ML16341B723
| ML16341B723 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Diablo Canyon  |
| Issue date: | 10/19/1981 |
| From: | Knight J, Miraglia F Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| Shared Package | |
| ML16341B724 | List: |
| References | |
| FOIA-81-406 NUDOCS 8110280380 | |
| Download: ML16341B723 (98) | |
Text
Docket No.:
50-276 OtlT 19 lg81
<< "~<I,'Il h ',
OCT2 6 1981t 8 ~
~~~ ~<gLATO%4 P)QMISS~
APPLICANT:
Pacific Gas
& Electric Company FACILITY:
Diablo Canyon, Unit 1
SUBJECT:
Meeting Summary for October 14-16, 1981 Discussions and Preliminary Audit of Seismic Analysis for Equipment and Components in Diablo Canyon, Unit 1 Containment Annulus.
During the period of October 14 through 16, 1981 representatives of the NRC staff and their consultants from Brookhaven National Laboratories met with the PG&E staff in San Francisco, California.
Enclosure 1 contains lists of attendees present at the start of each days meetings.
A summary of the principal activities for each days are described below.
Enclosure 2 contains a list of drawings or reports acquired by the staff during the conduct of these meetings.
After introductory comments by Messrs.
J. Knight and F. Miraglia of the NRC staff and Mr. John Hoch of PG&E, the morning session of October 14, 1981 followed the agenda in Enclosure 3.
Agenda item 1 -
PG&E staff briefly summarized the status of their current findings of their seismic re-analysis for equipment and components in the containment annulus for Unit 1.
This reanalysis is still in progress.
Based on work completed to date.
PG&E has concluded that design modifications will be required for a number of pipe supports and that no modifications appear to be required for major equipment, components or piping in the containment annulus.
Agenda item 2 -
PG&E provided the staff and its consultants with a handout (Enclos<<e 4) containing the vertical response spectra for various elevations in the containment annulus.
The structural model was discussed and NRC staff and their consultants asked questions and indicated areas of interests which would be pursued in the next few days.
This was also true for subsequent agenda items.
Agenda item 3 -
PG&E reported that no class 1 electrical equipment is located in the containment annulus.
Electric1 penetration panels in the containment annulus are supported from the crane wall not the containaient annulus structure, and thus do not appear to be affected by the opposite hand error which has been identified, CF 0280380 81 iax9 ADOCK 0500027S ICF
4
'I f
V U
Ahfh
~ h 4
'f
~
'I f VA+
V f
C f
t U
4
~
4 U
U h
A
~
~
hp A
4 P
v I
~ 4 Af hv 4
A
~ f.Ifl f
- p. 4 4
ff f
I 4
4 h
~'h
~
U V
~
hv V
U
~
4 4 l-UU ~
~
4
- h It ft h
~
I
~ lh
~
U
~
t v 4
IP UV 4
4 if
~
- h. ~
V
~ V
, fl 4
hl P A V V.
Chyle A
4 I r
4 It
- r. 4 p
~
4 I ~,
+.1$ wr~gP~l 4$ 44f <<~
1~ (4~+~4'~A g rhr 1: r'4 Uvh h'1'" 4 I
f
~
V ~
4 4
4 44
~
~ '.';r', i' V
'r
~
4 4'I
~ I i
I
0g 19 198'l Agenda item 4 - Instrumentation panels located in the annulus are reported to be mounted to the crane wall.
These panels would require further evaluation.
Standard and some special tubing supports were re-examined; application of corrected response spectra have not resulted in identified need for modifica-tion.
Certain field constructed tubing supports are undergoing re-analysis and PG&E reports no need to modify is anticipated.
Agenda item 5 - Accumulators are located on the base slab and so further evaluation is not presently anticipated by PG&E.
The supports for field installed bellows-sensor'n the accumulators",are being re-analyzed and is considered in the piping-supports discussion.
The fan coolers and associated Class 1 equipment is supported on annular steel.
PG&E reported that Westinghouse design of the fan coolers and PG&E's design of attachment and supports were based on envelopi.ng spectra and are unaffected by the oppos~iteeeand error.
The hydrogen-recombiners are located in annulus area.
The equipment was qualified by test by Westinghouse and review of the test results is reported to show sufficient margin to accommodate the proper vertical seismic loads.
Supports for the hydrogen recombiners were designed by PG&E, and were re-analyzed using;correct spectra.
PG&E found the reanalyzed supports were to be within allowable stress levels.
All remotely operated valves in the annulus were considered part of the piping analyses.
No modifications were found to be required by PG&E as a result of reanalysis.
Agenda item 6 - The only ventilation equipment in the annular space are reported to be the purge valvesducts for the HVAC containment penetrations and associated back draft dampers.
Reanalyses by PG&E did not indicate modifica-tions to be required.
Agenda item 7 - 'PG&E determined that fifty-three PG&E piping analyses used annular spectra.
Twenty-one of the analyses were required to'be re->un" Nine Westinghouse analyses used annular spectra.
Four of the Westinghouse anaTyses were required to,"be re-run.
Enclosure 5 lists piping analyses problems that were re-run by PG&E and Mestinghouse.
All piping stresses in the reanalyzed piping were reported to meet the Diab'lo Canyon design criteria.
Agenda item 8 -
Piping suppor t review status was discussed.
PG&E provided the staff and its consultants with a summary of the status as of October 14, 1981 (Enclosure 6).
Agenda item 9 - As a result of the second error discussed at the October 9, 1981 meeting in Bethesda, revised spectra were not provided to the designers of conduit and cable tray supports.
The cable trays and supports were re-analyzed using the correct spectra and PG&E reported that no modifications were found to be necessary.
However, certain cable trays will now be limited as to maximum permitted number of cables.
fg II
~J<'
3 0'9 195 Subsequent to PGSE's presentation and staff questions on each of the above agenda items, the staff and its consultants formed three groups - one structural and two piping and component which then proceeded to have more detailed discussions with their coanterparts in the PGSE staff.
These discussions and initial audits were conducted in the afternoon of October 14 and the entire day of October 15, 1981.
A brief summary of each group's activities for this period follows.
In the structural area, we discussed the details of the seismic model employed for the generation of vertical response spectra in the annulus area of the containment;with PG~E and URS Blume Associates staff.
We requested and reviewed the structural and shop drawings on which the seismic model was based (See Enclosure 2).
With respect to instrumentation installations, several instrument panels were identified. as being located in the annulus area.
Three individual units are mounted to the steel column on the ground.floor and all other units are installed against She crane wall with their feet bolted to the floor.
These panels were reported to have adequate design margins The three other panels are not subject to amplification of seismic ground motion because of their installation at the ground level and hence are not in the class of equipment affected by the opposite hand problem.
The instruments installed on these panels were shown to be qualified for the new spectra.
Instrument tubing is field installed per PGSE standards.
These standards provide the tube support spans based on a 20Hz limit.
A review process by PGSE has found. that all tubing,in the annulus area have fundamental frequencies above 40Hz except one case which is under study at this time.
Since the corrected spectra above. 40Hz do not have any significant change between the annulus frames, no change in design would be required.
With respect to mechanical equipment, the Westinghouse piping problem (Y6lhlVM) which was preliminarily audited Contained valves.
The increased nozzle loads due to change in spectra, were examined by the staff and shown to be within design limits.
Three types of venti~lation equipment are located in the annulus area.
Those are Gontainment Purge Valve ducts, Debris Screens, and the Containment fan cooler back draft dampers.
The only item structurally connected to the annulus floors is the damper unit.
There are five such units, one attached to each of the five fan coolers.
Westinghouse had originally qualified each fan cooler with the damper unit using the envelope spectra of all the frames.
In addition, a separate analysis of the damper unit alone has indicated the fundamental frequency of the damper unit was reported to be above 33Hz and hence, the ZPA load was used for qualification.
.0 I
~
ee
-L II I
iI L
L
'J ia A
I 1
II
0N'S l983 The containment purge valves were reviewed for their design adequacy and reported to be adequate for service under the proper seismic design loads.
With respect to piping and piping supports, five PG&E analysis problems (Prob. 3-4, Prob.
4A-12, Prob.
1-12, Prob. 4a-l, and Prob.
4A-26) were reviewed to verify that the correct vertical input response spectra were used in the reanalysis.
This verification involved comparing the input vertical response spectrum printed. in the computer output with correct vertical response spectrum from the Hosgri report.
If the response spectrum input to the computer program enveloped the correct Hosgri vertical response
- spectrum, the input was considered acceptable.
A sample of the support eva'luations was reviewed to ensure the correct loads from the reanalysis were input to the support evaluations.
In addition to the piping analyses previously discussed, we reviewed the Westinghouse stress analysis reports (Y6VVV50) relating to the safety injection system 1 and 2.
This piping problem includes the lines from the RCS hot legs up -to the anchor point in the annulus area.
The review involved the piping stresses, support loads, nozzle loads and valve accelerations.
The piping stresses and the valve accelerations were reported to be within the design allowables.
The support loads and nozzle loads were transmitted to PG&E for further design reviews.
The choice of response spectra per the isometric drawing and azimuthal location was specifically audited.
Piping problem (PG&E 06-11) was also reviewed.
This problem was determined by PG&E to not require a reevaluation effort as a result of the opposit~
hand. error.
This js because the original analysis included frames 1, 4 and 5 where as the new analysis required frame 4 and 5 spectra.
However, it was found that the original cal<<>>tion used erroneous spectra input and hence requires reanalysis with the appropriate spectra.
Previous and current loads in the pipe supports associated with these problems were also reviewed and compared with allowables.
The design methods utilized at the anchor point which was the interface between the Westinghouse (Y6VVV50) and PG&E problems (6-11) were also reviewed.
With respect to condui~t and cable tray supports, the design methods were reviewed.
Also reviewed were the spectra used initially and corrected.
The manner in which maximum g loads for condui t and supports were chosen were also examined.
On October 16, 1981 an exit meeting with PG&E management was held.
We requested and received an update in the status of all reanalysis.
The only significant change in status were the pipe support reviews (See ).
The 19 modifications identified as of October 16 as being required are sumnarized in Enclosure 8.
Ho design changes have been issued to the field as of the morning of October 16, 1981.
0 P
l II III Subsequent to the above status report, Nr. Knight discussed the staff request for additional information (See Enclosure 9).
This meeting summary which is being provided to all parties constitutes a formal request to PG&E for the information contained in Enclosure 9.
Me also described the content of completed audit packages that the staff would expect to review upon PG&E completion and verification of their reanalysis effort.
Nr. Niraglia discussed in general terms the content of the technical report.
Enclosure 10 briefly outlines the report content discussed.
Finally, the staff requested PG&E to provide us a schedule for the submittal of their technical report on the reanalysis effort and resulting modifications, the completion of the reanalysis and verification audit packages, and the design verification reports requested by Nr. Denton at the October 9, 1981 meeting in Bethesda.
PG&E indicated that they would"provide us with this information. by letter, early in the week, of October 19, 1981.
7 0 igim 1 signed by pg pygmy J ]Q,x'8~+
Frank J. Niraglia, Chief Licensing Branch No.
3 Division of Licegsing Otiynal slgnedbK James P. Knight, Assistant Director for Components
& Structures Engineering Division of Engineering
Enclosures:
1.
Lists of Attendees 2.
List of drawings or reports 3.
PG&E Agenda 4.
PG&E Handout 5.
Piping analyses problems re-run by PG&E & M 6.
Summary of piping support review status is of 10/14/81 7.
Pipe Support Review Status 8.
Sumary of 19 modifications identified as of 10/16 9.
Staff request for additional information 10.
Suggested Content of Technical Report OFFICE/
SURNAME/
OATE f>
DL:LB 3 0Ni'j"
0/
81 D
&SE JP
'ght 10/g /81 NRC FORM 3I8 IIO/8
) NRCM 0240 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY
- USGPO; I988-829-824
~,
I
~
II I I
IF I I
V vr
'I I
I v
~ \\
NI Nv C
E-D
=- l
~ Iivv I ~ v I
0VF ~
FI
,I ~ r I
I
'I I v I
N
'tegal',
I'l; I
'I '
r Vl',"'
~.->
~
'I Nd \\
.r
~ Nv rlv N
~
I
~ IN f'gg [+sf< I
+Vf~
N I
I*
~ I
~
~
~ ~
I Nil I'i
> V-.
~ '-' j I
II A
I I MV
~ II.I N IIP Ni
~
\\
I*,
I ev
fir. Malcolm H. Furbush Vice President
- General Counsel Pacific Gas 5 Electric Company P.O.
Box 7442 San Francisco,'alifornia 94120 DIABLO CANYOH CC:
Philip A. Crane, Jr.,
Esq.
Pacific Gas 8 Electric Company P.O.
Box 7442 San Francisco, California 94120 Janice E. Kerr, Esq.
California Public Utilities Commission 350 NcAllister Street San Francisco, Cali fornia 94102 Mr. Frederick Eissler, President Scenic Shoreline Preservation Conference, Inc.
4623 More Mesa Drive Santa Barbara, California 93105 Ms. Elizabeth Apfelberg 1415 Cozadero San Luis Obispo, California 93401 Mr. Gordon A. Silver Ms. Sandra A. Silver 1760 Alisal Street San Luis Obispo, California 93401 Harry M. Willis, Esq.
Seymour 8 Willis 601 California Street, Suite 2100 San Francisco, California 94108 Mr. Richard Hubbard NHB Technical Associates Suite K
1723 Hamilton Avenue San Jose, California 95125 Mr. John Narrs, Managing Editor San Luis Obispo County Telegram-Tribune 1321 Johnson Avenue P. 0.
Box 112 San Luis Obispo, California 93406
X
Mr. Malcolm H. Furbush cc:
Resident Inspector/Diablo Canyon NPS c/o U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission P. 0.
Box 369 Avila Beach, California 93424 Ms.
Raye Fleming 1920 Mattie Road Shell Beach, California 93440 John R. Phillips, Esq.
Simon Klevansky, Esq.
Margaret Blodgett, Esq.
Marion P. Johnston, Esq.
Joel
- Reynolds, Esq.
Center for Law in the Public Interest 10203 Santa Monica Boulevard Los Angeles, California 90067 Paul C. Valentine, Esq.
321 Lytton Avenue Palo Alto, California 94302 Mr. Byron S. Georgiov Legal Affairs Secretary Governor's Office State Capitol Sacramento, Cal ifornia 95814 Herbert H. Brown, Esq.
Hill, Christopher 8 Phillips, P.C.
1900 M Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C.
20036 Mr. Richard E. Blankenburg, Co-Publisher Mr. Wayne A. Soroyan, News Reporter South County Publishing Company P. 0.
Box 460 Arroyo Grande, California 93420 Mr. James
- 0. Schuyler Vice President
- Nuclear Generation Department Pacific Gas 8 Electric Company P.O.
Box 7442 San Francisco, California 94120 Bruce Norton, Esq.
Suite 202 3216 North 3rd Street
- Phoenix, Arizona 85012
k
~
g J
>1r ll P
nin rip ff
'..'=stini,': ause Ll.:c';i ic Cor~>oi ation P. 0.
~.-'ox dz5 Pi vl.>u:.r<gil > P<nil:iJl Vc'ifl I il 1 J230
- lie~i".21 R. Kl~in gi 1 v r, Cutler 8
)666 K Stl o".t, H
'.;5!1i n<J.
n )
9
~
C F. sq, Pickering I,I
~
'L'I ~
2Ul)iJ6 da. i >
c, tyy
~j 0V QCOAL4liVWeWj I
/
4.
l
~g~wg g~
L.C C5w+M lQ l g< 6//iCAl 7
/VUrMKOZ 2 ]MORC MuM 8 Q uzi r Ol~ 7 ROTC
/VOACS /',7, j!8, Q9 Ann O'O Ag9 A CONG ( Ol STR ~l C l Ulg~~
AMa ARP CO~ivfOhf TO Ac.~
F<VC r=~,~~ e S 44 4-7
~~
M 48 4~
404~
56 55 55 57
- co,.69
&2
'2Z.'/3
- Z'a; 4P Zo N!
85 8% 53 55 820~
.IG... ~ l8.
IS p.j
- 58. 33 5I'8 aI 47 Z7 29 Apo r,
- /9 -- I-'
8343
/5
'Ig BS: os" IY,
/3 gp,N+r "'
t3Y'Iq ~
/8 28 9) c7 8
I 8
( y7
~
7I
[3li
'87 6:
39 Q7
,ZS 30 l~
I fy (5
(
r
+ 7
~ r rr ~ r/
r/
/ ~.r r
/r//
R'Akte /
FRAhte g QAQc 8 i=PA,PtC
+
PRANG 8 GCG VA, '7/OhJS Ca.w>7'At V;M.GM7'e ~C /VlOR'7.rely C7 Cr,V8 JHA7HE&tA,T,'C AC. MaaC~ FOR VGA T1CAC. /Are "i.rfS
~ w'e w')
73/A;BL.a CAN lo,V Huc(cA Z
~ate"-R. )~l Ah~ ( ~N'lT'O 4 2
( ('l"UgE HO,4-2
I w
wrezioR (coNcrc'cre) sraucrurce veRv lc~L Rc'spo NS 8 SP8 C TgA JVCWMAIPIC V,G& HOSSRr, bros e wo.
eCa t A 7 loN
/wo.oo DAAfPI/vG = '8, 3 2-s - 77 cR(TGR!4 L
op o3 o +
o.5 0 G 07 08 Oi9 Pyle/0/3
]h/ J'6 CO/V N S
r IN7cRIOIP (cowcRcre) srRucruRe vew rfc~/
Respo NS e SPeC 7 8'A JvcNrAtAPic v.sm HosGlPI HOf3G NO ~
Bl ~
868 YA 7 I'ON' l4.OO f3AAt&IIVG= '2, 3 P 77 CR/TGR/8 O.O 0.3 o,+
o5 a.t-o.y o,8
. a,e PGl2!O/3
/H $ 8 CO&'
S
9 lA/7EI2I0 I2 (ANAlULUS) ST'l2 U< RUING.E YeRTIcA 4 gggpouse spec TRA
~cNrA<Ag(c 7'.5 Af R0$ 6JPI pl0/3 p NQ
~
4 l pl g YA7foM /40,00 QAAt&IMG=
'8 i 8 0 4 i~
Z-S - 77 cR/7 agj8 o 0 o I 0 p 03 I
y
~
o+
o5 o c O,T 0.8 O,q
/.O ERR'/G/3 tN St cofv N s
0 0
I' I1(
G M/TE)aioR (AumuLuS) Sreucrug E vek Ttcn c.
RCSPoNSG SF eC 7 RA ACmAtAZ(c v,5% HOSS']
JVOA t IVO.
48 868 t 8 7 to~
(4o,oo QAAf&fAIG 2
~ 8 - 77 CRI 7'ATRIA 7-2/-7?
O R
Q lQ0 V
a I
I I
a.o a,i
~
I O,p I
I
~
~
0,3 O,+
I s
~
o,5 I
~
I i!.,
II!II I
I I
s I
~
O. Q 0.7 08 o.e
/o Pe!2/o tD sM J'8 c om n E
Q
/A/7EIZ/0/2 (A/JA/U/ LIB) STIZUC TUI2 E t/'8R T/CA 6 laic'SPo A/$8 SPIC 7 l2'9, NcwwAetc v.su Rosser
)VO&e rvO.
4 8 868 YA 7 foN /40.00
/BAAL>1NG = ~
( g g Q ~lo 2-S - 77 cR/Typing 7-2/- 77 O,P 0.3 0,+
o.5 I
i I
1 II!
- i i
I I
i I
... i..L...
o.t o,7 0,8 0,0 l.0 p9]p/0/3
/~/ J 8Colv~S
0 I
l 1
~<>E<ioa (ANAIULU$) srzuc rue'a'eRz/c~
~
ReSPoese sPec v RA,
/VCW'AtAIPIC T.5 Af HOSSS (vow e rvo.
4 4 9/8 YA 7 loiv /4o,oo a~nnri~c
= e, 8
@ y /
2 77 c/2! 7.8A? l4 7-2/-77 I
~ ~
I
~
~
o.p 0,3 o +
o.5 O. G 0,7 08 O,q I 0 PR'R/0 Q /N $ 8 c 0 Jv tD S
0
G IAITEEiore (AA/Ngggg) gyp'~~~~~
VER T(CA t.
Rc'spoNse SF eC v RA NclvmA8 c
~, s w Hoss 8 i fVOae wo.
45Ql YA 7 lON
/Ho,oo QAAfF'IIVG = d, g
$ p Jo 2 77 CR/78+/4 7-2/- 77 O0 0
f tv V
V Q,O O,p 0 3
- o. +
o.5 L
J)
O C 0,7 O,g oq
/o 8R/0 Q (N $ 8 CO)V lD S
I
~
MITERxoR ( AAIAIULUS)SrRucruRE VBR7 tCWC.
laic'SPQN$ 8 sPcc 7 J24 NcwwAZc 7.s w HossR)
HGac tvo. po 868 YA7/oN /tc.s c
/3AAfRl]v6 = 0 g 9 Z 77 cR/ 7GR/A 7-2t-7p 2
s s
s I
I
~
'I I
s s I sIII
~
I s
~
II)II I
s I
~
s I; I s
I I
I I:.
I I
I I
s s
s s
I
~
~
ii
~.sl.
I s
~
s 00 0 I O,P 0.3 o,+
o5 0 C 0,7 0,8 O,q
/0 P<R/OQ.tN S8COW e S
I
~
/
IAITERIOR (AAIAIULUS)STIZUC TUR E'GR T/CA 4 laic'$Po N$ 8
$ PGc l RA, N<~~HA/2/c
- 7. 5 Af. H0$6R I bio Q8 No, 31 g~ Q 8 YA 7 /ON //9. 86 IDAAfj!NG= 0, Q
g 4%
2 v7 cRr 7'egin 7-Z/- 77 O.O I
~
I I
I I
L J..
LJJ oI op 03 Q+
I
.L.i o.5
- o. g o.7 o.8 o,f
/.0 j +R/o/3
/N $ 8 co& N S
ii! I l
I I
I III.
I I
I I l G
1AITERZOR (4AIA/~Lgg) g7RIJg~~RE VE'RT/CA C.
Rc SPoNSe sRcC 7 RA blew'Atg I2/c
- 7. 5 Af.R0$ 6 R I
]VOID6 NO
~
868 YA 7 lDb/ Ilc, 8g'3~m&frve
= 9, g
2 77 cR'/7'elf 4 any O
Q Oy 7-'/- 77 0
f
'Vy 0
V
+
2 Q;0'p o3 o +
o 5 07 08 gy
/g Psf?'10 Q /N $ 8 co]y < s
G
~N7ERiafe (AumuauS) Srauc7 uZi YGR TICA C.
laic'SPo Ns 6
$P 6 c T!2A Jvc'~AfAl2/c 7,5 Af R0$ GRI fVOa 6 MO
~
8~
4 LBLA71OtV tie.
Sa'A/M HIMG
~ 77 cRt v.eggs 7-2/ 77 O.O O,I O,p 0.3 O,+
o.5 O,Q ELISE 7.
<8 oq
/ o
l
lAI7EAIOR (AAIAVULUS)$77ZUCTURE VER TlCA C Rc'spoNSG SPGC 7 RA AcmAtAZ]c 7'.Gw HossRi hlof38 hco.
94
$ 68 YA 7 lOtV Il@,ec'AAf P!lvG
'2 77 cRl 78+/A 7-Z/- 77 4.
2 a.o I
I I
I I
I I
el O.l o,p 0.3 0,+
0.5 jIjlJ o.t o.7 o.8 o,~
/,o PRR(l3 iN Se Cow r) S
r
IAITERIO/2 (AAIA/ULUS)S TRUC TUgE YURT!CA, 6 l2cspo Nse spec TRA Nc'lv+fgrp/c 7, 5 Af Hoss R1
/vomer eo, I0 8'08 YA7fON
!O&.t 7 i3AAfPlfvG = 0, 9 2 77 Cg/T6'gag 7-'Z'j-77
~
~
a.o O,p 0.3 JJ.
-r 0,+
0,5 o.t-0.7 08 Oi I
/.0 PSR/Q A
/JV S8 COJv lD S
ECl Vl C+
lO CV
/A/'TER/OR (AAIA/ULUS)STIZUC TuRE vea TIca c.
laic'SPohlS e SPeC 7 RA 4'<~AfA8 lc
- 7. 5 Af ROSSER'I hto a e rvo.
qo 8'Ll L 8 7 (om 10@.
c7'amr/A/S
= 8, 8
2' 77 cR(welf4 7-Z/-7P 0,7
/.0
Qi;.
hvrER.ioz (AN~uLus) srzucruzE VERTlCA,L Rcseo~se sf ecv.RA '-
¹vvmAZrz v.su eossaI Hone
~o, 6/
9/8 YA7/oM l0G. cc 7 QAAfRlJUG 2 77 cR(7 8g/4 7-8/- 77 J
o.2 o,3 o.4 a,5 a, G D.7 peg l o G IW S'Cc~ MMd'.8 o.9
'1
t 0 y I
~gggRSRRkOSRRQggggg g ~ tllggg~
~
<ggamaEINHssgg~< >
~gQ
~Olarllka~a+g+AOEiahsaaaieassa aa~a~a~~wmwW~~~
y y
r L
0
)
~
(
0 I
Y 8
~~>ERIOIZ (ANAIULUS)Q7iP+Q7 Q+g VER TlCA C.
l2C'SPONS e SPIC 7 RA lV<~WAl2/C', 5 At ROSS R I glor) 8 tvo.
98 5Q8 YA 7 loN loc. G7 QAAfPiiVG =
2 77 cR(7 8g/4 7-PJ-77 O
Q.
0 f
0 a o o.j O,p 0.3 0,+
0.5 O.C 0.7 0 8
/.0 PRg/0 Q /N J'c cob/ N s
0 I
INTERial2 (ANNULUS)Z7RUc7 U.RE vea 7.tee ~
Rc spo Nsr swee v RA, Nccv+tAZ<c 7.s u.Hosea'I fv0 Q 8 IVO.
868 YA7!Ox lo]. as twM&lrvG = 4, 9
Z 77 cR/T8g/4 7- '2 l-77 a.o 0 p 03 Q+
o.5
- a. c 0,7 Oi5
/.o PeR (o r) I+ Se c om a S
I
tuvzxsoz (AAl~uLuS)Zrzucv use'sRTlcA<
RCSPONSG SPSC T)2'A hlcNAtAZ(c v. s w Hosea I HO@ e rvO.
R'Q8 Y~ T/oM lof.aa Qwmalwe
= 8, 9
Z ~7 CRt wegr4 7-2 I- '77 a,o J
I O,g 0.3 O,+
o.5
- a. c 0,7 o,8 l,o PER]Or3
>M ZecownS
I
~
~
G SuTERiOR (AmmuCuS) Smucz.uZZ VBRTICAG RC'SPO NS 8 SRG C Tgg, htCkVWg!Ply T.g Af ~0$.8tCI h/or) ~
No,
/0 868 YA 7 foN iot. s9
')A At&IIVG 2 77 cR) 78Apt4 T-ZI-7T I
~
I I
I I
I OIO OII
~
I I I.
a I
/
I O,p o.3 a.+
o5 0 G 07 08 0 5
/0 PPR/0 fD ]~ J'8 COP/ N S
0 I
0 IAITERzoR (ANAIULgg) +7IZuc Tggg VER 7'lcn c.
!2c sPo Nse sPec TRA, ivcvvAtAg(c 7',5 At RoSGRI
)@Or) 8
/vO.
/1 EQg trP TlON 101.33 QAAtPlNG =
'8
(
2 77 cRr v egrA 7-Z/-77 O.O O,p 0.3 o,+
o5
- o. c o.7 O8 I.o
&SR/0 Q
/h/ $ 8 co Jv tD S
0 IAITEEIOR (AAIAIULUS)STRUCTURE y8'R 7/CA ~
gpgpg N$ 8 sRGc 7 /PA mcuvmARc 7.5w R0$ 6uI
~Oa j.
rvo
~
/2 8j' YA 7 loN
/of,33'AAIt&IMG
=
'2 77 cR/7 egg4 T-2l 7 r O
Q Oi 0
f 4u0 U
I I
s.ll/
-a~ Jw j Q I J JllllL I LJq 0.0 o./
o,p 0.3 0,+
0.5 0, t 0,7 o,g g,q
(,0 8R/OQ 1N $ 8CO)V ID S
r
Endnoywe
~
I Gei.saic V.=-lv-e.", %arun Dug To Frame nrie!!ta1.'ion E ror S stem 1-9 Steam Generator Blowdown 4 Part 1
Steam Gene ator B'owdown 3
4A-10 4A-12 Steam Generator Blowdown 1 Part 2B Pressurize" Spray System Component Cooling Water - Fan Cooler 1
Component Cooling Water Fan Cooler 3
Component Cooling Water - Fan Cooler 5
C.C.W; Return Header from R.C.
Pump" Part 3
C.C.W. Return Header from R.C.
Pumps Part 5
C.C.W ~
R(tu",n Hen!er from R.C.
Pumps Part 6
C.C.W-Ret>:rn Header from R.C.
Pu'iud Fat t 2B
~it:
it>
(. C W
Pe" uy':"
!!".".;!cr fxo..
!'..C. P!
F: "t 8 Her er pro'.. RICo
"..".s i'ar 10 4A 17 4A-20 4A;? 2 4A 25 4A-26 6-5 9-11 1 1-22 C.C.WE Return C.C.W. Supply C.C.N.
Supp33
~
Safety Injecti from R.C.
Pu!;ps
.'nermal Barri r Part 3
to R.C.
Pumps - Part 2
ro P..C.
Pumps - Part 3
or. Loops 1 and 2 Part Regenerative Heat. Exchanger Out3.et Accumulator Fill Line
.C.W. Return Excess Letdown 1!eat Exchanaer c'.C.W.
Return from R.C.
Pumps Thermal Barrier - Part 1
Westin house Anal ses Y6VVV.EE Y6VVVEF Y6VVVEN Y6VVV50 Accumulator Loop 1
Accumulator Loop 2 Part 1
Accumulator Loop 2 Part 2
Safety Injection System 1 and 2
PHirschberg( 1687)!rg 10/14/81
e i
l
'PIPE SUPPORT REVIEW
'TATUS 'AND FINDINGS 10/14/81 PIPE SUPPORTS CLASS I SUPPORTS IN CONTAINMENT SUPPORTS SUPPORTS WITH SUPPORTS SUPPORTS SUPPORTS KNOWN REQUIRING PRELIMINARY IN REVIEW WITH REVIEW TO REQUIRE REVIEW
'REVIEW COMPLETE PROCESS COMPLETED MODIFICATION Large Diameter 1445 342 96 113 133 12 Small Diameter
< C2S)
TOTAL 1300 2745 423 96 119 232 304 437 13
I
October 16, 1981 PIPE SUPPORT REVIEW STATUS AND FINDIGNS PIPE SUPPORTS CLASS I SUPPORTS SUPPORTS WITH SUPPORTS IN REQUIRING PRELIMINARY CONTAINMENT REVIEW REVIEW COMPLETE SUPPORTS IN REVIEW PROCESS SUPPORTS WITH REVIEW COMPLETED SUPPORTS KNOWN TO REQUIRE MODIFICATION Large Diameter Small Diameter
( < 2-1/2 )
TOTAL 1445 1300 2745 342 440 782 49 49 132 81 213 161 359 520 18 19 MRTresler(4891):cg
c IN6 8 NAME I ~Z-3IS-I~
CON f4'k.hJ CLL I
CC W 5U P C HAg@g g Ch~~pc.
i~ s~u44cv size.
'v 0 Ol 2i, 0)
Vl 0 CO
~2
+35>l l - SC, - Z 5,( - C - SVI-SAZ~<y'ND I c2OI' HnT LGQ l-IC 8 525 lZ" C@QVAiQ VAR Ci-+
I C<W RAT l-KIG- (o2 o-Z-Z S fH 4EQ 3 Ql OW DA O'Vf' 5
Qho~qe is 2~u4l ar SiXe l4c m sn u.4lp<r 0
0
+
~o I
O O
Q CA 0
m c
O I
o0 Q
Z 22 55( SI l -kI4.- Ic 2o-2-T S>< CZ~ 5 8 I.e~ au Our O/S Nt.~ sg~4laav 22 3+7 sL I-sc-zl58" 4-1Z H~ ~ANMEL TRAP RE.L IF%
Ne.~
W~lol2e V
r w<
l2 p -o z
n
~r l2 Pl p
~
z 2
p p
~R GO ~I I-IC.I7-254 b RC.l' THEE BACaieL CCi tZS+
C.i o.~q~ i< sn~L lpc.r >iz>>
0
IR 4c s~
I-i~e +/>~~a I-Kt V-I5'57-G RG PPS BAaR.IER ccrc R.ET Hb4 dt4 AMQE5 C h a~)C la 533'.44C V g~~C O
cT Cl Vl IQ CO CQ I-Ki4-Io20 -P-Z SyM CiB&
3 l3I. ~
RIM OUT M/5
$4,4.+qC lh 5 lith IO444 5 IZC.
z 42
- goR, 94 sw I-SC.-3845-(o - SPI RH 4 WP I-I INQ Cel b LBCs 2 V
I - KIco-I o4 5- 'Z 4
%TH 6iS>
> 4 Q~~O'H TA&W HADAL I- 'Q-55-g, ge4c7~R PP
~ 5~4 h',0 i~
I 0- II)C- >le
@~cger~
cc m~y PP
- SA4t, pprm~g<
c aTeR fc fute BOR-c<owqe e'er.r shop /sad aowL.
5m'tl.uf +O Prl34I-e4'Or SIOK Q c.le+~
RePC<CC 3X5~ Vg L
~la~
<ry V Q ba)c v.ulcc I
O O
Q Ch ill C r O
O O0 Qz
~
- a (gyesp/z g 5T> 4EQ I 3 B~~PN TA~I
]pg$ ~ z/gV 57A/-584
<> y y gp
~.gg-52.$ -Q 40+f A<Af. FA< C.cI~
Cc~ 'REg~Phs tgm~e w~crecs pg~u~)
cobb'CE Ik'av pg PN 5ted I
'4 ~
Vl 0 -0 0 rl w
Pl 0
2 2
2 0
0
g 4.
\\
5aQ I'24 iZ.
LINlr 4 /hip lb'
- ICIIo- )O4 2 - 2 '~iZ I/
ST~ QKId I-8 +Ln~Ral ~hi%, (ICAL
+44 N LEE s De,(e.+c')
Q1 gp hJ PO I(g)
CQ t-X Iv-254 Z-Rr P 5 T'Hme.w BARRIS'. ccrc g.gT Q
Z m
I2 CZ >c
/0
+51
~l 355L
~- lCI7-E342 3
gC-P P
VNP Q.~
~gLR.I gg.
cCuo QGT 5~- 2~ y- 'g se-e Cc ~& ~mI I i)<MH~8,6E/
l-kz-3~8-Iz'd usa(W FAe gI g.
) CCLe Qg,T De.w+a-PAsS PLh:g E pC80reiC.
<+sgc~4 L c cc pla,t-a.
I O
O Q
CA U
m C
m
~
n O0 Qz z'C I
1 ~
tll p -p x
n rr Pl 0
z 2
p 0
),
Enclosure 9
Request for Additional Information Made of PG8E at October 16 1981 Meetin 1.
For the procedures employed for the generation of the vertical floor response spectra for the annulus of the containment provide the following additional specific information pertaining to the seismic assessment performed by the URS/J.
A. Blume Engineer s:
a.
Detailed description of the mathematical model, that is:
complete schematic representation (identification of all nodal points and elements).
nodal coordinates.
member properties (i.e., section areas and moment of inertias).
member releases and/or boundary conditions.
material properties (i.e., Young's modulus, Poissons ratio).
Values of the lumped masses.
b.
Vertical acceleration time hi story used as input in the model.
This earthquake record should be provided in digitized form as a card deck.
The number of digitized points, the time increment, the format type and finally a listing of the record should be provided.
T
Enclosure 9 (Cont.)
2.
Provide the following details for each of the four floors in the annulus area of the containment of Unit 1:
a.
Total weight and location for all major mechanical/electrical equipment located on the platforms.
b.
Total weight distribution of piping systems.
3.
A staff confirmatory analysis of two piping problems will be done.
The staff has chosen PGEE piping problems 6-11, and 4A-26.
For each of these
- problems, provide the following information:
a.
pi'ping layout or design and isometric drawings sufficient to model the system.
b.
support drawings and all applicable loads c.
the piping system desi'gn specification (including insulation) d.
valve weights and CG's, and modelling assumptions e.
appropriate broadened response spectra at all support points in digitized form f.
appropriate anchor movements (thermal and seismic) at all support points.
g.
any design change notices not yet incorporated into the piping or support drawings (later DCN's should be forwarded as received) h.
applicable support allowable loads.
applicable equipment nozzle allowable loads.
.~
g a~
Enclosure 9 (Cont.)
j.
piping and instrumentation diagrams (P8 ID's) for the system k.
thermal conditions or modes 1
other applicable dynamic loading conditions.
4.
During its preliminary audi t of piping support analyses, it was noted that for some supports in some problems the stiffness of the supports was modeled while for the most part supports were taken as rigid.
Provide and explain the selection process for support differentiation.
Given the fact that support stiffness is sometimes
- used, provide a list of all the problems requiring support redesign in which support stiffness was modeled.
For those problems where a support, whose stiffness was used in the analysis, is modified, provide a re-evaluation.
of the piping for all static and dynamic loads using the new support stiffness.
Enclosure 10 Su ested Content of Technical Re ort o
Structural Aspects of Containment Annulus Model of annulus equipment layout description of structural steel o
The errors discovery chronology o
Reanalysis Conducted Characterize spectra used initially and in reanalysis Characterize analysis techniques o
Description of Process for Determining Effect of Error (For Categories III through IX in Enclosure 3).
Criteria used Screening process basis for judging whether design was acceptable Reanalysis Results Modifications required o
Design verification process for reanalysis effort Specifically the procedures used to verify the correct response spectra was used for the problems involved in the re-evaluation effort.
o Other Issues Discuss other issues which were identified during reanalysis and
l.
gp Q
Q
Enclosure 10 (Cont; )
reevaluated for concerns other than theI'Frame orientation problem.
Discuss the results and significance of the issues reevaluated.
0 k.
'i, t s
/r>
NOTE TO:
Jim Sniezek Ed Jordan Bob Baer Itike Hilber OCT 1 6 1S81 CONFERENCE CALL REGARDING DIABLO CANYOtl Region V (Jesse Crews) would like to set up a conference call for IIonday morning around ll:30.
Jesse feels the need to reassess the extent of the Diablo Canyon problems.
Jesse is concerned that the early gA measures for design control (pre 1977) were inadequate.
He further feels that the PGSE review by Dr. Cloud may not be adequate.
Jesse's concern is based not only on the recent seismic anlaysis problem but because of the ea~er seismic problems with containment spray, final design of the electrical system and the fire protection system.
In each case it appears that the common failure was the lack of proper design basis information (Hosgri info.)
or assumptions.
Jesse is concerned that this problem may extend to other areas.
He recommends that the call include Jim Knight and Frank Htraglia.
Terry Harpster OFFICE/
SURNAME)
OATE/
C 'RPRIB 'Pjg
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~
~
~ or 0 ~ ~
~ ~ I ~ ~ ~ ~ ~i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
TL Yter
- l. $(681.. kl NRC FORM 318116/80) NRCM G240 O F F IC IAL R EGO R D COPY
- USGPO: 198~29-824
~
h
~
~
~
h