ML18057A484

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Summary of 900830 Meeting W/Util in NRC Headquarters to Discuss safety-related Piping Reverification Program. Attendees Listed in Encl 1
ML18057A484
Person / Time
Site: Palisades Entergy icon.png
Issue date: 09/18/1990
From: Brian Holian
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
NUDOCS 9009280127
Download: ML18057A484 (47)
v • d • e


Text

Oock~t No. 50-255 LICENSEE:.

FACILITY:.

SUBJECT:

e UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 September 18, 1990 Consumers Power Company

  • Pali~ade~ Nuclear Gerie~atins Plant SAFETY-RELATED PlPl~G REVERIFICATJO~ ~EETING SUM~ARY A tr..E-eting was ht:lc at NRC Heat'c;uarters on August 30, 1990 tei discuss Ccnsumers Power Compar.y Safety-Related Pipirig Reverification Program at the.P.alisades Pl~nt. Enclosure 1 provides a list of attendees; Enclosure 2, the handouts *
  • fro~ tht meeting.
  • The PalisacH Plant Safe:ty..:RE:lated Pipirig Rf:verificoticr1 Prograrn re~ultecl from..

staff irisptetior:s ir:~ late: 1989 cor1c.E:irriing the licer.see's response tc Fulletin 79-14. Phase onE: c:f thf. program fot.1lJGEd pipirig systerr woHcc~ns ar:d e-r.gir1eering rHt:tific.ations cf tighteer: str~ss pac~.ages. HE liceriseE: committed to corrplf.tf._ thi~ phas~ of tht program by Dece~btr 1990.

    • The~ pttHt*1.atiC;r1 surr.n!ariz~d ffodir:gs tc; d~te and nc,i.;rsted sch_E:dul~r rtlief in ce;rq*h~t h19

~*t;ase cine c:f the prnsram.

Five.cf tht-eighteen strtss packages tiave bet>n con-.plet.ely recor1ci1E:c, with ar. odditie;r1al ti9tit packages partia1.ly r£:cor.cilE-l' *. All supports mN:t Ir1terim Cperahi~it.) Criteria..

Five of fourty-h10

.supports rc*vit\\\\'l'c' vridet the ccn-r:1t*tt'.d strt>ss packagt:s required n.c.C:ifit"atior. to 11.f.et Ffocl Saft:ty Analysh REr:crt a11ci~*ab1es.

Th~ licensee st<itt::s that thi.s n-.<..c'ifitatfor: rote, oHH*Xirratt:1)' 12 pHced, is cc.ir1sisttt:t ~dtti the industry r1t1rn, or1 reve.r if inti (,f' i;rograf11S.

  • POST MElllNG ACTIONS lht: *week follt:~*ir.g the.meetir1g, Jin, Gavula~ Regic:n III° Rc*actur IrispHtor, ptt:forrrtc an.unschE:du 1tc ir1spect iot1 of He 1ict:r:SH* 1 ~ saf e;ty-re lated pipir.9 n:vu ifi tot i (,.fl progr-an*1.
  • Ttie ir-~pect i*c1r* iriceptridl:'rit ly vnif ied hf ormat ion s~ppliecl b~ t~~- licErsee ~t thf 8/30/90 ntEtirig.. Thrre.pets6ririe1 fron NRR at ter1dtC: tht inspect ictt1 E:'l! it n*ett irig at tht: Bechte 1 off i ct irt Gaithersburg on 9/6/90.

Ne ~ic.ilaticns weie uricovered dur*irig the inspection. It was evident

  • that the stress packages revicwd providf:'c! a clear_.deterniir.citior1 _of. operab.i1ity.

The n1ajc.irity cf time at tht exit rr.t:t-ting was spf:'r1t discussir19:

1)

.the ~otentia1 r*tct causes fot the errors.in tht: safety-related pipi~g stress ~alculations, and

  • 2) the schedule for performing future ~odificbtions as remai~ing str~ss

¥

  • 1. '.'
  • ~. -

packages are fir.aliud.

Stress c~lc:ulotfor1 surr.mary shu*ts, nquested at th E)(it n:eetir:g, \\oiere t~lettpitd to the Project ~ar1ager en 9/10/90 and are provided as Enclosure 3.

9009280127 900918 PDR ADOCK 05000255 P

PDC t* *.;

f, On 9112190 a conference call was held with Consumers Power requesting a letter documenting proposed changes to their phase one piping reverification program.

Overall, the staff considers the scope and level of effort proposed as

  • acceptable.

However, the staff requested the licensee to commit to the following additional measures:

completion of phase one modifications no later than the refueling outage following the steam generator replacement outage, a piping support preventative maintenance program, and a reevaluation of project schedule, including an assessment of which modifications could be completed during non-outage periods.

Enclosures:

1. List of Attendees
2.

Handouts

3.

Summary Sheets DISTRIBUTION

/

mrcii+TiTIY PD31 RIF JPARTLOW

  • JZWOLINSKI RPIERSON OGC NRC PARTICIPANTS JCLIFFORD BBURGESS JGAVULA ALEE PMIPD31:DRSP BHOLIAN ~

91 *~190 NRC & LOCAL PDRs FMIRAGLIA DCRUTCHFIELD PD31 RIF BHOLIAN EJORDAN ACRS(lO)

JRICHARDSON DDANIELSON TC HAN DIP~:DRSP RPI ON 91~ 90 Isl Brian E. Holian, Project Manager Project Directorate III-1 Division of Reactor Projects - III, IV, V & Special Projects Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation*

PALISADES MTG.

SUMMARY

F 1.

P'O

  • . \\ \\ I

... On 9/12/90 a ccinference call was held with Consumers Po~er ~equesti~s a*lette~.

docume~tir1g.prp~o~~d c~anges to tht:'~r phase one piping reverificatio~ program.

Over~ll~ th~ staff consider~ the scope and level of effort prop6sd as _

. accept.able.

However, the.. staff r~quested tht:* licen.see to co1rtnit to the follo~ing additicnal measures:

completion cf phas~ ~ne modifications no Jater than the refueling outage follcwing th~ stea~ generator replacenent outage, *

~

a piping support preveitativ~ maintenance progr~m, and a rHvaluation of prnjf:'ct ~chedule, includirig,.ar; asst:>ssmerrt,of. whfrh:

  • mcc!ificat for,s could be con-.pletec. du_r'i.ng. no~.-outage periods.*.. * * *

~*

Sri-an E. Holian, Prt1ject ~~anager *.:* *

.. :~

Pr"oject D.irHtoratt *rn-1.....

..'~... '*'-. '

... ~

~.

Div i sior1 of Rf:.actor Project's _.. Ill~*~

  • ** fv,-v:& Spe'cfal Pr*cjects*. *
. ~ ; '

... ~'. :

.(

.fr1closun*~:

1. **** L 1*st.. cf.Atter1dt=es
i. r.ai:cc:t.:ts
3.
  • Sl1rr0rr.ary Sheet~

J*

-~.

Office*. cf 'Nuch:at;"* Rt'actor Re.gulatior1 r,'.".' *

"1

'~*

.. ~

.. *r:..

l

  • -.~

<.... -~.. -

  • *,l

~...... -~*.

~**.

.-.. ' ; ~.

~.-.

l

~,

~,

~...

. ; :* ';. ~...

. r-

-.~

. ~ *; !

1 ',,

Mr. Gerald B. Slade Palisades Plant ct:

M. I. Miller, Esquire Sidley & Austin 54th Floor One first National Plaza

~hica~o, Illinois 60603 Mr. Thomas A. McNish, 'Secretary Consumers Power Company 212 West Michigan Avenue

. Jackson, Mi chi gan -49201 Judd L.

B~con~ Esquire Consumers Power Company 212 West Michigan Avenue J~ckson,'Michigan 49201

- Regional Admiliistrator, Fegfon III*

  • U.'S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 799 Roosev~lt Ro~d*

Glen Ellyn, Illino1s 60137 Jerry Sarno Township Supervisor**

. Covert TOwnshiv*

  • 36197 M-140 Highway Covert, Michigan 49043 Off i~e of the Goveinor
  • Room 1. ~ Capitol Building Lansing, Michigan 48913 Mr. David J. Vandewalle Director, Safety and Lice.nsing Palisades Plant.

27780 Blue Star Memorial* Hwy *

. Covert, Michigan 49043 Resid~nt.In~pector c/o U.S. *Nuclear Regulatory Commission Palisades Plant 27782 Blue Star Memorial Hwy.

Covert, Michigan 49043 Palisades Plant Nuclear Facilities and Environmental Monitoring-Section Office Division of Radiological Hea.lth P~o. Box. 30035

  • Lansing, Michigan 48909 Gerald Charnoff, P. C
  • Shaw, Pittman,

_ Potts & Trowbridge 2300 N.

St~eet, N.W.

Washin~ton, D~C. 20037 Mr. David.L. Brannen Vice President Palisades Generating Plant c/o Bechtel Power Corporation 15740 Shady Grove Road Gaithersburg, Maryland. 20877

~:..

NAME J. A. Gavula Duar.e Danit:lscr1

  • Brian Ji(;lian Arr10 ld LeE:

Dar: i e 1 *\\.,

  • Mo 1 one T. L.. C~ar

~. J. Vande~alle F.c*lfer \\.lerikins Johr1 Miliichh*llc,

.. f\\ *. Ka lycr err R. P..

A~an

  • P.orald L~ Mey~

R.

~; \\.'!ac.kscr1..

Mark. G.

C~mrcck* *

  • Glenn Y*.

Y~~sley Gerald S 1c.c'.E:

Ed:i Pitrscn MEEllNG ATTENDEES AUGUST*30, 1990 fQ!~?~MERS ~r9~~~.:f9~P~NY AFFILIATION NRC-RII NRC-RII tlRC/NRR

. NRC/NRR/EMEB.

CPCo/Pc.lisades NRC/NRR CPCo/F'c. lisades

  • CPCo/Jacksor.
  • ABB IMPELL Bechtl'l

'*Btchtf:' 1.

Bechttl.*

Bechtel CPCo/PaliscdH CPCo/QA..

CPCo/Plar.t ~iar1oger

. NRC/f':il<f</~ll31 EMCL.CSURE 1.

PHONE (708) 790-5761 (708) 790-5610

  • (301)* 492-:-1344 (301) 49{-6758 (616) 764 8913 (301) 492-0169 (616) 764-8913
  • ( 517) 788-1505 (708) 940-2037 (3Cl) 258-3147

. ~~

(301) 258-3320.

'. (301) 417~3J68

. {616) 764-8913

. (616) 764-8913.

.... {517) 7.88-214.3

  • *.. ( 3Cl) 492-l~40

. ' ' ~~,.

  • .*A*-

~

I

. ENCLOSURE 2 ES.*

\\

~;*

~ -

..'.-' ~

,* ~

  • !r...

- *.. ~;. '*_:.. ~. *.

-:; ***~ -:*.

. ~. :....-

t* :*-**:.. _....

... *

  • SAFETY-RELArfED PIPING, ,.*;,<}

REVERIFICATION PROGRAM *

..... -*._*,;i

.l*

_I

.~.:.

~,,..

. -~.

~ -

~

~

.,,.* J~.

.... *,.-.~~~~

.~-.

~.

~

~

""* _.,... **. POWERING

. MICHIGAN'S PROGRESS.

r e*

Consumers Power Company Nuclear Regulatory Commission

  • . Safety-Related Piping.:* Reverification***
  • . P~ogcram.R.esults and Future. Directions

~*

.. -~.. '

~

August

  • 30, 1990 *

~*.

Introductory Remarks SRPRP Action~ Complete & Results Independent Design Verification.

. Program RPsults Programmatic Actions In-P,rogress 8ic Res 1fl ts,.

SR PRP *Future *':Directions Closing Remarks

  • .NRC Comments

_ G B Slade.

DJ Malone

  • G Y Yeisley

.-DJ Malone

n. JMalone*

-G B Slade NRC Staff

. =

~.:.

I*

Tab Directory Agenda.*

Agenda' -

Ov-erhead~,

Tab A j

SRPRP -Data*

Tab B..

IDVP Data

~Tab C i-Tab D

-h-'

~-.-. '.

. Future PM Program Data

./fab E

  • --*~

,i

    • .~

.~'..

-.',.'f

-~.,; J.:,";

-/

(. ~

~..

-*~

~ *-: -....

  • ....: ~* - ' -:-

~ -..

PERFORM WALKDOWNS OF PIPING AND SUPPORTS CREATE REDUNE DRAWINGS UPDATE STRESS.

ISOMETRICS AND SUPPORT DRAWINGS DEFINE PHASE I PROJECT SCOPE GATHER EXISTING DATA DEVELOP PROJECT SPECIFl.CATIONS AND PROCEDURES UPDATE STRESS PACKAGES WITH FSAR QUALIFIED ANALYSIS ANO REVISED DRAWINGS EVALUATE DISCREPANCIES TO.

DETERMINE.ROOT CAUSES DRIVING REANALYSIS AND MODIFICATIONS..

PERFORM SAFETY MARGINS STUDY DEFINE PHASE II SCOPE PERFORM PIPE STRESS AND SUPPORT CORRECTNESS-ADEQUACY REVIEWS PERFORM RECONCILIATION.

REVIEWS OF AS-ANALYZED TO AS-BUILT TO AS-DESIGNED DEVELOP PIPE STRESS MODELS PERFORM PIPE STRESS ANO SUPf'QRTS.

RECONCILIATION ANALYSIS YES PERFORM ANALYSIS WITH REQUIRED MODIFICATIONS TO MEET FSAR CRITERIA DESIGN AND IMPLEMENT MODIFl<;:ATIONS REQUIRED TO MEET FSAR CRITERIA YES NO.

TAKE APPROPRIATE TECH. SPEC.

ACTION GENERATE AS-BUil T

  • RECONCILIATION (ASA) PACKAGES, '

INCLUDING RECONCILIATION CALCS, REDLINE DRAWINGS, ANO DISCREPANCY DATA SHEETS

~*1 *.

SRPRP Phase 1 Completion Status Q)

+-!

Q)

a.

E 0 u

+-'

c Q)

U-L Q) o_

80 60 40 80.1 Based on Full and Partial Poe kciges

    • -Based on the -five (5) Gomp.leted Pac.kag*e*s only.

Also included are two (2) modifications that would have *been required

  • if Cales. 05101 and 05102 were not being modified by the SGRP.. Actual resulting modification rate. is 11.93.

i:.*

~ :"

~.~.'

.* r..

~ '~

. 1.

SUMMARY

OF COMPLETELY RECONCILED PACKAGES' STRESS TOT.AL SUPPORTS NUMBER REQUIRING PROBLEM SUPPORTS

.RECONCILED MODIFICATIONS 03342 4

4 0

03356 8

8 o:

03360 8

8 5

05101 11 11.

NIA-INTERIM OPERABILITY ONLY~.

I 05102 lf 11

I. Modification design work not required si~e the 'si~am'.

Generator Re~lacement Project is reconfiguring these systems.

A t_otal of two modifications and one repair would_ have been required otherwise.:*

SUMMARY

OF PARTIALLY.RECONCILED PACKAGES

  • TOT AL SUPPORTS
SUPPORT LOADS_ LESS I I

STRESS

- E_XCEEDING SCREENING I.. THAN OR EQUAL LOADS > DESIGN I.

TO DESIGN.ANO

.TOTAL SUPPORTS

  • .. CRITERIA AND BUT< 1.5 X DESIGN PROBLEM SUPPORTS

. INACTIVE

.REQUIRING IOE.

I.OE TO BE DEFERRED' ICE TO BE DEFERRED 02502 21 6

10.

I

  • 5
  • o 02503 18
o 7

I S*

6 03361 31 3

17.*

.7..

4 03362.

11 3

2 s

1 03363 12 4

3 3

2 03364 12 2

3 7

0 03365 12 3

4 3

.l 2

03359 3

3 0

0 0

TOTALS

.___1_2_0 _ _.._ __

2_4 _____ _._ ______

4..;...6 ___ _.;.._-"'-......___-,-_35--'--*

  • ___

.,.....1_5 __ _,__...I f.*

.. * *1

'.-~* :_:,.

, ~

.:~*.*':_,.** t

  • r *-*

~

. ~*'.

,*, ~.

. -~ >..

. r..,

  • )
~ '

(:

    • ~
  • ~, ',.#

~

. /' '*.

\\ ~... * '

,\\.' '

e.

.. ~"

(/)

n.::::

0 Cl..

Cl..

(/)

LL.

0 Cf) w

.*C)*

.<{

1--z w 0

... n.:::: '

w Q_

. PIPE. SUPPORT DESIGN MARGINS 100 90 80 70 60*

50 40 30*

20 10

0.

Summary Based on Five Completely Reconciled.Packages

~-.*...

.1

.2

  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

. 6

  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
1. O IOC MAXIMUM INTERACTION.. RATIO (with Respect to fSAR Aliowables)

Pressure + Gravity + SSE Combination

1

~-

't.-.*.*

....... :,~'------

.i>>

~-.*;

e.

e PRELIMINARY OBSERVATIONS ON SIGNIFIC~NCE OF DISCREPANCIES DISCREPANCIES ANALYSI*S DRIVING PIPE SUPPORT APPROXIMATELY 55%

DUE TO SUPPORT DESiGN*DEFICIENCIES, CONS.ISTING_OF:

-FRICTION CONSIDERATIONS.

~PRINCIPLE" AXIS PROPERTIES

-DEF~ECTION

~WELD/MEMBER QUALIFICATION APPROXIMATELY 3Q% DUE TO LOAD INCRE~SE, R~SULTI~G FROM:

-INCORRECT* RES~ON~E SPECTRA

~VAL~E WEIGHT OR C.G.

Ld~ATION.

~EXCESSIVE PIPE SUPPOR~ GAP~

~

~UNINT~NTIONAL ~EST~AINTS.

    • APPRO.XIMA.TELY. 15% *DuE'* TO *AS-BUILT.

ISSUES,. CONSISTING OF:

-ANCHOR BQLTS SPACING* VIO~ATIONS

-CH~NGE.IN SPECIFIED WELD SIZE

-:-VENDOR COMPONENT I.NTERCHANGE

~ISCRE~ANCIE~ DRIVING MODIFICATidNS

~SEI.SMIC RESPONSE SPECTRA ERRORS

  • ~ALVE.WEIGHT/b.G. LbCATIONS.
  • VENDOR COMPONENTS INTERCHANGE
  • ROD' HANGE.R DESIG.N INADEQ\\JATE

-'-1"'

SUMMARY

OF FOR.-. STRESS *MODI FI.CATIONS PACKAGE 03360

\\

1.

2

  • ~

3 Support No.

CC9~

H802:

Uplift* due *to v-a. lv-.e*

. we *i ghts /C. G ~

1 ocat*i on and *se 1.smi c response spectra..

su~port No~*

... ~ca~

H804 =-

uplift.d*ue. to v a. 1 v e...., - **

  • we i g ht :!::> / c :.; G.*
  • l. 6 c:: *a t

. i C> n'. '

a. n a -

uni n t

e n.t !

on~ l

_restra.i.nt

. --- s u-*p i;)*o r**t,_:*

  • No ~

."t c*c 9 *~

H803:. *.upi.*ift_ d*ue.t.a:

V'.a. 1. V~*

w~.i g h t.s /.C *. G

~*,*

1 oc-*at.i.on.: and "~.e.i, sm i-C.

r e s p o n s e.. s p*e. c:::. :t r a

~. *.~

  • 4.**SUpport No.

CC9-*

5 H 8 0 2

  • 1. :

- 1 2 "

s i :z e

. 1 4*

  • pipe *.

clamp

.... was.

spe.c::i£ied by desi_g:n.*

but.'

~ ' 1-2 "_. *_ s*i ze. **.10 clamp w'a. s i :n.*s ta 11*ed.-,

which' h'i::\\s'

.io*~e*r**

.a.llo~able~

S u. -J;) p o r t N 6..

  • q C 8 _:_.

.H a O 5 :

  • De £* i c:: i e n c y.

i n 0 r i g i. n a. :;L r 0 d

h. a n g e ';i
  • d e s i g n..

I t c:: a. n

  • n.o t
  • swing to a.~~ommodate
  • mov-e men ts.

~.

-.'I

'J -.

.. ~-' ' :;..

.-.. *.'(.

... ~.. ~ ~...

. :* 1

. -.. J.;.:

.t

._ 1,: *.

.~
'

..y.

"l'.

  • :;\\.' ¥

-~. __._ ) ~--

~* * - ':'t

  • ~-

. ~ *_ '*:

  • '!)'-

~...

.J

  • ~.

Independent *nesi2n Verification Pro2ram Obj ectiVe: Prov-ide independent technical and quality overview

. of the SRPRP to verify the quality of the final design packag~s by:

Results:.

> Reverificatio'n program was adequately controlled by approved documents Walkdowns were accurately performed Hardware is represented by pla,nt design documentation_-:

. Reconciliations are being. adequately performed

  • .Overall outputs from the SRPRP.are accurate
  • control *of the SRPRP is adequate to assure a usable final product
l.
  • r

~-*

' ~ ~**

~~I y

Programmatic Action Information Civil I Structural Engineering Action Plan Action Categorize and ~nalyze past independent

  • third party review findings Review corrective action completion dates relative to analysis completion *dates l,nterview ~ESS Engineering personnel

. relative.to *usage of avciilable tools, the

  • need for further tools and reso1Jrce loading.
  • Evaluate. "Technical Evaluation of

-Engineering Analyses Performed in.

Support of Modifications for the Palisades Nuclear Plant" prepared by lmpell relative to issues identified by N,RC staff.

  • Provide completion date of engineering guidelines for stress package custodian, pipe support and pipe stress analyses.

Findings Com_ments identified by the third party reviewer were similar in

  • nature t9 that identified by _the NRC during IR 89024.

Technical Design Specificati~n revisions had not been revised when analyses were completed.

. Procedural revisions were in-progress during analyses preparations.

Engineering guidelines would. be benefic.ial, but not felt to be tha

  • root cause of difficulties.

Resources appear to be tapped*.

  • out. This precipitates poor quality
  • technical reviews. Additionally, :

personnel expertise is limited

  • with existing staff. Staff augmen-tation with vendor personnel * *..

did not alleviate concerns.

. Issues identified within structural

. an_alysis reviewed were similar.

to those identified by the NRC.

No deficiencies were identified to

  • impact analysis c0nclusion relative to safety significance.

Strengths and weaknesses reviewed for action within the Engineering Self-Assessment:'

Stress package custodian.guide

  • currently in-review.

Pipe support and stress guidelines in draft.

~.

-~*. '.*

~

Provide a conceptual annual cost for vendor pipe support and pipe stress analyses. Estimate-to give consideration to both planned and emergent work; Develop.and implement*a work assignment plan for pipe support and pipe stress analyses.

  • .. ~..

J:

1*

An estimate for vendor.

_services has been developed.

~ General service contracts a*re i~

place with sever:i vendors.

  • These vendors are being *.... *: *

. _ evaluated with the intent b'eing,

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

'.l.

., :**-=.

. that two prima_r:y veh~c;>rs *will be*. -.

selected, with two to four "* * **

  • . se.condary-vendors being cited.
  • (,'
    • ' -~
  • 't*

~..

~* t~-~

. - '. *... :. ~

  • t

.... ~.:--*'

  • . ' :*<,~'.
  • _...... ~...

'..*. ~'

'. f. *:' ~.

    • ,.I'

Support Preventative Maintenance Proaram

Purpose:

Based on the nature of the physical discrepancies*

identified during the detailed IE Bulletin 79-14 walkdowns a review of existing PPACS for* support_*

configuration maintenance was deemed nec.essary.

. Identifying physical discrepancies (e.g~.loos.e *nuts) relative to

.support *type Identifying. existing PP ACS* for support inspection Reviewing the exist*i~g ISi -Section XI program relative to the the nature.* of the discrepancies identified, supports currently*

within the program and periodicity of the.. in~pections Sur.veyed the ind us try throug.h NO MIS* and contacted Qther p*lants undertaking IE Bulletin 79-14 rever_ification programs Reviewing system* op_erating characte.ristics for. prediction of

  • periodicity

~: -

~*..

l '*

  • ~ :;,. -

. '*_i,

Facts Identified Re&:ardjn~ The Exjstin2 ISi Section XI Pro2ram Current inspection period is in accordance with ASME Section XI (i.e. maximum of a 10 year* periodicity).

E*xisting program only recently started using* support drawings for inspection (within last two operating cycles) lnsula~ion is not. removed Inaccessibility is an acceptable response provided* alternative inspectio~.s are performed.

Only a few supports per system are inspected within an inspection period in *accordance with Section. XI Section XI only requ*ires inspection* of,supports.. associated with-ASME Class 2 &.

  • 3 piping ov.er. four inch.es in diameter
  • No trending program *currently exists ltem~s
  • Under* Cons.jderatjOD Implementation of a.. baseline in~pection for supports.

associated. with safety. related,piping *.

  • Utilizing a piping diameter of two and one-half inches for*

support inclusion within. an inspection program Utilize the existing PP AC progra*m for ini"tiatjon of inspedions outside of Section XI: requirements Placing existing Section XI support inspections wit~in the PPAC system also in order to maintain one data base for program implementation

~.: _.: '

  • .~..

'f

L

-~ - :

.e

\\'

Support drawings will be take.n to* the field _doting* ~ns_pectioil~

The need for utilization pf-~'qualifi.ed inspectors" for* non;.*

Section XI *supp()rts

/""

.Development of a trending *program. ~hich_. would include,.boih>:.

Section XI a.nd non-Section XI supports to det~rriiine. future.

  • -~-... :

~... J.......

inspection. ~eeds

~~...

. Nature* o{ d,.eficien-cy _identified* re_Iaflv~ tQ *s~pport. type,'.lasf **

. in.sp.ection' <tate and. results., ~-nd system chataCteristi.~~.~to~-..t..

-~-

periodicity determinati'oil and future p_rogram' direciion. ~. ::*,,

-1.*

~,
  • .'l..

J

'*".1

~... *

Y:.
  • ~-...

~ *..

.. r.~.

-2:

~

  • .' \\
  • ~* ***::.,i.,
~

..~*

' ~.....,J

~

. :.!~:._.,.,.

~ -*.

-~**

~-.

\\ '..

~*=.

  • ~-.'.

'. ~..

-~*;_":_'.:"_)-..

' ~*.

. ~

. ~. -

. -::-- ~..

~ -... *,-,._

,
..r'_'

~.... --

l~..

'~I

  • _:.

-.. ~... ~* '

\\.*.;:'.._::__

    • **:.;i *.-

,~~.._,

f;

~

SRPRP Future Directions

- Actions to Be Completed in 1990 _

_ Remaining repairs (i.e. tightening of loose nuts) that were -

-id_entified during_ the: Spring Maintenance. Outage will be -

_completed during _the i'990 Refueling *& SGRP Outage.

CompletP the five_- modifications identified to be nece~sary"

.*in-order to :return systems to compliance with FSA:R ** -

allow~bles for t_he five str~ss _-packages fully rec_onciled. -

. ~*

~..

. *.,_.-;_ ~: ~'..

-. *. ~

. ~ ;

Corri p I et e -c iv ii Is tr u ct u r a l -a ct ion p I an i t_ ems: _-

~ d d it ion a II y, ~

-_ ~ _

Design* Engi_neering Self-Assess~~nt actions will be compl_eted

--~'is s~heduled for 1990.

*;.t 7

-* Actfons To Be Co<<u1leted JD 1991. _

-- Co~plete-analytical,_reconciliation/reconstitution_ of-the

_r~maining-: Phase* {*stress packages.

Finali'Ze-d*evelopment and implement the piping support ". _

  • preve.ntative.. m.aintenance _ program.

Modifications. will be* completed -based -on system accessibility -

.and management prioritization -of need relative.. to. safety-signific_ance of the particular -modification and other planned activities.

~:..

-~'....

  • ~

Actions To Be Completed* Jg 1992 - 1996 Reconcile/reconstitute approximately 12 stress packages

. each year.

  • Stress packages to be rec.onciled/reconstituted will_ be selected based on modifications plan1_1ed for a particular system and based on potential for p_ackages ex~ibiting characteristics. which have previously been identified as resulting in necessary modifications.

Modifications-* will.. be completed. based on system accessibility and management prioritization of need r_elative to safety-significance of* the particular *modification and 0U1er planned activities.

  • ~.*'-

"'r, SRPRP S*GRP IDVP IOE*

IOC

.I R.

CPCO PPACS*

NOMIS PORV.***

EA.

... e ABBREVIATION DEFINITIONS SAFETY RELATED

  • -PIPING R*EVERIFICAT:ION*

PROGRAM STEAM* GENER.ATOR REPLACEMENT-PROJECT INDE~ENPENT DESIGN VERIFICATION. PRdGR~M INTERIM OPERABILITY-'.

.. EV~L*U~TION INTERIM -ciPER~~ILITX CRITERIA.

~

.. (

.*... -... ~

INTERACTION.~ATIO

~-- t

~*~:;.-.:*:~#-

POWER COMPAN*.y.* :... ',*,*,. '<_"...,

CQ_NSUMERS PERIODIC PREDETER~~N~D.

ACTIVITY -CONTROL SYST~M:

":I:'

. NUCLEAR:~ OPERATIONS MAINTENANCE IN'FOR'MATI-ON SYSTEM POWER. OPERATED

~;EL:I.EF. >*'*

V-AL-VE.

EN~TNEERING ANALYSIS*

. *r

~* !'°"*

'Ct.

.. *-~...,

~-,.

~ ;....

"*-i'

PHASE l

COMPLETION STATUS:

.WALKDOWN SCOPE 18 STRESS PACKAGES

"(20 STRESS PROBLEMS)

.~7 STRESS PACKAGES. TO RECEIVE DETAILED WALKDOWNS

.. 12 Stress Packages have s.upport walkdowns completed all*

5 *'stress *Packages do not.

have all.suppo~'t walk~owns co*mplet~d 1

STRESS PACKAGE

.(l?ORVs.-

CALC 03375*)

D~emed.to not require a co~plete walkd6wn ~ue to. recent modification.-

and re*co_nfiguration "effort 311 SUPPORTS TO BE

~ALKED DOWN 290 Fabricated Support~

_17* Penetrations 251.SUPPORT WALKDOWNS* ARE COMPLETE.

234 Fabr.icated Supports 17 Penetra.tions

~..

~

.1

.. ~'

/

RECONCILIATION SCOPE 18 STRESS PACKAGES 112 5

PACKAGES 8

PACKAGES FULLY RECONCILED PARTIALLY RECONCILED **

PIPE SUPPORTS RECONCILED 42 (OUT OF 162 SUPPORTS IN THE 13 RECONCILED PACKAGES)

PIPE SUPPORTS ASSO~IAT~D WI~H FULLY RECONCILED $TRESS PACKAGES 2

of th~se are assu~~d inac~ive 70 PIPE SUPPORTS ASSOCIATED WITH PARTIALLY RECONCILED PACKAGES 24 of these are *assumed*-inactive It is noted that* of the :.62 sti~ports asso~iated *with the 13 re~onciled *pack~ges, o~ly l-5 * ~ft.ippor ts *that* had *1 cads greater than desigh (but -~ess than 1.5 X Design)' did not receive _speci~ic. rec6ncil.iati6n*

Fully recohc.i1ed

~nd16a.tes th~t the~

ent.ire stress* package, includi.rig piping and support~, meets Int~~i~

Ope~abillty ~riteria. (ICC).

Fiye 0£ t*hese p~cka.ges were cbmplete.

wa. lkd own pa.c"k.a.ges -

on*e. pa.ck'a.ge (Ca.le 05101).had 4

0£ 13 support wa.lkdo~ns complete, but a.~1 supports were reco*nc i led to** the *new loads.

Partially* r.econc.j..led indic.a.tes* the piping. stress meet~ ICC and that t~ose supports not meeting* the de£erra.1 screenin~ criteria.

ha.~e

~lso *been speci£ica.lly reconciled and meets roe.

. :-"'"**. ~ _- -

COMPLETION PERCENTAGES WA'LKDOWNS.

12 0£ 17 stress Packages Complet.ed 251.of 31-1.Pipe Walkdowns Support.

completed.

RE CO.NCI LI ATI ONS

  • *s.~ of 18. *Stress. Packages Comple~~lY.. Reconcil~d
    • .
  • 13 0£ 18 *stress Pack<::lges*

co.mple*t~ely. or Partially Rec.onciled*

.1.12 311 Pipe Supp~rts

  • ~ullyJReconci1~a*

C I n c 1 u a i n g 2 6* *As~ u tn ea

= 70 *'.6%

-8 0

~ 1%*

*-= 27.'8%

Inactive')**

~

'MQDI FI C::~TI O*NS Cofr\\pleted -~ack~.g~s')

I

( Ba*sed on 5

6*£* 42 Supp.or.ts *R~*qµired...

-'":**11.. /9%

Mod l:*f icat.1,. on to. meet-* FSAR:..... '.

  • a 1: 1 o.w ab 1 e s a 1 1 meet*
  • I o C 7

of

~ -~

4.2 'Suppor.ts would -hav'e.. 16~7%_

  • + eq.u ired.. Mo'd i £.i cation.

. \\ -.*.

. i f. the

  • s -:t. ea m *.- Ge n e rCi tor

.Rep1acemerit_._ProjeC*:t.*.c s.c;;RP.)..

were not *re con£ igu'r ing *.the; piping

  • I.

1'

~.. '.

~ ~;*

l I

\\*~-*.

,'~I.

.* ~ i ~'

'.*~*j-:-*...,;. :

M

.~. ::.;:.

.'1 *:

/*

  • ~:-* --~
r. ~*

I

. -~. i

f: STRESS

. **sLEM

.*JO.

SUPPORT NO.

03342

' EB1O-H227.1

. '. EB1 O-H227A

! EB1 O-H2278 I

  • : EB1 o..:.H227C.

~....

i. 03356

  • .HBC38-H1 I

1 HB35-H931..,!

I STRESS MARGIN

.*. (l) *e INTERACTION RATIO i

STRU~TURAL MEMBER*

VENDER j NORMAL ; SHEA~ :

LOCA~

ITEM

! STRESS J STRESS STRESS

.042

. 110

.600

. 524

. :420

.. 004

. I j i.

I

. j

..i. i ANCHOR WELD !

BOLT.

BASE PLATE

.. 192 I

.422

.403. !

.080

.510

.. 860 i

.080

!.. :540

  • .. soo, I.380
  • i"
41. -,

1

  • 704 i.

I CRITICAL*.

-.MARGIN.**

57.80/o 29.fr:i'

.*. 46.o*=v.:

. 110

  • 1.. 989 i *.100 I

.650

! !.916

.987. (.884. i 1.. 1*:/i)

.500

' HB35-H9.32

! *.860 I.032 I..170 I :400 SO. O*:V.:i

  • .. 116 J
  • _'.840

. j_,'.580 *.

.14.0010*

I HB35-H932. 1 I

.457

.096 I

.. 54.J'i/*:O i H~35-H934

.490

.460

_*354

.490 i'

. i

. 51.OC/eo

  • .,r-*

......___ ___.-. --. -~

  • ]'

05101

DBB1-H40.

..450' i..

340

  • ... 177

.196

.750..

.767 r *.59<>" !

    • 2~:;;~.*.

~ QBB1-H41

.402 i

.322

.. 902. i... 907

.773 9.3CJ'e;,

.*DBB1-H42

.217

  • j

.580 i

.. 224

  • 1 *.976 j

.526

.440

(

.2:3"/o

  • ~; --~....__;_D_B_B_1_*~~H_4_4_._....__ ______ --+-

1 _._7_i_3_...__.B_0_3_.....__*8_4_3 _ __,__*_9_0_1._. ____

.9_0~4-' ____........,_*_5_6_B_*~*1 __

. _9._6_~_o~*...;.,--

DBB1-H46 1*

.221 *- I. -.267 i*.530'

.600 1

.788 '.j 21.~/o

.... (DBe1-HSO.

.770

.210..

030.. !

.030*

-.64~

.860

.514 *:1... 1.4.0Y:". '..

i DBB1-H51

.2.04

.352

070 I

!.907 !..760 *

.544 l

  • 10. 90/eo

'! *. 951.0_2 I l DBB2~H59

.. : DBB2-HGO ;

.: FAILEO.FSAFtBUT MET IOC - ~EPAIR WOULD ttAVE BEEN REQUIRED (2)

. :j FAILED FSAR BUT MET iOC -.MODIFICATION WOULD HAVE BEEN REQUIRED (2). *. :<.

! DBB2-:-H52 I.. 200

.* '1

.080

.01 s**. '1

.080 i

.172 i

.. 600.

.261.. i

  • 40.oO,lo...
  • !* DBB2-H54 1

... 5~ 9 I *.339 i

.140 I.

780 *!

.**22.<Y-:lo I

i I

I i

I i

! DBB2-H55

'I

.215 I

.4~0 I

.670 i

/j 33.00/o i

i i

i i

i

.i.

I., :

i DBB2-H56 I

.760

863 i

.0.90 i

I.997 I I -

I

=0.00/(,. --

DB.B2-H57

,i

.690

-.240 I

.033. I

!.472 !

.460

.610'

31. ()Cleo i

I l DBB2-'HSB I

.202 I

.327. i

.0312 i.574 I

.517 I.516 I

.42.6:1;;;*

I*

.. ;.DBB2-H61 I i FAILED FSAR BUT MET IOC - MODIFICATION WOULD HAVE BEEN REQUIRED (2)

- i DBB_2-.H62

  • i

.5oo. I

.1s3 I *.o64 *. I.94o *

.300

  • 1 :610 !

6.0010..-":-0'.

  • . I DBB2-H63
  • I

.160

.111 l

.o95 I

i.. 377

.aoo. I.100 I 62.3Clo >

(1) Margin is_ with respect to FSAR/Code. Values, *uOless otherwise noted.

(2) ~odification design wort< not required since the SGRP is

'1.1 reconfiguring the sy5tem in the 1990 refueling outage,

. *~.

STRESS.;

r

  • . ~HLEM :

SUPPORT

...JO.

NO.

03360 l CC9-H800

CC9-H801

---! CC9-H802

' CC9-HB02.1 STRESS MARGIN INTERACTION RATIO

.310 I

.340.

.080

.137 i

.140 I

FAILED FSAR BUT MET IOC - MODIFICATION 15 REQUIRED i

PLATE !

I PIPE SUPPORT DELETED IN THE ANALYSIS - MODIFICATION IS REQUIRED FAILED FSAR Bi.JT M.ET IOC ~MODIFICATION IS REQUIRED

. *~*

CRITl.CAL MARGIN 66.00/o

CC9-
HB03

.660

.625 * !

.. 983 I

.0~2 :

.807

.408 1, 70/v
  • i<..

, CC9:--H803.1 I GC8-H804 i

~

.626. i

.202 I

.725 i

.120 :

.857

. ;.831 i

14.30/u I PIPE SUPPORT DELETED IN THE ANALYSIS - MODIFICATION IS REQUIRED.

I GC8._HB05 i FAILED FSAR BUT MET IOC - MODIFICATION IS REQUIRED (1) Margin is with respect to FSAR/Code Values, unless otherwise noted..

(2)* Modification design work not required since the SGRP*is.

reconfiguring the system in the 1990 refueling outage..

.e.

SCRE-ENING PARTIALLY RECONCILED STRESS PACKAG_ES Stres$ packages that *are

~n~omplete and

~re to be deferred uritil 1991; but' have physical or analyti*ca,1 discrepancies identified. were. *screened to ass*ure that -

  • ful 1

.. support reconciliation~ were* performed on those considered to be wo~st case~

Thes~

r e c o n c i I. i at i o n s

. u t i 1. i z:e d I n t e r l m.

Operabili*t:Y Evaluat_ion C I*."o.E. >

s'tre*ss analys.is..

  • loadings that :*incorporate any..

.and all field 6r analyt~cal

  • discrepancies previously*.

ident.ifi.eg~

The criteria utilized* to ass*ure that wars~. case *supports were rigorously assessed-*is a~ follows:

1 )

2.)*.

4 )

Those supports. idet\\t.if*ied dur*i-ng*

t h

e

  • _.. p * * *i p

e s

  • u p
  • p.
  • o.. r

. t

.adequa<:::y)'correct'nes_s' re:v.ie-ws *.**as=.

having

~uestionabl~

.de~i~n*

capabilities.

received specific reconcili~tion.

~-

  • ~

Those *. supports i'a*e*rit-i f ied

' **i=>_¥*

Bechtel

  • as. *,'*

bei*ng poss.ibie can a i a ate 5",. f o ~ mod i* f i cat l 6 n,

f or what~ever r~c?tso'ris.;

.r*eceived.

speci_fic reconciliation.

~..,..

T h o* s

~

. s u P*.P o r.t s w h o*:s :e.

  • r e c on c i l i at;. i on l bads. inc r ~as e d *by more than
  • 50% above,..thei*r.d.esign.*

l 0 'a a s

.. r e C: e i v e d

" s* p ~ c i '£ i c re'conciliat.ion..

ThOse supports* whose w'el:o. ~tress;;.*

interacti*on '-

ration*.**(I.R.)

wa*s *,

dee~ed *critical,

-.*or

.*where.*.. a*

compress'ive stre*s's

me'mber was**

identified as signif,icant

  • and

.*c'o n.. t r

o.1 1 in g,* *

  • s*p e.c*1*f*1 c re.concil.ia.tion was.

peJ;:formea*...

(This was perf.ormed because

_tp~

Inter.im operating.

cr.iteria does not provide for reia~atiori. of these paramet~r~* from

.t;.he

= FSAR

.values) 1,-.*'

.~. -

..... ~..

., *... ~

--~*

c,

  • :... ~->;-

-~: :.

--~.,,.. -

~*. _:_~~~-~ -.*};~_,.

~- *::.:.t....

. ~.-

  • .'\\:.":.

~T OF llTERI" OPERABILITY EYALUATIOIS (IOE)

Load LOad Total Decreased for

  • R-ined S11111e X Loed increase Stress Total

. Supports TOtal Total 5tnJOrts Supports Not

  • Slfl>Orts Not for Supports lot for ~ts lot Probl-Slax>rts
  • inactive Screened R~lri!!I IOE R~i.ri!!I IOE R~iri!!I IOE R~iri'1!1 *OE R~lrl!!I IOE

. (0* 10)

(10*20)

(20*30)

(30*40)

(40*50) 2502.

21 6

15 10 5

5

.0 0

0 0

0 0

2501 18 0

18 7

11 5

0 2

2 0

. 1 1159 3

l 0

0 0

0 0

0 0

0

  • o 0 e 1361 31 3

. 28 17 11 7

0 0

2 0

3362

. 11 3

8 z

6 4

0 0

0 0

3363 12 4

8 3

5 2

0 0

0 3364.

12 2

...

  • 10 3

7 7

0 0

0 0

0 0

3165 12 3

9 4*

5 3

'0 0

0 0

TOTAL 120 24.

96 46 50.

3]'

2 3

5 3

3

~..

INDEP~NT.DESIGN VERIFICATION PROG~DVP)

OBJECTIVE Provide independent technical and quality overview of the SRPRP to verify the quality of the final dedgn packages.

The IDVP criteria required that the.

work be reviewed for appropriateness of methodology, nt1merical.accuracy, and compliance to SRPRP procedures and specifications.

OBJECTIVE ACCOMPLISHED BY:

.-Developing project plans for the IDVP

.-Performing technical and quality reviews of program procedures and specifications..

-Considering previous CPCo and regulatory concerns, not only in the 79-14 area, but also in the quality assurance area relating to performance vs.

compliance

-Conducting overviews up-front during each activity and. providing feedback of results and concerns to project management so that cqrrections could be made in a timely manner

-Performing in-process QA surveillances. of walkdowns. an~ *reco.nciliations.

-Utilizing contracted technical expertise to supplement the site Qual~ty Assurance staff METHODOLOGY

1. Technical and quality reviews of various project procedures and specJfications were perf qrmed during the n9rmal review and approval process

, {...

at the beginning of the project.

This allowed any technical or quality

  • comments to be resolved prior to the document being issued for use.

The foUowing. documents wer~. reviewed:.. *

-Administradve Procedure 13. 05, "Safety Related Piping Reverification

  • Program (SRPRP)"

-EngineeringManµal Procedure EM-18-01, "SRPRP Walkdown" *

. -Engineering Manual Procedure EM-18-02, "SRPRP Reco.nciliations"

-Technical Specification C-173, "Technical Requirements for the Analysis and Design of Safety Related Pipe Supports" *

-Technical Specification M-195, "Requirements for.the Design and.Analysis

.of Palisades Plant Safety Related Piping and Instrument Tubing"

2. A Quality.Assurance surveillance of the SRPRP walkdowns was performed during the actual performance of the walkdowns by' Bechtel in both the Aw<:iliary Building and the Containment Building.

This surveillance consisted of:

/..

-Reviewing completed walkdown packag.es.

Reviews were conducted to assure that* the packages were complete and annotated as.. required by project * -

procedures.

A total.of*20 additional completed.pack~ges were reviewed.

3. A Quality Assurance surveillance of the. SRPRP *reco.nciliati6n.process.w:as

. conducted at the Bechtel office during_ the earl,y stages of -reconciliation.

It consisred of.performing independent technical reviews *Qf;one pipe stress

. calculation and seven pipe. suppor.t calcula~ions.- These reviews _were<..

0.

'\\***

  • ~

~ t conducted utilizing proj'ect documentation, as _well as a separate_ pr*ocedure::

providing instructions for performing the independe_nt. reviews and for*. *

  • formatting review results.

The progre.s.s of this surveillance and. the

.~ **

'):.,_,.

results tfo;!reof were discussed with.both CPCo. and Bechtel project,

,j ~--*

. management which allowed resoluti~n of any concerns.~r* questions resulting**

fr~m... the independent. revfew p*rior"'.*to ~ompi_etion-_ of ma"'ly reconcil~ation

~~-

packages.

RESULTS

    • t~

.. !_~-~-

L Comments made duri_ng the review. of -pro'Ject documeptation wer*e. ~~_solved vi.a-the normal review and approval process.

this resulted in a reverlficatiort- * * ***

program that is controlled by. approve'd do'cuments cont'aining the appifoable technicai and, q~ality requiieme~ts nec'essary to verify existir:lg. design information,* or to' correct that* information to. a status coris'istent with*

current CPCo s tandar_d~.

2: The_ results of the _walkdown surveillance showed that, in gen~r.al,*

. _performance of *the Bechtel walkdown teams. met th'e requiremen.ts of the SR~RP Project Plan, the Bechtel Quality Plan, and the CPCo walkdown p_rocedu_re-. *

  • Information:resulting from the Bechtel walkdowns indicates that the existing plant' is ~ell represented by design drawings-.

The indep.endent

  • overview showed that Bechtel adequately verified dimensions shown 011 the*

,design drawings I identified items existing in.. the f_ield which were* either different from the design drawings or were not shown ori the drawings, and correctly. identified physical discrepanci~s, and promptly re.poJ:".ted. them to_...

. CPCo project. personnel.

Th_e dimensional and informational results of the surveillance walkdowns agreed with the*Bechtel walk~o"Wn results, with ~ery few exceptions.

Witnessing actual walkdowns in progress.showed that.

  • techniques being used were adequate to accompl~sh the job; *and'.made some
  • comments "for improving those techniques;_* Reviews* of completed*

docu,mentation showed that procedural requfrements were bei_ng met, or assured that corrections were -made to 'the do.cu'.mentation as necessary.

No*

findings resulted from this surveillance, _and only one. signi~icant' observation relating to weld measure1nents was made..

~~-:-,.**

r:_'.*. -

.,,. *r

.!:~.

'I

i.*

. 3. The results of the--onciliation surveillance show-hat the reconciliation process-was being performed in accordance with the SRPRP project plan, the Bechtel Quality Plan, the governing CPCo sp~cifications and procedures, and the Bechtel Project Engineering Procedures that had been developed for this project.

The independent technical review of the reconcilation packages agreed with the.results and methodologies of.the Bechtel calculations.

This surveillance did note one deficiency relating to the consideration of SAM displacements in evaluating gap closure at a support* location; *and made several recommendations relating to the extent of documenting calculation me.thods.

Resolution of these did not alt.er the calculation results.

4. General conclusions that ~an.be drawn from the results of the IDVP are that the reverification program was followed, the overall quality of the project outputs is accurate, and control of the SRPRP is adequate to assure a useable final product.

r*

.. ~

... ~ :

\\'.

Independent Third Par, ieviewer Analysis Comments Engineering Analysis Description

  • Calculation Date Error Description Comment Code EA-SC-89-338-01 Rev 0 Pipe Support 11/8/89
1. reference documentation 5,

.2. thermal movements in non-supported 3

d~tion not considered

3. pipe strap eecentricity notconsidered 3 ' '

EA-SC-89-338-02 ~ev 0 Pipe Support 11/8/89

1. reference documentation 5
2. modeling discrepancies 2
3. no reference for input loads 5

4.: inobiainable effective throat of weld 2

  • e
5.. inconsistency in support model 3
6. wrong Fy input 2

EA-SC-89-338-03 Rev 0

  • Pipe Support

. I 1/8/89 J. wrong Fy i_npul 2

2. wrong weld size input lo calculation' 2

EA-03356/59-c/s-2.

Pipe SuJ>Port 1 J/18/89 '

J. load not consistent with pipe analysis 7

RevO input

2. reference documentation 5
3. misuse of handbook aJlowables, not

-2

. consistent with C-I 73(Q)

EA-03356/59-c/s-3 Pipe Support

  • I 1/18/89 I. loads not consistent with pipe analysis 7

RevO

  • input e
2. *\\\\:Ong pan number EA-03356/59-c/s-4 Pipe Support
  • 1 J/18/89

. l. load discrepancy

  • 2 RevO
2. refe~nce documentation.._ ~.

5

3. discrepancy in sway strut l0ading 2

(tension/compression)

Page* 1*..

~!.

    • ~::.

~

j

Engineenng Analysis EA-03356/59-c/s-5 RevO EA-03342-c/s-01 EA-03356/59-c/s-l Rev I EA-SC-89-338-04 RevO EA-FC-866-6 Rev 3 EA-FC-866-8. Rev 3 EA-FC-866-9 Rev3

  • . r.:*

-~ -

' I.

l' Independent Third. Party Reviewer Analysis Comments

. Description Pipe Support Pipe Stress Analysis Pipe Stress Analysis Pipe Stress Analysis Pipe Supprirt Pipe Support

. ~.

Pipe Sui)pon

,.1 *..

~.

  • Calcul.ation Date H/18/89 Error Description

~ ~ reference documentation I0/31/89.

i i/20/89 l

11/6/89 1 l{l9/89 11/29/89

.11/29i89' 2: miscalculation of seismic loading *

(calculation based on ZPA when OBE

.. should have been *used)

3. undoc~mented assumption
1.
  • modeling error (incorrect data.point
  • in horizintal response spectrum) 2.. ~odcling error (incorrect valve wt
  • input due to equipment data base error)
1. modeling error (piping not evaluated

. pressure) 2.. modCling error (support direction) *

' 3. valve weight documentation

4. reference,documentation

. No ~omments *

.1 :* ~centridty not considered.

2.. Pl not ev~luated in calc~iation I'. i>J not evaluated in calculatioiI

2. a.centricity not con.sidered
3. *local bending of angle not considered *

..

  • 1. local.bending of angte not co~sidered
2. Pl not evaluated in calculation

. 3~

  • eccentri~*ity n.ot consi~ered

.. \\'..

. Ir*

~* -.

.*Page 2-. *.-.

'"'I 1" -- -~.

.,t *.

  • '4

~

~- ~

~~\\..

Comment Code 5

3 4

2

2.

2 2

5 n/a 3

.6 -

6 3

6 6

6 3

J,

Engineering Analysis EA-SC-89-343-01 Rev 0 EA-89-241-03 Rev 0 EA-89-241-04 Rev 0 EA-03367~H711.1-c/s-01 RevO EA-03367-H712-c/s-01 RevO EA-03320-H149-cis-Ol RevO Independent.t.hird. Party 11~vlewer Analysis Comments Description Pipe Stress Analysis

- Pipe Support Pipe Support

  • . Pi~ Support Pipe Support Pipe Support

~.

~:*... :

1. ** ***

Cakul,ation Date 11/14/89 10/l2/89 10/11/89 10/5/89 l0/1Us9

. 10/14/89 Error Description

1. modulos of elastkty input for wrong

,tempcra~ure

  • 2. incorrect valve operator center of gravity input
3. wrong support orientation used Comment Code.

2 3

2

4. inconsistency in support load inputs 2

. 5. reference documentation 5

1. inconsistency fo SSE loading from piping analysis to calculation 1.. inconsistency on support.loads.

between calculation and piping anal.

2. overstressed shell anchors"(support
  • needs to be addressed for FSAR limits
1. correct lhennal loads not reflec:ted

' on drawings.

  • . 2. *reference documentation
3. wrong moment arm *utili;zed
1. incorreet use.of pipe deflection on weld
1. r ;ference documentation
  • 2. weld stresses are conbined non-typically
3. -clearance check not performed
4.
  • weld of trunnion notevaiuated lo ANSI 831.l criteria 7

6

.7 5

  • 3 3

5 3

6 3

Page 3 *

  • ,1:.

Independent.Third Party* httvlewer Analysis Comments Engineering Analysis Description EA-0334 l-S3-c/s-01 Pipe Support RevO EA-03341-S3-c/s-01_a

  • Pipe Support RevO EA-SC-89-309-01Rev0 Pipe Support EA-SC-89-309-02 Rev 0

. Pipe Support EA-FC-886-01 Rev 0 Conduit Support EA-FC-886-02 Rev 0 Pipe Stress Analysis EA-FC-886-04 Rev 0 Pipe Support EA-FC~886-03 Rev();.

Platform Clearance Eval.

~. -~..

i

~*.. ' 1 *.

.. t.

  • Error Description

. Calculation Date 10/11/89 I. wrong snubber load input in mooel 2.. level "O" increase factor is for the wrong material.

3. load discrepancy
4. weld discrepancy (all around ve..Sus two sides 1..

10/20189

  • 1. inc.orrect weld length utili:zed
2. Mx an~ My are reversed 10/25/89
1. load discr~pancy between computer

., : run and the calculation

2. walkdown info. not incorporated

. 1)/1/89.

. L load conditions al.interface not addreSS:Cd

.. 2.. tran~sitin of terms in calc.

3; base metal shear.not check

4. weld size disc~pancy 12/5189 No Comments 12/6/89 No Comments 12(7/89' No Comments 12/8/89 No Comments

. 'Page 4.

Comment Code 2*

.3

2.

2

2.

7 2

7 3

n/a 2

n/a n/a n/a n/a

Engineering Analysis 8303-c/s-013 Rev 0

_8303-c/s-007 Rev O.

GW0-8304-c/s-08 Rev l.*

EA-D-PAL-89-1270.Rv 1 EA-FC-8~ Rev 4 EA-FC-866-8 Rev.4

"" ~..

~ l

l.

11'.ldep~ndent: Third Party **Rt:,,lewer Analysis Comme!'lts Description Conduit Support OffSite Power Panel Pipe Support *.

i.. '

J>ipe S1ress Analysis Pipe* Support J

Pipe S~pport Caiculation Dale 11/20/89.

~" - ***.*

11/20/89.

Error Description*

  • . 1. chiinp interaction not checked

. 2. moment. neglected in s1ress calc.

. 3: incorrect sz and weld c~culations

.4. support self-weight not.considered

5. ;incomplete assumption

. 6. referenc~ documentallon.

7. base. metal shear does not control

.. 1; no r'eferenc~ provided lo' qualification

1. plate not properly evaluated
2. 'rcferenc.e discrepancy (comp. out)
  • 1; shear. shape factor is wf9ng *
    • .*... 4: *welded attachment qualificati~n not addressed-

.. 11/22/89 11/29/89 '*,

12/14/89

-'. ~*

. '(I

  • .t. :.. *,-.t

'~. \\* ~

  • 5. combined effect of anchor bolls not
    • -.. * ~dressed
1. incorrect equation used.
2.
  • incorrect ratio of hydrodynamic*

' fore~s uSed,:

i. third partY. re~iew cominents from.

..re.v :3 not addressed

1.,~ng fori:e used in ~oinent calc

.:. 2. ;third party review comments from

. rev 3 not addressed.

  • o:L ~ng_(riction force used
  • >(.*
  • y_:.

I. **::

  • t *

~

. ~.

Comment Code 1-_.

6 6

l 6

4 5

n/a 4

3 5

2 6

6

.3 n/a.

  • 2 n/a..

3

.,;I,'-

I.... :. '

~

~*

f~

~

Independent Third Party Reviewer Ar:-alysls Comments

  • r
  • Engineering Analysis Description.

Calculation Date Error Description Comment Code EA-FC-866-9 Rev 4 Pipe Support 12/*14189 L thermal movements and all loads do 2

not.renect the latest pipe stress

  • .analysis*
2. third party ~view comments from

.. n/a rev 3 not addressed *

. EA-SE-71-01Rev0 Pipe Shielding EvalUation l lf3/89

l. 'effect of added load on spring can 2

not addressed 2: no justification of frequency change 4

~

e EA-SE-71-02 Rev 0 Pipe Support 12/19/89.

L improper calculation of bolt 3

interaction ratio EA-SE-71-03 Rev 0 Pipe Support.

12/19/89 *.

I. improper calculation of bolt J.

interactin ratio

2. weid qualification not addressed in 6

calculation

3. stiffener base plate not checked for 6

friction load increase

4. di~repancy in plate size not_ analyzed 2

EA-SC-89283-01 Rev 0 Equipment Mounting Cale.

12/21/89 L term missing in ~eld check formula 3

lO account for moment loading

2. impact of inew_ attachment lO t.s~ not 6

.

  • il;counted for e
  • I..;*
  • .Page'&--.

~*...

... * ~*.*.:

' 'i_

r.

Independent Third *Party Reviewer Analysis Comments Engineering Analysis Description Calculation Dale Error Description Comment Code EA-SC-89259-002 Rev 0 Pipe Stress Analysis 12n.0/89 I. improper calc. (use of lhe~al 2

anchor movemnets in analysis)

2. reference documentation 5
3. discrepancy bctwccri plot and computer listing
4. wrong response spectr3 cutoff 2

frefquencc input SC-88-133-c/s-001Rv0 High Pressure Air System 5/3/88 No Comments n/a fillers EA-SC-89-364-01 Rev A Repair of AFW Room Hatch 2/16/90.

No Comments nfa.

Fasteners EA-FC-844-08 Rev A DEH Modification ti) Control 4/6/90

.L 'wrorig maximum siress* utilized Panel

2. wrong venical accelerations used

.2

3. wrong order of magnitude in OBE
  • and SSE stresses
4. does not address demolished portions 6
  • effect on existing barrier EA-SC-89-293-2 RevO

. Installation of Non-Q 4/i0/90 No Comments n/a Recorders to Replace

  • Existing EA-SC-90-060-02 Rev 0 P-55A Make-Up Waler

-4/10190 I. does,notaddfessfauhedload condition 6

Valve Replacement

2. incorrect inomenl calculation 1
3. reference documentation.
5.

EA-FC-858-02 Rev 0 Pipe SlreSS Analysis 4/5/90

1. -incomplete pllJ'llgraph Page 7

Engin~ring Anaiysis EA-SC-88138-4 Rev 0

  • EA-FC-818-16 Rev 0.

COMMENT CODE 2

3 4

5 6

7 Independent Third Pa;ty Reviewer Analysis Comments Deseription

. Pipe Stress A~lysis AFW Block Valve Position

.. SwitCh Actiiator Bracket Calculation Date

.9/2188 4/9/90.

DESCRIPTION PIPE.SUPPORTS (26) vfA THEMATICAL OR GENERAi ERROR INCORRECT DESIGN INPUT *

  • INC<?!lRECT DESIGN METHpc OR EQUATION UNVERIF1ED/UNCONSER-V ATIVE ASSUMPTION INADEQUA TE.RE~RENCING.

I1EM NOT EVALUATED OR

. NOT CHECKEI,) FOR WORST.

CONDmON

    • ERROR IN LOAD TRANSFER.*

TOTAL

' COMMENTS I ANAL vsis.

      • ~
  • :.,i

~.

2 18 17 o*

"9 11

~..

7 64 * ;*

2:46 f **

Error Description.

1. hydraulic transien.t load doesn't '

include dynamic load faetor per ASME B31.l I. or)en assumption not addressed *

2. integrity of references is questionable*

..PiPE STRESS ANALYSIS (9)

~.

.... l*'

3 JO 3

0 3

2 0

. 21 *

..2.33 F!.age* a.

. ('.,

~

}. '.... *.. *~*

~..

"l

~*~:*.*.
  • 4~~

~.*

.~~'i.. :;

.l,'**

"*'*~*-~*.*'

,-.:\\.'."_**.~... _*_,_:.. *.~... -... '.. -** r.1.**.*:...*. -.:~:'***~ *.. *... *.,.*... fi*... ~

  • ..i.~:... ~r-. *.. '*

~.*:

~--~*r:*,..,.:: :*.. ~

  • -.~(-*-?****...

~

~

I

  • I Comment Code 3

4 5

  • OTHER (11) 4 2
  • 3 6

0 20

) : ' ', ~

e.

SUHHARY~SRPRP WALKDOWN vs IN-SERVICE INSPECTION PROGRAM PHYSICAL DISCREPANCIES IDENTIFiED CLASSIFICATION CODES AUX.

CONT.

TOTAL i.- Anchor Bolt/Baseplate Discrepancies-2 6*

8

2. Hissing Patts

-~----~------~-------11 9

20 3.. Loose Nuts/Bolts

-~~'--------------- 7 1~

21

4. Ihterferences-

~~-- 1 2

3

5. ~dditional Supports/Restraints ---- 1 0 -

- 1

6. Damaged Par~s

~------ 1 7

8

7. Improper Installation --------'-----11 12 23 -

34 50 84 SUPPORTS W/DISCREPANCIES WALKED DOWN UNDER SRPRP

  • SUPPORTS W/DISC.

IN !SI PROGRAM SUPPORTS "W/DISC INSPECTED.

TO-DATE UNDER ISi

~------~------~--

16 RIGID FRAHE SUPPORTS (16 DISC.)

7 IN IS! (7 DISC.f

. 5 ANCHOR BOLT/BASEPLATE DISC.

4 1 HISSING PART l LOOSE NUT/BOLT 2 DAMAGED PARTS 1

7 IMPROPER INSTALLATION 2 -

16 ROD HANGER SUPPORTS (19 DISC.)

5 HISSING PARTS 6 LOOSE NUTS/BOLTS 1 INTERFERENCE 6 DAMAGED PARTS * -

1 iHPROPER INSTALLATION 3 S~UBBER$ (3 DISC.)

2 HISSING PARTS

, 1 LOOSE NUT/BOLT 24 SPRING SUPPORTS

( 28 DI SC.)..

14 STRUTS 1 ANCHOR BdLT/BASEPLAtE DISC.

6 HISSING PARTS 8 LOOSE NUTS/BOLTS 2 INTERFERENCES 1 ADDITIONAL SUPPORT

  • 10 IMPROPER INSTALLATION.

(18 DIS.C.)

2 ANCHOR BOLT/BASEPLATE Disc:

6 HISSING PARTS 5 LOOSE NUTS/BOLTS 5 IMPROPER INSTALLATION

. 13 IN IS I _ ( 16 DI SC-)

3 5

1

'6 1

3 lN !SI (3 DISC) -

. 2 1

19 IN ISI (23 DISC) 1 4

7_

2 9

7 IN ISi ( 1 DISC) 1 2

1.

4

_- 5 SUPPORTS (! DISC) 2 -

- 1 2

8 SUPPORTS (11 DISC) 3 4 -_

3

-1 0 SUPPORTS 15 SUPPORTS 119 DISC~ -

-1 3

4 2*

9

'. l SUPPORT ( 1 DISC) 1

--~-------~----------------------------------

73 SUPTS I.8~ DISCREPANCIES 49 IN ISI (_57 DISC.)

29 INSP. (36 DISC)

. -~:

. ~ ~... -

~-

l--~--~--~----------~-£;;i;;;;i;~-!;;ia;-;;-j;;;;i~;i-iii;~;;;;;~;-R;~;;;;;---e-------------------------'"----~---~--

. I_.

...... ~ -.-;---;-----:-------_____,._ -------~-------------------------------------- __,_ -----~---------------~ ___._ -____._. ___,: ___ -:~~-

o'*'

2T-Aug-90

~TED BY SUPPORT TYPE/STRESS PACKAGE I

~-------------------------------------------------------------------'-----------------------------*---

! STRESS PACKA<Z I -

PHYSICAL

.I CLASSI BLDGI SUPPORT TYPE I PART OF ISi I

YEAR OF I RESULTS OF I PIPE SUPPORT I I

DISCREPANCY I CODE I I

I J>ROGRA1 <Y/N) I INSPECTION I JNSPECTiON I -:..--------~------------~----------------~-------~------------------~---------------------------------------------~-~-~~.

" 83, 86 I 3342-EB10-R227C I 336.8-CC6-B708 I 3368-CC6-H717 I 3368-CC6-R721.9 I 3368-CC6-H774 I 5903-BBC37-Rl I 5903-HBC37-B4 I 3360-CCl-8803.1

  • I 3362-GCl-8746 I.3362'-GC.1-87 46 I 3363-GCl -H733 3378:..oc1-e1u.2 3378-DC2-H1. 2.

3378-DC2-H48 5903-HBC37-B7.

6903-HBC39-H1 2503-CCB2-H721 3356-HB35-H9l2.2

~J62.-GC1-HT47

  • l364-CC4-B7 49

""~4-GC1-H753.1 4-GC1-H753.1 3364-GC1-H753.i 3364-GCl-8756 3365-CC4-RT60 3365-GC1-R765 3366-DC1-H715.

3367-CC4-R771 3367-CC4-H771 33.67-GCl-8713.

3368-CC6-H775 5904-EB14-H229 3356'"HB35-H931 3378-DCi-8194 5904.-EBBT-82 3362-GC1-S743.1 3363-CC4-S730.1 I 3363-CC4-S730. 2 I 3342-EB10-H227A I 3342-EBt0-82278 I 3342-£810-82278 I 3356-HB35-H933 I 3356-:8835-8933 I 3366-HB35-R934 I 3369-CC2-R636 I 3359-CC2-H537 I

l-CC9-H800 IGAPS BEHIND PLATE I 1 I A I. RIGID FRAIE I

.ICRACK CONC A.B..

I 1 I C I RIGID FRAIE I

IDAIAGED CANTILEVER I 6 I C I RIGID ;RAIE I

!CRACK CONC A.B.

I 1 I C I RIGID FRAME I

ILOOSE IASHER A.B.

1.
  • 1 I C I RIGID FRAME I

IGAP/BOX FRAME I -7 I A I RIGID FRAME I

IG.AP/STANTION I 7.. 1 A I RIGID FRAIE I

ILOOSE ANCHOR BOLT I 1 I C I RIGID FRAIE I

IRUSTY IELDS * *

.1 7 I C I RIGID FRAIE I

!RUSTY IELDS I 7 I C

  • I RIGID FRAIE I

IRUSTY IELDS I 7 I C I RIGID FRAIE -

I ILOOSENUTSU-BOLT I* 3 I *A I RIGIDFRAIE I

INUTS \\JN U-BOLT.-IRNG 7 I A 1-RIGID FRAIE lllSSING NUT U-BOLT 2 I A I RIGID FRAIE IBENT U-BOLT/IGOll 6

A I RIGID FRAIE

!SHIMS IN$TALLED 7

A l*RIGID FRAME ILOOSE JAi NUT 3-C I ROD RANGER lllSSING LOCKNUT.

2 A I ROD HANGER IDEFORIED SUPPORT 6

C I ROD HANGER' I CLAlP I NTERFERANCE.

4 C I. ROP HAN~R IBENT CLAMP.

6 C I ROD HANGER IBENT ROD 6

C I ROD HANGER I LOOSE NUT.. _ -

3 C I ROD HANGER

.

  • I DEFORMED SUPPORT 6

C

  • ROD HANGER I DAIAGED 16 6
  • C ROD HANGER I

I DEFORMED SUPPORT 6

C ROD HANGER

.. I

!LOOSE CLAIP BoLT I

3 C

ROD HANGER I

INO.LOCKNUT IG27 I 2

C ROD HANGER I

lllS CLAIP BOLT MG351 - 2 C

ROD HANGER I

  • . I LOOSE NUT I

3 C

ROD HANGER

  • I I LOOSE BOL t I

3 C

ROD-HANGER I

IROD IN INSULATION I. 7 A

ROD HANGER *-

  • I iMISSING LOCKNUT.

I 2

A ROD HANGER I

I LOOSE LOCIMUT.

I 3

A ROD HANGER

. I

!MISSING CLAMP SPACRI 2

A

.ROD BANGER I

lllSSING WASHERS I

2

lllSSING WASHERS I

2 C

SNUBBER I

!LOOS! BOLTS I 3

lllSALIGNED CLAIP I

T A*

SPRING HANGER I llRONG CIP BOLT IG3 I. 7 A

SPRING HANGER I

!LOOS! LOCKNUT MG181 3

A SPRING HANGER I llRONG SPRING I

T A

SPRING HANGER I 111 SS I NG

I 2

A SPRING HANGER f

. lllSSING LOCKNUT

  • I 2

A SPRING HA~ I IANGLE NOT WELDED I

7 C

SPRING HANGER I ILOOSE*LOCKNUT I

3 C

SPRING HANGER I

!MISSING SADDLE I 7 C

SPRING HANGER I y

'_ y y

' y y

y y

N.

N

.N N

.N N

N N.

N y

y y

' y

. r.

y y

y y '

y y

y y

y y

'. y.

N*

. N -

N y

y y

y y

T

. y y

y.

y I

I I

I.

I I

I I.

I I.

I I

I 88 -

86 '

86 NA NA NA NA NA

'NA NA NA NA 83,86 T6 76 76 T4 83 88 88 88 83 86 NA NA NA 81,86 81,86' 81, 86 81,H 81,_86 81,86 81,88 86,88 81 I

OK I

NA I

OK.

I NA I

OK I

. OK I

OK llBIP RESTRAINT llBIP.RESTRAINT llRIP RESTRAINT IWiUP RESTRAINT-

_* I. 3.*. PIP! -.

I 2* lllPE I

2" PIP!

. I. 4* PIPE I

4* PIPE I

NA I

OI I

--NA I

NA I

OK

    • l.

I*

OK

, 01

. I NA 1-*

OK.

I NA I

- OK

. I

  • OK I

OK I

- Oit I

01

    • r.

I

  • OK L

4" PIPE I

3" PIPE I

4" PIPE I

NA I

NA I

NA I

OK

. I.

OK

.01 I

OI I

01 I

OK I 01-A.'l.R.

I 01-A.l.R.

" I OK

~-~

. *. :. ~

~ :,--;C--------_: __ ;;;;;;;;;;;-;;;;;;ti:;;-;;;;;;;;~;;;;;;;;;;;';;;;;;;---~-*---~

H

- ~-:

____ ------o ~------------~:..

-~:.--~-- ~!- ---- - -~ __
  • ___ -- - --*----- -: - - - --- -~---- -- - -~-----.:. --- _*_.; __ ------- -~ _._ --:--- - -:*-.-~.:- ~- - - _;. ______ *_,. ___ ;. __ ~-- ~----~----.:
1 *

, 27-Aug-9~ SORTED BY SUPPORT TYPE/STRESS PACKAGE

' I I

. :----.---------- --:_----------- ------------------:-------------------- ----:- ----:-------.--------*-- --~----;_:--"'-----------:----1 I STRESS PACKAGE I -

I PHYSICAL I CLASS I BLDG I SUPPORT TYPE I

PART OF I SI.

I YEAR OF

. I RESULTS OF. I

. I* PIPE SUPPORT I I

DISCREPANCY I CODE I I

-1 PROGRAI (Y/N) I INSPECTION I INSPECTION :.: I I ~-----------------------"'------~~---: ________________.:. ______ :~~-------~------------~-----.:~---~--~----------~--~-------j

  • I 33607CC9-H801 lllSSlNG SADDLE.

I. 7 I. C I SPRING HANGER I.

Y.

. 1-.

76..

I

.. OK

'~I I U62-CC 4..,17 39 I BENT ROD/SPNG UP /DN.1 7 I C I SPRING HANGER Y

.. j 76.

I

  • OK. :. '. I I 3362-GC1-H744 lllS LOCKNUT/THD ENGi 2
  • I.C I SPRING HANGER

. Y

  • .. "I :,
  • I..

NA.. *::::. I

  • I 3363-CCC-8728.
  • I LOOSE CLAIP BOLT I

3 I C I SPRING HANGER Y

I..

I

. NA,..*;I I 3363-CC4-H729

!LOOSE CLAIP BOLT I. 3 I C I SPRING RAN~R

. Y

.T4 *

  • 1.

OK..

I.

3364-CC4-H740 I LOOSE CLAIP BOLT *I 3 I C r SPRING HANGER.

Y

  • 1..

NA

.. ';l 3365-CC4-H758 ILOOSE LOCKNUT I

3 I C I SPRING HANGER Y

76

. I *...

OK.

°'I ll65-CC4-H758 I SPALLED CONE I

1.*I C I SPRING HANGER l..

  • 76

. I.

  • OK
. *.
  • 1 ;*

3366-CC4-H758 I BAD WELDS.

  • I*

1 I C I SPRING HAN~R

. <:y.

T6 i' * * **

OK '... :._,: I 3366-CCt-8759 ILOOSECLAIP_BOLT.*

I 3<1 C l'SPRINGHANGER*

Y

-NA' *--:L 3367-CC4-HT06:2-

.!TRAVEL STOP INSTL'DI

1. I C 1 *sPRING HANGER

.y

  • 'i6..

L * *.OK

..

  • __ '.._I.

3367-CC4-HT37 IUNINTEN.* RESTRAINT I

  • 4.., *c. I SPRING HANGER

. Y 88 *

.'t OK*

3378-DCt-8207 ISPRINu INTERFERANCEI 4. I A I SPRING RANGER

. Y 76 I

'~

OK

. :*Cf 3378-:DC1-R209

!MISSING JAi NUT I

2 *, A I* SPRING HANGER Y

. 83

" I

"~*OK*

  • . I 3378 SH 2 ~OP-30i8' ISUPPORT/CV.:.3018 r-_ I 5.I A. f SPRl~G*HANGE°R.

. *. N.

, cNA

. ; I

,_'... '.I 3378-DCt-8192 lllSSING CLAIP BOLT I 2 "I A I SPRING HANGER N

r*.

NA.

'..I 3* PIP!.. I'*

I '3378-DC1-H195 I LOOSE LOCKNUT

  • I 3 I A.* I SPRING HANGER N *.

I

  • NA_

. I::.. 3* PIPE 'f.

I 3378-DC1-H206

  • 111SSING SPACER I

2* I A I SPRING HANGER

.N I*..

"A ".. (~. *;49 PIP! '*. **I I 5102-DBB2""R61

.lllSALIGNED CLAIP

  • 1 1.. I C I SPRING HANGER. I *
, N *

. I : -

.NA

  • I 4* P.IPE :.*:I*.
  • 1 3356-HB35-H9U * "

lllSSING WASHERS

1. 2. I A I STRUT*

.. i.

Y.~*,.

  • I I*

NA

.. ** < J

  • I :1'"6-HB35-R932".1 lllSSING WASHERS -*.. j..

2 I A 'I-STRUT I

.:- Y I " *. -,

I.

NA*:*.,._

-'~I 1..

..-GC1-R743

  • I LOOSE NUT/ANCHOR** I** 1* I.C *I STRUT I

'*y.. **

. I I. *. NA**.** ' : I :

I lsli2-GC1-H74L lllSALIGNED CLAIP

  • 1 7 1. C *I STRUT 1-. *. Y I

. I*

._NA'*.-'**1 I 6903.:.HBC37~H2.

.BENT LOAD PIN *: ' I 1 I A 1: STRUT.

I *

  • *y
  • I

'86.. -:. r ***

oi. ~" *:.l I 5903-RBC37-H3 BOUND UP STRUT IG11 I 7 I A I STRUT I

- Y *

  • . 1.. *

" *. I.

NA* :.

-~* :.;T 1 *snt-DBC1-H4 LOOSE LOCKMUT'

I f I A 1 *STRUT.. :_-_:.. J Y

I*

I NA

. *.I I UOt~DBC2-R1 ALIGN PIPE CLAIP.

I.

T I* A I _STRUT *._

Y

  • I I

. *N~~

  • I",.

1* 3375-GCU-H850.1

.. llSSING.SPACER'.*

1

  • 2 I C *I STRUT_

N.

I NA.

J.. RELIEF -PIPING* I ':,

  • 1 :3375-GC11-H850. 2.

llSSING WASHER~~ : I. *. 2 I C. I* STRUT...

    • N *.

I NA *\\'.*

f.RELIE~ PIPING.* I -

I 3375-GC11-H850.2 LOOSE NUT * * *

. * :1

  • 3 I c* I STRUT

.N

  • I

. NA

  • .'I.RELIEF.-PIPING I*

I 3375-GC11-R862 BAD WELD I

7 I. C I STRUT:

N I.

NA

.f RELIEF PIPING*~l.

  • I 3375-GC11-H862 LOOSE NUT

. 1,*~3 I c I srnu*t.

N I

.NA:;*.., RELIEF-PIPING.I I.3375-GC11-H862 lllSSING WASHERS'. I *' 2 I C I STRUT N *

  • 1' NA

. I *RELiEf' PIPHCG l" I 3378-DCt-8193 I LOOSE LOCKNUT*

. *J 3

  • I A I STRUT

..... N I

NA

... I

  • 3° PIPE.. l.

. 1.s102-DBB2-HS7 tllSSJNGJAINUT I

2 I c*1*sTRUT

_.:*.N I

NA'

  • -., '*t*PIPE'**.*1' I 6903:-HBC37-H6

!GAP BEHIND PLATE I

1 I A I STRUT 1*

N I

NA I *..,. PIPE >.. I..

  • I S904-EBB5-H2 *

.

  • I LOOSE LOCKNUT:*

I 3 I *A I STRUT

  • I

.

  • N *.

.... I NA..

I 4" PIPE I'

I -*------~------..,----------------------*-------- ~--. _*.;;. _ ------------;-.-_*.:.:. ___ --..,-:.-----.;,- ~.;..:-___ :._.:._-:.:. ___ ---'-:-::._,..*_.:.:_:. _____. ___ :*.. +-:-1 * *.*

. ~

~,,..,. **,..

. *~.:

The attached stress* calculation m11rg~ n surrmary shows the stress ratio

. (actua1\\a11owable) for the stress cal cu1at1ons completed to date~ Two calculation.s show a small overstrE!ss re1at1ve to code requirements, however a11 stress ratios are less than one \\1hen compu*ed to our interim operability criteria.

Regarding. our request to defer SOflle rnodificati*:ms to the next refu1a11ng outage 1n l99Z, 1t appears that two plant.s in Region IV have been pennitted to startup with pipe supports outsidH-of FSAR criteria but within their interim operabilit~ criteria.

OPPO - Fort Calhoun recentli ide~tifled ptping design 4efic1enc1es 1n*t~o systems. They !1\\ade a limited number of modifications during their refueling outage to restore the piping/support!: to within their tnteriin operability ctiteria (which were based on the P~ltsades critetia). They then return~d the

  • unit to operation with the understan:lin9 that modifications to restore to FSAR criteria would b-e accompl 1Shed du.rinn the next refue1iag outage.

-~

Nebraska Public Power District - *Cooper recently completed a comprehensive *

  • Bulletin 79-14 reverification projHt including pfping walkdown and design overview.

Deficiencies outside of their interim operability criteria were.

  • addressed when they were discovered.

Modifications to restore piping and pipe,.

suppcirts to FSAR criter1a were prforHized and accomplished over a peripd :of two refu~ 1 i ng outagf;s.

Dav~ VandeWa11e

. ~'.

~.

~

I j

°'""".... **>**~1*

    • ~,
  • ~.~...:.*

~

':"'

  • t Letter No. 336 9/6/90 CALC* BO.

STRESS RATIO I

AVAILABU MARGIN, t STRESS RATIO N

F N

F I

1~

N*

U F

  • r--_,_~-+..,.~+------4---+~----1--~~_J o.s o.91

~.~2 so I 09 2a tT t-----:--*.;.----+--~~-4~--+___;~-+-~---J 3 3 s~

o. 2 7
o. 60 o.. s J ~~'~3""""":!:--4_c.... * ~'.... '-'-+--~----,.1.;_..,--_~_*_-"""". +-' _-.......;--..' ~

3342 o.74 o.a1.

-26 33 3359 0.;83 0.97 0.62.,

17 03 38 i------~------1-~

t-----+-"'~~-+---+--~---li-----+-----+----~

3_3_6o ___,._o..... *._ 4 lo: 41 !: 3 s t--6o--t_s_3 __ * ~I 6_s ___ ~_o_. 3-o-+_o_._3_1_,__1_0_.4--69---1'

-~--3_3_6_1 ___ *..... 2.. ~::.+;90. _ 35 /-1a ! 10 1 o.s9 o.97 u

03

.__~ ___

3_3_6_2 _ __,,.* __ o_._s_1_....... 1.~

16 39 t 2 i*-2-4-. +--.-o-.-5-4-+--o-*. -,-,.-+--4-6.......,_4_3_---i 3363.

0;44 o. ss

  • 1o.66 56 I i2 :* 34 o.43 o.5 57 so *

~-----~--~4~-

~--!-_~~-t-~.,--.~+--~~.__~~~------.:J 3364 o.s1 o.93 o.. 71 43 I 01 : 29 o.s2 o.53 _

48

47.

~*~-'-~-----

~---t----*----+-----+-..;...-'-4-------!

.. :l365 0.48 0.751-;,5~***~~2 j 2~-j 34 0.47 0.491

  • 53* 51 r----2-s-0*2--.....j....-..o~-.-6-3-!l-o-*....;9_6_..r_o_:69... -3' I 04.._,/_3_1___.,.~-o-. 4-a-+-o-.....

,-4*j-_-s--~-+--36-'-.....;.i

=~-*--2~s-0_3 __ __...._-;. 47 I o :ttlo.::. ~ j53Ts11*-,-s--+---_o-. -Go-+-o-.-4-,-!~-4-0--1-s-4.;,;;...__~

.,.--,..--51_0_1_---+~~ 0.871o.70 r-541 1~7

30
o. 20 o.381.. 80 62

_____ s_1_0_2*--~--o--*; 4.....:.4........ l

_o_._6_a_J._I~_;. 4~*1 56 l. 3;~.... i -s~2-_.+\\--o~

.* 9-+--o-. 2_6......;..i -.-8-1 __......::-1_4-.---.;...-1_

N = N9RMAL U = UPSET, F = FAULTED

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=ML18057A484&oldid=5020722"