ML20041G448

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Responds to 820205 Ltr Requesting Info Re Pipe Supports Base Plate Design.Status Rept Containing Outline of Facilities Planned Action & Status of Review of IE Bulletin 79-02 Encl
ML20041G448
Person / Time
Site: Diablo Canyon  Pacific Gas & Electric icon.png
Issue date: 03/12/1982
From: Crane P
PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC CO.
To: Engelken R
NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION V)
References
REF-SSINS-6820 IEB-79-02, IEB-79-2, NUDOCS 8203220312
Download: ML20041G448 (3)


Text

h Bulletin Reply 79-02 Docket Hos. 50-275/323 PACIFIC GAS AND E LE C T RIC C O M PANY 77 HrALE S T 4 F L T, SAN F L A N C. l S C O . C A l i F O R r41 A 94106 TF LE PHONE (415) ' 81 -4 ? l l

/

~

p.O boa 74. SAN F F A N C I SC O, C ALIF G R NI A 941:0 T E LE COPIE R (415) 543 7813 ROHEHT OHLDACH am iwra e v=a,at1> Nti

, , ,a.

C H A N L E S T. V AN DEUSEN - * ' * # * ' '

PHiLePA.GRANE,wR- " , , '

, . a

=;.,* ,,a** 1 7, , , ]

H P N R Y J. Le PL AN TE u, = * * ~ ~*

7---a , ,,,,'*g,,,, ,,. "f**

" . ' . ~ . ' . " , [ ([ .

JoHm n.oisson [,,*^^'--  ;

31,$ f , = ";***"',,

, ;V ARTHUR L.HILLMAN.JH.

, ,(* , , ,

^;' ." s'.'( L'=

LHARLES W T HI S S E L L *  %

. , . se ae v= a=

^" '

^ ' ' '

JAc S 'AL7 2 ". March 12,1982 JOSEPH I MEltY W -

fir. R. H. Engelken, Regional Administrator E 4 Office of Inspection and Enforcement

  • Region V Cl RECEIVED ,3 3 U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Conaission 2 w- --:

1450 ffaria Lane, Suite 210

,$ g .OI982 b -

T E 3 Walnut Creek, CA 94596 - nyffg 6- 4j l Re: Docket No. 50-275, OL-DPR-76 % g g Docket No. 50-323 y g Diablo Canyon Units 1 and 2 Pipe Supports Base Plate Design -- IEB-79-02 $.

Dear f1r. Engelken:

This is an interia response to your letter dated February 5, 1982 (attached). We are preparing procedures to perform tests and review quality control records to provide you with the information requested in your letter.

The attachment to this letter is pr .vi.'ed as a brief status report and contains an outline of PGandE's p.T a 1 iction and the status of the review of IE Bulletin 79-02. We expect ,,aaplete our work for Diablo Canyon Unit 1 and provide you with a ff* ' report, containfrig the information requested, by April 30, 1982. The .ork and final report for Unit 2 will be completed at a later date.

Very truly yours, Attachment b s /

cc (w/ enc.): Service List 8203220312 820312 PDR ADOCK 05000275 h\

G PDR

I. .

l ATTACHMENT (The numbers below correspond to the items listed in Attachment I to the February 5,1982 NRC letter) 1.1 Completion of Modifications for Unit 1 We have completed the Diablo Canyon Urlt 1 pipe support modiff-cations required to comply with the NRC I&E Bulletin 79-02, excluding resolution of issues raised by the February 5,1982 NRC letter.

1.2 Completion of Modifications and Analysis for Unit 2 The Unit 2 pipe support analysis and modification are 10% com-plete.

2. Current Status of Unit 2 Modifications Unit 2 modifications are approximately 10% complete.
3. Cyclic Loads No additional response required.

4.1 Preload and Embedment Depth The number of stud-type expansion anchors installed before August 1977 will be detemined from quality control records. We will then measure by sample testing:

o Existing preload (by torque-wrench method), and o Embedment depth (by ultrasonic testing).

4.2(a) "Almost Exclusively" Our records will be reviewed to determine the percentage of shell-type and stud-type expansion anchors used at Diablo Canyon before 1977. This will quantify the "almost exclusively" state-ment in our December 3,1980 letter to you.

4.2(b) Thread Engagement The stripping-strength for shell-type anchors will be determined by test. The load capacity of each type of shell expansion anchors used will be measured to verify that engagement of four threads provides stripping-strength that assures a minimum safety factor of 5 above design load.

y _

1

(. . .

7

5. Use of Expansion Anchors in Concrete Block Walls No additional response required.
6. Structural Steel Shapes Instead of Base Plates The relative percentage of pipe supports which have bases made of structural steel shapes instead of plates, will be deter-mined. These were previously reviewed for compliance to IE Bulletin 79-02.

NOTE: In our review of pipe supports with expansion anchors and bases made of structural steel shanes, we have taken into account the flexibility of structural shapes, and we have com-plied with the safety factors required between bolt design load and bolt ultimate capacity.

l

pd* "%, m ,,

8 o NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

  • E j REGION V o -

1440 BAAfuA LANE. Surft 240 e WuAufLIT CIMEK. CALP00BaA 94594

  • . 4*

February 5, 1982 Docket Nos. 50-275 [l3bE0 3" "-UI3 50-323 ((i3.0 !!d

Reub Tc: C rin To:

g nm NB D3 Sin WM JB:1 Pacific Gas and Electric Company

v. -) p p cp. jos *-

Ju P. O. Box 7442 ya p; a San Francisco, California 94120 .it t m.i p'j..,

, .1 "" ..

C00 C"3 r v . ---

""'""3 Attention: Mr. Philip A. Crane, Jr. ccw uvy txi.a con 0:sim Assistant General Counsel RLK f!LE:

Gentlemen:

Subfact: COMMENTS ON PG&E RESPONSE TO IE BULLETIN 79-02, " PIPE SUPPORT BASE PLATE DESIGN USING CONCRETE EXPANSION ANCHOR BOLTS" Re f: (a) IE Bulletin 79-02, " Pipe Support Base Plate Design Using Concrete Expansion Anchor Bolts" of March 8,1979 (b) PG&E letter of December 3,1980, Re: NRC IE Bulletin 79-02, Rev. 2 (c) NRC letter of November 28, 1979 Re: Consnents on PG&E Response to IE Bulletin 79-02 (d) NRC letter of October 9, 1980, Re: NRC Inspection at Diablo Canyon (e) PG&E letter of July 20,1979, Re: Diablo Canyon Units 1 and 2 (f) PG&E letter of September 19, 1979, Re: Diablo Canyon Units 1 and 2 l

The subject bulletin, reference (a), requested PG&E to perfonn certain actions to verify accurate design loads and adequate installation of concrete expansion bolts used in seismic Category I pipe supports and to report the results of those actions to the NRC. Subsequently, Revision 1, Supplement 1, and Revision 2 were issued which provided some details, clarifications, and in the case of Revision 2, new requirements. Refer-ence (b) is the current PG&E response to IE Bulletin 79-02. Reference (b) also responds to references (c) and (d) which were NRC comments to references (e) and (f), PG&E's initial responses to the bulletin.

l l

y;f2;& DGN" 1

FEg 5 1982 Your referenced responses to IE Bulletin 79-02 have been reviewed by the NRC Region Y staff. However, before we can complete our evaluation of the actions you have taken in response in the requests contained within IE Bulletin 79-02, it will be necessary for you to provide us with the additional infonnation identified in Attachment I of this letter.

To enable NRC Region V to complete a timely review of your IE Bulletin 79-02 actions, please submit to me the information identified in Attachment I prior to March 12, 1982.

ng e O gio 1 dministHa tor

Attachment:

As Stated bec: CPUC Applications 49051 and 50028 bbec: Diablo Distribution NOTE: MR. J. B. HOCH - Please prepare reply s

l l

I

. _ _ - , , . , . - . , - . - - - - ~ ~ - - - ~ ~ ' * ~ ~' #- -

i NRC RV Review of PG4E Responses to IE Bulletin 79-02 The specific requirements of IE Bulletin 79-02 and the corresponding PG8E responses are sumarized below. Additional information required by NRC Region V to continue its review of PG&E actions taken is identified.

1. Bulletin paragraph 1: Verify. pipe support base plate flexibility was accounted for in the calculation of anchor bolt loads. A description of the analytical model used is to be submitted.

PG&E Response: Base plate flexibility has been taken into account in the calculation of bolt loads. Teledyne Engineering per-formed the calculations for 1376 pipe supports for Unit 1.

The analytical model used has been provided. A number of supports in Unit I required modification.

Information Reouired by NRC Reg'( _:

1) Notification of completion of modifications for Unit 1.
2) Notification of completion of analysis and modifications for Unit 2.
2. Bulletin paragraph 2: Verify minimum anchor bolt factors of safety have been achieved.

PG&E Response: The bulletin safety factors have been verified in the calculations of the anchor bolt loads for Unit 1. 241 pipe supports required modifications for Unit I to achieve the factors of safety.

Information Required by NRC Region V: Current status of Unit 2 modifications.

3. Bulletin paragraph 3: Describe the design requirements for cyclic loads.

PG&E Response: The load combinations used to calculate bolt loads l are described.

l Information Required by NRC Region V: None

4. Bulletin paragraph 4: Verify from existing QC documentation or from a sampling testing program that anchor bolts are preloaded i and are properly installed.

PG&E Response: The preloading of shell type anchor bolts was verified by a field test sample of shell type anchors. For Hilti Kwik Bolts and other stud type anchors PG&E states that Attachment I Page 1 of 3

l e a

the torque values specified in the 1973 Edition of the Phillips Red Head Anchoring System Catalog were applied since August of 1977. For stud type anchor installations prior to August of 1977, acceptance of preload is based on the sampling done on shell type anchors.

Discussion:

' The bulletin requires some specific QC documentation that anchors are torqued to at least design load and that proper embedment is achieved after torquing. The PG&E position, in paragraph 3.F. of Attachment I to reference (b), states that Kwik bolts were installed with an " average filter installation torque" prior to August of 1977, when a torque value was first prescribed at Diablo, and that the " average filter installation torque" for stud type anchors had been detemined by testing the shell anchors of that period. The PG&E position does not address the fact that, while shell anchors do not have a tendency to pull out of their holes, Kwik bolt or stud type anchors do have that tendency. Experience has shown that craftsmen tend to stop torquing once a stud anchor tended to pull out of its hole. Paragraph 7 of Attachment I to reference (b),

states' that starting in 1977 stud type anchors were installed per " Instruction Number 98, Revision 0 dated January 21, 1977, which mandated...embedment depth". As previously pointed out in reference (d), Instruction Number 98 of January 21, 1977 did not mandate embedment depth-or torque. These requirements appeared in the July 27, 1977 revision. In regard to proper installation of Kwik bolt (or stud type) anchors, it does not appear that sufficient verification was provided which assures that embedment depths assumed in analysis were achieved in the field installations.

In reference to shell type anchors (e.g. HD0 or Phillips Red Head Self Drilling) further clarification is required regarding thread engagement adequacy. Re.ference (b), Attachment I,

paragraph 4c references J. E. Shigley "Nechanical Engineering Design" 3rd Edition, Section 6-8, page 252, as the justification that only three threads of engagement are necessary to achieve

! full bolt strength. The discussion by Shigley is general in nature and does not address specific material or application.

The inspector's calculations for sample sizes of Phillips Red Head Anchors show that approximately five threads of engagement are required for full bolt strength, but that four threads of engagement will provide sufficient bolt stripping strength to i provide factors of safety from three to four above the maximum allowable design loads listed in reference (b), Attachment II.

Reference (b) Attachment I, paragraph 7 states that prior to 1977, shell type anchors were "almost exclusively" used.

Attachment I Page 2 of 3 l, -- - - - . -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Infornation Required by NRC Region V:

(1) Fcr stud type anchors - Verification, from existing QC documenta-tion or from a sampling testing program, that stud type anchors installed prior to August, 1977 are preloaded to design load and are properly installed (correct embedment depth, torque, etc.).

(2) For thell type anchors - a numerical quantification of the term "almost exclusively", and an assessment of the stripping strength factors of safety achieved at Diablo Canyon for shell type anchors.

5. Bulletin paragraph 5: Determine the extent that expansion anchors were used in concrete block walls.

PG&E Response: No seismic Category I' piping systems are mounted on concrete block walls using expansion anchors.

Information Required by NRC Region V: None

6. Bulletin paragraph 6: Determine the extent that pipe supports with expansion anchor bolts used structural steel shapes instead of base plates and verify the steel shapes are included in the bulletin actions.

PG&E Response: None Informa,fon Required by NRC Region V: PG&E needs to provide a response to IE Bulletin 79-02, Rev. 2, paragraph 6.

l l

Attachment I Page 3 of 3

-.___._ . . _ - . . -