ML20032A488

Forwards PNO-V-81-059

ML20032A488
Person / Time
Site:	Diablo Canyon
Issue date:	10/28/1981
From:	Olmstead W NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE LEGAL DIRECTOR (OELD)
To:	Buck J, Johnson W, Moore T NRC ATOMIC SAFETY & LICENSING APPEAL PANEL (ASLAP)
References
ISSUANCES-OL, NUDOCS 8110300175
Download: ML20032A488 (1)

Text

_

l L

4

+-

e w

w w

w October 28, 1981 Dr. John H. Buck Dr. W. Reed Johnson Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Board Board U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555 Washington, DC 20555 y \\ ) ~~ l.

4r Thomas S. Moore, Esq.

O' At c Safety and Licensing Appeal

\\

O U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission U u,,,CT2 9 ISBih 2

Washington, DC 20555 s! D '3 9

li,

\\

in the Matter of 0)

P Pacific Gas and Electric Company (Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant, Unit Nos. I and 2)

Docket Hos. 50-275 0.L. and 50-323 0.L.

Dear Members of the Board:

The enclosed preliminary notification concerning recent developments at Diablo Canyon involving the containment building annulus region is being provided the boards and parties pursuant to your telephone request of October 27, 1981.

William J. Olmstead Deputy Chief Hearing Counsel

Enclosure:

As stated DISTRIBUTION:

W0lmstead (Chron) cc w/ enclosure:

NRC Central Service List 0 ELD FF (2)

Shapar/Engelhardt Chris tenbury/Scinto BJones DHassell MSweeney GJohnson D609 JMoore

/

BBuckley, 144 Phil.

II//

I omer)

OELD 811030017S 811028 sua m e) -pg, qg-PDR I&E our)

. 10../. 2.8../. 8.1... PNO-V-81-059 PDR i

i

, uscs o ivaa-no spj

-mc.

nerit-I A I msenon rnpv

~

m.,,

y.....

m.

e.. ~

a

lEli INART NOTIFIrATIOk 0F EVENT OR. UNUSUAL OC'CURRENCE-hNO-V 81-59.M w ? D

-his preliminey notification constitutes EARLY notice of eve'nts' of POSSIBLE safety or public r

nterest significance.. The information-is as initially re, ceived without verification or

• valuation, and is ba.sically all that is known by IE ytaff on this date.

Paciffe Gas & Electric Comp.iny s hM 'N-

U' Licensee Emergency Classification::

FACILITY:

Diablo Canyon. Unit Nos. 1 &'2'. t 0- : ' '. ' '. a -

Notification of Unusual Event.:

Alert.

T -: - '. j

. 'F

'4..F Docket Nos. 50-275 &.50-323 '.

Of,

Site Area Emergency a

' ?...

San Luis Obispo County, California..:

39

.e

,.+

.z <,.. j g p..g.g. g,. ;;.a, - g.

General Emergency.

c w c...

Not Applicable il W.

V

^

INCORRECT SEISMIC ANALYSIS TJ9 M.Ai W W.:

Sij8 JECT:

d.j :

. -o n. '

(Ref.: PNO-V-81-50 & 81-50A~, Entitled 7h.?.e 4 % 4 iGV Jr @.T e

L

FM..M,.6 N' - % m 4

6:.

tidw Inoperability of the Residual Heat Removal t

n A V...y.i r,3 c.:..U;.

. System - Incorrect Seismic + Analysis);.,,,:.;" n.f.5.w.

M

. p. ; ;

_y,

.t v

..c'

.; o* y;

. r 3.*

,.. ;g: :.

. Representatives of the Office of. Inspection and Enforcement continued, through the week -. Mii '.

, of October 19-23, 1981.- their inspection of activities related to' the Hos,gri reanalysis.' # '.'

1

,within theJcontainment building annulus area 'and the PG&E interface with John A. Slume and WA a

,F l.' Associates.

~

....s

~

i On October 22, 1981, inspectors from the Office of-Inspection and Enforcement determined

.v..

.that, in addition to 'he improper application 'of the diagram as reported to the NRC by PG&Et 4 k 4

29. 1981, the weights 1.isted on the diagram and used as an imput to John A? s.0,t on September W r. + t Blume and Associates for their development of response spectra, could not be verified as *

.being accurate.

PG&E representatives recalculated the weights. ~using current as-built m :-

w drawings, and detemined the new weights to be different.

4' As a result of the above,- PG&E representatives requested John A. Blume and Associates to develop new response spectra to assist in their detemination of the effect of these weight differences on hanger design.

Blume has completed the development of these new spectra 4

and they show a general shift to lower peak acceleration and lower frequencies in about one half (11 out of 20) of the frame spectrum curves.

In the other nine spectrian curves the peak acceleration is generally increased while tSe frequency of this acceleration is

- n '-

Because of these changes in spectrian curves PG&E personnel are currently

. unchanged.

peoforming calculations to detennine the effects on hanger design.

As of 9 AM P.S.T. on ' w PG&F analysts have performed two sample' calculations using " worst case" L'

26, 1981 October One calculation indicates no changes are required, while the second calculation s

'rs

. spectra.

indicates a maximum pipe support load increase of 800 W

PC8E's current plans are to perform a complete review of the Blume'model used for spectrum

. response curve calculations, and thoroughly validate the input information being utilized v l

by Blume..This work is not expected to be completed until October 28, 1981, at which time 2

.PG&E would expect to have a more complete understanding of the overall effect of this error

on hanger design.' '

CONTACT:

B. H. Faulkenberry J. L. Crews 46 3-3735 i

463-3738 t

.Is 8&rOTICi&7 W M-8 Q

(C.ont. )

' - 2......'.:

October 26, 1981,

PC-V-81-59

..a Because of the identification of this weight error, in conjunction with theitrs

..p >

improper application of the annulus ~ diagram.. and recent NRC findings.that W.udemc Associates)y related service contractors (in addition to John A. Blume andSh.tC: r/

other safet v.

had questionable. quality assurance controls in effect prior to dN.r :n:

v...

j.1978, a representative from the NRC Region.Y office met with PG&E officialsC.t: r'.VG

. n r J on Friday. October 23.1981,tand requested that they be prepared by Thursdat.:.t:.%V.&

2..

i.- October 29. 1981 to justify why the NRC should.not require the~ independent r.7 t i s-p.7. s :

verification effort being conducted by Dr.. Cloud. be broadened to includes..y ' v.. 6 t t

.. :ii,...non-seismic safety related.scryice type contractor work 6try

' w:. !.:/. xjNd.. ".;G s 4 !. -

4,.

......e 3

M.-;.. A meeting has been: tentatively scheduled for NRC ' representatives (NRR andid.m.y.N.6 V. s.

IE) to meet with PG&E officials at their offic'es in San Francisco to heari.5 7.. ui fini/.-

'.r t.

. their justification for 'not-broadening Dr. Oloud's independent verification.' C +. %

.S effort, to be updated regard'ng the cffect of the weight error on hangere-

..:,1.,. ; ~

. design, and to' review any.other information that has been developed by PG&E :c.m.'..

s since October 23. 1981.

~

ab=-

.; 4.

...... v.

o.;..-.

. :r.

r..

'Rit s. s This information..is current-as of 10:30 AM P.S.T. on October 26. 1981..

-C' 'W4.W.Y 1

.u.. v 4

1

.s.

.>. e l :.; :

' ';.s

^.

i

.o

..,.,. t,:.

~..

.f.

..~. ::.

-+

...e

.a--

+.

.e....

y....:v

.n. 4;..

.. F y -

y

. < e...,

.r.

~.

r.....,

...:,m g.9 1

..A

,..7...-

. o.

.+:

qt.

.. ;.p..., s..g -

p.

,t.

1.,L N.: :.

j.y.:9.h. 4:g.;..r

" ' < %.-, i.

k, W ?;f. y:g.:.1.n., m.::).*;. 2. :

L.~ J:;+ f....,...-

Cr.. g.. ',Q-

'g-.

4.,..

gf....

. n.. -

+-

/.

..v.

r.

..{

c; r

s'

.' ; =

7 #-

N.

(. -

.s.

n

~

/

• a.

?

+

.)

.