ML18116A192

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Summary of 790605 Meeting W/Vepco & S&W in Bethesda,Md Re Startup
ML18116A192
Person / Time
Site: Surry Dominion icon.png
Issue date: 06/08/1979
From: Neighbors J
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
NUDOCS 7907240612
Download: ML18116A192 (8)
v • d • e


Text

....

No.

JUN 7 1979 LICENSEE:

VIRGINIA ELECTRIC AND POWER COMPANY FAqLITY:

SURRY UNIT,1

SUBJECT:

SUMM,L\\RY OF MEETING HELD ON MAY 31, 1979 AT S_TONE ANI) ~J~BSTER (S&W). IN BOSTON MASSACHUSETTS The subject meetin9 was helo with S.&L~ and VEPCO to review pipe stress analyses and pipe support analyses. *

,~ A 1 i st of attendees i ~. attached. :*

~le discussed with VEPCO items that must be addressed prior to Surry.-1 startup.

These items are 1) subm_ittal of final, Soil Structure Interaction Report, 2} Interim justification of startup and operation while continuing analyzing, 3}' response to IE Bulletin 79-02, 4) response to IE Bulletin. 0fJA, 5) emergency bus modifications and 6) {nside recirculation pump motor bearing~.

It is expected that all :of these items will.be resolved before the seismic _revieiv is completed.

Stone and Webster has identified at thi*s time a total of' 72 pi.ping

  • analyses and 873 supports analyse$ to be* performed.. Jl.mong them, 29*.

piping atia*lyse's-with Engineering l\\ssurance che-cks have been* completed with stresses all \\tJithin allowables.

One.hundred thirty three supports have been analyzed and are conditionally accepted pending compari~on of calcu*lati'on inputs to as-bui1t MSK..

Stone ~nd v!ebster expects to complete. 47 pipe stress problems ( 42 ori.gi nal SHOCK-II runs plus S runs with Velan value wei~ht variation) and 255 supports a 11 through rn by June 15. l979.

During the preliminary suppo,rt*evaluation Stone and ~Jeqster has identjfied potential f1ard~,1are' chantJes on Problems, 743, _731A, 731B, and 548A.

Analyses for these cases, i*1hich may involve using braces for hangers and shfms to reduce pipe stresses are sti11 underway.

.:fl-90'1 t4 o bl A.-

~\\..

.. ~(>:

~~

.. ::::::\\: ::::::::::~:: :::::::j:*~*:.*.*.-.. *.:.-... *.*.*.. ::.*.*.*.'.*.*.J*.:::*.**.:**.:::::*::*.. :*.*:.:*t: :: :::: : :;'::: :: : J:::::::::::::::::::::::: !:*.:*:*.:*.:*.-.::::*.*.::*.:::

...,.... -...,.... :............................,....... :..... J.................................................. J NJlC FORM 3Ul (9-76~,l,'m.CM _0240

~

u.s. GOVERNMENT PRINTING.OFFICE: I 97~ - 265

  • 769

Meet i n~J Summary for Surry Unit 1 In this meeting_, the staff reviewed the results of _the follo;*-/ing two piping stress analysis packages.

(A)

Problem 3228 (Feedwater line -.loop B)

(B)

Problem_323B (Feedwater line - loop A).

Problem 322B used the orig1nal ARS whereas Problem 3238 used the SSI/ARS v1ith the soi*l properties correspond"ing to the last. interaction of SHAKE analyses.

It was found that tbe analysis procedures are*acceptable and stresses within FSAR ~llowables even if a factor:of 1.5 is applied, in Problem 323B, to both the inertia seismic stresses and those due to anchor movements. -

The staff has also reviev1ed a total of 42 supports identified in the foll m,ii ng 1 i nes.

(/\\)

(p)

(C)

(D)

Problem 323B (F~edwater Line - loop A)

Prohlem 322A (Main Steam Line - loog B)

Problem 323A (Main Steam Line - loop A)

Prob 1 em 5225A-f13 Containment & Reci rcul at ion Spray system - R. C.

It v-ws ind"ica{ed that all the supports revie1tJed were acceptable even vrith a factor of 1.5 applied to both inertia seismic stresses and those due to anchor moVl"!ments.

The question of 1:1hether the above factor of 1. 5 ( to account for the var-iation of soil properties) should be applied to the pipe stresses and support loads due to anchor movements has been raised in the meeting.

The guidance provided by NRC at this point is as fol1ov1s:

(,L\\)

For emer~ency loading conditions, the effect of anchor r.1ovement -~eed not be considered for the 1. 8 Sh check and, therefore, the l.* 5 fa*ctor need only be to be appl 1 ed to the in~rtia seismic str*ess,*

........ t

  • 1 I
  • t t.

I

  • o o * *
  • o o o o o *
  • o o o o o o '
  • o ' '

o o *

  • o o o o
  • o: o * * *'
  • o o
  • o
  • o o o '

o o

  • o
  • 7 o
  • o o * ' o o
  • o
  • o o o o o o * *
  • o o * '
  • o *
  • o ' o * * * * *
  • o ' * * *, * *
  • o o
  • o ' o
  • o
  • o o
  • o o o *: o o
  • o o *. o o o O
  • o ' o o *
  • o o
  • o o
  • o o O o ~ o o I

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

. DATE,-.

.*,....**...*.** ~ **..... : *.,,..,..... :~ *....*,..,........ *._..... :.,...........

0 NllC FORM 318 (9-76) NROI 0240

<.J.S. GO~ERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1970 **** *709

_I

-/

<~ 'fa OFFICl!I:~

fde,'->-:fC<D A

iy:A;'f'. liURNAMl!I: ~
  • l t\\._-.

.' Meeting Summary. for Surry Unit -1 (B)

For upset condfrion,.the effect of anchor movement needs to ~e.considere~ for'the 1.2 ~h check.

Theref?re,_ in add1t1on to the 1.5 factor which 1s to be applied to the

  • inertia seismic.stress, a suitable f{lctor should also be applied to the stress i nducE!d by anchor movements~
    • lJustification of the magnitude of any such factor~ pre-sumably less th?n.1.5, should be provided by the licensee.

Three more safety.related pipe lines infonnation was provid~d-to EG&G for EG&G's independent analysis.

These lii1es represent a fraction of the* _rernai ni ng unanalyzed 1 i nes under the StM scope of reanalysis~

They are as follows:

{/:\\)* Problem 636 (Pressurizer Spray & Relief)

(8)-. Problem 562 -(Recirculation Spray)

(C)

Problem 603 (Comp.anent Cooling Water)

Don Neighbors, Proje.ct Man~ger Operating Reactors Branch 1,1-1 *.

Division of Operating Reactors

Attachment:

Li st of Attendees cc: w/Attachment See next page.

\\ *.

DOR:OR

.Q-N,e.ig*hl:> *

  • 1 ;:i....,............ * *..... *............. _..... _............,....................... **********************. *****.............** ;.

.9.9/.1/.7.9...... :.:. **************i************.. ***-:*:*****_*************..........,.:.......... :.:........... :.-............,.... *.... :.,*:_.... :... '.*_;_..

                      • ,*********-**.****4**************************......................... _. ****************************************************...... :...............

NJlC FORM 318 (9-76)

  • NRCM' Q240

'R*u.s. ~OVERNMENT 0

~RINTING oF'FICE: 1970 ~ ZO!i ~ 7~~

r Docket No. 50-280

  • e.*.

UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 JUN 7 1979

. LICENSEE:

VIRGINIA ELECTRIC AND POWER COMPANY FACILITY:

SURRY UNIT l

SUBJECT:

SUMMARY

OF MEETING HELD ON MAY 31, 1979 AT STONE AND WEBSTER (S&W) IN ~OSTON MASSACHUSETTS Th~ subject meeting was held with S&W and VEPCO to review pipe stress

  • analyses and pipe support analyses.
  • A. 'ii st of attendees is attached.

We discussed witti VEPCO items that must be *addressed prior to Surry l s,tartup.

These items are l) submittal of final Soil Structure Interaction

.. Report, 2) Interim justification of startup and operation while continuing arialyzing, 3) response to IE Bulletin,79-02~ 4) respons~ to IE Bulletin*

79~06A, 5) emergency bus modifications and 6) inside recirculation pump *

motor bearings.

It is expected that all of these items will be resolved

    • before the seismic review is completed *

. stone and Webster has identified at this time a total of 72 piping analyses and 873 supports analyses to be performed.

Among them, 29

  • P,ip.ing analyses with Engineering Assurance checks have been completed with stresses all within allowables.

One hundred thirty three supports have been analyzed and are conditionally accepted pending comparison qf calculatidn inputs to as-built MSK.

Stone and Webster expects to complete 47 pipe stress problems (42 original

.* SHOGK~II runs plus 5 runs with Velan value weight variation) and 255 supports all through EA by June 15, 1979.

During the preliminary support evaluation Stone.and Webster has identified*

potential hardware.changes on Problems 743; 731A, 731B, and 548A.

AnaJyses for these cases, which may involve using braces for hangers and sh.imsto*

reduce pipe stresses are still underway.

r--

. ~.

Meeting Summary for Surry Unit l. In this meeting, the staff reviewed the results of the following two.

piping stress analysis packages.

(A)

Problem 322B (Feedwater line - loop B}

(B)

Problem 323B (Feedwater line - loop A)

Problem 322B used the orig1nal ARS whereas Problem 323B used the SSI/ARS with the soil properties corresponding to the last interaction of SHAKE analyses.

It was found that the analysis procedures are acceptable and stresses withinFSAR allowables even if a factor of 1.5 is applied, in Problem 323B, to both the inertia seismic stresses and those due to anchor

  • movements.
  • The staff has also reviewed a total of 42 supports identified in the fan owing lines.

(A)

Problem 323B (Feedwater Line~ loop A}

. (B)

Problem 322A (Main Steam Line - loop B)

(C)

Problem 323A (Main Steam Line - loop A)

(D)

Problem 5225A-A3 Containment & Recirculation Spray system - R. C.

It was indicated that all the supports reviewed were acceptable even with a factor of 1.5 applied to both inertia seismic stresses.and those due to anchor movements.

The* question of whether the above factor of 1. 5 (to account for the

  • v'ariation of soil properties) should be applied to the pipe stresses and. support loads due to arichor movements has been raised in the meeting.

The guidance provided by NRC at this point is as follows:

(A) ror emergency loading conditions, the effect of anchor..

movement need not be considered for the l. 8 Sh check

.,and, therefore, the 1.5 factor need only be t(j be applied to the inertia seismic stress.

(

Meeti,ng Summary for Surry Unit l e (B)

For upset condition, the effect of anchor movement needs

. to be considered for the 1.2 Sh check.

Therefore, in addition to the* 1.5 factor whith is to be applied to the inertia seismic stress, a suitable factor should also be applied to the stress induced by anchor movements *

. Justification of the magnitude of any such factor, pre-sumably less than 1.5, should be provided by the licensee.

Three more safety related pipe _lines infonnation was provided to EG&G for EG&G' s independent analysis.

These lines represent a fraction of 1 the remaining unanalyzed lines under thE(S&W scope of reanalysis.

They are as follows:

(A)

Problem 636 (Pressurizer Spray & Relief)

(B)

Problem 562 (Recirculatian Spray)

(C)

Problem 603 (Component Cooling Water)

Attachment:

Li st of Attendees tc: *_ w/Attachment

.See next page

~tw,12£,~..

Don Nei~l~;zyP-roject Manager Operating Reactors Branch Hl Division of Operating Reactors

NRC 0:-Neighbors A~ Lee W. Russell R. Maceks (EG&G)

B. Saffell (EG&G)

VEPCO W. Spencer C. M. Robinson R. MacManus G. Strickler S&W B. Crowe S. Rossier K. Reinschmidt E. Homer D. Esielionis

.R. Hankinson LIST OF ATTENDEES.

AT MAY 31, 1979 MEETING

I,

i Ii i

i' I

"--.... -1._.

Meeting Summary for Surry Unit l

  • Docket Fi 1 es NRC PDR Local PDR ORBl Reading NRR Reading H. Denton E. Case V. *Stello D. Eisenhut B. Grimes R. Vollmer A.
  • Schwencer D. Ziemann P. Check G. Lainas D. *Davis B. Grimes
r. Ippolito R. Reid V. ~Joonan G. Knighton D. Brinkman Project Manager OELD OI&E O)

C. Parrish ACRS (16)

NRC*. Participants J. Buchanan

.TERA,.

. L 1c~nsee

~~. Michael W. Maupin Hunton and Williams Post Office Box 1535 Richmond, Virginia 23213 Swem Library College of William and Mary Williamsburg, Virginia* 23185' Dona 1 d J. Burke

\\ \\

U., S. Nuclear Regulatory Ceimmi'ssion Region I I Office of Inspection and Enforcement

.101 Marietti Street, Suite 3100 Atlanta, Georgia. 30303

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=ML18116A192&oldid=4996846"