ML20004D771
| ML20004D771 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Millstone, Hatch, Monticello, Dresden, Peach Bottom, Browns Ferry, Nine Mile Point, Fermi, Oyster Creek, Hope Creek, Cooper, Pilgrim, Brunswick, Vermont Yankee, Duane Arnold, Quad Cities, FitzPatrick |
| Issue date: | 06/01/1981 |
| From: | Siegel B Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| REF-GTECI-A-07, REF-GTECI-CO, TASK-A-07, TASK-A-7, TASK-OR NUDOCS 8106100007 | |
| Download: ML20004D771 (17) | |
Text
.
pa aro uq%
UNITED STATES
[l>#t 'i NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
,q ~
j WASHINGTON. D. C. 20555 s+,
a gv f June 1, 1981 Generic Task No A-7 DOCKET NOS.: 50-219, 50-220, 50-237, 50-245, 50-249, 50-254, 50-259, 50-260, 50-263, 50-265, 50-271, 50-277, 50-278, 50-293, 50-296, 50-298, 50-321, 50-324, 50-325, 50-331, 50-333, 50-341, 50-354, 50-355, and 50-366 LICENSEES:
Boston Edison Company, Carolina Power and Light Company, Commonwealth Edison Company, Detroit Edison Company, Georgia Power Company, Iowa Electric Light and Power Company, Jersey Central Power and Light Company, Nebraska Public Power District, Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation, Northeast Nuclear Energy Company, Northern States Power Company, Philadelphia Electric-Company, Power Authority of the State of New York, Public Service Electric and Gas, Tennessee Valley Authority, Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corporation FACILITIES:
Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station, Nine Mile Point Unit No.1, Pilgrim Unit No.1, Dresden Unit Nos. 2 and 3, Millstone Unit No.1, Quad Cities Unit Nos. I and 2,
'Monticello, Peach Bottom Unit Nos. 2 and 3, Browns Ferry Units Nos.1, 2, and 3, Vermont Yankee, Hatch Unit Nos.1 and 2, Brunswick Unit Nos.1 and 2, Duane Arnold Energy Center, Cooper, Fitzpatrick, Enrico Fermi Unit No. 2, and Hope Creek Unit Nos.1 and 2
SUBJECT:
SUMMARY
OF MEETING HELD ON MAY 22, 1981, WITH THE MARK I OWNER'S GROUP
,On May 22, 1981, the staff met with representatives of General Electric and the Mark 1 Owner's Group in Bethesda, Maryland. The purpose of this meeting was to discuss progress in the implementation of the Mark 1 Long Term Pro-gram (LTP). The meeting attendees are identified in Enclosure 1, the meet-ing agenda in Enclosure 2, and copies of viewgraphs presented during the meeting are contained in Enclosure 3.
Mr. R. Logue gave the introduction and presented the licensee's interpretation of the NRC position on the Mark 1 LTP with regard to exceptions to NUREG 0661, staff review of Plant Unique Analyses (PUA), and requests for schedule relief.
The staff concurred on the licensee's interpretation, as presented in Enclosure 3.
9 8106100007
. Mr. G. Neils identified the types of Mark 1 structural modifications made or in progress at Monticello (pages 2-4 of Enclosure 3).
G. Neils and D. O'Rourke presented slides of the modifications made at Monticello and Peach bottom which were typicz.1 of those being made by the licensee's in the Owner's Group.
Mr. K. Ramsden identified the Owner's Group interpretations of NUREG 0661 which are being incorporated into the licensee's analyses, the specific details of which will be fully documented in the PVA reports.
Messrs. J. Carter, R. Smart, and J. Zaalouk described the schedular problems associated with their specific plants (pages 7-9 of Enclosure 3).
Mr. G. Neils suninarized the Owner's Group perspective with regard to the current status of the Mark 1 LTP implementation. He stated that nearly all the licensees will use one or more alternate interpretations of NUREG 0661, and that the final torus analysis is needed for inputs to the attached piping analyses. Hardware (i.e., snubbers), if needed, cannot be ordered until these analyses are com-pleted.
In addition, an iterative process is usually necessary between the torus analysis and attached piping analyses and even after PUA has been com-pleted, fine tuning of plant modifications may be required based on plant specific tests after modifications have been installed. Mr. Neils also noted that those licensees with 1981 dates would not complete the modifications if they involve the attached piping analyses, that those licensees with single-unit plants with early 1982 dates may complete the modifications on schedule, and those licensees with late 1982 dates will probably meet the schedules.
It was anticipated that the NT0Ls face the same problems as operatincj plants with regard to hardware delivery problems associated with the attached piping modifi-cations.
A discussion was pursued related to the inclusion of Hope Creek in the NRC PUA audit review.
It was mutually agreed that they be included; however, the staff informed the Owner's Group that this should not necessary be considered a final review since sthff' requirements may chang by the time the Hope Creek FSAR is submitted, The staff questioned the Owner's Group representatives concerning the difficulties i
associated with completing the plant-unique analyses and modification designs inasmuch as so many licensees had expressed concerns about potential failures to meet the Order completion dates. Based on the ensuing discussion, the staff l
drew the following conclusions:
e The licensees were requested to notify the staff as soon as they determine that they will take exception or use alternate approaches to those in NUREG 0661 so we can identify obvious problems as soon as possible.
. e When exceptions or alternate approaches are used, we expect the Owner's Group to provide guidance to al', licensees on the approach to be used.
e PUA audits will be performed t,y BNL and Franklin Institute.
e We expect the licensees to continue as directed by H. Denton or.
December 20, 1979, to improve safety as quickly as possible.
e The licensees, through the Owner's Group office,..ere requested to provide a " score card" to the staff for each plant which should identify dates for completion of analyses, design and installation cf the major and minor torus modifications and the attached piping modifications. Hope Creek and Fermi should be included. This
" score card" should identify the major outages during which modifi-cations are scheduled by refueling cycle and work that has been previously completed. A more detailed schedule breakdown similar to the modification categorization given on pages 2 and 3 of En-closure 3 should also be provided.
The information was requested to be provided in thirty (30) days e
(GE stated they will provide the staff a draft outline of the in-formation the Owner's Group will submit for staff approval).
e The staff stated it will review the submittals and, taking the plants with the earliest scheduled ccmpletion dates, w consider modify-ing the orders and establishing priorities. Tl
'censee's were re-quested to be prepared to justify the schedular..ianges identified on the " score card."
W l-d B. L. Si gel, Program Manager Mark 1 LTP Implementation
Enclosures:
As stated l
l l
l l
ATTENDEES BWR MARK 1 OWNER'S GROUP MEETING May 22, 1981 Name Organization Byron Siegel NRC/DL/0RB 2 Keith Wichman NRC/DL/0RAB Robert N. Smart NUSCo Gerald H. Neils NSPCo Robert H. Logue PECo R. M. Hunt GE Ozen Batum Southern Company Services K. B. Ramsden Commonwealth Edison Co.
Robert W. Wolf GPUN R. M. Weiner MPR C. I. Grimes NRC Jan S. Teraszkiewicz PASNY Billy W. Reid IE Bob Lowenstein IE Karl Meyer IE Harold Rehrauer Iowa Electric M. G. Mosier NMPC Harry Shearer Iowa Electric Addison B. Higginbotham NUTECH Vince Derr NUTECH N. W. Edwards NUTECH Dennis O'Rourke PEC0 M. F. Nash PSE&G Jim Carter TVA P. D. Hedgecock NUTECH Dick Boyle NPPD J. M. Pilant NPPD George Wagner Commonwealth Edison Robert Smith Yankee Atomic l
Robert E. White Yankee Atomic i.
Larry Steinert GE R. E. Keever NUTECH W. J. Fabruer Detroit Edison D. F. Lehnert Detroit Edison John R. Hoddy PASNY D. L. Bensinger CP&L l
Paulette Tranblay NUS for NSAC/EPRI Jimmy Zaalouk CP&L A. B. Cutter CP&L Leon Guaquil PASNY C. H. Hofmayer EDS. Nuclear Kulin D. Desai NRC/DE/EGB David Terao NRC/DE/MEB Shou-nien Hou NRC/DE/MEB N. Celia Teledyne Ralph B. Swenson PASNY R. J. DeLoach Boston Edison Co.
J. Keyes Boston Edison
MARK I CONTAINMENT PROGRAM NRC/ MARK I UTILITY MEETING MAY 22, 1981
____y________________________________________________________
lb OPENING REMARNS
~
NRC
" ' O INTRODUCTION LOGUE
..e 0
TYPICAL UTILITY ACTION / PROGRESS NEILS/0'ROURKE.
0..
TYPICAL NEED FOR INTERPRETATIONS RAMSDEN CARTER / SMART /ZAALOUK O
SCHEDULE ISSUES 0
PERSPECTIVE NEILS 0-CLOSING COMMENTS
- NRC O
y
--.,...-,,_-,-.,y
,.~s-r
.,y,..,m-
,.r,
- i. -.,.. -
m.y,.
UTILITY UNDERSTANDING OF NRC POSITION ON MARK I O
GENERIC ISSUES A6, A7, AND A39 ARE CLOSED OUT BY NUREG-0661 AND THE CONFIRMING ORDERS DATED JANUARY 13, 1981.
O dENERIC REVIEWS-OF EXCEPTIONS TO NUREG-0661 WILL NOT BE CONDUCTED BY THE NRC STAFF.
O IF A GIVEN UTILITY PLANS TO TAKE EXCEPTIONS TO NUREG-0661, INFORM THE NRC BY LETTER AT THE TIME OF THE DECISION AND COMMIT TO PROVIDE THE ENGINEERING BASES OF THOSE EXCEPTIONS IN THEIR INDIVIDUAL PUA REPORT.
0 UNDERSTAND THAT THE INDIVIDUAL PUA REPORTS ARE SUBJECT TO AUDITS AFTER SUBMITTAL.
O DO NOT ASK FOR GENERIC SCHEDULE RELIEF--INDIVIDUAL REQUESTS FOR' SCHEDULE RELIEF WILL BE CONSIDERED ONLY WHEN THE NEED IS QUANTIFIABLE.
1
MARK I CONTAINMENT PROGRAM STRUCTURAL MODIFICATIONS
~
MONTICELLO NUCLEAR GENERATING PLANT 9
5 3
/
10 I
\\
I i
wn l
-8 j
i i < dpQ 2 T t-J f
i
\\
4 I '
c - \\
f
,/
J
^
\\
.J 7
/
/
y
/
i
./ '1 hy%
^
2 i I,gp, myn g i, yN :
a=,
.g
- j
.2. c
.a..-
MODIFICATION DESCRIPTION' INSTALLATION DATE 1
TORUS COLUMN / PIN REINFORCEMENT SUMMER 1976 2
TORUS COLUMN TO SHELL REINFORCEMENT SPRING 1977 3
VENT HEADER COLUMN REINFORCEMENT FALL 1977 4
DOWNCOMER BRACING FALL 1978 5
VENT HEADER DEFLECTOR / CONNECTION PLATE FALL 1978 6
RHR ELBOW / SUPPORT FALL 1978 7
SRV T-QUENCHERS AND QUENCHER SUPPORT BEAM FALL 1978 8
SRV ELBOW SUPPORT BEAM SPRING 1980 SPRING 1980 9
ADDITIONAL SPRAY HEADER SUPPORTS 10 TORUS CATWALK SUPPORT MODIFICATION SPRING 1980 11 TORUS SADDLES SUMMER 1981 2
MARK I CONTAINMENT PROGRAM STRUCTURAL MODIFICATIONS MONTICELLO NUCLEAR GENERATING PLANT (CONTINUED)
X dwe,xV
\\r T/
I paawgr (
f D
1.
g4 N-x 12
' ~
.=,
g y
)
f' ? ' ~
z
. s..-
.. ;* a,
?
MODIFICATION DESCRIPTION INSTALLATION DATE 4
VENT HEADER DEFLECTOR FALL 1978 12 DOWNCOMER SHORTEN)NG FALL 1978 13 DOWNCOMER/ VENT HEADER INTERSECTION REINFORCEMENT SPRING 1980 14 TORUS CATWALK MIDBAY SUPPORT FALL 1981 g
I 3
~
MONTICELLO PLANT
~
MARK I CONTAINMENT PROGRAM PLANT MODIFICATIONS MODIFICATION DESCRIPTION _
COMPLETION DATE DRYWELL/WETWEEL PRESSURE DIFFERENTIAL SPRING 1976 TORUS SUPPORT COLUMN REINFORCEMENT SUMMER 1976 ADDITIONAL TORUS ANCHORAGE SUMMER 1976 TORUS COLUMN PIN REINFORCEMENT SUMMER 1976 SUPPORT COLUMN TO TORUS REINFORCEMENT SPRING 1977 ADDITIONAL 8" SRVDL VACUUM BREAKERS FALL 1977 V5NT HEADER SUPPORT COLUMN CONNECTION REINFORCEMENT FALL 1977 HPCI SPARGER PIPE SUPPORT FALL 1977 3 SRVDL T-QUENCHERS FALL
.1977 5 SRVDL T-QUENCHERS FALL 1978 DOWNCOMER SHORTENING FALL 1978 VENT HEADER DEFLECTOR FALL 1978 DOWNCOMER BRACING FALL 1978 RHR DISCHARGE ELBOW AND SUPPORT FALL 1978 RCIC SPARGER PIPE SUPPORT FALL 1978 SRVDL WETWELL SUPPORT REINFORCEMENT (ELBOW SUPPORT BEAM)
SPRING 1980 SRVDL DRYWELL SUPPORT REINFORCEMENT (6 SNUBBERS)
SPRING 1980 SPRAY HEADER SUPPORT REINFORCEMENT SPRING 1980 DOWNCOMER/ VENT HEADER INTERSECTION REINFORCEMENT SPRING 1980 TORUS CATWALK SUPPORT REINFORCEMENT SPRING 1980 TORUS CATWALK GRATING TIE-DOWN SPRING 1980 TORUS SUPPORT SADDLES SUMMER 1981 ADDITIONAL TORUS ANCHORAGE SUMMER 1981 COMPLETE SRVDL DRYWELL (INCLUDING DRYWELL STEEL REINFORCEMENT)
FALL 1981 TORUS MONORAIL REINFORCEMENT (IF REQUIRED)
FALL 1981 REINFORCEMENT OF VACUUM BREAKERS FALL 1981 TORUS CATWALK,MIDBAY COLUMNS FALL 1981 TORUSRINGGIhDERBRACINGMODIFICATION(IFREQUIRED)'
FALL 198:
SRV DISCHARGE LINE - VENT LINE PENETRATION' ASSESSMENT (IF REQUIRED)
FALL 1981 TORUS ATTACHED PIPING PRESSURE BOUNDARY MODIFICATONS (IF REQUIRED)
FALL 1982 TORUS ATTACHED PIPING SUPPORT (IF REQUIRED)
SPRING 1982 DOWNCOMER LATERAL LOAD ASSESSMENT (IF REQUIRED)
FALL 1o82 REMOVAL OF DRYWELL/WETWELL DIFFERENTIAL PRESSURE FALL 1981 nutech 4
j l
FRAMEWORK FOR INTERPRETATION WHY " INTERPRET" CRITERI A?
O IMPROVEMENTS IN METHODOLOGY BEYOND THAT IMPLIED IN CRITERIA 0
STRICT IMPOSITION OF CERTAIN CRITERIA YIELD
" HARDSHIP" MODIFICATION O
UTILIZE SIMPLER. ANALYTICAL METHODS WITHOUT COMPROMISING SAFETY e
j I
(
i j
5 l
+w,
TYPICAL INTERPRETATIONS 0
ALTERNATE SRV ANAL.YSIS APPROACH
- MODAL CORRECTION FACTORS
- CONFIRMATORY TESTS O
C.O. AND CHUGGING HARMONIC PHASING
- REALISTIC BASES FOR COMBINING HARMONICS 0
SUBMERGED STRUCTURES
- REALISTIC FSI EFFECTS
- APPROACH CONFIRMED BY TEST DATA 0
FROTH IMPINGEMENT LOADS
- DETAILED REVIEW OF % SCALE TEST RESULTS O TORUS LATERAL LOADS I
- LOAD DEFINITION BASES BEING REVIEWED l
- REACTION DUE TO SEISMIC BEING REVIEWED SPECIFIC DETAILS WILL BE FULLY DOCUMENTED IN PLANT UNIQUE ANALYSIS REPORTS.
6
NEED AND JUSTIFICATION FOR ADJUSTMENT IN MODIFICATION
\\
SCHEDULE
\\
STATUS
- a. Unit 1 - Currently in 113 day modification outage - several days behind schedule
- b. Design attention concentrating on Unit 3 NEED
- a. Unit 1 - E= tend orders to next refueling outage (March 1983) for many externat mods and some miaceilaneous internal moda
- b. Unit 3 - Extend orders for torus hydraulic anubbers; may require extension for some other internal and external mods REASONS AND JUSTIFICATIOh FOR NEED
- a. Many more modifications tha,n originally expected
- b. Material deliveries and drawing problems
- c. Back tb back long outages for torus mods on three units
- d. Sa.fety implications of c.
- e. Other modifications which must be done
~ &
P00R ORIGINAL 7
_,,,,,,-.---w me e-
~--ea
'#-W"
" ' " * ~
^
Mil 1 STONE NO 1 SCHEDULE PROBf FMS RELATED TO REFUEL OUTAGE e
DESIGN - INSTALL IMMEDIATELY OR NEXT OUTAGE o
MAJOR MODIFICATIONS INSTALLED OUTAGE OCT 1980 - JUNE 1981 ORDER DATE APR 1982 NET REFUEL LATE 1982 REMAINING MODS VENT HEADER - DOWNCOMER GUSSETTS ATTACHED PIPING ADDITIONAL " SUBMERGED STRUCTURE" MODS (?)
POOL TEMPERATURE MONITORING DISPLAY l
e OUTAGE DELAY EF'FECTS
\\
SRV TEST DELAYED l
DELAYS ATTACHED PIPING ANALYSIS & DESIGN EARLIEST OPPORTUNITY FOR MODS LATE 82 e
SCHEDULE EXTENSION NECESSARY 8
MK.W_. _
[f:fayisfni
(
i i
i;
'l v
! ;e -d.h.v %
k t
w t
I y
(
l t
I r
a~v
's t
i i
< Jch_ pi e
a b,
s t "rg =u a
g g
g*.
j ;-
i
- eg f
2 I
.bh{$i,[h h
J I *[
.k f
i f<
[
- +f h s A d F
- ,%qua.
m n
os m ;
m
?
o
. o o
w,
w m
m yc a
- 2:
z fs
[
l l
=
Vn 8
t n 3 I
5 t,
i t
a t
i
\\
?
ci f >- L '
C
,~
h l
i t"-
e Ci l
lc r
io i
7-g r
e tw i
e i
2 y e e
ij m
m m
s a s
, s
- a
-i m l
- m i !E
-o--
C I
s s
m I
0 3 m
)
m 8
m E r
- - c o
-.m Le
- 0 1
e ! e e
!g; e
e I?g#2@ ara
- 1. f
=
aJ s
s s
3 s s
a g
o
,m a
o a
t b aJ t
i @*-
p@Mi3ragi g
I l
l j
ry @dar e
ie m
e t
c
[
i 1
l r,.- m j
e t
Y:a, ci r
i i
8 c
'M1 1.L3!
l l
l j
i h;w.95,TD W.
(
i 9
e r
19.s k'$nin8 k 4
f l
9 i
w a
D 5
t a
[:z.3,e-fi o
ia r al ai 0
.g a;a, e
f ~g a
5 m* m!
m m
i m i m m
o i
m
[ s
, s r s
s s
s s
f't
.5 ID i
(D m
1 (D
ID i
tD t,<
03 a
f-IL c'
r I
.=
N C
S 1
I l
i l
CNy 3
I I
l
)
Fl E
l i
j
.c i
i
(
l C
p 4
w I
O o
t r
=
=
i,
.\\
I Ls mgx.
.a
.,i p
E I
I '.f*
d p
T sn O
l
[ g l
gg3 f*-
p w
l f
l Y
4
=
U I
g p3,,
w 5{
re-l am a
i m.
wt w
- >m W
w3 D
{ $
I hd
,~- NM LM i
z I
k..
[.? ;u;],
O 2
Q l
l EO l
- E m
i N
g 2
)
c z
l E
4 * >'"
l =w
, 3 Ly,pg g
w a
r
,!.o l wm j sq
=
=
e w
=
m, l
m u m=
o,
-.o a.,n.
=
e-
, mz I bA
+
=
- =
=
n
,%,.g~.,.w w
a
>- a ;
o c.s 1 3
>a I sm oc CC r =o
.y
. M.9 cc gn.a,
l
?.g%
g CL.
l o I
w (n M
WC3 I
Z f Q l Cn Q
t.=
l CC
.x
..w i
8'f6f I
l J
7 -,id l
L i
I.
9
PRESENT PERSPECTIVE l
0 INTERPRETATIONS / ALTERNATES 0
APPEARS NEARLY ALL WILL USE ONE OR MORE.
O WILL ADVISE BY LETTER AS SOON AS PRACTICAL.
O DETAILS IN PUA REPORT FOR POST-IMPLEMENTATION AUDIT.
O ATTACHED PIPING AND PENETRATIONS' O
FINAL TORUS ANALYSIS NEEDED FOR INPUTS TO PIPING ANALYSIS.
O MAGNITUDE OF ENGINEERING RESOURCES REQUIRED IS COMPARABLE TO ALL PREVIOUS WORK.
O NOT STRAIGHTFORWARD - COMPLEX ANALYSIS REQUIRED.
0 BEST EFFORTS STILL INVOLVE SCHEDULE UNCERTAINTIES.
O WILL ADVISE WHEN QUANTIFIABLE ON PLANT UNIQUE BASIS.
1 I
?
l l
l l
10
g[f s',,
- 4EETING SUfHARY DISTRIBUTION Docket File to NRC PDR~
h
/
h h,
Local PDR 1
! -) "@l o s 7gg 2
U NSIC T
TERA
\\
=$
oy J. Heltemes, AE00 T. Ippolito t
Project Manager (Siegel'- 3 copies)
~
OELD IE(3)
Licensing Assistant ACRS (10)
Each NRC participant 14eeting Summary File J. 01shinski B. Grimes, DEP S. Schwartz, DEP D. Ramos, EPDB F Pagano,'iPLB K. Wichman C. Grimes K. Desai O. Terao Shou-nien Hou Mr. L. D. Steinert, MC 681 General E'actric Company 175 Curtner Avenue San Jose, CA 95125 I
l
(
l l
l
..-- -