty and illegible, snubber name plate missing, water retention, pipe and check valve rusty etc., is identified as a new open item as UNR 50-280, 281/88-20-0 Support calculations for Unit 1 were not reviewed due to the time shortage, this item will be identified as IFI 50-280/88-20-0 Final Report Reviewed The licensee stated that IEB 79-14 for Surry Nuclear Plant Units 1 and 2 were completed in 1981 and 198 The licensee did not submit the official final reports oh IEB 79-14 for Units 1 and 2 to NRC for review after completionof their wor Instead, the licensee presented to the inspector a copy of letter for Unit 1 dated January 10, 1984, which was submitted to NRC t.o close out the requirements on 11Drder to Show Cause 11 dated March 13, 197 The letter stated that all piping and pipe support analyses associated with the Order to Show Cause, dated March 13, 1979, have been completed and all modifications resulting from these analyses have been installed. The licensee also presented a copy of letter for Unit 2 dated December 31, 1980, which was submitted to NRC to report the status of the work performed per IEB 79-1 The letter stated that all modifications except one for IEB 79-14 have been completed. The detail report on the I&E Bulletin 79-14, analysis for as-built safety-related piping systems for Surry Power Station, Unit 2 performed by Ebasco Service Incorporated dated
July 1981, was submitted for revie The report includes scope of analysis, pipe stress results, pipe support results, field verifi-cation of as-built conditions, *quality assurance and engineering assurance, support stiffness, NUPIPE computer code et The objective of IE Bulletin 79-14 was to verify that the seismic analysis applies to the actual configuration of safety-related piping system The field verification of as-built conditions has been performe The field verification produced detailed piping isometric drawings and pipe support sketches for each support upon which analysis was base The reanalysis of piping stresses and support loads were based on the field verified as-built conditions and included both the operating basis earthquake and design basis earthquake condition For analyses of anchor bolts and base plates, the requirements* on IEB 79-02 were use See Paragraph The detail report on IEB 79-14 for Unit 1 was not prepared by the l i c e n see.
Th e l i c e n see e n g i n e e rs stated that the p h i l o sop hy and methods used to complete Unit 1 for IEB. 79-14 were same as or similar to Unit The inspector randomly reviewed Procedure N.26-TPl-2 (STF-9), Preparation of Pipe Hanger As-Built Sketches, Unit 1 and J. 0. No. 12846.36 (STF-4), Procedure for Review of Isometric and As-Built Supports Generated for I.E.Bulletin 79-14, Unit The latter procedure was compared to J. 0. NO. 12846.39 (STF-12) with the same title for Unit 2 and found that the contents for both procedures are same or simila The* contents of detail reports on IEB 79-02 for both units were same or similar which were reviewed and stated in paragraph 2(a). Bulletin Closure The NRC Region II Inspection Report Numbers 50-280/79-53, 79-56, 79-58, 80-12, 80-18, 80-22 and 80-32 for Unit 1 and 50-281/79-71, 79-74, 80-13, 80-18, 80-25, 80-29, 80-30 and 80-35 for Unit 2 were performed for IEB 79-14 to verify and review the procedure, inspec-tion programs, analytical methods, modifications, and documentation The inspector also performed walkdowns in this inspection as stated in Paragraph 3(b) to verify the licensee performance and commitments on IEBs 79-02 and 79-1 Based on the previous inspection reports, this inspection and review of detail report stated in Paragraph 3(e),
Open Item 50-281/80-13-04 and IEB 79-14 are considered closed except for the new open items as stated in Paragraph 3(d). Heat Exchanger Support Installation Review During this refueling outage, the licensee A/E firm, Stone and Webster Engineering Corporations (SWEC) was replacing the recirculation spray heat exchanger and supports due to corrosio A large area of the outside protection layer of concrete for rebars was removed and exposed to air due to anchor bolt dri 11 i n The inspector was requested by the NRC Senior Resident Inspector to review the activity adequacy on the anchor bolt
- drilling procedures and methods.*
The inspector discussed the above concern with the licensee 1 s field engineer, project engineer and Stone and Webster field representative They said tbat it was very difficult to drill a hole in two inches space left within twelve inches span due to rebars already occupied six inches. The rebars were hit when they drilled each tim Finally, they consulted to the concrete specialist in their headquarters, Boston, Massachusetts to chip off the entire outer layer of concrete to find out the space for drilling a hole for a maxi bolt. The concrete cover was chipped in accordance with Drawing No. S8722-l-M-705, Sheet 2 of 8 and WP-E0 After the Drillco Maxi Bolts were installed, Master Builders 713 Grout was used to cover reba This grout has the same compression strength as the original concret Concrete repair and replacement instructions are shown in Step 4.8 of Procedure Pl-U The approach, drilling procedures and repair methods were acceptable to the inspector. The following documents were partially reviewed for concrete chipping, maxi bolt installation, and concrete repai DCP 87-22 Final Design Controlling Procedure P3-Ul, Instructions for the Removal and Replacement of 1-RS-E-l DCP 87-22 Final Design Controlling Procedure Pl-Ul, Instructions for Removal and Reinstallation of Interference Grout Placement Car Quality Control Test Data Sheets (a representative sample of grout test).
Procedure Number WP-E08, Drilling, Digging, and Cutting Surface Procedure WP-COS, Groutin Procedure CE-19, Installation of Drillco Maxi Bolt Construction Products Information - Master Builders 713 Grou Drawing from S-8722-1-M-705 Sheet 2 of 8 of DCP 87-2.
Exit Interview The inspection scope and results were summarized on May 27, 1988, with those persons indicated in paragraph The inspectors described the areas inspected and discussed in detail the inspection results listed belo Although reviewed during this inspection, proprietary information is not contained in this repor (Open) UNR 50-280, 281/88-20-01, As-built Drawing Discrepancies in Pipe Supports (Open) UNR 50-280, 281/88-20-02, Maintenances in Piping Systems
(Open) UNR 50-280, 281/88-20-03, Adequacy of l/8 11 Gap Tolerance Allowed for Anchor Bolt Diameters Greater Than 1/2 11 in Inspection Procedure No. STF-1 (Open) IFI 50-280, 281/88-20-04, Allowable Loads and Justifications for Hilti Anchor Bolts for IEB 79-02, NRC Information Notice No. 86-94 and 88-2 (Open) I.FI 50-280/88-20-05, Pipe Support Calculation Review for Unit *--:~....