IR 05000281/1980030
| ML18139A561 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Surry  |
| Issue date: | 08/22/1980 |
| From: | Compton R, Herdt A, Modenos L NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML18139A560 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-281-80-30, NUDOCS 8010020273 | |
| Download: ML18139A561 (4) | |
Text
UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
REGION II
Report No. 50-281/80-30 101 MARIETTA ST., N.W., SUITE 3100 ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30303 AUG 2 2 1980 Licensee:
Virginia Electric and Power Company Richmond, VA 23261 Facility Name:
Surry Plant Docket No. 50-281 License No. DPR-37 Inspect_ion at Ebasco Services Incorporated, New York Inspectors: /{ /?. ~
~
R. M. Compton
~
L!t~os ~
<t' /z z./<i J Date Signed
<( )2:z /<t,}
Date Signed Accompanying Personnel: J. R. Costello, IE RIV Vendor Inspection Branch Approved SUMMARY Inspection on July 24-25, 1980 Areas Inspected
~ )22../~0 ef, RCES Date Signed This routine announced inspection involved 24 inspector-hours at Ebasco Services Incorporated, New York in the areas of IE Bulletin 79-14, "Seismic Analysis for As-Built Safety-Related Piping Systems", IE Bulletin 79-02, "Pipe Support Base Plate Designs Using Concrete Expansion Anchor Bolts", and licensee actions on previous inspection finding Results Of the three areas inspected, no items of noncompliance or* 4ev.iations were identifie==============~-- ~
'-----------~*
.. * DETAILS Persons Contacted Licensee Employees J. L. Wilson, Station Manager
- R. K. MacManus, Associate Engineer
- R.H. Woodall, Associate Engineer Other Organizations
- H. W. Nelson, Project Manager, Ebasco Services Incorporated
- T. H. Blodgett, Assistant Project Manager, Eba~co R. O'Neill, Supervising Engineer, Ebasco
- M. Labib, Senior Engineer, Ebasco
- N. J. Shah, Lead Stress Engineer, Ebasco
- T. A. Cotter, Project QA Engineer, Ebasco
- S. W. Korde, Supervisor for Stress, Ebasco V. Shevchenko, Lead Civil Engineer, Ebasco
- Attended exit interview Exit Interview The inspection scope and findings were summarized on July 25, 1980 with those persons indicated in Paragraph 1 above, and by telephone with J. L. Wilson on August 12, 198.
Licensee Action on Previous Inspection Findings (Open) Unresolved Item 281/80-13-04:
IE Bulletin 79-14 as-built discre-pancie In IE Report 281/80-18 the inspector questioned the verification of snubber adequacy because installed snubber sizes were not always indicated on the as-built drawing The snubber verification for the following five supports were examine MKS - 118Al, Supports H 142 and H 143 MKS - 117Al, Supports H 1 and H4 MKS - 125Al-1, Support H 19 For the snubbers selected, either the design loads were low and the smallest possible snubber size had been assumed installed or the snubber size had been determined from field inspectio The approach used was discussed with the design engineers and vendor catalouges were examined. The inspec-tors had no further questions on this matte This item remains open pending review of the site snubber and spring support reinspection program and the valve weight verification progra ~--**>*-* *---:;---------. ~.
.
~ --~....
.. -
~-:---,..-,.....
..... ~, --~--------'--
-
.:
.-**,.*---*********
-2-Unresolved Items Unresolved items were not identified during this inspectio.
(Open) IE Bulletin 79-14, "Seismic Analysis for As-Built Safety-Related Piping Systems Ebasco procedures governing various aspects of the IE Bulletin 79-14 effort were reviewed for content and complete coverage_ of bulletin item The following stress problems were selected for examination of the evalua-tion and analysis work efforts:
Stress analysis calculation 14N070A, as-built isometrics MKS - SI - 1, 4, 5 & 6, Lines 10" SI-363, 12" SI-201, 12" SI-202, 12" SI-205, 12" SI-363 Stress analysis calculation 14N103, as-built isometric MKS - RC - 1, line 3" RC - 44 Documentation examined included stress and as-built isometrics, response spectra curves, input information to stress analysis, valve weight data supplied by Stone & Webster, LHSI pump nozzle load calculations and stress analysis result On 12" lines SI-201 and 202 it was noted that the valve weights input at node points 99 and 12 was 150 pounds but the actual valve weight was 570 pound However, Ebasco had also conservatively input the weight of an equivalent length of pipe at these points so that the net effects were negligible.* However, the licensee agreed to reanalyze this problem with the correct valve weights and to do a sample check of other isometrics to verify that this was an isolated cas Other valve weight inputs examined were correc The inspectors examined the treatment of U-bolt type pipe restraint Ebasco considers U-bolts as 2 way restraints unless pipe lugs are used, in which case they are considered 3 way restraint Design memo 31, Ebasco installation guidance for new U-bolt supports, specifies that for large bore piping a nut is placed on each side of the plate with a 1/16 inch clearance between U-bolt and pip Small bore U-bolt supports are double nutted on the back side with the first nut only finger tigh The inspec-tors examined the stress analysis inputs and the as-built sketches for the following three U-bolt supports:
Calculation 14N076, MKS WAPD-4, Support 5 Calculation 14N106, MKS CH-1, Support H4B Calculation 14N107, MKS CH-8, Support 17 All of these supports were input to the analysis as 2 way restraints. The*
sketch for the third support showed a 1/16 inch clearance between pipe and U-bol The first two showed no clearance and nuts on only one side. A check of the axial pipe movement at these points indicated a very small movement. However, as this may not always be the case the licensee agreed
.-
~
~~
"
-~--
-.;'...,....- ****,
>.,.._,.,-,
- . *...........-.-~--~-
-,
......... JY,>, -i?'"".'-,.--
.,,.,... -,-..-r-*_.., **,,,.-.. --, ~ * *,.*., *
JI-3-to review all U-bolt installations for which the as-built sketches show with one sided nutting and zero clearance. If there is significant axial pipe movement at these points, U-bolts will be adjusted to provide clearance or the piping and support analyses will be rerun to show acceptabilit This is identified as Inspector Followup Item 281-80-30-01, to be addressed during a future inspectio The program and licensee commitments for completion of IE Bulletin 79-14 after restart of Surry 2 were discusse Problem 14N012B for hanger 10 on MKS CH-11, including the support calculation, load tables and the initial factor of safety screening sheet was examine No items of noncompliance or deviations were identifie (Open) IE Bulletin 79-02, "Pipe Support Base Plate Designs Using Concrete Expansion Anchor Bolts" Inspector Followup Item 281/80-29-01 identified concerns the inspector had with the technical evaluation of expansion anchor test failure The licensee had completed a review of Ebasco's actions and all questions had been satisfactorily resolve The final documentation packages for trans-mittals N 161 and N 176 were examine The inspectors had no further questions on this matter and Inspector Followup Item 280/80-29-01 will be close VEPCO was a member of the utility group subscribing to Teledyne Engineering Services Report TR-3501-1, the generic response to IE Bulletin 79-0 The ANSYS program of baseplate flexibility analysis was discussed with the design engineer The Support Plate and Anchor Bolt Verification Analysis for supports 1 and 16 on MKS 117Bl and 122Dl, Sketch S-82 was examine No items of noncompliance or deviations were identifie ~----------.. *-*~h-~-,....-~-..--~ ----
.
~
.
.
-
........ ~.,.. __ * -r-,---::--r-o~-----,~~. p-
'
T **
..-T., **'
"1'>.**~-- * r,,:-L. ~.-~* *u *--
- -*-
-***-*---'****