ML18079A666
| ML18079A666 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Salem  |
| Issue date: | 07/05/1979 |
| From: | Schwencer A Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Librizzi F Public Service Enterprise Group |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 7908020281 | |
| Download: ML18079A666 (4) | |
Text
e HEGUlATO~V DOCKET Fil[ COPY JULY-Docket No. 50-272.
Mr. F. P. Librizzi, General El ectrk Production,
Production Department Public Service Electric and 80 Park Place, Room 7221 Newark, New Jersey 07101 -
Dear Mr~ Librizzi:
5' lS79 Manager Gas Company
- DISTRIBUTION - -
~ket File 50-272)V. Noonan NRC PDR R. LaGrange Local PDR NRR Rdg_
ORBl Rdg A. Schwencer.
W. Gamm-: i lJ -
W. Ross J. Dfodato.
C. Parrish I &E (3)
OELD, Attorney ACRS (16)
TERA J. Buchanan_
D. Ei serihut B. Grimes J. Carter On June 19, 1979, we had a meeting with your staff regarding Sal em Unit l operation pending completion of I&E Bulletin 79-07 requirements.
In that meeting, we agreed to provide guidance specifying what information should be included in your forthcoming request for this interim operation.
Our guidance is enclosed. It should be noted that code verification require-ments are includedi however, systems oriented comments are not.
As* discussed by telephone conversation on June 20, 1979 between R. LaGrange of the NRC staff and P. Moeller of PSE&G, the seismic responses should be combined by either 2-0 absolute or 3-D SR SS, but not both.
In that same_
conversation it was al so requested that your submittal be supplied to us no 1 ater than two weeks prior to projected unit start-up.
Enclosure:
Request for Additional Information cc: w/enclosure e:,,.,.ICI:~
\\_0-\\ 'f' llURNAMli ~
!\\(\\
DATl!C~
See next page Nw: OORH 318 (9*76) NllCM 02-'i
$incerely, Original Signed BY A. Schwencer, Chief Operating-Reactors Branch #1 Division of Operating Reactors e
- u.s. OCJVl!RNMllNT P'RINTINCJ OP"fl'ICE: 1971 - zers -, **
~~~~~~~~-
UNITED ST~)TES NUCLEAR REGu°lATORY COMMISSION
. WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 Docket No. 50-272 Mr. F. P. Li bri zz.i, General Ma n_ager Electric Production Production Department July 5, 1979 Public Service Electric and Gas Company 80 Park Place, Room 7221 Newark, New Jersey 07101
Dear Mr. Liqrizzi:
On June 19, 1979, we had.a meeting with your staff regarding Salem Unit 1
- operation pending completion of I&E Bulletin 79-07 requirements.
In that meeting, we agreed to provide guidance specifying what information should be included in your forthcoming request for this interim operation.
Our guidance is enclosed. It should be noted that code verification require-ments are included, however, systems oriented comments ~re not.
- As discussed by telephone conversation on June 20, 1979 between R. LaGrange of the NRC staff a~d P. Moeller of PSE&G, the seismic responses should be combined by either 2-D absolute or 3-D SR SS, tlut not both.
In that same conversation it was al so requested that your submittal be supplied to u*s no later than two weeks prior to projected unit start-up.
Enclosure:
Request for Additional Information cc: w/enclasure See next p~ge Sincerely,
- a. j~
A. ~'
Chief Operating Reactors Branch #1.
Division of Operating Reactors
_j
.\\,
-~
SALEM UNIT 1 REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION The following information should be included in your submittal requesting operation of Salem Unit l pending completion of the reanalysis effort.
- l. Results of all reanalyses performed including:
a)
A table showing system, problem number, old OBE and SSE load combination highest stress, new OBE and SSE load combination highest stress, and allowable for both load conditions. Also, state the Code which the piping is designed to.
- b)
Results of all pipe support re-evaluations completed.
State the code/criteria to which the units pipe supports, including weld and bolt sizing criteria, are designed.
Also, state your intention to comply, prior to facility startup, with I&E Bulletin 79-02 for all cases where loading on a pipe support increases as a result of the piping reanalysis and the support re-evaluation indicates that~ part of the support is not within the applicable acceptance criteria.
c)
Results of all nozzle and penetration loading re-evaluations and the criteria for their acceptability.
d)
A statement that all primary coolant pressure boundary piping has been reanalyzed and that the pipe stresses, support, and nozzle loadings are within the original limits.
e)
For all piping remaining to be analyzed, provide a table showing system, problem number, OBE and SSE load combination highest stress and allowables, and percentage of allowables the seismic stresses alone contribute.
- 2.
Discuss the impact the piping stress reanalyses effort has on the FSAR pipe break criteria.
Indicate whether postulated pipe break locations could or have change(d)
_as a result of the reanalyses and, if so, what you propose to do in the event a break location previously not designed for must be postulated.
- 3.
Describe the reanalysis method employed (e.g., response spectra modal analysis),
including whether valve mass eccentricities are accounted for, whether appropriate stress intensification factors are considered, how seismic responses are combined (e.g., 2-D absolute), and how seismic anchor movements are accounted fDr.
- 4.
Describe your program for addressing I&E Bulletin 79-02 including results of testing completed.
- 5.
if safety related piping was or is now seismically analyzed by other than computer, provide a detailed description of the method employed and indicate where it was
- used,
_J
~.
t
- ~*.\\,.
- G_ *.
- .2-
- 6.
Verify that the "as-built" condition of the plant is being analyzed, including pipe.geometry and lepgths, support types, locations, and details, and valve weights.
- 7.
Computer code verification requirements:
A.
Prior to Restarting
- 1.
Submission and review of liitings of all computer programs (dynamic portions) used in the reanalyses. If no program was used which performed intra-modal combinations internally, the methods used for performing these combinations should be submitted and reviewed.
- 2.
A committment to perform a series of NRC benchmark verifica-tion problems, and to submit typical reanalysis problems for confirmatory analysis by BNL.
B.
After Restarting and Prior to Completion of Reanalysis
- 1.
Full code verification from the originators of the code with confirmatory analysis.
- 2.
Full code verification and confirmatory analysis if the originator and the user are in the same organization.
- 3.
Partial verification and confirmatory analysis if a code (previously verified at the originator level) was acquired by the user (through buying or leasing arrangements).