ML20071H987

Forwards Objectives for 820316 Nrc/Fema Observed Emergency Exercise

ML20071H987
Person / Time
Site:	Oyster Creek
Issue date:	01/21/1982
From:	Carroll J GENERAL PUBLIC UTILITIES CORP.
To:	Haynes R NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I)
Shared Package
ML20050B624	List: ML20050B623 ML20071H987
References
NUDOCS 8204060152
Download: ML20071H987 (5)

Text

T

j'O R y

MAR 2 91983 Docket No.: 50-275 4

+

MEMORANDUM FOR: Chaiman Palladino-Comissioner Gilinsky Comissioner Ahearne Comissioner Roberts 4

Comissioner Asselstine FROM:

Darrell G. Eisenhut, Director Division of Licensing Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation

SUBJECT:

INFORMATION ITEMS REGARDING THE DESIGN VERIFICATION PROGRAM FOR DIABLO CANYON, UNIT 1 (Board Notification No. 43-41 )

In accordance with the present NRC procedures for Board Notifications, the following items are enclosed for infomation of the Comission:

1.

R. L. Cloud Associates Open Item Reports, March 10, 1983 i

2.

R. L. Cloud Associates, "ITR 40 - Soil-Intake Structure Sliding Resistance," March 10, 1983 l

3.

Stone & Webster Engineering Corporation, SWEC March Semi-monthly Report DCS-332Q (Ouality Assurance), March 11,1983 4.

Stone & Webster Engineering Corporation SWEC March Semi-monthly Report DCS 334, March 11,1983 5.

Teledyne Engineering Services, IDVP Semi-monthly Report, March 11, 1983 6.

R. F. Reedy Inc., Semi-monthly Report #25, March 16,1983 7.

Stone & Webster Engineering Corporation, "ITR 38 (Rev.1) - Final Report on Construction Quality Assurance Evaluation of Wismer &

Becker," March 18, 1983 8.

NRC Trip Report, Memorandum fmm H. Polk to G. Lear, dated March 23, 1983 C'304060152 830329 PDR'ADOCK 05000275 P

PDR

Contact:

Hans Schierling, ONRR X27100 or,,ce, sunnAus >

our>

nac ronu ais oo-soi nncu c24o OFFICIAL RECORD COPY-usom ini-m.co

o The Comission.

n The enclosures provide infomation on the status of activities performed under the Independent Design Verification Program (IDVP) for Diablo Canyon Unit 1 by the participating organizations. The information is relevant to the safety issue on the design adequacy of Diablo Canyon Unit 1.

This is the subject of Comission Order CLI-81-30 which is the basis for the IDVP.

The material does not pertain to those matters that were raised by ALAB-644.

p_igir.-3 c t ed 4

.t p:.;;uu c..

Darrell G. Eisenhut, Director Division of Licensing Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation i

Enclosures:

As stated cc:

J. F. Wolf, ASLB G. O. Bright ASLB J..Kline, ASLB T. S. Moore, ASLAB W. R. Johnson, ASLAB J. H. Buck, ASLAB SECY OGC OPE Parties to Proceedinq Distribution:

See attached sheet Y

/

T a

i h

y M

\\M n

Oki DL:LB#3il DL B#3 D

1 I

L

@L:

omce>

on T

DE surname > Schi e rl i.......

..L..'.............G 3../.....L......../. 8. 3..

3../....1..../. 8.3...

3^"

/83 lh.)/83 3/

..3.././.h/83 1

oney

- NRC FORM 318 (10-80) NHCM 0240

.OFFIClAL RECORD COPYI'

. usam mi-ass.m

-s-

'6

'3, 4

e5 ROBERT L'. CLOUD ASSOCIATES. INC.

125 UNIVER$lTV AVENUE SERMELEY, CAllFC 4NIA 94710 44156 841 9236 P105-4 March 10, 1933 Mr. G. H. Maneatis, Executive Vice President Facilities and Electric Resources Development Pacific Gas and Electric Company 77 Beale Street San Francisco, California 94106 1

Mr. H.R. Denton, Director Office of fiuclear Reactor Regulation U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.

20555

~

j Mr. R.H. Engelken, Regional Administrator d

Region V U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 1450 Maria Lane, Suite 210 Walnut Creek, California 94596 Docket No. 50-275 i

'Diablo Canyon Unit 1 License No. DPR-76 Gentlemen:

Enclosed please find Open Item Reports 1114, 1115, and 1116 Revision 0, issued by Robert L. Cloud and Associates during the prior reporting ~

~

period.

As required by DCNPP-IDVP-PP-005, Revision 2, individuals assigned by this organization to the IDVP have completed an acceptance state-

~

ment regarding potential or apparent conflicts of interest.

Yours truly, F.h14&%

F,dward Denison

/-

Enclosure cc: R. Fray M. Strumwasser R. Reedy J. Reynolds-F. Sestak D. Fleischaker W

8. Norton N. Cooper H. Schierling A. Gehr.

h m 2t h t S. Hubbard o

i s a yg.

- d

.~.

~.

File Revision tio.

o

5. Date reported to PG&E and TES 2/15/83 2.

Scheduled for RLCA (Originator) Semimonthly Report No. _ March 3.

Responsive to PG&E Technical Program: Task -

(if applicable) 4.

Prepared as a result of:

a. O QA Audit and Review Report of b.. O Field Inspection Deficiency

c. O Independent Calculation Deficiency

d. O Seismic Input Deficiency

e. O Design Methodolo ggDeficiency-

f. O Other Deficiency 5.

Structure (s), system (s) or component (s) involved:

Auxiliary Saltwater Pump 6.

Description of Concern:

The-design analysis,for the auxiliary saltwater pump does not consider the virtual mass contribution of the water surrounding'on the submerged pump ' casing.

7.

Significance of Concern:

The verifi~ cation analysis considered the v i r t u a l.w a t e r.-

mass contribution and found all stresses to be below the allowable.

8.

Reccianendation:

Error Class C.

l l

1 l

i 6g f

g, O

en

w c'

OPEN ITEM REPORT

~ File flo.

1115 File Revision No.

0 1.

Date reported to PGLE and.TES 2/16/83 2.

Scheduled for RLCA (Origina tor) Semimonthly ~ Report No. March 3.

Responsive to PG&E Technical Program: Task (if applicable) 4.

Prepared as a result of:

a. O QA Audit and Review Repor of

b. O Field Inspection Deficiency

c. O Independent Calculation Deficiency

d. O Seismic Input Deficiency

e. O Design Methodology Deficiency

f. R Other Deficiency 5.

Structure (s), system (s) or component (s) involved:

Phase I Independent-Calculations - Pipe Supports 6.

Descriptien of Concern:

The PGandE Phase I Report provides for a complete review of all design class I large bore pipe supports by the DCP.

7.

Significance of Concern:

Comparison of'IOVP independent. calculations to' superseded DCP work will not provide meaningf.ul results.

i.

8.

Recornnendation:

This item combines w'ith E01-1098 as an Error-Class A or B.

The IOVP will review the OCP current activities as detailed in ITR #8, Rey.-0.

/

O O

's.. ~,isjna ture :

/6 ?) -(9e ig inat<>r/de ;;.aiizat iori)

OPEfi iTEt1 REPORI File flo.

1116 File Rev isi.on flo.

0 1.

Date reported to PG&E and TES 2/18/83 2.

Scheduled for RLCA (Originator) Semimonthly Report tio. }iarch 3.

Responsive to PG&E Technical Program; Task N/A (if applicable) 4.

Prepared as a result of:

a. O QA Audit and Review Report of

b. O Field Inspection Deficiency c.xs Independent Calculation Deficiency

d. O Seismic Input Deficiency

e. O Design t ethodology Deficiency

f. O Other Deficiency S.

Structure (s), system (s) or component (s) invcived:

Main Steam Isolation Valve FCV-41 6.

Description of Concern:

Results of' design and independent verification analysis differ by more than 15%.

~

7.. Significance of Concern:

All stresses below allowable.

8., Recornnendation:

Closed item.

y el r

f f

C

^

+

. 4-ROBERT L. CLOUD ASSOCIATES. INC.

115 UNIVERSITY AVENUE BERMELEY. CALIFORNIA 94790

.4:si.4i..a..

P105-4 March 10, 1983

/

Mr. G. H. Maneatis, Executive Vice~ President Facilities and Electric Resources Development Pacific Gas and Electric Company 77 Beale Street San Francisco, California 94106 Mr. H.R. Denton, Director Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.

20555

~

Mr. R.H. Engelken, Regional Administrator Region V U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 1450 Maria Lane, Suite 210 Walnut Creek, California 94596 Docket No. 50-275 Diablo Canyon Unit 1 License No. DPR-76 Gentlemen:

Enclosed please find Interim Technical Report No. 40 on Soils-Intake Structure Sliding Resistance issued by Robert L. Cloud Associates for the Independent Design Verification Program, (P105-4-839-040).

Yours truly, Edward Denison Enclosure cc: R. Fray-M.'Strumwasser R. Reedy J.-Reynolds F. Sestak D. Fleischaker W. Cooper B. Norton-H. Schierling /

A. Gehr R...Hubbard.

ng w-

~

Robert L. Cloud and Associates, Inc i

l i

RLGA Interim Technical Report i

DIAED CANYON UNIT 1 INDEFENDDTI DESIGN VERIFICATION PROGRAM SOIIS REPORT - INTAKE SIRUCIUE SLIDING RESISTANCE ITR f 40 REVISION O L

Docket No. 50-275 License No. DPR-76

/*

Dr. R. McNeill Technical Raview w b 3/7/63 h a h s/9/s3 Pro.]ec

/Date Project Manager /Date T

Review h uvud P 105-4-839-040 hv 5I'v0 D ld y;,,

W TELEDfME ENGSEERNGSEMCES i

s.

PRO MAN MANAGER'S PREFACE DIABLO CANYON NUCLEAR POWER PLANT - UNIT 1 INDEPENDENT DESIGN VERIFICATION PR06/JM INTatIN TECf5tICAL REPORT SOILS - INTAKE $1RUCitNIE SLIDING RESISTANCE This is the fortieth of a series of Interim Technical Reports prepared by the DCNPP-IDVP for the purpose of providing a conclusion of the program.

This report provides the review results and conclusions of the IDVP intake structure sliding with respect to the review of soils resistance.

No E01 files were initiated as a result of this IDVP verification effort.

As IDVP Progran Manager, Teledyne Engineering Services has approved this ITR-40 including the conclusions presented.

The methodology followed by TES in performing this review and evaluation is describeh' in Appendix 8 to this report.

ITR Reviewed and Approved IDVP Progran Manager Teledyne Engineering Services f

S R. Wray Assistant Project Manager i

SOILS REPORT-INTAKE STRUCTURE, SLIDING RESISTANCE Contents i

)

Ease _HQ.

Program Manager's. Preface i

j List of Figures lii

)

}

1.0 Introduction

.1 i

Purpose and Scope 1

Summary 2

Background

2 4

i 2.0 IDVP Review Method and Results 5

l 2.1 HLA Specifications 8

2.2 IDVP Review and Calculations 8-i 2.3 IDVP/HLA Comparison 11 3.0 EOI Reports 13 4.0 Evaluation 13 1

5.0 Conclusion 13 l

6.0 References 14 Appendix A - Key Term Definitions l

Appendix B - Program Manager's Assessment i

e i

I ii s

e v--

- r

-.----,-w,,-

9, y-,

r y3--y y

4 i

Liat_of_Eigures Eigure_HQ.

Titia Eaga_No.

l 1

Intake Structure and Control 6

Building, Plan View 1

2 Intake Structure - Section View 7

A-A, Outline Only 4

3 Intake Structure Foundation, 9

i Plan Viey l

4 Intake Structure Foundation, 10 Profile A-A i

I i

l l

}

4 1

1 1

)

4 I

I*

l l

i l

I i

I I

)

111 l

)

~

t l

i.

1.0 INTRODUCTION

Purnosa and Sgggg j

This interim technical report summarizes the

~

review by the Independent Design verification l

Program (IDVP) of the sliding resistance, which is included in the soils analyses for.the intake i

4 structure at Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant, Unit 1 (DCNPP-1).

i The IDVP Phase I Plan specifies that Robert L.

C1'oud Associates review the soils analyses t

i performed by PGa'ndE's seismic service-related

^

contractor, Harding Lawson Associates (HLA).

For their soils analyses, HLA examined the following areas:

intake structure, outdoor water storage tanks, buried diesel fuel oil tanks and connecting lines, and buried auxiliary saltwater piping.

i For the intake structure, the HLA analyses included a lithology definition, backfill property definition, bearing capacicy calculations, lateral earth pressure calculations and sliding forces cal.culations.

All but the last of these subjects-has been verified and described in previous reports.

This report presents the IDVP review of the HLA postulated sliding surface and resistive forces.

This infermation was used in a subsequent structural review to determine the factor of safety I

against sliding.

The IDVP will address this subject in a later report on the structural review of the l

intake structure.

ITR #13, Revision 0, describes the IDVP review of bedrock depth determination,and backfill property definition for the intake structure (Reference 6).

ITR #39, Revision 0, describes the IDVP review of bearing capacity and lateral earth pressure (Reference 13).

The balance of the IDVP soils review both for the intake structure and the other areac will be

p. resented in separate ITRs.

These will include a j

review of possible changes that may have occurred which affect either the surface or. subsurface condition ' (e.g., additional roadways).

a 1

J

This report is one of several interim technical reports of the Independent Design Verification Program (IDVP).

Interim technical reports include references, sample definitions and descriptions, methodology, a listing of Error and Open Items, an examination of trends and concerns, and a conclusion (Reference 1).

This report presents the results of the IDVP intake building sliding resistance review and serves as a vehicle for NRC review.

It will also be referenced in the Phase I Final Report.

SWNBa&E The IDVP has compl'eted the review of the Harding Lawson Associates' (HLA) soils work for the DCNPP-1 intake structure.

The IDVP performed independent calculations, examined HLA reports, and compared results.

Both the HLA postulated cliding surface and resistive forces were found to either agree with j

IDVP results or to give conservative results.

Therefore, the HLA intake sliding. resistance conclusions were determined to be acceptable.

Backaround On September 28, 1981 PGandE reported that a diagram error had been found in a portion of the seismic qualification of the Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant Unit 1.

This error resulted in an inco'rrect application of the seismic floor response spectra for sections of the annulus of the Unit 1 containment building.

The error originated when PGandE transmitted a sketch of Unit 2 to a seismic service-related contractor.

This sketch contained geometry incorrectly identified as Unit 1 geometry.

o 2

-, - -. ~ _ =

-.,=-n---,.

x.,--,__

, As a result of this error, a seismic rever-ification program was established to determine if 4

the seismic qualification of the plant was adequate for the postulated Hosgri 7.5M earthquake.

This l

program was presented orally to the NRC in a meeting in Bethesda, Maryland on October 9, 1981.

Robert L. Cloud and Associates (RLCA) presented a preliminary report on the seismic reverification i

program to the NRC on November 12, 1981 (Reference 2). This report dealt with an examination of the

{

interface between URS/Blume and PGandE.

The NRC commissioners met during the week of November 16, 1981 to review the preliminary report and the overall situation.

On November 19, 1981 an Order Suspending License CLI-81-30 was issued which suspended PGandE's license to load fuel and conduct low power tests up to 5% of rated power at DCNPP-1.

This suspending order also specified that an independent design verification program be 1

conducted to ensure that the plant met the licensing criteria.

PGandE retained Robert L. Cloud and Associates as program manager to develop and implement a program that would address the concerns cited in the order suspending license CLI-81-30.

The Phase 3

I Plan for this program was transmitted to the NRC staff in December 1981 and discussed on February 3, 1962.

Phase I deals with PGandE internal activities and seismic service-related contracts prior to June 1978.

On March 19, 1982 the NRC approved Teledyne Engineering Services (TES) as program manager to replace Robert L. Cloud and Associates (RLCA).

However, RLCA continued to perform the independent review of seismic, structural, mechanical and geotechnical aspects of Phase I.

3 4

)

l The NRC approved the Independent Design Veri-fication Program Phase I Engineering. Program Plan i

on April 27, 1982 (Reference 3).

This plan l

dictates that a sample of piping, equipment, j

structures and components be selected for independent analysis.

The results of these analyses are to be compared to the design analyses 1

results.

If the acceptance criteria is exceeded, an Open Item Report is to be filed.

Interim j

technical reports are to be issued to explain the progress of different segments of the technical work.

i l

As part of Phase I Program, Roger F. Reedy, Inc. (RFR) performed a quality assurance (QA) review of PGandE and seismic service-related i

contractors prior to June 1978 which included the j

firm of Harding Lawson Associates (HLA).

The results of these QA reviews showed that Harding _

Lawson Associates did not implement a quality assurance program for the DCNPP-1-soils work.

As a i

result, RLCA and Dr. Robert McNeill formulated a i

review program to verify the HLA soils work (Reference 4).

1 In addition to the intake structure, the balance of the review program included the outdoor water storage tanks, auxiliary saltwater piping and a

diesel fuel oil tanks.

For the outdoor water i

storage tanks, the HLA analysis included a j

lithology definition, material property definition and bearing capacity calculations.

The IDVP re' view of this HLA work is presented in ITR #16, Revision 0 l

(Reference 5).

For the auxiliary saltwater piping and diesel fuel oil tanks, the HLA analyses i

included a lithology definition, material property a

definition and finite element analysis.

For intake structure, the HLA analyses included a lithology definition, backfill property definition, lateral earth pressure calculations, sliding force calculations and bearing capacity calculations.

ITR #13, Revision O presents the IDVP review of the bedrock depth and backfill property definition for the HLA intake structure analyses (Reference 6).

ITR'#39, Revision O presents the 3

IDVP review of the HLA lithology definition, bearing capacity and lateral earth pressure calculations for the intake, structure (Reference 13).

4 J

____--___*=v--,_-,es.m--__m-%w_

_.-,,-,.w-w,--mwgw%m,,,,-,4-m.,,,m,c,--

..,-,ymm,,a m e:w

' ar a gw smae

?e*

-'s w e- -

g y

2.0 IDVP REVIEW METHOD AND RESULTS s

Robert L. Cloud and Associates, together with Dr. Robert McNeill, reviewed HLA work, which i

consisted of postulating the sliding surface and determining resistive forces. -RLCA engineers and Dr.

Robert McNeill also toured the DCNPP site to examine exposed rock and in-situ backfill.

The intake structure is a reinforced concrete building 240 feet by 100 feet by 50 feet.

It is founded on a grout mudmat poured neat to bedrock.

Three sides have been backfilled to grade.

Figure 1 shows a plan view of the intake structure and control building.

Figure 2 shows the section view cf the intake structure.

These figures include approximate dimensions and elevations.

e e

n 5

I p

l l

rue North 108 feet 11 inches r

=

m iteference North s

i I

nn nn l

a Intake Structure 23 feet 0 inches Control Building s

l A+

l l

l

\\

c i

I o

Intake Structure 104 feet 2 inches

- )

\\

if Ae 239 feat 4 inches

=

=

Figure 1 Intake Structure and Control Building Plan View 6

)

m c,.m.

---

=ar e

mam

u. e. p w--hw w m a.ww a.

n i

l i

l l

104 feet 2 inches Top Deck Elevation

+17.5 feet s

- +i Backfill Mean Water 6s Level Elevation Intake Structure 0.0 fe t

-' - SeVrock

-18.5 feet Bedrock j Elevation -38.5 fee \\

-31.5 feet t

Figure 2 Intake Structure - Section View A-A Outline Only 7

.som m--ma nnema u L= W eev - *a a. e w urWN w-de s

.w.-

w, v.

_gw

-='m_

m mm a-

__p,,,_,,

4 j

2.1 EL&_SERGifiGatiQns In 1978, Harding Lawson Associates (HLA) determined the l

postulated sliding surface and resistance factors for the intake building (References 8 and 9).

Postulated sliding

).

surface was' defined-as shearing action through the bedrock between the two shear keys (see Figures 3 and 4).

Resistance factors included:

}

o Resistance to shear between the two shear keys.

4 I

l o Resistance to sliding along the remaining length of the base as.(weight reduce ~d by the effect of vertical acceleration) times (tangent of-the angle of internal friction).

o Resistance to sliding due to passive pressure on the western shear key as (2) times (cohesion).

i 2.2 IDVP Review and Calculagiggg

\\

j To verify the HLA work, the IDVP postulated the j

sliding surface and determined the resistance factors for j

the intake structure (Reference 10).

l Figure 3 shows the interface between the intake i

structure and the bedrock which the IDVP determined by j

reviewing the' concrete lift-pour drawings.

The IOVP postulated the sliding surface shown in Figure 4.

8 The IDVP determined three resistance factors:

}

l1 o Resistance to shear between the two shear keys.

i o Resistance to sliding along the remaining length j

of the base as (buoyant weight reduced by the i

effect of vertical acceleration) times

!l

{ coefficient of friction =.6).

o Passive pressure west of the outboard resistance i

along a 2 to 1 horizontal to vertical slope.

{

l j

i 8

4 4

l j

d a

u a

1 m

j nil N

\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\

,(,\\

l E

A 2

Pumps

\\ \\\\\\

\\\\

n elevation - 38 ft y

_16 ft_

h

\\ 91 ft N\\\\

.\\_

i AN\\\\\\\\NNNN\\\\\\

n 4

107 ft R

~

13 ft

+

a j

g elevation - 34.5 ft

[,

(

i n

)

N"

\\ \\ \\ \\ \\ \\ \\ \\ \\ \\ Tp I _ 34.5

% ' N N \\ \\ 1 120 ft 1

Unit Unit Bed rock surface I (

i elevation

- 31.5 ft i

i i

i i

Legend 1

i

\\\\\\

Shear key 1

i l

l l

Figure 3 Intake Structure Foundation l

Plan View

' a ?"* M

• e W+Nh*.wamw g P eWreP4,pWydrc _

_N,.

_,yp1P%63DM# N4Mubwr,1,,

t i

North h

East

=

• ^

(Pumps h=7 ft

- 2h=14 ft-Shear key Shear key S

,x3 y _i s

r Shear Shear Friction Friction Legend

__-_ Postulated sliding surface d* *

• Bedrock 4

Figure 4 Intake Structure Foundation Profile A-A 10 e

v es e e or

~ w e -* - e 4 -e -www e ateer - ' 'T - e e 'se + SP M vtM 84 M - ury tw< -vs'9 e a94 rwe - e-t ' - t serve e rmr t=-

+

ene-'c -

• v

.As

-:9e e-=**e t-g e e'

. e ir

~

2.3 IDYEZHL&_ Comparison

~

A comparison of the IDVP and HLA methods for postulating sliding surface and determining resistive forces showed that the two analyses were similiar with the following three exceptions:

1. The IDVP accounted for the resistive action west of the outbcard key as shear along a 2 to I horizontal to vertical slope. HLA accounted for this action by calculating (2) times cohesion (c).

Ehearing_Besistance_to_ Sliding in. Western _ Shear _Kex i

I HLA IDYE 2 (c) h c V h2 + (2h)2 2 (3ksf) 7 ft 3 ksf (15.7 ft)

= 42 k/ft

= 47 k/ft where c = 3 ksf h = 7 ft (see Figure 4)

2. The IDVP used a 0.6 frictional coefficient.

This frictional coefficient corresponds to,

concrete on gravel or coarse sand (Reference 11) and will yield conservative values.

BLA used a tangent of the angle of friction of the rock material.

This angle (30 degrees) is discussed in ITR #39 (Reference 13).

EIictional_Besistance_to_ Eliding along_Bemaining_ Length _of_Hase HLA IQYE Tan (d) 0.6 (Reference 11)

Tan 30 degrees =.58

3. The IDVP explicitly defined the structure's buoyant weight.

Although HLA did not specifically address buoyant weight, subsequent design calculations for factor of safety against sliding considered buoyant weight effects (Reference 12).

11 l '

V.M-

-""9'-"

'PW*3

• -+

f g

iP**%=

'e*_.

4

_'"'*'g M

'_-**'dt'*#N"

• "? T*ty*,

2 p,

---

r 2

l The differences in the HLA and IDVP results have been examined.

As shown previously, the HLA results for cases 1 and 2 produce smaller (conservative) resistive forces.

While the HLA results did not explicitly specify a bouyant structural weight, the IDVP determined that it was considered in a subsequent design analysis.

Therefore, this difference had no impact.

O 0

0 e

9 i

m 12 2

i O

l 3.0 EOI REPORTS

\\

No EOI reports were issued as a result of the IDVP verification of the intake structure sliding resistance.

4.0 EVALUATION The IDVP examined the HLA soils work for the intake structure related to the sliding resistance.

A review of the HLA specifications for postulated sliding surface and resistive forces was conducted and independent calculations were performed.

A comparison of IDVP and HLA results shows the HLA sliding resistance work to be acceptable.

5.0 CONCLUSION

The HLA soils work related to sliding resistance of the intake structure has be.en found acceptable by the IDVP.

e 13 e

i m' 9M--"M"@9'$-

1-Y""

.9 4*'_

[""""VC"'$-W"***N"O'*

?* 7'

"-""'"'M*

W"'

J#"'

-"'N' "612W'N

-P*61**

mittwm

• wew-

l, 4

-. =-

a e

l

6.0 REFERENCES

RLCA j-Baiaransas Title E_ile_No1 i.

l 1

DCNPP-1 Phase I Program Management Plan, Independent Design f

Verification Program, Revision 1, i

July 6, 1982 (Revision 0, March 29, I

1982).

l 2

" Preliminary Report, Seismic Reveri-P105-4-820-005 fication Program," Robert L. Cloud Associates, Inc., November 12, 1981.

l 3

DCNPP-1 Phase I Engineering Program Plan, Independent Design Verification i

Program, Revision 0, DCNPP-IDVP-PP-001, j

March 31, 1982.

i l

4 Program for Design Work Done by Harding Lawson Associates, Robert L.

1 Cloud Associates, Revision 0,,May l

28, 1982.

5

" Interim Technical Report, #16, P105-4-839-0161 i

Diablo Canyon Unit 1, Independent Design Verification Program, Soils-Outdoor Water Storage Tanks,"

Robert L. Cloud Associates, Inc'.,

4 Revision 0.

\\

j 6

" Interim Technical Report, #13, P105-4-839-013 1

Diablo Canyon Unit 1, Independent i

Design Verification Program, Soils-l Intake Structure," Robert L. Cloud Associates, Inc., Revision 0.

1 i

7 DCNPP-IDVP-PP-003 Preparation of j

Open Item Reports, Program 1

Resolution Reports, and IDV Completion Reports, Revision 1, June

)

]

18, 1982.

4 I

I i

^

14 l

---....:r.

.-..ey.-

y..-

,.. ~,. _ -.

J RLCA Befarensas Title Eile_Has 8

"Geotechnical Studies, Intake P105-4-449-001 Structure, Water Storage Tanks, Diesel Fuel Oil Storage Tanks, 1

Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant, San Luis Obispo County, California,"

Harding Lawson. Associates, April 12, 1978.

9 Letter of Transmittal, Harding-Lawson P105-4-449-049 Associates,.to URS/Blume, Intake (26,2'7 and 28) j Structure Sliding and Overturning i

s Resistance, March 30, 1978.

j 10 RLCA Calculation " Intake Structure-P105-4-515-014 Sliding Resistance" Revision O.

11

" Soils Mechanics, Its Principles and Structural Applications", Krynine, McGraw-Hill, Second Edition.

12 "Diablo Canycn Intake Structure, Log 2.2.2 Factor of Safety Against Overturning, Foundation Bearing Pressures," URS/Blume, November 13, 1978.

13

" Interim Technical Report, #39, P105-4-839-039 Diablo Canyon Unit 1, Independent Design Verification Program, Soils -

Intake Structure-Bearing Capacity and Lateral Earth Pressure," Robert L. Cloud Associat'es, Inc., Revision 0, I

h i

15 l

i j

i I

i i

RobertL. CloudandAssociates, Inc i

i l.

j l

l Appendix A Key Term Definitions

( 6 pages) i 1

l e

l l

l 1

1 i

j

. - ~ ~,.

s.-

KEY TERHS AND DEFINITIONS (The definitions in this glossary establish the meanings of words in the context of their use in this document.

These meanings in no way replace the specific legal and licensing definitions.)

Closed Item

- A form of program resolution of an Open Item which indicates that the reported. aspect is neither an Error nor a Deviation.

No further IDVP action is required (from Reference 7).

Completion Report

- Used to indicate that the IDVP effort related to the Open Item identified by the File Number is complete.

It references either a Program Resolution Report which recategorized the item as a Closed Item or a PGandE document which states that no physical modification is to be applied in the case of a Deviation or a Class D Error (from Reference 7).

DCNPP-1

. - Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant Unit 1 Design Codes

- Accepted industry standards for design (ex. AISC, AISI, ANSI, ASME, AWWA, IEEE).

EOI

- Error and Open Item Report A-1 i

l c

6

Error Report

- An Error is a form of program resolution of an Open Item indicating an incorrect result that has been verified as such.

It may be due to a mathe-matical mistake, use of wrong analytical' method, omission of data or use of inapplicable data.

Each Error shall be classified as one of the following:

o Class A: An Error is considered Class A if design criteria or operating limits of safety related.

equipment are exceeded and, as a result, physical modifications or changes in operating procedures are required.

Any PGandE corrective action is subject to verification by the IDVP.

]

o Class B: An Error is considered Class B if design f

criteria or operating limits of safety related equipment are exceeded, but are resolvable by means of more realistic calculations or retesting.

Any PGandE corrective action is subject to veri-fication by the IDVP.

o Class C: An Error is considered Class C if incorrect engineering or installation of safety related equipment is found, but no design criteria or operating limits are exceeded.

No physical modifications are required, but if any are applied they are subject to verification by the IDVP.

o Class D: An Error is considered Class D if safety related equipment is not affected.

No physical modifications are required, but if any are applied, thef are subject to verification by the IDVP (From Reference 7).

i A-2 9

.. ~

~,

-_t,

.?

e FSAR 4

- PG&ndE's Final Safety Analysis Report Hoagri Criteria

- Licensing criteria referring specifically to the postulated'7.5M Hosgri earthquake.

Hosgri Report

- A report issued by PGandE that summarizes their evaluation of-the DCNPP-1 for the postulated Hosgri 7.5M earthquake.

Includes seismic licensing criteria.

Hosgri 7.5M Earthquake

- Maximum earthquake for which the plant is designed to remain functional.

Same as Safe Shutdown Earthquake (SSE)..

Interim Technical Report

- Interim technical reports are prepared when a.

program participant has completed an aspect of their assigned effort in order to provide the completed analysis and conclusions.

These may be in support of an Error, Open Item or Program Interim Technical Report ' (cont.)

Resolution Report or in support of a portion of the work which verifies acceptability.

Since such a report is a conclusion of the program, it is subject to the review of the l

Program Manager.

The report will be trans-mitted simultaneously to PGandE and to the NRC i

(from Reference 1).

NRC

. Nuclear Regulatory Commission A-3 4

i

,l

'l

_;..n =.,

..a,.

I l

l NRC Order Suspending License CLI-81-30

- The order dated November 19, 1981 that sus-l

~

pended the license to load fuel and operate l

DCNPP-1 at power levels up to 5% of full power and specified the programs that must be completed prior to lifting of the suspension.

Open Item 1

- A concern that has not been verified, fully understood and its significance assessed.

The forms of program resolution of an Open Item are recategorization as an Error, as a Deviation, or as a closed. Item (from Reference 7).

PGandE

- Pacific Gas and Electric Company Phase I Program

- Review performed by RLCA, RFR, and TES restricted to verifying work performed prior to June 1978 related to the Hosgri re-evaluation design activities of PGandE and their seismic service-related contractors.

1 Potential Program Resolution Report and Potential Error Report

- Forms used for communication within IDVP.

Program Resolution Report

- Used to indicate that the specific item is no longer active in the IDVP.

It indicates whether the resolution is a closed Item, a Deviation, or that responsibility for an Open Item has been transferred to the PGandE Technical Program.

Further IDVP action is required upon completion of the associated PGandE Technical Program Task j

if the IDVP transfers an Open Item to PGandE or if physical modifications are applied with respect to a deviation (Reference 7).

A-4

~

- ~ ~

- - - - - -. mEwwssmaw

. - w r,w w.v.,-w,

- m r.

r a, ux psry

)

j RLCA l

- Robert L. Cloud and Associates, Inc.

j Sample 1

- Initial Sample stipulated in Phase I Program of equipment, components, and buildings to be design verified by independent analysis.

l Sampling Approach i

- Method used by the IDVP to determine the initial sample (buildings, piping, equipment and compon-ents) for analysis and to provide for sample j

expansion when required.

i SSE I

j

- Safe Shutdown Earthquake:

Maximum earthquake i

for which the plant is designed to remain

{

functional (Hosgri 7.5M).

l Seismic

- Refers to earthquake data.

Shear l

- Slicing motion parallel to plane of reference.

i j

Shear keys

- Structural member set in a slot or groove to resist planar forces.

1 Sliding resistance

- Resistance of base to sliding of a structure.

l l

TES

- Teledyne Engineering Services i-i i

A-5 i,

9 i

r

-y e

__v e

1

m l

' Verification Program 3

- Undertaken by the IDVP to evaluate Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant for compliance with the licensing criteria.

I v.

e l

l 4

i A-6 1

a

..... -._ __,__,.,...-- a_ewmss w:,

t l

RobertL. Cloud andAssociates, Inc 1

i

)

1 i

g i

I 1

1 Appendix B Program Manager's Assessment (1 page)

U

./

j

/

8 4

I O

i i

G

/

t

.. [,

m.

TN ENGNEERNG SBWICES PROGRAM MANAGER'S ASSESSiiENT As program manager of the Independent Design Verification Program, TES has reviewed the work of RLCA personnel and l

Dr. Robert McNeill in developing this Interim Technical Report.

The review activities of TES conform to the re-quirements of the Phase I Program Management Plan DCNPP-1 and the TES Engineering Procedure EP-1-014.

TES conducted the following tasks, in order to verify the 4

review methodologies employed, and final content of this ITR:

1)

A complete review and editorial comments were provided to RLCA'on drafts of this ITR.

2)

A general review of selected literature and background documents was conducted.

The items presented in this Interim Technical Report are considered complete and this ITR is therefore approved.

s TES will continue to review the progress of the RLCA and McNeill work related to the soils review program.

e B-1 s

. ~ -. -.

-4

.--u%.

... ~ _.

s.,+.

e STONE S WEBSTER ENGINEERING CORPORATdOM 245 SUMMER STREET. B o SToN. MASSACHUSETTS N=.

ADDRESS ALL CORRESPONDENCE TO P.O. DOX 2325. BOSTON. M ASS. 02107 W.U, TELEX: 94 0001 m r.

8 C NSimuCTION o aavam as afschs

'"'u".','o

'i"'.0!%.

0."#^*%."I,'!"

Mr. G. A. Maneatis, Executive Vice President March 11, 1983 Facilities Development Pacific Gas and Electric Company J.O. No. 14296,10 77 Beale Street DCS-332Q San Francisco, CA 94106

" Mr. H. R. Denton, Director Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.

20555 Mr. R. H. Engelken, Regional Administrator Region V U.S. Nuclear' Regulatory Commission 1450 Maria Lane, Suite 210 Walnut Creek, CA 94956 Dr. W. E. Cooper Teledyne Engineering Services 130 Second Avenue Waltham, MA 02254 Docket No. 50-275 Diablo Canyon Unit 1 License No. DPR-76 SWEC MARCH SEMIMONTHLY REPORT Gentlemen:

SWEC has issued no Open Its. Reportr n tred to the Construction Quality Assurance Evaluation since the Febr: E

-e anthly Report.

Very truly yours, f

F. Sestak, Jr.

Project Manager, Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant Enclosure cc:

H. Schierling (2)

D.F..Fleischaker

'R.R. Fray J.R. Reynolds R.F. Reedy.

B. Norton E.T. Denison A.C. Gehr M.J. Strumwasser Mp 2_ m,, e i n

~ ].-

"w " T.. ()

U

~

i

. $' b..

70 \\

STONE 6 WEBSTER ENGINEERING CORPORATION 245 SUMMER STREETt BOSTON. M ASSACH U SETTG E

ADDRESS ALI. CORRESPONDENCE TO P.O. BOX 2325. BOSTON. M ASS. 02107 W. U. T E L E X. 94 0001 N w oRK NSTRUCTtON CM ERRf MILL. N J.

REPORTS DENVER EX AMIN ATIONS CHIC AGO CONSULTING aD.ClEGON ORTL u

W ASHINGTON. D.C.

Mr. G.A. Maneatis,' Executive Vice President March 11, 1983 Facilities Devel'opment J.O.No. 14296 Pacific Gas and Electric Company DCS-334 77 Beale Street San Francisco, CA 94106 Mr. H.R. Denton, Director J Office of Nucicar Reactor Regulation U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.

20555 Mr. R.H. Engelken, Regional Administrator Region V U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 1450 Maria Lane, Suite 210, Walnut Creek, CA 94956 Dr. W.E. Cooper Teledyne Engineering Services 130 Second Avenue 2

Waltham, MA 02254 Docket No. 50-275 Diablo Canyon Unit 1 License No. DPR-76 SWEC MARCH SEMIMONTHLY REPORT s

Gentlemen:

Enclosed is the Open Item Report form (8064) issued by SWEC since our last Semimonthly Report.

V ry truly yours, g

Krechting roject Engineer, Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant nelosure l

ec:

H. Schierling (2)

D.F. Fleischaker R.R. Fray J.R. Reynolds R.F. Reedy B. Norton E.T. Denison A.C. Gehr-M.J. Strumwasser

.,;I

^2) >O D o4% U n I ft,

,m OPEN ITEM REPORT File No.

8064 File Revision No.

n 1.

Date reported to PG&E and TES 2/15/83 2.

Scheduled for we (Originator) Semimonthly Report No.

3.

Responsive to PG&E Technical Program:

Task (if applicable) 4.

Prepared as a result of:

a.- O QA Audit and Review-Report of

b. O Field Inspection Deficiency

c. O Independent Calculation Deficiency

d. O Seismic Input Deficiency

e. 23 Design Methodology Deficiency f.

Other Deficiency 5.

Structure (s), system (s) or component (s) involved:

Auxiliary Feedwater System Components POM 110, 111, 113 & 115 6.

Description of Concern:

POT & POM 110, 111, 113 & 115 are shown on instrumdat schematic 102036 sheets 8 & 8A as' Class 1A instruments. They are also listed in the September 1981 E. Q. report as safety related components not located in a severe environment. POT 113, 115 and POM 113 &l15 are located in area CE, a potentially severe environment. PG&E stated in a letter to R. L. Cloud, DCVP-RLCA-380, that they are not required to be. Class 1A safety-related components bu't were treated and installed as Class 1 devices for simplicity in wiring only. A comon circuit breaker provides AC control power to POM 113, 115, and HIC 72 and 73 as shown on dwg. 437507.

SWEC does not have documentation which indicates that POM 113 and POM 115 are environmentally qualified.

7.

Significance of Concern:

A failure of a non-qualified device, i.e. POM 113 or 115 may result in the tripping of the comon. circuit. breaker and loss of control., power to the auxiliary feedwater level control valves LCV, 113 and 115.

8.

Recortinendation:

~

l x

2l c

c un na rn ro.

(Originator / Organization)-

._