ML17264A220

Summary of Meeting W/Rochester Gas & Electric Corporation on 951017 in Rockville,Md Re SG Replacement Program & Proposed Containment Structural Mod Scheduled in Spring 1996 Refueling Outage.List of Meeting Attendees Encl

ML17264A220
Person / Time
Site:	Ginna
Issue date:	11/07/1995
From:	Andrea Johnson NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned)
To:	NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned)
References
NUDOCS 9511130248
Download: ML17264A220 (41)

Text

p'R REQO 0

co I

O Y/

Op gO

++*++

UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. 20555-0001 November 7,

1995 LICENSEE:

Rochester Gas and Electric Corporation FACILITY:

R.

E. Ginna Nuclear Power Plant

SUMMARY

Of MEETING WITH ROCHESTER GAS AND ELECTRIC CORPORATION ON STEAN GENERATOR REPLACEMENT OCTOBER 17, 1995 Rochester Gas and Electric Corporation (RG&E), made a presentation to" NRR/Region I at NRC Headquarters on October 17, 1995, regarding their steam generator replacement program and proposed containment structural modifications scheduled for a spring 1996 refueling outage.

The presentation discussed the various options used by RG&E in their decision-making process to prepare for the construction openings.

RG&E stated that the proposed structural modifications did not represent any unreviewed safety questions and no changes to plant Technical Specifications were necessary.

RG&E plans to use automatic jack hammers to prepare two construction openings on the dome of the containment structure.

RG&E presented their evaluations and considerations regarding total imposed loads on the dome (static and dynamic) from jack hammer impacts.

RG&E discussed the types of jackhammers and various tool attachment effects, dome natural frequencies/jack hammer driving frequencies, and analytical models for evaluating deflections and bending moments on the dome once the openings were made.

During discussions on the use of jackhammers, RG&E pointed out that the bottom layer of concrete usually breaks with an "undercut" since the hammer impact force tends to produce angular fracture planes.

In order to avoid undercuts, RG&E intends to chip back the concrete from the actual opening.

The presentation also discussed RG&E's testing approach in the use of mock up concrete blocks to develop construction strategies that would ensure minimal disruption of dome concrete.

The full scale mock up concrete blocks consisted of one flat and the other with a single curvature.

Testing on the flat concrete block has been completed.

The curved concrete block will be tested over the next 3 to 5 months to fine tune the jack hammer operating parameters, tool attachments and the sequences of the construction process.

The NRC staff requested that petrographic and/or chemical analysis of drilled concrete cores be conducted when openings in the dome are made.

The staff's request would allow RG&E to determine the depth to which chemical degradation of concrete has occurred due to exposure to the environment since the original concrete was placed in 1968.

The staff also recommended that upon completion of construction, during the structural integrity test, vertical deflection goL GSA'lr ~

'oI5iii30248 95ii07 PDR ADCICK 05000244 P

PDR MM RILI< CHlfKmMt'V'ii

November 7,

1995 measurements at the top of the prestressing anchors (the anchoring zone is not near the openings) be taken to ensure the availability of adequate prestressing force.

The staff intends to conduct an on-site review of the RG&E construction procedures, construction loads, and consideration of inadvertent impact loads and results of all analyses.

Enclosure 1 is a list of meeting attendees.

A copy of the meeting agenda and discussion material is included in Enclosure 2.

Sincerely, Original signed by:

Allen R. Johnson, Project Manager Project Directorate I-1 Division of Reactor Projects I/II Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Docket No. 50-244

Enclosures:

1. List of Attendees

2. Meeting Agenda and Discussion Material cc w/encls:

See next page DOCUMENT NAME:

G: iGINNAiG1 50244. MTS To receive a copy of this document, indicate In the box: "C" ~ Copy without enciosures "E" ~ Copy with enclosures "N" ~ No copy OFFICE NAME DATE LA:PDI-SLittl ll/

95 D: PDI-1 PM:PDI-1 LMarsh AJohnson:smm ll/

/95 ll/ /95 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY ll/

/95 ll/

/95

4 44 I

4'

Meetip Summar E-MAIL W. Russell/F.

Miraglia, 012-G18 R. Zimmerman, 012-G18 S.

Varga J. Zwolinski L. Harsh S. Little OGC V. HcCree, 017-G21 E. Jordan G. Bagchi C. Tan A. Chaffee E. Jordan A. Thadani L. Doerflein, RI T. Moslak, RI E. Gray, RI S. Chaudhary, RI ACRS W. Dean, 017-G21 HARD COPY w/both enclosures

[Docket Fi.le'UBLIC PDI-1 Reading A. Johnson J. Linville, RI

I

'\\>

~I I

L,

'J

measurements at the top of the prestressing anchors (the anchoring zone is not near the openings) be taken to ensure the availability of adequate prestressing force.

The staff intends to conduct an on-site review of the RGEE construction procedures, construction loads, and consideration of, inadvertent impact loads and results of all analyses.

Enclosure I is a list of meeting attendees.

A copy of the meeting agenda and discussion material is included in Enclosure 2.

Sincerely, Docket No. 50-244 Alle R. Johnson, Project Hanager Proje Direct te I-I Division o eactor Projects I/II Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation

Enclosures:

1. List of Attendees

2. Heeting Agenda and Discussion Material cc w/encls:

See next page

0 p

I

Rochester Gas and Electric Corporation R.

E. Ginna Nuclear Power Plant CC:

Thomas A. Moslak, Senior Resident Inspector R.E. Ginna Plant U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 1503 Lake Road

Ontario, NY 14519 Regional Administrator, Region I U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 475 Allendale Road King of Prussia, PA 19406 Mr. F. Williams Valentino, President New York State

Energy, Research, and Development Authority 2 Rockefeller Plaza

Albany, NY 12223-1253 Charlie Donaldson, Esq.

Assistant Attorney General New York Department of Law 120 Broadway New York, NY 10271 Nicholas S.

Reynolds Winston 5 Strawn 1400 L St.

N.W.

Washington, DC 20005-3502 Ms. Thelma Wideman

Director, Wayne County Emergency Management Office Wayne County Emergency Operations Center 7336 Route 31,

Lyons, NY 14489 Ms. Mary Louise Meisenzahl Administrator, Monroe County Office of Emergency Preparedness ill West Fall Road, Room ll Rochester, NY 14620 Dr. Robert C. Mecredy Vice President, Nuclear Operations Rochester Gas and Electric Corporation 89 East Avenue Rochester, NY 14649

OF HEETING ATT NDEES NRC MEETING MITH R C

ESTER GAS AND ELECTRIC CORPORATION R.

G NA NUC OW PLANT S

GENERATO L CE T

OCTOBER 17 1995

~NAME TITL Al Johnson, Project Manager Suresh K. Chaudhary, Sr. Reactor Engr.

Edwin H. Gray, Technical Assistant Chen P.

Tan Goutam Bagchi George Wrobel John F. Smith Len Sucheski Brian J.

Flynn Bernard J. Carrich, Asst Proj Hgr Hark Fitzsimmons, Str.

Eng Tom Harlow Mark Smith Eugene U. Thomas Tony Diperna Joseph Cowhill, Eng for Almaraz Sgr Mark S. Barth, Ceco Sgr ORGANIZATION NRC/NRR/PDI-1 NRC/Region I NRC/Region I NRC/NRR/ECGB NRC/NRR/ECGB RG&E RG&E RG&E RG&E RG&E RG&E RG&E Bechtel Bechtel Bechtel.

Bechtel Bechtel TELEPHONE NO.

(301) 415-1497 (610) 337-5335 (610) 337-5325 (301) 415-3515 (301) 415-2733 (716) 724-8070 (716) 724-8363 (716) 724-8112 (716) 771-4805 (716) 724-8060 (716) 724-8111 (716) 546-2700 (301) 417-4714 (301) 417-3195 (301) 417-3162 (301) 417-4369 (301) 417-4554 Enclosure 1

0 I

1

BW(

Snna SMlon Beebtel R.E. Ginna Nuclear Power Plant NRC Informational Meeting of Containment Openings Agenda October 17, 1995 I.

INTRODUCTION G. Wrobel II.

BACKGROUND B. Flynn III.

CONTAINMI~22lTOPENING DESIGN M. Fitzsimmons IV.

BECHTEL CONCRETE REMOVALEVALUATIONG. Thomas V.

RG&E CONTAINMENTANALYSIS L. Sucheski VI.

POST MODIFICATIONTESTING B. Flynn VII.

CONCLUSION J. Smith 17 October 95 Enclosure 2

8WI Snna Stakkl Bechtel

Background

NRC Informational Meetings, MGt September 1992

~ February 1993 MJune 1993

~. March 1994 A October 1994 10CFR50.59 Safety Evaluations

~

Seven of Eight Evaluations Complete

~

No Technical Specifications Changes Required

~

No Unreviewed Safety Questions Containment Openings

~

Decision to Use Current Method Testing June 1994 Decision August 1994 NRC Informed October 1994 Presentation 17 October 95

/

0 BWI Snnl Station Bechtek Development of Containment Openings

~

Bechtel Containment Opening Report, July 1993 v Evaluated Various Hole Configurations Recommended Hexagon/Hexagon-Slot Assumed Diamond Wire Saws

~

Steam Generator Detailed Drop Analysis Slight Refinement of Openings 17 October 95

~

~ '

"CROWN'ONCRETE REMOVAI OUTSIDE WALKWAYNETWORK, AtL AROUND EXTENT OF CHIP BACK OPENING OUTLINES I I I I CJJR4%D

.5Q Ig )

J 0

1 PARllAL PLAN QF CONTAINMIEM

~

~

')

~ ~

BWI Gnna ShklIN Bectrtei Concrete Removal Process Methods Considered

~

Wire Saw

~

Track Saw

~

Jackhammers

~

Remote Automated Jackhammers

~

Drilling/Expansion Grout 17 October 95

BW Qnna Shkbn Bechtel Concrete Removal Process Issues Considered

~

Time

~

Edge Preparation

~

Double Curvation of Dome

~

Liner Plate Fitup

~

Support of/and Abilityto Rig Out a Large Concrete Plug

~

Cost

~

Collection/Containment of Cutting Debris

~

Personnel Safety

~

Acceptability of Loads on Structure 17 October 95

~ ~

~

I N

'CROWN'ONCRETE REMOVAL

'OUTSIDE WALKWAYNETWORK, AU. AROUND EXTENT OF CHIP BACK OPENING OUTLINES D/

pARTIAL pLAN OF CONTAI DOME

P

~

~

AIITbMAFEDJACK HAMMIBR

'MACHINES TO BE MOUI47EQ ON CROWN'

~O

+>>

~t&HE'tel N

po o+

0 N

ELPf;

/

II 8-o

>e C

%4 I

g

~

PVHaavS'II,~

S~ IP Q<ISi. 9 CATCH CONTWNSJIEarr ALL AROUND

~

'i

~

~

~

1 ~

~~I~B4P ~%Et 5PRlHCi Lite Et, 99o'-8"

~ 4'

~ 1 ~

y ~

~i

~

~

~

~

A SECTION

.SECTIONAL VIEW OF CONTAINMENT DOME SHOWING

'CROWN'LIDE 3

iir

~ (

~

O~

0 s'm vengL A

OOOO OPENING (pose ot-Ll~ oigq

~T'J lb'LJl ECTED~ aF STD CPU

~

~

+f~ Cg

/~ ~ rr S'i"~H L.tWER PL4TE I~l&~&%4'Ca:

~ ~

~

8WI anna Statbn Bechtel Concrete Removal Process Conclusions 0

360'upport Platform "Crown" (Concrete Removal Outside Walkway Network)

Excavation of Openings in "Bands" No Strongbacks 0

No Enclosures Over Openings Utilizes Automated Hydraulic Jackhammers Located Above Openings on Dome and Below on Crown 17 October 95

7

~ ~

~

BWI Snna Shkbn Bechtel Repair To Containment Dome

~

Reuse Existing Liner Plate

~

Cadweld Rebar Splices or Stick-Weld

~

Leak Channel Integrity

~

Liner Stiffeners are Required

~

Monolithic Pour 17 October 95

8W(

Snna Statbn Bechtel Use of Automated Jackhammer for Concrete Removal at Temporary Openings 17 October 95

~ ~

~

15'-0" I

I<A<I I

I I

GROUT (CONF!NED)

L.

I X

P' I

I I

<IFII I

PRACTICE I

r I

~ x!

6;'

x IIGII AUTOMATED JACK HAMMER (CONFINED)

I I

I I

..I "C"

s<pss I

MANU%

j i

AUTOMATED JACK HAMMER i:

JACK HAMMER (UNCONFINED)

(UNCONFINED)

I I

ssE<<

I I

i i

GROUT (UNCONFINED)

PLAN CORE DRILL LOCATIONS ACCELEROMETER LOCATIONS 12" DEEP SHIM 12 "x12" WOOD BEAMS (TYPICAL)

PAC AT

'-0"

~

1 '- "

ELEVATION CONCRETE TEST BLOCK CORE DRILL AND ACCELEROMETER LOCATIONS FIGURE 1

SW(

Sntta Statke Bechtel Test. Block Demonstration Collected Data

~

Visual Observation Core Borings (2" diameter)

Boroscope Investigation of Concrete/Rebar Interface

~

Vibration Data

~

Time Histories on Concrete Surface at Various Locations 17 October 95

0 BWI Snnn Statke Sechtal Test Block Demonstration

==

Conclusion:==

No Damage Beyond Immediate Removal Area

~

Exposed Surface Remained Sound Where Concrete Broke Away

~

No Evidence of Damage at Concrete/Rebar Interface

~

No Evidence of Resonance Build-up

~

Response

was High Frequency

~

Maximum Displacement Approximately 2 Mils

~

Perhaps Imposed Force too Small to Excite "Fundamental" Modes

~

Response

Died Out Well Before Next Impact 17 October 95 yCw"

~ <e.

Meas.

28

~

~

P~P~~+~Q~+'.-'d'-

1 Vll.64-CA 4~~~yr<

..be.fel safe k'<<<<<< i 4J I

q+Vielipfg~~

.'iw,)w~~+wjgf<<+<<l%

~@pipe,&r4i'~ pi4 p~'g~<<'eas.

33

~ ~ (

~

~ '

~

I

~

<<<<l(

't \\ ~

Ki.

~

~

"0' M'ieve' 8 9

>S~ iin+ i 8'ma<y'7A+s a+ase atA'~4. i'VLhfl'Hl.

rf V

Lee.Fuucale

~

~

q

~

r g

~

~

%g&

~P l~

A W

~

. 'g&~%r.'~ ~ [seer QE

~BAN'~4JN

O'NA 'C ~'

'g:Pl f 5ltf $ }we%

P '

Meas.

46

\\ ~

~ ~

')J

~

~6 'iL;..'t+r'i'

"~ i<~i'~ ~i.'s'..i." '

~ '

'LhQ ~ldt 4o. M.seA:

SAMPLES OF RECORDED TIME HISTORIES FIGURE 2

15'-0"

'x 2.15 g/200 HZ 1.64 g/200 HZ 1.48 g/143 HZ 3.40 g/300 HZ 1 x x

7 X

1.04 g/400 HZ 2.09 g/

2.55 g/330 HZ 2.62 g/

2.12 g/165 HZ 1.65 g/

/165 HZ 3.27 g/165 HZ 2.42 g/164 HZ I

3 x!

I I

I 4 x IIQII I

I I

I

..I PLAN VIBRATION TEST RFSULTS (ACCELERATION-g's)

AUTOMATED JACK HAMMER ADJUSTED TO 900 LB-FT VIBRATION TEST RESULTS FIGURE 3

Cdnna Shkkn Bechtak Comparison Between the Brokk (Tarmac 125) and Teledyne TB-425 Energy Blows/Minute Wt. of Tool Dia. of Tool Tarmac 125 463 lb. ft.

784-862 48 lb.

3.13 in.

Teledyne TB-425 796 lb. ft 550/1100 85.8 lb.

3.75 in 17 October 95

~

~

~-

BWI Snnl Shkbn Bectrtal Changes Since Test Block Demonstration Plan to Use an Even Smaller Machine on Mock-up Tests (Brokk 125)

~

Total Global Force on Dome Expected to be Less Than 7 KIPS

~

2 to 3 KIPS Static Load (To Hold Tool Against Concrete)

~

Approximately 5 KIPS Transferred Globally to Dome

~

Limited by Contact Area of Tool and Confined Compressive Strength of Concrete 17 October 95

\\

4

~ 1 BWI Onna Staklon Bechtei Conclusions Dome Response Bounded by Test Block

~

Greater Effective Mass to Excite

~

Lower Energy Machine Automated Jackhammer Safe to Use on Dome

~

Experience with Test Block

~

Confirmation by Evaluation of Test Data

~

Further Confirmation on Mock-up 17 October 95

~ ~

~a

~

~ 1

~

SWI RGBE Containment Analysis

Purpose:

~

Confirm Dome/Liner is Structurally Adequate with Construction Openings 17 October 95 V

~\\

V ~

SWI anna Shkbn Bechhsi ROTE Containment Analysis Two Models Developed (ANSYS)

~

Global Overall Capability of Structure 100 KIP Load at Edge of Opening

~

Local No Adverse Impact on Liner 17 October 95 BW(

Cnna Sta0an Bectstat RGAE Containment Analysis

==

Conclusion:==

~

Bechtel Results Confirmed

~

No Adverse Stress in Liner Plate

~

Dome Concrete Capacity More than Adequate for Modelled Loads

~

Modelled Loads Much Greater than Automated 3ackhammer Loads

~

Dome Response Localized Only

~

Removal Method Results in No Large Concentrated Loads 17 October 95

BWI Snna Station Bectrtsl Post Modification Testing Containment Limited Structural Integrity Testing

~

115% Design Pressure

~

Displacement Measurements

~

Strain Gauges in Openings 9 Gauges 3 on Existing Rebar

~

Crack Mapping Around Openings Containment Integrated Leakrate Test

~

Design Pressure (60 psig)

~

10CFR50 Appendix J 17 October 95 v

v+

BWI Gnna Shkbn Bechtel Conclusion

~

Automated Jackhammers are the Best Alternative for Concrete Removal

~

No Unreviewed Safety Questions

~

Steam Generator Replacement under 10CFR50.59 17 October 95 a

')

~ +