ML19274E866

Summary of 790326 Meeting W/Util & Public at Plant Site Re Plant Layout & Reanalysis of Affected safety-related Piping

ML19274E866
Person / Time
Site:	FitzPatrick
Issue date:	04/05/1979
From:	Polk P Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:	Stello V Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
NUDOCS 7904280200
Download: ML19274E866 (5)

Text

.

y

[

UNITED STATES y*

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISslON j \\ I D ),

4 o

WASHINGTON, D. C. 20565 f q.

/. l

'% ' y/

s.

e APRll 5

1979 Docket No.60-333 MEMORANDUM FOR:

Victor Stello, Jr., Director, Division of Operating Reactors FROM:

Philip J. Polk, Project Manager, ORB #3, D0R

SUBJECT:

OPEN MEETING 0F MARCH 26, 1979 WITH THE POWER AUTHORITY OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK REGARDING SAFETY RELATED PIPING RE-ANALYSIS FOR THE JAMES A. FITZPATRICK NUCLEAR POWER PLANT In consonance with the commitment to afford high priority to the resolu-tion of the March 13, 1979 Show Cause Order, the NRR staff visited the James A. FitzPatrick Nuclear Plant on March 26, 1979.

The purpose of the visit was twofold:

(1) to discuss with the Power Authority of the State of New York (PASNY) the status of the re-analysis of affected safety related piping, and (2) to tour the FitzPatrick plant in order to survey the existing physical layout and design of these systems. The discussion was open to public observation while the plant tour was closed for security reasons.

Upon arrival, an informal technical information meeting was held at the Nine Mile Point Energy Information Center.

The meeting focused on pre-viously forwarded re-analysis status requests as delineated in enclosures (1), (2), (3) and (4). Meeting attendance enclosure (5), consisted of staffpersonnel,PASNYemployeesandconsuitants,andlocalpublicand newspaper representatives.

In general, PASNY provided a status of the FitzPatrick re-analysis effort.

In addition, the licensee did commit to providing in the near future a copy of the 10 volume FitzPatrick " Nuclear Steam System Supplier Operation and Maintenance Instruction Manual." However, due to the short advance meeting notice, PASNY did not, or could not, make available any documenta-tion of statements made.

In addition, many vagaries remained at the con-clusion of the meeting. Therefore, the following summary reflects preliminary verbal communications.

Introductory remarks were made by meeting participants.

The staff pre-sented the NRR task organization, Figure (1), and explained the division of responsibility within the organization.

Seventeen safety systems (enclosure 6) were identified as having been analyzed using the Pipe Stress-Shock II computer code.

These systems were all FSAR Section 12.2.3 systems within the Architect / Engineer (Stone 79042802 "

Victor Stello, Jr. & Webster Engineering Corporation) secpe of work.

(No systems were analyzed by Shock I).

The re-analysis being done by Stone & Webster Engineering Corporation will require 96 Pipe Stress-Shock III calculations.

Moreover, there are approximately 150 hand calculations for smaller diameter piping.

PASNY is approaching the re-analysis on a prioritized basis with highest priority afforded safe shutdown systems. To date two runs (RHR and RCIC steam supply) have been completed and pipe stress values were all within code allowable.

In addition to these runs, there is reason to feel that two other systems will be found acceptable.

During a past review of Safety Relief Valves, the General Electric Company analyzed and found acceptable the C Main Steam line and HPCI steam supply line inside containment.

Of the remaining systems an additional 80 Shock III runs had been completed but these remained unverified by Sunday, March 25, 1979.

Verification was necessary in order to ensure that the piping and instrument diagrams as well as isonetric/ sketches reflect the current as-built system layouts.

(There have been 700 modifications to FitzPatrick systems.)

In sum, for these runs, PASNY indicated that no pipe stress problems have been ident-ified to date.

Upon completion of verification, the review of supports and components will be initiated.

The NSSS's (General Electric Company) involvment in the re-analysis effort was discussed.

At this time G.E. does not intend to re-analyze the Recirculation Systen the only systen entirely within the original G.E.

scope of work.

With respect to the interface between G.E. and Stone &

Webster, the NSSS utilizes a lump cass model and establishes A/E stress criteria.

S&W will meet the original G.E. criteria and the NSSS will verify that the S&W design is within the criteria.

The staff requested the future PASNY plan of attack and indicated a pre-ference for sequential submittals of documented infomation.

(As a mininum, the trend of initial findings transnitted infomally was requested.)

Although a schedule was not forthcoming, PASNY did indicate that an Option Review Connittee had been established to review problen areas.

In essence, there are three areas where a problen may be identified:

(1) pipe stress analysis, (2) pipe suports' analysis; and (3) equipment / component analysis.

(Figure (2) reflects the logic process as understood.)

If the Shock III re-analysis identifies problen areas the Option Review Connittee will attenpt resolution in accordance with the following priority:

(1)

If the Pipe Stress-Shock III analysis indicates a pipe stress, support or conponent nroblen re-analyze using the N'JPIPE conputer code;

Victor Stello, Jr. (2)

If problem remains, re-analyze using amplified response spectra generated from FSAR time histories; (3)

If problem remains, re-analyze using FSAR values in a dynamic time-history analysis; (4)

If problem remains, consider minor hardware and/or configuration modification; (5)

If major hardware and/or configuration modifications are required, redevelop FSAR response spectra and re-analyze using new seismic criteria; and (6)

If problem remains, re-analyze using new higher damping values, different load combinations, elastic / plastic analysis, etc.

During the ensuing discussions the staff indicated that the response to I&E Bulletin 79-02, " Pipe Support Base Plate Designs Using Concrete Expansion Anchor Bolts", would be considered in staff judgement if made available sooner than 120 days as specified in the bulletin.

At the conclusion of the arrival meeting, the staff conducted a tour of the Fitz'atrick Plant. Most of the affected safety related piping, r

hangers, support and components outside containment were cited.

Upon completion of this survey a meeting was held to summarize the day's activities.

PASNY requested that the NRC indicate the form of the submittal required to return the plant to operation.

The staff informei the licensee of the intention to visit the S&W Boston offices in the near future in order to status the re-analysis effort. The form and required content of the submittal package (s) may become clear prior to, or during, this meeting.

In conclusion, the staff indicated that the PASNY schedule and plan of future action is of high import, and that the staff will be responsive to the receipt of documentation when submitted.

)

L/

~

Philip J. Polk, Project Manager Operating Reactors Branch #3 Division of Operating Reactors

Enclosures:

As stated

Power Authority of the State of New York cc:

Lewis R. Bennett, Assistant General Manager / General Counsel Power Authority of the State of New York 10 Columbus Circle New York, New York 10019 Mr. Peter W. Lyon Manager-Nuclear Operations Power Authority of the State of New York 10 Columbus Circle New York, New York 10019 Mr. J. D. Leonard, Jr.

Resident Manager James A. Fitzpatrick Nuclear Power Plant P. O. Box 41 Lycoming, New York 13093 Director, Technical Development Programs State of New York Energy Office Agency Building 2 Empire State Plaza Albany, New York 12223 Oswego County Office Building 46 E. Bridge Street Oswego, New York 13126 George M. Wilverding, Licensing Supervisor Power Authority of the State of New York 10 Columbus Circle New York, New York 10019

cc:

Mr. Herbert Van Schaach Mr. Paul Merges Oswego County Office Duilding New York State Department of 46 E. Bridge Street Environmental Conservation Oswego, New York 13125 44 Holland Avenue Western New York Service Group Ms. Andria Dravo Albany, New York 12208 Subcommittee on Energy and Environment Mr. Jay Dunkelberger 1327 Longworth Avenue New York State Energy Office Washington, D. C.

20515 2 Rockefeller Plaza Albany, New York 12223 Mr. Frank R. Church Town of Scriba Scriba Municipal Building R. D. #2, Creamery Road Box 76 Oswego, New York 13126 Mr. James Fest, Chairman R.D. 7 Bestview Drive Fulton, New York 13069 Mr. Robert D. Vessels, Director Office of Environmental Planning New York State Public Service Commission New York State Empire Plaza Albany, New York 12223 Mr. Thomas Cashman Environmental Conservation Department 50 Wolf Road Albany, New York Mr. T. K. DeBoer, Director Technical Development Programs State of New York Energy Office Agency Building 2 Empire State Plaza Albany, New York 12223 Mr. Robert Deyle County Planning Board Counth Building 4; E. Bridge Street Oswego, New York 13126

f* V W&

,8'yIy%

UN8 TED STATES

-1 NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

~

[*

h W ASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 W'f/

,, a,,

0..,-::i::

s -

j NOJE TO FIIES:

TELECON WITH STONE AND WEBSTER On today, March 20, 1979, I called Stone and Webster and discussed future actions to resolve the outstanding seismic questi:n en the five shut-down plants.

The specific items discussed were:

(1)

The first priority is to see the results, partial or complete, of a reanalysis of all safety related piping systems and suoports in each plant that were analyzed with or othersise effected by a SHOCK II analysis, and (2)

In these instances analyzed in Item (1) in which an over. stress (greater than FSAR allowable) is identified, a reanalysis using the OBE input (acceleration and floor response spectra) for the SSE analysis methodology (SSE load combination, SSE piping damping, SSE allowables, etc.)

(3)

Ar.y aeditional approaches that licensees consider desirable to.

pursue in those instances in which overstresses in their plants are ident'ified in (1) above.

We would not be prepared to connent on other approaches until after we have had an opportunity to review the results of Item (1) above.

Therefore it is important that these reanalyses results be performed quickly and ce submitted for~ staff review.

We will be contacting Stone and Webster later in the day to make arrangements for running our benchmark problems and other check calculations.

I also indicated that we would be informing each of the licensees of the foregoing to assure that they are well aware of our current views on -

this matter.

1 ctor S.:..".. o, J r., a. rector Division of Operatir.; Reactors

d' N

UNITED STATES j

g y%

~ '.

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Y.I E

W ASHINGTON. D. C. 20555 e

NOTE TO:

Review Team Members FROM:

William T. Russell RE:

SITE VISITS OBJECTIVE:

DEVELOP PLANT SPECIFIC INFORK; TION PACKAGES 1.

General - For Safe Shut-Down and Reg. Guide 1.29 Piping Systems

1) Obtain P & ids (Isometrics if available) 2)

Obtain FSAR system discriptions 3)

Detemine Quality Class I, II, III and boundries.

(should be in 50.55 a(g) submittal - ISI/IST) 4)

Detemine redundancy (single failure)

(i.e. - single drou lines in RHR, SI etc) 5)

Detemine interfaces between Safety and Non-Safety Systems, if any (i.e. - aux-feed / main feed) 6)

Detemine if procedures for shutdown w/ minimum safety systems exist II. Determine Affected Systems (i.e. - Those which used SHOCK II) 1)

Safety Systems 2)

Non-Safety Systems which interface with Safety Systems III. Determine How Remaining Safety Systems were Analyzed 1)

NSSS 2)

SH0CX I 3)

Hand Calculations bU T.

William T. Russell Coordinator

f'f

.-a 4,#

'sNITED STATES

[*.

~1 NUCLEAR RE 'iULATORY COMMISSION

1. P%

j WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 0%+/l "0TE TO FILES:

March 21,1979 TELECON WITH STONE AND WEBSTER I called Mr. Kennedy of Stone and Webster to discuss my March 20, 1979 meno regarding. future action to resolve outstanding seismic questions-en the five shut-down plants.

The purpose of the call was to clarify the type of reanalyses required for each plant.

Discussed were:

1.

Sizes of small piping that is designed using chart or other manual methods should be iden ti fi ed.

If the methods used for such small piping are different than the methods currently used the differences should be noted and justified.

2.

Reanalysis of primary system piping performed by NSSS is not required.

3.

All safety related piping (other than Item 1 and 2) and supports are to be analyzed or reanalyzed as neeoed using an acceptable code.

,. -f Qi w<n Victor Stello, 'Ir., Director Division of Operating Reactors O

,6 @ 's:u

[

a%

UNITcD STATES t.

'4 NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISslON I.ki j

W ASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 l.r'R&f E J

March 23,1979 NOTE T0:

W. T. Russell FROM:

Victor Stello, Jr., Director, D0R INFORMATION NEEDs 'EGARDING FIVE SHUTDOWN PLANTS Each licensee is to be contacted and requested to provide a copy of the computer code listing for all codes used in the seismic analysis or reanalysis of safety related systens in its plant (s).

The computer codes of interest include:

PIPESTRESS/ SHOCK 3 PIPESTRESS/SH0CK 2 PIPESTRESS/ SHOCK 1 NUPIPE Computer codes u:;ed by the NSSS vendor in the seismic analysis of the primary system Victor St'ello, Jr., Di rector Division of Operating Reactors See Attached for Distribution

5 MARCH 26, 1979 MEETING ATTENDEES

.NR C_

B. K. Grimes P. J. Polk W. A. Paulson J. R. Fair A. N. Fasano K. Abrahan G. Thinnes (EG8G)

PASNY J. R. Schneider A. J. Martin P. W. Lyon J. Leonard R. Pasternak W. Fernandez M. Cosgrove C. Patrick B. Pruncal M. Weatherby R. Lisno J. Dainore (Target Technology)

J. W. Cleveland (GE)

R. A. Hill (GE)

W. A. Matson (S&W)

L. D. Barnes (S&W)

M. J. Palie (S&W)

J. T. Christian (S&W)

PUBLIC J. Drumm S. Abbott D. Leonard D. Wallace (N.Y. State Office of Emergency Preparedness)

S. Holbrook (N. Y. State Congressional Staff)

J. C. Baranski (N. Y. State Energy Office)

B. Ward (Oswego Palladium Times)

S. Reinert (Oswego Valley News)

R. Caplan (Ecology Action)

L. Hanypsiak (Safe Energy for New Haven)

R. Burtch (Niagara Mohawk Power Corp.)

d yinIECT II.G.E J/JIES A. FITZPATRICK JOB NIR4BER 12966.141

- Indicates Total I of Problans Run SIIIPT/CIN. PROGRESS: SMIESS ANALYSIS Page-1 of 2 Using Chock II

/

STARIS IATE 3-2M 'Ii

- Indicates Total 8 of Problaas llun Usirs Shock I or II l

AS OF TDIE ~5 '. 3 h A P4

1. v1MrIN

1. ovER to

'IOTAL #

1. OF GOOD ALIDWABLE ATJDWANCE SUPIORT OF SMtESS BilOCK 3

_FREIJM.

EA PRELlH.

EA H)R fiYSTIM P110DTIM8 RUNSs ACCEPT.

ACCEPr.

ACCEPT.

ACCEPT.

REVIEN SHIESS RD1 ARKS O,

'O HAIN STF.AM f4 3

FEEIMATER 2.

CORE SPRAY RESITUAL

[

.1] EAT RRiOVAL IIIGli PRESS.

C

. COOL.IlkT. SY3.

b

^

REAC'IOR CORE

'd TROTA _ COOL.

(1)

IlEAC. WATER d

CIEAN-UP T

^

col 3 TROL ROD DitIVP.

m h'"'

STAllDBY I.TQUID CorIT, DRYUELL VE!!T AND IUIOE E4EltGEtiCY 4

(p IIERV,iml.

m IlEAC'IUR 13LIG.

.V CL, IDOP COOL.

T N

(CONTINUED OH PAGE 2)

~

" Credit niven oitly for runs checked against as bnilta,

k M

) A

-M'6 1

2" 1

4 1

6 6

3 T ES 92 2

R 1

A f

1 o

EE D

Ti AD R

2 R

DT S

E e

S B

g E

4R a

R I

P H

S T

UF S

B TO O

A J

TS SA S

T I

R W

S 0RE Y

01 UI L

1PFV A

U E

N S

R A

S S

T E

AP R

EE T

E C

S RC C

Ef A

VA OW S

D G

8I M r E

L I

r.

R A L t

G Eu 0

Rc 1

. PA M

4 T

1 AP 1C EE 0

/

E C

T NL C

UB A

I A

I ITW 1

1S ID WI MT L JP

1. A I E EC h

RC FA n

n u

u R

R DO3*

NM9 %

O s

s i

GKS a

K u

a c

CN C

1 l

1 F0U p)d$d$e }n b

b O1 R 1

11 o

o S

i Qq A

1 A'

r r

P P

P Z

f f

S T

h I

o oI S8 P

I

1. E4 8

E RD

/

r LTI A

l lo ASB S

aI a

T O

l E

tI tI OFR A

Tk Tk

' OP o

o I

1 b

l c

c J

s o so i

l eii el RI 4

9 tS t S I A.

a a

A E

cg cg R

S T

I i

in 1 n NE A

N '1 J

I 1 i r :

D OS GT L O W

?

di v

1 ns l

O I

I i

1 IU IU T

TT Nff On T D T

S a

I r

' CEm SS I 1 C

N UU D '. LgETLT A

EI l

1 T.

G1 I

NA A

0I S T

AF E 3

TR Uel l

l 1 I

I O

1I oX STFgFH.Cy T

CE i

I

1(

h A

N

) o O

F

/ A D

S E

2 K

U I

M N2 33 l

6 I

1 rE s

I.

2 G

rG 6

EE I

0A 6

f TM CP 9

o AIT 2

1 1

1 E

D AC G

R A

S E

EC F

T A

I E

P RO P

)

D A

EZ M.

TS C

EC 1

SA C

RC A

PA P

S 0

N J

O S

I EEN T

O I

A LHID A P T 'D R

T A

I E

OFRA TOTT DF D

AC E

EC F

i A

T w

IE E

P c

EC I

c RC I

A PA I

tQE E

L G. 0 D A Z 0 'D S

i TZA TR O0DA O

TI IT f

M U

S AC S

EC T

R A

ME t.

I I

ID P

HT EC A

RC I

PA I

S S

E AC R

- S EC G

RIN A

O EFO R

0II DT EC P

1AOA RC C

PA I !

I !

4ELC S

/

R T

EO.L F

EG DA K

I IAEV C

t l

I B

BE HT A

D, AC P

ESE EC Z

RT A

T LEP AME IF TI C EC OAC RC TI A PA I

A S

S E

ET L O E 'K D4@Igi<S%

o5X M

R 8

D I-AI L

s X

J T PI S UUFH 4

'1 S E

T V

f Lm V

R lA H

V

.E F

LO l

LF S l

4 T

AI P

D O

L1 N

D Rm E 'h

.M l

A l

T H

Y l D F

f D

J EA I

T C

r f W RF T

1 S

l 1

HA 1

T i

f D I

Y1 ET C

W oo B R 1

J Y

IF F RR S

C I

l t

A D

O S AT F OP EP T

C S.

F CS R J_

H R

R C n.

S D& 1 H_

R I

D i

l P

1 e c 7 <

T o N..M m

si M

U.N N

EM s a sp i

ahi 5 "8 s

e Gu n

o 22 da y

gg

=

n 8

o 5

• n5 f

C*

E asHB m

i n

5 e

r g

% G

'8 c

3 ds M

S a5 gm g

"il L

255 2

a 2

B l

c

!= w<

g 3

E.s

$2 B

sa

.m g

sc8

~

ase EBd b<g g

3 e

-mg; m

l E

i!B $

g@' di a$

e 8

J m

%S

?

$$55

?Ah'Y $l l0 Y,$,l bess e

d G

5 $

E, h h e:@ek3 a

ml 2.

2 c;

2 g :

aa m

a s es i!! 28 5E B

=

{

OM ob O AG OD

Director. NRR li. Denton E. Cas - D/D Director. 00R Director. D55 V. Stallo R. h ttson A/D for Engineer.

A/D for Englacer-3*mleCL ing & Projects. DOI Ing. 055 Ican D. Grimes J. Kalght fngineerin9

%chanical ussel Dranch. 00R Engineering Branch V. Noonan R 094DAk Beaver Valley Code Verification

0. Higginton.0ttDI R. LaGrange. EB F. Hiraglia, PSS D. Nrton. fGLG x

H. Ilartrman. H[5 H. Reich. BNL fit Patrick

- P. Polk. ORD-3 J. Fair. EB LJ. Paulson. P55 G. Thinnes. IG&G Haine Va Jee

.:,n dy l:. Helson. ORD-4 S. Ilosford, fB

1. Glaimell t. PSS Gruths. IG&G f

Sorry I & 2 c

K. Desal HED;

o. HeigtJ2 ors.Oltul A. Lee.58-f l'. Rictus. P55 Hasclk. IG1G

1. 6 g

s v

(

.e ei-~-

a

i

m,-

.m

,, 7

.,.,,-7e i

ij k

\\

s.

x. -

'N s s

's.'s,..x.

s-N

w..

s s

s

,-. x' -

N,..,

.J w

N, N

'N N 'N b

's.

-s N'.

x

- s N

s x

eg N

g A

A Jk A

M Ik 4

4

\\-

3 2

'u f

-)

L V

%aR T

's ?

2

^

3%

e W

Q Ak t

s a

4 2

E s.

4 E

W O

O o

Q O

a 4

O o

E T

E lu O

w b,7 J

d v

t w

)

D 0

h W

e-

~

a

-1 5

X

~

R Y

C C

\\.'

~

~

e, a

~

m

~

O

'f:

w -

a u w '1

's

(-

N 4

%~

\\

r, O $

c.

, s

^

V N

4 E:

1i

>c4 y ' 3 ?, {

\\

,;I d'

C 't JL E

F' u

2

- c w

b< Di g i

'q u

g w

7Z

.3

.o J

s k

I D %4

,1 -= '

1%

6 wi

t.,

~

..., s s.

~

~

e

[g ~

~

(,.

- Y kw b,,

'7

,n i

o

-. n t

e,

. L,

-