ML20085D892
| ML20085D892 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Shoreham File:Long Island Lighting Company icon.png |
| Issue date: | 07/26/1983 |
| From: | TELEDYNE ENGINEERING SERVICES |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20085D891 | List: |
| References | |
| TR-5633-4, NUDOCS 8307290163 | |
| Download: ML20085D892 (968) | |
Text
{{#Wiki_filter:~ 1 "RTELEDYNE TELEDYNE ENGit!EERING SERVICES CONTROLLED DOCUMENT TES PROJ. NO. _%33 , DATE 7'S7 M TECHNICAL REPORT TR-%33-4 FINAL REPORT INDEPENDENT DESIGN REVIEW FOR THE SHOREHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION BOOK 1 OF 3 JULY 22,1983 hDR O OOO 2 h PDR
LONG ISLAND LIGHTING COMPANY 175 EAST OLD COUNTRY ROAD HICKSVILLE, NEW YORK 11801 TECHNICAL REPORT TR-5633-4 FINAL REPORT INDEPENDENT DESIGN REVIEW FOR THE SHOREHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION BOOK 1 0F 3 JULY 22, 1983 1 I l i i l T TELEDYNE ENGINEERING SERVICES 130 SECOND AVENUE WALTHAM, MASSACHUSETTS 02254 617-890-3350
T F W NE ENGNEERNG SERVICES Technical Report TR-5633-4 TABLE OF CONTENTS BOOK 1 Page
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1 2.0 APPROACH 1 3.0 DEFINITIONS 4 3.1 Open Item (TES Internal) 5 3.2 Closed Item 5 3.3 Potential Finding (TES Internal) 5 3.4 Finding 5 3.5 Observation 5 4.0 SCOPE OF THE REVIEW 6 4.1 Task 1 - Design Process and Procedures 6 4.2 Task 2 - Review Design Requirements 7 4.3 Task 3 - Review As-Built Design Documents 7 4.4 Task 4 - Determine As-Built Plant Configuration 8 4.5 Task 5 - Compare As-Built Documentation to 9 Plant Configuration 4.6 Task 6 - Review LILCO QA and SWEC QA/QC/EA 9 Process and Documentation 5.0 REPORTING PROCESS 10 6.0 LILC0/SWEC RESPONSE APPROACH 13 7.0 RESULTS 14 7.1 Phase 1 15 7.2 Phase 2 15 7.3 Phase 3 16 7.4 Details of Items 16
8.0 CONCLUSION
S 17 l l
"M TF1FnYNE Technical Report ENGINEERING SERVICES TR-5633-4 TABLE OF CONTENTS (Cont'd)
BOOK 1 _ TABLES 1 -
SUMMARY
OF PHASE 1 REVIEW 2 -
SUMMARY
OF ITEMS - PHASE 2 FINDINGS ONLY 4 - LIST OF REVIEWED DOCUMENTS 3 - SUMMA FIGURES 2A1 --PHASE PORTION OF LPCS 1, PROJECT SYSTEM ORGANIZATION SUBJECT TO IDR 28 - PHASE 1, FLOWCHART 3A - PHASE 2/3, PROJECT ORGANIZATION 3B - PHASE 2/3, FLOWCHART APPENDICES. BOOK 1 1 - PROJECT QUALITY ASSURANCE PROGRAM 2 - ENGINEERING PROCEDURES B00K3 2 AND 3 3 - TIONS PROJECT REVIEW INTERNAL COMMITTEE, FINDING D
-BOOK 3 4 - RESOLUTIONS PROJECT REVIEW INTERNAL COMMITTEE ITEMS
, OBSERVATION DETAILS AND 5 - TRIP REPORTS
WF WNE ENGNEERING SERVCES Technical Report TR-5633-4
1.0 INTRODUCTION
This report presents the results of an Independent Design Review (IDR) performed by Teledyne Engineering Services (TES) at the request of Long Island Lighting Company (LILCO). The IDR was performed on a portion of the Low Pressure Core Spray (LPCS) System at the Shoreham Nuclear Power Station. The portion of the LPCS subject to the initial review is shown in Figure 1. In the process of performance of the IDR the scope of review increased to cover a number of items on a generic basis. The IDR was structured to verify that -the Design and Quality Assurance process imposed by documentation was successfully implemented and that the as-built configuration was in compliance with the comit-ment of the Final Safety Analysis Report (FSAR). 2.0 APPROACH The IDR looked at a specific time frame in the, design and construc-tion process which was ongoing at Shoreham. In fact as TES was review-ing design, analysis and construction documentation, Stone & Webster (SWEC) wa's'in the process of revising some of these. TES was unaware of the revisions that were underway or planned. Because of this, we opened items which, at the point in time we froze the process, appeared to be deficiencies. In some cases after issuarce of these items as pre-liminary Findings, the LILCO response indicated that the process in place at Shoreham had already found the same deficiency and had resolved it or, resolution was underway. This enabled TES to review the Shoreham ' process which uncovered the deficiency, the subsequent design changes, the reconciliation process with other disciplines and the final con-struction. This provided the review team with the opportunity to review the results of the total process as well as to review the ongoing design and construction activities over approximately thirteen months. In this
W P W NE ENGNEERING SERVCES Technical Report TR-5633-4 time frame, approximately 405 documents were reviewed by TES. A list of reviewed documents appears in Table 4. A review of this type involves significantly more man-hours than a review dealing only with final documentation because: (1) Items found by the normal design process are found by the Reviewer. For example, discrepancies which were found by the SWEC reconciliation process were also found by the Reviewer. (2) All preliminary Findings and Observations were responded to in detail by LILC0 and SWEC; even those that were already re-solved by the SWEC reconciliation process. (3) A complete re-review of the process was performed by TES after receiving responses to preliminary Findings. In some cases the normal SWEC process resulted in a completely new analysis being performed while TES was reviewing that revision in existence at the time of the IDR initiation. This required TES to review the new analysis in detail as well as the process which generated the need. Approximately 12,000 man-hourt, were expended in the performance of this IDR. A Project Review Team was formed to conduct the review and members of the team were assigned specific areas of responsibility. Each Reviewer reported directly to the Project and/or Assistant Project Manager. A Project Review Internal Committee was formed whose sole function was to review all Potential Findings and Observations prior to their final classification and submittal to LILC0. Items classified as Findings and Observations by the Internal Comittee were submitted in preliminary form to LILCO and items classified as Findings to the Nuclear Regulatory Comission (NRC). LILC0 and SWEC responded to these preliminary submittals, and a final review of Findings was performed by the individual TES Reviewer having responsibility and by the Project
W F W NE ENGNEERING SERVCES Technical Report TR-5633-4 Manager and chairman of the Internal Committee. A final disposition of each Finding was made based on that review and required agreement of the Reviewer, the Project Manager and Comittee Chairman. Responses to Observations were not reviewed by TES since they do not impact the adequacy of the QA or Design Process. The LILC0/SWEC responses to Observations are included in this Final Report and are a part of the project documentation. The IDR was performed under the requirements of the TES Quality Assurance Manual and was subject to audits by the assigned Project Quality Assurance Engineer (PQAE). An additional assignment of the PQAE was to perform that portion of the IDR related to review of the LILC0 QA and SWEC QA/QC/EA process and documentation. In both roles the PQAE reported through the Manager, Quality Assurance. The Project Quality Assurance Program is provided in Appendix 1. Engineering Procedures were prepared to provide guidance to the members of the project team in performing specific tasks. Copies of the Engineering Procedures used in the completion of this IDR are provided in Appendix 2 and a listing follows: Engineering Procedure Number Title EP-1-017 Teledyne Engineering Services Program Plan for Independent Design Review of Shoreham Nuclear Power Station LPCS System EP-1-018 Method of Review of As-Built Design Documents for the Low Pressure Core Spray System at the Shoreham Nuclear Power Station
'#PN ENGINEERING SERVICES Technical Report TR-5633-4 ,
Engineering Procedure Number Title EP-1-019 Procedure for Project Review Internal Committee Shoreham i Nuclear Power Station Independent Design Review EP-1-020 Procedure for Reviewing and Re-porting by TES 10CFR Part 21 Com-mittee Shoreham Nuclear Power Station Independent Design Review EP-1-021 QA Sampling Inspection Procedure Shoreham Nuclear Power Station Independent Design Review EP-5-006 Method of Determination of As-Built Configuration of Low Pres-sure Core Spray System at Shore-ham Nuclear Power Station In addition, at the completion of that portion of the review which re-sulted in the issuance of 16 Findings, TES Letter No. 5633-42 outlined the method to be followed in the revlew of responses to those Findings. 3.0 DEFINITIONS In any review process the definitions of terms used for reporting items by the individuals involved is important to understand since they form the basis of conclusions reached by all parties. The following definitions are used in this IDR.
TM ENGNEERING SSWICES Technical Report TR-5633-4 I 3.1 Open Item (TES Internal) An item requiring further review or more information before e decision can be reached. An Open Item can become a Finding, an Observa-tion or a Closed Item but cannot remain an Open Item in the TES Final Report. 3.2 Closed Item An Open Item which after further review is found to be in com-pliance and can be Closed. 3.3 Potential Finding (TES Internal) An item which the Reviewer and Project Manager feel could have an impact on the adequacy of the Design or QA process. All Potential Findings have been submitted to the Project Review Internal Comittee for disposition. A Potential Finding can become a Finding, an Observa-tion or can be Closed but cannot remain a Potential Finding in the TES Final Report. 3.4 Finding An item which impacts the adequacy of the Design er QA process. t 3.5 Observation An item that does not impact the adequacy of the Design or QA process but has significance relative to conservatism, design practice or applicable procedures.
TE N ENGINEERNG SERVICES Technical Report TR-5633-4 4.0 SCOPE OF THE INITIAL REVIEW The IDR was performed on one loop of the safety-related, seismic Category 1, Low Pressure Core Spray System (1E21). The review program was separated into six tasks. 4.1 Task 1 - Design Process and Procedures This task was designed to determine if LILC0 and SWEC had design control procedures that provided an acceptable process for taking design requirements and developing construction drawings that complied with FSAR comitments. Interfaces between internal organizations were determined in following the process of: (1) specification of design requirements, (2) development of design, (3) piping analysis, (4) support location and selection, (5) support analysis, (6) effect on building structure, (7) equipment loading requirements, (8) development of construction drawings, and (9) revisions to design and construction. Procedures, instructions and methods associated with the design process were made available to TES for review. The major portion of this task review was performed early in the IDR to familiarize Reviewers with the design process. However, this only provides evidence that a documented process exists. A major result of the IDR is to provide assurance that the established process is followed. Therefore, as items were opened by Reviewers, the design process was continually reviewed to determine whether or not procedures,
W F W NE ENGNEERNG SERVICES Technical Report TR-5633-4 instructions, and/or methods were available in the area of concern. The final review effort in this area was not completed until resolution of the last outstanding item at TES. 4.2 Task 2 - Review Design Requirements This task involved a review of the adequacy of the design requirements as they applied to piping, supports and floor mounted equipment. The major effort was to determine whether established speci-fications, standards and procedures complied with the FSAR, including applicable Codes, Standards and NRC design requirements. The proper application of these requirements is the basis for the licensing
' process, therefore it is critical to assure that the specification, standards and procedures utilized are in compliance. The engineer responsible for a design activity, rather than using the FSAR, relies on documents (i.e., specificaMons, etc.) which provide specific design input, criteria and details of implementation which are addressed more geners11y in the FSAR.
4.3 Task 3 - Review As-Built Design Documents An extensive review of design documents was performed. The types of documents reviewed included drawings, analyses, test procedures 4 and results, and design guides. The review, as a minimum, verified the following attributes. (1) the mathematical and/or computer model used, (2) the loading and load combinations (Normal and Upset Con-ditions), (3) the use of applicable Codes, Standards, Regulatory Guides, (4) conformance with acceptance criteria, (5) resolution of interface requirements (allowable nozzle loads, accelerations,etc.),
W F W NE ENGNEERNG SERVICES Technical Report TR-5633-4 (6) resolution of design change and field change requests, and (7) the final reports and drawings. The initial scope of the review included 7 piping analyses, 70 support designs and analyses, and'12 items of mechanical or electrical equipment. Four of the 12 equipment ite.ts were subjected to a full design review (pressure switch, loop level pump, motor operated valve and a relief valve) and 8 items were reviewed for satisfaction of inter-face requirements. Any item which resulted in generic concern was not limited by this scope and was pursued to a conclusion. In the completion of this task a number of calculations or analyses were performed by review team members in order to reach conclu- ! sions as to the adequacy of the submitted design documents. These cal-culations or analyses were not intended to be used as independent veri-fication analyses. They were performed to provide assurance to the Reviewer, to verify assumptions and to determine the adequacy of design guides. All calculations or analyses which form the basis for conclu-sions reached by the IDR were subjected to the requirements of the TES QA Manual and are on file in TES Document Control. 4.4 Task 4 - Determine As-Built Plant Configuration A detailed field walkdown of the portion of the LPCS system subject to the IDR was performed. This walkdown developed the geometry of the as-built piping and supports for all accessible locations. Clearances at penetrations, pipe whip restraints and other structures or components were determined. Location, type of support, available move-ment on snubbers and springs, and nameplate information on equipment was obtained. A significant number of photographs were taken for use by the project team in the review process. _m
W F W NE ENGINEERING SERVICES Technical Report TR-5633-4 4.5 Task 5 - Compare As-Built Documentation to Plant Configuration The plant configuration data gathered in Task 4 was compared with the as-built documentation reviewed in Task 3 to determine if discrepancies existed. As indicated, TES froze a specific time frame in the design process; because of this discrepancies between documentation and plant existed. In some cases TES was then able to obtain later as-built design docuraentation and instructions to the field from SWEC which indicated that the process being utilized by SWEC had already uncovered these discrepancies and action to resolve them was underway. TES project team members made three visits to the site to verify that the current documentation and plant configuration were compatible. 4.6 Task 6 - Review LILCO QA and SWEC QA/QC/EA Process and Documentation This task was divided into three subtasks which involved a review of QA, Engineering Assurance (EA), and Quality Control (QC) activities associated with construction of the Shoreham facility. (1) LI'LC0 QA audit findings, schedules, implementation and follow-up on corrective actions related to activities at SWEC was reviewed. (2) SWEC QA and EA audit findings, schedules, implementation and follow-up on corrective actions related to activities associated with the LPCS at Shoreham was reviewed. (3) SWEC construction activities related to LPCS pipe field ' welds were subjected to a QA sampling review. Documenta-tion and records for the following items were reviewed:
'A P W NE ENGNEERING SERVICES Technical Report TR-5633-4 a. training and qualification records of personnel,
- b. identification and control of material, parts and components,
- c. control of special processes,
- d. nonconformance and dispositioning report process,
- e. receiving inspection records,
- f. material certification records, and
- g. NDE records.
5.0 REPORTING FROCESS The following reporting process was utilized in the performance of this IDR. 5.1 Items developed by individual Reviewers were submitted to the Project Manager (PM) in writing using the Reviewer Report Form (RRF). 5.2 The PM reviewed each RRF with the individual responsible for its generation. This process required the PM to review the documents which formed the basis for generation of the RRF. A Project Manager Resolution Form (PMR) was generated and required signature of both the PM and the Reviewer to indicate agreement on item classification. Items classified as Closed were forwarded to TCS Document Control. Items requiring more information were so noted and the Reviewer was instructed to obtain the same. This required the Reviewer to search documentation available at TES for the required data or to prepare a Request For Information (RFI) form which was forwarded to LILC0/SWEC. Items classi-fied as Potential Findings and Observations and not requiring more review were forwarded to the Project Review Internal Committee for dis-position. All RRF, RFI and PMR forms are maintained in Document Control.
W TI:1FTVNE ENGINEERING SERVICES Technical Report TR-5633-4 5.3 The Project Review Internal Comittee reviewed items forwarded by the Project Manager. The comittee reviewed the data which formed the basis for the item and interviewed the responsible Reviewer arid Project Manager as required. The comittee developed a position on the consequence of an item as it related to the adequacy of the Design or QA Process and completed an Internal Comittee Resolution Form (ICR). The position presented in each ICR required a minimum of two signatures of comittee members and the PM. Those items classified as Findings or Observations were forwarded to LILCO and the NRC in preliminary form. All ICRs are maintained in Document Control at TES. 5.4 LILC0 and SWEC responded to Findings and Observations with additional information, changes to existing documentation, and/or remedial action. TES did not review responses to Observations since they do not effect Design or QA adequacy. Findings were reviewed by the Chairman of the Internal Comittee, the Reviewer responsible for genera-tion of the item and the Project Manager. Final classification of each item was based on this review and required agreement and signature of all three individuals. 5.5 Reports and correspondence resulting from this IDR were sub-mitted concurrently to LILC0 and the NRC. The dates and identification of reports and correspondence submitted prior to this Final Report were as follows. Identification Date Initial Status Report, TR-5633-2 July 9, 1982 Transmittal of ICR Forms, November 2, 1982 ICR Nos. 5633-1 through 5633-6 Transmittal of ICR No. 5633-9 November 30, 1982 through ICR No. 5633-12
WTri FrWNE ENGINEERING SERVICES Technical Report TR-5633-4 Identification Date Transmittal of ICR Nos. 5633-13, -14, December 8, 1982
-15, -17 and -18 Transmittal of ICR No. 5633-19 December 14, 1982 Transmittal of ICR Nos. 5633-20 and -21 January 11, 1983 Transmittal of ICR No. 5633-27 January 21, 1983 Transmittal of ICR No. 5633-28 January 31, 1983 Procedure for Phase 2 of Review February 11, 1983 Telephone Call Record (2/14/83) February 17, 1983 Minutes of Meeting (2/15/83) February 25, 1983 Transmittal of Phase 2 Review of March 4, 1983 ICR No. 5633-1 Transmittal of Phase 2 Review of March 11, 1983 ICR Nos. 5633-2, -9, -13, -14,
-15, -17, -18, -20 and -21 Transmittal of Phase 2 Review of March 15, 1983 ICR Nos. 5633-10, -19, -27 and -28 Minutes of Meeting (3/16/83) March 28, 1983 Telephone Call Record (3/22/83) April 7, 1983 Minutes of Meeting (3/30/83) April 6, 1983
'eTF13:fWNE ENGNEERING SERVICES Technical Report TR-5633-4 Identification Date Transmittal of Final Classification April 7, 1983 of ICR No. 5633-10 Minutes of Meeting (4/8/83) April 21, 1983 Minutes of Meeting (4/21/83) May 6, 1983 Transmittal of Final Classification May 20, 1983 of ICR No. 5633-18 Transmittal of Final Classification -June 6, 1983 of ICR No. 5633-19 Transmittal of Final Classification June 29, 1983 of ICR Nos. 5633-1, -2, -21, -27 and -28 Executive Sumary of Final Report June 30, 1983 Independent Design Review for the Shoreham Nuclear Power Station, TES Technical Report TR-5633-3 6.0 LILCO/SWEC RESP 0ItSE APPROACli LILC0/SWEC utilized a Disposition Response Form to respond to preliminary Findings, Observations and Additional Concerns.
The responses to preliminary Findings were very detailed and, where required, addressed items on a generic basis. For example, if a TES concern was related to a specific valve, the LILC0/SWEC response l addressed the specific valve as well as all other valves in the jane l category. In many cases this allowed TES to resolve any generic-' co'n-cerns the Reviewer may have had without requesting further data- . l
"WTs 1 s rVNE Technical Report TR-5633-4 In the case of Additional Concerns LILC0/SWEC referenced Studies or Evaluations that had been performed to validate their position and included a sumary of results. For any items within the scope of the ~
initial review (a portion of the LPCS system), Studies, Evaluations and/or Calculations were forwarded to TES. For items outside the scope of the initial reviev all requ' ired documentation was made available to TES reviewers at eitner SWEC offices or the Shoreham site. This was acceptable to TES and reduced the time involved in transmittal of docu-mentation. 7.0 RESULTS This IDR was performed in three phases. The first phase was a com-plete review of the Design and QA process which resulted in the genera-tion of items and resolution by the Internal Review Comittee. Phase 1 was completed with the issuance 'of ICR No. 5633-28 by the Internal Review Comittee ori January 31, 1983. An organizational chart for Phase 1 is shown in Figure 2A and a Flowchart indicating the Phase 1 process and interfaces is shown in Figure 28. Phase 2 involved a review of the initial LILC0 and SWEC responses to Findings issued by the TES Internal Review Comittee in Phase 1. This review resulted in the issuance by TES of detailed comments, which , Closed items or resulted in Additional Concerns, on each item classified as a Finding in Phase 1. ' Phase 2 was completed with the issuance of TES Additional Concern ICR No. 5633-28 on March 15, 1983. An organizational chart for Phase 2 is shown in Figure 3A and a Flowchart indicating the Phase 2 prccess and interfaces is shown in Figure 3B. Phase 3 involved a final review of each item for which Additional Concern was submitted to LILC0 and the NRC by TES. This review included detailed discussion which occurred at meetings between LILCO, SWEC and TES as well as the review by TES of formal responses submitted by LILC0
WTF1 FT?(E ENGNEERING SEFMCES Technical Report TR-5633-4 and SWEC. Minutes of these interface meetings and notes of telephone conference calls ure submitted to LILC0 and the NRC, and are included in Appendix 6. Phase 3 was complcted with the issuance of the Executive Sumary of Final Report - Independent Design Review for the Shoreham Nuclear Power Station, TES Technical Report TR-5633-3 dated June 30, 1983. An organizational chart for Phase 3 is shown in Figure 3A and a Flowchart indicating the Phase ' 3 process and interfaces is shown in Figure 3B. 7.1 Phase 1 The Phase 1 review resulted in Reviewers opening 170 items. In accordance with the reportmg process, 74 of these items were Closed after review by the Project Manager. In order to obtain more informa-tion concerning the remaining items 97 Requests for Information were prepared and silbmitted. Upon receipt of responses to these RFIs and further review of existing data an additional 68 items were Closed. The remaining items (28) were brought to the Project Review Internal Com-mittee as Potential Findings and Observations. These items were pre-liminarily classified by the Internal Comittee as follows and Findings and Observations were submitted to LILC0 and Findings to the NRC: 2 Closed 16 Findings 10 Observations The intent of this submittal was to outline TES' preliminary concerns and generate response from LILCO. A sumary of the Phase 1 review is given in Table 1. 7.2 Phase 2 LILC0 and SWEC responded to each of the preliminary Findings and Observations with additional information and/or reference to
WF WNE Te:hnical Report TR-5633-4 specific procedures, instructions and calculations currently available to TES. A meeting was held at SWEC offices in Boston on February 15, 1983 to discuss some of the LILC0 and SWEC responses to Findings. At that meeting further information was made available to TES and review of proprietary information was accomplished by TES Reviewers. Individual TES project team members reviewed the LILC0 and SWEC responses to Findings and met with the TES Project Manager and Internal Comittee Chairman to discuss individual items in detail. This review resulted in the closir.g of some items and the generation of Additional Concern on others. Submittals were made to LILC0 and the NRC outlining in detail the results of the TES review of each item. These submittals were completed on March 15, 1983, and a summary of the Phase 2 review is given in Table 2. 7.3 Phase 3 The TES submittals outlining Additional Concerns at the com-pletion of Phase 2 were specific in nature and provided sufficient detail to allow LILC0/SWEC to prepare final responses. In addition, meetings were held to discuss each item so that there was a clear under-standing of the issues and concerns of TES. It should be re. cognized that once an item reaches this Phase of the review process it usually has generic implications. Further, the detailed responses by LILC0/SWEC that are required cover areas well beyond the scope of the initial review. For example, concerns with small piping design criteria have resulted in the review of most of the small piping at the Shoreham Plant. This is well beyond the approximately 60 small piping systems covered by the original scope. A summary of the Phase 3 review is given in Table 3. 7.4 Details of Iteur. Items preliminarily classified as a Finding or Observation by the Project Review Internal Cemit;.ee are presented in Appendices 3 and
4%9 % NE ENGINEERING SERVICES Technical Report TR-5633-4 4, respectively. The format of the presentation is to provide all formal correspondence on each item. Generally this will include the following: ReviewerReportForm(RRF) Project Manager Resolution Form (PMR) RequestForInformation(RFI) Internal Committee Resolution Form (ICR) LILC0/SWEC Disposition Response TES Additional Concern Items are provided in a chronological order so that one can review the development of an item by the Reviewer to final closure. Revisions to documents are also included. The brief sumaries provided with each item initially classified as a Finding are taken from the Executive Surmary of Final Report, TES Technical Report TR-5633-3. For Observations brief summaries are not provided since the TES task did not require review of the LILC0/SWEC responses. TES did review all Observations to determina whether a trend was developing in a specific area of the Design Process. If it was, and an existing Finding was not issued in the area of concern, a Finding would have been prepared and issued. In addition, Appendix 5 contains copies of trip reports of TES reviewers. These reports are associated with visits to SWEC offices or the Shoreham site for review of proprietary documentation or determination of as-built configuration. These are made available in this report since resolution of some of the additional concerns reference specific trip reports.
8.0 CONCLUSION
S The Independent Design Review conducted by TES of the design and QA process at the Shoreham Nuclear Power Station was initiated as a review
"RTELEDYNE ENGNEERNG SERVICES Technical Report TR-5633-4 of a portion of the LPCS System. Based on the Findings and Additional Concerns issued during the implementation of this effort the scope of the review broadened into a generic review in the following areas:
(1) small bore piping, (2) attachment of supports to pipe, (3) consideration of time-history dynamic loading in piping and support design, (4) determination of applied accelerations on valve operators and comparison with allowables, (5) branch line stress intensification factors, (6) thermal attenuation modeling of tieback supports, and (7) adequacy of vibra check baseplates in a radiation environment. Based on the above list, it is apparent that a significant portion of the design at the Shoreham Plant has been subject to review and that the original scope was expanded greatly as a result of the initial review effort. In response to some of the Observations, LILC0/SWEC performed reviews of their own which were beyond the initial IDR scope. In some cases these reviews were limited to the work performed by certain individuals or groups, in other cases a 3dmpling of hardware was performed. The areas covered by these LILC0/SWEC reviews were jam nuts on pipe supports and lug design calculations. Further, since the design and construction process was ongoing at ' Shoreham at the time TES initiated the IDR, we were able to review the LILC0/SWEC process for discovering deficiencies, subsequent design changes, reconciliation with other disciplines and the final construc-tion. This provided the review team with the opportunity to review the
SPTs:1 m(NE ENGINEERING SERVICES Technical Report TR-5633-4 results of the total process as well as to review the ongoing design and construction activities. The responses by SWEC to a number of the generic items were in the form of Engineering Studies or Evaluaticns which differ from Calcula-tions in the SWEC Design Process. The term Calculation denotes an engineering / design technical report that provides the basis for an engineered design or conclusion and provides the full and formal docu-mentation of the engineering process. A Study or Evaluation serves to verify the conclusions of previously established calculations rather than replace them. For example, SWEC performed an Evaluation to deter-mine the adequacy of valve operators to meet acceptable acceleration levels. Part of this study involved reanalysis of 3 piping systems using different modeling techniques, damping values and/or acceleration summation. It is the recommendation of TES that these analyses should eventually become part of the formal documentation for 3horeham. That is, they should be modified accordingly to be classified as Calcula-tions. Further, TES recomends that LILC0 review all of the Studies and Evaluations performed as a result of this IDR to determine what existing Calculations require modification to bring the formal documentation in line with the conclusions of this IDR. It is recognized that not all of the Calculations impacted by Studies and Evaluations will require modi-fication and that reference to, or attachment of, the appropriate Study or Evaluation in the Calculation may be appropriate. Completion of this effort by LILC0 has no impact on the conclusions of this IDR and is recommended on'y to provide an appropriate set of records that can oe utilized in the future for maintenance, replacement, repair and modi-fication work by the utility. In the area of Quality Assurance the TES Reviewers in their sumary Trip Report indicate that the LILC0 QA Program as applied to construc-tion activity on the LPCS System at Shoreham demonstrates: management awareness and participation, a high level of proficiency and efficiency
1%T RTE ENGNEERING SERVICES Technical Report TR-5633-4 in the Quality Assurance organization, and exceeds the minimum in appli-cation and performance of the Quality Assurance Program requirements. Based on the results of our Independent Design Review it is TES' opinion that the commitments of the FSAR with respect to Design and Quality Assurance have been complied with by LILC0 and SWEC for the Shoreham Nuclear Power Station. v
TESPROJECT9633 TNK PENE NT DESIGN RE91EW 14-JUL-83 12:35:35 PAGE 1 SHOREHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION UNIT 1 LPCS SYSTEM REVICW LOG
=_ ..................... .... ..
RRF REV RRF PMR REV PMR RFI REV ICR ICR FINAL ITER REVIEWER DESCRIPTION NO NO CATEGORf NO NO CATE0 CRY NO NO NO CATEGORY RESOLUTION
-REV INITIAL .
1 0 EAS INEFFECTI'K SNUBBER 1 0 OPEN 1 0 OPEN 00 00 0 1 1 EAS INEFFECTIVE SNUBBER 1 1 CLOSED 1 1 CLOSED 00 00 0 2 0 EAS MIS $1NG NAME PLATE 2 0 OPEN 2 0 0 FEN 28 0 00 0 2 1 OPEN 2 1 OBSERVATION O0 0 5 FINDING CLOSED 3 83 2 1 EAS MISSING NAE PLATE 3 0 EAS MISSING SNUPBERS 3 0 OPEN 3 0 CPEN 00 00 0 3 1 EAS MISSING SN'JBBERS 3 1 CLOSED 3 1 CLOSED 00 00 0 4 0 EAS WRONG SPRING SIZES 4 0 OPEN 4 0 OPEN 00 00 0 4 1 EAS WRONG SPRING SIZES 4 1 CLOSED 4 1 CLOSED 00 00 0 5 0 EAS LATERAL CLEARANCE 5 0 CPEN 5 0 OPEN 00 00 0 5 1 EAS LATERAL CLEARANCE 5 1 OPEN 5 1 OPEN OO OO O 5 2 EAS LATERAL CLEARANCE 5 2 OPEN 5 2 CLOSED 00 00 0 6 0 EAS VALVE VGW 15A2 6 0 OPEN 6 0 OPEN 91 0 00 0 6 1 EAS VALVE VGW 15A2 6 1 POT. FIND 6 1 POT. FIND 00 0 15 FINDING CLOSED 3-11-93 7 0 EAS CLASS 1 PIPE SUPPORT GRATING 7 0 OPEN 7 0 OPEN 00 00 0 7 1 EAS CLASS 1 PIPE SUPPORT GRATING 7 1 CLOSED 7 1 CLOSED 00 00 0 8 0 EA3 SMALL BORE PIPE 80T SHOWN 8 0 OPEN 8 0 GPEN 21 0 50 0 8 2 EAS SMALL BORE PIPE NOT SHOWN 8 2 CLOSED 8 1 CLOSED 95 0 00 0 9 0 EAS PSSH026 WARPED CHANNEL 9 0 OPEN 9 0 OPEN 00 00 0 9 1 EAS PSSH026 WARPED CHANNEL 9 1 CLOSED 9 1 CLOSED 00 00 0 10 0 EAS INCORRECT REF ON DWG 10 0 OPEN 10 0 CPEN 20 0 00 0 10 1 EAS INCORRECT REF ON DWG 10 1 OPEN 10 1 CLOSED 00 00 0 2 11 0 EAS MISSING SUFFORT IC-7 11 0 OPEN 11 0 0 FEN 00 00 0 j
- 11 1 EAS MISSING SUFPORT IC-7 11 1 CLOSED 11 1 CLOSED 00 00 0
! 12 0 EAS LOOSE LOCKNUT 12 0 OPEN 12 0 OPEN 00 00 0 i 12 1 EAS LOOSE LOCKNUT 12 1 OPEN 12 1 OBSERVATIDs 00 0 6 OBSERVATION' O
~,. - , . , e m, - -- , - . - - , - - - - , .--,w-,wm-, ~~,-wm- .n,,r- --wr,, - , , -v-, ,,m-,e-#---,
TES PROJECT 3633 INDEPENDENT DESIGN REVIEW 14-JUL-83 12:33:33 PAGE 2 SHOREHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION UNIT 1 LPCS SYSTEM REVIEW LOG ITEM REVIEWER DESCRIPTION RRF REV RRF PMR REV PMR RFI REV ICR ICR FINAL
-REV INITIAL NO NO CATEGORY NO NO CATEGORY NO NO NO CATEGORY RESOLUTION 13 0 EAS ATTACH'D SUPP NOT SHOWN 13 0 OPEN 13 0 OPEN 19 0 00 0 13 2 EAS ATTACH'D SlFP NOT SHOWN 13 2 CLOSED 13 1 CLOSED 95 0 00 0 14 0 EAS DIMENSION DIFFERENCE 14 0 OPEN 14 0 OPEN , 13 0 00 0 14 1 EAS DIMENSION DIFFERENCE 14 1 CLOSED 14 1 CLOSED 00 00 0 15 0 EAS ATTACED SUPP NOT SHOWN 15 0 OPEN 15 0 OPEN 18 0 00 0 13 1 EAS ATTACHED SUPP NOT S'iOWN 15 1 OPEN 15 1 CLOSED 00 00 0 16 0 EAS DIMENSIONS DIFFERENT 16 0 OPEN 16 0 GPEN 00 00 0 16 1 EAS DIMENSIONS DIFFERENT 16 1 CLOSED 16 1 CLOSED 00 00 0 17 0 GSB SOURCE OF TIP CONDITIONS 17 0 OPEN 17 0 HOLD 00 00 0 17 1 GSB SOURCE OF T1P CONDITIONS 17 1 CLOSED 17 0 CLOSED 00 00 0 18 0 GSB SlW NUPIPE HPCI X-11A 18 0 OBSERVATION 10 0 OPEN 24 1 00 0 18 1 GSB SIW NUPIPE HPCI X-11A 18 1 CLOSED 18 1 CLOSED 00 00 0 19 0 MSA AX-8AA-3 AX10G-1 19 0 OPEN 19 0 OPEN 87 0 00 0 19 1 MSA AX-8AA-3 AX100-1 19 1 CLOSED 19 1 CLOSED 00 00 0 20 0 MSA DESIGN SPEC 20 0 OPEN 20 0 HOLD 00 00 0 20 1 MSA DESIGN SPEC 20 1 CLOSED 20 0 CLOSED 00 00 0 21 0 MSA DEADWEIGHT ANALYSIS 21 0 OPEN 21 0 OPEN 41 0 00 0 21 1 MSA DEADWEIGHT ANALYSIS 21 1 OPEN 21 1 HOLD 00 00 0 21 2 MSA DEADWEIGHT ANALYSIS 21 2 CLOSED 21 1 CLOSED 00 00 0 1
22 0 MSA FORMULA INCORRECT 21 0 OPEN 22 0 OPEN 80 00 0 22 1 MSA FORMULA INCORRECT 22 1 CLOSED 22 1 CLOSED 00 00 0 23 0 MSA PIPE WEIGHT 23 0 OPEN 23 0 CLOSED 00 00 0 24 0 MSA WALL DEFLECTION / STRESS 24 0 OPEN 24 0 OPEN 60 00 0 24 1 MSA WALL DEFLECTION / STRESS 24 1 Ci.0 SED 24 1 CLOSED 00 00 0 25 0 GSB SlW NUPIPE 25 0 OBSERVATION 25 0 CLOSED 0 0 00 0 l-
TN WE SERVICES Technical Report TR-5633-4 Table 1 Summary of Phase 1 Review i
TES PROJECT 5633 1NKPENIENT DESIGN REUZEW 14-JUL-83 12:35:35 PAGE 3 SHOREHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION UNIT 1 LPCS SYSTEM REVIEW LOG ITEM REVIEWER DESCRIPTION RRF REV RRF FMR REV PMR RFI REV ICR ICR FINAL
-REV INITIAL NO NO CATEGORY NO NO CATEGORY NO NO NO CATEGORY RESOLUTION 26 0 GSB SIW NUPIPE 26 0 OBSERVATION 26 0 OPEN 27 0 00 0 i
26 1 GSB SlW NUPIPE 26 1 CLOSED 26 1 CLOSED 00 00 0 27 0 JCT S1W SPEC SH1 88-AD REV 1 27 0 OBSERVATION 27 0 OBSERVATION 00 0 10 FINDING CLOSED 4 83 l 28 0 LEB 11600.02-AX-100-2 28 0 OPEN 28 0 OPEN 44 0 00 0 l 28 1 LES 11600.02-AX-10D-2 28 1 CLOSED 28 1 CLOSED 00 00 0 29 0 MSA PEN LOADS 29 0 0 PEN 29 0 CLOSED 00 00 0 30 0 MSA RESTRAINT STIFFNESS 30 0 OPEN 30 1 CLOSED 00 00 0 31 0 MSA VALVE MODELING 31 0 OPEN 31 0 OPEN 00 00 0 31 1 MSA VALVE MODELING 31 1 CLOSED 31 1 CLOSED 00 00 0 32 0 MSA PEN X 21A 32 0 OPEN 32 0 CLOSED 00 00 0 33 1 GSB R S CURVES 33 1 OBSERVATION 33 0 CLOSED 00 00 0 34 0 LEB 11600.02 AX 10D-2 34 0 0 FEN 34 0 OPEN 84 0 00 0 34 1 LEB 11600.02 AX 100-2 34 1 CLOSED 34 1 CLOSED 00 00 0 33 0 LEB 11600.02 AX 10D-2 35 0 OPEN 35 0 OPEN 50 00 0 35 1 LEB 11600.02 AX 100-2 35 1 OPEN 35 1 POT. FIND 0 0 0 20 FINDING CLOSED 3-11-83 36 0 MSA CALC PACK 11600.02 AX10B-3 36 0 OPEN 36 0 OPEN 70 00 0 36 1 MSA CALC PACK 11600.02 AX10B-3 36 1 CLOSED 36 1 CLOSED 00 00 0 37 0 GSB SEISMIC RESPONSE CURVES 37 0 OBSERVATION 37 0 CLOSED 70 00 0 38 0 GSB ANALYEIS X-10B 38 0 OPEN 38 0 OPEN 00 00 0 38 1 GSB ANALYSIS X-10B 38 1 CLOSED 38 1 CLOSED 00 00 0 39 0 GSB ANALYSIS X-10B 39 0 OBSERVATION 39 0 CPEN 20 00 0 39 1 GSB ANALYSIS X-10B 39 1 OBSERVATION 39 1 CLOSED 00 00 0 40 0 GSB S 1 W PIPE STRESS REPRT 40 0 OBSERVATION 40 0 OPEN 96 0 00 0 40 1 GSB S 1 W PIPE STRESS REPRT 40 1 POT FINDING 40 1 POT. FIND 00 0 21 FINDING CLOSED 6-24-83 41 0 EAS REF DOCUMENT DISCREPCY 40 0 OPEN 40 0 OPEN 17 0 00 0
TES PROJECT 5633 INDEFENDENT DESIGN REVIEW 14-JUL-83 12:35:35 PAGE 4 SHOREHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION UNIT 1 LPCS SYSTEM REVIEW LOG ITEM REVIEWER DESCRIPTION RRF REV RRF PMR REV PMR RFI REV ICR ICR FINAL
-REV INITIAL NO NO CATEGORY NO NO CATEGORY NO NO NO CATEGORY RESOLUTION 41 1 EAS REF DOCUMENT D'***EPCY 41 1 CLOSED 41 1 CLOSED 00 00 0 42 0 EAS SUPPORT STIFFNESS 42 0 OPEN 42 0 OPEN 00 00 0 42 1 EAS SUPPORT STIFFNESS 42 1 OPEN 42 1 OPEN 94 0 00 0 42 2 EAS SUPPORT ST!FFNESS 42 2 OPEN .42 2 CLOSED 00 00 0 43 0 LJD SUPPORT CALCS 43 0 OPEN 43 0 CLOSED 00 00 0 44 0 LJD SURORT CALCS 44 0 OPEN 44 0 OPEN 29 0 00 0 44 1 LJD SUPPORT CALCS 44 1 OPEN 44 1 OBSERVATION 00 0 4 OBSERVATION 0 .i 43 0 LJD PIPE SUPT 1 DUCT CRIT 45 0 OPEN 45 0 OPEN 00 00 0
- 45 1 LJD PIPE SUPTIDUCT CRIT 45 1 OPEN 45 1 CLOSED 00 00 0 1
46 0 JGP PIPE SUPRTIDUCT CRIT 46 0 OPEN 46 0 OPEN 23 0 00 0 46 1 JGP PIPE SUPRTLDUCT CRIT 46 1 CLOSED 46 1 CLOSED 00 00 0 47 0 LJD PIPE SUPRT1 DUCT CRIT 47 0 OPEN 47 0 CLOSED 00 00 0 48 0 LJD PIPE SUPRT1 DUCT CRIT 48 0 OPEN 48 0 GPEN 00 00 0 4 48 1 LJD PIPE SUPRT1 DUCT CRIT 48 1 OPEN 48 1 CLOSED 00 00 0 1 49 0 LJD PSSH 005 49 0 OPEN 49 0 OPEN 28 0 00 0 ' 49 1 LJD PSSH 005 49 1 OPEN 49 1 OBSERVATION 00 0 3 OBSERVATION 0 50 0 LJD IE 21 PSSH 003-4 50 0 OPEN 50 0 OPEN 28 0 00 0 30 1 LJD IE 21 PSSH 003-4 50 1 OPEN 50 1 CLOSED 00 00 0 i 51 0 LJD PIPE SUPPORT CALC 51 0 0 FEN 51 0 OPEN 35 0 00 0 l ! 51 1 LJD PIPE SUPPORT CALC 51 1 OPEN 51 1 POT. FIND 00 0 17 FINDING CLOSED 3-11-83 . 52 0 LJD PIPE SUPPORT CALC 52 0 OPEN 52 0 OPEN 35 0 00 0 l 52 1 LJD PIPE SUPPORT CALC 52 1 OPEN 52 1 POT. FIND 00 0 17 FINDING CLOSED 3-11-83 53 0 LJD PIPE SUPPORT CALC 53 0 OPEN 53 0 OPEN 00 00 0 i 33 1 LJD PIPE SUPPORT CALC 53 1 OPEN 53 1 CLOSED 00 00 0 l l 54 0 LJD PIPE SUPRTIDUCT CRIT 54 0 OPEN 54 0 OPEN 00 00 0
TES PROJECT 5633 INDEPENDENT DESIGN REVIEW 14-JUL-83 12:35:35 PAGE 5 SHOREHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION UNIT 1 LPCS SYSTEM REVIEW LOG RRF REV RRF PMR REV PMR RFI REV ICR ICR FINAL ITEM REVIEWER DESCRIPTION NO NO CATEGORY NO NO CATEGORY NO NO NO CATEGORY RESOLUTION
-REV INITIAL --- .
34 1 LJD PIPE SUPRT1 DUCT CRIT 54 1 OBSERVATION 54 1 CLOSED 00 00 0 55 0 LJD IE 21 PSR 002-3 CALCS 55 0 OPEN 55 0 OPEN 34 0 00 0 55 1 LJD IE 21 PSR 002-3 CALCS 55 1 CLOSED 55 1 CLOSED 00 00 0 56 0 LJD IE 21 PSR 002-3 56 0 OPEN 56 0 OPEN 35 0 00 0 56 1 LJD IE 21 PSR 002-3 56 1 OPEN 56 1 POT. FIND 00 0 17 FINDING CLOSED 3-11-83 57 0 RRN IE 21 PSSH 012-5 57 0 OPEN 57 0 OPEN 31 0 00 0 57 1 RRH IE 21 PSSH 012-5 57 1 OPEN 57 1 CLOSED 00 00 0 58 0 EAS PSR 014-5 58 0 OPEN 58 0 OPEN 00 00 0 58 1 EAS PSR 014-5 58 1 OPEN 58 1 CLOSED 00 00 0 39 0 EAS PSR 014-5 LOADS 59 0 OPEN 59 0 OPEN 16 0 00 0 59 1 EAS PSR 014-5 LOADS 59 1 OPEN 59 1 CLOSED 00 00 0 50 0 EAS PSR 014-5 WELD ITEMS 2,3 60 0 OPEN 60 0 OPEN 00 00 0 60 1 EAS PSR 014-5 WELD ITEMS 2 3 60 1 OPEN 60 1 CLOSED 00 00 0 61 0 EAS IE21 PSR 001 61 0 OPEN 61 0 OPEN 00 00 0 61 1 EAS IE21 PSR 001 61 1 OPEN 61 1 CLOSED 00 00 0 62 0 EAS IE 21 PSR 057 FRICTION 61 0 OPEN 61 0 OPEN 00 0 0 0 62 1 EAS IE 21 PSR 057 FRICTION 62 1 OPEN 62 1 POTEN FIND 00 0 8 CLOSED 0 63 0 EAS ITEM NOT CHECKED 63 0 OPEN 63 0 OPEN 00 00 0 l 63 1 EAS ITEM NOT CHECKED 63 1 OPEN 63 1 OBSERVATION 00 0 7 OBSERVATION O l 00 00 0 64 @ EAS PSST 059 DIM ON DWG 64 0 OPEN 64 0 OPEN 64 1 EAS PSST 058 DIM ON DWG 64 1 0 FEN 64 1 CLOSED 00 00 0 65 0 LJD SUPRT1 DUCT CRITERIA 55 0 CPEN 65 0 CPEN 00 00 0 65 1 LJD SUPRT1 DUCT CRITERIA 65 1 OPEN 65 1 POT. FIND 00 0 18 FINDING CLOSED 5-20-83 66 0 EAS SUPRT DIFF 66 0 OPEN 66 0 GPEN 00 00 0 66 1 EAS SUPRT DIFF 66 1 CLOSED 66 1 CLOSED 00 00 0 i
. _ _ _ - . - - _ - - . _ _ _ . _ _ . - _ . - _ . . . - . __ ._. ~ . . _ - _ _ . _ _ . _
TES PROJECT 5433 INKPEN K NT DESIGN REVIEW 14-JUL-83 12:35:33 PAGE 6 SHOREHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION UNIT 1 LPCS SYSTEM REVIEW LOG ITEM REVIEWER KSCRIPTION RRF REV RRF PMR REV PMR RFI REV ICR ICR FINAL
-REV INITIAL NO NO CATEGORY NO NO CATEGORY NO NO NO CATEGORY RESOLUTION 67 0 EAS EXTRA SUPRT IN M0 K L 67 0 OPEN 67 0 OPEN 00 00 0 67 1 EAS EXTRA SUPRT IN MODEL 67 1 CLOSED 67 1 CLOSED 00 00 0 68 0 EAS LOADS DWG TO BE REVISED 68 0 OPEN 68 0 OPEN 15 0 00 0 68 1 EAS LOADS DWG TO BE REVISED 68 1 OPEN 68 1 CLOSED 00 00 0 69 0 RRH WRONG VALUES 69 0 OPEN 69 0 OPEN 33 0 00 0 69 1 RRH WRONG VALUES 69 1 OPEN 69 1 CLOSED 00 00 0 70 0 JHM AUDIT S1W 70 0 POT FIND 70 0 OPEN 30 0 00 0 70 1 JHM AUDIT S1W 70 1 CLOSED 70 1 CLOSED 00 00 0 71 0 GSB M0 KLING METHOD 71 0 OBSERVATION 71 0 OPEN 00 00 0 71 1 GSB N014ELING METHOD 71 1 OBSERVATION 71 1 CLOSED 00 00 0 72 0 GSB PSR. 070 72 0 OPEN 72 0 OPEN 00 00 0 72 1 GSB PSR. 070 72 1 CLOSED 72 1 CLOSED 00 00 0 73 0 LEB ANCHOR MOVEMENTS 73 0 OPEN 73 0 OPEN 00 00 0 73 1 LEB ANCHOR MOVEMENTS 73 1 CLOSED 73 1 CLOSED 00 00 0 74 0 LEB X SECTION PROPERTIES 74 0 OPEN 74 0 OPEN 00 00 0 74 1 LEB X SECTION PROPERTIES 74 1 CLOSED 74 1 CLOSED 00 00 0 75 0 PRH CLAMP NOT WELDED PER 29.3-1 75 0 OPEN 75 0 OPEN 32 0 00 0 75 1 RRH CLAMP NOT WELDED PER 29.3-1 75 1 OPEN 75 1 CLOSED 00 00 0 76 0 LJD PSR 018-3 P29 76 0 OPEN 76 0 DPEN 00 00 0 1
76 1 LJD PSR 018-3 P29 76 1 OPEN 76 1 CLOSED 00 00 0 l 77 0 SS LOCATION PSST 013-5 77 0 OPEN 77 0 CLOSED 00 00 0 l 70 0 JGP PSSH 021 78 0 OPEN 78 1 CLOSED 00 00 0 78 1 JGP PSSH 021 78 1 OPEN 78 1 CLOSED 00 00 0 79 0 JGP PSSH 021 SUPP. CRITERIA SYS 79 0 OPEN 79 0 POT FIND 00 0 2 FINDING CLOSED 6-27-83 80 0 JGP DISPLACEMENTS PSSH 021 PG10A 80 0 OPEN 80 0 OPEN 00 00 0 l
i TES PROJECT 5633 INDEPENDENT DESEGN REVIEW 14-JUL-83 12:35:33 PAGE 7 l SHOREHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION UNIT 1 LPCS SYSTEM REVIEW LOG ITEM REVIEWER DESCRIPTION RRF REV RRF PMR REV PMR RFI REV ICR ICR FINAL
-REV INITIAL NO NO CATEGORY NO NO CATEGORY NO NO NO CATEGORY RESOLUTION 80 1 JGP DISPLACEMENTS PSSH 021 PG10A 80 1 CLOSED 80 1 CLOSED 00 00 0 81 0 JGP PSSH 021 REVISIONS 81 0 OPEN 81 0 OPEN 22 0 00 0 81 1 JGP PSSH 021 REVISIONS 81 1 CLOSED 81 1 CLOSED 00 00 0 82 0 EAS CALC VS DWO 82 0 OPEN 82 0 OPEN 46 0 00 0
, 82 1 EAS CALC VS DWG 82 1 OPEN 82 1 OBSERVATION 00 0 22 DBSERVATION 0 83 0 WJM STANDARD SUPPORTS 83 0 OPEN 83 0 OPEN 90 0 00 0 83 1 WJM STANDARD SUPPORTS 83 1 CLOSED 83 1 CLOSED 00 00 0 84 0 RRH PSR 050 84 0 OPEN 84 0 OPEN 00 00 0 84 1 RRH PSR 050 84 1 CLOSED 84 1 CLOSED 00 00 0 85 0 KTS PSST 066 85 0 OPEN 85 1 CLOSED 00 00 0 86 0 KTS PSST 066 P5 86 0 OPEN 86 0 OPEN 34 0 00 0 86 1 KTS PSST 066 P5 86 1 OPEN 84 1 CLOSED 00 00 0 87 0 KTS FSST 066 FAGE 10 87 0 OPEN 87 0 OPEN 00 00 0 87 1 KTS PSST 066 PAGE 10 87 1 OPEN 87 1 CLOSED 00 0 0 0 88 0 KTS PSST C66 PAGE 7 88 0 OPEN 88 0 CLOSED 00 00 0 89 0 KTS PSR 025 PAGE 6 89 0 OPEN 89 0 OPEN 00 00 0 1 69 1 KTS PSR 025 PAGE 6 89 1 CLOSED 89 1 CLOSED 00 00 0 t 90 0 KTS PSR 025 PAGE 10 90 0 OPEN 90 0 OPEN 00 00 0 [ 90 1 KTS PSR 025 PAGE 10 90 1 OPEN 90 1 CLOSED 00 00 0 91 0 KTS PSR 025 EMBEDDED PLATE 91 0 OPEN 91 0 OPEN 34 0 00 0 91 1 KTS PSR 025 EMBEDDED PLATE 91 1 OPEN 91 1 CLOSED 00 00 0 l , 92 0 KTS PSR 025 PAGE 12 92 0 OPEN 92 0 OPEN 00 00 0 92 1 KTS PSR 025 PAGE 12 92 1 OPEN 92 1 CLOSED 00 00 0 i 93 0 KTS PSR 025 PAGE 7 93 0 CPEN 93 0 OPEN 00 00 0 93 1 KTS PSRe025 PAGE 7 93 1 OPEN 93 1 CLOSED 00 0 0 0
TES PROJECT 3633 INDEPENDENT DESIGN REVIEW 14-JUL-83 12:35:35 PAGE 8 SHOREHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION UNIT 1 LPCS SYSTEM REVIEW LOG ITEM REVIEWER DESCRIPTION RRF REV RRF PMR REV PMR RFI REV ICR ICR FINAL
-REU jNITIAL NO NO CATEGORY NO NO CATEGORY NO NO NO CATEGORY RESOLUTION 94 0 WJM SNPS PRO
J. PROCEDURE
19 94 0 OPEN 94 0 OPEN 47 0 00 0 94 1 WJM SNPS PRO
J. PROCEDURE
19 94 1 CLOSED 94 1 CLOSED 00 00 0 95 0 KTS PG 2 ASSUMPTION CONFIRMED 95 0 OPEN 95 0 OPEN 55 0 00 0 95 1 KTS PG 2 ASSUMPTION CONFIRMED 95 1 CLOSED 95 1 CLOSED 00 00 0 96 0 GSB EXCLUDED LINES IN TIME HISY.' 96 0 OBSERVATION 96 0 OPEN 00 00 0 96 1 GSB EXCLUDED LINES IN TIME HISY. 96 1 OBSERVATION 96 1 POT. FIND 00 0 23 CLOSED 0 97 0 GSB ANALYSIS FOR 70 DEGREES 97 0 OPEN 97 0 OPEN 4 0 00 0 97 1 GSB ANALYSIS FOR 70 DEGREES 97 1 CLOSED 97 1 CLOSED 00 00 0 98 2 GSB MODELED TEMP CHANGE POINTS 98 2 CLOSED 98 0 CLOSED 00 00 0 99 0 KTS USE OF PITRIFE 99 0 OPEN 99 1 CLOSED 00 00 0 100 0 KTS DWG CALC PACK REVS DISAGREE 100 0 OPEN 100 0 OPEN 00 00 0 100 1 KTS DWG CALC PACK REVS DISAGREE 100 1 CLOSED 100 1 CLOSED 0 0 00 0 101 0 KTS WK SKETCH DOES NOT MATCH DWG 101 0 OPEN 101 0 DPEN 49 0 00 0 101 2 KTS WK SKETCH DOES NOT MATCH DWG 101 2 OPEN 101 1 CLOSED 00 00 0 1 102 0 KTS PSR 001-6 RE' DWG 102 0 OPEN 102 0 CPEN 49 0 00 0 102 1 KTS PSR 001-6 RE' DWG 102 1 OPEN 102 1 CLOSED 0 0 00 0 103 0 KTS CALC PACK NOT SIGNED 103 0 OPEN 103 0 CLOSED 00 00 0 L , 104 0 KIS NO CHECK FOR BASE PLATE 104 0 OPEN 104 0 CLOSED 00 00 0
- 105 0 LJD RRF 1 FMR 48 105 0 OPEN 105 0 CLOSED 00 00 0 104 0 KTS CALC PACK PSSH 045-7 106 0 OPEN 106 0 OPEN 00 00 0 106 1 KTS CALC PACK PSSH 045-7 106 1 CLOSED 106 1 CLOSED 00 00 0 107 0 KTS CALC PACK PSSH 045-7 107 0 OPEN 107 0 GPEN 48 0 00 0 4
107 1 KTS CALC PACK PSSH 045-7 107 1 CLOSED 107 1 CLOSED 00 00 0 108 0 LEB PACKAGE AX 10-D-2 108 0 CDEN 108 0 OPEN 85 0 00 0 108 1 LEB FACKAGE AX 10-D-2 108 1 0 FEN 108 1 POT. FIND 00 00 0 i
TES PROJECT 5633 INDEPENDENT DESIGN REV!EW 14-JUL-83 12:35:33 PAGE 9 SHOREHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION UNIT 1 LPCS SYSTEM REVIEW LOG ITEM REVIEWER DESCRIPTION RRF REV RRF PMR REV PMR RFI REV ICR ICR FINAL NO NO CATEGORY NO NO CATEGORY NO NO NO CATEGORY RESOLUTION
-REV INITIAL 108 2 CBSERVATION 108 2 OBSERVATION 00 0 27 FIhDING CLOSED 6-27-83 108 2 LEB PACKAGE AX 10-D-2 109 0 LEB PACKAGE AX 10-D-2 109 0 OBSERVATION 109 0 OPEN 00 00 0 109 1 LEB PACKAGE AX 10-D-2 109 1 CLOSED 109 1 CLOSED 00 00 0 110 0 LEB PACKAGE AX 10D 2 110 0 OBSERVATION 110 0 CLOSED 00 00 0 111 1 LEB INADE00 ATE SRV ENVELOPE 111 1 CLOSED 111 0 CLOSED 00 00 0 112 0 JCT PENN X-10B 112 0 OPEN 112 0 OPEN 89 0 00 0 112 1 JCT PENN X-10B 112 1 OPEN 112 1 OBSERVATION 00 0 26 OBSERVATION 0 113 0 KTS PACK REFLECT DWG CHANGE 113 0 OPEN 113 0 OPEN 00 00 0 113 1 KTS PACK REFLECT DWG CHANGE 113 1 CLOSED 113 1 CLOSED 00 00 0 114 0 KTS PG 5 ASSUMPTIONS CONFIRMED 114 0 OPEN 114 0 OPEN 78 0 00 0 114 1 KTS PG 5 ASSUMPTIONS CONFIRMED 114 1 CLOSED 114 1 CLOSED 00 00 0 113 0 KTS PSSA SIZE 8 STRUTS 115 0 OPEN 115 0 OPEN 77 0 00 0 115 1 KTS PSSA SIZE 8 STRUTS 115 1 OPEN 115 1 C10 SED 00 00 0 116 0 KTS DWG 8 CALC PACK 3 116 0 OPEN 116 0 OPEN 00 00 0 116 i KTS DWG B CALC PACK 3 116 1 CLOSED 116 1 CLOSED 00 00 0 117 0 KTS PSR 044 ASSUMPTIONS 117 0 OPEN 117 0 OPEN 74 0 00 0 117 1 KTS PSR 044 ASSUMPTIONS 117 1 OPEN 117 1 CLOSED 75 0 00 0 118 0 SW ANALYSIS l' PIPING 118 0 OPEN 118 0 OPEN 52 0 00 0 118 1 SDW ANALYSIS l' PIPING 118 1 CLOSED 118 1 CLOSED 00 00 0
[ 119 0 5 W DELTA T'S FOR SOCKOLEiS 119 0 OPEN 119 1 OBSERVATION 00 0 11 OBSERVATION 0 120 0 SDW TESTING COND. CORE SPRAY 120 0 OPEN 120 0 OPEN 53 0 00 0 120 1 SW TESTING COND. CORE SPRAY 120 1 CLOSED 120 1 CLOSED 00 00 0 l 121 0 SDW TRANSIENT EVENT 7.4 121 0 OPEN 121 0 CPEN 54 0 00 0 121 1 SDW TRANSIENT EVENT 7.4 121 1 OPEN 121 1 CLOSED 00 00 0 122 0 SDW DERIVATION OF DELTA TS 122 0 OPEN 122 0 OPEN 55 0 00 0
. _ . . _ . .. _ .. __ __ ~ _
TES PROJECT 5633 INDEPENDENT DESIGN REVIEW 14-JUL-83 12:33:35 Pf,GE 10 SHOREHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION UNIT 1 LPCS SYSTEM REVIEW LOG ITEM REVIEWER DESCRIPTION RRF REV RRF PMR REV PMR FFI REV ICR ICR FINAL
-REV fCITIAL NO NO CATEGORY NO NO CATEGORY NO NO NO CATEGORY RESOLUTION 122 1 S W DERIVATION OF DELTA TS 122 1 CLOSED '122 1 CLOSED 00 00 0 123 0 SDW RPV N0ZZLE MATERIAL 123 0 OPEN 123 0 OPEN 56 0 00 0 123 1 SDW RPV N0ZZLE MATERIAL 123 1 POT. FIND 123 1 POT. FIND 00 0 14 FINDING CLOSED 3-11-83 124 0 SDW BRANCH FILM COEFF. 124 0 OPEN 124 0 OPEN 58 0 00 0 124 1 SDW BRANCH FILM COEFF. 124 1 CLOSED 124 1 CLOSED 00 00 0 125 0 SDW FREE FILM COEFFS. 125 0 OPEN 125 0 CLOSED 00 00 0 126 0 SDW RPV N0ZZLE DISPLACEMENTS 126 0 OPEN 126 0 OPEN 59 0 00 0 126 1 SDW RPV N0ZZLE DISPLACEMENTS 126 1 POT. FIND 126 1 OBSERVATION 00 0 16 OBSERVATION 0 127 0 SDW SOURCE OF DELTA TS 127 0 OPEN 127 0 OPEN 60 0 00 0 127 1 SDW SOURCE OF DELTA TS 127 1 OPEN 127 1 CLOSED 00 00 0 128 0 SDW LUG EVALUATION 128 0 OPEN 128 0 OPEN 00 00 0 128 1 SDW LUG EVALUATION 128 1 CLOSED 128 1 CLOSED 00 00 0 129 0 SDW CLASS 1 CERTIFICATION 129 0 OPEN 129 0 DPEN 61 0 00 0 129 1 SDW CLASS 1 CERTIFICATION 129 1 CLOSED 129 1 CLOSED 00.00 0 130 0 SDW BRANCH PROPERTIES 130 0 OPEN 130 0 OPEN 00 00 0 130 1 SDW BRANCH PROPERTIES 130 1 CLOSED 130 1 CLOSED 0 0 00 0 131 0 SDW MISSING CALC. PAGES 131 0 OPEN 131 0 OPEN 57 0 00 0 131 1 SDW MISSING CALC. PAGES 131 1 CLOSED 131 .1 CLOSED 00 00 0 132 0 SDW E0. 10 MOMENTS 132 0 OPEN 132 0 OPEN 62 0 00 0 i
132 1 SDW EQ. 10 NOMENTS 132 1 OPEN 132 1 OBSERVATION 00 0 24 OBSERVATION 0 133 0 EAS RADIATION LEVEL 9 LPCS 133 0 OPEN 133 0 OPEN 11 0 00 0 133 1 EAS RADIATION LEVEL 9 LPCS 133 1 POT.FkND133 1 POT. FIND 11 1 0 12 FINDING CLOSED 3-11-83 134 0 LEB DATA SHEET DISCREPANCIES 134 0 DBEERVATION 134 0 OPEN 63 0 00 0 134 1 LEB DATA SHEET DISCREPANCIES 134 1 CLOSED 134 1 CLOSED 00 00 0 135 0 LEB DYNAMIC DISPLACEMENT 135 0 OPEN 135 0 GPEN 64 0 00 0
TES PROJECT 56?3 INDEPENDENT DESIGN REVIEW 14-JUL-83 12:33:35 PAGE 11 SHOREHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION UNIT 1 LPCS SYSTEM REVIEW LOG RRF REV RRF PMR REV PMR RFI REV ICR ICR FINAL ITEM REVIEWER DESCRIPTION NO NO CATEGORY NO NO CATEGORY NO NO NO CATEGORY RESOLUTION
-REV INITIAL
= _ - .._
135 1 LEB DYNAMIC DISPLACEMENT 135 1 OPEN 135 1 CLOSED 00 00 0 136 0 LEB SUPPR. POOL CURVES 136 0 OPEN 136 0 OPEN 65 0 00 0 136 1 LEB SUPPR. POOL CURVES 136 1 CLOSED 136 1 CLOSED 00 00 0 137 0 LEB SKEWED SUPPORT 137 0 OPEN 137 0 OPEN 00 00 0 137 1 LEB SKEWED SUPPORT 137 1 OPEN 137 1 CLOSED 00 00 0 138 0 LEB BR. LINE ANALYSIS 138 0 OPEN 138 0 POT. FIND 00 0 1 FINDING CLOSED 6-27-83 139 0 LEB BRANCH SIF 139 0 OPEN 139 0 CLOSED 00 00 0 140 0 OBSERVATION 140 0 OBSERVATION 0 0 00 0 140 0 LEB BRANCH SIF 140 1 LEB NO SIF INPUT 180 1 CLOSED 140 1 CLOSED 0 0 00 0 141 0 LEB DISCREPANCIES DATA TABLE 141 0 OPEN 141 0 OPEN 66 0 00 0 141 1 LEB DISCREPANCIES DATA TABLE 141 1 CLOSED 141 1 CLOSED 00 00 0 142 0 LEB PIPE AND TIEBACK PROPS. 142 0 OPEN 142 0 OPEN 67 0 00 0 142 1 LEB PIPE AND TIEBACK PROPS. 142 1 CLOSED 142 i CLOSED 00 00 0 143 0 LEB VALVE OPERATOR STIFFNESS 143 0 OPEN 143 0 CLOSED 00 00 0 144 0 LEB BRANCH LINE ANALYSIS 144 0 OBSERVATION 144 0 DPEN 68 0 00 0 144 1 LEB BRANCH LINE ANALYSIS 144 1 CLOSED 144 1 CLOSED 00 00 0 145 0 LEB BRANCH LINE TEMP. 145 0 OPEN 145 0 OPEN 00 00 0 143 1 LEB BRANCH LINE TEMP. 145 1 OPEN 145 1 POT. FIND 00 0 28 FINDING CLOSED 6-27-93 ( 146 0 LEB BRANCH LINE DISCREP. 146 0 OBSERVATION 146 0 OPEN 69 0 00 0 140 i LEB BRANCH LINE DISCREP. 146 1 CLOSED 146 1 CLOSED 00 00 0 147 0 LEB MASS POINT.' N0 DES 147 0 OfEN 147 0 OPEN 70 0 00 0 1 l 147 i LEB MASS POINTS N] DES 147 1 CLOSED 147 1 CLOSED 00 00 0 l 71 0 00 0 148 0 LEB BRANCH LINE SEISMIC 148 0 OPEN 148 0 GPEN l l l 148 1 LEB FRANCH LINE SEISMIC 148 1 Cl.0 SED 148 1 CLOSED 00 00 0 l 149 0 MSA FUNCTIONAL CAPABILITY 149 0 OPEN 149 0 CLOSED 00 00 0 l
TES PROJECT 5633 INKPENDENT DESIGN REVIEW 14-JUL-83 12:35:33 PAGE 12 . SHOREHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION UNIT 1 LPCS SYSTEM REVIEW LOG ITEM REVIEER KSCRIPTION RRF REV RRF PMR REV PMR RFI REV ICR ICR FINAL
-REV INITIAL NO NO CATEGORY NO NO CATEGORY NO N0 NO CATEGORY RESOLUTION 150 0 RRH MISSING PAGE 150 0 OPEN 150 0 OPEN 73 0 00 0 150 1 RRH MISSING PAGE 150 1 OPEN 150 1 CLOSED 00 00 0 131 0 KTS ELD SIZE 151 0 OPEN 151 0 OPEN 49 0 00 0 131 2 KTS ELD SIZE 151 2 OPEN 151 1 CLOSED 00 00 0 152 0 GSB PILUG OUTPUT MISSING 152 0 OBSERVATION 152 0 OPEN 79 0 00 0 i 152 1 GSB PILUG OUTPUT HISSING 152 1 CLOSED 152 1 CLOSED 00 00 0 133 0 KIS ATTACHMENT PT. MD. 153 0 OPEN 153 0 OPEN 81 0 00 0 153 1 KTS ATTACHMENT PT. NO. 153 1 CLOSED 153 1 CLOSED 00 00 0 154 0 KTS PITRIFE RUN MISSING 154 0 DPEN 154 0 OPEN 76 0 00 0 l
154 1 KTS PITRIFE RUN MISSING 154 1 CLOSED 154 1 CLOSED 00 00 0 155 0 KTS PIPE ELEVATION 155 0 OPEN 155 0 OPEN 00 00 0 155 1 KTS PIPE ELEVATION 155 1 OPEN 155 1 CLOSED 00 00 0 156 0 KTS AD ED SENDING STRESS 156 0 OPEN 156 0 OfEN O0 00 0 156 1 KTS ADDED BENDING STRESS 154 1 CLOSED 156 1 CLOSED 00 00 0 157 0 KTS CONFIRM ASSUMPTION 15/ 0 GPEN 157 0 OPEN 80 0 00 0 137 1 KTS CONFIRM ASSUMPTION 157 1 OPEN 157 1 CLOSED 00 00 0 158 0 GSB DYNAMIC M0 KLING 158 1 OPEN 150 0 CLOSED 00 00 0 r 159 0 LEB SUPPORT STIFFNESS 159 0 OPEN 159 0 GPEN 72 0 00 0 159 1 LEB SUPPORT STIFFNESS 159 1 CLOSED 159 1 CLOSED 00 00 0 160 0 LEB MODELING OF SUPPORT 160 0 OPEN 160 0 OPEN 82 0 00 0 160 1 LEB MODELING OF SUPPORT 160 1 OPEN 160 1 CLOSED 00 00 0 161 0 LEB VALVE ACCELERATIONS 161 0 OPEN 161 0 OPEN 83 0 00 0 161 1 LEB VALVE ACCELERATIONS 161 1 CLOSED 161 1 CLOSED 00 00 0 l 162 0 EAS SHIELD WALL ATTACHMENTS 162 0 CDEN 162 0 POT. FIND 37 0 0 13 FINDING CLOSED 3-11-83 163 0 MSA STRESS CALC. PACKAGE REVS. 163 0 OPEN 163 0 CLOSED 00 00 0
l TESPROJECT5633 INDEPENDENT DESIGN REVIEW 14->JL-83 12:33:33 PAGE 13 i SHOREHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION UNIT 1 LPCS SYSTEM REVIEW LOG ITEN REVIEWEk DESCRIPTION RRF REV RRF PNR REV PMR RFI REV ICR ICR FINAL REV INITIALU NO NO CATEGORY NO NO CATEGORY NO NO NO CATEGORY RESOLUTION
. .g .._____ _ . . . . . _ _ . . . _ _ _ . . . . . . . . . _ _ . . . . . . . . - - - _...___...-- -
164 0 EAS SUFf0RT FRICTION CRITERIA 164 0 OPEN 164 0 POT. FIND 00 0 9 FINDING CLOSED 3-11-83 165 0 SDW SUPERCEDED PAGES 165 0 OPEN 165 0 CLOSED 00 C0 0 166 0 SDW AREA REINF.CALCS 166 0 CPEN 166 0 OPEN 88 0 00 0 166 1 SDW AREA REINF.CALCS 166 1 OPEN 166 1 CLOSED 00 00 0 167 0 SDW DELTA T LISTING 167 0 OPEN 167 0 CLOSED 00 00 0 160 0 KTS SUPPORT PSR 052 168 0 OPEN 168 0 QPEN 97 0 00 0 168 1 KTS ORT PSR 052 168 1 OPEN 168 1 CLOSED 00 00 0 169..'0' GSB WATER HAMNER LOADS 169 0 POT. FIND 169 0 POT. FIND 00 0 19 FINDINO CLOSED 6-6-83 170 0 KTS LUG CALCULATIONS 170 0 OPEN 170 0 OBSERVATION 00 0 25 OBSERVATION 0 00 00 00 00 00 0 l l l l i l l l I l
4t M NE Technical Report TR-5633-4 Table 2 Summary of Items Phase 2 Findings Only Status after Review of Generic LILC0/SWEC Response Response Modification Required ICR No. Closed Additional Concern Yes No Documentation Plant 1 Additional Concern X No No 2 Additional Concern X Yes No 5 Closed X No No 9 Closed X No No 10 Additional Concern X No No 12 Closed X Yes No 13 Closed X No No 14 Closed X No No 15 Closed X Yes No 17 Closed X No No f 18 Additional Concern X No No 19 Additional Concern X Yes No l l 20 Closed X No No 21 Additional Concern X As part of SWEC No Reconciliation 27 Additional Concern X Yes No l 28 Additional Concern X As part of SWEC No Reconciliation l
1 %' F W N E Technical Report TR-5633-4 Table 3 Sunnary of Items Phase 3 Additional Concerns Only i Status after Review of Generic ICR LILC0/SWEC Response Response Modification Required No. Closed Finding Yes No Documentation Plant 1 Closed X Yes No 2 Closed X Yes No 10 Closed X No No 18 Closed X No No 19 Closed X Yes No 21 Closed X Yes No 27 Closed X Yes No 28 Closed X Yes No i l ! 1 l l l
W F W NE S Technical Report TR-5633-4 Table 4 List of Reviewed Doctments i I l l l l l 1
TN ENGNEERING SERVICES Technical Report TR-5633-4 DOC N NTS REVIEWED AT TES OFFICES LILCO MANUALS
- 1. Safety Evaluation Report (SER) for Shoreham Nuclear Power Station, Unit No. 1, NUREG-0420, Docket No. 50-322, April 1981
- 2. Supplement No. 1 to SER, NUREG-0420 Supplement No. 1, September 1981
- 3. Supplement No. 2 to SER, NUREG-0420 Supplement No. 2, February 1982
- 4. LILC0 Quality Assurance Manual, Revision 14, December 1, 1981
- 5. LILC0 Quality Assurance Procedures, April 9, 1981
- 6. LILC0 Project Manual for Shoreham Nuclear Power Station, Unit No.
1, December 21, 1981.
- 7. Shoreham Plant Design Assessment Report, Volumes 1 and 2 GE DOC N NTS
- 1. GE Specification No. GE 21A942, Rev. O, RPV Purchase Spec.
- 2. GE Specification No. GE 21A9221BC, Rev. O, Pump Purchase Spec.
- 3. GE Specification No. GE 21A922AY, Rev. 2, Motor Purchase Spec.
- 4. GE Document No. 22A1435, Rev. 1, Core Spray System Design Speci-fication, April 10, 1979
- 5. GE Document No. 22A1435, Rev. 2, Core Spray System Design Speci-fication Data Sheet, December 30, 1976 l
- 6. GE Document No. 22A4250AF, Rev. O, Core Spray Nozzle Safe End and Welded Thermal Sleeve Design Specification Data Sheet, July 26, 1976
- 7. GE Document No. 386HA617, Rev.1, Load Combination and Acceptance Criteria for Piping Systems SWEC SPECIFICATIONS
- 1. SH1-68 Design and Fabrication of Nuclear Power Plant Piping Supports, Rev. 2, December 14, 1981
- 2. SH1-171 Piping Engineering and Design, Rev. 1, May 1, 1980 l
l
W F W NE ENGNEERING SERVCES Technical Report TR-5633-4 3. SH1-171 Piping Engineering and Design, Rev. 2, July 29, 1982
- 4. SH1-158B Furnishing and Installation of Thermal Insulation -
Outside Primary Containment, Rev. 1, October 27, 1980
- 5. SH1-157 Furnishing and Installation of Thermal Insulation -
Inside Primary Containment, Rev. 1, September 25, 1981
- 6. SH1-24 Shop Fabricated Piping, Rev. 3, August 19, 1981
- 7. SH1-75 Shop Fabricated and Field Erection of Reactor Containment Steel Plate Liner, Rev. 4, March 3, 1982
- 8. SH1-180V Carbon Steel Valves 2 " and larger, Rev. 1, July 23, 1981
- 9. SH1-232 Special Check Valves, Rev. 1, September 23, 1980
- 10. SH1-253 Motor Operated Carbon Steel Valves, 2 " and Smaller, Rev.
1, January 21, 1982
- 11. SH1-88V Motor Operated Carbon Steel Valves, 2 " and Larger, Rev.
1, November 16, 1981
- 12. SH1-88AD Motor-0perated Carbon Steel Valves, 2\" and Larger, Rev.
1, October 29, 1981
- 13. SH1-056 Field Fabrication and Erection of Piping, Rev. 3, October 27, 1980
- 14. SH1-171 E&DCR's that Effect Specification SH1-171, P-3931A ,-
P-3962, P-3962A, P-39628, P-3965, P-3965A, P-3966, P-3966A, P-39668, P-3880A, P-3887A
- 15. E&DCR P-3887B
- 16. E&DCR P-3965B 1
Descriptio6
- 17. System -
Core Spray System, Rev. O, November 20, 1975
- 18. Final Safety Analysis Report (FSAR)
- 19. Quality Assurance and Control Manual - ASME Section III, Book No.
l 22 as defined by Table of Contents dated February 4, 1982
- 20. Quality Assurance Manual as defined by Index Issue 82-2
- 21. Pipe Stress, Pipe Support and Duct Support Criteria Document for the Shoreham Nuclear Power Station, dated December 1981, including Rev. 1 dated May 1982
TE WE Technical Report TR-5633-4 22. SWEC Shoreham Project Procedures Manual Project General Instruc-tions, April 15, 1982
- 23. Engineering Assurance Division Procured Services Group Surveys and Audits for 1980, 1981 and 1982, EA-516
- 24. Engineering Assurance Audit Schedules for Project Audit Nos. 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39 and 40
- 25. Engineering Assurance Audit Schedule, Site Engineering Office Audit Nos. 9, 10, 11, 12 and 13
- 26. QA Costs and Auditing Division Audit Schedule - Third Quarter 1980
- 27. Audit Agenda for Shoreham Site Audit Nos. 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40 and 41
- 28. Suppression Pool ARS Curves dated February 28, 1978
- 29. Reactor Building ARS Curves dated March 1973 SWEC PROCEDURES
- 1. EMTG-5A, SWEC Procedure, Pages 3 to 30 of 68 only, SWEC Quality l
Control Inspection Report for Item 1E21-PSSH-043 l
- 2. Q.C. 15.4, a SWEC Field Quality Control Procedure j 3. STP 811, LILC0 Test Procedure entitled "B0P Systems - Thermal l
Expansion Testing"
- 4. EMD-80-3, SWEC Procedure, SWEC SE0 ' demo Nos. 63, 63A, 638, 63C and 63D i SWEC REVIEW FORMS
- 1. SWEC Review of Supplier Document Form for Valve No. IE11-MOV-031A-D and 032A-D, dated August 4, 1982
- 2. SWEC Review of Supplier Document Form for Valve No.1E21-MOV-035A, B, dated March 31, 1982
- 3. SWEC Review of Supplier Document Form for Valve 1E11-M0V-38A, B, dated March 22, 1982
- 4. SWEC Review of Supplier Document Form for Valve No.1E21-M0V-031A, B, dated March 31, 1982
WTF1 FtWNE ENGEEERING SERVICES Technical Report TR-5633-4 5. SWEC ~ Review of Supplier Document Form for Valve No.1E11-MOV-042A, B, dated August 4, ~1982
- 6. SWEC Review of Supplier Document Form for Valve No.1E11-MOV-034A, B, dated March 31, 1982 SWEC STRESS CALCULATION PACKAGES
- 1. Problem AX-8AA-3
- 2. Problem AX-10G-1
- 3. Problem AX-11A-2
- 4. Problem AX-108-3, and 4 ,
- 5. Problem AX-10D-2
- 6. Problem AX-10A-2, 3 and 4 ,
- 7. Problem AX-8K SWEC SQRT DOCtMENTATION PACKAGES
- 1. SQRT-88AD-1: 1E21*M0V-035AB
- 2. SQRT-88AD-3: 1E21*M0V-031AB
- 3. SQRT-88V-3: 1E21*M0V-034AB ,
- 4. SQRT-88V-13: 1E21*MOV-033AB l S. SQRT-191-1: 1E21*RV-092, 093, 096 --
1
- 6. SQRT-235-1: 1E21*P049AB l 7. SQRT E21N0088: 1221*PS012AB
- 8. SQRT E21N009B: 1E21*PS013AB
- 9. SQRT E21N0010B: 1E21*PS098AB
- 10. Seismic Qualification Documentation for Pressure Switches E21N008A/B and E21N009A/B, Rev. 1, July 29, 1982
\
m m
TN Technical Report TR-5633-4 - s SUEC PIPE SUPPORT CALCULATION PACKAGES
,' ~
System Suoport Revision
- 1. 1E21 PSR 001 8
- 2. 1821 PSSH 001 3
- 3. 1821 PSSH 001 1
- 4. 1E21 PSR 002 5
- 5. 1E21 PSSH 003 5
- 6. 1E21 PSSH 003 4
- 7. 1E21 PSR 004 4
- 8. 1E21 PSSH 005 8
- 9. 1E21 PSSH 005 7
- 10. 1E21 PSSH 005 6
- 11. 1E21 PSA 007 7
- 12. 1E21 PSR 009 5
- 13. 1E21 PSSH 010 5
- 14. 1E21 PSR 011 2
- 15. 1E21 PSSH 012 5
- 16. IE21 PSST 013 5
- 17. 1E21 PSR 014 5
- 18. 1E21 PSST 015 4
- 19. 1E21 PSA 016
- 20. 1E21 PSST 017 5
- 21. 1E21 PSR 018 3 22, 1E21 PSSH 019 3
- 23. 1E21 PSR 020 5
- 24. 1E21 PSSH 021 3
- 25. 1E21 PSA 023 4
- 26. 1E21 PSA 024 5
- 27. 1821 PSSH 024 6
- 28. 1821 PSSH 024 4
- 29. 1E21 PSR 025 2 i
- 30. 1E21 PSSH 026 10
- 31. 1E21 PSR 028 3
- 32. 1E21 PSSH 029 4
- 33. 1E21 PSR 030 6
- 34. 1E21 PSR 031 7
- 35. 1E21 PSSH 032 5
- 36. 1E21 PSSH 033 5
- 37. 1E21 PSR 034 4
- 38. 1E21 PSSH 035 10
-39. 1E21 PSSH 036 8
- 40. 1E21 PSR 038 3
- 41. 1E21 PSSH 039 7
- 42. 1E21 PSR 040 6
- 43. 1E21 PSR 041 6
- 44. 1E21 PSSH 042 6 i
W TASTVNE ENGNEERING SERVICES Technical Report TR-5633-4 . System Support Revision
- 45. 1E21 P5SH 043 8 46, 1E21 PSR 044 3
- 47. 1E21 PSSH 045m 7
- 48. 1E21 PSSH 046 9
- 49. 1E21 PSR 049 6
- 50. IE21 PSR 050 5
- 51. 1E21 PSR 051 2
- 52. 1E21 PSR 052 5
- 53. 1E21 PSST 053 5
- 54. 1E21 PSSH 054 2
- 55. 1E21 PSR 057 3
- 56. 1E21 PSST 058 8
- 57. 1E21 PSA 059 7
- 58. 1E21 PSST 063 5
- 59. 1E21 PSR 064 3
- 60. 1E21 PSR 065 7
- 61. 1E21 PSST 066 3
- 62. 1E21 PSR 067 3
- 63. 1E21 PSSH 068 1
- 64. 1E21 PSR 069 2
- 65. 1E21 PSSP 800 8
- 66. 1E21 PSSP 801 8
- 67. 1E21 PSSP 804 6
- 68. 1E21 ' PSSP 806 3'
- 69. 1E21 PSSP 807 3
- 70. 1E21 PSSP 809 3
- 71. 1E21 PSSP 810 1
- 72. 1E21 PSR 5032 1
- 73. 1E21 PSR 5033 1
- 74. 1E21 PSR 5034 1
- 75. 1E21 PSR 5035 1
- 76. 1E21 PSR 5036 1
- 77. 1E21 PSR 5057 1
- 78. 1E21 PFr 134 1
- 79. 1E11 JTA 2 SWEL CALCULArl0NS
- 1. 11600.02, EMD-NP(B)-129-X5, " Seismic Displacement Mode by Mode Contribution," dated September 17, 1979
- 2. 11600.02-NP(B)-202 (Calc. Excerpt) T-Quencher ARS Cleves
- 3. 11600.02-NP(B)-202 (Calc. Excerpt) AP ARS Curves
- 4. 11600.02-NP(B)-261-FA-0, "Waterhammer Analysis for RHR Containment Spray System"
1PT5157VNE ENGNEERING SERVICES Technical Report TR-5633-4 5. 11600.02-NP(B)-126-FIA, "Waterhamer Analysis for Minimum Flow Bypass line of the HPCI System"
- 6. 11600.02-NP(B)-360-FA-0, "Waterhamer Analysis for Core Spray System Due to Flow in Empty Line" 7, 11600.02-NP(B)-120-FIA, Rev. 2, "Waterhamer Analysis for the Test Line of the Core Spray System"
- 8. 11600.02-NP(B)-124-F1A, "Waterhammer Analysis for the RHR System"
- 9. 11600.02-NP(B)-79-F1A, " Core Spray Prob.100 and 101 Waterhamer"
- 10. 11600.02-NS(B)-045-2 dated July 21, 1982, Penetration Calculation
- 11. 11600.02-NS(B)-088 dated July 15, 1982, Penetration Calculation
- 12. 11600.02-NP(B)-465-XC, Rev. O, Class 1 Lug Analysis SWEC DRAWINGS
- 1. 11600.02-FC-16A Reactor Building Plan, El 40'-0", SH-1
- 2. 11600.02-FM23A Core Spray System Boundaries
- 3. 11600.02-FV-1E-10 Primary Containment Penetrat bn
- 4. 11600.02-FV-1H-9 Primary Containment Penetration
- 5. 11600.02-FV-1J-7 Primary Containment Penetration
- 6. 11600.02-FV-1L-8 Primary Containment Penetration
- 7. 11600.02-3.14-610 Primary Containment Penetration
- 8. 11600.02-3.14-628 Primary Containment Penetration l
l 9. 11600.02-3.14-63C Primary Containment Penetration
- 10. 11600.02-3.14-105B Primary Containment Penetration
- 11. 11600.02-3.14-1108 Primary Containment Penetration
- 12. 11600.03-SFSK-1AE-2 Embedded Plates Reactor Building
- 13. 11600.03-CFSK-27T-5 Embedded Iron and Steel Reactor Building l
- 14. 11600.02-5.18-66E Reactor Vessel Drawings l
W F W NE Technical Report TR-5633-4 15. 11600.02-5.18-67E Reactor Vessel Drawings '
- 16. 11600.02-5.17-5A Reactor Vessel Drawings
- 17. 11600.02-2.16-10C Reactor Vessel Drawings
- 18. 11600.02-2.15-36C Reactor Vessel Drawings
- 19. 11600.02-FM-23-10 Flow Diagrams and Piping Drawings
- 20. 11600.02-FP-10A-8 Flow Diagrams and Piping Drawings
- 21. 11600.02-FP-106-9 Flow Diagrams and Piping Drawings
- 22. 11600.02-FP-10C-8 Flow Diagrams and Piping Drawings
- 23. 11600.02-FP-100-7 Flow Diagrams and Piping Drawings
- 24. 11600.02-FP-10E-8 Flow Diagrams and Piping Drawings
- 25. 11600.02-FP-10F-7 Flow Diagrams and Piping Drawings
- 26. 11600.02-FM-25A-13 Flow Diagram HPCI
- 27. 11600.02-FM-20B-15 Flow Diagram RHR
- 28. P1005-5 Small Bore Isometric Drawings
- 29. P1006-3 Small Bore Isometric Drawings
- 30. P1008-6 Small Bore Isometric Drawings
- 31. P1011-5 Small Bore Isometric Drawings
- 32. P1012-6 Small Bore Isometric Drawings
- 33. P1053-8 Staall Bore Isometric Drawings
- 34. P1054-7 Small Bore Isometric Drawings
- 35. P1056-4 Small Bore Isometric Drawings
- 36. P1083-3 Small Bare Isometric Drawings
- 37. 1E11 RHR Issue 7 System Line Designation Table
- 38. 1E21 Core Spray Issue 6 System Line Designation Table I 39. 1E41 HPCI Issue 10 System Line Designation Table i
1 i I
I i 1 W W W NE ! Technical Report TR-5633-4 i
- 40. Flow Diagram Color Coded and Work Sketches Relating AX-8K, 8AA, 10A, 108, 10D, 10G and 11A to the Total Spray System
- 41. E2821 IC-2 As Built Isometric
- 42. E2821 IC-6 As Built Isometric
- 43. E2821 IC-7 As Built Isometric
- 44. E2821 IC-47 As Built Isometric
- 45. E2821 IC-55 As Built Isometric
- 46. E2821 IC-56 As Built Isometric
- 47. E2821 IC-57 As Built Isometric
- 48. E2821 IC-59 As Built Isometric
- 49. E2821 IC-63 As Built Isometric
- 50. E2821 IC-64 As Built Isometric
- 51. E2821 IC-65 As Built Isometric
-52. E2821 IC-66 As Built Isometric
- 53. E2821 IC-178 As Built Isometric
- 54. E2821 IC-179 As Built Isometric SWEC VALVE DRAWINGS
- 1. 11600.02-6.37-65F 1
- 2. 11600.02-6.37-114C
- 3. 11600.02-6.37-105F
- 4. 11600.02-6.37-1200
- 5. 11600.02-6.51-006F
- 6. 11600.02-6.35-101
- 7. 11600.02-6.36-29
- 8. 11600.02-6.36-18
- 9. 11600.02-6.36-33 l
- 10. 11600.02-6.36-37
- 11. 11600.02-6.37-128
- 12. 11600.02-6.37-151
- 13. 11600.02-6.37-212
- 14. 11600.02-6.54-5
- 15. 11600.02-6.54-7 l
TN l Technical Report TR-5633-4 16. 11600.02-6.54-10
- 17. 11600.02-6.34-126E
- 18. 11600.02-6.35-137C
- 19. 11600.02-6.35-155E
- 20. 11600.02-6.37-89E
- 21. 11600.02-6.17-111C
- 22. 11600.02-6.37-143G
- 23. 11600.02-6.37-171A
- 24. 11600.02-6.35-3D
- 25. 11600.02-6.35-64D
- 26. 11600.02-6.35-122A
- 27. 11600.02-6.35-125B
- 28. 11600.02-6.35-20K
- 29. 11600.02-5.35-27A 30, 11600.02-6.35-65F
- 31. 11600.02-6.35-203D
- 32. 11600.02-6.35-170C
- 33. 11600.02-6.36-20K
- 34. 11600.02-6.37-170C
- 35. 11600.02-6.36-37K SWEC STRUCTURAL STEEL DRAWINGS
- 1. 11600.02-BS-23AP-3-1 Reac. Building Misc. Platforms (Below El.
(Sheet 2 only) 40'-0")
- 2. 11600.02-BS-23AP-4-2 Reac. Bldg. Misc. Paltforms (El. 20'-0"-
(Sheet 1) 40'-0") i l 3. 11600.02-BS-23AP-4-2 Reac. Bldg. Misc. Platforms (El. 20'-0"- l (Sheet 2) 40'-0") l 4. 11600.02-BS-23AP-8-2 Reac. Bldg. Misc. Platforms (El. 20'-0"- 40'-0") i 5. 11600.02-BS-23AP-9-1 Reac. Bldg. Misc. Platforms (El. 20'-0"- 40'-0")
- 6. 11600.02-BS-23AP-16-1 Reac. Bldg. Misc. Platforms (El . 8'-0" to El. 20'-0")
- 7. 11600.02-BS-23AP-17-1 Reac. Bldg. Misc. Platforms (El. 8.' - El.
20'-0")
- 8. 11600.02-BS-23AP-18-1 Reac. Bldg. Misc. Platforms (El. 8'- El.
20'-0") i
W F W NE Technical Report TR-5633-4 9. 11600.02-BS-23AP-21-1 Reac. Bldg. Misc. Platforms (El. 40'-0" to (Sheet 1) 63'-0")
- 10. 11600.02-BS-23AP-21-1 Reac. Bldg. Misc. Platforms (El. 40'-0" to (Sheet 2) 63'-0")
- 11. 11600.02-BS-23AP-42-5 Reac. Bldg. Misc. Platforms (El. 112'-9" to 150'-9")
- 12. 11600.02-FS-23W-5 Reac. Cont. Bldg. - Steel Framing Sht. 4
- 13. 11600.02-FS-23AF-5 Reac. Bldg. Floor Framing El. 150'-9"
- 14. 11600.02-FS-23AG-5 Reac. Bldg. Floor Framing El. 175'-9"
- 15. 11600.02-FS-23AL-2 Reac. Bldg. Trolley BMS: DETS
- 16. 11600.02-FS-23AM-1 Reac. Bldg. Misc. Framing, Sh. 4
- 17. 11600.02-FS-23AS-3 Reac. Cont. Misc. Platform Framing
- 18. 11600.02-FS-23AU-1 Reac. Bldg. Misc. Platform Framing 19, 11600.02-FS-23AV-2 Reac. Bldg. Misc. Platform Framing
- 20. 11600.02-FS-23AY-3 Reac. Bldg. Misc. Platform Framing
- 21. 11600.02-FS-23AZ-3 Reac. Cont. Platform (El. 76'-5 3/4" Sh. 1)
- 22. 11600.02-FS-23BE-3 Reac. Cont. Platform (El. 76'-5 3/4" Sh. 6)
- 23. 11600.02-FS-23F-6 Reac. Cont. Platform (El. 96'-11 1/2")
SWEC E&DCR t F-19935 F-20805 F-27933 F-39953 F-20531 F-20531A F-25600 F-18995 F-39954 F-18606 F-19579 F-19931 1 F-30397 F-19933 F-18168 F-25596 F-25602 F-20212 F-14663 F-17748 l F-17748A F-177488 F-19198 F-19495 F-19495A F-19723 F-28806 F-11664C F-12593F F-34583 F-17020L F-17020M F-17020N F-3449A *P-03449A *P-03915A ,
*P-04018 F-10100F F-23413 F-33966B F-27182A *P-03859 F-09149C F-12598C l
I
"#TA m(NE ENGINEERING SERVICES Technical Report TR-5633-4 F-16022C F-16022E F-25822A F-39669 F-39669A F-26932 F-27038 F-26625 F-11662A F-11662B F-12860 F-11824 F-09631B F-22222A F-22222B F-25346B SWEC N&D 2562 2370 2560 2580 2460 2723 2588 2617 2552 2409 2561 2576 3999 4778 5157 3366 3054 2347 3871 3996 4673 4534 3084 1552 4347 3580 2977 2341 3532 1612 1957 3633 3822 1292 3463 4028 4296 3438 SWEC E&DCR_
P-3672 A P-4053 P-4171 P-4178 P-4191 P-4192 P-4221 P-4226 P-4237 P-4250 P-4281 P-4285 P-4296 P-4298 P-4304 P-4333 F-1748 I F-10623 B F-10623 C F-20226 F-20226 A F-14663 F-16604 E F-16785 A l F-23659 A F-24523 A F-33482 F-38471 i F-39903 F-39903 A-H F-39903 J-N F-39903 P-T F-40589 F-41311 F-41437 F-41437 A F-41438
- F-41439 F-41439 A F-41440 F-41441 F-41442 F-41443 F-41444 F-41445 F-41446 F-41447 F-41448 F-41449 l F-41450 F-41451 F-41451 A F-41452 F-41452 A-E F-41453 F-41454 F-41455 F-41456 F-41457 F-41458 F-41459 F-41460 F-41460 A-B F-41521 A F-41522 A F-41603 F-41604 F-41604 A F-41648 L
s l WTF1 m(NE ENGINEERING SERVICES Technical Report TR-5633-4 F-41649 F-41650 F-41651 F-41652 F-41669 F-41726 F-41727 F-41728 F-41729 F-41730 F-41850 F-41850 A-E F-41910 F-41910 A F-41911 F-41911 A F-41912 F-41912 A-C F-42117 F-42117 A F-42188 F-42189 F-42211 F-42218 F-42306 F-42306 A-B F-42307 F-42382 F-42382 A-B F-42574 F-42575 F-42576 F-42603 F-42604 F-42605 F-42606 F-42606 A F-42607 F-42608 F-42609 F-42610 F-42892 F-42923 F-42923 A F-42924 F-42925 F-42960 F-41961 F-42962 F-42963 F-42963 A-D F-42964 F-42965 F-43102 F-43102 A-C F-43126 F-43128 F-43129 F-43130 F-43173 F-43175 F-43177 F-43178 F-43235 F-43316 F-43316 A-B F-43492 F-43541 F-43541 A F-43542 F-43543 F-43544 F-43545 F-43547 F-43594 F-43595 F-43596 F-43597 F-43597 A F-43618 F-43619 F-43687 F-43688 F-43688 A F-43722 F-43723 F-43739 F-43739 A F-43803 F-43804 F-43865 F-43865 A,B&C F-43918 F-43919 F-43920 F-43921 F-43922 F-43923 F-43965 F-43966 F-43967 F-43968 F-43969 F-43978 F-44024 F-44109 F-44133 F-44134 F-44135 F-44173 F-44173 A F-44188 F-44189 F-44199 F-44225 F-44234 F-44234 A-B F-44352 F-44397 F-44398 A-D F-44400 F-44401 F-44402 F-44403 F-44404 F-44404 B F-44405 F-44405 A-B F-4445P F-44461 F-44461 A F-44462 F-44462 A-B F-44463 F-44467 F-44467 A F-444580 F-44597 F-44597 A F-44640 F-44649 F-44666 F-44667 F-44668 F-44701 F-44730 F-44739 F-44740 N l F-44741 F 44809 F-44816 F-44817 i F-44819 F-44821 F-44822 F-44823 i F-44828 F-44828 A F-44835 F-44878 F-44880- F-44911 F-44937 N F-44938 F-45001 H-9603 F-10623 B F-10623 C l F-20226 F-20226 A F-14663 i
W TELED(NE ENGINEERING SERVK;ES Technical Report TR-5633-4 SWEC SUPPORT DRAWINGS Support Drawing No. - Rev. 1E21-PSA Ove BZ-10B-4-5 1E21-PSR 028 BZ-10B-21-5 1E21-PSSH 029 B/P-1E21-PSSH-029-4 1E21-PSR 064 BZ-10B-37-6 1E21-PSR 030 BZ-10B-22-5 1E21-PSSH 032 B/P-1E21-PSSH 032-11 1E21-PSR 031 BZ-10B-23-10 1E21-PSSH 033 B/P-1E21-PSSH 033-7 1E21-PSR 034 BZ-10B-24-9 1E21-PSSH 035 B/P-1E21-PSSH 035-10 1E21-PSSP 804 BZ-108-30-6 1E21-PSSP 806 B2-10B-42-4 1E21-PSSH 036 BZ-108-39-6 1E21-PSA 023 BZ-10B-17-5 1E21-PSR 038 BZ-10B-26-6 1E21-PSSH 039 B/P-1E21-PSSH 039-6 1E21-PSR 065 BZ-10B-38-7 1E21-PSR 040 BZ-10B-27-9 1E21-PSSH 042 B/P-1E21-PSSH 042-7 1E21-PSR 041 BZ-108-28-12 1E21-PSSH 043 B/P-1E21-PSSH 043-9 1E21-PSR 044 BZ-10B-29-8 1E21-PSSH 045 B/P-1E21-PSSH 045-11 1E21-PSSP 807 BZ-10B-31-3 1E21-PSSP 809 BZ-10B-41-3 1E21-PSSH 046 BZ-108-40-6 1E21-PSR 001 BZ-10B-1-9 1E21-PSR 002 BZ-10B-2-3 1E21-PSSH 003 B/P-1E21-PSSH 003-4 1C?l-PSR 004 BZ-10B-3-6 1E21-PSSH 005 B/P-1E21-PPSH 005-6 1E21-FSA 059 BZ-10B-5-6 1E21-PSST 063 B/P-1E21-PSST 063-4 i 1E21-PSR C50 BZ-10B-33-7 l 1E21-PSR 040 BZ-10B-32-6 1E21-PSST Ol'/ BZ-108-13-8 1E21-PSR 018 BZ-10B-14-6 1E21-PSSH 019 B/P-1E21-PSSH 019-3 1E21-PSR 020 BZ-108-15-7 1E21-PSSH 021 B/P-1E21-PSSH 021-3 1E21-PSA 024 BZ-108-18-9 1E21-PSR 067 BZ-10B-46-1
- 1E21-PSR 011 BZ-108-9-7 l 1E21-PSSH 012 B/P-1E21-PSSH 012-3 l
l l 1
W F W NE Technical Report TR-5633-4 Support No. Drawing No. - Rev. 1E21-PSST 013 B/P-1E21-PSSH 013-5 1E21-PSSP 800 BZ-10B-10-11 1E21-PSSP 801 BZ-10B-10-11 1E21-PSR 014 BZ-10B-11-7 1E21-PSST 066 BZ-108-45-2 1E21-PSST 015 B/P-1E21-PSST 015-3 1E21-PSR 051 BZ-108-34-6 1E21-PSR-052 BZ-108-35-9 1E21-PSA 016 BZ-10B-12-5 1E21-PSST 058 B/P-1E21-PSST 058-8 1E21-PSST 053 B/P-1E21-PSST 053-6 1E21-PSSH 054 B/P-1E21-PSSH 054-5 1E21-PSA 055 1E21-PSA 056 1E21-PSR 057 BZ-108-20-5 1E21-PSA 011 1E21-PSA 012 1E21-PSSH 013 B/P-1E41-PSSH 013-6 1E21-PSSH 059 BZ-11B-36-1 1E21-PSST 014 B/P-1E41-PSST 014-7 1E21-PSR 015 BZ-11B-12-10 1E21-PSSH 016 B/P-1E41-PSSH 016-3 1E21-PSA 017 1E21-PSA 067 1E21-PSA 178 1E21-PSSH 068 B/P-1E11-PSSH 068-2 1E21-PSR 069 BZ-8E-17-3 1E21-PSR 070 BZ-8F-1-9 1E21-PSR 071 BZ-8F-18-7 1E21-PSA 072 BZ-8F-16-9 1E21-PSSH 159 B/Z-1E11-PSSH 159-2 1E21-PSA 160 1E21-PSA 190 l 1E21-PSR 025 BZ-108-19-5 ! 1E21-PSSH 026 B/P-1E21-PSSH 026-11 l l
WTA FTVNE ENGNEERING SEFMCES -Technical Report TR-5633-4 DOCUENTS REVIEWED AT CLIENT OFFICES Trip Report No. 1792: System AX-3E - Support Calculations: PSR-233 PSR-240 PSR-237 PSR-242 System AX Support Calculations: PSR-049 System AX-7F - Support Calculations: PSR-101 System AX-33C - Support Calculations: PSSP-813 PSSP-814 System AX-1D Support Calcalations: PSR-033 PSR-037 System Al-36 Support Calculations: PSR-279 PSR-280 PSR-291 PSA-022 PSA-192 PSST-278 PSR-283 PSR-286 PSA-288 PSA-329 Stress Packages - AX-3L-4, AX-10-3 E&DCR - P-2623C-Z, P-24860 Support Calculations: IB21-PSSH-001 1821-PSSH-0024 1E21-PSSH-005 1M50-PSA-603 1M50-PSA-616 1M50-PSA-014 1M50-PSA-608 1E11-PSA-001
W F W NE Technical Report TR-5633-4 Trip Report No. 1788: Calculation No. 11600.02 NP(B) 803 XH dated April 19, 1983, " Method of Endpoint Movement Evaluation for Small Bore Piping Reviewed Under Project Procedure 42." Trip Report No. 1763: Valve Acceleration Qualification Calculations; Valve System MOV 031A 1E11 MOV 033A 1E21 MOV 0338 1E21 MOV 040A 1E11 MOV 041 1E41 MOV 041B 1E11 MOV 0368 1E11 M0V 040A IT4B Trip Report No. 1749: Review of Supports with Transmitted Time History Loads for Systems: AX-1A, 20, 2E, 3F, 3L, 3P, 3Y, 3AF AX-8D, 8E, 8J AX-33A, 33E, 33G, 33H AX-537H, 537J, 537AJ AX-11C Trip Report No. 1683: e EMTP 8.22-0, Engineering Mechanics Seismic Report Standard Review Procedure, December 5, 1975 e Form 5040.518 Review of Suppliers Technical Document includes final approval forms for calculations 88AD-1, 88AD-2, 88AD-3, 88AD-5, 88AD-6, 88AD-7 e Interoffice Meaos dated August 1974 for review of Anchor Darling seismic reports e Velan Seismic Analysis Report 6" Forged Bolted Bonnet Gate and Globe Valve, SQRT 88V-8 e Copes-Vulcan Seismic Analysis Report 1B31*A0V-081 & 082, SQRT 318-1 e Pratt Seismic Analysis Report, Specification No. SH1-197
W Tn nWNE ENGINEERING SERVICES Technical Report TR-5633-4 Trip Report No. 1507: Documents Reviewed by TES at SWEC August 25, 1982
- 1. SNPS Project Procedure No. 42, Rev. 1, May 14, 1982.
- 2. Structural Steel Calculation Nos. S23-6001 thru S23-6253 (Steel Elevation 76' - 5 3/4"). ,
- 3. Structural Steel Calculation No. 523-46009 through S23-46207 (Steel Elevation 96' - 11 1/2").
- 4. SWEC Drawing No. 11600.02-FV-1S-4, Reactor Containment Liner PAD Tabulation, Sheet 1.
- 5. SWEC Drawing No. 11600.02-FV-1AC-4, Reactor Containment Lineg, Drygell Composite Development of Overlay Pads, Sheet 2 (120 -
240 ).
- 6. Concrete Calculation No. C16-2001 thru C16-2362 (Concrete Elevation 40).
- 7. Rework of Drawing FC-16A-3, Marked up with Pipe Support Reaction Loads for Structural Evaluation.
- 8. Procedure titled " Field Design of Lightly Loaded Overlay Pads,"
last revised July 5,1978. (To be used with Project Procedure No. 18.)
- 9. Design Specification No. SH1-171, Rev. 2, July 29, 1982.
- 10. Pipe Stress Analysis Sumary 11600.02-AX-108-3.
- 11. Dravo Corporation, Pipe Fabrication Drawing Sketch E-2821, IC-63, Rev. 10L.
- 12. SWEC Drawing No. 11600.02-8Z-108-3-7, Sheets 1 and 2, Pipe Supports Reactor Core Spray Mark No. 1E21-PSR004.
- 13. Sub-calculation No. 1E21, Support No. PSR004.
- 14. SWEC Drawing No. 11600.02-BZ-10B-2-4, Core Spray Pipe Support PSR002 Reactor Building.
- 15. Sub-calculation No. 1E21, Support No. PSR002.
- 16. E&DCR No. F-42161, Job No. 11600.02, Reference Support No.
l 1E11-PSST 332, Drawing No. BZ-8H-79, Plant Location Area 7, Change Spring Hanger to Vertical Constraint. l 17. Sub-calculation No. 1E21, Support No. PSSH012.
- i
! i
W F W NE ENGINEERING SERVICES Technical Report TR-5633-4 18. Bergen-Paterson Drawing No. 1E21-PSSH012-3, Spring Hanger.
- 19. Logic Diagrams for Core Spray:
SWEC Drawing No. 1160.02-LSK-25-10A, Core Spray Pump 1E21-P013A 108, Core Spray Inboard Valve IOC, Min. Flow Bypass Valve 1E21-M0V034A
-10D, Testable Check Valve 1E21
-A0V081A
- 20. SWEC Drawing No. 11600.02-ESK-6E2101, Rev. 6, AC Elementary Diagram 480V Core Spray Line Fill PMP.
- 21. SWEC Drawing No. 11600.02-FM-23A-14, Flow Diagram for Core Spray.
- 22. SWEC Drawing No. 11600.02-FP-10A-8, Piping Plan Elevation Drawing.
- 23. Dravo Corporation, Drawing No. E-2821, IC-64, Rev.11R, Stamped As-Built, Core Spray to Reactor.
- 24. SWEC Drawing No. 11600.02-FM-23A-15, Issue 7, System 1E21 Core Spray Flow Diagram Trip Report of August 25, 1982:
- 1. LJ0-8-A Allowable stress and deflection for pipe support design
- 2. EMD-80-02 Stiffness representation of supports anchors and restraints for pife stress analysis and pipe support design
- 3. EMD-80-03 Friction forces for the design of pipe support i guide and restraints
- 4. EMTG-5-A Design and installation of piping and piping supports for small bore (2" and under) piping systems
- 5. F-73493 Ogden Technology Labs Inc., " Seismic Vibration of Barksdale Pressure Switch Cat. No. P1H-M855 SS-V
- 6. SH1-343 Specification for Installation of Tubing and Instrumentation
T W P W NE ENGNEERING SERVICES Technical Report TR-5633-4 , Trip Report No. 1534: Weld record packages and associates QA records were reviewed for thirty-seven field pipe and attachment welds, as listed: Problem No. - Piping Iso. Field Weld No. Attachment AX 10A IC - 64 FW 1, 5, 6,10 FWE AX 10 B IC - 63 FW 1, 3, 4, 5, 6. 8 FWB AX 10 B IC - 66 FW 1, 2, 4, 5, 8, 10 AX 8K IC - 66 FW 6 FWC AX 8K IC - 47 FW 4, 5 AX 11 A IC - 55 FW 1, 2, 6, 7 & 10 FWD AX 11 A IC - 178 FW 1 AX 11 A IC - 179 FW 6 AX 11 A IC - 56 FWB AX 10 G IC - 55 FW 3 AX 8 AA IC - 6 FW 4 AX 8 AA IC - 7 FW 8 AX 10 D IC - 66 FW 3, 7, 9 TES QA sampled the LILC0 Site Field QA Audit Records for years 1979 thru l 1982 as listed below. Thirty two record packages were reviewed. Scope Of Audit 1979 1980 1981 1982 Receiving Inspection FA 996 FA 1159 FA 1289 FA 1427 ! NDE Procedures FA 1012 FA 1085 FA 1361 FA 1488 Site NCR Control FA 994 FA 1115 FA 1290 FA 1480 l Site Purchasing FA 907 FA 1158 FA 1339 FA 1428 l Onsite Audit Plan FA 982 FA 1058 FA 1326 FA 1421 Training - QA Training i And Personnel Qualification FA 1040 FA 1116 FA 1327 FA 1485 Design Change, E & DCR l Control Program FA 970 FA 1179 FA 1302 FA 1494 l Document Site Control Program FA 990 FA 1217 FA 1341 FA 1468 l
TF ME ENGINEERING SERVCES Technical Report TR-5633-4 The TES reviewer sampled ten (10) LILC0 Site QA surveillance reports for the years 1976 thru 1979. All of the surveillance reports pertained to construction activity on the 1-E21 LPCS System. Year Report No. Subject Of Surveillance 1976 MF - 6 Valve welded in line 1976 MF - 10 Mech. eqpt in short term storage, or stored in place. 1977 MA - 23 SWEC Welding performance 1977 ME - 58 Courter & Co. weld material control field application. 1978 MF - 35 Mech. eqpt in short term storage, or stored in place. MF - 55 MF - 56 1979 MG - 11 ASME - Pressure test (Small Bore) Engineering Assurance Audits Reviewed Year Audit No. Audit Date Activity Audited 1979 28 3/6 thru 27 Project-Boston 29 6/6 thru 29 Project-Boston 30 9/5 thru 12 Project-Boston 30 9/5 thru 12 Project-Toronto 31 12/3 thru 19 Project-Boston Extended thru 1/18/80 7 5/8 thru 5/25 Shore S;;e Engrg. Office l 8 9/5 thru 7 Site Engrg. L Office 1980 32 3/10 thru 28 Project-Boston 33 6/2 thru 20 Project-Boston 34 9/22 thru 10/1 Project-Boston 35 12/30 thru 1/16/81 Project-Boston 9 4/28 thru 5/1 Shore Site Engrg. Office 10 9/10 thru 9/11 Site Engrg. Office l l . __
WTA AWNE Technical Report TR-5633-4 Year Audit No. Audit Date Activity Audited 1981 36 4/14 thru 5/1 Project-Boston 37 7/6 thru 24 Project-Boston 38 10/22 thru 30 Project-Boston 11 4/6 thru 10 Shoreham Site Engrg. Office 12 10/9 thru 11/19 Site Engrg. Office 1982 39 1/7 thru 18 Project-Boston 40 4/12 thru 30 Project-Boston 41 6/29 thru 7/27 Project-Boston 13 4/12 thru 4/16 Shoreham Site Engrg. Office None 1/19 thru 23 SWCL Toronto None 3/8 thru 12 NY Engrg. Office SWEC OA Cost and Audit Division Audits _ Boston Office Year Audit No. Audit Date Activity Audited 1979 6 3/12 thru 16 QA Program 1980 7 3/17 thru 21 QA Program 1981 8 2/23 thru 27 QA Program 1982 9 3/8 thru 12 QA Program 4 d 7
~ , , . . . - ~ .
WTFI m(NE ENGNEERING SERVICES Technical Report TR-5633 SWEC QA Cost and Audit Division Audits - Shoreham Site Note: These audits also included Courter & Co. QA Program for site: Year Audit No. Audit Date Activity Audited 1979 29 2/12 thru 16 QA Program 30 4/30 thru 5/4 QA Program 31 8/27 thru 8/31 QA Program 32 11/5 thru 9 QA Program 1980 33 3/25 thru 3/29 QA Program 34 5/19 thru 23 QA Program 35 8/25 thru 29 QA Program 36 11/27 thru 31 QA Program 1981 37 2/9 thru 2/13 QA Program 38 5/18 thru 5/22 QA Program 39 8/31 thru 9/4 QA Program 40 11/16 thru 20 QA Program 1982 41 2/8 thru 12 QA Program 42 6/7 thru 10 QA Program l l l l l i I
T M W NE SERVICES Technical Report TR-5633-4 FIGURES 1, 2A, 28, 3A, 38 i r,_ __ _ . _
G C V R 4 E 3 S 1' 3 G 56 - 2 N - - R R { 1 0 E T E 3 M L l { 2 2 G - R N : W E - E # 1 " 2 B 1 f t[ $ Di e. 2 U . E T !_ 1 +~ n
~
1 0 3 x 2 O f } ' l W 2 f 8 I R W 2 N 'N49"2 T - 1 h} R D I 4 l p - 1 p 4 t o
]
1 t c o . 1 v w-
+J j b
e
.'::4 u
L O 6 S u O m g~ i P N T r t e O s w I S 4I S y pm ,[ _ S E S eP i i R T e C P i P L p ' U S
-13 fo n
m 6 i o i r t o " P o r
.k
*C -
2 I 1 1 g e I 0 r 3 J u 2 R
- u
+ c '
- -h w i F
g [ W e [
* "2 7 f I 1
l: f 1 ' h 1
- 0 i 3
~ -
y + - 2 R W
* "2 1
6 ~
~
I 1 ETA m(NE ENGNEERING SERVICES Technical Report TR-5633-4 h Figure 2A Phase 1 Project Organization TES D. F. Landers
.. Sr. Vice President
. LILC0 Project Engineer M. Milligan J. P. King Project Review Assistant Internal Committee Asst. Project Engineer Project Manager J. A. Flaherty, C. Seaman Chairman Technical Interface E. Montgomery I I I I Review Team Members
~
TN ENGDEERNG SERVICES LILCD TES REVIEWER TES PROJECT MANAGER TES INTERNAL COMMITTEE DATA AND INFORMATION j RRF 4 PMR RFI m l 't RESPONSE "
-REVISE RRF
> REVISE PMR
& CLOSE "
i 0BSERVATION , OR ICR FINDING y DISPOSITION FIGURE 2B PHASE 1 FLOWCHART TR-5633-4
1 WNNE ENGNEERNG SERVICES Technical Report TR-5633-4 Figure 3A Phase 2/3 Project Organization TES D. F. Landers /J. p. King LILC0 I I Reviewer Chairman Project Review Internal Committee
TN ENGNEERNG SERVICES TR-5633-4 LILC0 TES PHASE 2/3 DISPOSITION RESPONSE :- REVISE ICR ADDITIONAL " > CLOSE CONCERNS h F DISPOSITION
RESPONSE
& REVISE ICR
, FINDING "
FIGURE 3B PHASE 2/3 FLOWCHART
"/PTCl AT/NE Technical Report ENGINEERING SERVICES ~
TR-5633-4 APPENDIX 1 PROJECT QUALITY ASSURANCE PROGRAM INDEPENDENT DESIGN REVIEW SHOREHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION I i (
TN ENGNEERING SERVICES PROJECT QA PROGRAM D. F. Landers / Project No. 5633 Project Manager J. P. King Initiated On 4-29-82 REV 0 Date 6-30-82 Client Long Island Lighting Company, Shoreham Nuclear Power Station PROJECT SCOPE Provide an Independent Design Review of the Low Pressure Core Spray System as defined in Figure 1 of EP-1-017, and as clarified by LILC0 letter to TES of 6-8-82. This review shall encompass the structural and mechanical aspects of this system only. Applicable Sections 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 15, 16, 17 and 18 REVISION LEGEND Revision Date Changes in Section l 0 6-30-82 Initial Issue I 1 7-14-83 1,1, 1.3 and 5.2 l l 1 l l REVISION APPROVAL Project Manager b Date 7- /d* b EA Manager IN(( Date 7////48 QA Manager
-[ d, , #<.<,o Date
,- //,9 // 3 3/82
s 1%T WE - ENGNEERNG SERVICES J PRO'ECT 5633 ' , PROJECT QA PROGRAM REV 1 'DATE, 1/14/83 PAGE 1 0F 7', , s
-NOTE: The following paragraphs are numbered to correspond to the TES QA Manual.
1.0 PROJECT ORGANIZATION . 1.1 TES Organization i . Project Manager: D. F. Landers Assistant Project Manager: J. P. King QA Engineer: J.H. Malonson Project Review Internal Committee: J.A. Flaherty, Chairman i 10CFR Part 21 Committee: R. Wray, Chairman 1.2 Client Organization Project Manager: William Museler, Manager Construction & Engineering (Shoreham) Contractual: Andy Wofford, V.P. Purchasing Quality Assurance: Frank Gerecke, Division Manager, Q.A. 1.3 Interfaces TES LILC0 S&W Project Manager: D. F. Landers / M.H. Milligan R.E. Foley b J. P. King Contractual: W.S. Moonan A. Wofford N/A Quality Assurance: J.H. Malonson J.Kelley (Site)/ R. Costa E. P. Cassiano Eng. Assurance: J.H. Malonson N/A A.J.Benecchi Technical Data: D. F. Landers / E. Montgomery R.Hankinson - J. P. King 1.4 Project Document Distribution Controlled Document Distribution: The following personnel at TES are authorized to withdraw RECORD COPY from Document Con-trol. (This is an exception to SQAP-81-01, Section 3.3(d).) D. F. Landers J. P. King J. H. Malonson Report Distribution: D. F. Landers /J. P. King (TES)
W TELEDYfE ENGWNEERNG SERVCES PROJECT 5633 PROJECT QA PROGRAM REV 1 DATE 7/14/83 PAGE 2 0F 7
/
2.0 PROGRAM 2.1 ' Client Requirements No additional requirements to TES QA Manual. 2.2 TES Requirements This Project QA Program, latest revision, constitutes the QA requiraments for Shoreham Nuclear Power Station Independent Design Review Program for the LPCS system. 2.3 TES Quality Assurance Manual Applicability Quality Assurance activities 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 15, 16, 17, and 18 apply as supplemented by this PQAP. 2.4 Implementation TES Engineering Procedure EP-1-017, "TES Project Plan for Independent Design Review of Shoreham Nuclear Power Station LPCS System," latest revision, defines the plan for implementation. 2.5 Indoctrination . Each TES employee assigned to this project shall complete and sign a copy of Attachment 1. These documents shall become QA Records. 3.0 DESIGN CONTROL Any calculations or analysis performed by TES and used to substantiate a TES conclusion shall be subject to the checking, verification and design control requirements of the TES QA Program.
YN ENGeEERING SEMCES PROJECT 5633 PROJECT QA PROGRAM REV 1 DATE 7/14/83 PAGE 3 0F 7 5.0 PROCEDURES, INSTRUCTIONS AND DRAWINGS 5.1 General TEP-1-001, Revision 2 " Initiation, Approval, Implementation, Revision and Control of TES Procedures and Engineering Instructions" TEP-1-002, Revision 2 " Guidelines for Writing TES Engineering Procedures" < 5.2 Supplementary Program requirements will be implemented in accordance with EP-1-017 "Teledyne Engineering Services Program Plan for Independent Design Review of Shoreham Nuclear Power Station
/ LPCS System," and the following:
EP-5-006, Revision 0 " Method of Determination of As-Built Configuration of Low Pressure Core Spray System at Shoreham Nuclear Power Station" EP-1-018, Revision 0 " Method of Review of As-Built Design Documents for the LPCS System at the Shoreham Nuclear Power Station" EP-1-019. Revision 1 " Procedure for Project Review Internal Committee Shoreham Nuclear Power Station Independent Design Review". EP-1-020, Revision 0 " Procedure for Reviewing and Reporting by TES 10CFR Part 21 Committee Shoreham Nuclear Power Station, Independent , Design Review". EP-1-021, Revision 1 "QA Review Sampling Procedure Shoreham Nuclear Power Station Independent g Design Review". 6.0 DOCUMENT CONTROL 6.1 General The requirements of the TES QA' Manual apply except as modified by TES SQAP 81-01, Revision 0, and this PQAP. 6.2 Controlled Documents - TES Generated Documents developed by TES shall be controlled documents. Telecons, minutes of meetings, trip reports, and memoranda shall become project QA records.
YN ENGNERNG SERVICES PROJECT 5633 PROJECT QA PROGRAM REV 1 DATE 7/14/83 PAGE 4 0F 7 i 6.3 Controlled Documents - Client Generated LILC0 documents shall be transmitted to: Teledyne Engineering Services Project 5633 130 Second Avenue Waltham, MA 02254 Attention: Document Control 6.4 All LILC0 documents received for the performance of the tasks shall be returned to LILCO six months after submittal of final report. 15.0 NONCONFORMING MATERIAL OR ITEMS No additional requirements to TES QA Manual. 16.0 CORRECTIVE ACTION No additional requirements to TES QA Manual. 17.0 QUALITY ASSURANCE RECORDS 17.1 The TES QA records shall be retained in accordance with Attachment 2, QA Records P.equirements List. i 17.2 Personnel statements regarding potential or apparent conflicts of interest by TES employees / contract engineers shall be retained by the TES Personnel Relations Manager. 18.0 AUDITS The requirements of the TES QA Manual apply as implemented by Attachment 3 of this PQAP.
WM FNGDEstNG SERVCES PROJECT 5633 PROJECT QA PROGRAM REV 1 DATE 7/14/83 PAGE 5 0F 7 Project 5633 Rev. O ATTACHMENT 1 T0: D. F. Landers, Project Manager J. H. Malonson, QA Engineer
SUBJECT:
Project 5633, Independent Design Review, Shoreham Nuclear Power Station: Project Indoctrination I certify that I have read and understand, and that I will comply with, the following documents which control this project.
- 1. Project QA Program, Revision 0.
- 2. TES Engineering Procedure EP-1-017, "TES Project Plan for Independent Design Review of Shoreham Nuclear Power Station LPCS System", Revision 0.
Signed:
Title:
Date:
TE N Project 5633 Rev. 1 N SEMCES ATTACHMENT 2 QA RECORDS REQUIREMENTS LIST Page 6 of 7 TYPE RETENTION PERIOD CODE CLIENT PROJECT BY OWNER BY TES
- 1. CLIENT DOCUMENTS A. Specifications X 6 months B. Procedures . A 6 months j C. Drawings .X 6 months g 6 D. Instructions x 6 montns E. _
Other x 6 montfis II. TES DESIGN DOCUMENTS A. Specifications B. Procedures X 6 months C. Drawings X b montns D. Instructions X o montns E. Analyses X b montns j F. Reports X n monm3 l G. Reviews l H. Other l 111. PERSONNEL QUALIFICATIONS N/A l A. Welders B. NDE C. QC Inspectors D. Other IV. EQUIPMENT QUALIFICATIONS N/A A. Calibration B. Standards C. Other l V. VENDOR REQUIREMENTS g l A. Personnel Qualifications l B. Measurement / Test C. Procurerr,ent j D. Other - VI. TES DOCUMENTS A. Project QA Program X 2 years B. Specist QA Procedures ^ C. Project Instructions 2 years O. NDE Reports E. Other VII. AUDITS A. Per Audit Plan 1 year X B. Vendor C. Other 3/80
YN PROJECT 5633 REV 1 DATE 7/14/83 PROJECT QA PROGRAM 7 PAGE _J_ 0F Project 5633 Rev. 1 ATTACHMENT 3 1.0 PROJECT AUDITS 1.1 During progress of Independent Design Review activity the QA Engineer shall perform an internal project audit of work in process. This audit shall be performed using a prepared checklist to cover document control and requirements of the PQAP and TES Engineering Procedures. 1.2 Prior to project close-out the PQAE shall conduct a final project audit to asstre the identification, accumulation and storage of Project QA Records and update of Project Personnel Training Records. 1.3 Upon completion of the QA Audit and documenting the results, the QA Engineer shall discuss his findings with the TES QA Manager and the Project Manager. 2.0 AUDITOR QUALIFICATION For this scope of work, all personnel performing QA auditing and assignments shall have been qualified per ANSI N45.2.23, 1978.
. .. -- __ . . - = - _ . . . . . . = - _ _ - _ . _ . . .. .. - - - . _-_
4 r ENGINEERING PROCE0dRE EP-1-017
; TELEDYNE ENGINEERING SERVICES PROGRAM PLAN
- FOR INDEPENDENT DESIGN REVIEW 0F SH0REHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION LPCS SYSTEM T
l ! i REVISION 1 4 PROJECT 5633 h JULY 8, 1983 h 1 Prepared by: A
% Date 7 'bI3 Approved by: .
M Date 1 Project Manager
/;' ,
7[/9[8.3 Reviewed by: <&,-h Date Quality'Assur[nce [ i WTELEDYNE ENGINEERING SERVICES 130 SECOND AVENUE WALTHAM, MASS ACHUSETTS 02254 . 617-Fa}3350 r-- e e- -,i.e -,ew , - + - . - = , -e--ge-,.- ---,--=<v-,-,,r--%..v,e, <s. -- + .--,,-e. - - - , - - . . - . - e---, ---e,,--.---- --e,- - - - ~----e--s---,, -
"RTELEDYNE Technical Report ENGINEERING SERVICES TR-5633-4 APPENDIX 2 ENGINEERING PROCEDURES INDEPENDENT DESIGN REVIEW SHOREHAM MUCLEAR POWER STATION
Engineering Procedure EP-1-017
'WPTF1 M g
REVISION StM4ARY TABLE Rtv. No. Section Page Description 1 Enclosure 1 10 "two of the three members" becomes "two members". 1 Enclosure 1 12 Added " Observations" after" Potential Findings" 1 Enclosure 1 16 Revised Project Review Internal Committee Membership , 1 - - Total no. of pages = 3 in procedure, and 22 in Enclosure 1. t S/82 Page ( i )
WTEt FrWNE ENGINEERING SERVICES ENGINEERING PROCEDURE TITLE: EP _1_017 M% REV. ~ _0 REV. TES PROGRAM PLAN FOR INDEPENDENT DESIGN ORIG. 3FK L 4 4t. 0 RIG. ENG. AS. #&p,Q
~
REVIEW 0F SH0REHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION ENG. AS. LPCS SYSTEM Q. A. cCS 6/d/p, Q.A. PROJ. MGR. M "PROJ. MGR. DATE tal 4 t h DATE SECTION DESCRIPTION REV. 1.0 SCOPE 1.1 This Engineering Procedure provides the method to be used by Teledyne Engineering Services (TES) in performing the Shoreham Nuclear Power Station LPCS System Independent Design Review Program under Project 5633. 2.0 APPLICATION 2.1 Details Enclosure (1) to this procedure contains the Program Plan for the Independent Design Review, including: a) Criteria b) Personnel responsibilities 2.2 References a) Project QA Program, Project No. 5633 b) EP-5-006, " Method of Determination of As-Built Configuration of Low Pressure Core Spray System at Shoreham Nuclear Power Station" c) EP-1-018, " Method of Review of As-Built Design Documents
- for the LPCS System at the Shoreham Nuclear Power
- Station" d) EP-1-019, " Procedure for Project Review Internal Committee Shoreham Nuclear Power Station Independent Design Review e) EP-1-020, " Procedure for Reviewing and Reporting by TES 10CFR Part 21 Committee Shoreham Nuclear Power Station Independent Design Review".
f) EP-1-021, "QA Sampling Inspection Procedure Shoreham Nuclear Power Station Independent Design Review". 2/81 , _
SPTwi prWNE ENGINEERING SERVICES ENGINEERING PROCEDURE PAGE TITLE: EP 017 2 REV. O REV. TES PROGRAM PLAN FOR INDEPENDENT DESIGN ORIG. "7pK. 4.r.8's ORIG. REVIEW 0F SHOREHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION ENG. AS. (7A 1 0 ENG. AS. LPCS SYSTEM Q. A. CCJ (/d/p> Q.A. PROJ. MGR. T)FL. PROJ. MGR. DATE 4/6/FE DATE I ( SECTION DESCRIPTION REV. 3.0 METHOD 3.1 Independent Design Review Program 3.1.1 Section 1.0 of Enclosure (1) describes the Independent Design Review Program Scope, including: a) Specific system to be reviewed b) Exclusion of items and areas from review 3.1.2 The objective of the Independent Design Review Program conducted by TES is to determine the adequacy of the design process as it relatas to Normal and Upset service loadings of a specific system. That system is the LPCS System, as shown darkened in Figure 1 of Enclosure (1), and as clarified by LILC0 letter to TES of 6-8-82. It is anticipated that this type of review would result in conclusions that are applicable to all work performed by the organizations subject to the review. )' 3.1.3 The Independent Design Review Program includes eight tasks. Section 3.0 of Enclosure (1) describes the tasks in detail. / 3.2 Project Organization Section 4.0 of Enclosure (1) describes the TES project organi-zation. 3.3 TES Technical Efforts 2/81
SeTF1 FDYNE ENGINEERING SERVICES ENGINEERING PROCEDURE PAGE TITLE: EP 017 3 REV. .D REV. . TES PROGRAM PLAN FOR INDEPENDENT DESIGN ORIG. W L471l0 RIG. j REVIEW 0F SH0REHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION ENG. AS./7MC. _ ENG. AS. ; LPCS SYSTEM Q. A. <-Mg 4/d/pf Q.A. PROJ. MGR. M '~ PROJ. MGR. ~ DATE (,l4ffv DATE i SECTION DESCRIPTION REV. ! l 3.3.1 In general, TES will not perform any detailed analyses to arrive at conclusions. Review of existing analyses performed I by the organizations involved will be sufficient and, further, will provide better insight as to the design of other plant systems for which they were responsible. Any calculations or , analysis performed by TES ar.d used to substantiate a TES ! conclusion shall be subject to the checking, verification and i design control requirements of the TES QA Manual. 3.4 TES Reporting 3.4.1 Section 3.8 of Enclosure (1) describes the TES reporting of the results of this project. This is Task 7 of the Program Plan. l I 3.4.2 Task 8 of the Independent Design Review Program Plan of Enclo-sure (1) describes the Project Review Internal Committee. This comittee will assess the impact of any potential findings on the overall design adequacy of the LPCS System. 4.0 RECORDS ! All records shall be controlled in accordance with the PQAP. i l 2/81
SeTA m(NE ENGINEERING SERVICES ENGINEERING PROCEDURE EP 017 PAGE TITLD TES PROGRAM PLAN FOR INDEPENDENT Rb. w"N kt-R 0R b.
*^*
SHOREHAM NUCL OW T N LPCS SYSTEM *
, ^ ((
PROJ. MGR. E g , PROJ. MGR. DATE W4f fb DATE SECTION DESCRIPTION REV. ENCLOSURE (1) TO EP-1-017 TES PROGRAM PLAN FOR THE SH0REHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION LPCS SYSTEM INDEPENDENT DESIGN REVIEW
?
o l 2/81
"eTf:1 ETP(NE ENGINEERING SERVICES Enclosure (1)
EP-1-017 A
1.0 INTRODUCTION
Teledyne Engineering Services, at the request of the Long Island Lighting Company (LILCO), is performing an Independent Design Review at the Shoreham Nuclear Power Station. The design review is limited to the LPCS system shown darkened in Figure 1, for Normal and Upset Service levels. This enclosure provides the Program Plan to be utilized by TES in performing this review. 2.0 PROGRAM PLAN OUTLINE 2.1 General The final result of this independent review is to determire the adequacy of the design process as it relates to the Shoreham Nuclear Power Station. It is anticipated that this type of review would result in conclusions that are applicable to all work performed by the organizations subject to the review. In general, the reviewer will not perform any detailed analyses to arrive at conclusions. Review of existing analyses performed by the organizations involved will be sufficient and further, will provide better insight as to the design of other plant systems for which they were responsible. This does not p preclude the reviewer from performing any calculations and analyses that are deemed necessary. Any calculations or analysis performed by TES and used to substantiate a TES conclusion shall be subject to the checking, verification and design control requirements of the TES QA Manual. The generation of dynamic spectra and the validation of computer programs utilized by the organizations involved are specifically excluded from review. The reviewer will accept dynamic spectra for the buildings involved as presented and will only assure l that their application to the system is appropriate. It is assumed that any computer program used has already been subjected to proper ! , validation and verification procedures. 1 I
4
#'?IC f GANZ ENGWNEERNG SERVICES Enclosure (1)
EP-1-017 2.2 Plan Outline Essentially the reviewer will start with the final design package which is presented as being representative of the as-built system. From this point the reviewer will work back through the design process to the initial design assuring that interface control (internal and external) was applied. The program is separated into eight tasks as follows:
-Task 1 - Review Design Process and Procedures Task 2 - Review Design Requirements Task 3 - Review As-Built Design Documents Task 4 - Determine As-Built Plant Configuration Task 5 - Compare As-Built Documentation to Plant Configuration Task 6 - Review LILC0 QA and S&W QA/QC/EA Process and Documentation f; Task 7 - Reporting Task 8 - Project Review Internal Committee 3.0 PROGRAM PLAN IMPLE*.tNTATION 3.1 General The following sections discuss the detailed implementation of each task outlined in Section 2.0 above. It is anticipated that some tasks will proceed in parallel while implementation of others will be dependent on completion of associated tasks. Terminology is used in the l
"P Tr.,rr,YNE ENGINEERING SER\/lCES Enclosure (1)
EP-1-017 following task descriptions that may not be particular to S&W and/or LILCO. However, the intent is to define scope and methed, and terminology can be revised to suit the particular organizations involved. 3.2 Task 1 - Review Design Process and Procedures , The reviewer will meet with S&W to determine what process is used in taking desigr. requirements and developing construction drawings. Further, the process of developing revisions to the design will be re-viewed. Interfaces betv;een internal organizations will be determined in following the process of: a) specification of design requirements b) development of preliminary design c) piping analysis d) support location and selection e) support analysis f) effect on building structure g) equipment loading requirements h) development of construction drawings i) revisions to design Interfaces between external organizations will be determined in following the process of: a) transmittal of information to the external organization f b) review of procedures l
^
l
WMNE ENGEEERiNG SERVCES Enclosure (1) EP-1-017 c) review of design d) transmittal of developed information to vendor organi-zations. (i.e., loads on building structure, etc.) a) dealing with Field Change Requests (FCR), er the equivalent f) dealing with Engineering Change Notices (ECN) or the equivalent g) dealing with nonconformance and associated corrective action Procedures, instructions and methods associated with developing the design of the LPCS system will be made available to the reviewer. The reviewer must become familiar with these procedures to assure that implementation was adhered to by the design organizations. 3.3 Task 2 - Review Design Requi_rements The adequacy of the design requirements as delineated in the
- General Electric (GE) and S&W LPCS system specifications, standards and
! procedures will be reviewed for compliance with FSAR commitments and NRC requirements. This review will include piping, supports, pipe and floor mounted equipment and containment penetration. 1 The documents subject to review will be determined in Task 1. l
, , . . . . ,.-__,_.--,4._ ,_..,_-_.m... .
SPTELEDYNE ENGNEERING SERVICES Enclosure (1) EP-1-017 3.4 Task 3 - Review As-Built Design Documents The as-built documentation supplied by S&W will be reviewed to determine compliance with FSAR and Design Specification commitments. A detailed review of the Design Specification will be performed ~in Task 2 since that document forms the basis for the design approach. The review of as-built design documents will cover the piping, supports, and selected pipe or floor mounted mechanical and electrical components. Mechanical and electrical components that have previously received third-party review by S&W or G.E. to current NRC (SQRT) guidelines will be reviewed for satisfaction of interface requirements only. This work will be performed in accordance with Engineering Procedure EP-1-018,
" Method of Review of As-Built Design Documents for the LPCS System at the Shoreham Nuclear Power Station."
3.5 Task 4 - Determine As-Built Plant Configuration A field walkdown of the system will be performed. This walkdown will develop the geometry of the as-built piping, supports and equipment mounting for all accessible locations. Clearances at any penetrations, pipe whip restraints or other structures or components will be determined. A copy of the as-built isometric will be made (preferably traced) by TES. The TES isometric will not include dimensions or support locations. This work will be performed in , accordance with Engineering Procedure EP-5-006, " Method of Determination of As-Built Configuration of the LPCS System at Shoreham Nuclear Power Station." 3.6 Task 5 - Compare As-Built Documentation to Plant Configuration The reviewer will obtain from LILC0 or S&W the as-built documentation which is specified to be representative of the plant ! configuration. The as-built configuration obtained in Task 4 will be I compared with the submitted documentation. l
WTA STWNE ENGINEERING SERVCES Enclosure (1) EP-1-017 The as-built documentation used in this task is the same package that will be used in the detailed review of Task 3. This package should represent revisions resulting from ECN's, FCR's and any applicable corrective action for nonconformance and therefore will allow TES to review the process of the design back to initiation; and determine if changes and interfaces were implemented properly in the design process. 3.7 Task 6 - Review LILC0 QA and S&W QA/QC/EA Process and Documentation The reviewer will obtain LILC0 QA audit findings related to activities at S&W. The specific activities cited will be reviewed to determine if corrective action was taken and if LILC0 audit personnel assured that this occurred. Audit schedules and implementation will also be reviewed. With respect to S&W activities the following review will be performed on a sample basis, in accordance with Engineering Procedure EP-1-021, "QA Sampling Inspection Procedure".
- a. training and qualification records of construction personnel
- b. identification and control of material, parts and components
- c. control of special processes
" d. non-conformance and dispositioning report process
- e. receiving inspection records
- f. material certification records
- g. NDE records Additionally, the reviewer will obtain S&W QA and EA audit findings related to activities on the LPCS system at Shoreham. Schedule implementation and follow-up on corrective action will be reviewed.
W P W NE ENGNEERNG SERVICES Enclosure (1) EP-1-017 This activity will be performed by the Project QA Engineer who will report directly to the Manager, Quality Assurance, for this task and in his role as QA Engineer on this project. 3.8 Task 7 - Reporting Reporting of TES review team members will comply with the fol-lowing. 3.8.1 Definitions The following definitions are to be used by TES review team members in preparing reports to the Project Manager on their review work. a) Open Item (TES Internal) - An item requiring further review or more information before a decision can be reached. An Open Item can become a Potential Finding, an Observation or a Closed Item but cannot remain an Open Item in the TES Final Report. b) Closed Item - An Open Item which after further review can be closed. I c) Potential Finding (TES Internal)-An item which the reviewer and TES Project Manager feel could have an impact on the adequacy of the design or QA process. All Potential Findings will be submitted to the Project Review Internal Committee for disposition. A Potential Finding can become a Finding, or an Observation but cannot remain a Potential Finding in the TEli Final Report.
W P W NE ENGINEERING SERVCES Enclosure (1) EP-1-017 d) Finding - An item which the Project Review Internal Committee has reviewed and has determined impacts the adequacy of the design or QA process. e) Observation - An item that does not impact the adequacy of the design or QA process but has significance relative to conservatism, design practice or applicable procedures. 3.8.2 Reporting Process The following process of reporting will be adhered to by the TES review team members. a) Items will be submitted to the Project Manager in writing using the Reviewer Report Form (RRF). The definitions of Section 3.8.1 will be used in classifying the item by the reviewer. The original of this form will be forwarded to the TES Project Manager. Additional information regarding an item required by a reviewer will be obtained by means of a Request for Informati'on Form (RFI). b) The Project Manager will review the RRF and complete a Project Manager Resolution Form (PMR). The PMR must be signed by the TES reviewer who L initiated the RRF to indicate his agreement with the resolution. The original RRF and PMR will be maintained as QA records. If the item is classified as a Potential Finding, or if resolution of the item cannot be reached by the Project Manager, or if the TES reviewer does not agree with the resolution, the RRF and PMR will be forwarded to the Project Review Internal Committee for l resolution. l l
TF WE ENGNEERNG SERVCES Enclosure (1) EP-1-017 REV 1 c) The Project Review Internal Comittee will review the RRF end PMR and develop a position on the consequence of the item as it relates to the adequacy of the design or QA process. The Internal Committee will present this position by completing an Internal Comittee Resolution (ICR) form, a copy of which requires signature by two members of the b committee. A copy of the ICR will be submitted to the Project Manager and the TES reviewer. The original ICR will be attached to the origir,al RRF and PMR and will be maintained as QA records. d) The Project Manager shall review the ICR, and may return this report to the committee if their conclusions do not meet established review criteria. If agreement between the Project Manager and/or the Reviewer and the Internal Committee cannot be reached the Project Manager will, in writing, request the TES 10CFR Part 21 Committee to review the issue. Findings of the Internal Committee accepted by the Project Manager will be reported to LILCO. LILC0 may propose a plan for remedial action for the Finding, which will be included in the TES Final Report. e) The TES Part 21 Committee will review any items forwarded to it in writing by the Project Manager and/or the Reviewer in accordance with Engineering Procedure EP-1-020, " Procedure for Reviewing and Reporting by TES 10CFR Part 21 Committe Shoreham Nuclear Power Station Independent Design Review". Reporting will be directly to LILC0 and the NRC in accordance with the Engineering Procedure EP-1-020.
W F W NE ENGINEERING SERVICES Enclosure (1) EP-1-017 3.8.3 Report Submittal TES will submit reports to LILC0 and the NRC concurrently. The following schedule for submittal is provided and assumes receipt of required information on a timely basis. Findings - within three working days of determination by TES Initial Status Report - June 30, 1982 , Final Report - August 11, 1982 a) Findings will be transmitted to LILC0 in letter form with copies of the RRF, PMR, and ICR corresponding to that Finding. b) The Initial Status Report will outline the progress to that date of the review. Any Findings which have been submitted by letter report to LILC0 will be included in this report. Reported Findings ! which LILC0 has responded to with a remedial action plan will be so noted, and the plan will be L included in the TES report. Areas which have been reviewed and are still under discussion by the review team or Internal Committee will be noted. c) The Final Report will contain all Findings, including an assessment of extent, evaluation of safety impact and appropriate recommendations. Observations will be reported including an assessment of why they are not Findings. Closed Items will not be included in the Final Report. l
WM ENGNEERING SERVICES Enclosure (1) EP-1-017 REV 1 d) TES will maintain as Project QA records all items reported by TES reviewers with associated resolu-tions. These will be available for review by LILC0 or the NRC. 3.9 Task 8 - Project Review Internal Comittee TES will form an Internal Committee whose responsibility will be to review all Potential Findings and Observations of t'he review team, b in accordance with Engineering Procedure EP-1-019. This review will include the definition and accuracy, and assess the impact of any Potential Findings and Observations on the design and QA process adequacy. Reporting by the Internal Committee will be in accordance with Task 7.
W F W NE ENGINEERING SERVCES Enclosure (1) EP-1-017 4.0 PROJECT STAFFING 4.1 Project Review Team This Independent Design Review will be under the general direction of Mr. Donald F. Landers, Senior Vice-President. The Assistant Project Manager will be Mr. James P. King who is authorized to perform all functions of the Project Manager in Mr. Landers absence. TES will provide staffing to this project as required to complete the effort outlined. Figure 2 provides the Project Review Team senior staffing members by Tasks. In order to qualify as an independent reviewer for the design verification program at Shoreham, all personnel assigned will sign a statement regarding potential or apparent conflicts of interest. These statements shall be retained by the TES Personnel Relations Manager. A copy of this statement format is presented herein. 4.2 Project Review Internal Committee This committee approach is currently used by TES for projects that involve state-of-the-art engineering. TES forms a committee in such cases composed of senior level personnel who have the necessary expertise to resolve technical issues presented by the particular project under review. The committee members for this project are shown in Figure 3. 4.3 TES 10CFR Part 21 Committee The TES 10CFR Part 21 committee will be utilized in this project as a means of final review, as described in Engineering Procedure EP-1-020. The Committee will only consider items where agreement between the Project Manager and/or Reviewer and the Project Review Internal Committee cannot be reached. The resolution by the committee is final. Reporting will be directly to LILC0 and the NRC in accordance with EP-1-020.
. , _ , , ,--,i.m_, , , - - , ,
j '~ i ~ J. . , . . 'k . , . . . , . _. .~7.' j (q ' . , ,8 8 . - ! G59 i! E = ii 2
. vi mub e d*n2 H r e liq ,
s=a ,- : nu - NE. w ;.l 2 ; J"I l e l
- a. -
!H h i -
d.s , ';, L ,.;d i 1 5 4: , %l l E
' 3dr , tit.2:
-n.=. m
- i 5
H m+ie. .s. 1 .,5 ; p@dm.%m;9 i lv e E
< - ei s '5 ! 6 3 t
- ilID,: :ll. dj!p .,.n;=1,)p i t e . .
5 3 e ,. 3 *;m : v b . W! O 4-A ,4: d+.1 #
; l .8 -: :>
gn,n .m.4 9,
.. ,3, e = a j .
. il.
- ./I33 .
t, >. 5 i g: e n.,
-. ;I. 8 e, 9.{.t s pdp:.,0,
%r i
e ,e ,g,.1 1 ed s h lww g, 9 . . . . *n. o i, oi s e, c:=,l' .te. g 2 I.I,l t.til g. s-i
- f r 8 5 8- T 4,
;'{4's fffl.(f3;I pi ..,v,e'hj-lig,5,.ge;,3 f,P w II M . d do.
p dp y
,f' p%' .it'3, .1g' ;'i 4W y -a a
o g IlN 10 'd ithnj.igu:pt@j3
; 3 s ,-
'. 1- 1 13 3 o wa g Yr a
.g 9j ?jt.d gi p 4 *:
. -A4 2 t.b, (W y? , i e
' li
$q!f ji 8'l @iein; yr.' pa j h. 9:; i i!'MdPPM;
?
'Wl{! ! !ui. d
_ ii-9. ! i ,.,
$. 'cu'f .b n ::
s . =p , p
.:r ;m. , y; g y .2. f
- s _a 44,_ _i ._4v. w e
$t r g @ .- , qj g' ,
hh'
.. <p .
3 { ll;j ( jff@, p'3
~
U = s s'b i !
, p '
i =T" Q 1 5? q %
;. A' .a p - 1u, 1
so,. ) , b .i, l , ( JA e. n u F,
,I s?
, < s u.
i ,3r, :. 4
.oL 4~-~
l i.A .
...e.
- b. ,3 o '.
t.
. _ _ t,, . . . i
/, r3 I "*
1 4" fll,"~ j
'".. Ts I'
=
l " .;
. 2
/.e .th 9
~J e l e g. r. ? 3
( $) 4 5
,i!, [
- e 1.,t _-
2, . , s, . / e(; a" . . 5: 9 i - .i : q # 4. 7.. 1 a .: %.~. y .:
- i. , ._u pr W; , Iy'
- wRida; -e 4',
I
. , - - F d
4
@i e-g -
1 3 r; - - IIi .
! fs, 4t . .pt
- --mi-ab - hl' I.g ' . W
;; l 2 W pi I
; p (- A 4 ;,idl Lt g ? ]- 't .Pu ;. .l 4
a n; up
;' q ({;;mg ;: g' h Cp
.,q .,. ,.p y'. .. :; .
4
; 2 ;g ,a
- b'. c t. 4.- .3 . ~h3 . ;: -
E; ; N.p ihjn. g r
- p. ..
-.-n Ftew
.. l pn r i
... .u,:.: . .
- p w yi- ;
n .. s 4 t - ( - s:
. ,d n$..eb. 4,t q
3 si
..v_ -
3, .. ir y I : l. .. . _1 Yph h <O . l r: a ,. T ? h g,W.5 l[M; 3, x h w$]I:.h i g l (ar W nn, u,m...d
' e - r p !
l.. _
,go. h. > m' l a,s.p; lh. e.u' . . .t 1 ,. .o. . . : .--
M e' e.M:_ei d' '. ( y 2.
= 1 . ..
.t t) 1 s s ) r. ,g- 3!p i 3
4'a 3 E 7.b k; @f
.f J 9 ,,,m.r.: Ia r ; } %a gM ' $p a
a 1. =
;-c,%
. ( an g;
- ./ '
;jl q
n- ,. ;j ,:e. ,l ( j jq"..,_ e .t yl 4 g 9, ,
,j~
ja . r' . : .n_ . .s= : 0 -.e-e .- n- ,q r .
. e . { ;
. ,w 7 z'. :j ,g ;
/ .,
g g n - E i, b;r 7 i, : ! ih ~ii F m-. G.a a . ~- &, ~ t t* -?: n k E .. o '-
,, u
1 Q ] . - - hi 0
{
<a t jy
.W e >-,-y . f ' .m .:e mH' a p.3.
- p 4(**
y .g. ___ go . g. n ,m s 'e
-p # i ay i l fE Ja H 1
W ?D .Md; uh * )'- , 1: ' !
;,; h.~:.e.
F ma y.:. e; -y ,.. > N.q.. f %.,
, ; V.=
1 M.n " pimi. g j=.. 4 ;. .
-- . ) . .i g i 4 i.c. t ga
- _ =
y D::
., - I .
ua. ,'. s .,.!: O e,r w e ~
.y
.- p m ; ,t- ed -
\ ,
.. 1 I
p ; 3 _e
- c. q , r
.: w~~
,d. . ;>
.l 4 m~
t .. J cJ2
* .-< &. M.4 g -
.: i;4 cw'H. W:.' .' Ms M' ?
e m 3
. N. . :... cm . .
s.p. --..-.m_
. .. -g
':.!o ,-
- i. ,; ,J g (,:--
,s i
--**' 1: .M.i s v w ,
~
La l C f }a, q.- i . -f( ~ - ,f U.xb.. f II :a }L. ;._.?(%-pap.G.!,H!% i i;, 9 s . m
'Mj L,r,.
' M. a . !T. .,
;.2 . . i ,
n . - m' 2.
. . .e'&_ .'._p . . ', f. ,s .,
it .d * *s i'
' , - J' .t , g;..
w r _1 T
- t 1
_i_ vc..v. t :c .
+-,.
=
=..--Ha.
r iy ." 30 j Jh g& L '-
? :; j$j d
L . , :.' j. , /- [M I oa.o, _
. l 5} j .h..! i m, il y
o - .i i 4 s
.- i r,
% yip. , .. . 'g pl .
; .. f. #. . ' ]- . .. .
~,
, -t , .
I. ) [ L i e a. ,
~;
- c. , a n,~,
a.--,
= 3,. ;
. ..O+b , e M
Q'g.. e . **^*. ,* " * ' - * \= h (. it-
.'9 , i li, Il'I fi )..[ ].I".,'.._ ..a. V y. ]:.,Q . p', .p. , ~*'
I .pp-'----
.,i. .[
- M,,_ yc--s. M - ,r.
'- ;, .g,.
! :4 . .
. . , -a. .. T m -- * %l . . .
h.-
SP F W NE ENGINEERING SERVICES Enclosure (1) EP-1-017 D. F. Landers Senior Vice-President J. P. King Assistant Project Manager Tasks 1, 2 & 3 Tasks 4 & 5 Task 6 R. D. Hookway J. P. King J. H. Malonson R. A. Enos E. A. Solla PQAE V. M. Chauhan Figure 2 TES Project Review Team Senior Staffing l l __ , _ _ _ , - . , v- -- ,- v- T
TF WE ENGNEERNG SERVICES Enclosure (1) EP-1-017 REV 1 J. A. Flaherty, Chairman G. A. Carpenter R. M. Pace F. B. Stille Figure 3 b Project Review Internal Comittee
TE ME ENGNEERNG SERVICES Enclosure (1) EP-1-017 Independent Design Review Shoreham Nuclear Power Station Reviewer Report Form RRF No. 5633-Reviewer Name: Date: Classification of Item (Per 3.8.1): Reference Documents: Description of Item:
1PTri m(NE
/ ENGINEERING SERVCES Enclosure (1) EP-1-017 Independent Design Review Shoreham Nuclear Power Station Project Manager Resolution Form PMR No.
5633-Reference PRF No. 5633- Date: 4 Description of Resolution: Classification of Item after Resolution: Reviewer Signature Project Manager signature
SPTELEDYNE ENGNEERING SERVCES Enclosure (1) EP-1-017 Independent Design Review Shoreham Nuclear Power Station Internal Comittee Resolution Form ICR No. 5633-
Reference:
RRF No. 5633- Date: PMR No. 5633-Internal Comittee Resolution of Potential Finding: l l Classification of Item after Committee Resolution: l l l Committee Chairman Signature Project Manager Signature f l Committee Member Signature Committee Member Signature i
y EN3BEEMiG!E5MCES Enclosure (1) EP-1-017 Independent Design Review Shoreham Nuclear Power Station - LPCS System Review Log RRF Reviewer Proj. Mgr. ICR Rev. Comm. Item No. Description No. Category PMR No. Category No. Category Final Resolution
WTA s:rVNE ENGNEERING SERVICES Enclosure (1) EP-1-017 INFORMATION REQUEST SHOREHAM INDEPENDENT DESIGN REVIEW PROJECT: 5633 REVIEWER: DATE: T0: 3&Wl l CALC.#: REV.: LILC0 L_J SUPT.#: REV.: DWG. N0.: REV.: RFI: 5633 - DESCRIPTION: PAGE OF REPLY BY: PHONE C TELECOPY TO FOLLOW R MAIL l l l l ATTACHMENTS SIGNATURE DATE
W TrirIWNE ENGNEERING SERVCES Enclosure (1) EP-1-017 Statement Regarding Potential or Apparent Conflicts of Interest Project 5633 To: Teledyne Engineering Services Whereas, the undersigned employee (" Employee") or Contract Engineer (" Contractor") understands that he or she is being considered as a participant to provide services to Long Island Lighting Company (LILC0) with respect to the Independent Design Review of the Shoreham Nuclear Power Station; and Whereas, Employee / Contractor understands that it is necessary that proposed participants be screened for any potential or apparant conflicts of interest with respect to this assignment; Therefore, for the above-stated purposes Employee / Contractor makes the following representations to Teledyne Engineering Services: (1) Employee / Contractor has no present or past work experience in design, construction or quality assurance of the Shoreham Nuclear Power Station or LILCO. (2) Neither Employee / Contractor, nor any member of his or her immediate family (parents, spouse, children and granchildren) shall be employed by Long Island Lighting Co. (LILC0), Stone and Webster Engineering Corp. (S&W) or General Electric Co. (G.E.). (3) Neither Employee / Contractor, nor any members of his or her immediate family shall have cumulative ownership interest in LILCO, S&W or GE which exceeds 5% of their gross family income. This statement is based upon the Employee's/ Contractor's best [ information and belief and any exceptions to the representations contained herein have been described on the reverse side of this document. Dated: Signature: Print Name
1 l ENGINEERING PROCEDURE EP-1-018 METHOD OF REVIEW 0F AS-BUILT DESIGN DOCUMENTS FOR THE LOW PRESSURE CORE SPRAY SYSTEM AT THE SHOREHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION REVISION O PROJECT 5533 JUNE 2, 1982 Prepared by: M E Date b"1-Il Approved by: y M Date b i Project Manager
/
Reviewed by: e Date /8 !82 Quality'Assu[ance / WTELEDYNE ENGINEERING SERVICES 130 SECOND AVENUE WALTHAM, MASSACHUSETTS 02254 617-890-3350
YE MEM NO ENGINEERING PROCEDURE PAGE y TITLE: EP 018 REV. .O REV. METHOD OF REVIEW OF AS-BUILT DESIGN ORIG. ~3]K. &.2J 8, ORIG. DOCUMENTS FOR THE LOW PRESSURE CORE SPRAY ENG. AS. /E9P ENG. AS. SYSTEM AT SHOREHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION Q. A. <C5 6N/AQ.A. t PROJ. MGR.1f L PROJ. MGR. 4,ljles_ DATE DATE SECTION DESCRIPTION REV. 1.0 SCOPE This procedure describes the method to be used in reviewing the As-Built Design Documents of LPCS System at Shoreham Nuclear Power Station. The purpose of this procedure is to outline the extent of review and the major approaches to be used. This procedure is not intended to be a detailed checklist nor is it intended to linit the reviewer. 2.0 APPLICATION 2.1 References a) Project QA Program, Project No. 5633 b) EP-1-017 "TES Project Plan for Independent Design Review of Shoreham Nucler Power Station LPCS System c) EP-5-006, " Method of Determination of As-Built Configuration of LPCS System at Shoreham Nuclear Power Station 3.0 METHOD 3.1 Design Requirements
- 3.1.1 A detailed review of FSAR commitments in the area of Design Requirements (Loads, Load Combinations, Operating f Conditions, Design Criteria, etc.) will be made.
3.1.2 A detailed review of the Certified Design Specification for the LPCS System will be made to determine if it satisfies Code, FSAR and NRC requirements committed to in the FSAR. 3.1.3 All referenced documents in the Certified Design Specification 'thich are applicable to the scope of this Independent resign Review will also be reviewed for compliance, l i l 2/81 . _ . _
WT3:1 m(NE ENGINEERING SERVICES ENGINEERING PROCEDURE 018 PArg TITLE: EP REV. .O REV. METHOD 0F REVIEW 0F AS-BUILT DESIGN ORIG. "3E 6-24% ORIG. DOCUMENTS FOR THE LOW PRESSURE CORE SPRAY ENG. AS. #iff) ENG. AS. SYSTEM AT SHOREHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION Q. A. er65 4/d/AQ.A. PROJ. MGR.T W PROJ. MGR. DATE t,(4 ir2. DATE SECTION DESCRIPTION REV. 3.2 Design and Analysis Based upon the Design Requirements, the adequacy of the design and analysis shall be reviewed. For each qualification analysis the reviewer, as a minimum, will verify:
- 1) the mathematical and/or computer model used
- 2) the loadin and load combinations (Normal and Upset Conditions)g ,
- 3) the use of applicable Codes, Standards, Regulator 3 Guides,
- 4) conformance with acceptance criteria, applicable to the LPCS system.
- 5) resolution of interface requirements (allowable nozzle loads, accelerations,etc.),
- 6) resolution of design change and field change requests, and
! 7) the final reports and drawings. 3.3 Technical Review of Analysis , The technical review will ccnsist of the following activities as a minimum:
- 1) Pipe Stress Analysis Review a) Input Data Check (Normal and Upset Conditions) o Internal piping pressure o Thermal load cases
, o System operating modes
- o Seismic spectra and anchor movements l o SRV spectra and anchor movements l o Fluid transients and other occasional loads, if ap-plicable l
2/81
WTri pnYNE ENGNEERING SENICES ENGINEERING PROCEDURE TITLE: EP 018 PAGJ REV. . O REV. METHOD OF REVIEW 0F AS-BUILT DESIGN ORIG. MAC L-2-h ORIG. DOCUMENTS FOR THE LOW PRESSURE CORE SPRAY ENG. AS. OMR ENG. AS. SYSTEM AT SHOREHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION Q. A. MJ 64/42 Q.A. PROJ. MGR. " W PROJ. MGR. DATE q4Ih DATE SECTION DESCRIPTION REV. b) Piping Model Check o Piping geometry check o Piping section physical and material properties o Support and restraint stiffness, location and orientation o Fittings, nozzles and valves o System boundaries c) Related Calculations o Stress intensification factors and indices o Flow indu:ed transient and steady-state loads (pool drag, impact loads, etc.) o Valve model natural frequency o T AT T -T Temperature b o Load summaries (31('supho,rtd, res)traints, penetrations, nozzles,etc.) d) Stress Reports o Certification o Load cases o Load combinations o Code compliance o Valve requirements l 0 System functional capability
- 2) Pipe Support Analysis Review a) Input Data Check o Loads o Load combinations o Support types and location o Deflection calculations o Pipe stresses at welded attachments 2/81
"RTA m(NE ENGINEERING SERVICES ENGINEERING PROCEDURE 018 PAGg TITLE: EP REV. _0 REV.
METHOD OF REVIEW 0F AS-BUILT DESIGN GRIG. Uf E F2Tr1 0 RIG. DOCUMENTS FOR THE LOW PRESSURE CORE SPRAY ENG. AS.__- e ENG. AS. SYSTEM AT SHOREHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION Q.A. c d J_ ( h fo Q.A. PROJ. MGR.J)FL ~ PROJ. MGR. DATE &/4/ys. DATE SECTION DESCRIPTION REV. b) Design Calculations o Member sizing, stiffness, stability o Weld calculations o Stress allowables o Vendor allowables for standard hardware o Computer model geometry, section properties anc material properties o Expansion bolt load calculations o Baseplate flexibility 3.4 Vendor Qualified Mechanical and Electrical Components
- 1) Components that have previously received third-party review by S&W or GE to current NRC (SQRT) guidelines will be verified for satisfaction of interface requirements (allowable nozzle loads, accelerations, etc.) only. A list of this equipment must be obtained from LILC0 with certification that the third-party review has been successfully completed.
- 2) Selected ripe-mounted and floor-mounted mechanical and electrical equipment qualification reports (from above) will be independently reviewed to assure that their mechanical and structural design requirements are satisfied. LILC0 will select the components for review.
3.5 Check List This procedure does not limit the reviewer as to scope and depth of review. However, as a minimum, the check lists of Enclosures 1 and 2 must be completed by the reviewer. 4.0 RECORDS _QA Records All records shall be controlled in accordance with the PQAP. 2/81
WTF1 PTY(NE ENGNEERNG SERVICES ENGINEERING PROCEDURE TITLE: EP 018 ^T REV. O REY. METHOD OF REVIEW 0F AS-BUILT DESIGN ORIG. _ M L4- M 10 RIG. DOCUMENTS FOR THE LOW PRESSURE CORE SPRAY ENG. AS. ///12(M ENG. AS. SYSTEM AT SH0REHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION Q. A. cr_(/4/p2 Q.A. PROJ. MGR.' % ~~ PROJ. MGR. DATE M4 ft2, DATE SECTION DESCRIPTION REV. ENCLOSURE (1) TO EP-1-018 CHECK LIST FOR PIPE STRESS ANALYSIS REVIEW SHOREHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION LPCS SYSTEM INDEPENDENT DESIGN REVIEW 2/81
WMNE co e (1) ENGNEERING SERVICES PIPE STRESS ANALYSIS REVIEW CHECK LIST PIPE STRESS
SUMMARY
AX N0. Item Initial Date 1.0 Input Data Check (Normal and Upset Conditions Only) 1.1 Internal piping pressure 1.2 Thermal load cases 1.3 System operating modes 1.4 Seismic spectra and anchor movements 1.5 SRV spectra and anchor movements 1.6 Fluid transients and other occasional loads, if applicable 2.0 Piping Model Check 2.1 Piping geometry check 2.2 Piping section physical and material properties 2.3 Support and restraint stiffness, location and orientation 2.4 Fittings, nozzles and valves 2.5 System boundaries 3.0 Related Calculations 3.1 Stress intensification factors and indices 3.2 Flow induced transient and steady-state loads (pool drag, impact loads,etc.) 3.3 Valve model natural frequency 3.4 Temperature (aT 1
,a2 T ,a T -T) b 3.5 Load summaries (supports, restraints, penetrations, nozzles,etc.)
4.0 Stress Reports 4.1 Certification i 4.2 Load cases 4.3 Load combinations 4.4 Code compliance 4.5 Valve requirements 4.6 System functional capability
"RTF1 FrWNE ENGINEERNG SERVICES ENGINEERING PROCEDURE TITLE: EP 018 f REV. .
O REV. METHOD OF REVIEW 0F AS-BUILT DESIGN ORIG. M 6,1-S$0 RIG. DOCUMENTS FOR THE LOW PRESSURE CORE SPRAY ENG. AS. m e ENG. AS. SYSTEM AT SHOREHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION Q.A. d C J ( M /p2 Q.A. PROJ. MGRJFL. PROJ. MGR. DATE L/4i-fft. DATE SECTION DESCRIPTION REV. ENCLOSURE (2) TO EP-1-018 CHECK LIST FOR PIPE SUPPORT ANALYSIS REVIEW SHOREHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION LPCS SYSTEM INDEPENDENT DESIGN REVIEW l l l l ( 2/81 i
1%'MNE
. ENGINEERING SERVICES EP-1-018 Enclosure (2) l PIPE SUPPORT ANALYSIS REVIEW CHECK LIST l
PIPE STRESS
SUMMARY
AX NO. PIPE SUPPORT NO. Item Initial Date 1.0 Input Data Check 1.1 Loads 1.2 Load combinations 1.3 Support types and location 1.4 Deflection calculations 1.5 Pipe stresses at welded attachments 2.0 Design Calculations 2.1 Member sizing, stiffness, stability 2.2 Weld calculations 2.3 Stress allowables 2.4 Vendor allowables for standard hardware 2.5 Computer model geometry, section properties and material properties 2.6 Expansion bolt load calculations l 2.7 Baseplate flexibility l l l
ENGINEEPING PROCEDURE EP-1-019 PROCEDURE FOR PROJECT REVIEW INTERNAL COMMITTEE SHOREHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION INDEPENDENT DESIGN REVIEW REVISION 1 PROJECT 5633 JULY 8, 1983 Prepared by: MW % Date 7"N3 Approved by: I #d' i41 Date l Project Manager
/-*
Reviewed by: Aevt-> Date 7//V/f3 Quald y As N e [ WTELEDYNE ENGINEERING SERVICES 130 SECOND AVENUE WALTHAM, MASSACHUSETTS 02254 617-890-3350
W TELEDYNE Engineering Procedure EP-1-019 ENNG SERVCES REVISION SUMARY TABLE Rev. No. Section g Description 1 3.1 1 Revised Review Internal Committee Membership 1 - - Total no. of pages = 2 i S/82 Page ( i )
.10Tri m(NE BGINEERING SEMCES
,?
ENGINEERING PROCEDURE PAGE TITLE: EP 019 l - REV. O REV. 1 ORIG. JpK .0 RIG pi(W_7- M 3 l PROCEDURE FOR PROJ.MGR.' DFL PROJ.MGR. DFL PROJECT REVIEW INTERNAL COMMITTEE ENG.AS. MAR ENG.AS. dead 7 SHOREHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION Q.A. CGS Q.A. e c 5 DATE 6/9/82 DATE 7/N/p3 INDEPENDENT DESIGN REVIEW INFO. COPY: DFL,JAF RW,NSC SECTION DESCRIPTION REV. 1.0 SCOPE
>- This procedure provides the general guidelines to be used by the Project Review Internal Committee in reviewing Potential Findings forwarded by the Project Manager and/or the Reviewer.
2.0 APPLICATION 2.1 References
- a. Project QA Program, Project 5633
- b. EP-1-017, TES Program Plan for Independent Design Review of Shoreham Nuclear Power Station Low Pressure Core Spray System
- c. EP-5-006, Method of Determination of As-Built l
Configuration of Low Pressure Core Spray System at l Shoreham Nuclear Power Station I d. EP-1-018, Method of Review of As-Built Design Documents ! fcr i the low Pressure Core Spray System at the Shoreham Nuclear Power Staticn
- e. EP-1-020, Procedure for Reviewing and Reporting by TES 10CFR Part 21 Committee Shoreham Nuclear Power Station Independent Design Review
- f. EP-1-021, QA Sampling Inspection Procedure Shoreham Nuclear Power Station Independent Design Review 3.0 METHOD 3.1 Personnel The Project Review Internal Committee will be composed of the 1 following members of the TES senior staff:
James A. Flaherty, Chairman l George A. Carpenter ' Raymond M. Pace Frank B. Stille 3/83
~
9PTA AYNE ENGJNEERING SERVICES ENGINEERING PROCEDURE TITLE: EP 019 N REV. .O REV. PROCEDURE FOR ORIS. 3MC L-2. 340 RIG. PROJECT REVIEW INTERNAL COMMITTEE ENG. AS. #1ph ENG. AS. SHOREHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION Q. A. ga:5 6/w/hQ.A. PROJ. MGR.18C PROJ. MGR, INDEPENDENT DESIGN REVIEW DATE ,.fg h DATE SECTION DESCRIPTION REV .- 3.2 Duties The Committee is responsible for reviewing Potential Findings forwarded by the Project Manager and/or the Reviewer to determine whether to categorize Potential Findings as Findings or to lower the categorization to an Observation or to close the item. 3.3 Process The Committee has access to all the data, criteria, analyses, etc., that are required for them to reach a majority decision. The Committee can discuss the Potential Finding with the Reviewer and Project Manager in order to develop more detailed information for their use. 3.4 Reporting 3.4.1 The Committee is required to complete an Internal Comittee Report (ICR) form for each Potential Finding presented to them. The Chairman or his designee completes the ICR presenting the majority opinion of the Committee. At least two members of the Committee must sign the ICR. In the case where the third member of the Committee does not agree with the Comittee action he can attach his opinion to the ICR. 3.4.2 The ICR will be forwarded to the Project Manager for his review. The Project Manager will review the resolution reached by the Internal Committee to determine if it complies with the Independent Design Review process. If it does not, he will return the ICR with an explanation of the review process that has not been adhered to. The Project Manager will sign the ICR if he is in agreement with the Internal Committee resolution, l 3.4.3 The Project Manager or the Reviewer has the opportunity to I appeal the resolution of the Internal Comittee to the TES l 10CFR21 Committee. The resolution of the 10CFR21 Committee is j final and will be reported directly to LILC0 and NRC concurrently. 4.0 RECORDS Originals of all ICR's will become Proinct GA Rornrrk. 2/81 1
ENGINEERING PROCEDURE EP-1-020 PROCEDURE FOR REVIEWING AND REPORTING BY TES 10CFR PART 21 COMMITTEE SHOREHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION INDEPENDENT DESIGN REVIEW REVISION O PROJECT 5633 JUNE 2, 1982 Prepared by: $_- ;_ _- Date d-7-kT Approved by: M Date kk4 $7 Project Manager
/ -.
Reviewed by: h 9t<o Date / Md Quality Nance [ l TTELEDYNE ENGINEERING SERVICES I 130 SECOND AVENUE l WALTHAM, MASSACHUSETTS 02254 l 617-890-3350 l l
WTA ANNE ENGINEERING SERVICES ENGINEERING PROCEDURE PAGE TITLE: EP 020 1 PROCEDURE FOR REVIEWING AND REV. _ _0 REV. REPORTING BY ORIG. M 64 4% 0 RIG. TES 10CFR PART 21 COMMITTEE ENG. AS.//> Mfd . ENG. AS. SHOREHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION Q. A. rCS 6/w AQ.A. INDEPENDENT DESIGN REVIEW PROJ. MGR. W L PROJ. MGR. DATE i /dl0 b DATE SECTION DESCRIPTION REV. 1.0 SCOPE This procedure provides the general guidelines to be used by the TES 10CFR Part 21 Committee in reviewing and reporting items. 2.0 APPLICATION 2.1 References
- a. Project QA Program, Project 5633
- b. EP-1-017, TES Program Plan for Independent Design Review of Shoreham Nuclear Power Station Low Pressure Core Spray System,
- c. EP-5-006, Method of Determination of As-Built Configuration of Low Pressure Core Spray Systera at Shoreham Nuclear Power Station.
- d. EP-1-018, Method of Review of As-Built Design Documents for the Low Pressure Core Spray System at the Shoreham Nuclear Power Station.
- e. EP-1-019, Procedure for Project Review Internal Committee Shoreham Nuclear Power Station Independent Design Review.
3.0 METHOD 3.1 Personnel The 10CFR Part 21 Committee, as a minimum, will be composed of I the Manager of Engineering Analysis, as Chairman, a TES l Consulting Engineer, and a member of the TES staff with applicable expertise, l l l l l 2/81 l
~
l "RTF1 FIWNE ENGINEERING SERVICES ENGINEERING PROCEDURE TITLE: EP 020 2 REV. .0 REV. PROCEDURE FOR REVIEWING AND ORIG. "FK l-2 M ORIG. REPORTING BY ENG. AS. ENG. AS. //7/dA? TES 10CFR PART 21 COMMITTEE SHOREHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION Q. A. c6J 6/etetQ.A. PROJ. MGR. W PROJ. MGR. INDEPENDENT DESIGN REVIEW DATE DATE bl4 f fL SECTION DESCRIPTION REV. 3.2 Duties The Comittee is responsible for reviewing items forwarded by the Project Manager and/or the Reviewer in writing. The only items to be considered are those where agreement between the Project Manager and/or Reviewer and the Project Review Internal Comittee cannot be reached. The committee will determine whether to categorize the items as Findings, Observations or to close the item. 3.3 Process The Committee has access to all the data, criteria, analyses, etc., that are required for them to reach a decision. The Committee can discuss the item with the Reviewer, Project Manager and Project Review Internal Committee, in order to develop more detailed information for their use. 3.4 Reporting The resolution by the 10CFR Part 21 Committee is final. A written report will be made to LILC0 and the NRC concurrently within three working days of resolution of an item. 4.0 RECORDS Originals of Reports will become Project QA Records. 2/81
r
)
ENGINEERING PROCEDURE EP-1-021
' QA REVIEW SAMPLING PROCEDURE SH0REHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION INDEPENDENT, DESIGN REVIEW FOR THE LPCS SYSTEM REVISION 1 .
PROJECT 5633 SEPTEMBER 9, 1982 i Prepared by: - h n-yt4 W Date f9[ Approved by: d a, -
'M _ Date N'l_
Project Ma gF [ I Reviewed by: . ct _. > Date k Quality Assurance WTELEDYNE ENGINEERING SERVICES 130 SECOND AVENUE WALTHAM, MASSACHUSETTS 02254 617-89C)3350
'RTA STWNE ENGINEERING SERVICES ENGINEERING PROCEDURE
^
TITLE: EP 021 j E 0 QA REVIEW SAMPLING PROCEDURE p ggM b SHOREHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION ENG. " A,T. JC#> ENG AS. MAR ' INDEPENDENT DESIGN REVIEW FOR THE LPCS SYSTEM Q.A. CGS Q. A. cas ., PROJ. MGR. JPK PROJ. MGIC37/ll ' DATE 6/18/82 DATE 8/9/El DESCRIPTION REV. SECTION 1.0 SCOPE This procedure describes the sampling plan to be used for the TES QA review of SWEC construction activities for the LPCS System at the Shoreham Nuclear Power Station. This procedure is provided solely to define the lot size and sample size and to assure random selection and review of the sample. The procedure is not intended to provide a statistical inspection sampling plan. 2.0 APPLICATION The sampling plan will be applied to the review of documentation and records for the folloaing: a) training and qualification records of personnel b) identification and control of material, parts and components c) control of special processes [ d) nonconformance and dispositioning report process c) receiving inspection records f) material certification records g) NDE records
2.1 REFERENCES
. 1 2.l.1 TES EP-1-017 TES Program Plan For Independent Design Review of Shoreham NPS LPCS System.
2/81
"RTp1 FrWNE ENGINEERING SERVICES ENGINEERING PROCEDURE PAGE TITLE: EP 021 2 REV. O REV. _1 QA REVIEW SAMPLING PROCEDURE ORIG. JHM ORIG. (2M SH0REHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION ENG. AS. MAR ENG. ASC 9f/>
INDEPENDENT DESIGN REVIEW FOR THE LPCS SYSTEM Q.A. CGS Q.A. cc5 PROJ. MGR. JPX PROJ. MGR.WJC. DATE 6/18/82 DATE .9/9ho DESCRIPTION REV. SECTION I 3.0 LOT DEFINITION 3.1 Lot size is established as a nominal count of field pipe welds and support or restraint welds to pipe for the E21 LPCS System as shown darkened in Figure I of Enclosure 1 to EP 017 and as clarified by LILCO (M. Milligan) letter to TES dated 6/8/82. 3.2 The lot is regarded as homogeneous, including pipe, valve, support and attachment welds. 3.3 For purposes of this review, the lot size will be 83. 4.0 SAMPLE DEFINITION l 4.1 As a minimum, 35 weld record packages will be the sample size for review. 4.2 At the discretion of the reviewer, and to assure a sufficiently represented population and distribution of characteristics (see 2.1), the reviewer may select additional weld record packages for review. 4.3 The sample will not exceed 50% of lot size. 5.0 METHOD 5.1 The reviewer will prepare a checklist per the form attached. 5.2 Identify the weld location per the As Built isometric drawing. 5.3 Apply a random selection of characteristics a thru g (see 2.1) to each of the weld records reviewed. Assure a reasonably equal distribution of characteristics for each record reviewed. 2/81 1
"RTF1 mYNE ENGINEERING SERVICES ENGINEERING PROCEDURE PAGE TITLE: EP 021 QA REVIEW SAMPLING PROCEDURE REV. O REV. _ _1 SHOREHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION ORIG. JHM ORIG. M /M ,
INDEPENDENT DESIGN REVIEW ENG. AS. MAR ENG. AVM ' FOR THE LPCS SYSTEM Q.A. CGS Q.A. d 6 $ , , PROJ. MGR. JPK PROJ. MGRc FlC DATE 6/18/82 DATE S/97#s DESCRIPTION REV. SECTION 5.4 Enter all reportable conditions in the coments section of the checklist form. 6.0 REPORTS 6.1 Results of this review will be forwarded to TES QA MGR for reporting in accordance with EP-1-017 Enclosure 1 Section 3.8.2. 7.0 RECORDS Documents produced as a result of this review will become TES project records. F 2/81
d ,- - e. k g re ~ m a, M. g. n i, w. a _ e r t a D gD ct ia rc te ,. T N g g i n o a.
.r s
E M M t O g c I s C g u r h. c - g t s n at t N O
~
i I A, t I T - W A V R E r S B O e w e N i v e , b O" _ O I T E A T W I V R
,49 .
S E o g R R E N . W o ,,d _. O G I . . P S ... N O R DE g _ A g E C L N T U E D N N
,gf g
S p g g N M O M E @,' e . W A P H E E D e,ge , _ S
^
R IN M O e _ H S 6 p 8, d W O m
&e a
. @ h t
e
. 6 M m e 9 .
g *og . e e G W mg h g 3 c t ._ 4 4 W e w _ o t 8*o ,, 4, o - h 48 b t s p,p . i l k _ c e 6g a h C . y v r t - e a n R m e1 n m2 & u h0 S " . c- . a1 o s i - t - N s t 1 tP e d* AE O r 1 C . S t e I S W' _
ENGINEERING PROCEDURE EP-5-006 METHOD OF DETERMINATION OF AS-BUILT CONFIGURATION OF LOW PRESSURE CORE SPRAY SYSTEM AT SHOREHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION REVISION O PROJECT 5633 JUNE 2, 1982 Prepared by: h h_ Date d"Ed% Approved by: L S*- _ Date kj SI Project Manager
/
Reviewed by: [ h& Date /V [.& QualitfAssura#nce [ TTELEDYNE ENGINEERING SERVICES 130 SECOND AVENUE WALTHAM, MASSACHUSETTS 02254 617-890-3350
T WTI:15mYNE ENGdNEERING SERVICES ENGINEERING PROCEDURE TITLE: EP 006 , PAG { REV. __ _Q REV. METHOD OF DETERMINATION OF AS-BUILT ORIG. "JFK LeNLORIG. CONFIGURATION OF LOW PRESSURE CORE SPRAY ENG. AS.Apas o ENG. AS. SYSTEM AT SHOREHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION Q. A. 66J 'hWtz Q.A. PROJ. MGR.'DFL, PROJ. MGR. DATE &/4/ft DATE ( 'I SECTION DESCRIPTION REV. 1.0 SCOPE This procedure describes the method to be used in determining the "as-built" configuration of Low Pressure Core Spray System at Shoreham Nuclear Power Station. The purpose of this procedure is to obtain dimensional verification of portions of the LPCS system to provide the independent reviewers (TES) sufficient data to verify that the design was properly implemented. 2.0 APPLICATION 2.1 References a) Project QA Program, Project No. 5633. b) EP-1-017, "TES Project Plan for Independent Design Review of Shoreham Nuclear Power Station LPCS System. 2.2 Equipment for the equipment to be used in obtaining measurements required by this procedure, no formal calibration is required. However, only undamaged measuring tapes, scales, etc., shall be used. 3.0 METHOD 3.1 As-Built Data 3.1.1 The Project Manager shall obtain from S&W the as-built data package, following interface definitions described in the References Section 2.1. All documents received shall be recorded on a document list, noting the revision and any applicable Engineering Change Notices (ECN's) or other records of changes in process. 3.1.2 A copy of the as-built isometric obtained from S&W will be made (preferably traced) by TES drafting excluding all dimensions and support locations. Copies of the TES isometric will then be used in the determination of as-built piping configuration. 2/81
/
\
WTF1 PTVNE ENGNEERNG SERVICES ENGINEERING PROCEDURE TITLE: EP -S-006 2 REV. .O REV. METHOD OF DETERMINATION OF AS-BUILT ORIG. *3F K 4 M S-0 RIG. ENG. AS./M tp ENG. AS. CONFIGURATION OF LOW PRESSURE CORE SPRAY Q. A. d C,r Wr/AQ.A. SYSTEM AT SHOREHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION PROJ. MGR. E PROJ. MGR. DATE bl4l & DATE SECTION DESCRIPTION REV. 3.1.3 Copies of the support details supplied by S&W will be used to verify support as-built configuration. 3.2 Field "As-Built" System Verification 3.2.1 The Lead Engineer and other engineers performing the verification shall review the documents acquired under Section 3.1. The TES Project Manager shall review and approve the selection of personnel for the field verification. 3.2.2 A general walk-down of the system shall be performed to familiarize TES personnel with the location, general layout, accessibility, and quantity of piping and pipe supports. 3.2.3 The portion of the LPCS System outlined in Figure 1 uf EP-1-017 shall be verified. As a minimum, the following shall be verified: a) Piping geometry
- 1) Type of fittings and location
- 2) Location of valves and orientation
- 3) Length and orientation of pipe b) Supports
- 1) Location 2 Type and direction restrained 3 Spring sizes and settings 4 Snubber sizes and settings
- 5) Pin-to-pin length for snubbers and struts
- 6) Clearances
- 7) Support hardware - size of primary structural members, component standard part designations (part numbers), overall support configuration l
c 2/81 s
WTi:1 m(NE ENGINEERING SERVICES ENGINEERING PROCEDURE PAGE TITLE: EP 006 3 REV. .0 REV. METHOD OF DETERMINATION OF AS-BUILT ORIG.~M L-178.0 RIG. ENG. AS. #### ENG. AS. CONFIGURATION OF LOW PRESSURE CORE SPRAY SYSTEM AT SHOREHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION Q.A. c c 5 M v/oQ.A. PROJ. MGR, W PROJ. MGR. DATE W4 ' tt DATE SECTION DESCRIPTION REV. c) Location and nature of pipe attachments, such as lugs, stanchions, etc. d) Location and nature of any interferences which may inhibit pipe motion e) Valves
- 1) Record nameplate data on valves and valve operators
- 2) Determine length between the centerline of the valve to the approximate centerline of the valve operator
- 3) Determine the orientation of the valve operator using the horizontal or vertical plane for reference f) Equipment mounting characteristics
) 3.2.4 Should some locations be inaccessible the Lead Engineer shall document this including reasons why and report this to the Project Manager. s 3.2.5 Photographs shall be taken where deemed necessary by TES , personnel, to augment the field review, particularly in case of inaccessibility. 3.2.6 A list of all personnel contacted in the field and the reason for the contact will be made. 3.2.7 A written record of all activities accomplished at the site will be made. 2/81
WTri pr?(NE ENGNEERNG SERACES ENGINEERING PROCEDURE EP 006 pay TITLE: l REV. .O _ REV. METHOD OF DETERMINATION OF AS-BUILT ORIG. UPK, L.1-It ORIG. l l CONFIGURATION OF LOW PRESSURE CORE SPRAY ENG. AS. ////A/P ENG. AS. SYSTEM AT SHOREHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION Q.A. cGI 69y/pzQ.A. PROJ. MGR M PROJ. MGR. DATE elHft DATE SECTION DESCRIPTION REV. 3.3 Documentation 3.3.1 Each dimension and system characteristic checked shall be signed by two of the TES personnel present. Upon return to the TES offices the original TES copy of the as-built piping documentation shall be marked up with all information contained on the record copy used in determining as-built configuration. TES personnel initials need not be included but all the members of the field team must sign the TES original isometric indicating that the transfer of information from the record copy to the tracing is correct. 3.3.2 All data sheets shall be initialed and dated by two of the TES personnel present. All data shall be recorded in ink. Any errors / changes shall be lined-out and initialed. 4.0 RECORDS The originals of all recorded data, photographs and the tracing shall become project QA records. I 2/81
l 4
"RTELEDYNE TELEDYt!E EN'i!NEERING SERVICES ENGINEERING SERVICES CONTROLLED DOCUMENT TES PilDJ. NO. N()M __
DATE 1-]'7 M TECHNICAL REPORT TR-%33-4 FINAL REPORT INDEPENDENT DESIGN REVIEW FOR THE SHOREHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION BOOK 2 OF 3 JULY 22,1983
- ._ .. __ _-..,_,.._e_. -
._,....y ,. ,, , ......-,,,,.___,._-,_,,,,...---,.~.-.,,-w .-~,,_m _ , - -
i l LONG ISLAND LIGHTING COMPANY 175 EAST OLD COUNTRY ROAD HICKSVILLE, NEW YCRK 11801 TECHNICAL REPORT TR-5633-4 FINAL REPORT INDEPENDENT DESIGN REVIEW FOR THE SHOREHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION BOOK 2 0F 3 JULY 22, 1983 1 WTELEDYNE ENGINEERING SERVICES 130 SECOND AVENUE WALTHAM, MASSACHUSETTS 02254 617-890-3350
P
- TF ME ENGGEERNG SERVCES Technical Report TR-5633-4 TABLE OF CONTEKTS BOOK 1 Page
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1 2.0 APPROACH 1 3.0 DEFINITIONS 4 3.1 Open Item (TES Internal) 5 3.2 Closed Item 5 3.3 Potential Finding (TES Internal) 5 3.4 Finding 5 3.5 Observaliun 5 4.0 SCOPE OF THE REVIEW 6 4.1 Task 1 - Design Process and Procedures 6 4.2 Task 2 - Review Design Requirements 7 4.3 Task 3 - Review As-Built Design Documents 7 4.4 Task 4 - Determine As-Built Plant Configuration 8 4.5 Task 5 - Compare As-Built Documentation to 9 Plant Configuration 4.6 Task 6 - Review LILC0 QA and SWEC QA/QC/EA 9 Process and Documentation 5.0 REPORTING PROCESS 10 < 6.0 LILC0/SWEC RESPONSE APPROACH 13 7.0 RESULTS 14 7.1 Phase 1 15 7.2 Phase 2 15 7.3 Phase 3 16 7.4 Details of Items 16
8.0 CONCLUSION
S 17
W F W NE ENGINEERING SERVICES Technical Report TR-5633-4 TABLE OF CONTENTS (Cont'd) BOOK 1 TABLES 1 -
SUMMARY
OF PHASE 1 REVIEW 2 -
SUMMARY
OF ITEMS - PHASE 2 FINDINGS ONLY 3 -
SUMMARY
OF ITEMS - PHASE 3 ADDITIONAL CONCERNS ONLY 4 - LIST OF REVIEWED DOCUMENTS FIGURES 1 - PORTION OF LPCS SYSTEM SUBJECT TO IDR 2A - PHASE 1, PROJECT ORGANIZATION 2B - PHASE 1, FLOWCHART 3A - PHASE 2/3, PROJECT ORGANIZATION 3B - PHASE 2/3, FLOWCHART APPENDICES BOOK 1 1 - PROJECT QUALITY ASSURANCE PROGRAM 2 - ENGINEERING PROCEDURES BOOKS 2 AND 3 3 - PROJECT REVIEW INTERNAL COMMITTEE, FINDING DETAILS AND RESOLU-TIONS BOOK 3 4 - PROJECT REVIEW INTERNAL COV.MITTEE ITEMS, OBSERVATION DETAILS AND RESOLUTIONS 5 - TRIP REPORTS
l
'RTFi Frh'NE l Technical Report ENGINEERING SERVICES TR-5633-4 l
1 l APPENDIX 3 PROJECT REVIEW INTERNAL COP 9tITTEE FINDIN3 DETAILS AND RESOLUTIONS l l l l l l
WTF1 FrWNE ENGINEERING SERVCES Technical Report TR-5633-4 A3.1 ICR No. 5633-1 TES issued ICR No. 5633-1 on November 2,1982 as a Finding on the use of chart methods to qualify a 2-inch branch line. A disposition response was received from LILC0/SWEC on January 15, 1983. This response including additional information supplied by SWEC and subse-quent meetings to discuss the technical issues involved, have resolved the initial concern but raised a generic issue with respect to the adequacy and the application of the SWEC design procedure for small bore piping. The TES concern was in the following three areas: (1) Failure to consider the full range of seismic anchor dis-placements as an alternative to thermal expansion plus one-half the range of seismic anchor displacement (2) Failure to consider two-directional horizontal seismic build-ing displacements (3) Failure to consider that horizontal building steel vertical displacements are out-of-phase with vertical displacement of the shield wall, reactor vessel and other large structures As a result of an interface meeting held at TES with LILC0/SWEC personnel and disposition response received on May 18, 1983, the above concerns were answered as follows: (1) The full range of seismic anchor displacement, if considered as an alternative to thermal expansion plus one-half the range of seismic anchor displacement, would be accomodated by the portion of allowable stress set aside in the SWEC procedure for thermal expansion.
l
'RTA AWNE ENGINEERING SERVICES Technical Report TR-5633-4 l (2) A SWEC Interoffice Memo (SBM #6) was issued August 1982 to provide a uniform procedure for qualifying small bore piping when using Design Guide EMTG-5-A. SBM #6 is clear in requir-ing consideration of two directional horizontal seismic dis-placement (X and Z) in qualifying small bore piping. All small bore qualifications prior to issuance of SBM #6 were l
reviewed by SWEC and randomly audited by TES to assure com-pliance with SBH #6. Small bore qualifications after issuance of SMB #6 were also reviewed by SWEC and randomly audited by TES to assure compliance since a qualification l package dated after issuance of SBM #6 was found not to be in compliance by TES Reviewers. (3) The frequencies of horizontal building steel were well above l that for the building and therefore phase differences would essentially be negligible. TES determined through analysis that frequencies of the horizontal building steel in the Reactor Building were above 18 Hz. The significant building frequencies supplied by LILC0/SWEC occur in the range of 1.5 to 3.0 Hz. Accepting these building spectra as provided would indicate that phasing of the horizontal steel vertical l displacements relative to the shield wall, reactor vessel and other large structures in the reactor building would not l occur. This issue was generic in nature and required significant review of existing designs and analyses by SWEC to validate the acceptability of small bore piping. Essentially all of the small bore piping was reviewed by SWEC to assure compliance with procedures deemed acceptable by TES. Further, significant review and analysis of Reactor Building l horizontal steel was performed by TES to determine fundamental frequencies. This was done in order to assure that these frequencies
WTm m(NE ENGINEERING SERVICES Technical Report ! TR-5633-4 were well above the first building vertical frequencies contained in spectra published in Volume 5 of the FSAR. Based on the extensive review and modification of calculations performed by SWEC and the sample. review and analysis performed by TES, the small bore piping is determined to be in compliance with the requirements of the FSAR and this iteni was Closed. I l 1 l l l l I t . _ _ . , _ _ _ _-. - _ - _ .
TE WE ENGNEERNG SERVCES Enclosure (1) EP-1-017 Independent Design Review Shoreham Nuclear Power Station Internal Comittee Resolution Form CONTROLLED DOCUMENT ICR No. 5633-1
Reference:
RRF No. 5633- /37 Date: //////2 PMRNo.5633-/38 Internal Comittee Resolution of Potential Finding: f/,e d'o .,, ea s
- b f oo<eurs w.'IL +ke Reviewe- a nd P ojec} Ma na,en inco.npe/e l and The are o/ FAe c. Aa /.c a <e c ou /d he <a en i ,pd e a fAe a do.y*<y o/ fde de rsq r .
Ha /tne e o ,,, ,,,; f lee A,i dele <<ed R) /4e a c k. o., t- +ke e.Lo ice of T.r.R 74a wi// de e ddysised u,,b, a ser a <de z c R. Classification of Item after Comittee Resolution: Fe,7 //ng
%)r - w 4A b Project Manager Signature Com
- e Cha' M na [ e
. on
.ittee h Signature wa l Id*4
,Co M ee Member Signature
-~ 4 .= .v ,g3. q- - --~~q p;;,__._.3 m p z.~._.. .. 3.-.
ENGNEERNG SERVCES -- 1 t TELEDYNE ENGINEERING SERVIC I) CONTROLLED Enclosure (1) EP-1-017 DOCUMENT TES PROJ. NO. _ .5 (r 33 DATE-m , .n RECORD COPY PRO). No. Independent Design Review Shoreham Nuclear Power Station Reviewer Report Form RRF No. 5633-1% 1 Reviewer Name: bee 4 440 A) Date: 9, gf , p.g Classification of Item (Per 3.8.1): Opeu Reference Documents: e,c kag p $ Y - / 0/4 '2. X colao G & A 8 ('d ) j Is. I. c r,4 Description of Item: Q a ult Cte.Ai e n ef branck iiu e * (z*- w t.- 3 g -so n - z)
- vio t cam pute r AA413 9.ed.
a bqsr Q used A. cAarf
- gau/,%
brasek b'us . However, cl< art is tneamplete , QAA A af(>ents it was tesed incorrectly N%d
}f 11 suett c%mpl<hd y c.v u // }n de'ce.te liNe biIs l
- als
- ef,'s eg er e with s z f = l. 0 - beca u s e ;
bruA. s1.n = s. + up s ocar woz.o en ss.P = L. ! AL , i
'eTF1 FnYNE ENGINEERING S S RECORD Enclosure (1)
EP-1-017 PRol.No. b - TELEDYNE ENGINEEPING SERVICES
. CONTROLLED Independa.t Design Review DOCUMENT Sbcreham F :ciear Power Station TES PPOJ. NO._ _ a ob ,
Project Mr :ager Resolution Form D A l E __, u a at PMR No. 5633- ISS Reference RRF No. 5633 ISD Date: Tft.T[St Description of Resolution: pg , gc g, g gee 5 eget ge4tooeE , THE St.owtm biPP6 FENCE 5 t.50GTR imir9.'o CFi%TL0F (427 i+ Siu) ~TFS c ( cc TES 7%b Mj s t.o wf x = 2.o 7 . % ' i~- 6 '15 PT. q ts fr iS.o pr. 2 7.o P T PT' L '# FT' L ' o K' "I ' 0 * *- 'O' 5 0 FT-0 15 \t 15 FT. s .5 PT. 1.o P r. to FT. i Classification of Item after Resolution- - PoTecTtAt Fiodig . w k w Reviewer Signature
?xL Project Manager Signature
r-w l TES PROJECT 5633 - INDEPENDENT DESIGN REVIEW I SHOREHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION - LPCS SYSTEM DISPOSITION RESPONSE FORM DATE: January 11, 1983 la 5 WS ICR NO. 5633-1 633 PWR No. 5633-138 TeWyne WM M-RRF No. 5633-138 TELEDYNE ENGINEERING SERVICES CLASSIFICATION CONTROLLED DOCUMENT Finding TES PROJ. NO. b3 DATE /./7[3 REFERENCE DOCUMENTS RECORD COPY FRO).NO. $D $ b _ AX-10A-2 (Pg. 00100 66A,B,,&C) TES STATEMENT OF FINDING l l l Qualification of branch line (2"-WR-31-301-2) not computer analyzed. l Analyst used a chart to qualify branch line. However, chart is incomplete and it appears it was used incorrectly and if it were completed it would indicata line fails. l I TES CONCLUSION OF FINDING E The Committee concurs with the Reviewer and Project Manager. The use of the charts are incomplete and could have an impact on the adequacy of the design. i
RESPONSE
l t the evaluation of small bore piping for flexibility and adequacy of support locations is an activity carried out by engineering personnel assigned to the Site Engineering Office (SED) and is not addressed as part of the Boston stress calculation effort unless specifically included in the mathematical model of the piping computer stress analysis. Branch line 2"-WR-31-301-2 was not in-cluded in the computer analysis for AX 10A-2. The identification of support types and support locations for small bore pipe is accomplished by the use of design guide - EMTG-5A (Reference 1). This guide allows SEO personnel to locate pipe supports and provide adequate flexibility, deadweight spans, and seismic spans for
. op .m , , /
piping 2 inches and under. In addition, this guide assigns responsibilities to various site personnel who are involved in the small bore effort. Further, as part of the as-b'uilt piping review and reconciliation program, each Cat. 1 non-computer analyzed small bore line has been given a final review to confirm that support locations are in agreement with EMTG-5. The process for conducting this review and the responsibilities of both Boston and SEO personnel are described in Project Procedure 42 (Reference 2). Finally, a memo was issued on October 14, 1982 (Reference 3) to reaffirm the division of responsibility between the Boston Headquarters Office and the SEO with regard to small bore piping. The branch line flexibility analysis by the chart method contained in the stress calculation for AX-10A-2 was done so inadvertantly and does not stand as the qualification of this branch line. When Rev. 3 of this calculation was issued on November 8, 1982, it was recognized that the small bore evaluation was the responsibility of the SEO and, hence, it was deleted from the Boston calculation. The same branch line was evaluated, as it should have been, at the SEO on June 30, 1982 and found acceptable (Reference 4). A subsequent evaluation, Reference 5 (attached), was made November 5, 1982. This confirmatory calculation attested to the conclusion of the SEO evaluation. The l total deflection at the connection of the 2 in. branch line to the 10"-WR l 301-2 run pipe of 1.2 in. in the run pipe axial direction is compensated for the 12 feet of 2 inch pipe perpendicular to this displacement. In addition the vert-ical relative displacement between the 2 inch connection on the run pipe and support PSA-5100 of 0.25 inch is compensated for by 6 feet of 2 inch pipe. The calculated maximum stress considering both the stress intensification factor of the fitting to pipe junction and the socket weld attaching the branch pipe to the ! fitting is 21,600 psi. This is less than the EQ (10) allowable of 22,500 psi and t l much less than the EQ (11) allowable of 37,500 psi. All calculations were made by utilizing a guided cantilever beam analogy. CORRECTIVE ACTION Prior to the issuance of the finding by TES, a memo (Reference 3) was issued to clarifiy responsibilities of headquarters and site personnel. In addition, AX-l 10A-3 was reviewed in conjunction with the issuance of the final stress analysis I for the system. We have verified the adequacy and corrections of the analysis as a result of that review. In view of the above and our systematic review of l l
_ . - = _ _. . . . - - - , Page 3 ot 4
- all final stress docuuents at the time of issuance, further corrective action j is not warranted.
I PREVENTIVE ACTION i When stress documents are prepared for final issue a thorough review is
. performed to ensure that the analysis is both technically adequate and appropriately described. This systematic review takes place in accordance with Project Procedure 42 and is the final check prior to issuance.
COMPLIANCE DATE Not applicable SAFETY IMPLICATION There is no safety implication. This line is acceptable. f l i f ////l[G so- - b Mb'Maasue fe)s SWEC Responsible Engineer LILCO Project Engineer h *) GDK I!ll Ob CProjee/ Engineer l l l
rage
- os 4 REFERENCES
- 1. EMTG-5-A, " Design and Installation of Piping and Piping Supports for Small Bore Piping Systems" December 15,1976 (Proprietary Document).
- 2. SNPS project procedure No. 42 " Procedure for Seismic Category I As-built Piping Review and Reconciliation" Revision 2 dated October 22, 1982.
- 3. IOM " Qualification of Small Bore Piping, Vent and Drain Attachments to Large Piping" from DCFoster to PCharnowski/RBain dated October 14, 1982.
- 4. SEO checklist for as-built review of (small bore) seismic category I piping noncomputer analyzed. System package E21.21.
- 5. Supplemental Evaluation of Small Bore Stress Package E21.21, Isometrics P1062-4 and P1081-5.
3 . . . . . ..---.-- srgg g SUBJECT QUALIFICATION OF SMALL BORE PIPING, VENT AHD DRAIN DATE October 14, 1932
' .ATIACIDfENTS TO LARGE PIPING FROM DCFoster TO PCzarnowski/RBain CC SJYerardi
# DGusso R0badiah GBechen REFoley
- RFHankinson:cdb /
File R2-General The purpose of this pemo is to clarify the Division of responsibility between the SEO and Boston office regarding the qualification of small, bore, vent and drain connections to large bore piping. VENT & DRAIN ATTACHMENTS June 29, 1981 E&DCR P-3672 was issued to the SEO. This E&DCR instructed the SEO to supp~ ort all single and double vent, drain and test connections
. located on piping greater than Ils dia. inside the pri=ary and secondary contaitment. This remains the base-line document, any vent or drain councetion not supported at all or not. supported in accordance with the
-referenced E&DCR or its subsequent revisions must be evaluated and
. resolved by the SEO. .This- evaluation should address both the design of the support and the stress developed in..the branch pipe. Suitable documentation
- -must . exist to substantiate deviations to E&DCR P-3672.
-The ctress analysis by computer for large b' ore piping does not typically
- -contain c=all' piping such as vents or drains. The effects of the branch piping on to the run pipe is usually considered to be insignificant and is not included in the model. However, there are instances when there is good reasons to include the vents or drains in the codel. For examnia, the qualification of an intersection in Class 1 piping requires the combination of branch and run stress prior to. performing a fatigue evaluation.
It-is far easier to let NUPIPE perform this evaluation than to do it by hand. As s' result, there are some AX's that contain vents, drains and test connections in the model. If the vent and drain has'been qualified by computer analyses, then it is necessary for PSAS Boston to identify to the Field those connections to qualified. . SMALL BORE PIPING The attachment location of small bore piping and the evaluation of the adequacy of span length from the run pipe to the first restraint locacica en the small bore piping vill be evaluated at the SEO. AX's that h:ve nall bore piping, included in the model and as a result are qualified by cocTuter taalysis need not to be evaluated by the SEO. As stated above, Boston PSAS must identify rAese connections to the SEO via marked up worksketches to avoid dupli at-ice of effort. D. C. Foster
;, ..g .,
f _ __ . . . . . - - . ... .] '
y _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . . _ . . _ _ _ . - _ . . . _ . _ . . .
.-/ 2eE4 ..
. p.
J.
- n. :,2 . ?.. .;.'
, . . - Attachment 3.1 fyg l [ d. S S ?5 SMALL BORE AS-BUILT ,',
PACKAGE STATUS SU124ARY ; .- < *wse er for Sys. Pac %sge EM 2/ . {- FIRST KdVIBJ ,_ FINAL REVIElJ COMMENT Not W e:ng,e - -
.7 Iso # Iss# Avail.able Sat f;o: po rts Anal.*:c Sat Unsat. '#-
l
\
\
! A -10A -l ,'?
A/06? A _ _._ ._,, ... N A M6"Ab di l l. . 12/0 8 / 6
.i n o ~,,'. -<,,.
O ' ~~ ^ W/CE() 7 Y kn
.s a; ~
c
,d-w.
([ U'h h {/
.w-I
= l' v.
i ~ _F_irst Review: -/ ~7 W , g'." W, / .. l'
- 1 not available
# add / delete supports L---
Responsible nq U W-er
' Date
/ _ _ _
! Janalyze '
# satisfactory T Final Review:
t/ satis f actory 3 v .sh ) / 3 7 f
~
#unsatis f actory b Responsible Engineer 'Date Total # Inos 3 -
i Changes in Status
\
' ~
J
' l.. =
e ';,9 u
..w gi' ,
. _. 3 5
-:-~b a . A --
i.,
- Al l a t ! s !'rt*li t $
pa.m 1.il 3 SEO OIECRI.lS I Ril AS-Bl:II.T RI; Vill' 01* (SMALL liORE) SI:!SMIC CATl:CORY I PIPINC NON-CO !Pirl'ER AN ALY;'.I'.D SYSTEM. PACKAGE: M[ _ _ , _ _ _ ISO # ISS # DATE 1.G4 A N00
- Y- l0,f/5 P l Phal . . .S. _
to ifI A = Acceptable l' = 1nacceptable NA = Not Applica&le
- 1) Piling Materia _l, Status Corrent Line # Size /S chedule
- thterial** l a) k)R-31-30/ Q-/ $sec SA/C6 Gk 8 !b I l
b) _ c) /
/ _
_._.___.[_.
/
.I Re fe rence : Bill of Materials on above Iso (s)
*0nly 3/4" to 2", sch 40 6 80 are acceptable j
**0nly SA 376 TP 304 5 SA 106 GRB are accept able i
- 2) Operatine Conditions (Normal 6 Upset) [;
r P= 8V_psig , T= / '/O F., insulation = A' __ Re fe ren ce : Line Desig,nat ion Table Sys6B / Sht / Iss 7 ,e ( o r) __,___ , , _ _ _ _ ____,__
- 3) Imposed Relative Di s p l a ce re n,t s_
't h e rma l Restil t aot Displace: c; ' JS '
's "
Seismir Result an t ilispl act r .,6/' ' 0' Re fe re:u. -Ay /c A gr / cop Ay,c [ggy '
-R.B HM::newrs
')
. T her a.il Ouset si.qu i remen t s 7; v
1
P P 4 2. At t achnen t 3 Par,e 2 of 3
- 5) Support ,Sppa Requi_rj cen,t._s_
' Status _ Comment Permitted Maxinun Span rotween Spts._ Span
- Pp c Size 9.# IQ~[" idNf&ue PSASM 12.W
/ /
h'/ (2)
<- ,- /. ___. '
/ / /_ / / .__l
/ / .
/
- 6) Valve or rianne Wei_S h '. "egd reents Permitted
,Qpe S_ize Mark # cr,t.ypje Weight Re fe rence ** Weicht* j 2" Vassoc. W J2 P _qc-375 79 A
/
l
,l / piIl i
- 7) Valve Supycrt Rentiirc rren_t._s --
ql g _J Suppo rt; c f valves la with cac two-uny rest ralnt o r an ! I anchor within 6" af the pipe to valve ucid
- 0) Pipt S_u_ m. . w..t Fu . c t i_o_n_ A l' l
I
;r ns e re in Pipo cuppcrt tyres (P93, l'9 A , c r e . ) are loc !
accordance wi th EWP 9.5 rec,ui rerc-nte cad c,r .:nt...! thevi: t u i .>
!?c ierence : ISO : opp ot t::bulac icn ar.J 14DCR F-3'.. ,16 1 i
...t
- Peru'.tt.d Srch Perr ~rted Sp.r. Po r.- I L r r d l _ l"?') 31 Cli . @li '?"l?t'-f _ . U.CJ 9 i
. .P1P3_ E.iFf .
3/3" 4'-e" 7 ' - 0" lo" .- 1" 7'_c" e,'-6" h i- f 1 1/4" 9'-0" 10*-6" ;0' 1 1/2" 10 ' - O l '. ' - 6 " 30i: . 1" li'-0" 12' J" i N I f':Perjcet
- r. prin; fiin n~ &
f
-------y , - , -,-=w-- ra ,e.- - T-- --
m
/iW.!
", t i. .u. it : . .L 3 P. u 3 oc3 pygl ..es -! n,g.. . !.ii. t I'm ( FFtQ
. . .?!W. .b5 S .YMTS. $ $ACUY !?. ~hk.--- -.
... 0W. S ?.. ...$U ff N .. W TO N ?lW ?
hM/TS. hAes) ,/41 ( W f,,_ W .S _.k8%. S + A /S.Q.CW
... $ pd9 0AT*W S $ Al_, & S/~ff, &~)M Q~S .
J'PfN f" & ../~S ..
. .f. {gg . .B5nvyel...&kdo.g...p.o.A.._5__.1.o..o... A. A..... J.u..s._ c_. n.. o n.-
(.z. W
/0 f/f 6' /S /Q '~Y. .; E..C. . frD.S . AL&WA.8..l.f...O..f.... f A Y.- .- .h. -
..]l/f . _ Ot9- / A77&. . /S .N'*1"N/4. 3. .. /1MO. .A. . _DO@. AWfMW
. . - - . ~ . - . . .- -- --.. .. . .--.
isce fv-t;:ec evai.s .ti 'n c:i at t t;.S ed si cets
};Ucd..... "'dGd I[']a , I t I_O ' . '
. &c ~
BLF. AS /5 . . . . . . . isacor r:d. .% pp-rt Ch.q:0 idecov . /ir ;1yr i .- ytx Ise .-- .s f '.]' e u.u. . . i. : a_.m. _ _n_ r- ,
, , /. ' N ilt Approvid i...
Pen d i :- 'Q'. :c. q,t
/.s-B a il t not l:::. .cVed
& P 6/ ~2.
feviever Dh t t-A%Q ).) 2- V 2 r.e,r.. tac ii : e r 9.it e
CALCULATION SHEET A soto es C ALCUL ATION IDENTIFICATION NUMBER //] J. O. O R W.O. N O. l DIVISION & GROUP C ALCUL ATION NO. OPTIONAL TASK CODE PAGE 3 --
& ' ot' Sys w w - ---
E ~J c?! --a?h Sc4 8 6 b % g8 h%fiCS $0bS~ 6 P/ss/ -C \ 7 : fv~AcvAnou oF SEZ4nd" Neems Be7towd Psn siso nam I so ctwhs w/to'4 Rg & %) flicyGeWAu l
' ular & 'y Essrt!ap [
y i ia r
I !
fhl f/// "" 6 4 C/*r tur)
,s i ,
's e , u _ (p e_ fibcf.s4 s'oG l
lj P4vd 8 s. i S i!' p e:aro! l 20 l i i l [ en ! p u
- I ar t
23 , I i 24 {
** i gg!o
l 26 i ; A/$7D fian Keuw h>CrcArev flu. cuppese75 a '2 } b.L<- c s://so , I 75 Emcr.s 62A; ' 29 l
/ ~724 m L Adgit e Ai/cikR PS4 Sko DuE To RSOAL Td6xus Gnowrs of BZm. 7sei,ve- /< = ss.zs ' ,f* w.s ' c<e = oui'
//
u d' DT* /> - 70 = so 'F; 55
'* AR = ss.25(i:)(tixd&so)
- jay
AV* 28.(sC 3) (Gwl5l)[So)= . 519 (fgomf
" o 36
- l. ;. : . L.'tl , f, 'A f' 1 0 L./,tL'I' sY.*i'.Y f',v~.Y / i ' .' As e ,5 N'/** /Li. *,'i f~5 $5 ,,j A,0 f f Go a f' .:
^
(a* s ,') , ,4'X /J -/, , />: .~ >
?.oci:.<',~
i 39 N /-
/),* ;a: : - V :i$ * . w' 0 / j];,ll; y ac y , ,m C.
4l %
/
g/,:v'd ,' ' , l "[ d 43 ~C ft/'70 t' ds
't /?'% \' '( lll}[ fA by f I' j, ;,[, f -! t' -**? . o , /76 ?
m on ry x iusr 6v ,::u.n<>>>e.e. b <. . . i r r iC s.ni / 46
- GALCUL Ai aun SHth I A '/310 65 CALCUL ATION IDENTIFICATION NUMBER O
'7 -
J. O. O R W.O. N O. DIVISION G GROUP CALCUL ATION NO. OPTIONAL TASK CODE PAGE i i 3 h.nT/;f WrFCH,q t /Yv/-tTS {s MP) & A,v0 & jfW ],]!us ,* is
* /]p . C G l ~ . fs ' = . f3 " OsypWs '
s A i
//
0 /) ypz r * . WO . 'T/ f ' . 09 / r 1
, a l\
SA /0C (/?/S 0 /?! E , s tV! t.* r. ' b, , ~.% cif '2 i so : , ($ *L , yo' 0 0 7C2 ,,fr
~
I sa gggfc
'/'7 *Ts' c t'
- hD E
Sw+ d ~7.
,g &
M' 7cf % f 9f e( I
/,b(visC f.c7s C.%
/~2n ! 6.
i! t7.kirs /c "4 j bi# .
/. F
*.tt r3 i^O Ps/1 She = 19 ' - /la e/>T';aur 16 47
'a -?) - Y;. .. i - , .
h'ht-f's (5 f S. fd ?l. C (00F /]it =
/jv 2 2 C ','
.??f to b
'e' 2'
~ ;, f , ;i g. ,t'y.f i., , (3 ff,- s.U s) ('O /Sc' /)i ': .sO3'/ l 2'
/)v . ct z " ;
23 E*
- b l b~ F* u l /[ hsf-fr .'.11.L / ~ b lV l'b rs / : !'
26 . ..' I,,_ ,y,,,,, ( ) fj f-l G g gg gj a>f fj k' f g; p, g ' 3 --
,. ,o y q '{
2r ,
-X ,,
I ' 2C k;,, (, aa t + . c it) + (. .:n + 7 ft . ::22 I 29 !
= '"
30 fy: .usf + .? ?G . 3i [% It,'t. " f'_fy/-f D U hl -d 't 0 $.' ~ A' I ~ '~ 33 34 [];# 2 "35;? + . p df - Q(:: D' , ~- 1,1 . . , 33 K - 36 /j v , -' 039 + 02: . ( 2/;) = oi/ 37 f't 3 g/- i-ff- h ,] , 5 l5 y? ~$~
> $ '* / /1 / /s/fl.' J /* W i) a p. .~ c i= a '-
i' , R4b ' Q.v. 9 2.: w u is " c'we a 40 s
/,gg;2Z_t]';_~ ;
i:1. b j) u' + w 1 /)g - ei ( 42 as /) _/f
.. L- wFe "
,?
es o 46
V A Lv U L 4 I IVl4 bntti A 5010 61 - C ALCUL ATION @EN TIFIC ATION NUMBER J.O. O R W.O. NO. DIVISION & GROUP /g 'CALCUL ATION NO. OPTIONAL TASK CODE PAGE x
,' f pY4f' %& /\j
/ i-
,/ ( l_
i) 2 / . g/ \ ; a ! y J,,4 s# i a ..
- b u
gl4lElaW ws w f s y o")(-t no ,
,7 ,n ,
i 40 7
,e E y r,l'
, 'T
.3 4 "C
% k~
f5 3 ,
~
16 fi 1 .. l -
& W R 31 Sol A #
18 d
.9 f
SIO en %) 2
- 22 23
< g,z n
27 #g #I ee l.
*'a e, Pido gg>1t) g 29 \
'N
' ._ , ',]
' ' N - / T1 .g 1 30
,, y, ,,a - eo; 9J y
., grs .
*hsc/160) S A
ff.
< W Q's s /
- _,# 4.26 .
*a y .,
MY/6I ( k 3a %s op., / t 9 , n j i;\'gV %'> ( M 40 e w, , 8 . , U *' $ L .Tso f/01/ N. lV
.. g eso
.:st; / O Y 46
l t l SMAl.L IIORI' W -Ill!I LT P"CJI l itEViiM PFoul:M' 1 FIX 150 I_T_E_.M_S. xis. vt.c w n SSI #l Tsc PMR-Y
. rac ser i
og u.r. 1 g FQC 1::::'t.T L UM CAT. 71 The following itewr, on th.' above iso requite re z!slon pri n t.a sir,n-of f : l] I'r/.;F. J- / n L.7yt u ub'. . . . . /p... . . ( k.. t. m< ...u. t Q .. .
.t
./po) 9. :sr R. .-3./_ . _SJ/ <2- / _. _ .
.- / ,-
// , . i. ,
- i/ 3
- p% '
. - . . . . . //. o.,.
( '~,'l' G. / /
.. . 4 m e. e .w . D .
9
STONE F. CEBSTER ENGINEERirJG COOFORATION CALCUL ATION SHEET
- r. w,. ..
CALCULATION IDENTIFICATION NUMBER , l J 0. O R W.O. N C. OlVISION O GROUP CALCUL ATION NO. OPTIONAL TASK CODE PAGE M w. hWR4T I 3 w gg, Q$MML we \O4TTC N OG Jt-satb C C.% hQS$ e sbEN
- 3_
$64 #
k kh
- 9
'60 se .
II 93 se fS to if it e9 23 2,1 23 to EMdb 6 CygQ > Y. %N ,N) $ y g 30 36 , 32 33 34 35 34 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 41 46 me & -***-ee me. % ww_ --
-m mmi m e.
... STONE B WESSTER ENGINEERING CO iPORATION
, CALCULATION SHEET a so e as -
CALCULATION IDENTIFICATION NUMBER J.O. .) R W.O. NO. OlVISION & GROUP CALCUL ATION NO. OPTIONAL TASK CODE PAGEM
' ~
t V esastoca
, s/\
3 - r.:wir.- 51
\
4 '
\ Q s S 4, 4 ,,.,wg,,73,3,, 7,,
0 7
.g;sr4 O
~b\ ./ Q
'S
~
/ bw%Ruw G 9'
^[
l limm.y - - -
Co<C . . tX 13 - s M ay Mc4, we.sj GTua.4.st Gys... ,w.e !
. if' * ,
Isast\ - s s ea y - i.
.a 20
{ tt Alte.mc~\ M.,.e we..ws e.n: MA Stoo Qw.s h[v.mx , iso ps et,7_. hss.: u n
. \ *Z.1 "
. v a,, \. . w as
** 1
\utam\ N%un ca 1 igt 1 c dce.s 69T99,kxto-A, '
=-
%s..a.- %.s,d C.sez.
c,Dtsid ' . lcm '
. %,w .s 4 " .
32
\. T.: k itiC.v k _w s . 3 C. s'"*
- 3. .
33 ds w.w .G59 .\'C'l*.532" ss s MEe nce.1 .34 . 613 ' . o z. 'l
?) b e.iw . c. Nc.e.~e.ct .S ' widw.,
f$J.2d 51c.c Ei io s '-G g CBEA l s Lo.m.= . ~2.P_,~'I
)4 l 4.
m.# .22-es as ~.
,, STONE & WEBSTER ENGINEERING CORPORATION CALCULATION SHEET l
- n. .
C ALCULATION 10ENTIF! CATION NUMBER J.O. O R W.O. NO. OlVISION & GROUP CALCUL ATION NO. OPTIONAL TASK CODE PAGE M
)
i 3 QBE
- SR.V e OBEA Moa.ums Sn.~ h%-to A W.m eB ' G9 S
da h .co t t.oc6 + .T.t iN (.002.+ .os9 + .279P
- 313 7
AV * (. + . ti(e + . 2.7 to) s . 3 S l' - 1 int, Nsuetg M.. -e-w m , ey.g.Me.,
'S 1
~
ii ea
\ em 9 esmou M. - . I
] 42 5 .227' & . 375' * .Gloo "
aV * .ocA & . itb + (.zas . Z44) = .12.7" I?
\ m h m m e m k a w so n., D m e w. e as tus w uv S o w c, '
i.
** a34 . 532.+ .(.Go = u92,"
i - l A Y* .02.1 t . 2.2.6 * .M9 a3 l 24 l ts 27 29 30 l
- 32 33 .
34 , 35 34 l 37 3. 39 l 4o l ) .4143 44 4S 4. g,m eag we wem eens am - +* * **==Ne+e 8 e*-
- N+ eme.
--y m- p ,- - , .-,,.ve -.y. , , .. y .
m.
- , --,--r--- , .
l STONE 0. UEBSTER ENGINEERING CORP 3R ATIO N CALCULATION SHEET ( CALCULATION IDENTIFICATION NUMBER l a.o. o R w.o. No. Division o GaoUP CALCUL ATION NO. OPTIONAL TASK CODE PAGEdd6
,' b,.m,% .. % F Q koss, c..sn won 5
2" 'Sc>oo" s.w.h. C ~
-.y m pehah 2c-<A
- I i
~
h L,ch I I L .s7s oo.2.vrs-w, i.sn -
- i.1,157 T.s.SGS /
8 2 = .T 31.a3 v e- u.sxio',st
- 1 -
to x w cf ( },' . sr ' .,w. 20 O . .= km,~ L-V A ,,, b b N { i U 22 L o.s fre \ s = o.st.97X.s30 = .3s0 t.I,zs' 23 G 3 . -1 g\ b k % e.g e. s 8 u.c b e,ge. s e c.v e s l o.: moe is gu. A W ?,W,.,g d 6 u d , , hg h z. % e. .. EMT) s2 os ssvd d 4. < b l e 9 F. ( l 29 30
- b
( L % { c' ( T' O { v' 33 . i.s \. r~ \ W~ \-7T \CP 2 i.235) _ 5.12.s 3.
- 1.s (,Ms)'Is(s.asT's s.i / /.s31 \ .ws i.s /
,, O hL, , ceb.,g hom <s. g b. E,umc,. h ccer.on
; L . c.... 6 % L % )
, O * cexe. (cw> u isk.8&s10.ist) . e,zs ..,. \t , F\uo,%
- c-
~
(i%)' a H wo.md , wh = (atz t.s c A(. sal (.wd = cs,9 _.b e <ms
- - , , __ _ _. . _ _ , . - ._. . _ - , - - - L- ._ -
STONE & CEBSTER ENGINEERING CORPORATION CALCULATION SHEET 4 am . CALCULATION IDENTIFICATION NUMBER , J.O. O R W.O. N O. OlVISION O GROUP CALCUL ATION NO. OPTIONAL TASK CODE PAGEGsa8 Mb #fti6m4T 5 Mr s (tb% M,,'] i ( 8tI5'~+ (AW)
- 1o 111 in Oo G,3/ it.,7.e<. .-L .wu ,%. 5 (ii.=5.17.s)
'a ik My , $( My ~
c:.a.1 hv . 2.ot 8 M r t2
% 3 C ve,., T T4' 4.b 1r(t.n4PC 530 13 55 s 2 otB (to,7 si -. Al s 2.ll.15' m' 1% OL Q TTto4 ILSSS *= " $ *
=
- 19 0' *'*'.
Ta* M r_ l.S NT t.0 MT = 1. 0 667i d
- M 45 M 23 w t (m#(.ua)
L'TE.9.NT M o f AO wG.sq R7 145 Tw Bvv'#w i# * (s.nc0(.sts3(d ums:
.. sv6r34(.G1)~
D ee.w.~,,,,c M <s.u S e.ss n 7T). * (4s4')(3.cd_ co84 nI 34
% = h. ( o c.s3 0 '
35 49m.7106 in RfA.Y 37 12,% peasa% e e 6 tS Oil C Ce SC C CO C w o p4.% 6 ww & OAD p.es g y.o-c h O43 s+s n..-~.r .
<st s 66 9 & (6 0 + 7.,llol 7 6 37 iCC 4
2.2 98Ci 4 3Wo O .', bomen a w acc.e.s A Me.
-r- e- ,e we - ep-- w --en- --,,-w- ---y y-y.-,-r<-e,-e.y y--*,,---e w, yw. - ce yspe-,w, i--- pa-u w
i l STONE P. Y!ESSTER ENGINEERING CORPOR ATION CALCULATION SHEET l wo .s CALCULATION IDENTIFICATION NUMBER , J.O. O R W.O. NO. OlVISION O GROUP CALCUL ATION NO. OPTIONAL TASK CODE PAGEG tf( 3 bhmoTtons
*) usceo enO CuWTsLCvC.R. h e use.o ott e Stist.55 S
u O .,
..\ w m.c mou - s be.6 %
<-%-n - mm. -
$f.e Cs* 6 % g M 4.t O 0%IT O F D 4.i b O '% % 4# df. C
- As m
~lk.m.,, g % cwS.<_,; k~ s% m% h % q
%wQ IDC.C MWm1C MOTgp5 % N519@.qA,0 SO' % Sf,,, $MC.
< .4 ' i' 7.m ibg%wos e o. c.~ . md, 23 O% II 23 24 ES to 27 28 j 29 30 t 32 33 . 34 35 1 36 l 37 34 33 40 4 f 42 b/ .
,3 44 4S 44 a----- - ___. _
y - - - - . . - - - - . , , e _.___g, . . - . _ _ , . . . - . _ , -
,-_,,,ww - - --- -,__-.--,-,,-_--7
, STONE 8. WEBSTER ENGINEERING CORPORATION
~
, CALCULATION SHEET CALCULATION IDENTIFICATION NUMSER J.O. O R W.O. N O. OlVISION & GROUP CALCUL ATION NO. OPTIONAL TASK CODE PAGE$f.h E.T E.RMt t 1Gic<T c.; bG uwp o.3 9 OTQv %
3 n: t.s E o b53 t- %T bMt u quw.*.C
. ...cm e
=
..,,4-
- H ,- > , s
, . , m. .sz s%,
so.. 2, , . .. ..> ... .. N - P s n - 5 tc c. 7 t
'a 9(.st s%st , 6e%4&C (ass), e7e s-it/
?(t56)5 4h* 12.ib ft
(_szs%s'sh 6eM4A(24aN = wasi. A M= e tossy-IS I '
" l>sc M: Q.ibS.~ N b,,wh h hieg 3. "P. 4. bing N=
b' E Lef_ .131
~
23os esJ usF T . Tc<i.t3 @ (.s30
. c.c. 3 y 4.?
~
20 a '4 "* I.$ I* b6 3Ib yS 6 40 4CA.=5
" z., L. L E,3'-o " b ~
W~.1 .= 6.s w % @ ' s az es: b c&.%.a.=- ws- <l 27
% s c L . L t b L E
- m m e x e_.
, # se- s, m 30 % -y.- - - >< >.
si . 3 v to : .stS% I lO ktil Z3 % : .r - _ __ ; . e DkhlC l 33 l 34 (.57 $ d.I * (ib TL I3 . b s et - 37 t4 - s 2ceo' S 6 t*scs \ :
%4 v
- 27 3 {S 8-2 a31 h _' s - L '254 el stan* W% ' Et I k*
f5L 44 s } l.h *
.., STONE & WEBSTCR ENGINEERING CORPORATION
.' . CALCULATION SHEET
.s a soie as C ALCULATION IDENTIFICATION NUMSER A J.O. O R W.O. NO. OlvlS10N & GROUP CALCULATION NO. OPTIONAL TASK CODE PAGE M r i v~
TT.4** i t. W. 4a ITEThC4 8%T4 e \t 4 3 4 w.un.n c, . . . . . w. ..sts*l-7 I Pin Stoo wP (.szs)f727._' 340 a lb nt e
=
~
- 3. "
- v = s/v s-,0 , 4tor , e,c 2 r= 540 z.s4_. g3 4 p 7
'8
- .7s t
.3 SS he % :4Idonl 1 %>13Apf A.,m EC p_
(t.5Y2..ul(4L6): tSBo pl n - 19 y* I. ' N y$J Nw- (sts z.\ isso% issth s,ss ,s;
=> e==- r= %,,J) 34 as %sC1m,% A
% kkb -t b h1 I k h %
aT 28 a VDm 5 a p, = e' (4e4M.37sh 4 t. ue) r36i ed (e4W4 ee4esT 4cm) =
-\ p : 13 \ 3 u t. '
33 34 35 OhTson S .tc.c 4,_ 37
,s t (% Cm) 4 1.zSL 39 vp w el e6 + (.,s3(z.4(%9a +4LU
- lec= rs ~
\ **
l j \?.A s 5pl-5 t%M p-l .i E- S .., >caepwe.G
,',' h .c./ &toq 4B4 & C is')(5'.izs')(nth 6 6cco ~, Ec,9 i., k q w w. G g .
~17c 2 4 ,%w-
. '%_. a !L
- - - -,-w-. ,,+y ,:.---gw- - , -,, y-w-- ,- -
- , ,--swe
a
- CALCUL ATLON SHEET. -%
a ,A>
' ' ^
r { C ALCUL AT!'sN IDEN TIFiC ATION NUMBER ;'$1g
,, . o n w. o. NO.
osv.lSION & GROUP CALCUL ATION NO. OPTIONAL TASK CODE PAGE p Mv . ic< w_ ag:
. it.
3,* g L I: c o__ E.0 5.-._P..TAK & s%u..s._5 P _ 2 4M 4 I STRuc7dge et. McRML $ U PSET FA4LTE TJ ' C N_3 X.- Y Z x Y 5.I ' .~
- 8' 2,4-6 2.91 2.5 2.86 f./6 3,/D;
'. .3 l '. 2.87 2.44 3.3 3.'23 &IJ 3,8W , ;
S3' :. 97 253 3.22 3=b + 57 90' 3.20 ??6 334 3 lb H6 3 7 0L'W* i
~ 5HieLD W4LL W 3>. 2 0 236 S. .::S il 3.66 9 86 "
- 4l4 f/93-G >' ' 4 49 5. +9 CA 4.s2. 5 23 7,lF P . P. V. 90' } 3 20 :36 3.39 3.6(> 4:86 ' 4<19.!
.s i
" i IsI' 5.c'I 4 19 5 55 6.15 3.?9 665-n'!' 509 4l9 Tss 6.15 6 79 6,65'
" ' 2. :, i hA4 2.% 2OF
~
8' 2M/ 3.25
! R.B. PRIMARY ' 215.30 '
. ' 2.H I 5.53 '
5 33 3.2'i i 6 16
, j 57' 5.53 2 57 <h 5C! -
5.79 339 14/6 I s 83' d.? ! 3.5] h.b8 7 08 4: 21-1 l 658
' i IO6' E.43 3, h l' % A22. 4c7 L_ _ I5]'_ , 2.89 S40 3.20 333 4*l5 &g4& S68 8' 2.5 2 ~ 207 a
' R B.RcodoM(l B 8' l 7.14 2.16 2.52*
2.2 c 1_29" 2m 2.26
' 2* L
~
~ lB' lH-. l ! .25l 2.59%1 2.26 I. *ft -
' l.59 , 3.cc lA S ~.V. _~
'" \
I 173 i 6/$6 ?. ~. C l. c3 I C.90 I J.C7 l /.a8Ej 12 8 ' 151'
; 2.00 2 Bo ' 2 .01 '! 2.28 3.tI } ?30'.
2.33 2.01 2.33 3.18
- 2.30 9.:
4 ns' l 1.ci9 i.sq z.u 2.m i l 233 s.ie navT.: I 203' 2 72 ! 233 2.74
" l ..
!._.t .fs.c6 d12 3.oh'.
m e,,a q s s. I t.92 2.40 iso t1 zn , w 1 29 [0NOL ll 6?! S a* 2,44 , 2.Si : . 3.00 l 2M6 3@.y' - E00M , 107.S' 2:10 l 7.65 1.7+,' 235 285 II i 3.21 ; 2:4I , 3 5&',f
- t. . .
_ .. j /.87 ! 155 , 1.52 i 2.qa l 2 i C .;; 29' %
.S(ggggjwgggj , ~19 75,Zn. ;7 32lg
" l 28 l , %?3 I _2&l 2MS;; l l.65 .Mo a
15.8' 2,15 l 2.co l l 4!2 ' 2.26 . , 4383b
, 2.S3 .
- 2. '-:! 7//3 ; 32oyl g'g3pg ; 37:5'. l 2 82 l 233 ! 3 14 lj: .I36 ; 2.72 l 3.il y' 7 SC 3' l 3 ob ; 2.tl 3 24 l ; .?.6 5 ; 2.53 ' 'rC8~ -
I 70' 36] l _ _ . . . . . .. ! ?.22 i 36S i !35 ' 2.62 l 4%. 4 g . l N ..E .
- - -v.-.-~.. .. ..,. ~.._.... . , . . . . _ ,_ , , , , . , , , , . _ . ...- _ ..._.
_. . n-9 T Cw r. . :M T:P CNGINc:4TNG C C R oc Q *. T t '*! s _ , _ , , , , V AX ST.4ESS SUMMAAY I ENT L I LCC. . _.S HO R fd%M__uN I T t J . t. . 11600 02.0.0_.0 DAC3 100._____._ . 7 IP'ING SYST EA CORE SPRAY P l .' I .', G ( f s 21)
*EP_CR.T
., LA AA llo00.02-AA-ICA-/. ___
R 5 F '. ORA %fNGS .:G q_Af MMme S H Eci~. t s g j a g y _ ga_r c - i STAtSSES AND CISPLACEMENTS. 71: 9_ _. .. _
- CCN0 ! !!UN--CA3 d 2 THERMAL - JESIGN C ALCULA TED S TRESS DISPLACEMENTS (1N) ocfNT No. (PSI) OX OY __,_,_DL_.___.__..__.
27 4659. -0.216 - 1.024 -0.043 2J 29 4o77. 27.42.
-0.16d
-0.14 j 0.992 0.962
-0.017
-0.004
'40 2847. -0Cb0 0.922 0.01.5 ..
35 3L57. a 39 0.650 0.055 37 1150. .004 0.772 0.177
% 40 2/99. A b -0.036 0.706 0.418 y 45 552o 4 7 -0.03d 0.70L 0.435' 47- 7 'I.*h -0.123 0.634 0.486 50 A2 - -0.133 0.6 15 _ 0. 479 __
54 @T 7. -0.159 0.602 ~ 0.462 05 4442. -0.211 0.550 0.420 oC 4545. -0.246 0.510 0.394 o 34a l. -0.250 J.417 0.24L 6* 1514. -0.086 0.347 0.073 65 4002 -O dL5.1_ - 0.335 0.019 66 4450. -0.062 0.3t9 -0.030 of 2286. -0.086 0.319 -0.042 70 37 -0.0d7 0.316 -0.042 73 do9. -0.087 0.3 L6 -0.J42 73 co9. -0.087 0.3L3 -0.042
._71 _ .__ 523_. -0.004 1 313 -0 '}.is _
S0 ' 224. -0.272 0.323 -0.130 ai 256. -0.453 0.334 -0.213 o2 291. -0.4 73 0.334 -0.225 3 2v . u. -0.472 0.356 -0.225 o201 0. -0.474 0.315 -0.225 ei 317, -G.ea? 1. n s -0.7'o 35 334. -0.491 0.335 -0.234 oc - -0.342 0.3 37 -0.25,1 87 . -7.535 1. 4 h -0.2u0 3o 82 7. -0.592 0 . 3 r, -0.202
. , ,4 995. -0.59) 0.34c -0.2%
7 ,. 90 1000.. -Q & .0 342 ... .- 0 2.3.S _ 1 91 2990. -0.ovl 0. 3 f' i -.1.2ce 94 3075. -0.5v2 ?.325 -0.2al
,- * '. v . m .. u - m_ . . _. 2 - a _s m,e-e .e -,- . r oc- is u g -.
l ( \
.'( 9 7, N c - N F AS T *k CNCTNFCRfNG CCQDCRATfdN I/
l
. AX STRESS 5UM.4ARY l 'I UNIT 1 J .C . 11600.02.00.0 DEQ3 _100 .
f lY,j.Ed.TLILCC._3HLMEHAM PINJ 3Y3 TEM C0hti SPRAY PIPIhG [1C-7/) AIPCM onAX l luc 0.02- AX- L C A - /
.thb. cnw1hn9 ,$65 mc .2 s a1_%% ! uteri %9Iuev n Tc -
DISPLACEMENTS 3*59.. - CONDITICN--CASE 10 GaE INERTIA 10851) DISPLACEMENTS (IN) 70 INT No. 0X OY D L _ ._._
< 28 0.020 0.020 0.020 29 0.3L2 _._ 0.020 0.012 1 30 0.001 *
- 0 020 0.00L l 25 0.021 0.020 0.018 37 0 .<03% 0.033 q.026 .
40 g . 6,3' O.0o2 0.014 45 0.086 0.014 s 47 x f3p0.044 0.042 0.103 0.010
.y 50 '
\*' O.042 0.100 0.0LO S*, j 0.040 0.098 0.010 5.5 A 0.037 _ _
O_3.,03.3. . ______0.010... 0~.035 0.0LO e0 62 Q' 0.025 0.090 0.061 0.010 66 0.007 0.012 0.001 c5 0.003 0.005 0.uJL 66 0.000 0.000 0.000 67 _ . . , _ _ _ _ Q,000... _ .0.000 .O.000 70 0.000 0.000 0.000 73 0.000 0.000 0.000 73 0.000 0.009 0.000 70 0.000 0.000 0.000 30 0.00L 0.006 0.033 _. 8 L ._,__ . __ _. 0.002 o o11 ._ . 0. G.J.5._ o2 0.002 0.011 0.005 8200 - 0.003 0.0L1 0.006
*o 201 0.002 0.011 0.004 1 43 0.002 0.oLL 0.005 85 0.002 0.011 0.004 l
ou c.an) a.n1 n.nna _ _.. at 0.006 0.011 0.01o 4 0.J01 0.000 0.002 o9 0.000 0.007 0.001 90 0.000 0.0Co 0.001 91 0.001 0.0v5 0.012 , Si _ _ . _ . -
._.0. m o. 2.051 ._
Q .,0 0. 2__. __ .
? G* 0. 0 0'. 0.011 0.006 LGd 0.322 0 . 0 l 0.014
* *
- wewe e . . . . .
~ ~ -- - - - - _ - - . _ _ - _.
ST63f F R 'a F M T C D CNCf4FCMfvd Ef"M00Raff0N
~~ 37
** AX STRESS
SUMMARY
I.E4T _LILCC__ _5HGRiluli UN r T t i.L. 116 00. 0 2 . Q_0. 0 9 4 0 B_._1.0 J , IP!NJ SYSTE;1 CGAE SPRAY PIPIiG [i F 2 r ) ngPLx! iAA L lu00.0 2- A4- L O A- / l Rep. an. IN C E ff 6- AL3F#E.4 ruCJ .*h-/1- r t e nt F v - _gg F _ DISPLACEMENTS D d ___ - CCNDITICN--CAS E li SRV INEATIA DISPLACEMENT 3 (IM) PCfNT NO. DX DY O2, _ __,..._. . 23 0.030 0.032 0.031 29 0.017 _ 0.0 32 0.018 30 0.006 ( 0.032 0.002 15 0.03 0.033 0.028 37 Dead 0.046 0, 04J .._... 40 L.N82 0.115 0.054 . 45 f.083 0.120 0.055 i N 47 xO 0.084 0.142 0.052 lh 20 54 g7 5 0.035 0.086 0.L41 0.139 0.05L 0.049 55 A . 0.091 0.135 0.044 0.132 60 42 rQ# 0.096 0.090 0.096 0.041 0.037 64 0.029 0.021 0.008 o5 0.013 0.0 LJ 0.005 co 0.001 0.0J2 0.003 l _ 67 0 0 ._Q 0_L 0. 00 L . ...0. 002 70 0.001 0.031 0.001 73 0.001 0.001 0.001 73 0.001 0.00t 0.001 is 0.000 0.000 0.003 BC 0.012 0.033 0.222 ei __. 0.020 0. t 55 0214t d2 0 .0 19 0.154 0.040 3200 - 0.024 0.154 0.050 8201 0 . .) 15 0.154 0.032 l s3 0.0 19 0.L53 0.039 a5 0.313 0.152 0.030
. 8.6 0.?i4 O dle- 0.0M . . ... . . _
8T 0.065 0.13s 0.L24 de 0.00, 0.1to 0.0L9 39 0 . 0 -) 1 0.0do 0.006 10 0.0G2 0.0/? 0.J04 9L 0.004 0.052 0.005 42 _ . _ __ _" t'~ . . C .01.- . .0 J 2.7_. . . ja h 0.03; 0.01- 0.031 10] 0.055 0.012 0.054 e " " " -
- e e 6 aeu.., amm es ..
a -- _. ,_,_.__-,_.,,_7_ . , , , , , , , . - , _ _,_,,,ey_,,7-y m ._.___,.._%, _ , , , - + , ,
) . . . - = - __ _
.s. .....m,
,c ..
i - * .* 9TONF t E49TER ENd f N F::i f AG C CR PCR ATf D*a _ 94
.: Ax STRESS
SUMMARY
l t.'.L WJ,.L. ! LC.Q___S H C R E H A;4 U'e f T 1 J.C. 11600.02.00.0 9%3. 1.0.0 _ IPING SYST=.* CCAE SMAY PIP!hG[ltha1) esiPCRT wR AA --Fl o C O .0 2- A A- 10 A -l REF. D,1A.INC3 SG REFE_.R ~c NC_ _SHE5T rss/nsv _ care t DISPLACEMENTS CCN0! TION-CAS E 31 . go.3
. T IME MI STORY (MATER MAMMER,00E TO CS PUMP STARTUP)
OISPLACEMENTS (INJ _ a01hT NC. OX DV 0.E - . _ . _ _ _ _ _ 28 0.006 - 0.006 0.004 2, 0.004 - 0.006 0.002 0 -0.00L N - 0.006 0.000 35 -0.00 - 0.006 - 0.00-+ 37 -0A84 0 906
- q. 00.6 _ .
40 Oh 0.016 -0.004 ' 45 *016 0.017 - 0.004 47 .A 0.016 0.020 - 0.005 50 %/ -0.010 0.020 -0.0J5 54 -0.016 0.020 -0.005 55 A. -0.015 02 019 _ 0.0 0 6.. . 60 / -0.015 0.0ts - 0.006 62 -0.011 0.012 -0.006 64 - 0.002 0.002 - 0.00L 65 -0.001 0.001 -0.001 o .2 0.000 0.000 -0.000
... o7.__ .._
o.000 a.00' -0 000___. 70 0.000 0.000 -0.000 73 0.J00 0.00J -0.000 73 0.000 0.000 - 0.001 73 -0.000 0.00] -0.000 90 0.000 - 0.001 - 0 . 0/,1 i _,,,e 1 _ , _ 0 J00 -0.303 --0 # 011 a2 0.000 - 0.003 -0.00L 9200, -0.001 - 0.033 -0.001 d201 -0.000 -0.0J3 0.00t 24 0.J00 - 0.003 -0.00L d5 0.000 -0.001 -0.001 _. _ . So . __ 0W -0 U.LI. -0 on? ._ o7 -0.002 - 0.0J3 0.002 de 0.000 -0.001 0.000
.W -0.00# -0.0J3 0.00' 10 --
_ -0. J 0 . -0.Cv3 0.000
. il At -0.00o -
0.001 -0.000 92 rioTE. ,. n uurs c t.
/ -0.J0
-v.0G3 _. .-0.00'
- 100 J.J . . - JO P
e
.----------r.---eye-- ,-e- - -
-,mem---m----p +.w,wv.,y -m--e----,-yr- - .-*-e-_- p*ngmyee---
92 STCNE & WEBSTER ENGINEERING CORPORATION
~
AX STRESS
SUMMARY
s - CLIENT LILCO - SHOREHAM UNIT 1 J.0. 11600.02.00.0 PROB. 100 P I PI Nii S DTIH CORF s PIMY P I e i nii ()[2]1
,lgl .jl; i . l: . I i . .'s; .- ,, e.,
. ,l REF. DRAWINGS SEE-REFERENCE SHEET ISS/RC" -
" ATE -
Is l '. I'l h '. rl4l ll l i - CONDITION --- CASE 33
. OBE ANCHOR MOVEMENTS - X+Y+Z DIR. Sc5 3 DISPLACEMENT'S (IN)
POINT NO. DX DY DZ - 89 0.211 0.226 0.279 90 0.217 17 0.298 91 0.225 .227 0.324 92 0.229 .228 0.358 34 0.221 0,228 0.350 , 100 0.18 0.228 0 .31 9 102 07* 0.228 0.316 104 s#\@w.18F75 0.228 0.312 106 108 #$.\ h 0.1140.11 6-0.228 0.228 0.226 0.223 110 */ 0.117 0.228 0.221 111 0.183 0.228 0.186 112 0.185 0.228 0.185 113 0.207 0.2?8 0.177 114 0.225 0.228 0.170 116 0.223 0.228 0.166 117 0.214 0.227 0.166 - 120 0.r go 0.226 0.164 122 0.167 0.225 0.161 125 0.162 0.225 0.160 126 0.160 0.225 0.154 127 0.161 0.225 0.153 . 128 0.162 0.225 0.152
. 129 0.164 0.224 0.146 1 31 ~ 0.15 9 0.221 0.146 133 0.1E3 0.219 0.145 135 0.147 0.218 0.141 140 0.138 0.218 0.134 113 0.126 0.218 0.126
- - _ , , - - - , -m-
.L=_.
*4
- :~~~* .
~n ,
_,,,,w +.-: : . . . - =- g W-_ s - - %
-- - m.!__ .
. - . , . ~ .---....
~~~~~~~hM _ - _ - - _ ~ _a_ . _ _----
- 9 0 . 23- - - - _ _ - - . 2 7 6- - - - - _ - - - - - - 2 2 8. - - - - - - - - . - , 0 . 51 S . - - - - - 415- - .
.277 .2_28 0.52.1 41_6 ..
& 9_o.50 0 5. 2 3. _ _ - - - - _ . 4 1 6 - - . . -
-__-- - 99._75
- ---_-____-----__--___.2.2.8
.278 _ - - _ - - _ _ _ - - - - - .
0 5.2 5- - - - - - _ - _. 41.6 _ - _ . . . -
._2. 8 0_ _ _ _ _ _ - _ .12.8_ - _ - _ _ _ _ - _ - - _ . - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _10 0 . 0 0 _ _ _ _ - - -
0.527 416
-100.25 .281 .228
. 5.3.0. - _ _ _ _ - . 4 1 6 - - ' _ -
R 2.8- - _ - . . - _ - - - _ _ - 0.
- - _ _ _ _ - _ _21 0.0. 5 0. - - _ _ _ --_. 2 R 2 - - _ _ _ - _ -
8 - - - - - - - .0 . 5 3 2 - - - - - - - . 4 16 . - - - .
. _ _ - _ __ _ _(0.0 ----
. 7 5 - - _ _ _ - - . 2 8. 3. - _ - - - - _ . 2. 2. - _ _ - - _s .
_q 5.3 4 .416
.284 .228 101.00
. 5 3. 6. - - - _ - - _ . 4.16- _ - _ .
------__-_----_-_-_-----.2.8..
~
.295 .2 ...---- - -
________101.25 Nemc sts - Pg."J).co
-s - _ . 5 3.8 - _ - - - - - . 4.1.6 - - _ .
- _ - -- _ _ - _1.01. 5 0 _ - _ _ - _ _ _. 2. 8 7. _ - - - _ _ - _ _ _ _ _. 2.2.8--
. 2_2,8 0.541 _._41.6 101.75 .288 228- - - - _ . .. - - - - - - _ 0 . 5 4 3. _ - - .. . - - . 4.1 6
. - - - - - - - 1.0.2 . 0 0. _ _ - _ _ - - _. 2 8 9 _ _ - _ - _ _ _ .
0 545 417- - - _ _ .
. - _ _ _ _, _ _ ----1 -- 0 2 . _2 5 - _ _ _ _ _ - _. _2 0 0_ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . 2 2 8_ _ _ _ - _ - - - _ - _ _ _ ._ - - - _ _ - - - _ _
.228 0.547 4_(7
.291 10.2.50
.(~N 102.75 .293 .228 - - -0.55 - .0. - - - _ _ _ _ . 4.17 - - - . . . - .
't i D' . . 5. 5.2. - _ - - _ - - . 417 . ----.
- _ _ _ _ - _ _1 01. 0.0. - _ - _ _ - _ - _. 29 4- - - - _ _ - _ . _ _ . 2. 2 8 - _ - - _ - - -/_ - - .0
.295 .22,8 0.554 4_3.7 1,03.25 1 0.3 30__-____-_.*'96 - - - _ _ _ _ _ _. _ - R2 8 _ _ _ - - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _0 . 5.5. 6 _ _ _ _ -
0 558 4
-.1.7 - --_
- _ _ _ - _ _ _ -(0 3 . 7 5 _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ . 2. 9 7 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . 2 2 8_ _ _ _ _ _ _ -417
.226 0.561 104.00 .208
- 0. . 5 6 3 -- - - - _ . 417 10 .
- - - _ - - - - - - - .4 . 2. 5. - - - - - - - - . 3. 0. 0. - _ - - - - _ - . 2.2.9 - - - - - - - - - - -
417 ----
--------__------ 0.565 s_- --_- -
--_--_-_---.-----_-------__--__.2.2.8 104.50 .301 -
417
.229 0.567 104.75 .302
-- _ _ -_ _ _ _ _1.0 . 0.0 -- _ _ _ _ _ - 3 03- - - - _ _ _ - - . 2 2. 8. - - - - - - _ _ - _ - _ 0 5 7 0-----
. - - - - - _ - - - _ - - .3 2 8 - - - - _ - - - _ - _ .p . 5 7 2 _ - - - - _ . 4.1.8- - _
- _ - _ - _ _- _.w10 _---- 5 . 23-_ _ _ - - - 3 0 4
.228 0.574 4 1 8-._.
105.50 .305 l ---___- 10 5 . 7 5- _ _ _ _ _ _- . 3 0 7. - - - - _ - - - - . 2. 2. 8 - - - - - - - - - - 0 5 7 6. -
,223- -- ------ - 0 5.7.8 - - - _ - . .4 1 9 . - - -
106 . 00-----_-----.8 .30 - -------
.228 0.581 418 106.25 .309
.310 . 2 2 8. . - - . - - - - - - - - - 0 . 5 9. 3. . - - - - - - . 4 1 3-.
---_----------.0 106.5 . --
1 1
- 0. .585.-- ---_ 418...
L -1 % . 7 5 ___. . . ._- . 311- - - - - - _- - . 2. 2 8 --_--------
~
'N COMIROLLED I
'/^kg,.- (' ~ h' DOCUMENT l N' D RECEIVED
,4 <5
@gr
?,o N /
.- ! u;anver ammn !
/ \ . , t C 531
<s' . s ,r
; ~. , ,, 'x
- T:q, x*'r' crr-
- F r, L N
- b;}~k * (Cf. ' ' \
/ ,
. - ... ,, . .,..c, 3
Qbwe".- ...,i ., . t
' C,4 < -
l f,1 d
; ,o Y -
. c./
6
/A 40 OCI '
. ,...a ,/ .
e,fs'/a (,
. 0p 7 py .-.............,,,,,,..,,,,,
* / ,-
- s. -
I
/ .
. t.
e
/, ,, ' l, g
C'b s / .; ' 4' ,
- t. ar' env2.-us == w:s rame,.c iam ss A %,.e ~~ *' -m ~ .
' g .d,, '. s o;g:.!-*/,,'
. g t " ,
* = r' s wr a ierm :n m
~
' ' v:, m - ;n . wv i. .m .., .,
j ,*
/.- 7 f,3 #'2., ( .I asr w.~ - - rs. wx . m gr- ri 1
r .. * ! \
\
20
- j ,g
- nt. 4mma oes eca nr.: csarx..
am-b ,,
- 2. Pa's c.c ru sr . :au- Og ,
f , m , , _ . - - s ,_.s . x - dv , g /, _ 004py '
> t - - r..; ggege pg3sgs; i L,0, y , ,
- w. r3.
h
'x .,,
NUCLE AR SAFETY P . ? Tr .
- s 4 .,. t AT 1 g' 4 ~I .! capggegAy .
, f'3 '
. RE ACTOR EU LQNG CF ;
. F L 2. 78'-7*
r . v . ,. .
~
" ' " 4 R E-O'? EE iso. Pl00-V _ -
- r. o .. , . . .. . .
ICN REF W.S /- ON CONTROL ISOMETRjC Se - 4564 ........ ..
' COURTER and COMPANY
"" a' e., ... ..
EIEWIC 6W C6 ' Shoreham Noclear Power Station- t, fl W cmstuto= comaru ouwn cc t.2 .c.,m:, i
! 1
' ! Long Island Light;ng Compcny wrGr c.n s,s. , m c. . . ECOC R CSS tc FP-!CB 9;J 2)!
w e. NA a s to. 5 tr e. A c y 2,: a [5, co li- -
- q* g yg g,, ,, g er [N$ct at os - *.m
- A' f Of0*'*9' -
l CLA55 ~
'10' T Qas , M a g e.
- s. ' '
' N I d d- - d . .[' ' ' 3 f.-
I t*:8' La ' 4 4- 'hfI
< 41 ' * .
./..
'.- {/ h,r,* % -
r , c ; c. -- ^ p . < .- ) . ,/,/ ( j
/, 3 -
, _ . . .e ,,.
' // J .6,7 e' /
CONTROLLED ..c,. iDOCUMENTj
/
J/ . . , m... m. m - l' RE
, ' ' ' " ' " ' * ' ^
,. v ., / -
ps'["' -/ 3 ; O 'i l em _C_EIVED.....<...-s~-u
,/
b ,b ' 8
.- 3 !.'88 m r . .;,
,/
c.- *) ,T.*n'ex.nwcr* m T' M M M SE :s e SJm MD 3
=
s / 3 .r . c 4 N
/
a r u ., u=>. n. .a er
- v5 '. 'yN + 90 F ,m , _ . . . .m
'-:' " "~" " '" '
. u . .
s .\ s @ k.-s /'3; --
' ' " ^
g "1 N .
.,6S si
~
~
~
(a / 9 M, ?. O .
., k u y -2)- * -
I
' (, ' e < -Jr . / ; .
/ .
'g/ g. a' " '
"w,
~~
CORE SPRAY S'f S'. i
=
(v ()#-
, ' REACTOR BUILD). '
t
,, .J , - '<
p n.. un. ,. FL. EL. 78'-7' -
.6rt,', t r" 9 9y I
- \ '
p .
,,. s8.g
. \
,) .
Osv
.+ +. ,
s
~
t) V,,. o I
- p -
-- - 1 p1@3 0 01 97 J 3' [.: bM[J6CE A SAFETY
. . . .. ... .. _ Tf ,,.$4e i 4, o. A. CAT. 1--
&e.ppok.._,
g' . -
\
~
~
Es% 2 70 iso: Plo81-f
^
' S a G' O* W Gee M. Ql-
. I
, , 7 CONTROL 1S0" t
- 7 an 1.. -
COURTER and C
- c . . co u . .. .
i t ;
- . . - - , , , . . . , , - . . . . , - 'Shorehom Nuclear Passyer I 1G'- T 2.70 4' A "
Long Island Lightir
- s. s. v., t.u ..s. n .n iet -' /: # /I 5 i ,
,$e6 $I ,i - 7 i n. _lke. h D r ; # h, s. [,c { gge _j 3 TCN E ( W E E S T !" E '* ~.'" ~
.s Fd ~ _
0 OI _ g ._.j . 4. , j ,'. . * - w. I's= ~ T FT'
- --+- P'-Q~ L_ i d
- u ,
. '5 '
3', T ( tg , he
- h
INDEPENDENT DESIGN REVIEW FPR a E 10 m TELEDYNE ENGINEERING SERVICES (TES)
% 33 Teledyne Engineering Servim PROJECT 5633 SHOREHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION CONTROLLED LPCS SYSTEM DOCUMENT TES PROJ. NO. M DATE_ @ d$'83 RECORD COPY PRO). NO. _
ADDITIONAL IhTORMATION REQUESTED BY TES Submitted by M ' l 9 3
}Date Concurred by: j yd %N w 2 I$$).1
\ Date l
l
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION TO THE RESPONSE TO ICR 5633-1 The general guidance used at Shoreham for stress evaluation of small bore piping is EMTG-5/EMTP.9.5. This guideline provides specific direction regarding the treatment of thermal and seismic end movements i.e. , .5 inch and .75 inch respectively. Over the duration of the Shoreham project a number of deviations and restrictions to the guidance of EMTG-5 have been issued. One such- restriction relative to seismic end displacements was issued in July 1980 (attached) when the allowable was lowered to .35 inch. This lowered value was subsequently used in the final acceptance review of all seismic designed small bore piping. This review was conducted in accordance with project procedure 42 by the Site Engineering Office (SEO). During the Project Procedrue 42 review the SEO raised a concern that with a group of engineer performing the review, uniformity of the review process was difficult to maintain. To alleviate the concern a series of numbered memos was issued to these personnel to provide detail implementation guidance. Among these memos are two that deal with the combination of seismic and thermal end movements. Copies of these memos, SEM#3 and SBM#6 are attached. These me:nos are based on ASME III equation 11 allowable stress values. Accordingly a deviation to the allowable end movements noted above .5 inch and .35 inch necessitates an Equation 11 evaluation. Inherent in this evaluation also is the absolute combination of thermal and seismic displacement. In short, end movements were appropriately combined where necessary. To verify this we recently sampled 100 small bore lines that were evaluated in accordance with the Project Procedure 42 process. Of the 100 lines, 55 have end movements greater than our screening criteria of .5' inch for thermal and .35 inch for seismic. Of the 55, four did not specifically combine thermal and seismic movements; in three cases this was due to the negligible magnitude of either the seismic or thermal movement. The other case was the branch line cited in ICR-1 where the combination was made in a , supplemental calculation supplied with our original response . In summary, small bore thermal and seismic end displacement have been r appropriately considered as part of the Proj ect Procedure 42 stress reconciliation process. ATTACHMENTS
- 1. Shoreham Project Modification of EMTG-5, July 3,1980
- 2. SBM#3 - Seismic and Thermal End pint movmeents - PP-42, July 16,1982
- 3. SBM#6 Review of Displacement at Piping End Points or between supports, August 18, 1982 1
B9-221-J
,,----+--,--w-.,,r y , ,- --- ,,~-- - , -r -e , . ,- --,,,---w -,.---,-n --,,--.--e wy +x - - , - - - , - - - - , .
- 66' INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM y o, R$, 11600.02 A .e.
SUBJECT ASSESSMENT OF PROJECT MODIFICATION DATE July 3, 1980 0F EMTG-5 FOR APPLICATION TO LILCO-SHOREHAM PROJECT FROM ALVanSickel 1E() EJBrabazon CC SYerardi D0usso DCFoster DFShave JFreeman RFHankinson ,## FChan:dm
References:
- 1. SWEC Calculation No. 11600.02-NP(B)-114-T3-1 "Small Bore Support Spans and Design Loads," dated November 28, 1979
, 2. IOM " Scope of Work - Acceptability of Deviations to EMTG-5 for the Shoreham Project" from T.Y. Chang /G. Arena to D.F. Shave, dated November 8, 1979
- 3. SWEC Calculation No. 11600.02-NP(B)-022-T3 "ENTG-5 Qualification of Shoreham-LILCO Project - Unique Modifications," dated March 21, 1980.
The Engineering Mechanics Division has reviewed the project modifica- . tions to EMTG-5, Ref. (1), for the following applications: l 1. Carbon Steel PipinE - For installation in the secondary contain-ment, screenwell/pumphouse, and control / turbine room.
- 2. Stainless Steel Piping - For, installation in the primary containment i areas.
, This evaluation was performed in accordance with the instructions of Reference 2. L The results of this review :.ndicate that the project modifications to EHTG-5, as outlined in Reference 1, are acceptable when subject to the following limitations:
- 1. Piping cases qualified are limited to:
- Maximum
- Maximum Pipe Size Schedule Material Contents Temperature Pressure Insulation 3/4", 1", 80 A-106 GrB Water 546 F 1,005 psi Calcium ik", 1 ", Silicate 2" ,
3/4n,in 80s SA-376 TP304 Water 575 F 1,250 psi None 15 only Standard SA-312 TP304 Air 150*F 125 psi None
.' Page 2 a EMTG-5 I.O.1:.
- The pressure and temperature limits represent upper bound limits. Lower pressures and temperature applications are acceptable.
- 2. Calcium Silicate insulation is limited to a d'ensity of 12 lb/ft 3 '
. and thickness of 2 inches. 3 Stress intensification factors for piping and components are limited to those for socket weld fittings and components,
. i = 1.3, based on ASME Section III,1971 issue. If piping c5mponents exist which have stress intensification factors greater than 1.3, an evaluation must be made on a case by case basis.
- 4. The loading conditions are limited to thermal expansion; internal pressure; deadweight; seismic OBE and SSE inertia; OBE and thermal anchor movements; and SRV and LOCA inertia (where applicable). Load combinations and corresponding allowables are indicated in Reference 3.
- 5. The effects of seismic inertia, SRV, and LOCA inertia are limited to piping within the following areas:
Required Building Input Data ARS Curve Used (stored at) Primary Containment OBE, SSE ATS No . "11600.NPB 1-D1:6" SRV, LOCA Disc "NUPIPE. SEISMIC.SRVALL- " Envelops RPV el 151 ft. PED / Shield Wall Primary Containment, Secondary Cont. el 8 ft to 151 ft. Secondary Containment OBE, SSE. ATS No. "11600.NPB 01-D1:6" . SRV, LOCA Dict "NUPIPE. SEISMIC.NPQRST12" Envelops all curves between el 151 ft to 8 ft.- l L Screenwell/Pumphouse OBE, SSE ATS No. "11600.PUMPHOUSE:6" Only one curve exists for el 20.5 ft. Turbine / Control Room OBE, SSE ATS No. "11600.TURBENVP:6" Envelops all curves between el 15 ft to 107.5 ft. ARS curves used for a particular building envelop ARS curves for all elevations of that building where small bore piping is installed or will be installed. i 6. Reference (3) qualifies reference (1) for nonannular piping
. applications only.
- 7. Resultant thermal and seismic anchor movements are limited to 0.50" and 0.35", respectively, applied differentia 11y across a single span.
.c , - - - . - . ~ . . - . . - - - - . . . - - . . , , _ . , - - - - -
, . P;gs 3 g EMTG-5 I.O.M.
- 8. No LOCA or SRV anchor movements are considered.
- 9. Noneccentric valves with weights less than or equal to those tabulated below, and supported with at least one two-way restraint or anchor located 6 inches from the valve body, are acceM able.
, TABLE Nominal Pipe Size, in. Maximum Valve Weight, Ib.
3/4 ' 10 1 25
. I 1/4 50 1 1/2 50 2 75
- 10. Valves exceeding these limits must be evaluated on a case by case basis. In cases where water has been assumed as the retained fluid in the calculation of weight per foot of pipe, it is acceptable for qualification of steam or gas filled cases as well.
In addition, the pipe support loads of Reference (1) were compared to those loads calculated during this study. This comparison indicated that the support design loads of Reference (1) are acceptable with one exception. Support design loads, Page 9 of 71, in accordance with Reference (1), are 105 lbs for 3/4" pipe and 145 lbs for 1" pipe. A design load of 160 lbs should be used for Models L-3/4" and 1". The analysis of free end connections such as vents and drains and the evaluation of equipment nozzle loads were not included as part of this study. , I EKfG-5A, with modifications in accordance with this memorandum, should be used only by or under direction of PSAS engineering personnel. Cases
- not falling within the limitations of this guideline must be resolved by
- the Principal PSAS Engineer or his designee.
$ b st-~
A. L. VanSickel 7 e 9 e o _ . _ , _,, , ,p -.. - , _ - . . . . .._ ,-- - ..,,.-,-_-,-,-____,._--,y-----_ _- ,--.p, , , - , , - ,.,,,w--m n_e-.%,.wr.,y -
---,c.
FORW A*3D WHITE AND PINK COPlEL RETAIN PINK COPY FO2 Fit E.
" 3 INTEROFFICE CORRESPONDENCE **3 PC, / cP TO: l Location SUBJECT / REFERENCE J.O. NO. //(, 6 ' ' OQ NN YL' l .S ei.smic. d- ervnct) end p:.'nT FROM; ION y g gg g *
(f
"'"**';~~
W , Q , y; pp v.z ,Ah,..ss+ m s~t,g % s 4LJ tw & w & & .7La d em e.f tlh p 4tij /Q a s% 4n~4 & N m ~/dd.-# aLorv/ /-l f w.w a A A A a d % A- s/u ~ a n y , % ,~tfy ? k 96~ g!s .dda~:L .shan~ ri A- w & n [ g y4,, & a mdau nu~# L & + w .u s ?} m j;n & .j 3%.6 & M /w;uh~~C . I +* uw-u utn a a ~a/~Asr
,/hp,,. ,u A , L 4 te k s L A n M h -
kJ-L n. & /p Lf ' /Li - At q M s/w # &<~~ , a.-p m & . 7Le ,ofuuru a~e- ao odtryw4'- Lt 1,/ot-W I L,~1 ne ,uum mng m st/w ,/L.~ l hl yl ' M Aun w + sr eLuL p g M L erw w c/64's . l ( it, om se < It w o), aa pm # dus/ra siceme hw a~< woo P'yl m-oNe
;a
=c A stads && ,ds & ses n A.-
e /W ins mew & + L- &&k s) }L M& #6+~c ~
>vM .( dc- >Aa'ed& L m- na& A pd a .
~
a.{ Nf), x) A avnddL sys~ s % d~ A- m Adg. i A d6Ja A.&, Asn zr fr~k~ it A~& la .
+ 4 a. .s' t 4 J .ap n adh Ax <> A A .) '
w u o>4, imp n uJ sk /JW 44 kt ype A a enbt w p L a~y-L. c/ .ii k . n . J & . . Do ut pe~/n u/dlsu w l p.rs/ & lifi
& O G y // a a - d , M p k U p p6 .
> M~ A Os0 "i w-a s- m. ,
~
CALCULATION SHEET
' s sm ss S&M d 2 m 3 ef 3 C ALCUL ATION 6DENTIFICATION NUMBER J.O. O R W.O. N O. DIVISION & GROUP CALCUL ATION NO. OPTIONAL TASK CODE PAGE Y
t[, 4. [_$ ACC.E PTABL E S14 AXE SPACE SPAA15 - c A I2.B o M STrEL.. ._ UI FOR STRESS F 13, oo c> 4 /b(, 6/2.3 1._ S ,
% i IN 1 W. 2
.I z.4 l' 2.% 3.ii , ,
.3.32 3. n
.z 3.49 3.9 ) 4.39 ,
i+.7o r,25
,f 9.2.s 4.79 5,33 S.76 6.44
.4 Ef.94 5.53 6.21 6.65 7.43
.5 5.52 6.is 6-97 7.43 9. 31 r.
.6 6.05 6.77 7.61 9N 9.lo
'7 " ,7 ' 6.54 7.31 B,22. 9.79 9. 6'3 v 21
" 1
,9 6.91 7.92 9.79 .9.40 10 5) i 23
" ,9 9,32,
- 7. 'f l B.2 9 9,97 11, is 25
- 1. o 7.01 B.74 9.B2 Jo.51 )).75 t1 l.1 8.19 9.17 10.30 11,02 12.32 29
- l. 2. 6,56 4.58 10.7L 11. 5 1 12..BT 31 32 8 ASED ON ' G UIDGD C ANTILEtIEPy
/4 Ax. STflESS 613;oe PS' '
As3OMES P+DL STa5SS 6 s, o b0 PS
- 3' f THERA 14L EAPANSloN STRESS 619,600
.Sc. = Sn >- 15,0 0 0 Ps' CT6 65bF)
{: l, 3 E e = '2.1 Cg AIO' l') . 39 4o
$ 3{ { Q {
92
, 42 i
43 L 44 l [ 4S j l
i CALCUL ATION SHEET A soto es 8M83 [6 Z B F 3 C ALCUL ATION IDENTIFIC ATION NUMBER J. O. O R W.O. N O. DIVISION & GROUP CALCUL ATION NO. OPTIONAL TASK CODE PAGE I ACCE PTABLE SHAKE SPACE SPA MS - STAIA1 L ES.7 STEFL roR STREG5 6 f(,,ooo Psi A 396 VJc 4 ,.. A 312 7P 3o4 c -
'Mf 1 ) Yq }V2. Z_
,1 2.2.9 2.51 2,62. 3, o 7_ 3.37 2, 3.17 3.5's 3.99 4.'ZT 4,Ll?
.3 3,9S 14.35~ 4.BB E. 23 5. OT l
,H LJ,qq 5.02. W] 4, o3 (,,}$
47
,5 S o1 f.61 431 6.75 % 5 'l ,
[ 6 6.49 6. l ~ 6.9) 7.39 9.26. g ',~, 7 5.93 6.64 7. Lib 7AS 9.92.
,6 b,34 7. l 0 3.'I6 9.53 9,54
,1 G.73 7.53 9.4L 9.o.5 to.l'z.
27 J,o 7.Do -7.94 9.92 9,64 10. 6 7
),l ].lN 6,32. 9,35' IL). D I ll. l lt t
/.2, 7.W S.69 9.77 10.46 11. 6 0 32 B ASED ON 6t)1D E D C/lN Tl LFNG/24
" A A)(. .ST/L 6SS S I4 000 PS{ -
- Ass t> Atss P4- D L Str7_ ess 6 s oo o P si IjT61C AM /1L C->CPA Nsio N STR.G55 6 19, 500 PM
~" Sc : / 9. 9 4.s; , s j, > / 5. 9 a s . ( r (c,so).
39 [ ==.1, 3 Ec_ .c 2 9. 2, x t o Y P5; . 40 S 3 h be. Di .' e gt e2 44 t 45
- w. ..
A,
\ o9f g.) .
": INTEROFFICE CORRESPONDENCE gg f ., .TO: i Location SUBJECT / REFERENCE / J.O. NO. nfoCO. O~2 .
1 '? 6;- *\ ssTE,BuTsoR l PP47- EWP %S R.f ose.ua
$ r,FROM: l LocAticN 2E DdV6D.59\at4.N$TS U 39\^QboO nTS
$ F. ,D_Esquons G C ne.noe. L ! S E O ,se_ h m % pere
. MESSAGE:-
' A14 %O C, 4.'i o 90 osJsOE C,.orwn7h OrvsD 9.he R A A3st sT y .v% g g "
aa .m.mg w o.s % - s a e.,,,p a e,m 4 cc. beAen upcxs eSheo %Abeoo.161 b ~mmQ. sw A dke.we.d edubet. n weet3%be.so 330e_d .Ttse. ses j
= bb w_J % dhma 6 c3.-6,\4 sdom,on, peob.%1 i 4 %. % sses. h .9 % m e m . M\ g gsm % p an,s . .Y.
4.4 DJ DOS hMbT h $ MOO *g.D h("YN QQQ MDQ g Qh QT S 6 cs.L l4 e m b xnon page .
! h p ie m \cs. L 6 sedokl as ~ p m ,
#- DATE SIGN A TURE , TFLEPHON":
., L REPLY: l j[ sn debo~,g ehe ee.cbo\a e,ee wb
- p l\\d b .se sec.m ,vn, & h c.Jc. m m . _u , s I
o wws,mo AA h bw w \e.se sndde.1 m,\\ - j L s d b az h a d [l 7
,~&w :s4de_ L d\ mycae.s ch asbW sgJ -m hgxs se A_
f % d Ne "~ % d[
;i.
~ _.
.wf%:ew\st w %e.<-ss.g_ .
I ,
,,h ' OATE S;GNATURE TELEPHONE A 04a138 l (. .s hkNDER Dl" 'CH AND RETAIN THIS COPY ;
. VMl V VLM i iV14 Q T1 C C 1 A $010 63
- C ALCUL ATION 'DENTIFICATION NUMBER J.O. O R W.O. N O. OlvlSION O GROUP CALCUL ATION NO. OPTIONAL TASK CODE DAGE N#.
n , ETEPttt4MTCN O@ CLATN E s S c3 v\CP O \C.4W $. ha = ~f @ Eueb (hem,E-~1bec,wh bl wem bh sum se=e .
%@ h Eutst Dste.%1T b ex.w dvmcTicmLe,m end (>omT on.
; Gsr ws,mmx met ceoss ,5suai.csvam .
to IXeesxuDseWemcar er11 @ lie.e%# m M* Ae.R
. 7tJ IADsel.Gs2*
#2 -
' '3 g ?. _ nY: 47-i is t 16 aCm me:e- %e v Ne l
e
- a= = a av r
II Tg.c ..-.bsc6 stm o ~Pci.c @ E=41.bx Ahc2 i
-r h=o' 22 o %g v %t. j 23 fy,( ,, g Ags 24
=$ .m. 2 et m u G tc.,
- D .sn b c.c r e c 1 26
- 2' I-ax, = sn- a'x 6 :
*', . . :_4YT T 4YA - d\S 30
'A?T T 43h ' 47B I
EISM st 1SPLNe 'E ME Q""" 07 C a mv a AxRg l a.) o s e r u E a , a . 34
. bb NeRTM 36
+ .. 3, c>et A
. -; d o
-w =lce n W r a bisw I 49 l
% PN OBEAE4mdisdwwDshws.syssT[<ts\ites,g 3'bg.@Et 45 w m,_ .a=
t 46 , , , , , _ e
< CALCULATION SHEET A $010 65 C ALCUL ATION IDEN TIFIC ATION NUMBER J.O. O R W.O. N O. CIVISION & GROUP CALCUL A T!ON NO. OoTIONAL TASK CODE " AG E' ' #.
^h l
I s
. E\S14%C \ ', (> CR %iT OF- C \N T 3
' ~
s E A 9=%90s\s .dsu[.Ju.e.%rr92.t.,T,t<ts) Ax -3.e E.. s 7
~ w a. -
8
. \cTAL EL%V &. C\S MI C *, p O CCh*pTT TW E.El4 Ci NTS 10
_ AC.NED 0 )W C LDen s.Q, TQ.OC.TOtt h 1\$E 4Y,3. ** ,g Q
; o wa. whys _ ,a , A ,@ f,u @ s,s gg
,, A.- dQ _ a E,-
. ETI C bb bkN 4 7 #.s E TMk C M70C( h.DO%, , LD W4 k k *
~
to ru..hcohchhmu(As.1 b.g,Cuemus ^ teee s) x
~* '
D
- e, 12 g'
1
- Ens 9EcTsoE (<W+;NT + N; 2
f ,.
)a1- ,_ m 6 ;9" .
g3 . i (* s\ 3. {U._D.S D Q ,- w 2. b4M 'OECTsCM M Ak + M. S +..A b > t s ta b . N - A y
.~ . .,.
. ht t,.C.D ALL%YtC ~i e,6L osG, . Wt h t./ vviAL , a b$
Et$0_ " .,
a%r,. + 'l" bi out_ ,eccri c>ig sp\ncem.e.<c .LSee (cw gT u hdo_\wcmRn3_BFF5 - h+ ses% Ya~ , f r _ 3 _
-_ yG 3s y -
i 3a ' ny l 7._. ._. 7 1 Ed O h m Tu 2 c. % N 3 (lMo igT Ek y REdDbe)m O ay j g,, 43 ($ha%wpy (evga nuage i,,7)) (a w e. an g y, 44 s , 46 - b' __ - ' i 7
-a i
- n
GALGUL AIIUN SHt t I
- A 50'0 CS
_ CALCULATION IDENTirlCATION NUMBER - J.O. O R W.O. N O. n' VISION G GROUP CALCUL ATION NO. OPTIONAL TASK CODE PAGE #. ' G,7 1 3 fiE.%No9AT'.ON_ec E E C.B O 6' 1. OE Ed14Tu O W Ab\?_t E. I 'a ., m
'x N nm -! M ec.Tived bE.N;T4 -
, @vn
- k. x, hv%
'9 t i i& c. -\- 34 '
w I b 3 n 1 82 M i t - 13 ^ X QMQL( o _ -% _ CHEW DNE 1 ENbIN
'X, 9.t .
. @M s I;* y q, qo q, l SO ,,
h,f - y @X q i . 29 ' 4 Q2 %E.taf4TT Chv Q_1 @ n%TN x k, - b_6 '/3 x % Ntnne 2e .g ceased , , k t._ G>45
^Q, Q-@',
33 y . bL
, ), E g -t- "R C.C$ b hIh 35' '-
,t
$$ b -' ,
Were (n Er._, h"b \ es ee ls" 'dSSecrwe. _L bgb w oue, b le)ne.e- - c.d
<o bio w %., next s-9 Soc ta=,cnns v ax --w as ,' s s M w ed k pg. mdi e k.d y m h iw.at-. d ec;n .
g:..: a. - v- - 5 s 88 + a w a + ,- - a n - a
,, Lesip A t .w s eg,;r z ss,.,cn 3 a m m - s m . - _h
R. FORWARD WHITE AND PINK COPf ES. RETAf N f*lNK COPY FOR FILE. g U .
. INTEROFFICE CORRESPONDENCE l .i TO: i toCAttoN SUBJECT / REFERENCE / J O. *.O. LUooO.oL i S'T Ct.M J"f t o ^ f bECInoq d OS $3M
- g. ', . CROM: l LocAtio~ ,
3
, S !1* Liohh b b
, '- MESSAGE:- i
%$6 o o@e SW3ObCD OODO WA M 4340 NC."T ! Of'\ C@
' SBtA% m coyu%re wer9 .sEc:T4M _Lv. m .
':4 bue.n ca.\. e uk,n he, v.ehrsee., me me-et kh3een NgeccTs
'f a. h e = (o % . w e L .\A,n se ne.e A nesem~e., se soc oc.g%. wc. m m -dga m on ssmto o h b ...s , e ed 40o %s dbba.AL kei 4e .l ne.a..n% %oq,me.,. - g ,.
S- s e e n . w. ~ m mse.w .
' I g
_ , 1 L& '. W,Y,-Z 3 = LOBE ~.L 4 SR\l'E k + \oBEA,,g. oge A c , SMrion _W.c SicT on .u_JL 8lA54DATE l 0t-
' ' ( w-
. h'u ATURE ~s _
rLEDMONE
} -
REPLY: i l- . I i i i cart sicsArunt . t wo~c i ', . l l A 040138 l
WTELED(NE ENGEERING SERVICES INDEPENDENT DESIGN REVIEW DM ammm em CONTROLLED SHOREHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION DOCUMENT TES PROJ. NO. b3h DATE 3e4 1% ICR NO. 5633- 1
Reference:
RRF No. 5633- 138 Date: 3/4/83 PMR No. 5633- 138 Classification of Item - Reaffirmation of Finding Ba . Reviewer Signature
- h. <
CommitteeChairmanSignNure
. d4A $
Project Manager Signature l l f i 1
W TELEDYNE ICR No. 5633-1 .
1.0 INTRODUCTION
Teledyne Engineering Services (TES) issued ICR-5633-1 on November 2, 1983 which was a Finding on the use of chart methods to qualify a 2 inch branch line. A disposition response from Long Island Lighting Co. (LILC0) and Stone and Webster (SWEC) was received by TES on January 15, 1983. This response indicated the following: (1) The chart analysis reviewed by TES was improper. (2) Small bore piping analysis activity was assigned to the Site Engineering Office (SE0). (3) Revision 3 of the piping analysis, issued November 8,1982, was invalidated since it had not been performed by SEO. (4) The line was evaluated by SE0 on June 30, 1982 and found acceptable. (5) A more refined calculation was performed on November 5,1982 and confirmed acceptability. The calculations of June 30th and November 5th, along with other pertinent information, were attached to the response for TES review. A meeting was held at SWEC in Boston on Feburary 15, 1983 to discuss outstanding items requiring addi'ional information. As a result of that meeting TES was supplied with the nonproprietary portion of Design Guide EMTG-5-A and three Interoffice Memos / Correspondence which modified the use of, and provided guidance on, EMTG-5-A. These are SBM #6, SBM #3 and EMTG-5 I.0.M. dated July 30, 1980. 2.0 REVIEW OF SBN #6 l An understanding of the utilization of EMTG-5-A can best be
~
determined by reviewing cases of application and directives associated with its use. A summary of the TES review of SBM #6 follows: l l l
W P W NE ICR No. 5633-1 , (1) This document is reviewed with the understanding that @ is representative of the terminal end of a small bore pipe at a run pipe which this SBM is defined as being applicable to. (2) SBM #6 provides concise instructions on the use of EMTG-5-A/EMTP.9.5. (3) The calculation of Relative Thermal Displacements between Points A and B is appropriate. (4) The calculation of Relative Seismic Displacements between Points A and B is not proper for the condition considered in (1) above. It is appropriate to assume that vertical seismic building displacements are in phase within a building. However, to assume that the piping seismic vertical displace-ment is in phase with the building vertical displacement is not proper and can be unconservative. This error can result in two situations of concern: (1) underestimation of the relative seismic displacement which results in pipe acceptance since the result is less than the 0.35 inches criteria, (2) improper evaluation of lines which do not meet the 0.35 inch displacement criteria. 3.0 REVIEW OF SBN #3 In reviewing SBM #3 the following is noted: (1) The acceptable shake space spans are based on a maximum stress in a guided cantilever of 13,000 psi for A106, GRB and 16,000 psi for A376 and A312. (2) This stress combined with other assumed stresses equals the
= 37,500 psi. Any margin that exists would allowable SA+Sh have to be in lower thermal expansion and pressure stresses.
i t
WP WNE ICR No. 5633-1 Examples could be given to indicate a margin existed for these stresses but conversely examples ceuld be given to indicate zero or little margin. One would expect that a guide " inherent conservatisms that would not result in mar 3 noi situations. For example, EMTG-5-A, Paragraph 5.3, specifies that hanger / support spac'ngi for seismic inertia effects is based on 10 G's (SSE) and 6 G's (0BE) over the entire frequency spectrum. This is a conservative approach. Unfortunately this effect, seismic inertia, is not considered in the Equation (11) solution which is used to address anchor motions. Further, conservatisms in seismic inertia impose closer spacing between support and anchor points which aggravates the anchor motion problem. (3) The author states that:
"Eq. 11 includes stress due to enchor movements but only considering one-half the full range, while thermal expansion stress is computed using the range of thermal moments."
- This statement does not appear in the ASME Code. However, a Code Interpretation, 111-1-78-212, does exist which allows the use of one-half the range of moment due to seismic anchor displacements to be used in combination with the Thermal Expansion Moment Range for evaluating Eq. (10).
Industry practice, as TES understands it, is to follow this approach but to also look at the range of seismic anchor dis-placement alone and to use the worst case. Therefore the statement is partially acceptable since it follows the re-sponse to a specific Code Inquiry but concern exists for situ-ations in which the seismic anchor moment range exceeds
"#Tri rrWNE ENGINEERING SERVICES ICR No. 5633-1 ,
r thermal expansion moment range plus one-half the range of seismic moment. 4.0 HORIZONTAL SEISMIC BUILDING DISPLACEMENTS There is concern that horizontal seismic building displacements are not being applied in accordance with SWEC design guidance. SBM #6 is clear in requiring the user to obtain both an X and Z seismic displace-ment of the building. However, in reviewing implementation it appears that only one direction of horizontal seismic building displacement is being applied. Reviewing the submittals from SWEC in response to ICR-5633-1 indicates the following: (1) PP42 calculation for E21, ISO Numbers P1062 and P1081. Page 2 of 2, the seismic movements at Reactor Building elevation 96.6' (0BE) are listed as: A H :: 0.264" a V : 0.228" 1 The A H listed is taken from a two-dimensional model of the building and is the horizontal displacement in one direction, North-South (Z) or East-West (X). Therefore the calculation should consider that the 0.264" is acting in both the X and Z directions and the resultant noriz'ntal displacement should be used. (2) The supplemental evaluation of the above piping has the same discrepancy. The seismic movements of the Reactor Building at elevation 101'-6"(OBE) are given on Page 2 of 8 as: A Radial = 0.287" a Vertical = 0.228"
W TA m(NE ICR No. 5633-1 . On Page 3 of 8 the horizontal displacement of the branch connection at the run pipe (Nodes 88 and 89) considers both X and Z displacements and a resultant radial displacement, A R, is given as 0.373. In calculating the total seismic movement 0.373 is added to 0.287, the single direction horizontal seismic building displacement. For this particular model there may be justification for not considering that the Z direction seismic building and pipe displacements are out of phase because of the support configuration on the run pipe and the branch pipe. However, this is not noted anywhere in either calculation. Since TES does not have any other supplemental or PP42 calculation packages to review, we must assume the potential for error exists. Further, since detailed review of EMTG-5-A would consume excessive time and man-hours TES has performed analyses of three small bore pipes which are part of the LPCS piping under review to determine stresses due to anchor motion effects. The results are as follows: Stress (psi) TES Model No. Thermal + h SAM
- 2 times SAM 1 25,000 24,000 2 15,000 32,000 3 16,600 32,000
- SAM = Seismic Anchor Motion l Based on the establishment in SWEC small bore piping procedures of 13,000 psi (A106, GRB) and 16,000 psi (A376 and A312) as a limit for l this condition, these results support the concern of TES with respect to i the techique used for design of small bore piping.
l l
W N W NE ENGNEERING SERVICES ICR No. 5633-1 5.0 REC 0f0ENDATION It is recommended that all small bore piping attached to large pipe and the building be reviewed to determine relative anchor displacements assuming the building and the large (run) pipe seismic displacements are out of phase in all three directions, X, Y and Z. These half-range seismic displacements should then be combined with others (thermal, SRV, etc.) and compared with twice the seismic anchor displacement case and the maximum condition used. A number of worst cases should be computer analyzed to determine stress levels for comparison with the appropriate allowables and support loads determined for reevaluation of the supports. h
TELEDYNE ENGINEERING SERVICES CONTROLLED DOCUf.ENT "i'a # TES PROJ. NO S 33 DATE 583 8 INDEPEND'ENT DESIGN REVIEW RECORD COPY PROJ NO. TELEDYNE ENGINEERING SERVICES (TES) PROJECT 5633 SHOREHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION
~
LPC'S SYSTEM DISPOSITION RESPONSE FOPJi ICR No. 5633-1 Additional Concern PMR NO. 5633-138 Rev. 1 RRF NO. 5633-138 Rev. 1 ) 0N *~ bla lY %de/ry SWEC Responsitile Efgineer/Date h" SVTEC'Pfoj Ect Engineer /Da'te / b ]
~L11.C0 Project Engineeryate B9-11600.28-337-C
CLiSSIFICATION Additional concerns REFERENCE DOCUMENTS Ref. 1 ICR-5633-1, Additional Concern dated 3/4/83. Ref. 2. EMTC-5 (EMTP9.5), " Design and Installation of Piping and Piping i Supports for Small Bore Piping Systems", December 15, 1976 (Proprietary Document) Ref. 3. IOM " Assessment of Project Modification of EMTG-5 for Application to LILCO-Shoreham Project", dated July 3, 1980. Ref. 4. SNPS Project Procedure No. 42 " Procedure for Seismic Cat. I As-Built Piping Review and Reconciliation", up to and including Rev. 2, dated October 22, 1982. Ref. 5. Small Bore Memorandum (SBM) #3 " Seismic and Thermal End Point Movements" - PP-42, July 16, 1982. Ref. 6. IOC Small Bore Memorandum (SBM) #6 "PP-42 EMTP 9.5 Review Relative Displacements at Piping End Points or Between Supports", August 18, 1982. Ref. 7 IOC "Section VI of SBM #6", August 23, 1982. Ref. 8. ASME B&PV Code, Section III, 1971 Edition with all Addenda up to and including Winter 1972. Ref. 9. Code Interpretation III-1-78-212 "Section III, Division I, NC-3652.3 Treatment of Anchor Point Movements" issued July 21, 1978. Ref. 10. SWEC calculations 11600.02 NP(E)-803-XH End Point Movement Evalua-tion for Small Bore Piping Reviewed Project Procedure 42. TES STATEMENT OF ADDITIONAL CONCERN Revision 1 to Finding 5633-1 addresses two new areas of concern to 1o3. First TES questions the method used by SWEC in the dete rmination of relative seismic displacements used to essess small bore piping flexibility from the attachment to a large pipe ta the first restraint on the small pipe. Second, TES questions the method used by SWEC r.o determine the moments that result from thermal expansion and seismic anchor displace-4 ments. (See Ref. I for full text of Additional Concern.) B9-11600.28-337-C 1
)
i TES RECOMMENDATION I 1
"It is recommended that all small bore piping attached to large pipe and l the building be reviewed to c'ete rmine relative anchor displacements assuming the building and the large (run) pipe seismic displacements are l out of phase in all three directions X, Y and Z. These half range seismic displacements should then be combined with others (thermal, SRV, etc.) and compared with twice the seismic anchor displacement case and the maximum used. A number of worst cases should be computer analyzed to determine stress levels for comparison with the appropriate allowables and support loads determined for reevaluation of the suppports."
RESPONSE
The evaluation of small bore piping for flexibility and adequacy of support locations is carried out by engineering personnel assigned to the Site Engineering Office (SEO). The identification of support types and locations for small bore piping was accomplished by the use of a design guide EMTC-5/EMTP 9.5, Ref. 2, as modified by Ref. 3 for the Shoreham Project. Further, as part of the as-built piping review and reconciliation program, each Category I non-computer analyzed small bore line has been given a final review to confirm that support locations are in greement with the guidance of EMTG-5/EMTP 9.5 as modified for the Shoreham $'roject. This review was conducted in accordance with Project Procedure 42, Ref. 4, by engineering personnel at the Site Engineering Office. j I B9-11600.28-337-C 2 l I
During the Project Procedure 42 review the SEO raised a concern that uniformity of the review process was difficult to maintain, because of individual judgment involved in areas such as determining relative seismic displacements. To alleviate this concern a series of numbered memorandums were issued to engineering personnel involved in the review to provide detailed guidance. Among these memorandums are two that deal with the combination of seismic and thermal end movements (SBM #3, Ref. 5, and SBM
#6, Ref. 6 and 7).
SBM #6, issued August 18, 1982, provides guidance on how to calculate relative thermal and seismic displacements at piping end points or between supports affected by differential building motions. Section VI of SMB #6 shows two methods for calculating relative seismic displacements. The first method applied to a piping system and its supports located in the same building and attached to the same structure. The second method applies to piping attached to different structures or in separate buildings. It was recognized that a small pipe coming off a large run pipe with supports attached to the same structure could be subjected to inertial displacements of the run pipe that may be out of phase with the building. As a result a subsequent memorandum, Ref. 7, was issued on August 23, 1982 to clarify the required calculation of relative seismic displacements constained in Section VI of SBM #6. The memorandum required the reviewer to determine the relative seismic displacements due to anchor motion effects (the displacements transmitted through or to the pipe due to the movement of the building) and combine this absolutely with the displace-N l ! E9-11600.28-337-C 3 x
ments experienced by the run pipe due to the inertial effects of the run pipe in all three global directions--X, Y, and Z. Hence, for supports attached to the same building anchor motion effects would be determined as follows: i [ ! A X, Y, Z = f0BEI + SRVIl + OBEA A
- OBEA B
In Reference 1, TES outlines an alternate method of calculating relative i seismic motion. Specifically TES suggests that the calculation of vertical
! . relative seismic motion between a small bore pipe attachment point to a large diameter run pipe and the first restraint on the small bore line be assumed entirely out of phase for piping located within a building located on a common foundation. For Shoreham the following method has been util-ized. The piping response in the vertical direction is illustrated by Figure la. Here Yg , Yb represent structural displacements in the vertical direction and U c represents the inertia movement of the run pipe in the vertical direction. The net vertical end motion for the branch line becomes l Y, - Yb l + U
- c. The justification for subtracting Y a
-Y b is as follows:
- 1. Where a and b are connected to vertical walls, the overall motion i
is in phase due to the inherent stiffness of the walls in the vertical directicn. i E9-11o00.28-337-C 4 s _- . , - - - ~ . - _ - , _ _ . , _ . - - _ - , , _ , . , , , , _ . . _mm.___,, , _ _ , , , , , , , , . . _ . _ , , . , , , , . _ , , , _ _ , _ , , _ _ , _ . _ , , ,
i
- 2. Although not as obvious, the same argument can be made where Point a is on the wall and Point b is on a steel beam (see Figure IB). The magnitude of the differential motion between a beam support point (typically a wall) and a point along the beam will be governed by the ratio of the support excitation frequency to the first natural frequency of the beam in the vertical direction. Although the beams are multiple degrees of freedom systems, their lower bound dynamic characteristics can be described using a single degree of freedom system representing the first mode frequency.
4 Figure 2 represents a beam attached to a concrete structure. The first mode frequency for the system will control the dynamic behavior. This behavior is illustrated in terms of the ratio of beam to structural support
- input motion and the phase relationship between the support and the beam.
For frequencies of input below the beam natural frequency, the amplitude amplification is slightly greater than one and the phase angle is near zero degrees. This indicates that as long as the beam natural frequency is high compared to the input excitation frequency, the beam and structure may be e considered as moving together. For example, the significant vertical seismic frequencies of the reactor building are well below 10 cycles, while a lower bound of natural frequencies for horizontal structural elements is approximately 20 cycles and above. Thus, the beam frequency relative to the input. motion is high and can be considered in phase with the structure. l B9-11600.28-337-C 5
._ i - - - .--- --
Figure 3 is a typical vertical OBE amplified response cpectra for elevation 39 f t. of the reactor building. It can be seen that significant input only occurs at frequencies below 4 cycles which is well removed from the natural frequencies of structural elements. To demonstrate that the building and steel are in phase and that their relative motion is negligible, a simply supported beam was modeled as a three-mass system with a first-mode frequency of 20 cps. This model is shown in Figure 4. A reactor building vertical seismic time history at elevation 39 ft was used as input and the beam relative displacement time history was plotted as output. The input and output is plotted in Figures 5 and 6, respectively. As can be seen from Figure 6, the maximum relative displacement is 1.3 percent of the input displacement, thus verifying that beam stiffness has an insignificant effect on the relative motion between the structure and support points on the pipe. SBM No. 3 provided guidance to reviewers on how to evaluate piping spans that may be longer than those established in EMTG-5 or piping spans sub-jected to thermal or seismic loads that exceed the 0.5 in. thermal and O.35 in. seismic displacement limits established in Reference 3. The permis-sible spans established in SBM No. 3 were based on allocating the Class 2 and 3 Equation 11 allowable stress of NC-3652.3 of Reference 8. For example, A106 Grade B carbon steel pipe has an Equation 11 allowable of 37,500 psi. Out of this allowable, 5,000 psi is allocated to internal pressure and deadweight stress, 19,500 psi allocated for thermal stress, and the remaining 13,000 psi for imposed displacement stress. Based on i i
- B9-ll600.28-337-C 6 4
1 4
. . . - _ . . -,. - .- -- - . .- )
this value of 13,000 psi, acceptance spans of different pipe sizes for different imposed displacements were established. As indicated in the memorandum, the calculation of the moment term fi c is based upon the full range of thermal stress combined uith half the range of seismic displacement stress. This method of calculating the moment term ?!c is consistent with code interpretation III-1-78-212, Reference 9, issued July 21, 1978. The ASt!E code does not require that Equation 10 or 11 be satisfied by considering the larger of either the full range of thermal expansion in combination with one-half the seismic anchor motion range or the full seismic anchor range. If this were a requirement, it would have no significance because of the f methodology used at Shoreham. As stated above, the basis for establishing shake space allowable spans for A106 Grade B material in SBF1 No. 3 was to apportion the overall allowable to consistent elements, 19,500 psi for thermal and 13,000 psi for imposed displacement. If it were required to check full range of seismic anchor displacement, this would mean that the portion of the allowable stress a jlicable c to thermal expansion could now be made available for total seismic anchor motion; i.e. , the allotment for total seismic anchor motion would become 19,500 psi + 13,000 psi = 32,500 psi. Since the seismic spans are based on 13,000 psi allotment, doubling this to represent full range of seismic motion would yield a maxi-mum stress of 26,000 psi which is much less than the 32,500 psi available for total seismic anchor motion. B9-11600.28-337-C 7 i
In summary, the calculation of relat ive seismic displacements as explained in SBt! No. 6 is conservative and is an acceptable method for the evaluation of these displacements. However, recognizing the time frame from the start of the small bore effort (6/82) to the issuance of SBtl No. 6 (8/82), SWEC has reviewed all 808 small bore packages done as part of the small bore review effort to assure that the guidance provided in SBF1 No. 6 (Refer-ence 7) had been uniformly implemented. Attached are copies of 20 review forms executed as a result of this evaluation. The results of this review are documented in Reference 10. In addition, the metholology used at Shoreham for determining termc fi is acceptable. Four (4) small bore review packages that utilized SBFI No. 6 methodology both before and af ter the issuance of SBM No. 6 are also attached for review. CORRECTIVE isCTION As discussed above, qualification of small bore branch lines is conducted
.n accordance with accepted methods and procedures.
PREVENTIVE ACTION None required. As demonstrated above, an adequate design has resulted from ' implementation of our program at Shoreham. COMPLIANCE DATE Not applicable. Designs have been issued and hardware installed in accord-ance with requirements. B9-11600.28-337-C 8 l
SAFETY Ih?LICATION None. As demonstrated above, the design is adequate to meet requirements. ATTACHMENTS i Figure la Branch Pipe /Run Pipe to Structure Figure Ib Run Pipe Structure / Branch Pipe to Structural Beam Figure 2 Response of Beam Attached to Structure Figure 3 Vertical ARS - Reactor Building Figure 4 Beam Model for Time History Model Figure 5 Displacement Time History cf Input Motion to Beam Model Figure 6 Relative Displacement Output at Center of Beam Model i Attachment 4 Relative Displacement Review Forms (20) Attachment 5 Small Bore Review Packages (4) s t i l I l B9-11600.28-337-C 9 i i l l _ _ . _ _ _ -. _ . _ _ . _ _ - . _ , . . _ _ _ , _ . , _ . . . , . _ . . . . _ . , _ . _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ , . _ _ . _ _ _ . . _ . . . _ _ . _ _ _ _ . _ _ . _ _ , ~ _ _ _ _
Figure 1A-3 ranch Pipe /Run Pipe to Structure 4 A Y., Ya.+ U,. RUN
.'. . Ys PIPE
..... .A ( . *J,
.6..
g. g . .' g . d .*
*4 ; SRANCH PIPE ..'*..<
?. .. ' ..' .' =. fg ) '
.A . ., , ,
d . .
...g
,4 g .
.1 . .
a.
...'4.,
. .. . . .. .s .4 .
A '.
*.?
....,'.*},*,.*1,*~,.'.<*..
r
,.g * .s .*: * . . * ,,* ;f **..;,".'..*'*
; e ~ s*...**,. . *A * *4.A i: .
- f. ,.,. 5. , .... . .
A C- B = Ye.-Ym
= Y. -Y6 + 0s. '
Figure 1B-Run Pipe to Structure / Branch Pipe to Structural Beam s A a t Y = Ya.+Uc. RUN t Y PIPE 6...
. A. C 4
. r s-l g . .e .. .
* .. g ..
4 4 ORANCH PIPE . . , ,
?. ..* ..
. t ) .
.s . .,
) d
...* '. . .y
... . @4--- PIPE SUPPORT . . . .
.a a .
- * ~ .
*** * - Ys . a.
. , .n g - sfgueTURAl. BEAM ...
.. .. g . .. .
.... .. . . . . . .. . . . . .r - 4 ~
A '.
, ; j '.. ' ; ,* .
.. , .** *. 4 :.' : *** .**
*.? r. .s.:* . .'. <..*.*.;
~ ! ****. ...
. . ..*. e.
- f. . . ' . :, , . . *_ _ ._ .* *...
- 4. * ; . :* ! '. ; ,* * . 4 . s. ,* **.
. . ..4
.,,,,--.-,-----.-=w---.
XM a N M i X RooR $K g p
- f.s :**. s .. . s . : a. .
. mmy
,. I I
a a 1 8 Y BFAM l i X FLOOR I i 1.0 I 1 I l.O 180* -- , I I l
~ -s PHASE ~
O l I i o ! l A i FIGURE 2 l 4- FREQUENCY RATIO INPUT FRE.QuENc.Y To BEAN \ FREcuENc.y l Fig. 2 Response of Beam Attached to Structure 1 i l l
0 6 I 0 1 E B O L 8 T A NC AEI T Z RM R H TN CI E Y E AV P T) C 6 N 3S N% O E GM C (2
' U Q I E F AYT R HRE F EAS RD P ON U 4 HO o
S C'9 E 3 S . L E 2 O 5 0 5 O 1 1 01 8r(ri ' 8
I FIGURE 4 BEAM MODEL FOR TIME HISTORY EXAMPLE I: s 16' .. a p 4.0typ. g g
=
f 20.0 Hz f = 79.4 H g 2 f = 168.7 H z 3 l t l
.g. - _ . . -. _ ..
s.........
.. . . . , . . . . . . . . . .. . . . ~
g
- e. . . .
.1...._.e.._.m._... ;.....
.......s _...9
.4~o.,:- . . . . .&
.[. ..
...L.._
.49 -. . _ 4.
. . 4 . .
{ a .. ,. _.
. 9y.
-- . . . . . _ . .{-. . :. . . .
.. . l. . _ . . . . 4 .._g_ . - 6-.-.--- .
._.,.._.._..~.'d __ - ..... ....
. .* .. . 4.. 4.. 6. ... .. .
....p... . . . ..4-.-L.-....+ . .
.._.4_. _ __ { . 4 . .- 4_. . 4 .. ...;
. _ . . . . .p... . .
a-._.. .
. f
....a. ... .. . . - . . . . 4
.s............ ... .J . .. i . . . . . . .
g.... . . . j. ._ . ..
.._._7....
r._. L....
..._4___......
.-}~...
....+.....
4... 7.~
.-...j.. .
..4...._3,..,.. ..
. . . . ..f
. . .. s ... . _ . .
.. q... 9 .. . 7 ; . .., . _ _;..
.4_._...... _ ._... } .....
__...._.7,_.....
.I....... ... .
..- .... . . 4 .
,. . . . ....4...._.
g, ~ ., ,, _.,,,, . ,h. , $ I Q %,. . . -. .. .. Jp,Qa .. .. wmg _.... .. .. _g .. .....~4- . l.
..q.... .9 m_. .q . ..,,
. 6 me.,g i . . ... . ....
.m.,.+
.}. . . . .
. .. 4 . .t.....a'...--+~~*...+ . .. ......_.].... .
__..,7.... % . . . . _ . _ _ .. .
, . . . . __r _
._ O., 3 ._ .._...._ . . _
n.-.... .
.m e. ,,,.~ a. g . . . 6.. . . .
.-.. g .. . ,.. . . - . .
4
.n- ..,. ,
..l ,
., ~ ~_
,.-_.w.
g~ g
~ . . .1,-
, . ., . q. ., .
. =._ j % _.4 . j l
.g
. . . f. .
o
.- .1. 9. . ~. ,. . j o..
..em
.~..t.._ ,.-4 .e
- 4. . . .
. I... 2. J .- . . ., . ~ . . - .
,w..
.I
. m ,. . .
}.- .._. : -- . . _ . . . .
j
.~_2 _. .. g .
g- .. ... . . . . . .. - ._ . . . ..
- s. . . . . . . , . }....... . .-
%. 5 . . ., .. . . .
.g . . 1 7_.._
..o._..
. . . , 6ae . .
, _ .-g .-_}. y
.4-s-. . , , . .
. .n,,, .._.f. .1- 1 ..4.... , . . . _ .
. m. . .. .
y .4.- 6..
. g ;... - -
.. . 4 .. ..
. ..t. . .4 . . .
.- 4w : . . . -
y . . ._. ,.- . , _ _ . .ps _
._a* .. .
, . . . . . .g... s g _. _
. .a . . .
,.._._o.,,
I . _ _7: m 7 .. . . , . . . 4.
...a
.n,. .
p - . . - F- r _. - . . _-
-* .- 4 .. . .ici . =.
- g. _ . -+ - ..-
.4. ..
g .q.
.~ ._ _ _ . ._ .. .. .. .. .. ,. _ .
~_.. . ,
.d . ..- ... .g 1.E.
.~e._..v_ .
._ _. i l . .._ . .g Lp ,
. 'T . . Mg + . . . - . . , .. - m .. . . _ .
......t.
_ -- . . . . ,G.
. . . . . . . . , . . .. .. cm . . .4..
1 . ..
.Q .
. . . . . . . l. . . . . . _ . .. . . ._ .. .%. $ .. ,g,.. ...1....4
. .-. 4 _. p.. . , . . . = .
9 ,
~
.{.., g..W..-...
. .., ._..j.
5 E. g 3,,
, ,,a,,
..... . } ...+.. . ..
g .. _ 4.._ 3... J a.
- . ;o...4
.e... ....C-
- o. . . . . . . .
-.. .a.,p5.. . =_ ._.,_..,.L..... ,g a, g .4 4 _. m. p .. . . ,
.. 53. g . _
.3...
. . . - . . . ..7 ,...4....y.._.
.. 4 ..
{ . . _ . y 4 .
,m.
.s. .
f..
. 5... 9...,
. . . . . .. T. s
_a - g . , . ... . . ,,,,.2 .... .a . ....., .
, v.
i .. .
.4..
. . ~ . . . . 2. . . . ,4.....__.~...
p _ % .4 t . . . .
, .,. . _ _4
, 42 1c,
.. - - . . . . ._.._. s - _. g . . _
..j
.H.. - ..
4
. .i.. _.... ...j.
...-9 P
6 .9.----_..,_..___..._.
.4. ..
=a.
.~
_ .4
-- u
..4.... .
L.._..
.._ , .s . . . . . _ . .j _C -. p . .j . 1
_p
.._.L_
. . . . .s ... ..... . . .
p.. .. 4 _
. . - . - + . - . .
.. } .. . . .
..4....
4
.. ..i.
;p .9.,_.L~_... _j ._j - _L._ . ... _p ..
_p4 m ..~.,4 _-..- _,._. - ._...,_ _ .._...
. . . . . .- v 4 . ,
. ,j . . . _ .
.I 4 _
g.. ~ . _....., c..
. _ . ...-4 . . . . . . . . . .--4 L....._- .. . . _ . . . . . . . . .y... _ . ~ . . . , ,
. . . , . . . _ . } . . .
}.......-. h .
4.. . ." .1.. _ . p .. _ _. -.. _~.d --.
. ..._..h
. ..._. .'=>..l..,. ..[ .e. g .
4. e.
. ..I
- j- _. .
_._t. . . ...-._..4 _. . . . . .. . - 4
.w 4,. _
; . . . . ; .. . , i I... _ _ - -. _-,. 4. ..._. . - . _ . . .
.4. . . ..
.-g. A.... _
..g..-..j..4.,.._.. q. ..
.-.9...
.n.
..L..
.. .4.- .. . . ..J g
4_.- .. . . . - . . ... -- * . . _. . -. . a . . ..
, . . . l. .
. p_
.a.__ . . ,
.. .. 4..._.,...._._...t............ .._
~ . .j . . . _
...}_ _. ._. . . . . . . _ . _ .
..._. 6 . - ~ L. . .
. ._. . . _ 4 4_.. .
, , ., ._.4 .
. .. ,. . t
..p-s._... _ L. . ,j ..m
. . 4 .. . .
..g.. _-!.
g..
.y.....,.....,.+t-+-~~-f----.--E,-+-----*-----$
4.. _
. y. ... .. . . . .
.. ...s ....g.. .-! . g. 4
.._,f_..._ _ _ .
. j. . h... _.d.....e. f , , .__.W_,7._
.._..._.r......_#_.,._-...._r
- 9. .- _ .
, 6.. . ..L. . i..
. ...k. _ . . . _.--y.._..} ,
e _. .. . ).. . . . ._.. --_.. - s- : .a ._ - _J
. .. . . . . ._ 2..
. p -
.. ., y_ -E 4._ -f.. -
_ e . __
. . _ _ e _ .,. .-5 h . ..
l I j
, .y ,
........._..g._ __9., _
. . ...g..
g,
.a. ...y._
7,J __g _ . y._g _g,
...y...,..4 ,
mg .s .-__.,..._._--t_ + _ w 1 ----------r---+ i- v- r-f
.d _.&.
g . _..%....,.,.4 .u. , .%_,.. l
. . _ ,._.__..._ .~ 7_ _ _ ,
... . . . . .. . _ g _ ,.
... .._.g _ _5 -.
_; _ - 4 j , m _
., g. .
.g.._g... _ _ .
y j , M,
.._ - _.- -[
}. . . ._ _ . . . . _ .
.p p
_ ~.e,i
. n .g .-,._.i ._.g._ -
..__ ~ ' . -;._ _
.-_.d__.,4..
j
. . . . - . . . -_ - . , ,-. .dus _4 h-'*'"***~**** - t T- M '~
h **
- 1 m; .
g- .. . .a r
. l . . _ _i .__._. ..!
__4__._ a..'
...!_. +. _ . . . _ _ . .
. ... _ .+ . . . , .
g;
=
.~ t _. . , _ . , . _
auus. . g, -.-.1..-_.... h *. _ d . .. _
....,......u h.q,...,.._.-..
g...__ n-_
...y.__..._._.f..__.... _ .- , . . . . . . _ _, , .! g.. j_ 4_.-
~
..g .._p _ -v ._4.. . - -. . ._.. _ - Q -w.._~_.
._.._m y g 6.-_.--
_.b.p Y
. , . _ . . . . .. . . . 4
. . . _4 -+.
,4&.._ .._
_-,.9..._ ... y-
. _ - . _ . _ . . ~
.{, _
...,W .. . .
. .. .6..* M" _....J
. ;a..g , .
...l...-.-.M.4.__.._.
...-9
+.gI r.a ...
L. e - , __ ; - y p.__.
.{
. .. . . . . . ~
. _ . . _. . . _ . . . g. . - -
J.._,7._...._.,-_4.. - _ , . . . _ - , p
,-~.9,-._._. A '.
-4 .. , - - _
. m ...__t_. 4 { 4 . . ,-.
. . . _ , . . .9_..... -
. 1 .
g .4 __ e .. 3.,..._.
. . --..p_
p._
.}
i - 1 ._ 4 _74,, . _+_
, '~' ~ ~ ' " ~ ~ ~
g....._..
. _ . . _ .___...-.6 .. , ; . _ ; _.g._4._.._.._..._
.9 r 7; j p....._,..._.-..__I-_._ ____,9_..___
s . ,. .. _ . _ . _ .
._+;. L.. -
. .. C .
J
, . . . . . _ . . , A.. . . _ .
, __ q w...-.
3 . F-._.. - .F.--.,.. t-_.m*.-*.. r 2
. , . h.
.e,.._...,u d4 u__
4.._."._.-_.__-.f. . 3
. . .c .
.{__
..,..-.--- ..__..,9__:_. .._:
....t---.-M..._~.*.*.._.---i
. . . . ._ . p. -_.
p ..:__.
-M . .,...___ ._ !_
.. - ._.J..........__ ..
_.._.m a_...,-..-.- F
-..y-.
C.B L.i-..-.-_ .. .. j . .. .c
..._., ._p . . . . - - . <. e. -..H _ . .._.r_.-.
- .3 ,.
.q._._+
----=_._j. .
8 _.__1 -- -.
. . . _ . _.4 . I.{ _.-_
_9
,....__J,._. . . . ~ .
. _ _ . _ _ _ . . _ .+
-_-j_ -_
J aos ' _ 4 M 6 3..-.- ..ep_. ..) --..,.-,.q-.g..-... y t h< , .=...-.-.j. - 8 . .._ . e , . . . . _ . ...., ... ..m_.-. - - . . '. . _ . .
...-_.4 ....-6 . _ . . - . . . . . . . . . . _ - 4.,- 4 : _-
.-D ..g
,._..,...._......__.___f____....._.4
-1
, , . e - '. l. . , .. .._._
--{ p
.. . . . _ . - . _ - . - . . . ...._.-t-------~~j ---*-
.. , . . . . . . - ...._p-.-p... .
... ._. , _ _. . . . ~ . . _ . . . ~ -__., .
, . _ . . . ..p. ._ .e e
4__....
?
. +.
- 3 l
A it- %b TAF LC6 tnM ADDITIONAL INFORMATION TO RESPONSE ICR-5633-1 The computer generated table of building displacements provided as Page 7 of 9 of the supplemental calculation appe'nded to the Response to ICR-5633-1 comes from Calculation Number 11600.02-NP(B)-129-X5. In accordance with this calculation the horizontal earthquake is applied in both the "X" and "Z" directions simultaneously. The table is limited in applicability to the Reactor Building only. TT EDYNE ENGINEERING SERVICES CONTROLLED DOCUMiiN T 9- N
- .UJ. NO, 'V M 3 a.c 5 re m E
RECORD COPY FROJ. NO. . b N i i i i s ( 1 r S
- .a-,,.- < - r., - - , - . -r-,w-- - g ,,-g- , , ----, , -m- , - - g ----.~--,,--n=,gw- ,,-,,-w- , - r ,.,w, -m ,7
C>F t. TAF SHOREHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION LONG ISLAND LICHTING COMPANY Correlation Between Shoreham Project EMD Organization and EAP 5.4 Organization Lead Engineer (EMD) (Lead Engineer) (EAP) Principal Engineer (EMD) Responsible Engineer (EAP) Responsible Engineer (EMD) Responsible Supervisor (Desien) (EAP) Engineers - Performs more Designers - Perform normal complicated pipe pipe support support analysis, design and calculations, previde technical check drawings direction Drafters - Prepare pipe support drawings O O m -
% F cWTEL&6E .
ENGINEERING SERVICEG INDEPENDENT DESIGN REVIEW , SHOREHAM NUCLEAR P0' DER PL%T , C0iffROLLED DOCllMENT ,
- 1. Rev. 1 ICR No. 5633 ,
Date: 6/27/83 ,
Reference:
RRF No. 5633- 138 PMR No. 5633 138 , Classification of Item: Closed A g} .r' Reviewer Signature
- k
@ 5 airman Signature (
onnittee , dd 5 Abus " Project Manager Signature f
=
t
. 'RTF1 Frt/NE ENGINEERING SERVICES ICR No. Sb33-1, Rev. I , -f
% I 1.0 SupMARY \
Durirg, review of AX-10A-2 and its associated calculation package t, NP('Bb5X-00.100, TES reviewer generated RRF-5633-138 (September 21, 1902). This RRF indicated the chart method (contained in NP(B)-5X-00.100) qualifying branch line 3"-WR-31-301-2 was incomplete and incor-r'ect; and if correctly completed would indicate the branch line failing. As ,', result ,of RRF/PMR-5633-133 TES issued ICR No. 5633-1 on November 2, 1982 classified as a, fin (irq.
, , s,
, The LILC0/SWEC disposition response received January 15, 1983 indicated the following:
(1) The chart analysis reviewed by TES was improper. (2) The evaluatinn of small bore piping not included in the computer model is the responsibility of the Site Engineering Office (SE0). (3) The identification of support types and locations for small bore piping is accomplished by SE0 personnel using technical design guide EMTG-5A. (4) A SWEC memcgandum dated October 14, 1982 clarified the division of responsibility between SE0 and SWEC Boston office regarding qualification of small bore piping. (5) Revision 3 of the branch line analysis, issued November 8, s 1982, was invaltiated since it had not been performed by SE0. (6) The line was evaluated by SE0 on June 30, 1982 and found acceptable. (7) A more refined calculation was performed on November 5,1982 to confirm acceptability. The calculations of June 30 and November 5,1982, along with other pertinent information, were attached to the response for TES review.
W F W NE ENGINEERING SERVICES ICR No. 5633-1, Rev. 1 % A meeting was held at SWEC in Boston on Feburary 15, 1983 to dis-cuss outstanding items requiring additional information. As a result of that meeting TES was supplied with the nonproprietary portion of Design Guide EMTG-5A and three Interoffice Memos / Correspondence which modified the use of, and provided guidance on, EMTG-5A. These are SBM #6, SBM #3 and EMTG-5 1.0.M. dated July 30, 1980. Af ter a detailed review of these procedures, TES reissued ICR No. 5633-1 on March 4, 1983, classified as an Additional Conc (rn, indicating the following: (1) Reviets of S8M #6
- a. This document is reviewed with the understanding that @
is representative of the terminal end of a small bore pipe
~
at a run pipe which this SBM is defined as being applic-able to.
- b. SBM #6 provides concise instructions on the use of EMTG-5A/EMTP.9.5.
- c. The calculation of Relative Thermal Displacements between Points A and B is appropriate.
- d. The calculation of Relative Seismic Displacements between Points A and B is not proper for the condition considered
~
in (a.) above. It is appropriate to assume that vertical seismic building displacements are in phase within a building. However, to assume that the piping seismic vertical displacement of the primary and intermediate horizontal structural steel, to which the small bore piping is commonly attached, is in phase with the building
S WTs i m(NE ENGNEERING SERVICES ICR No. 5633-1, Rev. 1 vertical displacement is not proper and can be unconserva-tive. This error can result in two situations of concern: (1) underestimation of the relative seismic dis-placement which results in pipe acceptance since the result is less than the 0.35 inches criteria, (2) improper evaluation of lines' which do not meet the 0.35 inch dis-placement criteria. (2) Review of S8M #3 In reviewing SBM #3 the following is noted:
- a. The acceptable shake space spans are based on a maximum stress in a guided cantilever of 13,000 psi for A106, Gr.B and 16,000 psi for A376 and A312.
- b. This stress combined with other assumed stresses equals the allowable SA+ S h= 37,500 psi. Any margin that exists would have to be in lower thermal expansion and pressure stresses,
- c. The author states that:
"Eq. 11 includes stress due to anchor movements but only considering one-half the full range, while thermal expan-sion stress is computed using the range of thermal moments."
Industry practice, as TES understands it, is to follow this approach but to also look at the range of seismic anchor displacement alone and to use the worst case. Concern exists for situations in which the seismic anchor moment range exceeds thermal expansion moment range plus one-half the range of seismic anchor moment.
W F W NE ENGNEERNG SERVCES ICR No. 5633-1, Rev. 1 (. (3) Horizontal Seismic Building Displacements There is concern that horizontal seismic building displace-ments are not being applied in accordance with SWEC design guidance. SBM #6 is clear in requiring the user to obtain both an X and Z seismic displacement of the building. However, in reviewing implementation it appears that only one direction of horizontal seismic building displacement is being applied for small bore piping lines shown on Isometrics P1062-4 and P1081-5. An interface meeting was held at TES on March 16, 1983 between LILCO, SWEC and TES personnel for clarification of the items reported in ICR No. 5633-1 as Additional Concerns on March 4, 1983. TES summarized these concerns as follows:
- a. Consideration of building and piping seismic vertical displacements as being in phase per SWEC Interoffice Correspondence SBM #6.
- b. For the subject small bore piping calculations for Isometric P1062-4 and P1081-5, only one direction of horizontal seismic building displacement is being applied, instead of both X and Z as required by SWEC procedures,
- c. The consideration of either thermal and seismic anchor displacement or 2x seismic anchor dispJacement in satisfying Equation (11).
l ! A second interface meeting was held at TES on March 30, 1983 to further discuss the concern involving building and piping l seismic vertical displacements being in phase. The discussion involved mostly the consideration of piping attached to
W TELEDYNE ENGINEERING SERVCES ICR No. 5633-1, Rev. 1 horizontal (radial) beams. SWEC has performed in-house sampling review of primary and intermediate horizontal steel in different buildings. The SWEC conclusion to this survey of frequencies is that a lower bound of natural frequencies of the steel is 70 hz, therefore the members are rigid, and there
~
is very little differenc'e in amplification and phase angle between the horizontal beams and the building walls. It was agreed that TES personnel would visit SWEC offices and look at the applicable steel drawings of the SWEC review. Also, the TES personnel would select some of the drawings for a verification review at TES. As part of a third interface meeting held on April 8,1983,
~
the following items were discussed relative to ICR No. 5633-1, Additional Concerns:
- a. SWEC/LILCO have completed a review of all small bore cal-culations with respect to relative displacements. This review covered small bore calculations performed before and af ter the issuance of SWEC Procedure SBM #6. SWEC
^ review disposition cover sheets for all calculations will be included with the formal response to this item. TES requested that complete data be submitted for at least two each of the review packages (before and after SBM #6) along with the formal response.
- b. Further discussion was held on the subject of the con-sideration of seismic vertical displacements for building and piping, attached to horizontal beams, being in phase.
A subsequent TES review has indicated that there are loca-tions where the fundamental frequency of horizontal beams is less than 30 hertz. LILC0/SWEC stated that they will
"RTF1 m(NE ENGINEERING SERVICES ICR No. 5633-1, Rev. 1 respond to this concern in the formal response to ICR No.
5633-1. The LILC0/SWEC disposition response to ICR No. 5633-1, Addi-tional Concerns, was received by TES on May 18, 1983. This response indicated the following:
- a. With respect to building and piping seismic vertical displacements being phase; even for a lower bound of natural frequencies of 20 bz for horizontal structural steel the ratio of beam frequencies relative to the sig-nificant building frequencies (less than 10 hz) would still be small enough to conclude the amplification and phase differences are negligible
- b. With respect to horizontal :;eismic building displacements being applied in both the X and Z directions, SWEC attached to the response 20 review forms, from reconfirma-tion of all small bore packages, executed to assure that the guidance provided in SBM #6 had been uniformly imple-mented. Four small bore review packages utilizing SBM #6 methodology both before and after the issuance of SBM #6 were also attached for TES review.
- c. With respect to combinations of loadings for Equation 11 (NC) Code evaluation, the ASME Code does not require Equa-
- t. ;ns 10 or 11 be satisfied by considering the larger of either the full range of thermal expansion in combination with one-half the seismic anchor displacements or the full anchor displacement range. If it were a requirement the portion of the allowable set aside for thermal expansion would be available for anchor displacement.
4%9 M NE ENGINEERING SERVCES ICR No. 5633-1, Rev. 1 2.0 RESOLUTIOq - TES has reviewed the LILC0/SWEC disposition response to ICR No. 5633-1, Additional Concerns, as follows: (1) TES previously complete' d 'an evaluation of the building steel vertical frequencies and agreed the lower bound of natural frequencies for the horizontal building steel was 20 hz. TES' review of the vertical seismic amplified response spectra also indicated the significant building frequencies were less than 10 hz. The FSAR, Volume 5, Section 3.7, documents the first vertical mode of the reactor building to be 2.1 hz. Building frequencies above the 20 hz would cause the beams to move out of phase, however the displacements at these frequencies (as determined by the amplified response spectra) would be insig-nificant. (2) In addition to the four small bore packages submitted with the LILC0/SWEC response, TES reviewed a random sampling of small bore qualification packages at SE0 on June 22, 1983. As a result of this review, TES verified that the proper imple-mentation of horizontal seismic displacements, per the criteria of IOC SBM #6, has been accomplished. (3) TES agrees with the LILC0/SWEC response, that the portion of the allowable allocated to thermal stresses by SBM #3 would be available for full range seismic anchor movement. Based on the information obtained through interface meetings and the detailed reviews described herein, of the LILC0/SWEC disposition response, TES is of the opinion that the Additional Concerns presented in ICR No. 5633-1 have been answered to our satisfaction, and that this item can be Closed.
WTA AVNE ENGINEERING SERVICES Technical Report TR-5633-4 A3.2 ICR No. 5633-2 TES issued ICR No. 5633-2 on November 2,1982 as a Findinc on the selection and use of pads on large bore piping. A Disposition Response was received from LILC0/SWEC on January 15, 1983. At a meeting held at SWEC on February 15, 1983, TES requested, and was supplied with, three additional calculations for review which represented the highest stressed locations of all pads reviewed by SWEC. In reviewing these additional calculations TES still had concerns with respect to adequacy and application of the design procedure for pads on small bore piping. These concerns were in the following areas: (1) Single axial type supports which are designed and constructed offset from the pipe centerline are not modelled as offsets in the piping analysis. (2) The attachments of pads and/or trunnions directly to elbows changes the flexibility and stress distribution in the elbow. SWEC did not account for these effects in their piping analy-sis. (3) The allowable stresses in welds attacting pads to the pipe did not satisfy the requirements of ANS1 B31.1-1967 which is the governing Code. (4) The design basis used when a trunnion is welded to a pad assumes zero pressure stress. TES did not understand the basis for this assumption. In response to the concerns outlined above, LILC0/SWEC submitted further disposition as follows:
"RTF1 FIWNE ENGINEERING SERVCES Technical Report TR-5633-4 .
(1) All Category I supports were reviewed and additional calcula-tions performed to determine if offsets in supports affected the piping and support analysis. (2) The analytical technique used by SWEC for pads attached directly to elbows was made available for TES review. (3) SWEC revised calculations as appropriate to satisfy the re-duced allowable stresses required by ANSI B31.1-1967. (4) The detailed design basis for pads and trunnions and the resulting calculations were made available for TES review. TES reviewed the disposition response to each item and, where new calculations were required, performed a detailed audit of a sample number. The results of the TES review indicate the following: (1) SWEC reanalyzed 13 piping stress calculations and reviewed and/or revised 60 support calculations. The results of the review and reanalysis indicate a change in stress of less than 10%. (2) The analytical technique used by SWEC for pads welded to elbows is conservative. , (3) SWEC revised 7 calculations to acconmodate the requirements of ANSI B31.1-1967. All calculations reduced the allowable stress by 40%, as required, and the designs were acceptable. (4) TES reviewed the detailed design basis as well as the cal-culations for any pads whose geometry was outside the limits of the SWEC procedure and found the designs were acceptable.
SPTA WNE ENGNEERING SERVICES Technical Report TR-5633-4 Based on the data supplied by LILC0/SWEC and the sample review and audit performed by TES personnel this item was Closed. l 1 l l 1
S N W NE ENGNEERING SERVICES Enclosure (1) EP-1-017 l Independent Design Review Shoreham Nuclear Power Station Internal Comittee Resolution Form CONTROLLED DOCUMENT ICR No. 5633- 2.
Reference:
RRFNo.5633-]_f_ Date: //////8 PMR No. 5633- 79 Internal Comittee Resolution of Potential Finding: 7/pg Z~C. c onfun Ma esn 99. . T/pg. wihbt hlrd Reve'teute a nY h9jte Si te of 4l,e Pc. c cloer ve d o s voe l' *vNh Yht s tw % ce due . 7/ sis cou W ha ve an imfacl **
+ 4e a cle g a a c3 c h + L e 5esf4*-
i l l Classification of Item after Comittee Resolution: frahfng l M hs b b tee Chai ignturh Project Manager Signature n - [omittebiber Signature ff Condtee kembe[ Signature
"RTriprWNE '
ENGINEERING SERVICES Enclosure (1) -17_ EP-1-017 RECORD COPY PROJ. NO. i /$'7 ~h TELEDYNE ENGINEERING SERVICES
. . CONTROLLED Independent Design Review DOCUMENT Shoreham Nuclear Power Station TES PROJ. NO. 5>$N Reviewer Report Form DATE h b3 '[', d RRF No.
5633- 79 Reviewer Name: ,[, fe,-ley Date: frj//>5j /(, 2 Classification of Item (Per 3.8.1): OI Reference Documents:
/. hp Syyf- Cu fu n 1-/) 9 /E 2 / - /'ss N o 2 i
- 2. Pi,oe s k s R ,x se,s,,,,, z ,,,,7 ,y ,.,_ & h ,, , Q , , f, flre ~S /s ore * !* ~~s /vue/eur /2ce, e, s
//u o o ,12. 73 "
Description of Item: w // m e, = . 3 is l fip c.t. LL4 // Ler*,Nrsins S&f
,e u , re > exfe<srois o f~ p,/ s y. ;, j
~~
Sef 2 ,y , of t /
e
JeEt cc44cca- 4o t e, , s
,g ,
(2c)ui r e cl f3tl 5 4 ze . , wJR: .3 53 + 2( 4. 7 e ) e /3 , r O'S s.-- : 6.0 + z.(4.16 ) 4 /6I 56x t?S he ep t-7,, Q g ,, . . Ae+v<. I p< d s o te = 7 x '7 " e. gpy ,.. f" p;f/8.]/
7eTF1 FrWNE ME EM Enclosure (1) ( EP-1-017 Independet.t Design Review Shcreham N clear Power Station Project Mr :ager Resolution Form PMR No. 5633 W Reference RRF No. 5633- 7i Date: 7/ZC'[@2. Description of Resolution: TM INWAu.Apo^) ViaLkTes *i4) i CEITM tA . T W M (cA) M.Co JIot ATci'S Si N) 42'TefMA-l TELCJYi:E ENGiffEERING SERVICES CONTROLLED ' DOCUMENT NECORO CDPy TES PROJ. tio.) yf _ PRoj_qo. DATE_ 9/ Py ) Classification of Item after Resolution: Sjgpg g
/
M[eviewerSi[ature ) (Aj Project Manager Signature
-- - ,n, --, ,, , ,---,w--, ---- , , - - - - - - - - - - - , - - , , , - - . - - --n-- -- - - - -
--. RECORD COPY rao;.so. 6 3 3
- TES PROJECT 5633-INDEPENDENT DESIGN REVIEW SHOREHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION-LPCS SYSTEM i ,
DISPOSITION RESPONSE FORM l 191519fa DATE: January 11, 1983 h ICR No. 5633 - 2 Rev. G PMR NO. 5633 - 79 Rev. O TELEDYNE ENGINEERIPG SERVICES CONTROLLED RRF No. 5633 - 79 Rev. O DOCUM-TES PROJ. NO. V _ CLASSIFICATION: Finding DATE / /M . _ _ REFERENCE DOCUMENTS: 1) Pipe Support cales. and dwg. 1E21-PSSH021
- 2) Pipe Stress, Pipe Support and Duct Support Criteria for the Shoreham Nuclear Power Station TES STATEMENT OF FINDING The installation violates S&W criteria. The design also violates S&W criteria.
TES CONCLUSION OF FINDING The I.C. concurs with the Reviewer and Project Manager. The size of the pad does not agree with the S&W procedure. This could have an impact on the adequacy of the design.
RESPONSE
The support was originally vendor designed using vendor standard practice. Dimensional requirements of the reinforcing pad are based on the lengths required for local stresses in the pad to attenuate longitudinally and circumferentially over the run pipe wall. When the pad is dimensionally less than SWEC criteria permits, the magnitude of the total stresses in the . pipe wall can be evaluated by performing a PILUG analysis using the I footprint of the existing reinforcing pad (7" x 7") and the properties of the run pipe. A separate run using this approach has been included in Revision 5 of the calculation and confirms the acceptability of the local stresses in the run pipe. Revision 5 is forwarded for your review. Welded installation of the reinforcing pad to the run pipe, although dif ferent than permitted by S&W criteria, has been qualified through appropriate analysis in the calculation of record and is acceptable. CORRECTIVE ACTION We have identified all Category I supports with reinforcing pads. Drawings for these supports were reviewed to determine which were originated by the vendor. The following supports utilize vendor designed reinforcing pads.
~
Pad Required Support Type of Existing Pad by Design Criteria No. Attachment Length Width Length Width IR21-PSSII001 Lug 14.5 10.0 17.6 10.5 IB21-PSSH023 Tube Steel 13.5 13.5 12.9 12.9 1B21-PSSH024 Lug 16.12 16.12 17.5 10.7 IB21-PSSIIO25 Lug 15.0 10.0 13.0 7.6 IB21-PSSH029 Lug 15.0 10.0 12.1 7.4 IB21-PSSH032 Lug 14.5 10.0 12.6 7.9 IB21-PSSIIO35 Trunnion 15.0 15.0 11.4 11.4 IEll-PSSH029 Trunnion 10.87 10.87 16.5 16.5 IEll-PSSG103 Trunnion 13 13 20.8 20.8 lE11-PSST 150 Trunnion 22 27 18.9 18.9 IE21-PSSH005 WF 7 7 12.4 12.4 IE21-PSSH010 WF 7 7 11.9 11.9 lE21-PSSH021 WF 7 7 12.4 9.7 IE41-PSSG013 Trunnion 18 18 16.9 16.9 IP42-PSST 090 Trunnion 6 7.5 6.8 6.8 IP42-PSST 098 Trunnion 6 7.5 6.8 6.8 Support numbers IB21-PSSH023, 025, 209, 032, 035, IEll-PSST 105 and IE41-PSSH013 are acceptable by inspection as existing pad sizes for these supports either meet or exceed required pad sizes. The remainder have been reviewed as described above and all have been found acceptable. COMPLIANCE DATE All additional analyses are complete. PREVENTIVE ACTION None. The scope is limited to the sixteen pads evaluated above. Therefore, no additional investigation is required. SAFETY IMPLICATION i There is no safety implication for these supports since the local pipe stresses are within the allowables. A r LA.c , hY~h l' , _ m nu nauew 3 i SWEC Responsible Engin(er/Date LILCO Project Engineer /Date l f'/EC Project 1% hhLD ljffg3 I
'ineer/Date
/
i g Attachments
- 1. Revision 5 of Pipe Support calc IE21 PSSH021
~
STONE G YJEBSTER ENGINEERING CC RPOR ATION SUBCALCULATION TITLE PAGE - CLIENT & PROJECT PAGE 1 OF 3 l LILCO, SHOREHAM I fc ev.[f P55j C A L CUL ATION TITLE (Indicative of the Objective); Q A CATEGORY (d PIPE SUPPORT SUBCALCULATION: ANALYSIS OF M- NUCLE AR PIPE SUPPORT NO. I E 'z.i - P 6 s H d 'L' SAFETY RELATED ON SYSTEM R6MCT' C C s '-- LeFA1 h P 'li G OII Om O OTHER SUBCALCULATION NO. J. O. O R W.O NO DIVISION & GROUP CALC. NO. SYS) SUPPORT NO. WORK P CK AG E NO. 11600.02 NP(B ) .I E 2 1 - P s LH oil NA APP ROVA LS - SIGN ATUR E L D A TE lSUB SUPERSEDES CONFIRMATION I PR E PA R E R (S)/D AT E (S) R E VIEWER (S)/D ATE (S) OR RE REV E E S)/DATE(S) NO. O. Y
- N
///////////// E ///////////// 9 ///////////// 9
! c. r ry:., _6) l l T L
- i c.t t t v o. - s s /
,i. -
g 3 2.o-ev 6 2 I d D , % tU S \ AMA2 MAL XQ5 ,1C Adi i ///17h A J =41 10dL Y 3 2 / 6 - u - 9 z. ~ 4/ad-e L nore. 7 so st._ _ B. BCD CL C) _QL,$J2f pio w se:ono tryc. nenwe[
.h]. btybbi E U.$. h W E Y $ ~ LIT a d R _ k b l 9 ')-6Zl Q - (Q -R$ - i <i-II ,' L->
UcMb2uNcu t
/jI pt/.L , K IR 6 % [LW=& '
/-//-83 l /-//-83 l [ .fffE* L n rEEN [ 4 /
E Y d,47.t_/f[ou l- %./N
.n.
* - n -e2 I
LEGEND: *SEE SHL.T [ FOR REASON CONFIRMATION REQUILED E OFFICE CODE: 1= BOSTON, 2=SEO, 3= SITE RF.3. ENG., 4=NOT USED, 5-SWCL DISTRIBUTION I DUP. . go 0 l COPY d,.f{ GROUP I N AME G LOC ATION SENT I l (d ( ) RECORDS MGT. i l REV. REV. FILES (OR FIRE l f N# Mi'E /2k5/4 I FILE IF NONE) l l SWCL IJ..SWENKER/ TORONTO I i i
.PSAS (BOSTON)p. P A ny S /2kS/4 l PSAS (SITE) ! C.F.NG/51,0 i i l I i l l I I e i
STONE & 'JJESSTER ENGINEEnlNG CORPORATION CALCUL ATION SHEET
& $010 45 CALCULATION IDENTIFICATION NUMBER J.O. O R W.O. N O. DIVISION & GROUP System No. Support No. PAGE 11600.02 NP(8) /E2/ P6 5 d d 2 / -d' 2
3 TABLE OF CONTENTS 4 s Page Description Page Number 7 Subcalculation Title Page i o Table of Contents 2 ao Description of Calc. Revision 3 si
, ,, Calculation Summary a) Objective b) Method / Assumptions N
'S c) Data / Equations (References) T is d) Conclusions 4
,, e) Review Statement 4 Design Input Data io to a) Applicable Docu=ents tJaed d to b) Basic Analytical Data 7
- c) Pipe Support Location 7
,, d) Pipe Support Sketch e) Pipe Support Load and @9 Deflection Summary Page #O
[) ts SPKoWG HANf Ee cisif N Si+EE'I~
,, Calculations t te GTEUcru2A( ANAlfSo C of TS <{,7(,s, f x 7g (f 17.-/4' 1*
CHECK. CPKiH( \/ S t f~ A /4 /5 3i R/ufiNPv7 IS -20 w at r) CMeutireud 21-2 8 33 34
%Tjffb',"fffff,]E9"'= ' * * ' 5 29 30 35 30 37 se Computer Run Log 8/
39 Attachments _ soc .gu .3 9 ists E4 A n t. w i L Oe. .p
*0 l ATTA e H . [ 2 P6 '5 ) 5.
et 2. soc - Rn^ 999 w E t oE O 19YT*C & - 6 ( / e6 ) b 3.k< - SA- to ?I %5 HisiMtis (2 fY,5} 7.
<a ap ia orie ne fue ien 8
~ ,.
CLIENT: LILCO KJ CALC NO. 11600.02 - NP( 8 ) t c Z.1 - f ' 0 ' 9 ? ' T - PAGE - 3 LOCATION: SIIOREllAM STONE & WEBSTER ENGINEERING CORPORATION PIPE SUPPORT-CALCULATION SHEET I SYSTEM: R. F AC 1, coeE
DAY f- < e ' - s " DESCRIPTION OF CALC REVISION" REV. NO. DESCRIPTION OF CIIANGES REASON FOR CHANGE Fcv<st 1 r? > ?
r: n i tc. r,e tr - ^
<r,< . ro o e> ,
.: i ~ t r
(?) 71, w (/I t c , H ,cra p r
- c. <, p r, 2 ; .,
1 ys - -. o., 1< r,: c- r' 7, ; ri e . .,
. s ta r . . :-rrce r/cr.
j'l y / 's !
- 2 c n L C U L A 'T o n pi ( r. , , , y j- rt ,y f 6 v't f g j) (; ) N e' ni
[n' s ~
'~ /?Lr, /I X d ' 3 3
ff VI S E D PMES 4 TO / 2, 2/, 2 5, 3 0, 3/ A N.b WEL D $ /V)EntBEA* 5/EE C//AMSE PZK ADDE D P/1GE 24 . / T.7) c R F-22 92/A O R G CVl A'i~I O d COr694 E l'El'y' R E V t 5 2 D '# " " * ' ' ' "# # #A " ' 5 to c - Rm 784' (se e A Yi' m s a T # z ) 6
STONE E WEB 3TER ENGINEERING CORPORATION CALCUL ATION SHEET CALCUL ATION IDENTIFICATION NUMBER J.O.OR W.O.NO. DIVISION 6 FROUP CALCUL ATION NO. OPTIONAL TASK CODE PAGE 11600.02 NP (B) IF2 f . PS3#4 21 -f N/A CALCULATION
SUMMARY
ossective or cateutation See Objective in Master Calculation 11600.02-NP(B)- /63 / ~2 Subcalculation Objective:-7#3 o g g ECTivE OF "TH f s GO Bd. Addy(G gf/ lSTO PETE 9 bas ME Tid AT THE DECAL STMss 25 i N Tl+ E t*i4b /LNj) THE O U N ?* h t fl/V ACCf G Te h e y PE L sc e. - Em - 784 0 c c arTac it.
- 2)
INE O PE SutyotCT PEKt'oKms IT's INT 2tios p Furici, oM I%h Ak Jg)B - 3. t calcuLatsom utrMoo/assuurrious See Page and Table _ offContents in Master Calculation ll600.02-NP(B)- //~2/ - 8 of this Subcalculation. Specific Assumptions from Master Calc., (by Assumption No.): b souncre or oAra/covations (References) See References in Master Calculation ll600.02-NP(B)- /E2 / - 2 and individual pages of this subcalculation. 11600.02 - Pipe Stress, Pipe Support and Duct Support criteria document for the Shoreham Nuclear Power Station, Rev. 2, 0-12-02 This document will be referenced throughout the subcalculation as "DCD-2" . conclusions (Circle one) a) Existing support is acceptable.
) Existing support is acceptable with modifications.
c) Existing support removed. d) New support is acceptable. e) Other (spes;fy): [ See also Conclusion in Master Calculation 11600.02-NP(B)- /62/-E . arverern(s)comur=ts i lparrassa catt Review by observation See Page 1 See PG. 1 using engineering judgment See page 1 per EAP 5.3. See PG. 1 imorressormr nevenwen 8"T8 See P a g e (12nd level) See po, 1
, , _y. - - - , ,, - - - - , ,-- --- - , --,---m --.-,y-
STONE P. YtEBSTER ENGINEE RING CORPOR ATION CALCULATION SHEET
& 5010 65 CALCUL ATION IDENTIFICATION NUMBER J.O. O R W.O. NO. DIVISION & GROUP CALCUL ATION NO. OPTIONAL TASK CODE PAGE
//(o 0 0. 0 7. N P(G ) IEtI-PssH6t t - C r.1lA i
A SSuin PTION S
- 1) si I s A GSursE D TtMY INFO,zunT, e N PzovioeO By lo.c. 7.t w - 3 7 ro hszeirvo - P&ggs,/F2m to R.IAbeT N, 2 E 6 A RO inf /A/TEf*R A-L WEcpao 4GACHMEHB, /5 VAC 1 O
^
C ON PI AM& To 0 M i5 iE E & O IIL 5 D t$ ir
- 2) SuPP6(LT h%S BEEN A WACHBQ 'To ExtsT N(
Eto3G DED d'AT2 . IT t S AGSum BD ~T*tH;7' 'TH/ 5 24 WATE. 0Ad SAFE c y' NAiv' OLE THB D GSit; M d'okD S F(LoM THIS SuPPodI c aN r=, aru T.o N is dr R 5 Guis2 e s3 26 I p's $ A SSUMED Y)%9Y YHG iN FO*1M AYe U M e R0 \/s OED 30 By soc /2 m - 7B y R E ( 4fe D au 6 R E A r4 A C y .S tf dP WEcu E p /Gir+c H m n nT tS t/A6 o D 3 / 33 CONI =u(tw ATtad 13 i? ECput L G T3 3s 37 39 A}iTa Ass ueG O ~iiM 7 "THE lH Fo sTica Mo J,oiO By ^
- IOC GA-103i RE f A u.poHf ~ Tin \c H-r,sr oase5, C as.E .S,
** IS
. 43
\/sa L r) d.cW Fr flMAT o M 'S 2EQun EE D .3 46
STCE O CESSTER ENGINEERl".6 COCPORATION CALCULATION SHEET asome a CALCULATION IDENTIFICATION NUMSgR
/
J.O. O R W.O. MO. OlVISION 6 SROUP CALCUL ATION NO. OPTIONAL TASK CODE PAGE V 11600.02 NP(8 ) /Ett-fstdd 21 5~ NA 8 Confira. Esq'j s RIF DESIGN INFUT DATA Yes usumptior a yo, Listing of Design Input Data Documents, not shown in List
- of Reference of Master Cale, applicable to this subesicu-o lation.
- Support Dws:
a 11600.02-BZ- _ _ , , , , , _ , , , _ , . , _ _ _ _ _ _ Bergen Paterson Dws. No. /62 / -#55# o21 -5~ asDCR: F- 2 292 i A QEE Pgg,f,)_ _, _ _ _ _ _ _ ii 8: _ _. _ _ ._ _ - - _ _ IS ir ____ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ is _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ o IOC/IGH: lac- %-39 (tHTEq_wgyE_p_qcy} Ai?AcH ** I J I
** grac? z 3' Ioc - M -78Wwet Oa o AT1'Ac u_) 9/
sa lot- SA lo34 [TI ME b I Go Rs ES C/3S25,) ATTAc.u
- 3 ) f
- Drawings: 11600.02 - FP ~
as FC - 16 A - G' l 24H" 3 FS -
,, F_ .- -
F - ~ er - ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Dravo ISO IC --- DTD
~ " " ' ~
f as As-Built ISO /E2/- /c -G3 iot DTD 5-2 4-82 ~-~ a, Surveyor's Sketch - DTD - The following special data checks were made in the process 38 of completing this calc. (for information only) 32 HDT ss YeslNo aseb ( se ss NF, Code Check (Structure) _ Base Plate: OcD-2. ATTM'T 4.1__ _ _l __ g V ENTR612 g 4 Intergral Welded Attachment 3 r D ~"79-7
- /
STRUDL SW _ _ , _ _ _ , . _ _ _ , _ _ . , , , ,
~
2 2 U g / se STRUDL II _ _ _ _ __, _ _ ,_,,,,_, _ _ _ _ g ,
- 8) PITRUST _ _ _ _ _ _ __,. ,_, _ _4./ '
40 PILUG _ _ _ _ _ , , , _ _ _ f _ e, PITRIFE _ _ , , _ , , _ _ _ _ _ _ _ M
,, Other #
44
$ .6EE M kJ ts i-Teon Y j 4S 43 [
l
STONE & CE8 STER ENGINEEGINC CORPORATION CALCULATION SHEET 4 .i. CALCUL ATION IDENTIFICATION NUMBER J.O. O R W.O. NO. DIVISION D GROUP CALCUL ATION NO. OPTIONAL TASK CODE PAGE 7 11600.02 NP (8 ) /E21 - PDH o 21 -f- NA l Confirm. Req'd,
- REF DESIGN. INPUT DATA (CONT'D) Yes Assumptiori 3
n Q e4 Pipe Line Ider c e ifgation No. /1 - w R- 2 2 - 20 / -2 s / 2, 7.5~O
%M APipe 0.D. IN.
hd
- Pipe Wall Ihickness O.375' IN.
.$ d g O $ Pipe Material SA /OG 6i ff 13
[e , 4 Insulation WThickness
% pe n_
'O g ,' Pressure: Design 6'00 PSIG
@b t 4 hidt Oper PF4E [d~O PSIG
'a yeMj f N&U Peak 48f PSIG
'3 f 5, k O Temperature: Design /G *F e 8 sg MM Oper Pfu: ~2o 5' 'F f$$f 4 N&U Peak / '70 *F Ab III
" SC" (Allowable Run Pipe Stress @ Ambient Temp) /37600 PSI Appendix ,",SH"(Allowable Run Pipe Stress @ Zof 'F Temp)/foco PSI is T Se q*3y n(ppo grygey, y47gg,at y p . , g, yg,yoo pgy Pipe Stress INFO Used:
to 2' ) DOCUMENT NO. /4 X- /O 8 -3 (TIME HISTORY YES NO er RUN NO. Rld 49 O 6 / DATE OF RUN d-2-R2 POINT R8 23 DOCUMENT NO. (TIME HISTORY YES NO ) as RUN NO. DATE OF RUN POINT as DOCUMENT NO. (TIME HISTORY YES _ NO _ r*
? RUN NO. DATE OF RUN POINT
% h DOCUMENT NO. (TIME HISTORY YES NO )
as ' b RUN NO. DATE OF RUN POINT 3* () D Dnic o F / $50/1. G -il. Q *L 38 s
'f Pipe Support Location: BLDG AREA 6 q k Column (TYP) 33 E -
- 6 This location reflects 34 d 49 wy a deviation of c %v g is w e 0 , FT . b 't fm b t' n 3(,'-9f ~s IN.
30 gy / CT) IN -/ DIR 2 @ l66)Z+ /.1/7 : /0, Z F7 4 V
/O. 2 67 h9, 7 5'!
3'
- r. A -
so y & = IEEt PsSuoZl n
., M O N l' 4 ,A 3' $ g g ' g 'l
. Prom location on p 8 Referenced Stress
*3 g?
ea 2 j ( Document es w cs t8
.s n8 a PLAN ON es Q q
STONE & WEBSTER ENGINEERING CORPORATION CALCUL ATION SHEET A 5m0 65 C ALCUL ATION IDENTIFICATION NUMBER J.O. O R W.O. NO. DIVISION D GROUP CAL.CUL ATiON NO. OPTIONAL TASK CODE PAGE Yi
'I( O o. on ttf(8) ic2i-ps s,p ,73 g g/g r
- 2 P iF i ". d t ;. .. T :*"cp pg, gg.
3
- N o h _
17k _r eJ e
.- I \ t g .,,
a to 74 1 g s a [W3 C d c3.s . _ a __ _
" 3 's '
s' ~_ ! .t-5 to jV s s ( s l
- k-
\ s e o -r To i s s s v.
- se
', d c.T r !~.* 9
', 81 3
s3 L is x '(MG'52[
\ - i
- 2
+ ,
y L tI L u
,, , w .m is i l' g ;- gy
\ ~
G
J 4. . . h
' 1 20 v, 4
.h am n. . . . , <
- se -
"s n.sc a. . n'$ } , C, ^ /1. T '"' "
2, E v'5 Tim G CML * . " #' (ft p c 3 2. f c 2%W l i ' wTiy l 27 ( T y r) i i 2a ' { . l $ 29 Q t. t 36.o IC gV
,,e i ,
32 r - - . . 3, . 33 e l 34
' I h 33 A.'.d'3 s I
*2
-it(
- 3. /! s" .
.2 ". \s.r o .t u. 3st o"
" o -e e u eT. ,-t M. ,y, -~3 40 41 S tJOTE : P G 2. &{ Dcil i~-22 9 2 l A 43 44 4S 46 e
, - .,v,. . - . . , ,- ,. ,---..-,,,.,.,.,,,,,,,-----.e .
- ~
I STONE & WEBSTER ENGINEERING CORPOR ATION CALCUL ATION SHEET
& Mt0 65 C ALCUL ATION IDENTIFICATION NUMBER J.O. O R W.O. N O. OlVISION D GROUP CALCUL ATION NO. OPTIONAL TASK CODE PAGE '
// 6 00,02. M P@) If 2 1. P s s u s z.1- f N/A l
2 p g ,. E. S u e e t,6 T SKETCH P C,, 2_ te r 7 . 3 4 5 l e \ , 1- , y p . q . c .,,, , , . - so 9 nN \ sr s A le % %
'2 ' 8 r, 3 / [ E (TY F - 2..'uc t 0 33 ps wq
,, i
- 6. esp; IS l s '
It I is 5 'E c " 8 o n 2- 1
'S ** ( F2o rvi N 8) 2i M O i C 6sA L.5 L.I $ T 22 tic; ti' . El 4 ' b I Tc .4 l D E 6C A
- M I'PI -
M 8 4 E C ' F]- 23 l l vsis - t 'l-y AR MR iMG ~
** 2 1 T. 5, GA L Y I F z LG,
~
A G o O J;C f. 2s 3 2 g j ' x L' A iq."tc A _ g g,
- to Pg R g(ott (<o" 'o svir) , '
27 f.zz9t.tA + H f wG x 25>< o'- to % Lc t =, 5 2e 5 i 7xi"A7'tc. A -3 6 29 (E'f*7 4' F'? G.75e( 30 31 32 33 34 3S 36 3? - 38 39 40 di 42 43 44 45 46
g y W w w w W W W W W W W W W eer g
$s
/~ L r. # . 7 ( l (. D U . t> ? - fli (8 )- I f' 2. t - I 3' h 0 2.1 - [--
PPE .'>oPfoe.T LM D AHp D G WCTr od M '^^^Y O h d. . r c s*'s s ** s.. t* l - . .) r
- O O o O O O O O O O O 3 O O O O O O O O C O O e R.
m p N O. O. O. O. O. O. O. O. O. O. O. as i >= W = C4 O O O O O O O o O O O L*r M t O e 0 0 si Eb a; 4 E2 V. C6 m O O O O O O O O O O O m O O O O O O O O O O O eJ e O. O. O. O. O. O. O. O. O. O. O o L>
- N (J
gJ O ct M O i O o O O O o o O O e O O GL *4 > N 9 4 e aO > c O O O O O O 'o O O O esJ (> O Q O CJ O O O O O O O O
>= 3 M Dw x C. O. O. O. O. O. O. O. O. O. O.
gM a O O O O O o O o O O O
.. a e i e O
U - ee N N t% M t> , tJ e M & e-e uJ G.a ,
- C.
O. O. O. O. O. O. O. O. O. O. > aN O O O O O O O O O O O O si Z e e 2. ( 4J M [ Ik
= O *4 m
5 un O O ts (J O N, o O O M O m u. 7 (J -E Ow O. O. . ( J. O. O. O. O. O. O. O. 4 O
*eO O O O O O O O O O o O h- >- 2
> e e < 2m W D e4 -
W >= J >* M C. w O .4 P= 40 PJ N M M cJ O N O LJ cy O. O. O. O. O. w M.
\g O. O. O. O. O. s O C. >=
m O o O O O O O O O O O O L. LN 3 6 D k> O M m C: 74 M.- p >- C- C 8-e.t <t O JM Cr U * * * * * * * *
- mb b.
O O O* O O O o o* o* o O O* O o >- G a .t =Jmw of r Er O N C. e O N Z '% < OM ML y N > e.J U r= >= b-ct: U M D: UO O J <.t =. st X anJ un eo
= u ;; u. Jw *Z r.
M ca c- _s <I 4 a e 5 .J w u. M. <r M. u. wJ m . . . . . . . . . . . . . et M O e:t h., E w O O o O O O O O O O. O o O MOOMw0 *.m > e .e W> Z d >- E e= L. > Z W A 2 D Et M ft w > 2 >4 hJ C O O t '* Z. O O b::"@i JC"' O O w .J & Z M e-- Z f. c,. m OZ=wZ uJ M*- U't M wa L > o-e M U w M .J T CM M rt ) LJ C4 C U e iJ = = Q Q m Z.J I 1 1 *I L I EZ Z i.J = O mJ cc w r - w w
>- W O 6J uJ Z uJ *J *) i3 I CEM o d. c O , . . . . . . . . . W e44 c,1 u w O ':.; O O C m Q M .. O O. O O O O O O. O O. O O O JOC O O m H > .J <% P- >-
w o CL W re X M Z >* ed D. b us
.~. o O La. >- EL m . . . . . . . . . . . .
O O O O O O O O. o o o C O O M N M ss O asJ *t L MO
- t. ** J u n -
r,.] and C M _ J . . . . . . . O e . m O O O O. O. O O O. O. O *). O. wI M CL Z F ' ud6 G k ea m
?
e e e e t >t-OZ E< M Y U s t C# + eJ O O e
- o. R% . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4:iJ 4 M
2 M O O gI X O O O O O O O O O O O O O >= Z ** >=
*T w
ee e w 2412.42 uJ u
>= 2 ua : M 4 .,.2 J ! J M /", I M lc M *. CL Jf <: . .i *1
% ZO *! CL O Z 7. ~~ Z Z OM kJ D uJ w M t.J e O EG C .J.-*m. OOG M MOs- O.
.,3 m . . . . . . . . . . .
H 2 m = m eser e e e e e O e e ,e et m 3 F.. N Ch N la to C. 4 eJ eJ e O EL O >- C 4 *1 < st < eo
- L ua M e* to O 4A J & El M LA U1 e O 6-e et tJ ft f J kJ TL UUUUO M
- m . k (4 e4 M M LG & @ N @ 4 e o tJ K kJN84\ O O ULaU v U 4 M sO t O *- LsOM tad M m Z O O O O O t.J M a a ZM m C 2 .
- g.J
> *
- hJ Q 4.J
- 3 O LA PJ (> M C M PJ @ P*
2 O* m.
. M - M M M M -
m e .
=.. u .
J
- c. O-
= .
M ,a - g M M
. m m o e
- g. n . >e <! *4 & Ek a 4 <t <a s1 =1 .-e sw . O.6 . w J u. w w w w w u u u u u w 3 co m4 ca e m c> M MCM . . -e.J e. o
. : o, u s.1 o I z = u u o o u et
. . . C. c o O m - - - O O O O o o i l' I O 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 0
S( V) CMC. NO. // Goo .ot- n e(s) . us z g-- es.s r/ oz i - f STONE & WEBSTER ENGINEERING CORPORATION t PIPE STRESS ANALYSIS
SUMMARY
SHEET PA8E //
' 188 IDENilflCATigg LILCO SHOREHAM UNIT 1 J,g, 11600.02 PROBLEN NO. Io i PIPINGSYSIIM coes sne everem rem >
REPiti It AX 11600.02- AX- 10 s- J (Copido Fcom A-A- to 8 .3 ') REF.BRAWINGS SEE REFEREMC.E SHstr SPRING HANGER DESIGN SHEET COLD SPRING DISPLACEMENTS (IN) HOT SET M ME- CONSTANT POINT LOAD LOAD LOAD ME LOAD , A L8- LB. LB. LB/IN. Ax Ay LB. , 65' .cos 7087 nois -3W.5 -33 3 -3<f71 -312 3 12-82 'Vs i F 4
)iO .coi .o4-o .o!7 -15 2.2. -16'+4 -159'l- -158 3 % N51 A *11 8-) .
8 CWE16 RT- ol: 72..o t 65 use'D 'N ?W'S
' 'Cwe nG Hrv or A-+.~1 L.ss usen in ANAt Ysis I )
l
- THERMAL BUILDING MOVEMENT 3 HAVE BEEN TACTORED OUT
._ _ . ._.._ ,__ _ _.._ _.-______ _ ___._..___.-_ ___ _ __.~.--...__ _ _ .....__ __. _ - ,_._._,_ -
STONE & CEBSTER ENGINEERING CORPORATION CALCUL ATION SHEET
. A $010 65 CALCULATION IDENTIFICATION NUMBER J.O. O R W.O. N O. OlVISION D GROUP CALCUL ATION NO. OPTIONAL TASK CODE PAGE /2 lI (<> D U . D 'l N f(. b ) I E 7 i - f'5 514 O Z.1 -[ PI / A i
8 Ac t, ETi.o 0 c r 0R4 L A M a tst t i s ce T. S . G i b % E L23 L C 3 e
- e 4 -
c
, o 3 [ s, .m .
i A
\
6 I r o. n, A g s /,3 ,5 *
\ \ .
e s
-r.s. 6 % 6 % t N . ti xio n io[vssf 14 vetheatz 'PRed6)M
%Z7 (v s i e i9 veninea stainc,) V Pr. C,
' \
t6. s 10 cut -ro S u n T \
.\ [
" $ R, / ',
f * " , ,
, i 4,,
'2 cc, z.e ,
' p s" '
is 's ') G. -10$ g\ - I4 l is
'v ' ' p 1>
n . ,, ,. 16 t6 ,_.th ir , _L I j # ,7 1 se p n i Eg -+F x to ai g*,G/J s e c.v on i-i 8 e im A g( 6 3, s (n):- 7,(. 23 N l- , 61.s* 'd
** DfL'GN L.o re t ) F g i 3 h '. 5 o consibERIMc W'G5' 05 r 9-C vh ~1s es s a st f ,jG= 3Soe ta . LTo 8i 4Hsily $7.vi)
,, m
$~2 . FRIZ'.Tiog poes GxiST BUT'osE 4'bA 5 Fgs cicoH Fae.i'v L = 0.3 (M k'- M
I'(~'0" V
Fb'Tcl ;- p%t c,4 p) " Fort Conseqg/AT<.s e , ,
( usi art <Te uciuvs t p( 38 Po ' H 7 c ' ss re tt < c<. A tA om t n is mor en,s c ( WEcD C4c. Ot/4/ w -
' F.7 : 3500 ser s t c r: " ca r c <
Co Site A FR'CT'UN RT point C. ~ U E ' T ' 8 v'E" 1'1 'l se -p o ,6 ( 3 5 00') = 1o5o#- mg-my4 - eviu O
p.y?esig?omena rou &
Aw, R A. , ao M g: F Y ( 15,Q 4. F g.( #3.7 5) = 15 0 0(15 1) +10 5 u(i 3.U7 .% 75)-:m 41 4r M g- F x(i5i) t F7 ( 7,G): I o 5 o ( r5.t.) & i s 50 ( 7. 6) : '2 '3 9W - +: 43
" '=
1%c- F y (isash Es; h . 0 = / o s v (it.n) m o . ( 7. 6P 4 i c 3 - . 4 r[= y scx P a' = 5 4 = to CO * - v - - , - w. p r-w- e.-- - --w y ,y- - - - -
+ STONE & CEBSTER ENGINEERING CORPORATION 4
. '. . CALCULATION SHEET
. A 5010 65 CALCUL AT';N IDENTIFICATION NUMBER DIVISION & GROUP CALCUL ATION NO. OPTIONAL TASK CODE PAGE I J.O. O R W.O. NO.
i /l600.t2 Mf(O) )E'LI-95 Spell *[ N[h 8 , 6 E F, STRdC7VA4L A N A L N Li k ( b t $ H V r b 3
- F t t o tv c Geoint y: o r< t r_5 A L O N c, M C t4 6 d it Lic A t, M is '
s ' 7
; fac.,e t /050
}
- 2c.5~
L3.5* to G3.'E
,, d5 l2
'3
! Fg L 14 II p
'5 FaG:t lose *
, 16 Fy = F, = wr L L s(' 05o) + on 2 G .s (I O S v)= 140? f,; g F 3 : ?. .S o o
- M y ,= M -2:,=- u< 63 5 (P %G) 4 c c 2 G .5 ( t% g) 23 ces 61. 5(CH3 8) + ce< I6 5 ( SIO N
- 6 6 3 8 ' '*
24 2s M 5 g)q: z.3 *n y o 4# 26 27 t u r_c K s a t a f, oF r. t_ (,1 (, Yk 1 2 ~1" LG 28 n 29 A/ b: A - G t o.So A - I o.l .o t 5 - l 6 .2.,,3r:2.I9 ,, l ' ! M. i- , c 38 bc t 2. $ -- Y\ + S_ /FEI , J. I F Y l ' 85 n f 17.< e3 c zl(IA b -QA. t)t B (b' t) t B(A.t14 3* TAEtt 'I 35 e 6C90G p _5__ ( l 9 O B) p 5 ( 3 50o) = -2, 2 z.7 f n . 35 t ( C - o . SYo.5 B(6-0.5)o.5 B (G - o . 5)o .s 37
,f b 93 4,< 0. 9 ($ 3)s 0 9 (36ovo)w 14400 0. S l .
a ec.s.it *
- TM. 6x6122 o.K in s 9 c. A (<
45
- 42 43 44 45 46 A. , _.,.- - . -- . . _ _ . . , ,
i
? ^ '
CALCULATION SHEET
. & $010 65 CALCULATION IDENTIFICATION NUMBER J.O. O R W.O. NO. DIVISION & GROUP CALCUL ATION NO. OPTIONAL TASK CODE PAGE
/ / 0 00.0 t 148]h) I Cll- f S5 H00-[ NfA 8
2 1 g c p, g 7,,L U C T V y1 A L 614 A d c, . .s eon 7 3 gl C 0 E C \L E. G t\ .b ' M G [ fmy y pwgsk = 8 7 gy (Sec PC, It) ff S-l3T LD83 P S i. f4 f.8 f M- '2- ( I N 15. 5 'A 16 Fa M 5. 'l5 y 2.. l i
- bC D- g A XI AL c t r's f f'C.'S s s o H
'O M F 17 Co3t inau 31 T c =. Fx _. _i408 - z35 P. s l .
im Ay f o, ; 13 14 O GL tl b r d C, - y T k )( ,$ 15 Vg,y = l M 3 l '2. S 9 4 o I4 78 9.S . t sy / 6 . 2. 18 19
% C *n b )H G _ Q-1 $ y g}
20 2' Og )t/iv l . 6(,9 O G -. 1-1130 f S.I. 22 / 6 , '2. SK 23 2* Q,c R o c,i o n ( CoenfatssioN d SENbint) , 2S De u-2. % I Tc h .y Ys , 2 Ta7 +- IO 8' TA Eu. F3t Fb F6 8 l 4 , S . 3 ( 's) ! 2S top rr 6 C 3 si F 6 "~ O' b (S Y)6 = 0.4 ( 36000) - 2. i b o t c : .). 32 55
?35 4 14 76 4- 453o 027 4. I 35 20630 1160u 36 37 f, T. s , 6 FG 7 t y t7 t.c. o r.
g i$ S c s t m G 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 l
o e vevo em vu s.uJ e L n s.,es u s re L L n e rs o hu n ru n n s a v s's CALCULATION SHEET A 5010 65 CALCULATION IDENTIFICATION NUMBER l J.O. O R W.O. N O. DIVISION D GROUP CALCUL ATION NO. OPTIONAL TASK CODE PAGE ! l IllrCO ,o 2 HP(8) tezi-PssH ezi-S N/,9 K5F 2 C HEs t- SPiziN (, vs I F
- I 4
- r. /
i% 2(o Exi s7w4 B/r .ctaia k r/s 1 i= tf-PS zz woewog TUat 5 o i= sPRinf
*- 3 13 2437 7 3 %fd 14 45
- ha os an e t
- e r (es . ii ) usc, w o, l,' wx, na co m m eaa wrry iw -rne wo e.csag i u u n o ,= n g gx, g,,a g pg,,,,,
23 V 5) F
- l 4 .
24 fY$ b h &l fp $4 f r k3(
,ws t = g" x. io j '"
' 29
, P62t i=
x +(ii - % b /op + 0 g -ig : to n
, h e ca.n . ins rsa m ,o,< pe in ,ir . io j pg 9.
tunw ia fjg , Og l 39 40
** l, E A !Md 0/P VSiP # /4 5PRIN6 15 44 f4~ D I? 000 TE 45 46
,,....-o,,.-., ... ...- ...... . ... .. . ,, ..
CALCULATION SHEET A 501n 65 _ C ALCUL ATION IDENTIFICATION NUMBER J. O. O R W.O. N O. OlVISION & GROUP CALCUL ATlON NO. OPTIONAL TASK CODE PAGE
-IIlooO o L NP(B) IE21- Pss Hs2l-5 N/n 11&f~
2 Pl LU 6 IN P UT S 6 P I L Ul) /9NAlySs'L ONE ( T b ( Q u A / I P '(.S
- 7tz Loc,9c stee ssss inine Pa- o .
me-9C Run H0.(%6SC70/G 07D l-4-Er3 (see co,spaTEn. tos PG S I $ nyTm'7A et t Pi t us AtlA Ly si s 7u30 (1E) cpaALiPys 14
'T~HE locat. . S T12 E s S E S IN THE PI PE W A(.'.f .
M E - 9 5~ Ru N WO. R 6 3 [?O18 DTD / ~/I ~B 3 (SEtl COM P(,R ER 406 P.30 Q 67 TN.T A) 19 28 Ps L.04 s d PuT F oit A N AlySe,5 Z 22 Ron P.pe o.a . = Pun P, pe o.D. + 2 Tn a ~TH. c a. nes s 7 Rua P.Pe o a. : i z . 7 s'" +. y .370 = l.3. S' il 26 1 A ) er . m E. Ron e, p e Ta ,cy. ness = Pan Ty,cyugsS 29 nc e] '* ' Rvu pip 2 'Triit.1 w s s s - o a 3 7 5"
" ( Pa u Ta uce. n cs s : 0. 0 .i 33 34 3,
g P2E SSur% 2 = 0. O PSI 37 38 39 45 DAx 1 AL = 6.37 42 44 DCIRCO = 6.I 3 45 46
CALCUL ATION SHEET
, & $010 65 C ALCUL ATION IDENTIFICATION NUMBER . J.O. O R W.O. N O. DIVISION & GROUP CALCUL ATION NO. OPTIONAL TASK CODE PAGE Illoco. ot. MPC e) IE21 -pss H ez a- S N/p '
R E F' l 2 PI L U4 /N PO T C CNY ' 5 6 b / Gg Al'(oco. STRESS = 12,600 PS' Sc?h (Fo(L A- 3G M ATER 1AL ) 10 tg 1 0. A(L
'2 Tt 13 15 TN PuT loa os .
46 LOADS well 82. EX Gr?TED BY /NE SUN 18 ' 20 ON THE Rur/ Pi PE . 29 s WNE 0/Vl y' Lonb THAT EXis i IS 23
,, >' 'lll:
3 3 26 27 28 ll, [ [_ r ,, 30 y si ---- 32 33 34 3S 38 37 32 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46
S T ONL 45 Ct t$S l L H LN blN E E NIN b LUMt"UM A I IU N CALCULATION SHEET
& $010 65 _.
CALCULATION IDENTIFICATION NUMBER J.O. O R W.O. N O. DIVISION & GROUP CALCUL ATlON NO. OPTICNAL TASK CODE PAGElb NP(6) 11600.0L IEZI - P.SSt/0ZI- S M/A 2 REF Pi Luf 1H POT $0NT. S C A LC u lbTE M8s tMi M'E 5 , 9 10 pl = /)q psi 12 13
.3 Q 02EI = 317 Psi 16 W '
'THE st i = 44 s~ P S t 19 20 25 23 o B E A = s~7 Ps <
- 24 26 SS ET = CC2 P st*
27 28 29 occo = / g g v i. ,2 + see mec@ 3 3. 3' V s e no sra j*me ic]r p . m 4 PC D-Z ((g W : 66 7 P5' 34
=[(c 26)*+ ( z o o)2 39 CCC E : E
,, SR ,
+ DOC A 39 40 43 hbh -h- k === l 44 45 46
CALCULATION SHEET A $010 6% C ALCUL ATION IDENTIFICATION Nt)MBER
,J.O. O R W.O. N O. DIVISION & GROUP CALCUL ATION NO. OPTIONAL TASK CODE PAGE k
) g,o o . o t NPCS) IEL I -95sH ot.t-5 Nj'A 2
REF R/v4 mR;T doNT. S t z L 8 o fLF .- SRff loch + %E H'sT*1 C As,216 di7 44/2 sn oF T t+E T 43 0 ,
'o CE D -Z 56E ATT/K.H *
'Y4GL5 AMum W Y 4.ra(b)
),
occ F.- (4 30.)'+ (4rzf4 (d 6(o)' = /o zc e s < 16 NOT E*. Y #8C MufL ss NoY Tt+2 SM-m E A- 5, IN "TH E P lt/Q AHM/ S il Run # RO 3.570(6 f 6 )@ ~ pTy , /-4 -93 ' l-u-g3 21 23 Yb iS- wc (( H a vc:,. Vc./Ly' dt TIM &W4 To THE- 8 (04 ANA C y's s b , 25 26 27 20 Ftto m Pr ( U 6 4 W e 4 y r/ 5 1 MG 9 S' l2vN #2C797C /6 L " 'RuN coiYpiTt oH DTD / 8 3 ' E 34 losa < s% cono>Ts o a i tot s722sc - S360 Pt< 38 (p Sc, o PLi < I2,600 Psi Attocu-e e $5 0.6 N. h .$*b.$$ h /0 Ph kS A cc s e 7 4 <3 c is. . 43 44 45 46
STONE & CEBSTER ENGINEERING CORPORATION CALCULATION SHEET A VHO $4 CALCUL ATION IDENTIFICATION NUMBER J.O. O R W.O. NO. DIVISION & GROUP CALCUL ATION NO. OPTIONAp TASK CODE PAGE 20
)}{rOO.OE NPCB) IE2-t-Pssif ott -s N(4 REF '
Plv4 meuT ccen~
@luf /N P u T F oll AN M y6is .u sun Ps 72 0 D. = 12.2S~0 L ,,
RUN 7tPs THICl< HEss .- 0.37[ 4 b PA)) T*HICKHE SS .- 0.0 t6 . k y PREssc.< es : 550. 0 i=s * * /: II. 5~ I6 g it k Dg z, g t. = 7,o is 'u i Exi s r,af, 19 LV
** h) 3 s' y 'e%,st,a, = 7,o ';
23 2s YH A "* " ' ' ' ' = '& * ?' ' '"
)
b/ [Fo0. SAlo6 42.B MATEAiA(_.) 27 E-E!& - LnPvT losa s f Mus @wes wo u. GE YttE S6m2 4G 30 32 M M YGss .T GHcusa o d P4 I ? - t 9' .
*- y Fi20m PrluG Appt15os tr_ ll v H Ro SS 20 t TT OTp /- n - e3 3S Ron co H onYeon 2. L'o n D in'4 Coho oTo oH I 39 TOTel SYricss = /315') psi { IS}000 Pst* M&ovJ 40 e a $ $ D(h{ $$&h 5 h lk Y I I wm m ace paua 45 46 I
STONE P. CEBSTER ENGINEERING CORPOR ATION
. CALCULATION SHEET . A $010 CS CALCUL ATION IDENTIFICATION NUMBER J.O. O R W.O. NO. DIVISION & GROUP CALCUL ATION NO. OPTIONAL TASK CODE PAGE 1A I l 6 00 . 6 'd MEk 8 ) IC'L l-f M L del-[ DI /0 i
SEr W CLb C A L C s/ L A T o t H C 3 EM bMG Wt L b T.s. &; x G A o.S oo To E y a t. r I N G E tA E 9 L A'r E 5 rv ,T
- 4 r "l {, '{
7 C o t\ S i t) E R t N C. Ci. G F C_C T' v f_ , s s U1-5 8 W Ct t o ti top 4 Bot -.0 M LN ',
- V SC- t tt is n L '_ t. L _ v> fi. L h ; s, gg 's 's '
to ( WC.tn gia 'b' s s t c s. ) % 's ' f3 (Ex,sT.N4 WEc0 is QgM3 3 5t oci) @ D ) , , g __, i3 . , p " 's G .5 n
] Fi asc s 6
i, ,
's )( = 6 __ g,7 o
N u = s ., - Tl w,s G . 5 ti a v> r t t Otorc En r L 23 2* A = ? ( b) : 7 ( L.'7) = 13. 4 23 g, , __ c ( d'), g ( g, ,7) : y o. 2
** 'l ,, Wl 3 = ( t. * '1Y)'y - Q 27 as y/( ,s f ,4 ? , k : 902 & i S (I- 7h-- M 29 L. /
T/C 3 ~E, & 3 3: 40: 6 4 ig i El 32 33 ht N(( $ k TY'.O F Cr*TgL roR. / [did (OtV [OADS MU MOLUOEO co N.r. g g vA Ta G M. 3, 3' f4,2 T'I 7 ci i
'050 M l' M X c, s l, '76 '5 '6 in -F 58 Fa c - i o So## M 2 sMa c ' '4 ' 3 6 "'- E
~
f:t F3 Fyq=3500 M 3 M fc, Z39So i-F 38
'1
'__.p, p A '
,o g g , l 2 " F3 4 tos q = y _ n, s,, g ,z3 .
u^ % 4s .n ac. . , 42 43 44 43 46 l t
. . . STONE & WEBSTER ENGINEERING CORPOi1ATION CALCUL ATION SHEET
& $010 6$
CALCUL ATION IDENTIFICATION NUMBER J. O. O R W. O. NO. DIVISION & GROUP
;/600,o1 CALCUL ATION NO. OPTIONAL TASK CODE PAGE b in P (. B)
' i E 2.1 -PSSH o z t-S N /h g
i n' c r. tV c- L b c A ._ c .'s co"7 3 **0ch
- r.~ra n -71 73 s
t 1 ro so p (fr 3 B4 23%o [. 13 9 -t 30 5o 5 Li 801B 3Sao # L3y i 2 Sc// g6/ r3 4 40.1 'S 5z
#3.$ *
, 6 5: bcb - 2
'O A TT. h -i (N t ii er 0 /7 c 'l (, g) j 74 pt g
$3 Li ,5.?. ( b) Ss-- 2. I o o o P s .t.
PG,S-26 is 85 t>v : 3 b li O,2434 k " t y . 5 T t N C. WC d se 0.tirJ(71000) 1e F+ i " ,: t t c T ic t 'd 20 21 A y" pit. tty w c t. b z - s i c c. 3- S ' br 5 55 is Abr6V8": O K. . 22 f_ t, e t . 2 - 23 p 7 4 -i
,, w n e. : :. ncer -
.eu 24 96 t. c r e s L td. 4 tA i n . to.s. t L6 : .7 5 ) 5 '1 T 14 t e x. ci t 5s op T. s M A X .w t t b (t:0 5) = 0 700 7 u i n -) c A iM7:
rs .F4 Iej o
-y e i ti th ,
j 26 g j;, , ,, y
- y. , t t r_ T wt Lb r 27 c,qq 1 S i L E s 15 g.s. L A bs e.* , : s 67 r " (N 26 F - -
30 WEL O sPolint, s uffouT Bonom Flans 2 to A'O ^ E TO 32 TS, 6 A(e X 33 3s INE /06D 4 cts av () ON 'TI, c W66 P 36
/4 CN'd[
ST A Com PSE.SS o V5 lonD - ~. ME lo *P lu*'C BE 3, Thnc,.Petco Fattjm Si=Wsuf To 7.G.6x6,*.$. 40
*' ~
. . THE FLARE BEVEC 42 tNECl> 014 TV)d S* PES 44 lS ADEQufi~2 By boob 5 H f ir W E Ru M 4 46 LA MD
- STONE & CEBSTER ENGINEERING CORPORATION CALCULATION SHEET A 5010 ES C ALCUL ATION IDENTIFICATION NUMBER J. O. O R W.O. NO. DIVISION & GROUP CALCUL ATlON NO. OPTIONAL TASK CODE
}/600 02- HP(s) tezi- Ps suals -S N/g PAGE
- RE F
,' W6tD G 4 ( C. cow %
' ~
WELo PLAT 5 ["x 6 "x 12 76 w6 pc25 x to f "l'4. r o llTEm 3 f g pf g($ q) ,, z.88 i[W(aAzs,): g3.2 '# s N .1
.0
.v 1
. n % 'l ,, A h it -
l_o: g , kV
~
as ' 8 N
- i. I + -
9 as ir Te ') = IA 2+I wCo s- *V ,m
.s JL '
gy Qlwz 18 n
,, = = o.Asl
,, - 7 gg3 - S.ods" a, 'G ~ IL E
- hGxze = =
22
- d. I 3
~
L : .ns(s.ncef 2+ 53.3 es c6 it , 26 27
,e 30 Z~e 7
= 6 3. R '"4 3#
32 04 b ON b dC,Yf W
- ss */ 4 Fx : o.o" ,q 3 : o,o fY> Il s
s pf,9 f Y: '34 7/ /Vt y g.o"d F+ = o o # m y: 247,c 1,zsJ ,72m " Mo A 17 aN TAL SHENL FonCES Ac YtNf CH WELD 5 TomwG
*l, 3i PCATC) To FlAuf E . p mee, s s's we.sD Y= D'
- T*nex To C C; W ay
;, f. y V = T0*C ^^ [Pd r : mc>a= 0.=
v aaca on-s e n a a n a.( 1m)
A $010 65 CALCULATION SHEET CALCUL ATION IDENTIFICATION NUMBER J.O.GR W.O.NO. OtVISION & GROUP Ish oo.o2 C ALCUL ATION NO. OPTIONAL TASK CODE p NP L D.) IEzi-rssH oz a- G* 14 fig PAGE 2 3 WELD C AlC C oid I-4 WECD finTE f' (9 X 10 TO Wl*x ZSX 10 $ l'd;. 7 CONT. 8 l0 Tl+E HORI MMTAL. , . SHEN tt FORCES
' ACTiHf DN WEcos
" TON < rtz MA725, To flan 6E
'5 2
JS 3471 . Tdf5 i oRd E I5 vc Ay 5ovt4 C ESY 4 0 m F A ,.2ea 4 Th.5. w w u ra ew. m c,m n.:. uc,as <ooa E Hf )n55 21N4
~Tu O4 MENT Ex.sToHQ weld 20
- 2. SIM6LE B EvsL.
/G f*AILTt A L PsME TTC A Tt*'d 22 15 ADE@A ATE .
23 24 2% 26 27 28 29 30 36 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 of 42 43 44 45 46
CTONE & Y!EBSTER LNGINELHING CORPOM ATION CALCULATION SHEET
& 5010 65 C ALCUL ATION IDENTIFICATION NUMBER J. O. O R W. O. N O. DIVISION D GROUP CALCUL ATION NO. OPTIONAL TASK CODE PAGE 2 Iltaoo.02. NP(S) /E2s- Pss d o2, -E N/At REF W EL.D C HL C. . C614T.
S WFLD 82T*W&sd ?AD f9 El b
- p. , (trem s;9,4 3 P4 s gf 9} 5,g,4 gggy f SiHfLE BEVEL
- F
?f g 3 ,sg7,,,,_, p,,,rg gr, o,;[w i a 3 )
10 l-42
' ~
Lof4 0 F r2 Ors fi duf, *Z
'2
[mo- p* A q, Nis 9 7 74.g3 = 2 g,3 ys Ru n
- RO 3S* 70 /6 pro 1-4 -B 3
" v 3EE Com eviefu 404 ?& 1l
" ( G 7 7 p ',' 4 ,, e
= F, : W : o. o e . = 4: 16 249 is is }g d . I 3 " w t' E
/~g : P : 0. 0 /M2 : Mr : 0O NeTE: vsE T **a A R E f* C F
,, w6A2S+['W'Tc5 Fo a. w A 6 .PrMErvs1019 F3 .g 34ZF 4 : g, - o, o
23 24 2S 26 ( -q z -z
)~= fl M, m - P /^ t -. '3
+ M7 e
2r
- + -t + v -t~
-A Bi Q_ _A ' c, _
./ _
A Qc3 l 29 30 3e 32 f :: 2 {9 +b) - { {f 373~.+. 6,13} - z g, o y 2' = e 3m n) = c. v c (s3. 2 7s+ 2 e.,3) = 52. G 3 n 36 37 38 4 /(p 2 h } 5.S 4' C+ +o
- O +
25.00
*0
.ff, ( f 42 4S f = 33B*/iii 46
STONE E CEBSTER ENGINEERING CORPORATION
. CALCULATION SHEET
& $010 65 C ALCUL ATION IDENTIFICATION NUMBER J. O. O R W. O. N O. DIVISION & GROUP CALCUL ATION NO. OPTIONAL, TASK CODE PAGE [ b I,6,oo. o z n P c B) rev Pssaoz o - 5* Mfg Ref we co c44c. doiv7. -
4 s -
- Wsw rScrwee x pap (f A757) W4 x25 +h <FESTE ScoM I-a %
7 Q1
*
- h f- ,hb+l
- O I-Vl- w= s so OT k o Su - 12,600 PL Foi? A-B G 4
3 38 (f%.17 ) ss w = lo x 12, & o O ss W = 0 O'I S~ Exisitaf wetD sii E 15 h_
's wie Te u. C' **
sn wrii S = T[ O. 512 5'~ } 0,0 4 S' gev 2. 2S
** . , Ett sTiWG N G,NGlE SEv5L, SRTim. PEMETRATION ts (w 7er ) ou 4 s ,oz 3 is opzece 28 ALs0 *THE & S'I'IIsLE bet /EL, 0 27: 86 PgggTaAT, o,4 tw .n c~ a m s. m . , wa s is sa o 4
a va w rc c.~ce r~c ws,Oa r., r 6 _ o a ,_z.s ) a
, : eeonre w. , o x cons,oea,m n ,s Y 39 WE L O, By cisix6 Goop EHf /NEEizik6 DD6mEstT 40 el 42 43 de 4S
} 46
STONE ts WLBST L H LNUIN Lt NING GUMPUN Allo N CALCULATION SHEET A 5010 65 C ALCUL ATION IDENTjFICATION NUMBER J.O. O R W.O. N O. DIVIS10N D GROUP CALCUL ATION NO. OPTIONAL TASK CODE PAGED 7 I(fooO OE NA(Q) 1E21-Psw e21 - $~ N/4 RE F _ t 3 WELb d Al C. . $O14 I . W540 PAD ($ x,x1) ro Rort h Ps . (ITEM G 4 pep 2 IZ "Wk -2 2 ~ dol-E. fh 5 $ 9b e Ex r Goiv4 vvico jg 1"N W dD WE4.D f to F3 lt Ak e2 Y load f(LCM Po lu4 1T-So . F, y ,q, p 16
/q.23 b1 kc)14 # & 3570/8 f
DTD HI-8 5
's
, , Sec Ccvpurw t'os P6 8I
'S b
- b'EN., ( ATTM'T # d[
to p, , Ve : o, 0 m,: M s - 17 6~[3 ,, e i ei
** e #-
140TE: &z f b Otminstw f7: f: 0. 0 h: MT = 0 0 : i J'L AfC TMd SMS M g P tuf av pot *. F, : Vu- 3125 m s: M c 6.6,, y es 26 27
** _7
- 5 _2 -z S= _.& p. m, M, 5 Mz 2'
+ + + -+ + t-38
.A 3, 2 2 .. _
A Vc , _ _A Uc, 32 A = 2 l << +O = 2 (6. !87'L 6.18 7 ") = 24. 75 g ~ 4 a' . 4 (d. 'T7)t _ g 7,o4
>= i 3 3 39 40 ai -
12 - - E - S A 25 vo -L S. o + n es3 +o + 0 + v _ f/. o 1 _ _ _ _ 24.75 _ 46
-f = 3 7 / Viv'
STONE & CEBSTER ENGINEERING CORPOR ATION CALCULATION SHEET i so,os CALCUL ATION IDENTIFICATION NUMBER J.O. O R W.O. NO. DIVISION D GROUP CALCUL ATION NO. OPTIONAL TASK CODE PAGE S istoo.0L NP(B) IE2t P s s H 0 2t-5 N/A KE a l 3 WELD l' M C . CCMT 4
' T20i4 PIPE CONT I
weia WrO ( ! x7 A7 ) ~ro q W = f 62 ,65s a t) 1 63 , 70 7 s 10 I Q g o ot 6#= 15000 7 5' FOR
,, O l~
k ; 37f SA l06 & SS /A ATER.s4L 2
's W (SEc P(7 0) 16
( 6 x issoo).707
' if
,g W=0.058 gs: Givs wet o is
- l ., ,, (Pn6E %)
c' 22
- o. ore < 0. i t 7 5 23 s 3 **
. , Exisriaf g F.ctET sieL D A-czo,200a 0 2r is enova 28 29 30 ' II
- 32 33 34 SS 36 37 SS 39 i 40 41 42 i 43 e4
! 46 l
. _ . , _ _ ~ _ . , _ . .___ _ , _ _ _ . _ _ . . _. _
STONE & CEBSTER ENGINEERING CORPORATION CALCULATION SHEET A 5010 65 C ALCULATION IDENTIFICATION NUMBER J. O. O R W.O. N O. DIVISION & GROUP CALCUL ATION NO. OPTIONAL TASK CODE PAGE
//600.02 H P ( 8.) Inzt-P.s W oLI-C N/4 REf-2 DETeam inE 7%E A DEQUSC Y of Wfo n 2 G~ % 5 2-hA6XIZ'l4 TATC f S (item 3 $ 4 i P6 % 4 9) t+ EM S E il P RO PE R TtES foe CONsER VA Tt s m us2 J A & m n5 2 2. Fe o P an G ,E t 12 14 0f Vlb h $ V O/lbf a A.I 7 ,a 4 1 I-4Z A = 7. 5 3_ .,,4 1~x.. = 53. 3 5 = /6. 7 ,a l1 gp I: . ,, force 5 l Momrum /Jc.Mf ON v)(o n z[ .
22 g i e St.
sEE F, : o. o Ma: O.O P6. 2 E ts 21 Fy - 3 4 v i /n y = c .o " *
~
" % .1 o .o* h4 = ) 7 789 ,, +
30 3I naow. sT&Ess.
" 45Mt Iir " npew.x oeea.rT a <, 7e.m e = 20 C=.*. t asE 200 "F 3,
y 37 wCx ze M Eselec / .s 4-3G Fy @ 200 P= Fy = 32. 7 sc s : 40
<=
" co -t rms
.Atw Surk 9 .sniess = . 6 Fy : .6 (32,trK5tj
/96%Q fGI s
~
43 4. c.3(b) 44 45 46
STONE & CEBSTER ENGINEtHING COMPUMAILON CALCULATION SHEET
& 5010 65 CALCULATION IDENTIFICATION NUMBER J.O. O R W.O. N O. DIVISION & GROUP CALCUL ATION NO. OPTION AL TASK CODE PAGE ll60o .oz NPC8) tair -nst r ozi-s' N/4 2
Rc P DETW,H E %E A DEau Ac.Y co= Wfox2S Plus G 2-["x6xIt'l'4 i%Tc c coisT, 7 8 4.1 Allov] S il EM. STs% 5 5 5 ~. -4 P ry = szer
), s i. 2 , q [32. Y Xfl ) = 13 / 2 0 PS
- i 13 Pf' f-64 14 IS
- CrMe. BsnD,a6 STesss, is ,,==.
!7789
- Dc D -? y_ M s. .
= 106s Ps i di.s c e3 g jg 7
,u a i
pes r6 H 22
% ets I '
c= 24 lo6 s Ps s' 4 / 9 6 %O Ps < Mc ou). 2S 36 C A Ce. sdeML S W E .5 5 . se
- NO es YY '
Pf : l . O. WotES e I
.. (' = L P,= th = nm se wes.
32
- 3, 6EE A/c -c.37-z(.4sc) .22 o Pc, _ 4 - -
M /N E 247/ Aw = /. 74 7 37 V= 5 /. 74 7,,, a = 1787 PS > 3. 39 y W87 P.5 ? g iSI26 951 A.L(oca. i 42
~
<s
.. w a xac ms 2- f "x 0 x z" d4 iwTe s age 44 h0 &N 46
a C ALCUL ATION NO.
~
11600.02 - NP(8) -sezs eswort-s PAGE NO. - JOB ORDER NO. 11600.02 8/ dF 3/ WG= GOOD RUN COM PUTER LOG N= NULLIFIED
.RUN NUMBER DATE
- STATUS PROGRAM NUMBER #NIEL PREPARER CHECKER COMMEMPS Ro357oo3 .;- v.- 31 ~ ma is- os/o t z . e ,rs. E v 's wa A <emu' ' oc e, t 2, .t ::s E v c. s e s A r__ !_ n s - .e L o S S 'lo II 6-26-62 f1 t1 E --1 : o ?l o z b. T, n : r PoLUG O != fu a R C O
- D 0 2/7017. t Z-Z1-82 N ta E - 9 3 03/oz *yogamucpi ,n peji g g ScA.
ot 13 12-30-82 N M E 't C' O3l0z Carcasan m 'I i is /4 12 ~3o82 N M&v f o3/02 c4/baiancret f I ti Ib l-4-83 k M E.cf f 65jnz 3pfog,ppy; ql
*I I& I-1-83 & M 6 '1$ 03/o7 hik,3s ANC el @4nueno i
gq n7 I-it -83 N' /d[~ 95 0 3,foz ames nectil us Pu T E / A 0 R-tt i8 l-!! ~ 8 3 4 IA E ~9L- 03/o7 m ,a g g,, y,ggggg i
C.1 W ll060.t 1 -tiif6)- l C 11- f: . 'l ~*-[ - gf7jlc /p,,pf;[ 4 [
,[ '
l tocatc= SUS.'ECT I cErE AEN,E l J O. NO. $, /d 2
; l P. FI?J.IBO/A PAE"5 l 245-4 '
F;]*/: w N CA.3 D A M G " S jgg i
? MESSAGL -
Utan reviewing e=isti::e integral Walded Attacb=mwr= l I for undstad load definitions (i.e. h to Later Screas).
! the following cha*1 apoly to those attacksmuts that hcx
{ raf= farming pads,: , I
!, 1. If the tr==n4= bas been welded to the pad '
but not ths pipe, only the pad thi-k=eas shall . be used in FIT 2rST/PILEC analyses for e=1e=1 "'an,_ ' of local stresses. - t
; 2. If tr=enice =nd pad have been installed is accorda-noe with IED 79-14, cre:iit day be takes for the '
embined thinhness of pad and pipe. I
~. I.W./..'s indlertir.r failure alumid be referre.4 to the tuuersign2d p:for to final dispesitia.-.. '
However, since th _ cac of f'1==p A=ehar is preferabia . to the use cf Seg rented Pads, t*cAs option should s be im estigated for 6" and ==d-r piping. l \ !
! 4-17-al -
)' ha h SIDP.ATURE ex. 2653 TE'- E PeiO=E
( OATE i AEPLY: ^
- ~Icht 2, 3 A BNG -
No Coww7' . i l' /o'c= 7 YI / ,*.1 w lin T is Md77-ioP OF Aupt VSis M Pe20 H'G~RY l on o waos sr ,ni pire iur=useci,u ? *
- 6. Lui n r is , Myy two of AM di VS/S /=^M WL
!?wi pips stra-sses nr pso, is/M "vm'M'E, !
t C.4/ U T P & S S vr2 G- 15 yo ge= uSc p I I p. a.,ap r pno .si za- L un rs nPPt v m m's i Me rnoo ;' . miw uess u n t , n ' i i u , s !-I n f e . P
- e
- we,w ,
j i
._ - l NUiB i APR 2 31981.ni.m:
-e /-z 2lV1 s
===%w Q,P' , , .
, Am 7/?
mv ~ P- __h o o4o m REPUER DETURN wwrf f COPv et TA:N TH:5 C')rv
I n/ve v/ Q ul I l b O O . D 7,, - f f h )- 1 ( 11 - ( Lf. 4 ( 7. i - [ - Ariw w,1*l W 2* 2 t i l i INTEROFFICE CORRESPONDENCE {~ SUBJECT / F.EFERENCE / J.O. NO. 11603.C2 I 10.P. Piraino/u.. Parha i Lof+^T
. 'ON
; i Mii. M ATTAtEMRETS
! LOCAfsON 1
E 4 l FROM. Martin i, I uESSAGE With recc:t to cuestions rciana on Item 1 of gr IDC dated b17-81, th:
! following caswors are provided:
I 1. Ara 2yse using noncess hataeas. a.comm_,a using soj.et.a area er l pad to v i . e 44 w - .. I
; D. Eant. The is no requirement to ^=1=1=to locc1 stresses in pipe at i the periphsry of the ynd.
I I run PTTamT/PL*t C. Ynen trc= ion is vs3ded to tho ;xad but not the ppo,iG2FEo be ese::
! '#~
- vith prc:rczre = 0; i.e., pressura is (met 3ys eas itr the pipc.
- 2. Yne method defined itr Itm 1 applies only to existing dW": Increfore -
the pad dimensions are da%ad iqr the _ Wit wN==Mem If pad is iudatuats, ese Item 3 i
-f3 hg. L_ s., ;
L:As1 *E.!' ,*7 5 3N A' L'6 f "eE g M. b b , g O f c. iJ , *Lu beV C.2 8 4 6 Tr t i $ 1OC 45 i
)f*3 \(p M bb9D ANC *$a M E6 (CA> T3 QM AT1C3d 7
% c;n R c D. '
i
%he "
Q/ Y/ . f ec A AT L'R( If Lf h0M DATi AN 931
/
- . , _ , --..-_,...,.n_ . . , _ . _ _ . .,_ ., . . - . . . ,. . -._
fIw cKe. vo. st&oo.ct- n eca ) -tea.1-ess e o2 s - s' ~ ~ A rts c H
- 2- / oi= I INTEROFFICE CbRRESPONDENCERM 78f TO: l Location SUBJECT / REFERENCE / J.O.NO. //fcO.02 RPEh '24W4 oEZ s - PssH OEi R$.Cbfbaunern /7w Lock.ABy ! 25 8 wstozO ATMHMENT
_ "_'*** .S U PPO RT IE21 - PsSH OZ I HAS ~1O' BE R5 ANALYSED. (P6R.~TES . PRO,TEc.T 5633 - lNDE PE N DENT DES 16M REVIE.W] 3Y PERFORmlH6 A PiLu4 A n o t. 1 so s assH4 THE Foot. PenNT
.0F THE. EMSTin4 .REINFOR6in4 PA D {7 x 7 ") -
_.@ GH06 0 THE Fo6T PRINT OF THE Ex147tw4 i?E1HFORs IW4.Pso BE A Hr%l 1 2 5 0 .A5 A du4 0-2 fl SCpOPR2 I t:vM M /0 M .?
& WEhT PROC 50uRE Shout.D BE OSED 'TO ANAlf22 "This on > SwamumoH) ?
@ wewao w usr Attoarreunzar((ns wa si.es Sc t % .) s snouts..82 tus usz0 .'To
.. . AMaly2E THe.5 WECOGO ATi'AMMENIs fiP2 inATE2 SAL SA 106
- . . A))wszoro erramenT msisaua-L '4R6'(S
- -. B A . 3 fe .
. (sci Su = I2, feco Pso' )? .
PE ASE ADw52 J2-30-2z OATE Gf.0A [' SaGNATURE fx /9 3 TE LE PHONE ( - m&u /Gae.;ye
.2) 7 5d vf fW fa U ad/4al6'h'tl/A"A de a6a ry, 44' tui/dm 4 Mfewwend, AcaAf :
7 (ha /. 9 "x 7 " A3 g , a4 a us/4pnM A "d6 PA f ' fffe tou'l 6d/79 ifA'/f - + O/W-
,f;4 amAckdaaAo ,A.i &Me pabeM mw7
]
LN' (k e0;c kk W
, f ' a/ d a w A r , d Tt v ,e 19 6 sa<
/bx&
fjpg taz// ,Psd9 - /,/ /sc WE tu / ,/hd ,
//3
/ OfE F3 /
7 Sicid A TURF #
/322 TE LE PMONE
& 044138
6ftoe_oLc.Nofi60os 01, N P 63) IEZi -FSS#O2/ -$~
~
ft'OA C H # S P4 i OP 2 INTEROFFICE CORRESPONDENCE S/ /03 / (' To: j tocATioN SUBJECT / REFERENCE / J.O. NO. f f 6pp, O E ftralmo s/0. CD'TIO l?A5ffl py_ jog' y gj7, , ,g 1 L k h /f&cka,A:
# /
& 7e MESSAGE:- /
f/am ,. l n u:;fj the artdwy C- u A.me t rv e h s taa /, ,s g& #y X-tot 5. 5.y ~ ) ~ f / H ory-3 sh~, 2 b E* t bis bon'e.s , C,u$e5 i(o' /c, J /f/,l7 bw b mo Wb s.'e 3 if b *- ll tob ~cb is A '-c - l l l/p ,,./ a ,, ) w A :c 4 .s E ~ y,y T f ./4 0 ac-s lj cas e. A', .
/7 (it'.p:) (>pp gL.,il,fg _ j,-),j fdf {/ a bbt t ** b * e' $ C a j ej (G f / 7 u,a5 ,) a3 [ &}
S u oec); y t, 6 A .- aNacl-) Z0c uf 6 ,a,,s m lg .f f,,.
,,,,/, ,,
p.ye nypa & h a f h ,. A K -/c 8 did & 8 2
,7, euse. a v:S e.
t 2 r M4 4$ $ (VSS DATE _ SIGNATURE TELEPHONE REPLY: ((, f (,fy 7/}}(lljft /
/ C 2/) ANo^'l k /
E k * ' .. TtE, Time RL6 TOE 1 LOAD 5 FOK.AY-tOS AEE AS Sinit D O td TWE ATTM.HED t.O .C. 'OTa. (t-3-52 TWC RAFID Pump / *,Th!'T / STDP (CASE 5 n) i6 USED FOR P1 t u. CCht,lTIONE , z- [', AND DC, Eitu\ER. CI- TWE RAP D PLW'P "X7tR.T/ 5TCf' CC/EC*ai7) N T,k AND 1RICCTLON FLotn PtimP STACT LO_ASE W if.o 1 -15 USED FCC i.:.1 T4E FAULTE.D CCMDIT1045 S ..9 E g %. . . 4I hn b \98 3 \ 3_UdM _ lR12_ g 'DATE SIGNATURE TEM PHONE
p st w A R D W M e l t. a n e.# s' e a *= ---- skw 1 r 90 0, et - n s t a) - t E-2.s - 95s g o z.t [ d T T. 3 ) 1 INTEROFFICE CORRESPONDENCE *Ne i l
-y l tocano= SUBJECT / REFERENCE / J.O. NO. l g 6 QQ, Q1 6 P. Pepi/P. Castrichini 245/4 I gou toca io= Final Pipe Supports Loads !
P. PIR AINO /C. Ca u 5$ v ! 2 4 c,/ 4 AX- 106 - 9 Prob. No. /O/ I {wESSAGE:- A:: ached is the Run of Reccrd, for the Pipe Suppor: su==ary and Sprir.g Data Shee: fer-AX- I C S Prob. lot for :he class 2 !. 3 inpu: recenciliation. l The r=n of records are: F@,iM eNA4 - f.cN Fs RM ATioN KEGus2cb ; Run Nu=ber Sub=itter Dated N' (c: T (-7 %- i W o6i b- L o g.q a 12. N cc'T f. I" nob NM6 "D /MO$kKA 70. a, %[ M: +-* .\ J 6 ' N * * ' * * ' ' ##' # **# ~h " * * * ' ' ' ** " "'O l cc: R. Kimball ' H. H usuv4 TCMEN CA5EE I tdCUJD E I . i p.Gusso .. .gz. .. ..c. z c r x
, ~
i
. PapiD zuuo suge _sj ,u 605Amz "-
- 2 M cAtc @ or D 'JUN o 1982 tacu
%gcr,org F LCW PJN D Siter
" *- NO 'gg.. -
i W '- us&D ia ......c.. y k-3, nec rED ??w CQ/,,: , ! -
"* ct.sr e m yu . L.6, !
;l EEPLY:
!j NOIB jut! 41982 A.thrb NOTED JUN 3 tor 2 "'*" !. !
. ,1 ,
NOTB JUN.-3'1982 u.rma t
-4 .
s i I I i CATE M rAfgeg ULI'"O*E
4 a A l D l s
'rG t
^ ~
e
% ^
, em M
1 O Y
.d%
u~ ,~ I o 5b~ -
. r
.a ,-
L I. c 4 2 W T l f
- l NOTES * /V\ l( CC.g:([ Q2 fjf f'-
Ib d d d (bd @,p/$ fug$ 45 tYOYED ON N"n PUTch /g:(,(Sgg th 4 g 31 ) D
.7
. _ _ . _ ... ._ _ _ _ _ ... . _ _.. ' ~ . . - . . , . _ .
eense esome ***e e e eewewe a e somose eerse emmes seena escene seems a w e e e. . . .e . . ... . . . . . . . . . e
* *
- e ee a e . . me .. .
- e . e * * * . , ,
.... . . . . . e eueue .... . . . . . . . ..... ...., .... . ..... .....
e * *
- e ** e e .e sw * * *
- e
- a e e * * .. m a e e e e s* *
- ma w on. e *
- a a e u o a e e evene * *een a e e mann en * ...... menen umano e ...... e e
==== m a wena === *
- enee me== una eau a e maan === an e. *** we une ** ammes one um a e e == m *
- me a e *
- a a == = m e e e a 4
- ew e a *e * *
- e a em o eem **.
- en e aee one een een * *e*
- me , e . ... ... . . ... .. e *
- e . ***
* * ** * * * * == *
- ea w a me *
- w e e e* * * * ** * *
- w e e a en mee. e m amne new
- e m ma mese *
- man *
- unum www me a e e == * *e *
- won **
- e LILCO SHOREHAH 1 BP-1E21.PSSH021-5 ItPUT DY:CAPODIANCHI J.O. 11600.02 SYSTEH: CORE SPRAY PPG QA CAT.I.245/8 i
I
' ' COMPUTER PROGRAM PILUG - HE-95 j
VERSICil 3 LEVEL 2 PREPARED FOR THE POHER DIVISION XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXYXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX BY THE X X Iti>UT PREPARED BY fb) 7- / /F/ g
. ... ................ . cot:PUTER OIVISICH X EDATE) X
. .. ......... ... . X X X ItTUT CHECHED BY
/ // dip X (DATE) X
_ ................................. X X X RUlf DATE TUESDAY JANUARY 4.1983 X X tit!E 24 itIN 16 SEC PAST 11 AH X XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXYXXX?:XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX ee
-e-s=0 O W M.
O M 48 M
'E 18 M
M .J ., ' t
- H M
at O a g . . Mu c osJ OM M e4 OM
>Z ss tr M 4 M g& w m, E 4N EL N "3 Z O. O. O. O. O. O. O. O. O. O.
O O O O O O O O O O O
>w M 4: M.
Os MM 9 w P P le g e 3 O. O. O. O. O. O. O. O. O. O. N u O O O O O O O O O O N BA a O M N u a O a .J M. w
> $= O w4 P*
.J u
. M.
M K O. O. O. O. O. O. O. O. O. 4 4 O. MU O O O O O O O O O O B u M MO ad a4 4 wA M - M
>>4 <1 0
N. u O. O O
- O. O.
O O
- O. O.
O l . E W O O O O O O O O O O G. EL M M M r- O EL laJ o , Nn M. O Z O O 3 O. o M. E O.. P= 0% M w > c 2w Z &a. O. j W p- It b O. O. O. O. O. O. O. O. O. O. O MM N M O O O O O O O O O O
> M Z N 9
*M Q O O N O ,$, M M g
$ I E
Q b
.J H w
M C O. O. O. O. O. O. O. O. O. O. e O. O.
> O O O O O O O O O O M M C N O O O 4 O O M
- Z w w O M lE &
MM m . 8L Z 18 N w M. -u O 4 r x w y) O O O O O O O O E N gi nas M 4 laJ Q M I O. O. O. O. O. O. O. O. O. O. Z O 19 MO O @ P* W (J M O O P= O Rtl M tO et M M M M a w O 9 H N O M M M e w c. M <r a"*
, EL D u
C O O
.J M e M. H P* O w
> M. @ M 5=
ze heJ D 5 M 0
- O M 0
s* 0 O 0 CC 'g M *1 3 9 n O M N M M M M N i u x .. n. n .J
.J M
M O O es u O M h. O w 4 b H 4 M n: a a 3 w as aaJ se u- $ a
- e. g w w w w w w u u o a
.J M u . .J O o M x x z u u o M z M E EL G M O O O M b H H O O O EL M J
f I l' i
.. .- - - - - - , , -r- - -- -. . . , , , . , ,., --.---.--n-- i,--n. . . - - , - - - ,, ------ --- ,
- . . . _ ._ .. . - - - . _ . _ _ ._ ..m... m -.. -_ _ . . :_ _
LILCO S!tCREHtJ1 1 BP-1E21,PSSH021-5 J.D. II600.02 VERSION 3 LEVEL 2 TUESDAY JANLW1Y 4.19',3 PAGE 2 ItPUT BY:CAPOSIANCHI SYSTEtt:CC?E SPRAY PPG QA CAT.1.245/6 TIttE 24 I!IN 16 CEC PAST 11 Att RUN CCNDITION 2 ASME SEC III CLASS 213 A?O D31.1 MJCLEA*.t LOADItG CCtOITION 1 NCRHAL/ UPSET (PPI SUSTAIt; D Ot:LY) P*DL+t:NS l ItPUT FuRCES Are H0HENTS HITH SIGt4S hh!CH GENERATED HAXIttVH STRESS FX F' FZ HX HY HZ DEADLCAD 0.0 3425.00 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 REVOLVED FORCES APO HCliENTS ' F1 F2 F3 H1 H2 M3 DEADLOAD 3425.00 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 i 9 4 I i l 4 1 T M 1 em
LILC3 SHOPEHAM 1 BP-1E21 PSSH021-5 J.O. 11600.02 VERSION 3 LEVEL 2 TUESDAY JAt:UARY 4.1'83 PAGE 3 It;PUT DY: CAP 03IM! CHI SYSTEH:CCRE SPRAY PPG CA CAT.1.145/8 e tit'E 24 ftIN 18 SEC PAST 11 (JI RUN COM ITIC*4 2 ASttE SEC III CLASS M 1 A!O B31.1 ffJCL EAt LOADING CC;"JITICt1 1 NOPHAL/ UPSET (PRI SUSTAINED CtLY) PeCLettNS C0tNERT FC.'CES AND ltD? TENTS TO CCC7DINATES FER HELDIt:3 PESEtPCH COUFCIL EULLETIN 107. P = 0.0 HC = 0.0 12. = 16268.75 tti = 0.0 VC = 0.0 VL = 3425.00 PRESS = 0.0 CIITS ARE LB.. IN-LB. & PSIG AU EU CU OU FIG. 3C P ( tC9t?".t. ) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 FIG. IC-1 P (DEt3Iti3) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 FIG. 3A !!Ct f C?l!AL ) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 FIG. 1A t!C( CEf 0Ifi3 ) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 FIG. 3B l'L i tCEl'.".L ) -25S9.76 2589.76 0.0 0.0 FIG. 1B HLIBEfDifG) -2767.20 2767.20 0.0 0.0 CIRCUtt. PRESSL"?E STRESS 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 SUtt. OF CIRCU't. STRESSES -5356.95 5355.95 0.0 0.0 FIG. 4C P (NORitAL) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 FIG. 2C-1 P (CEr:DIt:G) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 FIG. 4A I:ClitCC!!ft ) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 FIG. 2A I!CI DEf;Dit'3 ) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 FIG. 4B flLi tic 2f tAL ) -1335.04 1335.04 0.0 0.0 FIG. EB l'Lt DEtO!!!G) -4910.59 4910.59 0.0 0.0 AXIAL PRESSU"E STRESS 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 SCI. OF AXIAL STRESSES -6245.62 6245.62 0.0 0.0 SHEAR STRESS BY HT 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 S:4 EAR STRESS BY VC 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 SitEA9 STRESS BY VL 0.0 0.0 -716.90 716.90 Sull. OF SHEAR STRESSES 0.0 0.0 -716.90 716.90 DIFFERENCE OF PRIN. STRESSES. 888.67 889.67 1433.80 1433.80 ttAX. PRIriCIPAL STRESS -5356.95 6245.62 716.90 716.90 HIN. PRIffCIPAL STRESS -6245.62 5156.95 -716.90 -716.90 HAXIttUM STRESS INTENSITY 6245.62 TOTAL STRESS t 6360. 3 LESS THui 1.00 m SH =( 12600.1 7
_. . ---. _ m . . , - - _ _ . _ _. . _ _ _ _ l l LILCO SHCREHAH 1 BP-1E21.PSSH021-5 J.O. 11600.02 VERSION 3 LEVEL 2 TUESDt.Y JAh*JARY 4,19 3 PAGE 4 IfrUT BY:CAPOSIAftCHI SYSTEtt:CO2E SPRAY PPG QA CAT.1.245/6- TIttE 24 HIH 16 SEC PAST 11 Att RUM CCtCITION 2 AStfE SEC III CLASS 2&3 AFC B31.1 NUCLFAR LOADING CO:QITICH 2 NCRHAL/ UPSET (PRI SUSTAINED +0CCASICHAL) P+CL+SRSSt03EI,0CCU MtNS ItFUT FCPCES AfD HOHENTS MITH SIGHS HHICH GENERATED HAXIIRJtt STRESS FX FY FZ HX HY HZ DEADLCAD 0.0 3425.00 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 C3EI 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 , CCCU 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 REVCLVED FORCES AND HCitENTS i F1 F2 F3 H1 H2 K3 DEADLCAC 3425.00 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 CSEI O.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1 OCCU 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 l l i 8
~
a l i l i 1 i SE
LILCO SHOREHAM 1 BP-1E21.PSSH021-5 J.C. 11600.02 VERSION 3 LEVEL t TUESDAY JAt!UA%Y 4,1983 PAGE 5 IFPUT BY:CAPOSIAMCHI SYSTE!!: CORE $ FRAY FPG QA CAT.1,245/8 tit:E 24 HIN 16 SEC PAST 11 Ut RUN C0tGITION 2 ASHE SEC III CLASS 2&3 AF'") B31.1 ffUCLEAR LOADIriG CONDITION 2 NORMAL / UPSET (PRI SUSTAINED +0CCASIONAL) P+DL*SPSSIC3EI.0CCUl+t?tS CotNERT FORCES AND HCitEffTS TO C00RDIttATES PER HELDIfG RESEARCH COUNCIL EULLETIN 107. P = 0.0 HC = 0.0 ItL = 16268.75 llT = 0.0 VC = 0.0 VL = 3425.00 PRESS = 0.0 UNITS ARE LB., IN-LB. & PSIG AU BU CU DU 1 FIG. 3C P (NORifAll 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 , FIG. IC-1 P (BEFOIrGI 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 FIG. 3A HCi tic?t tAL ) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 ( FIG.1A ItCt CEf;DItG) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 FIG. 3B ltL(tical!AL ) -25S7.76 2569.76 0.0 0.0 FIG. IB ILt BEf tDItiG ) -2767.20 2767.20 0.0 0.0 CIRCUtt. PRESSURE STRESS 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 SUN. OF CIRCU:1. STRESSES -5356.95 5355.95 0.0 0.0 FIG. 4C P (NORitAL) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 FIG. 2C-1 P IDEt0ING) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 FIG. 4A HCtNCT!!All 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 FIG. 2A HCtBEtOIttGI 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 FIG. 48 HLINCR! TALI -1335.04 1335.04 0.0 0.0 FIG. 2B tti CEtt01ttG) -4910.59 4910.59 0.0 0.0 AXIAL PRESSURE STRESS 0.0 0.0 0.n 0.0 SU:1. OF AXIAL STRESSES -6245.62 6245.62 0.0 0.0 SMEAR STRESS BY HT 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 SHEAR STRESS BY VC 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 SHEAR STRESS BY VL 0.0 0.0 -716.90 716.90 SU:1. OF SHEAR STRESSES 0.0 0.0 -716.90 716.90 DIFFERENCE OF PRIN. STRESSES. 888.67 888.67 1433.80 1433.80 , , HAX. PRINCIPAL STRESS -5356.95 624S.62 716.90 716.90 HIN. PRINCIPAL STRESS -6245.62 5355.95 -716.90 -716.90 4 HAXIlfUH STRESS INTENSITY 6245.62 TOTAL STRESS ( 7098.) LESS THAN 1.20 m SH =( 15120.1 l 7 4 i SS i
. _ . . _- . . _ _ _ _ ~_
LILC0 SHOREHAH I BP-1E21 PSSH021-S J.D. 11600.02 VERSIDH 3 LEVEL. 2 ItPUT LY:CAPOSIAt4 CHI TUESDAY JANU'AY 4d923 PAGE 4 SYSTE!!:CC"tE SP2AY PPG CA CAT.1.24S/8 TIllE 24 HIN 16 SEC PAST 11 AN EtJN CONDITION 2 ASHE SEC III CLASS 213 Ato B31.1 NUCLEAR LOADItG CotDITICH 3A HORHAL/ UPSET (PRI SUSTAINED +SEC) P+CL+0 DEA +THER+10iS ItFUT FORCES APO H0HENTS HITH SIGNS HHICH GENERATED HAXIHUti STRESS ' FX FY FZ HX HY HZ DEADLOAD 0.0 3425.00 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 OBEA 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 THER 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 REVOLVED FORCE 3 APO Hof fENTS F1 F2 F3 Hi H2 H3 DEADLOAD 34ES.00 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 OBEA 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 THER 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
-a
_- % - y LILC3 SHOREHAH 1 BP-1E21 PSSH021-5 J.O. 11600.02 VERSIDH 3 LEVEL 2 TUE3 DAY JANUA,tY 4,1983 PAGE 7
- IIPUT BY:CAPOSIANCHI SYSTEll:CCRE SPRAY FPG QA CAT.1,245/3 tit:E 24 HIH 16 3EC P 3 T 11 AH PUN C0tOITION 2 ASHE SEC III CLASS 2E3 Ato B31.1 HUCLEAR LOADING CO'0! TION 3A NORHAL/ UPSET (PRI SUSTAINED +5EC) P+DL+0 DEA +THER+HNS C0tNERT FORCES AND H0ttENTS TO C00"DIttATES PER HELDItt3 PESEAPCH COUt(CIL BULLETIN 107.
P = 0.0 HC = 0.0 It = 16268.75 Ili = 0.0 VC = 0.0 VL = 3425.00 FRESS = 0.0 UNITS ARE LB., IH-LB. & PSIG AU eu CU DU FIG. 3C P (NORHAL) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 FIG.1C-1 P (BEIDII;G) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 FIG. 3A HCI NOcitAL ) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 FIG. 1A ttCICEIDIt:G) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 FIG. 33 f tL( t:Citt,*.L ) -25S9.76 2589.76 0.0 0.0 FIG. 10 13.( DEf 31tro ) -2767.20 2767.20 0.0 0.0 CIRCt3t. PRESSURE STRESS 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Sulf. OF CIRCUti. STRESSES -5356.95 5356.95 0.0 0.0 FIG. 4C P (NORitAL) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 FIG. 2C-1 P (DEt0It:3) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 FIG. 4A ItC t t;Ont!"L ) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 FIG. 2A ItC(EEtOII:3 3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 FIG. 48 HL(tiO2t!AL ) -1335.04 1335.04 0.0 0.0 FIG. 2B ttL(CEIDING) -4910.59 4910.59 0.0 0.0 AXIAL PRES!URE STRESS 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 SV:1. OF AXIAL STRESSES -6245.62 6245.62 0.0 0.0 SHEAR STRESS BY HT 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 SHEAR STRESS BY VC 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 SHEAR STRESS BY VL 0.0 0.0 -716.90 716.90 SUM. OF SHEAR STREOSES 0.0 0.0 -716.90 716.90 DIFFEREHCE OF PRIN. STRESSES. 880.67 808.67 1433.80 1433.80 HAX. PDit(CIPAL STRESS -5356.95 6245.62 716.90 716.90 HIN. PRINCIPAL STRESS -6245.62 5356.95 -716.90 -716.90 HAXIlfUtl ST1tESS INTEttSI1Y 6245.62 TOTAL STRESS ( 6062.3 LESS THAN 1.25e(SC+SH) =( 31500.) 7
)
w 0 et k &Z
*1 ee we k
MO r* w
@M es
*9 WM
>Z k$
29 4E SJ
~h kw 4L OH MH w
O. O. O. O. O. O. O O O g C O O N e eJ e fM Z J w M. E
>> +
O. O. O. w4 g O. O. O. w JU gO O O N O O O MC 4 h* 4 w M E O. w M a MO J W kA M wm g O. O. O. O. O. O. O.
> h g O O O g O O O 4 a
- K M k u 4 W
w M z N g.: M.
+ O QU O w
.U e8 w W e O. M Z 4 O. O. O. O. O. O.
O% Q M a N O O O M O O O '+ 9w 4 w b 6 MM H Z
*M N M z
- o. H u
! "3 M k H ea a I O N w %
O. O. O. O. O. O. M b M > M O O N O O O M M e A. d B s E I M M M M MM aa u z e
.3 w M - O. O. O. w O. O. O.
et N M M Z M A O O O r ce M N Q O 6 WM W w a M@ I M C4 a NW> R G2 M w 5*
=
N 5 M w U O w > U k M > 0 > 0 M .J .2 O u e g g S 4 w a w > O 4 4 w
=
w 4 3 a a J u O a8 E e E 8 s 5
=
8 a II
- l s e
LILCD SH03EHAM 1 BP-1E21,PSSH021-5 J.D. 11600.02 VERSICH 3 LEVEL 2 TUESDAY JANUARY 4,1983 s***.* Pl.GE 9 IIFUT BY:CAPOSIAitCHI SYSTEll:CO2E SPRAY PPG DA CAT.1.245/3 TIttE 24 HIN 16 SEC PAST 11 Att RUN CONDITION 2 ASitE SEC III CLASS 213 APO B31.1 NUCLEAR LOADING C0f0ITIO*4 3B NCRttAL/ UPSET (PRI SUSTAINED +5ECl P+DL+0EEA+THER+HNS CONVERT FORCES AND HCHENTS TO COORDINATES PER HELDING RESEARCH COUNCIL CULLETIN 107. P = 0.0 HC = 0.0 ItL = 16268.75 f fT = 0.0 VC = 0.0 VL = 3425.00 PRESS = 0.0 UNITS ARE LB., IN-LB. & PSIG AU BU CU CU - FIG. 3C P (NORMAL) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 FIG. 1C-1 P (EEFOIri3) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 FIG. 3A 11C(f;CRt'AL I 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 FIG. IA HCICEPCIti3) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 FIG. 3B HLINORt!ALI -2587.76 2S39.76 0.0 0.0 FIG. IS HLIDEt: DIN 3) -2767.20 2767.20 0.0 0.0 CIRCUtt. PRESSURE STRESS 0.0 0.C 0.0 0.0 Sutt. OF CIRCU:1. STRESSES -5356.95 5356.95 0.0 0.0 FIG. 4C P (NORilAL) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 FIG. 2C-1 P (bet 0IllG) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3 FIG. 4A I!CI NC2?tAL ) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 FIS. 2A HCI BEtiDItiG ) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 ! FIG. 48 HL( NCRitAL ) -1335.04 1335.04 0.0 0.0 FIG. D HL(BENDING) -4910.59 4910.59 0.0 0.0 AMIAL PRESSURE STRESS 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 SU't. OF AXIAL STRESSES -6245.62 6245.62 0.0 0.0
- SHEAR STRESS BY HT 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1 SHEAR STRESS BY VC 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 i
SHEAR STRESS BY VL 0.0 0.0 -716.90 716.90 Sutl. OF SHEAR STRESSES 0.0 0.0 -716.90 716.90 DIFFERENCE OF PRIll. STRESSES. 888.67 688.67 1433.80 1433.80 HAX. PRINCIPAL STRESS -5356.95 6245.62 716.90 716.90 HIN. PRINCIPAL STRESS -6245.62 5356.95 -716.90 -716.90 1 l HAXINUH STRESS INTENSITY 6245.62 TOTAL STRESS ( 6417. ) LESS THAN 1.25mt SC+SH) =( 31500.) i 5 i es
-~
_ _ . _ _ _ v_ y._ LILCD SHOREHAM 1 BP-1E21 PSSH021-5 J.O. 11600.02 VERSION 3 LEVEL 2 ItiPUT BY:CAPCDIANCHI TUESDAY JANUAAY 4.1983 PAGE 10 SYSTEll:CCRE SPRAY PFG QA CAT.1.245/8 TIltE 2*4ilIN 16 SEC PAST 11 AH RUN CONDITION 2 AStfE SEC III CLASS 213 AND B31.1 f"JCLEAR LOADING CONDITION 3C NORHAL/ UPSET (PRI SUSTAINED +SEC) P+DL+03EA+THER+ttNS INPUT FORCES AND HOttENTS WITH SIGNS HHICH GENERATED HAXIffUti STRESS FX FY FZ HX HY HZ DEADLOAD 0.0 3425.00 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 DSIA 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 THER 3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 REVOLVED FORCES Ate HCHENTS F1 F2 F3 H1 H2 H3 DEADLOAD 3425.00 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 03EA 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Tt:ER 3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
_ ,_ _ _ y i LILCO SHC'tEHAM 1 BP-IE21,PSSH021-5 J.O. 11600.02 VERSICN 3 LEVEL 2 TUEC3AY JAt:UA'tY 4,1983 l PAGE 11 ItTUT BY:CAPO3IAtiCHI SYSTDt:CCRE SPRAY PPG QA CAT.1,245/8 tit:! 24 t'IH 16 SEC PAST 11 A!I 4 PUN CCfDITION 2 ASt!E SEC III CLASS 213 AMD B31.1 t'UCLEA'? LOADING CCNDITICH 3C ttDPitAL/ UPSET IPRI SUSTAltiED+SEC) P+DL+03EA+THER+tcIS i CONVERT FORCES AND H0' TENTS TO CCO2DIttATES PER HELDItt3 PESEARCH COUt(CIL BULLETIN 107. P = 0.0 HC = 0.0 ft = 162(8.75 llT = 0.0 VC = 0.0 VL = 3425.03 FRESS - 0.0 UNITS ARE LB., IN.LB. & PSIG AU DU CU DU l FIG. 3C P (NCRHAL) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 FIG. IC-1 P (BEFOIttG) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 FIG. 3A HCitiCR tAL) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 FIG. lA HC(CEt:3It:G) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 FIG. 3S ItL(titritAL) -2589.76 2589.76 0.0 0.0 FIG.1B tt(CEt0ItiG) -2767.20 2767.20 0.0 0.0 CIRCUtt. PRESSURE STRESS 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 SU't. OF CIRCUH. STRESSES -5356.95 53S6.95 0.0 0.0
- FIG. 4C P (t10Rit*L ) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 FIG. 2C-1 P (BETIDING) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
,' FIG. 4A !!C(tiO2!!?.L ) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 FIG. 2A l'Ot DEt:DItlG) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 FIG. 4B tt t t107tfAL ) -1335.04 1335.04 0.0 0.0 FIG. 28 f fLt DEt: DING) -4910.59 4910.59 0.0 0.0 i AMIAL PRES!U?E STPESS 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 4 SUH. OF AXIAL STRESSES -6245.62 6245.62 0.0 0.0 SHEAR STRESS BY HT 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
- S
- iEAR STRESS BY VC 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 i
SHEAR STRESS BY VL 0.0 0.0 -716.90 716.90 SUlt. OF SHEAR STRESSES 0.0 0.0 -716.90 716.90 i l DIFFERENCE OF PRIN. STRESSES. 889.67 888.67 1433.80 1433.80 HAX. PRItfCIPAL STRESS -5356.95 6245.62 716.90 716.90 l HIN. PRINCIPAL STRESS - -6245.62 - 5356.95 -716.90 -716.90 ,i HAXIffUM STRESS INTENSITY 6245.62 i TOTAL STRESS ( 6417. ) LESS THAN 1.25st SC+SH) =( 31500.1 7 i ep
.. ., _. - n. w LILC3 SHOREHAH 1 BP-1E21 PSSH021-5 J.D. II600.02 VERSION 3 LEVEL 2 TUESD*.Y JAfrJtJtY 4,19I3 PAGE 12 ItFUT BY:CtJCSIAttCHI SYSTEtt:CCRE SPRAY PFG QA CAT.1,28?S/8 tit!E 24 HIN 16 SEC PAST 11 AH RUti CO?cITIort 2 AS1tE SEC III CLASS 2&3 A?O B31.1 NUCLEAR LOADItiS CO?;0ITIO!4 4 EHERGEffCY P +0L +0CCE +t NS INPUT FORCES Ato H0ffENTS HITH SIGNS HHICH GEtlERATED HAXIMUtt STRESS FX FY FZ HX HY HZ DEAOLOAD 0.0 34 S.00 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 OCCE 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 REVOLVED FORCES AND H0!!ENTS F1 F2 F3 M1 H2 H3 DEADLOAD 3425.00 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 DCCE 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 en
- n. - . .
LILCO SHOREHAH 1 BP-1E21.PSSH021-5 J.O. 11600.02 VERSION 3 LEVEL 2 TUESDAY JAtfJART 4,1783 PAGE 13 ItiPUT BY:CAPOSIAtCHI SYSTEH:CCRE SPRAY PPG QA CAT.1.245/8 tit!! 24 ttIti 16 SEC PAST 11 AM RUN CotCITION 2 ASHE SEC III CLASS 2E3 Ato B31.1 HUCLEAR LOADItG C0tCITICH 4 EHERGEt'CY P + DL + 0CCE + t"G CotNERT Fo?CES Att) HOMEtiTS TO CCCRDIt{ATES PER HELOIrf3 RESEARCH COUNCIL CULLETIN 107. P = 0.0 HC = 0.0 l'L = 16268.75 IIT = 0.0 VC = 0.0 VL = 3425.00 FRESS = 0.0 U' LITS ARE LB. , IN-LB. & PSIG AU CU CU OU FIG. 3C P (NCRt1AL) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 FIG. IC-1 P (CETOItG) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 FIG. 3A HC(FC2ttAL) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 FIG. IA HCI CEt:DIt:3) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 FIG ?S PLi tic 2t!AL ) -2587.74 2589.76 0.0 0.0 FIG. IB I"-( CEl:DItG ) -2767.20 2767.20 0.0 0.0 CIRCCf. PPESSURE STRESS 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 SU:f. OF CIRCUti. STRESSES -5356.95 5356.95 0.0 0.0 FIG. 4C P (NCRifAL) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 FIG. 2C-1 P (BEtOItG) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 FIG. CA t*Ci tC7t!* L ) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 FIG. 2A tr(set @Itt3) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 FIG. 43 HL(NC'it:AL ) -1335.04 1335.C4 0.0 0.0 FIG. 2D lt( bet'311:3 ) -4910.59 4910.59 0.0 0.0 A.4IAL PRESSURE STRESS 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Sutt. OF AXIAL STRESSES -6245.62 6245.62 0.0 0.0 SMEAR STRESS BY HT 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 S:iEAR STRE S BY VC 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 S'IEAR STRESS BY VL 0.0 0.0 -716.90 716.90 SL"I. OF SHEAR STRESSES 0.0 0.0 -716.90 716.90 OIFFERENCE OF PRIH. m STRESSES. 888.67 688.67 1433.60 1433.60 HAX. PRItCIPAL STRESS -5356.95 6245.62 716.90 716.90 HIN. PRItCIPAL STRESS -6245.62 5356.95 -716.90 -716.90 HAXIlfUM STRESS INTENSITY 6245.62 TOTAL ST9ESS ( 7140.) LESS THAN 1.80
- SH =( 22600.3 7
I ea
-- -. -. n.
LILC3 SHOREHAH 1 BP-1E21.PSSH021-5 J.D. 11600.02 VERSIDH 3 LEVEL 2 TUESDAY JANUARY 4,1983 PAGE 14 ItPUT BY: CAP 031ttEH1 SYSTEH: CORE SPRAY PPG QA CAT.1,245/8 Til1E E4 HIN 16 SEC PAST 11 Afl EUN C0tCITION 2 AS11E SEC III CLASS 213 AfD B31.1 NUCLEAR LOAD 1ttG CotfDITION 5 FAULTED P+DL+SPSSISSEI,0CCF)+HNS ItPUT TCRCES AND HOMEHTS HITH SIGNS HHICH GENERATED HAXIHUM STRESS FX FY FZ HX HY HZ DEADLOAD 0.0 3425.00 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 SSEI 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 OCCF 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 REVOLVED FCRCES AHD H0!!ENTS F1 F2 F3 H1 H2 H3 DEAOLOAD 3425.00 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 SSEI 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 OCCF 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 38
^ - ^
LILC3 SHOREHAH 1 BP-1E21.PSS9021-5 J.D. 11600.02 VERSION 3 LEVEL 2 ItPUT BY:CAPC3IA'.; CHI TUESDAY JAPUARY 4.1983 PAGE 15 SYSTEH: CORE SPRAY PPG QA CAT.1.245/8 TI!!E 24 HIH 16 SEC PAST 11 AN rut 4 CONDITION 2 ASitE SEC III CLASS 213 ATO B31.1 NUCLEAR , LOADING CO*CITION 5 F*.ULTED P +DL+5'?SS(SSEI.0CCF blitiS CONVERT P = FC.?CES AND HoffEt(TS TD C00RDIttATES PER HELDIttG OESEAPCM COLNCIL DULLETIN 107. 0.0 11C z 0.0 ftL = 16268.75 HT = VC
- 0.0 0.0 VL = 3425.00 PRESS = 0.0 UtlITS ARE LD., IN-LB. & PSIG AU BU CU DU FIG. 3C P (PCRftAL) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 FIG. JC 'i P (EEtOItG) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 FIG. 3A l*C( PC21!t.L ) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 FIG. IA HCI DEtCItG) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 FIG. 33 I!L(f C2 tit-L ) -2589.76 2589.76 0.0 0.0 FIG. IB HL(CEICItG) -2767.20 2767.20 0.0 0.0 i CIRCUlf. PRESS2E STRESS 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 SUH. OF CIRCUtt. STRESSES -5356.95 5355.95 0.0 0.0 FIG. 4C P (NORMAL) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.3 FIG. EC-1 P (CEICING) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 FIG. 4A itC( tC2!tAL ) 0.0 FIG. 2A HCI DEPOIriG )
0.0 0.0 0.0 I 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 FIG. 4B ttLitC2tfAL ) -1335.04 1335.04 0.0 0.0 FIG. 2B IfL( BE!OIt{G ) -4910.59 4910.59 0.0 0.0 AXIAL PRESOURE STRESS 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 i s'Jtt. OF AXIAL STRESSES -6245.62 6245.62 0.0 0.0 4 SHEt.R STRESS BY HT 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 SHEAR STRESS BY VC 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 SMEAR STRESS BY VL 0.0 0.0 -716.90 716.90 SUH. OF SHEAR STRESSES 0.0 0.0 -716.90 716.90 DIFFERENCE OF PRIN. i STRESSES. 868.67 880.47 1433.60 1933.80
! HAX. FRIttCIPAL STRFSS -5356.95 6245.62 716.90 716.90
$ HIN. PRINCIPAL STRESS
-6245.62 5356.95 -716.90 -716.90 M
HAXIttUH STRESS INTENSITY 6245.62 i TOTAL STRESS ( 7649.) LESS THAN 2.40 m SH =( 30240.) I C 1 se
y .- -- - LILCO SHCREHAH 1 BP-1E21.PSSH021-5 J.D. 11600.02 VERSION 3 LEVEL 2 TUESDAY JAHUARY 4,1983 PAGE 16 ItFUT BY:CAPOBIAt; CHI SYSTEft:C07E SPRAY PPG QA CAT.1,245/8 tit!E 24 ftIN 16 SEC PAST 11 AH NCMfAL Et0 OF RUN I. M ee
'5
_- . _ .v_ .. . .. 1 SY-014 (LSTIDR) VERSIC*4(1 LEVEL 01 CPEATED OM 79.258 AT tit:" 11.22.18 HMSEC---0000 LSTID2--0001 f tAIN----0001 VERHAP--0001 YHD--- --0000 RODSH---0001 OV! PLAY-tt0ME 0 LOAD HOUL" E IDENTIFICATION RECOPDS FRCH DATA SET NA?:E: PIPE. TRUST. LUG PRCG9tti (Hit!CER) HA'1E:PILUG 0 THIS PROGRAff NAS LINHEDITED ON NOV 16,1977(77 3201/07.51.17 (EDITOR SC104 /0307) CROUTIMES TRAMSLATCR IDENTIFICATION RECO2DS 04TC/HH.H!!.SS TRAN3LATOR/VERSIDH ROUTINES HAIN HOV 16,1977(173201/09.37.51 5734F03 /0201 DATE/HH.fol.SS TRANSLATOR /VERSICH
+
CottD , CALSET AUG 4.1975(752161/10.48.15 5734F03 /0201 SEP 16.1975(752591/10.32.53 5734F03 /0201
+
SET CDS Bt> JUL 31.1975(752121/08.32.22 5734F03 /0201 AUG 4.1975(752161/09.50.45 5734F03 /0201
+
CILON ZHtJiES JUL 31,1975(752121/06.32.22 5734F03 /0201 AJL 31.1975( 75212 3/08.32.22 5734F03 /0201
+
Cot:30 ABSFil JUL 29,1975(752101/17.37.53 5734F03 /0201
+
JUL 29.1975(752101/17.37.59 5734F03 /0201 FICTR D064 JUL 29,1975(752101/17.38.07 5734F03 /0201 JUL 29,1975(752101/17.38.10 5734F03 /0201
+
IDFORC Jtt 29,1975(752101/17.38.15 5734F03 FORCES JUL 29,1975(752101/17.38.13 5734F03 /0201
+ /0201 LINE LILOOP JUL 29,1975(752101/17.38.21 5734F03 /0201 JUL 29.1975(752101/17.38.18 5734F03 /0201
+ -
HIH HAMEFF JUL 29.1975(752101/17.38.27 5734F03 /0201 JUL 29.1975(75210)/17.38.25 5734F03 /0201
+
PRItR PIPE JUL 29,1975(752101/17.38.33 5734F03 /0201 JUL 29.1975(752101/17.38.30 5734F03 /0201
+
i SCALLS RITEF JUL 29,1975(752101/17.38.35 5734F03 /0201
+ JUL 29.1975(752101/17.38.38 5734F03 /0201 SRSS ERR JUL 29.1975(752101/17.38.49 5734F03 /0201 JUL 29 1975(752101/17.38.47 5734FD3 /0201
+
+ CBETAS AMGANG JUL 29,1975(752101/17.38.53 5734F03 /0201 JUL 29,1975(752101/17.38.56 5734F03 /0201
+
COEFF C0 CRAN JUL 29.1975(752101/17.39.02 5734F03 /0201 JUL 29.1975(752101/17.38.59 5734F03 /0201
+
OTHER3 STRSSL JUL 29.1975(752101/17.39.08 5734F03 /0201 JUL 29.1975(752101/17.39.05 5734F03 /0201 l + READ STRSSP JUL 29,1975(752101/17.39.11 5734F03 /0201 JUL 29,1975(752101/17.39.13 5734F03 /0201 4
+
j LOADI HOVE JUL 29,1975(152101/17.39.18 5734F03 /0201 JUL 29.1975(752101/17.39.21 5734F03 /0201 IHOECOHH FIOAPS JUL 9.1976(761911/
+
5734AS100 /0501 IHOCOl!H2 JUL 9,1976(76191)/ IHOUDPT IHOUATBL DEC 7.1976(763423/ 360SA5037 /2100 5734AS100 /0501 J re i
)
m. N
~
i *E n m
.J
#=
Q 8
- M O oo Ow m
m M. M
-e f Mm
>Z H M
Z M w N 2 M EL I *
". o* O* *O *e *O 9 O* O*
', , , , O O O O.
e= OM O M- r-E
. k o. O. O. O. a. O. o. a. a. O.
% U O O O O O o o o O Nm &
& M N u
- O
.J H W *
> i- .
4 ad gaa f O O.
< M O. O. a. O. O. O. O. O. O. O.
MO O O O O O O O O O O N M MC .J fi EL 4 W& M X
>>4 4 O
- N.
la O O O O O O O O O O 2 M W O O O O O O O O O O C., M EL M Ill EL M r* > IL N las M mW W
- 4m 9
! O O *3 e N 4/1 9= EE [ O ++ @M e OZ &W ce W > O O
@w M E O O O O O O O O O O
- ce > N & * * * * * * * *
- O MM m N O O O O O O O O= O g
*M M N w a m 7
kI &
.g b O
3 H ee O w @ .J 88
>= EE Od O X m
w o O h 6 O. O. O. O. O. O. O. O. O. O. e O U W > O O O O O O O O O O m ee = wgM e e N O O A O O 8 O M O. g 0o8 w M o MM O E o tz 8 5-2 w W E d ' O M N ana O o o e o O O O
*a e bWD w r wM & g g M o. O. O. o. O. o. O. O. O. c. O n M8 8ME S e M M N fJt O O M O m M aa i e a m m em e e e . >-
a4 N O uMM O
.J e M e re e.
et
< E u m ana Q H ** N P Ma-4 EL M O
O 9 E eaa
>
- Z >= O M i
i 5* Z 5 M
>Ss u u "O M 8 9O ena >= M O EL M hO* O Z N w5 8 a sr 0 - N M M - - a M a a m.
e u 8 M u
- eaa ( b M 4 M M M m 3 asa h naa n EL >= EL saa sea saa w w w U U U EL
.J M W Z .J ID ED M Z Z Z U U U M Z i
M
.J st EL e M O O O M >= H H O O O EL M ag w I I e i
0
,.--,-s,--, - , , , . . . . , - - .w-._ ,m,-,,+-,.,,._,y, ,-,,,--.,-,.-v.,, , , - <., , , - - - - - , ---y y- e-. .---e.n m , - - - - ~ - ,
-, ._ _ ._. m. v v-ausse menos evas e e emesse a e assess messe esese sexes esse ** marren e e a e se e e se e a een o e e e a e a e a e a e e m ae a e e e en ea e e a e e e e e o e e some e a e e e e seems eene e e a e e e e ===== ennen es*e e sneen menen e e e e e ee e o ee en a e o e e e e e e e e a e e e e e e se e * ** e one a e e e e e e u o e e nemme e mese e e enveen se en ennene eenen emmen a seamen a e neue e e eene see e e ese* eeuw one een e a wenn een om saw een me een em anone one en e e e no e e e == e e e e e a me a e o e e o e e ae e e e= w e e =
- en e een eee a we e eoe see een een e emo e me e e e one see e e een emme e e o e aee a w we e e e e ** a e mo e a en e a e e a ee m e e ee e e e e e e e en
.een e e meme see o e eeen eene e e one e e seen een se e e e me e ee e e nem **
- e LILCO SHOREHAM 1 BP-1E21.PSSH021-5 INPUT BY:CAPOBIANCHI J.O. 11600.02 SYSTEH: CORE SPRAY PPG QA CAT.1.245/8
'
- PILUG COMPUTER PROGRAH - HE-95 VERSIDH 3 LEVEL
~
PREPARED FOR THE P0HER DIVISION
.. . . M UXXnXXXXXXXHXUXUXXXHXXXXXXXHXXH UXX
. ........... . BY THE X l . .............. . X INPUT PREPARED B l / /
j . ... ................ . COMPUTER DIVISION X (DATE) X j X X
. ......... .. ... . X INPUT CHECHED BY / / X X (DATE) X 7 ................................. X X X RUN DATE TUESDAY JANUARY 11.1963 X X TIHE 12 HIN 58 SEC PAST 5 PH X XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX D b
e- -- -- _ m v v-LILC3 SHOREHAH 1 BP-1E21 PSSH021-5 J.O. 11600.02 VEISIDH 3 LEVEL 2 TUESDAY JANUARY 11,1983 PAGE 2 INPUT EY: CAP 0BIANCHI SYSTEH: CORE SPRAY PPG Q3 CAT.1.215/8 TIHE 12 HIH So SEC PAST 5 PH RUN CONDITION 2 ASHE SEC III CLASS 213 AND B31.1 NUCLEAR LOADING CONDITION 1 HORHAL/ UPSET (PRI SUSTAINED OtLY) P.DL+tetS INPUT FORCES AtG HCHEHTS HITH SIGNS HHICH GENERATED HAXIttUH STRESS FX FY FZ HX HY HZ DEADLOAD 0.0 3425.00 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 i REVOLVED FORCES AND H0HEHTS F1 F2 F3 M1 H2 H3 DEADLOAD 3425.00 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 I i M 1
--- _. _ -- y- v y LILC3 SHORENAH 1 BP-1E21.PSSH021-5 J.D. 11400.02 VERSION 3 LEVEL 2 . TUESOf.Y JANUARY 11.1913 PAGE 3 INPUT Ef:CAPOSIANCHI SYSTEH: CORE SPRAY PP3 QA CAT.1.245/3 TIHE 12 HIH 58 SEC PAST 5 PN .
RUN CONDITION 2 ASHE SEC III CLASS 243 AND B31.1 NUCLEAR LOADING CONDITION 1 NORMAL / UPSET (PRI SUSTAINEO ONLY) P+0L+)8(5 CONVERT FORCES APO HOMENTS TO CCORDINATES PER HELOING RESEARCH COUNCIL BULLETIN 107. P a 0.0 HC a 0.0 K z 17553.12 HT a 0.0 VC = 0.0 VL a 3425.00 PRESS a 402.65 UNITS ARE LB., IN-LB. & PSIG AU CU CU DU FIG. 3C P (NORMAL) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 FIG.1C-1 P (BENDING) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 FIG 34 HC(NORHAL) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 FIG. lA HC(BENDING) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 FIG. 38 ft.( NORHAL ) -2260.17 2260.17 0.0 0.0 FIG. IR HL(BENDING) -2351.44 2351.64 0.0 0.0 CIRCUH. PRESSURE STRESS 8533.31 8533.31 8533.31 8533.31 SUH. OF CIRCUH. STRESSES 3921.50 13145.12 8533.31 8533.31 FIG. 4C P (NORMAL) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 FIG. 2C-1 P (BENDING) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 FIG. 4A HC(NORMAL) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 FIG. 2A HC(BEFOING) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 FIG. 48 M.(NORHAL) -1173.58 1173.58 0.0 0.0 FIG. 28 HL(BENDING) -4272.48 4272.48 0.0 0.0 AXIAL PRESSURE STRESS 4266.66 4266.66 4266.66 4246.66 S'fH. OF AXIAL STRESSES -1179.40 9712.71 4266.66 4266.64 SHEAR STRESS BY HT 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 SHEAR STRESS SY VC 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 SHEAR STRESS SY VL 0.0 0.0 -452.38 452.38 SUH. OF SHEAR STRESSES 0.0 0.0 -652.38 652.38 OIFFERENCE OF PRIN. STRESSES. 5100.90 3432.41 4441.70 4441.70 HAX. PRINCIPAL STRESS 3921.50 13145.12 8630.83 8630.83 HIN. PRINCIPAL STRESS -1179.40 9712.71 4149.13 4169.13 HAXIHUN STRESS INTENSITY -13145.12 TOTAL STRESS ( 13259.) LESS THAM 1.00 m SH =( 15000.) M
'I
. --. n. ,. - - - w - _ _ _ .
-------y--------
LILC3 SHOREHAH 1 BP.1E21.PSSH021-5 J.O. 11400.02 VERSION 3 LEVEL 2 TUES0*.Y JANUARY 11.1983 PAGE 4 If7UT BY:CAPOSIANCHI SYSTEH: CORE SPRAY PPG CA CAT.1.2;S/8 TIHE 12 HIH 58 SEC PAST S PH RUN CONDITION 2 A3HE SEC III CLASS 243 APC B31.1 NUCLEAR LOADING CONDITION 2 NORHAL/ UPSET (PRI SUSTAINED +0CCASIDHAL) P+CL+SRSS(08EI,0CCU)+WIS INPUT FORCES AND H0HENTS HITH SIGNS HHICH GENERATED HAXIHUH STRESS FX FY FZ HX HY HZ DEADLOAD 0 . O~ 3425.00 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 OBEI 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 OCCU 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 REVOLVED FORCES APC HOMENTS F1 F2 F3 H1 H2 H3 DEADLOAD 3425.00 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 DBEI 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 OCCU 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 P M
_ _ _ + --w- _- - - y p- y LILC3 SHOREHAH 1 BP-1E21.PSSH021-5 J.O. 11600.02 VEISION 3 LEVEL 2 TUESOAY JANUARY 11,1923 PAGE 5 INPUT EYtCAP0BIANCHI SYSTEH: CORE SPRAY PP3 QA CAT.1.215/3 TIHE 12 HIH 58 SEC PAST 5 PH . RUN C0tCITION 2 ASHE SEC III CLASS 213 Ate B31.1 NUCLEAR LOADING CONDITION 2 NORHAL/ UPSET (PRI SUSTAINEO+ OCCASIONAL) P +0L +5RSS( CBEI,0CCU )+tetS CONVERT FORCES Att H0HENTS TO COORDINATES PER HELOING RESEARCH COUNCIL BULLETIN 107. P a 0.0 HC a 0.0 HL a 17553.12 HT s 0.0 VC a 0.0 VL s 3425.00 PRESS = 482.65 UNITS ARE LB., IN-LB. 1 PSIG AU BU CU 00 FIG. 3C P (NORMAL) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 FIG. IC-1 P (BEHOING) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 FIG. 3A HC(NORltAL ) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 FIG. lA HC(BENDING) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 FIG. 38 HL(NOR! tall -2260.17 2240.17 0.0 0.0 FIG. IB HL(BEHOING) -2351.64 2351.64 0.0 0.0 CIRCUH. PRESSURE STRESS 8533.31 8533.31 8533.31 8533.31 SUH. OF CIRCUH. STRESSES 3921.50 13145.12 8533.31 8533.31 FIG. 4C P IHORMAll 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 FIG. 2C-1 P (BEbOING) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 FIG. 4A HC(NORitAL) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 FIG. 2A HC(BENDING) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 FIG. 4B HL(NORMAL) -1173.58 1173.58 0.0 0.0 FIG. 2B HL(BEN 0!NG) -4272.48 4272.48 0.0 0.0 AXIAL PRESSURE STRESS 4266.66 4266.66 4266.66 4266.64 SUtt. OF AXIAL STRESSES -1179.40 9712.71 4266.66 4266.66 SPPAR STRESS BY HT 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 E 'AR STRESS SY VC 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 St AR STRESS BY VL 0.0 0.0 -652.38 452.38 SUH. OF SHEAR STRESSES 0.0 0.0 -652.38 652.38 OIFFERENCE OF PRIN. STRESSES. 5100.90 ~,432.41 4441.70 4461.70 i HAX. PRINCIPAL STRESS 3921.50 13145.12 8630.83 8630.83 HIN. PRINCIPAL STRESS -1179.40 9712.71 41'9.13 4169.13 HAXIHUH STRESS INTENSITY 13145.12 TOTAL STRESS ( 13998.3 LESS THAN 1.20 m SH =( 18000.) 7 as
__. _ _ _ p _. y- y y- - v w -- --- LILCO SHOREHAN 1 BP-1E21 PSSH021-3 J.D. 11600.02 VERSIDH 3 LEVEL 2 TUES0*Y JANUARY 11.1983 PAGE 6 INPUT BY: CAP 0BIANCHI SYSTEH: CORE SPRAY PPG QA CAT.1.215/O TIHE 12 HIH S8 SEC PAST 5 PH PUH CONDITION 2 ASHE SEC III CLASS 2&3 AND B31.1 HUCLEAR LOADING CONDITION 3A (40RHAL/ UPSET (PRI SUSTAINED +SEC) P+DL+0BEA+THERdetS ItFUT FORCES AND H0HEHTS HITH SIGNS HHICH CEt4ERATE0 HAXIMUH STRESS FX FY FZ HX HY HZ DEAOLOAO 0.0 3425.00 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 CBEA 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 THER 1 0.0 0_0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 REVOLVE 0 FORCES APC H0HENTS F1 F2 F3 H1 H2 H3 l DEADLOAO 3425.00 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 l l OBEA 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 l THER 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 e.m M
LILCO SHOREHAH 1 BP-1E21sPSSH021-5 J.C. 11:00.02 VERSION 3 LEVEL 2 TUE50AY JANUARY 11,1983 PAGE 7 IN UT EY: CAP 0BIANCHI SYSTEft: CORE SP'aY PPG QA CAT.1.2 5/8 TIHE 12 HIH 58 SEC PAST 5 PH RUN CONDITION 2 ASHE SEC III CLASS 213 AND B31.1 NUCLEAR LOADING CONDITION 3A NORHAL/ UPSET (PRI SUSTAINED +SEC) P +DL
- 0BE A+THE R +19tS CONVERT FORCES APO H0HEHTS TO CGORDINATES PER HELDING RESEARCH CCUNCIL BULLETIN 107.
P a 0.0 HC = 0.0 HL a 17553.12 f tT = 0.0 VC 0.0 VL a 3425.00 PRESS = 482.65 UNITS ARE LB. IN-LB. & PSIG AU BU CU DU FIG. 3C P (NORMAL) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 FIG. IC-1 P (BENDING) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 FIG. 3A PC(NCRtIAL) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 FIG. 1 A HC(BENDING) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 FIG. 3B M.( NOPitAL ) -2260.17 2260.17 0.0 0.0 FIG. IB HL(BENDING) -2351.44 2351.e4 0.0 0.0 l CIRCUtt. PRESSURE STRESS 8533.31 8533.31 8533.31 8533.31 SUH. OF CIRCUH. STRESSES 3921.50 13145.12 8533.31 6533.31 FIG 4C P (NORHAL) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 FIG. 2C-1 P (BENDING) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 , FIG. 4A HC(NORitAL) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 FIG. 2A HC(BENDING) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 ) FIG. 48 PL( NORitAL ) -1173.58 1173.58 0.0 0.3 FIG. 2B HL(BENDING) -4272.48 4272.48 0.0 0.0 AXIAL PRESSURE STRESS 4266.66 4266.66 4266.66 4266.66
$UN. OF AXIAL STRESSES -1179.40 9712.71 4266.66 4266.66 i SHEAR STNESS BY HT 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 SHEAR STRESS BY VC 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 SHEAR STRESS BY VL 0.0 0.0 -652.38 652.38 SUH. OF SHEM STRESSES 0.0 0.0 -452.38 452.36 OIFFERENCE OF PRIN.
STRESSES. 5100.90 3032.41 4461.70 4461.70 HAX. PRINCIPAL STRESS 3921.50 13145.12 8630.83 8630.83 . HIN. PRD'CIPAL STRESS -1179.40 9712.71 4169.13 4169.13 HAXIttVH STRESS INTENSITY 13145.12 TOTAL STRESS ( 13761.) LESS THAN 1.25e(SC+5H) = ( 37500.) 7 i . EE
o w 3 ag m W 3 28 aa 23
*5 E hi RO E ... ...
y4 4 4 g 4 4 4 "1 I - ..ee Em av y y.ee .. g.
.8 ;
E 8 =
>E, E
i n y .s . .e a g .e .e .e
*t Ef
=
Cg X Ug 4 .. 1 aS y 4 a *
- 9 9 a
.= . y g y . . . m . . .
- 5 9
.a 8 E=
-5
' : E
~
" - E
- e* e*e g e n== ===
T g d t B Et 7,
=
E
!~
-m E
5" .
=g . e . e e e -
e-g g w ee..,
"8 "
k% " 8 E* - E I. = E # 0 f m B" a E e C l3 WseW l .. 5 l Wse e s E" -- 8 ar s8 a . E a 8 a l 9
VERSION 3 LEVEL 2 TUE30AY JANUARY 11.1983 PAGE 9 LILC3 SHOREHAM 1 BP-1E21.PSSH021-5 J.O. 11600.02 SYSTEH: CORE SPRAY PPG QA CAT.1.2 5/3 TIHE 12 HIN 58 SEC #AST 5 PH ItFUT BY:CAPOSIANCHI RUM CONDITION 2 ASHE SEC III CLASS 2&3 AND B31.1 NUCLEAR LOADING COtCITIOH 38 NORMAL / UPSET (PRI SUSTAINEO+SEC) PeDL+0BEA+THER+MtS CONVERT FCRCES AND HOMENTS TO COORDINATES PER HELDING RESEARCH CCUNCIL EULLETIN 107. P a 0.0 HC a 0.0 HL = 17553.12 HT a 0.0 VL a 3425.00 PRESS = 482.65 UrtITS ARE LB. , IH-LB. & PSIG VC a 0.0 AU BU CU DU FIG. 3C P (NORMAL) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 FIG. 1C.1 P (BEFOING) 0.0 FIG. 3A HCI NORt1All 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 HCIBEICING ) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 FIG.1A lLi ttORMAL ) -2260.17 2260.17 0.0 0.0 FIG. 3B PL(BENDING) -2351.64 2351.64 0.0 0.0 FIG. 18 CIRCUH. PRESSURE STRESS 6533.31 8533.31 8533.31 8533.31 SUH. OF CIRCUH. STRESSES 3921.50 13145.12 8533.31 8533.31 FIG. 4C P (NORMAL) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 FIG. 2C-1 P (BENDING) 0.0 0.0 00 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 FIG. 4A HC(NORHAL) 0.0 FIG. 2A HCIDENDING) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 FIG. 4B IL(NORMAL) -1173.58 1173.58 0.0 0.0 FIG. 2B tLIBENDING) -4272.48 4272.48 0.0 0.0 AXIAL PRESSURE STRESS 4266.66 4266.66 4266.66 4266.66
$UH. OF AXIAL STRESSES -1179.40 9712.71 4266.66 4266.66 SHEAR STRESS BY HT 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 SHEAR STRESS BY VC 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 SHEAR STRESS BY VL 0.0 0.0 -652.38 652.38 SUH. OF SHEAR STRESSES 0.0 0.0 -652.38 652.38 DIFFERENCE OF PRIN.
STRESSES. 5100.s0 3432.41 4461.70 4461.70 HAX. PRINCIPAL STRESS 3921.50 13145.12 8630.83 8630.83 HIN. PRINCIPAL STRESS -1179.40 9712.71 4169.13 4169.13 HAXIHUH STRESS INTENSITY 13145.12 TOTAL STRESS E 13316. ) LESS THAN 1.25mt SC+SH) s( 37500.1 ~. eg
LILC3 SHOREMAH 1 BP-1E21.PSSH021-5 J.S. 11400.02 VEXSIGH 3 LEVEL 2 TUESOAY JAPOMRY 11.1903 PAGE 10 INPUT CY CAP 001ANCHI SYSTEH: CORE SPRAY PPG OA CAT.1,2;5/3 TIHE 12 HIH 58 SEC PAST 5 PH , RUH C0teITIDH 2 ASHE SEC III Ct4SS 2A3 Ate C31.1 NUCLEAR 1 LOA 0!HG CoteITION 3C HORMAL/ UPSET (PRI SUSTAINED +5EC) P+0L+0BEA<THER+HMS INPUT FORCE 3 Ate HOHEHTS HITH SIGNS DRtICH GENERATE 0 HAXIHUM STRESS FX FY FZ HX HY HZ OEADLOAD 0.0 3425.00 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 OBEA 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 THER 3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 REVOLVED FORCES Ate H0HENTS i F1 F2 F3 H1 H2 H3 OEAOLCAP 3425.00 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 DBE F. 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1 THER 3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 i i 4 4 l i ) i 1 i
~
i s 1 s
LILCO SHOREHAH 1 BP-1E213.PSSH021-5 J.D. 11400.02 VERSION 3 LEVEL 2 TUESOAY JANUARY 11,1983 PAGE 11 ItFUT EY3 CAP 0BIANCHI tYSTEH: CORE SPR*.Y PPG QA CAT.1.2;5/Q TIME 12 HIN 58 SEC PAST 5 PH RUN CONDITION 2 ASHE SEC III CLASS 213 AND B31.1 NUCLEAR LOADING CONDITION 3C HORMAL/ UPSET (PRI SUSTAINED +SEC) P+DL+0BEA+THER+HMS CONVERT FORCES AND N0HENTS TO COORDINATES PER HELDING RESEARCH COUNCIL BULLETIN 107. P = 0.0 HC s 0.0 HL a 17553.12 HT = 0.0 VC s 0.0 VL s 3425.00 PRESS a 482.45 UNITS ARE LB., IN-LB. & PSIG AU Bd CU DU FIG. 3C P (NORMAL) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 FIG. 1C-1 P (BENDING) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 FIG. 3A HCIN0pttAll 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 FIG. lA HC(BDCING) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 FIG. 30 HLINORitAL) -2260.17 2260.17 0.0 0.0 FIG. 15 HL(BENDING) -2351.64 2351.64 0.0 0.0 CIRCUH. PFESSURE STRESS 8533.31 8533.31 8533.31 8533.31 SUH. OF CIRCUH. STRESSES 3921.50 13145.12 8533.31 8533.31 i FIC. 4C P (NORMAll 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 j FIG. 2C-1 P (BENDING) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 FIG. 4A HC(NORttAL) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 FIG. 2A HCIBENDING) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 FIG. 45 HLINORHAL) -1173.58 1173.58 0.0 0.0 FIG. 28 HL(BENDING) -4272.48 4272.48 0.0 0.0 , AXIAL PRESSURE STRESS 4266.66 4266.66 4266.66 4266.66
$Utt. OF AXIAL STRESSES -1179.40 9712.71 4266.66 4266.66 l
SHEAR STRESS BY HT 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 SHEAR STRESS BY VC 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 SHEAR STRESS BY VL 0.0 0.0 -452.38 652.38 SUH. OF SHEAR STRESSES 0.0 0.0 -652.38 452.38 DIFFERENCE OF PRIN. STRESSES. 5100.90 3432.41 4461.70 4461.70 HAX. PRINCI/AL STRESS 3921.50 13145.12 6630.83 8630.83 HIN. PRINCIPAL STRESS -1179.40 9712.71 4169.13 4169.13 HAXDIUM STRESS INTENSITY 13145.12 1 1 TOTAL STRESS ( 13316.) LESS TNAN 1.25m(SC+SH) =( 37500.)
~
31 1
J.O. 11600.02 VERSIDH 3 LEVEL 2 TUESO4Y JANUARY 11,1983 PAGE 12 LILCO SHOREHAH 1 BP-1E21.PSSH021 5 ItFUT BY: CAP 0BIANCHI SYST[H: CORE SPR*.Y PP3 (A CAT.1.215/8 TIME 12 HIH 58 SEC PAST 5 PH RUN CONDITION 2 ASHE SEC III CLASS 2A3 AND C31.1 t;MEAR LOADING COH01 TION 4 EHERGENCY P+DL+0CCE+tNS IPPUT FORCES APC HOMENTS HITH SIGNS HHICH GENERATED HAXIHUH STRESS FX FY FZ HX ltY HZ DEADLOAD 0.0 3425.00 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 OCCE 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 4 REVOLVED FORCES AND H0HENTS
. F1 F2 F3 H1 H2 H3 OEAOLOAD 3425.00 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1
j OCCE 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 J
+
4 1 a t i f f a e
., _ ,~__ . _ _ _ . . . . _ .
LILC3 SHOREHAM 1 BP-1E21 PSSH021-5 J.O. 11600.02 VE".SION 3 LEVEL 2 TUESDAY JANUARY 11.1913 PAGE 13 INPUT BY: CAP 0BIANCHI SYSTEH: CORE SPRAY PPG QA CAT.1.215/8 TIHE 12 HIH 58 SEC PAST 5 PM l RUN CCHOITION 2 A.9 tE SEC III CLASS 243 AND E31.1 HUCLEAR I LCAOING C0teITICH 4 EHERGENCY P+DL+0CCE+ttiS i CONVERT FORCES Ale HOMENTS TO COORCINATES PER HELDING RESEARCH COUNCIL BULLETIN 107. P s 0.0 HC = 0.0 IL = 17553.12 HT a 0.0 VC = 0.0 VL = 3425.00 PRESS a 482.65 UNITS ARE LB., IH-LB. & PSIG AU BU CU DU FIG. 3C P (NORHAll 0.0 0.0- 0.0 0.0 FIG. 1C-1 P (BENDINGI 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 FIG. 3A HC(HORHALI 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 , FIG. 1 A HC(BENDING) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 > FIG. 3B HL( NORitAL ) -2260.17 2260.17 0.0 0.0 FIG. 18 HLtBENDING) ,-2351.64 2351.44 0.0 0.0 CIRCUH. PRESSURE STRESS. 8533.31 8533.31 8533.31 8533.31
- SUH. OF CIRCUH. STRESSES 3921.50 13145.12 8533.31 8533.31
} FIG. 4C P (NORHALI 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 FIG. 2C-1 P (BENDING) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 FIG. 4A HC(HORifAL I 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
. FIG. 2A HC(BENDING) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 ,
1 FIG. 48 HL(HORHAL) -1173.58 1173.58 0.0 0.0 ) FIG. 28 HL(BENDING) 4272.48 4272.48 0.0 0.0 i AXIAL PRESSURE STRESS 4266.66 4266.66 4266.66 4266.66 . SUH. OF AXIAL STRESSES -1179.40 9712.71 4266.66 4266.66 i SHEAR STRESS BY HT 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 l SHEAR STRESS BY VC 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 SHEAR STRESS BY VL 0.0 0.0 -452.38 452.38 SUtt. OF SHEAR STRESSES 0.0 0.0 -452.38 452.38 I DIFFERENCE OF PRIN. STRESSES. 5100.90 3432.41 4461.70 4461.70 ] HAX. PRINCIPAL STRESS 3921.50 13145.12 8630.83 8630.83 I T HIN. PRINCIPAL STRESS -1179.40 9712.71 4169.13 4169.13
~
1
! HAXIHUH STRESS IHTENSITY 13145.12 i
I TOTAL STRESS ( 14039.3 LESS THAN 1.80 m S*4 =( 27000.)
LILC3 SHOREHAH 1 8P-1E21.PSSH021-5 J.O. 11'00.02 VERSICH 3 LEVEL 2 "ItNAf JANUARY 11.1983 PAGE 14 ItFUT BY:CAPOBIANCHI SYSTEH: CORE SPRAY PP) QA CAT.1.Z'5/8 TIHE 12 HIH 58 SEC PAST 5 PH RUN C0HOITIDH 2 ASHE SEC III CLASS 213 AND B31.1 HUCLEAR LOADING CCHDITION 5 FAULTED P+DL+SRSSISSEI,0CCF)dttS INPUT FORCES Ate H0HENTS HITH SIGHS D#f!CH GENERATED HAXIHUM STRESS FX FY FZ MX HY HZ DEADLOAD 0.0 3425.00 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 SSEI 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 DCCF 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 REVOLVE 0 FORCES Ate HOMENTS F1 F2 F3 H1 H2 H3 DEAOLOAD 3425.00 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 SSEI 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 DCCF 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 M W I
LILCO SHORENAN 1 BP-1E21.PSSH021-5 J.C. 11600.02 VE2SIDH 3 LEVEL 2 TUESOAY JANUARY 11,1983 PAGE 15 INPUT SY CAPOSIANCHI SYSTEH: CORE SPRAY PPG QA CAT.let!5/3 TIHE 12 HIM 58 SEC PAST 5 PH CUN CONDITION 2 LSHE SEC III CLASS 283 AND C31.1 HUCLEAR LOADING CONDITION 5 FAULTED PeDL+SRSS(SSEI.0CCFl+HNS CONVERT FORCES AND HOMENTS TO COORDINATES PER HELOING RESEARCH COUNCIL BULLETIN 107. P s 0.0 HC = 0.0 HL s 17553.12 HT = 0.0 VC a 0.0 VL z 3425.06 PRESS a 482.65 UNITS ARE LB., IN-LB. & PSIG AU BU CU DU FIG. 3C P (NORMAll 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 FIG. 1C-1 P (BENDING) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 FIG. 3A HCINCRifAL) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 FIG. IA HCIBEtCING) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 FIG. 3S FLINCRitAL) -2260.17 2260.17 0.0 0.0 FIG. 18 HL(BENDING) -2351.64 2351.64 0.0 0.0 r CIRCUH. PRESSURE STRESS 8533.31 8533.31 8533.31 8533.31 SUH. OF CIRCUlt. STRESSES 3? 1.50 13145.12 8533.31 8533.31 1 FIG. 4C P (NORMALI 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 FIG. 2C-1 P (BENDING) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 FIG. 4A HCINORffALI O.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 FIG. 2A HCtBENDING) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 FIG. 48 HL(NORHAll -1173.58 1173.58 0.0 0.0 FIG. 2B HLtBENDING) -4272.48 4272.48 0.0 0.0 AXIAL PRESSURE STRESS 4266.66 4266.66 4266.66 4266.66
$UH. OF AXIAL STRESSES -1179.40 9712.71 4266.66 4266.66 SHEAR STRESS BY HT 0.0 0.0 0.0 d.0 SHEAR STRESS BY VC 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
, SHEAR STRESS BY VL c.0 0.0 -652.38 452.38 SUlt. OF SHEAR STRESSES 0.0 0.0 -652.38 652.38 DIFFERENCE OF PRIN. STRESSES. 5100.90 3432.41 4461.70 4461.70 4 HAX. PRINCIPAL STRESS 3921.50 13145.12 8630,83 8630.83 l HIN. PRINCIPAL STRESS -1179.40 9712.71 4169.13 4169.13 i i 13145.12 HAXIMUN STRESS INTENSITY TOTAL STRESS ( 14548.) LESS THAN 2.40 m SH =( 36000.) I sp
LILCS SHOREHAM 1 BP-1E21 PSSH021-5 J.O. 11600.02 VE4"SION 3 LEVEL 2 TUESDAY JANUARY 11,1963 PAGE 16 < INPUT BYtCAP0BIANCHI SYSTEH: CORE SPRAY PP3 QA CAT.1.21L5/3 TIHE 12 HIN 58 SEC PAST 5 PM NORHAL END OF RUN 4 1 a 5 I i ? i ) - i f j i i
~
i I I 4 q r
, 1 SY-014 (LSTIOR) VERSION 00 LEVEL 01 CIEATED OH 79.258 AT TIME 11.22.15 MHSEC---0000 LSTIDR--0001 HAIM----0001 VERHAP--0001 YHD C000 R00SN---0001 ! OVERLAY-NONE a
t 0 LOAD HODULE IDENTIFICATI0H RECORDS FROH DATA SET NAttE= PIPE. TRUST. LUG PROGRAM (NEMBER) NAHE=PILUG i THIS PROGRAM HAS LINHEDITED ON HOV 16. 1977(77 3203/09.51.17 (EDITUR SC104 /0307) 0 TRANSLATDR IDENTIFICATI0H RECORDS TRANSLATOR / VERSION ROUTINE' DATE/HH.HH.SS TRANSLATOR / VERSION 0 ROUTINES DATE/HH.HH.SS HAIN HOV 14.1977(773201/09.37.51 5734F03 /0201
+ COND SEP 16.1975(752591/10.32.53 5734F03 /0201 CALSET AUG 4,1975(752161/10.48.15 5734F03 /0201
- SET AUG 4 1975(75216)/09.50.45 5734F03 /0201
+
CDS B8 JUL 31.1975(752121/08.32.22 5734F03 /0201
- 4 CILON JUL 31.1975(752121/08.32.22 5734F03 /0201
+
ZNAMES JUL 31.1975(752127/08.32.22 5734F03 /0201
+ A8SFH JUL 29.19 75(752101/17.37.53 5734F03 /0201 COH50 JUL 29,1975(152101/17.37.59 5734F03 /0201
+ D064 JUL 29.1975(752101/17.38.07 5734F03 /0201 FICTR JUL 29.1975(752101/17.38.10 5734F03 /0201 i + FORCES JUL 29.1975(152101/17.38.13 5734F03 /0201 IDFORC JUL 29 1975(752101/17.38.15 5734F03 /0201 LINE JUL 29.1975(752101/17.38.18 5734F03 /0201 j +
- LILOOP JUL 29.1975(752101/17.38.21 5734F03 /0201 /0201
+ HAHEFF JUL 29.1975(752101/17.38.25 5734F03 HIN JUL 29,1975(752101/17.38.27 5734F03 /0201 4 PIPE JUL 29.1975(752101/17.38.30 5734F03 /0201
+
3 PRINT JUL 29,1975(752101/17.36.33 5734F03 /0201 RITEF JUL 29,1975(752101/17.38.35 5734F03 /0201 ) + i SCALLS JUL 29.1975(752101/17.38.38 5734F03 /0201 /0201
+ SRSS JUL 29.1975(752101/17.38.47 5734F03 ERR JUL 29.1975(152101/17.38.49 5734F03 /0201 ANGANG JUL 29 1975(75210l/17.38.53 5734F03 /0201
+
i CBETAS JUL 29.1975(752101/17.38.56 5734F03 /0201 1 + COEFF JUL 29.1975(752101/17.38.59 5734F03 /0201 I COCRAN JUL 29,1975(752101/17.39.02 5734F03 /0201 OTHER3 JUL 29,1975(752101/17.39.05 5734F03 /0201 4 + {' STRSSL JUL 29,1975(752101/17.39.08 5734F03 /0201 STRSSP JUL 29.1975(752101/17.39.11 5734F03 /0201 l + 1 READ JUL 29,1975(752101/17.39.13 5734F03 /0201
+ HOVE JUL 29,1975(752101/17.39.18 5734F03 /0201
] LOADI JUL 29.1975(752101/17.39.21 5734F03 /0201 JUL 9,1976(76191)/ 5741SC103 /0102
+ IHOEFIDS j
j _ , IHOECOHH FIOAPS JUL 9,1976(761911/ 57344S100 /0501
+ IMOCOMH2 JUL 9.1976(74191)/ 5734AS100 /0501 IHOUDPT IHOUATBL DEC 7.1976(76342)/ 360SAS037 /2100 l
I 3 4 e I i
4 *
'#%' M N E ENG#EERNG SERVICES INDEPENDENT DESIGN REVIEW SHOREHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION CONTROLLED DOCUMENT ICR N0.
5633 2
Reference:
RRF No. 5633- 79 Date: 3/11/83 PMR No. 5633- 79 Classification of Item: Additional Concern f].
. Us mA deviewerSignature
.s. MLk ~'
CommitteeChairmanbgnature 5-
. ph5 Project Manager Signature
- , . - - - -- ,. - - - , . ~ - , - , . , - , - -
,-- . - - - , , , - , - - , - . - ,..-.,,,-,--,,,...nn., ,_.
WNNE ICR No. 5633-2 _1_ ENGINEERING SERVICES
1.0 INTRODUCTION
TES issued ICR No. 5633-2 on November 2,1982 which was a Finding on the selection and use of pads on large bore piping. A disposition response from LILC0 and SWEC was received by TES on January 15, 1983. This response indicated the following: (1) Support was vendor designed. (2) Pad and pipe reanalyzed on January 11, 1983 and found acceptable. (3) All Category I supports with reinforcing pads designed by vendors were reviewed by SWEC. The calculations of January lith along with other pertinent information were attached to the response for TES review. A meeting was held at SWEC in Boston on February 15, 1983 to discuss outstanding items requiring additional information. As a result of that meeting TES was supplied with three additional calculation packages for the highest (pipe stress) stressed locations. 2.0 PIPE SUPPORT CALCULATIONS TES has reviewed the revised support calculations 1E21-PSSH021 (Revision 5) submitted with the SWEC response, and the three additional calculation packages received after the meeting at SWEC. These are 1821-PSSH001, 1B21-PSSH024 and 1E21-PSSH005. In reviewing the above calculations additional concerns have been raised by the reviewer. These are: (1) The supports are all axial type supports. However, the supports are offset and therefore a primary bcnding load is induced in the piping system due to this offset.
I l
'MTELEDYNE ICR No. 5633-2 -
Beam offsets were not modelled into the piping analysis for any of the following Spring (s) or Rigid (R) Supports. PSSH021(S) PSSH026(S) PSR050(R),,, PSSH010(S) l PSR064(R) PSR011(R) Support 1E21-PSR-065 was modelled with an offset (2) Except for support 1E21-PSSH-21 calculations for pad stresses and weld stresses of pad to pipe are not included in the analysis package. (3) The allowable stress for A36 steel welded to the pressure boundary is given on Page 17 of Calculation 1E21-PSSH-21-5 as 12,600 psi. This value is used again on Page 26 for the weld of the pad to the W6X25. However, the allowable stress of the weld to the pipe used the piping allowable (15,000 psi for SA106 Gr B) instead of the lower of the allowables which is required by B31.1 for attachments to the pressure boundary. Section III 1971 Edition with Winter 1972 Addenda (Code defined in FSAR) states in Paragraph NC-3676.9 that supports conform to the requirements of ANSI B31.1 1967 in accordance with Paragraph 121. The reviewer cannot ascertain what Code (s) and Juri dictional boundaries have been applied in the design of the supports. (4) For Support 1E21-PSSH005 the analyst used the fillet weld f centerline as the pad edge for qualifying the pipe stresses. In addition the offset described in (1) above was not included in the calculations. _ _ _ _ _ l
"MTELEDYNE ENGNEEFUNG SERVICES ICR No. 5633-2 '
(5) The Interoffice Memos contained in 1E21-PSSH021 as Attachment Nos.1 and 2 serve as the design basis for pad analysis. What are pad size limits (size, shape, thickness) when a trunnion is welded to a pad but not the pipe and therefore pressure is assumed zero and only carried by pipe? (6) The attachment of pads and/or trunnions directly to elbows changes the flexibility and stress intensification. It does not appear that SWEC accounted for these changes in the analysis. The above additional concerns apply to both SWEC and vendor designed pads and trunnions. In view of the above additional concerns, this item cannot be Closed at this time.
- TELEDYNE ENGINEERING SERVICES CONTROLLED DOCUMENT 't )-l .
TES PROJ. NO., .b DATE bM h RECORD COPY
' PROJ. NO. _ bD -
INDEPENDENT DESIGN REVIEW TELEDYNE ENGINEERING SERVICES (TES) PROJECT'5633 SHOREHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION LPCS SYSTEM DISPOSITION RESPONSE FORM ICR No. 5633-2 Additional Concern PMR No. 5633-79 Rev. O RRF No. 5633-79 Rev. 5 1 ' M8M SWE'C Responsitile F/igineer/Date
/
SWE(T/rgjJc't Engineer /Date Y
/
US' T* rO LILCO Project Enginekr/Date B9-11600.28-117-H 9-2-)
ICR No. 5633-2 ICR No. 5633-2, Rev. O Classification: Additional Concern Reference Document: 1) SWEC Disposition Response Form - ICR No. 5633-2, Rev. 0
- 2) Pipe Support Calculation Review IE21-PSSH021, Rev. 5 IB21-PSSH001, Engineering Review Package (ERP)
IB21-PSSH024, ERP 1E21-PSSH005, ERP TES STATEMENT OF ADDITIONAL CONCERN TES has reviewed the revised support calculations 1E21-PSSH021 (Revision 5) submitted with the SWEC response and the three additional calculation packages received after the meeting at SWEC. These are 1B21-PSSH001, 1821-PSSH024, and IE21-PSSH005. 1 In reviewing the above calculations, additional concerns have been raised by the reviewer. These are: (1) The supports are all axial type supports. However, the supports are offset, and therefore a primary bending load is induced in the piping system due to this offset. H Beam offsets were not modeled into the piping analysis for any of the following Spring (S) or Rigid (R) Supports: PSSH021(S) PSSH026(S) PSR050(R) PSSH010(S) PSR064(R) PSR011(R) B9-11600.28-117-F 1
-J e p 4., __
i i l l Support 1E21-PSR-065 was modelled with an offset. (2) Except for support 1E21-PSSH-21 calculations for pad stresses and weld stresses of pad to pipe are not included in the analysis package. (3) The allowable stress for A36 steel welded to the pressure boundary is given on Page 17 of Calculation lE21-PSSH-21-5 as 12,600 psi. This value is used again on Page 26 for the weld of i the pad to the W6X25. However, the allowable stress of the weld to the pipe used the piping allowable (15,000 psi for SA106 Grade B) instead of the lower of the allowables which is required by B31.1 for attachments to the pressure boundary. Section III 1971 Edition with Winter 1972 Addenda (Code defined in FSAR) states in Paragraph NC-3676.9 that supports conform to the requirements of ANSI B31.1 1967 in accordance with Paragraph 121. The - reviewer cannot ascertain what Code (s) and Jurisdictional 4 boundaries have been applied in the design of the supports. (4) For Support IE21-PSSIl005, the analyst used the fillet weld center-line as the pad edge for qualifying the pipe stresses. In
- ' addition, the of fset described in (1) above was not included in i
the calculations. (5) The Interoffice Memorandums contained in 1E21-PSSH021 as A Attachments Nos. I and 2 serve as the design basis for pad B9-11600.28-117-F 2 1
, . . _ - _ . , . . , _ . _ ___ _ __ , _ , - . . _ _ _ ~ _ _ . . . _ _ _ _ _ _ . , _ . - . ___ _ _,_ _ .,
analysis. What are pad size limits (size, shape, thickness) when a trunnion is welded to a pad but not the pipe, and therefore pressure is assumed zero and only carried by pipe? (6) The attachment of pads and/or trunnions directly to elbows changes the flexibility and stress intensification. It does not appear that SWEC accounted for these changes in the analysis.
RESPONSE
Concern No. 1 During the initial design phase of the Shoreham project the pipe stress analyst identified the type and location of pipe supports required to control piping response due to particular loading conditions. The pipe support designer then designed the support to provide the function denoted by the pipe stress analyst. If the support had an offset inherent in its design, the local stress effect was evaluated. The moments caused by the offset were included in the local stress analysis at the attachment to the run pipe. As an element of the Project Procedure 42 "As-Built" review, the achievement of pipe support function within the plant was reconciled to the analysis of record. The effects of support eccentricity to the overall response of the piping system were assessed on a case basis. In some instances the eccentric member was included in the pipe s t.res s model; in other cases eccentric members were not included. Generally the member was added to the stress B9-11600.28-117-F 3
analysis when the analyst was attempting to realistically model the system and reduce modeling conservatism. 4 To determine the number of cases where eccentric supports were used in the plant design, a review of all QA Category I pipe supports was conducted. This review identified a total of 87 eccentric supports. Of this total 29 had been modelled into the stress ' analysis of record thus accounting for 4 the eccentricity in the overall system. The effects of the eccentricity of the remaining 58 supports is under evaluation. The evaluation of these remaining supports proceeds in the following i systematic manner: 4 Eccentric spring hangers are eliminated from the review since they have no impact on the dynamic response of the piping systen..
- Piping models containing only one eccentric support with a small amount of eccentricity, i.e. support attachment location is a few inches above the pipe surface, are not deemed significant and are eliminated from further review.
i Piping models that contain multiple eccentric supports, with a
- ' small amount of eccentricity, are eliminated from further review j- if the eccentric supports are isolated from each other by piping geometry or other supports.
1 i f B9-11600.28-117-F 4 e- _ - - - . , , . . _ - . _ . . _
-,,_m.,y_.,o,.y._ _.,y,__,,._,_,yy..~_,,,,....,_,..._,_,.c,_ ,_,,__m.vr-rv m e- rv-~w'W'-=w----m*-m'--v'tvw --w r-=~-----'"
Piping models not meeting the above screening criteria are being reanalyzed to evaluate the global and local effects of support eccentricity. Based on progress to date, significant changes to piping system response have not been identified nor is any anticipated on the balance. The analyses on Core Spray Systen piping included in this review will be forwarded to TES by June 6,1983. The re-mainder will be cortplete on June 10, 1983. Concern No. 2
'1he analysis of reinforcing pad and weld stresses have been addressed in all Core Spray supports with reinforcing pads sent to TES for review. The original TES concern on ICR No. 2 for support No. lE21-PSSH021 was an undersized reinforcing pad that violated SWEC criteria. SWEC concluded that additional analyses be performed to determine the magnitude of local run pipe stresses using the footprint of the pad to represent a trunnion.
Further, SWII performed an enginwring review of all such pads with the resulting conclusion that all supports identified were acceptable. As support 1E21-PSSH021 was the support of original concern, it was revised to include the new analyses and the calculation was forwarded to TES with the SWDC response to ICR No. 2. On February 15, 1983, in accordance with TES request, three (3) of the engineering analyses for the most highly stressed I supports were given to TES for review. These engineering review packages for 1B21-PSSH001, PSSH024, and 1E21-PSSH005 were not final calculations and only the effects of IIX'AL stress in the run pipe was addressed. (Routinely, SWDC addresses these effects, as well as other items relative tc the design of a support, and documents them in a Shoreham pipe L9-11600.28-117-P 5 l i
support calculation.) These calculations have since been completed and are now being forwarded for TES review. The original judgments based on the engineering evaluations are unaffected by the coinpletion of the calculations. Concern No. 3 Pipe support code applicability may be found in the Shoreham Design Criteria Document, page 2-1, paragraph 2.2.1 which states ' ASME Boiler and Pressure Vesset Code, Section III, 1971 Edition and all addenda up to and including Winter 1972 and applicable code cases. ASME III Subsection 1 NB-3674, NC-3674, and ND-3674 define requirements for supports for Class 1, 2, and 3 piping systems respectively. ' Paragraph NC-3676.9 of ASME III 1971 states that supports conform to the requirements of ANSI B31.1, 1967, paragrapn 121 which states in part, "If materials for (integral) attachments have different stress values than the pipe, the lower stress value of the two should be used." The support cited by TES has an A36 reinforcing pad with an allowable stress of Sh = 12600 psi. The run pipe is A106 Grade B, with an allowable stress of Sh = 15000 psi. It is SWEC standard practice to use the lower of these values for the calculation of the weld joining pad to pipe and we therefore concur with TES. The weld has been recalculated using the proper allowable. The results are insignificant for this support, as the new required fillet weld size i becomes 0.07-in. in comparison with the design weld size, of 0.19-in. For reference purposes, the existing calculated value was 0.06-in. As a result of this concern, SWEC has performed a review of all Category I supports with reinforcing pads (350) and more specifically, the welds joining the B9-il600.28-il7-F 6
i reinforcing pad to the pipe and has concluded that seven (7) additional supports with A36 pads have used the bigher run pipe allowable. Welds have all been found to be acceptable (See Table 3-1 attached). Concern No. 4 The local stress evaluation for support IE21-PSSII005 included one-half the fillet weld dimension as representative of the footprint of the pad on the pipe. Typically this is not done. The calculation of local stress for an undersized pad usually considers the actual pad dimension without taking credit for the weld. In this particular instance the local stress, including the offset effect when combined with pressure and deadweight stress in the pipe, exceeded the code allowable by less than 2 percent. Since the load path into the pipe wall is through the fillet weld, it is justifiable to consider part of the weld to be an extension of the pad dimension. In this particular situation including half the dimension of the fillet weld as part of the pad dimension results in meeting code allowables. There still exists a great deal of conservatism even in this approach. All calculated quantities both membrane and local bending are assumed to be primary stress. Whereas, in reality the local bending terms, which are deflection limited, can be classifed as secondary stress and compared to a separate allowable. If only the membrane stress quantities are considered in combination with pressure and the mininum normal pipe stress due to deadweight, the calentated stresses (without allowing for hall the weld size) is below code allowable. Specifically, for the cited support without incres ,ing pad dia,ension to include the fillet weld, the combination of B9-11600.28-117-F 7
pressure and menbrano stress due to deadweight plus the minimum ncminal stress in the pipe due to deadweight, becomes 11,340 psi versus an allowable of 15,000 psi. Thus, the increase in pad dimension to include 1/2 the fillet weld size is a conservative technique when contrasted to the reduction of stress achieved by elimination of secondary stress dircussed above. This treat-ment of secondary stress is another$-acceptable approach that the designer could have selected. The global effects of the eccentricities associated with Calc. No. PSS11005 are being evaluated as part of the response of Its No.1. i e, 4 l B9-ll600.28-ll7-F 8
Concern No. 5 The Shoreham Design Criteria Document page 4-11,, paragraph 4.6.1, Local Stresses, states, " Pipe wall reinforcing pads for designs issued prior to November 16, 1979, the date of issuance of Reference 41 (EMD-79-24) were designed in accordance with Reference 44 (SATM 17, Revision 5 and earlier revisions)." Supports that were originally designed by SKEC are reviewed for acceptability against these documents, as required. SATM-17 Revision 5 establishes the pad size limits (size, shape, thickness) when a trunnion is welded to a pad but not the pipe. Criteria of SATM 17 Revision 5 are summarized in Table 5-1. As noted in the criteria, a possibility exists through absolute application , of the requirements that a pad could be sized at less than the pipe wall thickness. This is due to the 1/4-inch default value defined by the cri-teria. To verify that this defaalt value was not used and the minimum value selected always resulted in a pad thickness equal to or greater than the pipe wall thickness, a review of all reinforcing pads was conducted. During the review, four pads were found to have thicknesses slightly less than the pipe wall. In all cases the differences in thickness was found insignificant. During the same review it was also verified that (excluding a few special cases) the design did not take credit in the local stress evaluation for a pad thickness greater than 1.5 times the pipe wall thick-ness. t B9-11600.28-117-F 9 l
Concern No. 6 The attachnent of pipe support pads and trunnions directly to elbows is a design not encouraged at Shoreham. In certain special circumstances, this type of design has been necessary. Typical piping systms are conposed of pipe bends, elbows, tees, valves ard piping of different sizes being routed in different directions. The manner of support and the types of supports are important in controlling system response. Attaching a pad and support to one elbow of the system, out of a piping system conposed of many elbows will not have a significant impact on the overall syst m response. The change in stress distribution in the elbow can be altered over that which would develop in an unrestrained elbow. The stress developed in a restrained elbow is accounted for by adding the fitting intensified stress for each loading condition with the calculated local stress at the attach-ment location. The calculated stresses are then cmbined and appropriate code allowables are checked. This approach conservatively assumes that the maximum fitting stress and local stress at the attachment location are occurring at the same location and are additive. Corrective Action As discussed above in Items 1 and 4, the effects of support eccentricity on the piping systm global response is under evaluation. No physical modifications are anticipated as a result of this evaluation. As part of B9-ll600.28-ll7-F 10
.w-, ,- - e- + -- ---__-y = c -c - , - , . - , , , r--- - - - -m ,. -- , ,--
our ongoing review of eccentric supports (Concern No.1 above), AX-10B will be reissued to include the offsets noted in Concern No. 4. Preventive Action As noted in the text for Concerns 3 and 5, preventive action reviews were conducted. As a result of these reviews, no designs were reviesed. Accordingly, no continuing preventive action is planned. Itan No. 1 is still under detailed review to confirm judgments made during the As-Built Reconciliation Program, i Carpliance Date The evaluation of the effects of support eccentricity is underway and is expected to be catplete by June 10, 1983. Safety Iuplication The concerns detailed above involve interpretation and confirmation of design approaches. They have no significance in terms of safety. Overall, as discussed within the individual itens, cocpliance with appropriate criteria is demonstrated. B9-ll600.28-ll7_p y1
ATTACHMENTS Attachment 2-1 Calculation for IB21-PSSH001 Attachment 2-2 Calculation for IB21-PSSH004 Attachment 2-3 Calculation for IB21-PSSH005 1
., a Table 3-1 Reinforcing Pad Weld Size Comparison Table 5-1 SATM-17 Revision 5 Reinforcing Pad Criteria for Size, Shape, and Thickness J
h B9-11600.28-117-F 12
TABLE 3-1 Reinforcing Pad Weld Size Comparison Weld Existing New(I) Designed Calculation Pad Pipe Allowabic Calculated Calculated Weld Size Humber Material Material Used Weld (Inches) Weld (Inches) (Inches) IEll-PSA246-2 SA36 SA106 GR.B 15,000 psi 0.10 0.11 0.25
~
IEll-PSSil103-4 SA36 SA106 GR.B Not Calculated (2) Not Calculated (2) 0.04 0.19 f IEll-PSSII010-6 SA36 SA106 GR.B 15,000 psi 0.07 0.08 0.25 IG33-PSSP202-3 SA36 SA106 GR.B 15,000 psi 0.01 0.01 0.38 I IP41-PSSIIO94-4 SA36 SA106 GR.B 15,000 psi 0.35 0.41 0.75 IEll-PSA259-2 SA36 SA106 GR.B 15,000 psi 0.10 0.12 0.25 lE21-PSSil021-5 SA36 SA106 GR.B 15,000 psi 0.06 0.07 0.19 1 j (1) SA36 allowable Sil = 12,600 psi ] SA106 GRB allowable SH = 15,000 psi 4 i' (2) Notation in calculation that pad was so lightly loaded that the weld size was not calculated. 4 B9-il600.28-291-R i i
Table 5-1 SATM-17 Revision 5 Reinforcing Pad Criteria for Size, Shape, and Thickness Reinforcing Max 1.5 t P 1 Pad Thickness Min T but not less tris 1/4 inch Reinforcing 2 Pad Size (Circular) D+4)(t T p
+t pad)
Reinforcing 1) Pad Length 2 Daxial+4}R(t p +t pad) 3 Pad Size (Square or 2) Pad Width 1Dcircu + 4V R(tp +t pad) Rectangular) Reinforcing 1) Circular with trunnion 4 Pad type integral attachment Shape 2) Square (SQ) or rectangular (Rect) with Sq or Rect type integral attachments t p
= pipe wall thickness (in) t pad reinf rCing Pad thickness (in)
R = run pipe outside radius (in) D t
= trunnion outside dia (in)
D circu
= attachment width in run pipe circumferential plane (in)
D axial
= attachment length in run pipe longitudinal plane (in) i B9-11600.28-117-F
"RTELEDYNE ENGINEERING SERVICES INDEPENDENT DESIGN REVIEW SHORENAM NUCLEAR POWER PLANT CONTROLLED DOCUMENT ICR No. 5633- 2, Rev.1 Date: 6/27/83
Reference:
RRF No. 5633- 79 PMR No. 5633- 79 Classification of Item: Closed i mn devieweYSignature CommitteeChairmanSignatuh Xu%L Project Manager Signature
WF WNE ENGNEERING SERVCES ICR No. 5633-2, Revision 1 - 1.0 StM4ARY c Referenced Documents (1) TES ICR No. 5633-2 dated November 2, 1982. (2) SWEC Disposition Response Form for ICR No. 5633-2 dated January 11, 1983. (3) TES ICR No. 5633-2, Additional Concern, dated March 11, 1983. (4) SWEC Disposition Response Form for ICR No. 5633-2, Additional Concern. (5) TES Trip Report No. 1792. During the original. review of pipe support design calculations, the TES reviewer noted that the size of pads did not agree with the SWEC design procedures. l The LILC0/SWEC response (Reference (2)) indicatd that the partic-ular support was designed using vendor standard practice. SWEC identi-fied all Category I supports with reinforcing pads designed by vendors. TES requested copies of the three most highly stressed supports for / detailed review. TES then reviwed these additional supports. This l review, summarized in the Reference (3) ICR, produced the following additional concerns: - (1) The supports are all axial-type supports. However, the sup-ports are offset and, therefore, a primary bending load is induced in the piping system due to this offset. Beam offsets were not modeled into the piping analysis for certain specific supports.
"RTri m(NE ENGNEERING SERVICES ICR No. 5633-2, Revision 1 .
TES stated that the above additional concerns apply to SWEC- and vendor-designed pads and trunnions. 2.0 RESOLUTION The LILC0/SWEC response to the TES Additional Concern (Refer-ence (3)) is contained in Reference (4). SWEC performed additional calculations and review of all Category I supports to determine if " offset" affected the piping and support anal-ysis. Based en this review, SWEC noted that no significant changes to the piping-system response have been identified. SWEC also perforn.ed additional review of supports for Items 3, 4, and 5. Based on these reviews, SWEC noted that no field modifications or decrease in the structural design margin was required. SWEC reviewed and described the analytical technique used for pad welded to piping elbows. In order to assure compliance that all items addressed in Refer-ence (3) were adequate, TES randomly selected and reviewed the additional documentation generated by SWEC. The additional documentation reviewed by TES for each item is as follows. J For Additional Concern No. 1 SWEC reran thirteen AX piping stress models and reviewed and/or revised sixty support calculations. TES reviewed the following systems and supports.
i m W NE BIGNEERING SERVICES ICR No. 5633-2, Revision 1 _4_ (1) System AX-25G-2, Problem 256 Nine support calculations were reviewed. (2) Subsystem AX-3E Four offsets were added to model: ', PSR-233 PSR-240 PSR-237 PSR-242 Attachment loads increased more than ten percent for PSR-233 and PSR-242, but resulting stress evaluation using PILUG or PITRUST was acceptable (3) Subsystem AX-336 One offset added to model, PSR-049. Change in stress was less than 10 percent. (4) Subsystem AX-7F One offset added to model, PSR-101. Change in stress was less than ten percent. (5) Subsystem AX-33C Two offsets added to model, PSSP-813 and PSSP-814. Attachment stresses changed less than 10 percent. (6) The following supports with offsets were reviewed:
4%"M ERING SERVICES ICR No. 5633-2, Revision 1 -5_ Subsystem Support Number AX-10-3 PSR-033 PSR-037 AX-3L-4 PSR-279 PSR-280 PSR-291 PSA-022 PSA-192 PSST-278 PSR-283 PSR-286 PSA-288 PSA-329 (7) In addition, stress problems AX-3L-4 and AX-10-3 were reviewed for effects of support offset. It was noted that TES had reviewed subsystems AX-10A and B as part of the original packages sent to TES. For Additional Concern No. 2 TES reviewed E&DCR P-2623C-Z and E&DCR 24860 for pad and weld size call-out and supports 1821-PSSH-001 and 1821-PSSH-0024. All pads welded to liner are made from SA-537, Grade B material; therefore, containment liner stresses will govern due to embedded support stud spacing. SWEC Drawing No. 11600.02-FV-ID-9 calls for all liner plate pad material less than 3/8" thick to be SA-537, Grade B; E&DCR 24860 will ultimately be incorporated on this drawing.
W W W NE ERING SERVICES ICR No. 5633-2, Revision 1 -6_ s . For Additional Concern No. 3 TES reviewed all seven revised calculations referenced in Table 3-1 of SWEC response dated May 19, 1983. All calculations did reduce the allowable stress by 40 percent (to 0.6 S h) and used the lower allowable material. ~ For Additional Concern No. 4 TES reviewed the calculations for support 1E21-PSSH-005 and, while at SWEC, reviewed the PILUG computer code results. The latest computer run used the actual pad size in the input, not the center line of the weld, as originally done. Stresses were broken out into primary and secondary stress categories and compared to their applicable allowables. For Additional Concern No. 5 J. Flaherty, E. Solla, and F. Harrigan discussed the basis of pad-size limits and reviewed Table 5-1 supplied in the SWEC response. J. Flaherty reviewed the four pads whose thicknesses were less than the minimum value of 1/4 inches. The pipe walls for these four cases were 0.365 inches. The supports reviewed were IM50 PSA-603, PSA-616, PSA-014 and IM50 PSA-608. For the case where the pad was greater than 11/2 times the thickness of the pipe, TES reviewed support 1E11-PSA-001. Si..ce the pad thickness exceeded the criteria, SWEC used the PITRIFE computer analysis since the EMD 79-24 criteria were violated. Two runs were made. The first run qualifies the trunnion intersection; the second computer run evaluates the stress at the edge of the pad. For Additional Concern No. 6 The analytical technique used for pads welded to elbows by SWEC is conservative.
W P W NE ICR No. 5633-2, Revision 1 -7_ ENGNEERING SERVICES
-m
3.0 CONCLUSION
S Based on the data supplied by LILC0/SWE0 in References (2) and '4), and the additional documents reviewed by TES on June 13, 1983,'iES con-siders the LILC0/SWEC response to adequately assess the impact of this Finding. TES personnel are in agreement that they have reviewed suf-ficient SWEC documentation to consider this item closed. g - - -
SPTF1 m(NE ENGNEERING SERVICES Technical Report TR-5633-4 A3.3 ICR No. 5633-5 TES issued ICR No. 5633-5 on November 2,1982 as a Finding due to a missing nameplate on a spring suppurt. TES was concerned with the following: .. (1) SWEC Specification SH1-68 was violated since it required a nameplate. (2) As-built configuration could not be determined without the nameplate data. A Disposition Respcnse was issued by LILC0/SWEC on February 9, 1983. That response indicated the following: (1) The Field Quality Control inspection report indicates that the nameplate was in place on February 10, 1981. (2) The support was turned over to LILC0 start-up in March 1981. Between March 1981 and June 1982 the nameplate was removed. (3) A revision to the support in question was issued on July 20, 1982 and completed after the TES field walkdown and a name-plate was installed. TES was concerned that the nameplate would not have been installed if the support had not been modified. During a meeting at SWEC on February 15, 1983, SWEC Procedure STP No. 811, "B0P Systems - Thermal Expansion Testing," was reviewed by TES. This procedure requires that all spring hangers be inspected as part of the thermal expansion testing program and requires checking of the nameplate.
WNNE Technical Report TR-5633-4 Since the specific support of concern was corrected by the normal construction process and since adequate procedures exist to detect this problem on a generic basis this item was Closed. l i
WE WE ENGNEERNG SERVICES Enclosure (1) EP-1-017 Independent Design Review Shoreham Nuclear Power Station Internal Committee Resolution Form CONTROLLED DOCUMENT ICR No. I 5633- 8
Reference:
RRF No. 5633- 2 A%i Date: ////[I1. PMR No. 5633- 1 / #.J. Internal Committee Resolution of Potential Finding: 7/pg I , (,
~D oes >o/ a, e -;M ne n a.<,a w a , s . p ,. ,,., J M* "* se * *l +4 ft 7 7 m e. T />e miss/>rr i,*me plale 2e ,, , ,, ? < a c esr. 2W b e aa-e ,
cou U i ,psemL 4,e
;/ 44e A s LiN vefiede d'e/e n,,,i,,,e i m f ossi ble h do es anoe
+Le M 3e siv d ee,,a ,4, u ! M. e l e o ld load '. e Is
+4e stving , kd o,
se; *
! ** E** !!** *"' A' * *
- YC Wt ou $ 6*'
I bem *s ' r,c. ),a.s clart/ N d # dis r, ,, o/, ,., , , Classification of Item after Committee Resolution! NM I"j
.. S
- o ittee Chain - S, ' re Project Manager Signature
' mittee MMSignature 4/ ,( L,,
}^ pbei ComdtteeMember/51gnature
. rs a re ri er ivc ENGINEERING SERVICES Enclosure (1) - EP-1-017 TELEDYNE ENGINEERING SERVICES CONTROLLED DOCUMENT 1ES PROJ. NO d(a33 Independent Design Review DATE 7 6 8E Shoreham Nuclear Power Station Reviewer Report Form k
MdW.t90D. SW _ RRF No. 5633- 4 ReviewerName:ffAIC- 0L04 Date: f-23 32 Classification of Item: oPEN /T(:% Reference Documents: p jq79 pw C, I E 2 / PSS H cat 43 -9 Description of Item: M** S 9;'Q UNO * " [Jo fliA m E Pt.A T G gg g (, of S uppoA T IG'Al'f SN'*43 7ge TNG~Safcn& S ffA & 0 Ol)'TA C O U O ^' W [3c:_ t/ c-%- iFi L:0. Reviewer signature
1%V MM ENGNEERNG SERVICES - Enclosure (1) EP-1-017 Independent Design Review Shoreham Nuclear Power Station Project Manager Resolution Form PMR No. 5633 2 Date: Reference RRF No. 5633 2-8[24f6L Description of Resolution: OQ [C&f*()s!>.) TillP 2 S IE N UApuf RAT 6 TELEDYNE ENGINEERING SERVICES CONTROLLED DOC WENT RECORD Copy TES PRO). I;O. f4 7 -? - FRO) no DATE 9//b Classification of Item after Resolution: CM Reviewer Signature Project Manager Signature
rs a cLcL/I IMC ENGNEER!NGSERVICES .
~
RECORD COPY Enclosure (1) gg,y - EP-1-017 p,gy, go, TELEDYNE ENGINEERING SERVICES CONTROLLED DOCUMENT TES PROJ. NO kb Independent Design Review DATE /N Shoreham Nuclear Power Station Reviewer Report Form - RRF No. 5633- M ,e.,; Reviewer Name: [A.,c_ c.,c 4 Date: 9-7-81 Classification of Item: CPc/4 /7m Reference Documents:
- /ft,p R@a,s.7 IDc3 bPFC. S H l- 6 8 Description of Item:
~/~c,tg g y gpsp.r r Ye n W IS SPAss's m es s a,a c, ,
es Srict pas accescu a ro sowe S n n -4.8 ou P. 1 2 3 l
... % panwn. r we, mnu numune, eao ese,aaA r,t,,
et LDAD S t+ alt 66' Or WS To4*St,FD dAJ WAC.9 WA4 (.c a"Y3. AJAwsr Pt.hrf. . - THv"R EF*** -f*His ts, I*v t/tcc A noa . at= Tyrs l SP9-ua ca
.sp e c. %o c.w ivo ,vk w co o a-1s wms rs . 0 L j i
Reviewer signature !l t
D%" ENGNEERING SOMCES Enclosure (1) TELEDYNE ENGINEERING EP-1-017 CONTROLLED DOCU T TES PROJ. NO. Independent Design Review DATE_ y = Shoreham Nuclear Power Station Project Manager Resolution Form RECORD COPY gg
~
PMR No. 5633- 7 g4Y,d Reference RRF No. 5633 T M , f Date: /o-/r-Ft Description of Resolution: 7M NO76 [/@d'8#)(/ f Efe. sH./ -4 7 .
~
Classification of Item after Resolution: bI[d[/8M Reviewer Signature h-Pr Manager Sitjnatury
?
"RTF1FD(NE O' ENGINEERING SERVICES EP 1 01 bbh w
UCT 13 BR/ INFORMATION REQUEST Teledyne Engineerina Services SHOREHAM INDEPENDENT DESIGN REVIEW c6 M M %B M W fr PROJECT: 5633 REVIEWER: L ,T.b;Lun DATE: fr 4 0 , t 2. TO: saw$ CALC.f: REV.: - LILCO C SUPT.f: REV.: DWG. NO.: REV.: RFI: 5633 26 DESCRIPTION: PAGE I 0F I bf-QAt. PTo4h p tQteb g0\de.Irc h p Wbg (
~S^ M er or spr'.g 6p sLoaG be :pai 61.h vs q d y S D Work er re. drunk ,
REPLY BY: PHONE L_] TELECOPY TO FOLLOW O MAIL L_j It There are no specific project guidelines addressing the above issue. is the task of the stress analyst to identify support type and location in order to qualify the piping system for the different leading conditions in accordance with the respective code requirements. l L_) ATTACHMENTS
,M '
-- SIGNA RE DATE 16/4/ht l
C GR i () 1047 5633 Teledyne Engineering Services TELEDYNE ENGINEERING SERVICES INDEPENDENT DESIGN REVIEW CONTROLLED DOCUMENT TELEDYNE ENGINEERING SERVICES (TES) TES PROJ. NO. 333 PROJECT 5633 DATE &l6 %9 SHOREHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION RECORD COPY LPCS SYSTEM PROJ.HQ. A - DISPOSITION RESPONSE FORM ICR NO. 5633- 5 PMR NO. 5633- 2 Rev. 1 RRF NO. 5633- 2 Rev. 1 (2 f % fuFe.%i SWEC Responsib.Le ' Engineer /Date Y $1 SWEC'P~roject Engineer /Dat'e mCe Pr.,.e< e.g1_fye
ICR No. 5633 - 5 Rev. O CLASSIFICATION: Finding REFERENCE DOCUMENTS: 1. Trip Reports 1474, 1510
- 2. Drawing IE21-PSSH-043-9
- 3. Specification SH1-068 TES STATEMENT OF FINDIN__G The nameplate for this spring is still missing and, according to Specifica-tion SH1-068 on page 1-23, "The hanger type, mark number, and calibrated load shall be diestamped on each hanger nameplate. . ." Therefore, this spring is in violation of this specification since no nameplate exists.
TES CONCLUSION OF FINDING The IC does not agree with the Reviewer or Project Manager at this time. The missing nameplate could impact the Design Process. It becomes impos-sible to determine whether the as-built reflects the as-designed condition. How does one set the spring, hot or cold load, etc? Without further information, the IC classified this item as a finding.
RESPONSE
At the time of Teledyne's original inspection on June 14, 1982, no nameplate was found on support 1E21-PSSH-043. SWEC performed a review of the subject support and determined the following: This support was originally inspected by SWEC Field Quality Control on February 10, 1981, to Issue 9 of IE21-PSSH-043. At the time of its inspection, the support had a naneplate attached with the required hot and cold settings stamped thereon. (See FQC Inspection Report dated February 10, 1981, attached.) The support was turned over to LILCO Startup in March of 1981. The tag somehow was removed (undetermined) during the period from March 1981 to June 14, 1982. Subsequent to the Teledyne June 14, 1982 inspection, a Phase III rework was generated for this support. This Phase III rework was generated because of a modification to the support as required by Issue 10 to IE21-PSSH-043, not for replacement of the nameplate only. Issue 10 was issued on July 20, 1982, and a Phase III rework E21-205 was generated on August 20, 1982. Teledyne performed a reinspection on September 7, 1982, and still found the nameplate to be missing. In this case, the modification was in process and a new nameplate was required prior to ccmpletion of the support. The support was completed and signed off by FQC on October 5,1982, which included the verification that the nameplate was in place. If further modification had not been required, the missing nameplate problem would have been discovered as a result of Plant Startup procedures, as outlined in STP No. 811 " BOP systems - Thermal Expansion Testing" (page 2 of
- 13) which states: ." Visual inspection will determine if there are any interferences , whether spring hangers are unloaded or overloaded. . . . , etc."
Furthermore, nonexistence of the nameplate would easily be visually detected and resolved. B9-11600.02-316-J 1 a
-. , -, ,..,.--,,._..,n . - . . - . . .
r Tne following explains how a spring hanger identity can be readily ascer-tained in the event of a missing nameplate. The nameplate identifies the manufacturer of the spring, spring sire, spring type, spring rate, hot load, cold load, and support mark number. The drawing of record shows the required spring to be a Corner & Lada Company (refer to ICR No. 5633-22), spring part No. 582, size 11, type A with hot load = 1316#, cold load = 1510# and with pipe movement = 1/4 in. up. In the absence of the nameplate and using the data on the drawing of record, the following can be used to verify all of the above. Note: Corner & Lada Company Catalog, 1977, Section 5 is used as the source of Attachments 2 through 5. These attach-ments are also included in E&DCR 12993A which addresses hanger part material interchangeability.
- 1. The manufacturer of the spring can be verified visually, as Corner &
Lada Company uniquely makes use of spacer travel stops which are either in place or in stored position on the spring. Refer to Attachment 2 and paragraph 4.a. .
- 2. Spring size and figure number can be verified dimensionally by com-paring the installed spring can length and diameter to the catalog value, as this length varies for all spring sizes and figure numbers.
(Refer to Attachment 3 casing length B = 6 5/8 in.) Determination of spring figure number also establishes spring rate, as both vary coincidentally.
- 3. Spring type can be determined visually by comparing the installed spring to the different types shown in the catalog. (Refer to Attach-ment 4.)
- 4. The cold load can be verified as a function of the measured length of the travel stop spacer or the distance measured from the underside of the spring can top cap to the top of the load indicator. (See Attach-ment 2.)
a) Spacer method - Travel stop spacers provide (2) distinct func-tions. First, redetermined position (cold they allowSecondly, load). the springbytolocking be set at thea sp p' ring against upward or downward movement, the travel stops cause the spring to act as a rigid hanger. This ccadition is desirable whenever the piping or equipment being supported is subjected to a significant . weight change such as hydro test loading. When removed to free ,I the spring, the stop is conveniently stored on the unit by threading the down limit bolt with the spacer into the spring can bottom cap. (See Attachment 2.) By measuring the length of the spacer and plotting this length against the appropriate spring j size and figure number on the size and series selection chart (Attachment 3), the cold load can readily be determined. For this support, the spacer is in its stored position and its measured length is 3/4 in. Using Attachment 5 as previously described, the cold load becomes 1530# as compared to an actual calculated value of 1510#. Thus, the cold set load has been set reasonably and properly. B9-11600.02-316-J 2
)
b) Load indicator method - When the spacers are in the stored posi-tion, the measured distance between the underside of the top cap and the top of the load indicator can be used to verify the cold load. For this support, the measured distance is 3/4 in. and the cold load is determined as in 4.a.
- 5. Hot load - The hot load can be determined by plotting the A Y movement, shown on the drawing of record using Attachment 5 (positive movement up, negative movement down) with the cold load as the origin.
For this support, the A Y movement on the drawing is 1/4 in. up (+1/4 in.) Using the cold load as the origin (1530#) and plotting upward 1/4 in; the hot load becomes 1360# as compared to the calculated
- value of 1316#. This is a reasonable approximation of the value shown ,
on the drawing. It is noted here that (1) verification of the hot load is not required during the system cold condition and (2) verification that the cold load setting is in compliance with the cold load speci-fied on the drawing ensures that the spring has been set properly for cold to hot pipe movement.
- 6. Additional method.S - Not mentioned previously but equally effective are the following methods which can be utilized to verify some of the ,
spring data, a) Corner & Lada places a white plastic marker with an embossed "C" and a red plastic marker with an embossed "H" on the spring can adjacent to the load indicator slot independent of the nameplate.
-r The markers indicate cold (C) and hot (H) positions of the pipe, and actual loads can be verified as described in 4.b.
~
b) Corner & Lada Company diestamps the top and bottom caps with the spring type and size at assembly. i The verification methods discussed in this reply address Corner & Lada Company springs specifically, . but a similar approach can be utilized to
. verify other manufacturers' springs.
The existence of a nameplate simplifies verification. As discussed above, spring data can be verified visually, dimensionally, and logically without the nameplate, through site inspection, . the use of the drawing of record, and the vendor catalog. Therefore, neither the design process nor the
.as-built reconciliation is impacted.
CORRECTIVE ACTION j- None required. Complete. Nameplate has been reinstalled. I PREVENTlVE ACTION None required. Had TES not identified this condition, the programs already in place would have addressed it. B9-11600.02-316-J 3 _ _ . . . _ . . - - ~ . _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ . _ --.~__-_ -
i COMPLIANCE-DATE Not applicable. As demonstrated above, full compliance has already been achieved. SAFTEY IMPLICATION l We do not agree that this finding has any safety significance, first, because absence of the nameplate does not have an effect on the operability of the spring and, second, our QA program in place would have identified this item. Attachments:
- 1. FQC Inspection Report dated February 10, 1981
- 2. Corner & Lada Company Catalog,1977, Section 5, page 5.2
- 3. Corner & Lada Company Catalog,1977, Section 5, page 5.5
.4. Corner & Lada Company Catalog,1977, Section 5, page 5.1
- 5. Corner & Lada Company Catalog,1977, Section 5, page 5.4 l
7 f B9-11600.02-316-J 4
CTONEC WE'lSTER ENGINEERING CORPORATION CONTROL ,,, ,,,, ,,,,
' // GOD, 6~C 2 -/C - P/ ,/- GYSTEM(S) OR LOCATION (S) REFERENCE !
p' PARTLSI NAME DOCUMENT (S) 0." l 6 M b g 4
~ et io , ' n gge I G-E ,
i. G A car-r
" DESCRIPTION (S) AND INSPECTION REMARK (S) g
- O'P.O
- ITEM QTY. ,
as uk,-s e Zm m .pufwad m % kw msk-ed p t%z a6cv< m.a%L iec.f. A w W ~ & f'A W sea
. 4 iin ) n a . u p 4 2 t o n , t h ,s u a w D -
4 m,6, vn sn au & a y & & 6 W iuS <( th
.ca v). ~
whG ,& n A -tha dwM ,ee, 430 N&' a I e QUALITY CONTRCk IN$PCCJENS, 'DATE 'PAGC t Wh }
- b" OF
Macu me e ,
~
NAMEPLATE
. i V'w* v.e'I
(/ g g , A nar-eplate is attached to every vanatie sonng adjacent to the slot in the casrg This identfies the ind% dual unit by sace. f.gure rumber, type. and the custorrer s mark number. In adoit-on. a trave'sca:e located on the nameplate allons tne eas y viewing of the position of the spang in its wo'ong range Red and whee W > dramond-shaped marners are a;tached at the position sca'e le show the design het f ( and cold oositions respective %. The stamp;ng of the spring ra;e and actuai hot anc cold loads on the nameptate assu es a tota! cefimtion of the un t s toad characteristcs C mui f for erection andin-service reference f/etne nameptates are avaiao.e en spec al C " =" order. TRAVEL STOPS Trave' stops, when furnished. serve *wo (21 dist.nct fu9cuens First travet siccs j a' low the spr.ng to be set at a predetermined position ir our f actory and het there nt Pet;nt Apphec Fe' a*ter the vanatte sonng is instayed and emction of assocatec pts,r.g o' equ.pmeat is p comp ete This enmmates the neec for time-consum ng adjustment in the f. eld and he'ps to assure the proper setting of the umt prior to ope'abon
- _ @ '"T Second:y. by loceng tne spnng agamst upward and cownward movement. tr e u u- -
. rw casi.f". travel s:cos incuce the spnn; to act as a ngid hange' This cond tion is cesirst e stor whenever the piping of equpment tung suppo ted is subjectec to a sign't' cant wetgBt
- PAE set PIECE change. Hyo ostabc tests tnem cal cieanouts, and chances or repair to an erstr;
' :spAcsA, i
~~1,'~~ -
" system are common occrences which cal for "blocong' of the
- :C
~ -- removat stcrage at the umt and re-instaradon if recuired.Wnen s C- '-
Q-l ; and both preset pieces " float '. i e ,t there isassures ce This 3 sma!!that gap betweer there :s nc the tc
, bott head and between the tcp cap anc the p ese pie 7- d ' load on the stops and that the umt is prcperly posit oned to the cotc settr,g h in,3
~ ~ t'
~ - -
condit on, tne down hrrit be*ts may easdy te untnreaced ' rom the p*sto, cac r :
' ~
removed witn tne preset piece tr rougn tne s'ot in the casing The sicc car, t%n ce
. TnAvE.siOP convementy stored at the umt by threacm; the down hmit boa m r es c'esct p #ce sTCmEo into the tot'om cap.
. .L PoS' TION A red tag showeg removu instruccons :s attachec to each spong sr.ccec s '.'
tras el stCps ;re.
*" LOAD COUPLfNG " Travel Stops".Whe" O dered as suc .. ui cens s e wo i21 te- s a cov.n <
head to!! and a preset p ete toipe scaceri When a Cus*C"'er ces"Es that "N9"en' be "blocned 'in one (1) c:recDon OTy. e the the cown W.:t bc1 wmca 0*cH nts cce
~
movement, or the prese* piece which presets the p ping to the colc pas tion and prohib:ts up movement, may be orcered indiwduady. ADJUSTMENT After the p: ping or equipment is erected and aper a:1 teshnoDVwhien Th.s is accompiishec might turninp tne cause ioac coupeg a tempo Is Comp:eted, the variable spnng shou!d be acjusted to its Cold pos! bon. is properly located if travel stops have been furrished. they sho !c-piping or equipment reaches its full operating conctons, a check and. if necessa"i. a finat shouid be made at the vanable spnng LIFTING LUGS Lifting tugs welded to the sice of tre vanarie spring housmg
. provide a ready means c' a~acnment fer use in e ect en They are 2 50W 7. _
m avaflabie On Sites 9 through 22 for all types and senes
'I C ~
% .*oia hole e o
=
i C Comer 6 Lada Co.,inc. m
FIG. 582 SHORT SPRh 'G Tvees A s s TYPE _ ;> B -'- m ~ TYPE ' ' i " l1 ' r.cos:tr . ' -- A I ii '- GD 6 P(A NO' F URf.'iHE2 I ' i
, g RH i*CELO . e> g:- gq s i.
1_ -- w "r-~ l (.. r .1, 2e , 2 .
, -- >wy. -
m '-~
~-
,fp , , % ~ g3y 4 ,
,_ Q.l ;. f
~
8 ' 0 ~-
, ~,- m-
"' . s . .- L .,4--N A?/EP. A* E s..- - , s
_ ._. -T s v l
.'" N ,
(- Jp j r'
' -- - J '
- x .
t--=; SE -; , (~ ' af e' -- -- J, i !
-= .
r r% .
' j M.,--- *., -
,-' N *
. , ,s s, i e .
.--- W ' ' % ,' - '_
~
~ _ , '~ m ; ' P1 - --
- - - _ '-Q, ;, w g a
i N t-i . I. h / r _) i i' i
& J i e
'- ! l, l g 4 !
I I
, t '-' M /'
y'- U N.* 2 s i' ,
, c M AX.* I'l), , ,
I
==
v ~=r t, E**COEVEN'
' @ HEdo ruws~:t. e m~ !~~~' ' ' __i g,, or ; s T HA E AD ,
f g- - - - - ' j SEE *aE r Ettte ' r , ' y
._ e,,
w:sc: }
*---,-,it *:: s v -
i - ew , : n : -~n . - 1 1 f LO AOS - DiW ENSIONS - W EIGHTS
.e-
.,, ..,.1
& W .co W i m ;- i w; .,c e s.x a e u r * .
' E ,e %' -
,N- ,**r E r p e .-e ; E .;aN c' 4t '
59: S~ i
, CV . ; l T>r*EA! Ts:. F
.-a: mem ,
F.:e . %ea. i.tas r ;;re a;' .e-: * :c G- 4' i C m- , H t r. 1. ' j 2 L' - i
- 5. r; ~. Y c . E.w; F J G *e i te ,6- a:* A ' 6ea:
- i s' C i 4 ; 6b 5'. 7 6*.
4 4. , g ;
, , l d' .
5' ; '% 6% ' e Q (9 j ' 4 -I i 21 4 5' 14 . 10 4 S: 3 - 4' , i 4 a
' ! 44 ' : E ' 74 9' e .
- 12? 4 5' . 5': 7% 6% 5: , '.
i 4% 7 t 4% ; '4 9' + 'O. 166 7 's 1's . 44 7' : 6 2 4 223 6 ': !3 l5 ; 54 4 l '4 ' 2% e' l5 , 74 E. F 94 1r, .
' f '5' 294 9 ' 54 i 6+. E'. 9'e -
5 i
' 5' . l e's 7%i 9 ' 2's 'O's E 399 14 i l'5'sj 's % 2% ?e 's i 14 54 - 8% ' *:
; 7 I 532' 16 . %' 4 6% i 6% I '
6 04 7' r 9' . 10'5 + 8 I 712 17 f I i 64 ' I 6% - 97 Eb 10' : '17 '4%
' i it - 128- *C.
I 7', ' I 1's 's 1C4 9' . 9 l 950 3E 4 6 8% 1 1% i 24 1 2 g% e 94 I lii. . 10 1235 4 'i b '
' . 5.
i ' 6s, '25 44 7 11
- if91 44 14 .. 1'. Co 1CN f*: 10%
7 1% 3 Sr. 2138 3e 4 , 74 11 ' . 94 - 12 13 . 2850 46 , 1 i 4 i
- 8. . ' 8% . 1% l (2
. r.
14 , N
.~.1 . ,.
1 's j 7,, ,2s , 0..it'.
,2 z. -.
; .4 m . ~
5
.. - . , , . . .,s r, . .. : , ,,1 . - . - . , , , - ,3. s , s.. u, ..,.:- , , e, . .
m-, -- . 2 , 1,. ,.. 5 , ... , ,
- . ... , is 9. ,4 . m.
,5 m
71n u, 7 ., 1 5 n2 . ,,, ,..
% 2 1N. 15% 14% 1( '94 I -
2 14 3 2:
'T 95SC 85 1.. 6 ' 11 .
104 17 % 56 14 : -
' 1:4 4 : b 2%
t'b ?P-
"' 'F- .~4'.
~
10 1 P.4 5 164 T- 4' : i% b ?>e 7 12% 13 24 P L'.
- 3-19 96625 2W 2.
2' : ' 15 . . . _ . . . C . . 4_. m _ . r ,.
*4 .
20 ~23:! I t '- n
,~ m . ,, , 3. . .m. ,c. ,,,. 2. . . :. .-
2, m 299 2. , i , c . , ,, 3 4 - i 3 4_ s.-
.~5s. ;
- . 25% . . 2 3 121% j
-,? .! .
i IO 595m i 371 , d~' ComCT 6 LCiC41 CO.,inC. 5=
nuem m e m + VARIASLE SPRINGS
"*'*"5"*""'
STANDARD SPRING FIG. 568 SHORT SPRING FIG. 582 DOUBLE SPRING FIG. 598
~ Whenever p;p:ng" moves ve ticaFy.there d a rseed for a pipe hanger which wd su;pc the g7 .c, piping wN!e accommodating the verical movement A detscnng ect on. type andhanger fAs thischange if tne inherent func ictin if the movement ooes not exceed the acowabte spnn L f ,.,,/, r I1 q j? scoportir.g 'o'ce caused by tne spnr g ce .ection is a towable. a vanab.e spnng fds this func:.On
, 9 Simpiy enou;h. t.s the pipmg moves in a sertical di*ection. it causes the vanab'e sc*mg to f, cet ect M ecua. d: stance As the sonng cef.ects. the supporting force it is exe ting on tne :: e
)*-7 '
l.'i a constant. unicae for each s.ze of a part'cuiar senes. Spnng rates crc snown at tne tettom o' changes by an arnount ecual to the ve % cal rnovernent times the spong ra'e. That sprm; ra'e is ( p;,=? p P ' c. ', tne vanac e sp*mg toac cha 1 U Dunn; assembly of the variab'e spnne unit. the cost is precomeressed to a posion w ch
%Q ;. < hj establi shes a starca d m.nimum load for each see Precompression se ves to minimae tne 8
n.r w head space requirec fcr the use of sa iab'e scnngs It also ac's as a pre-ac,ustment cf tne r spieg thus recuc ng the t.me anc iabor required dunng instaJat,en to set the hanger te the o % ' ~ f, , f t' desired pcsit;cr. I ( O - .i W The casm; or the Corne' 6 Laca vanatie spnng hancer es s otted the FULL LENC7n c' i the casmc ct t.,o ,2fl ocat.ons 150 apart Tn:s feate e. net ecmme- to vanacres ma,dacuee
~j
&,7-my"ev;,"
A? .
- by others, a!iows to a icac anc ces t.on reacmg AND a corpiete .n sevce visua. espect c- r the sonna coit and otrer interna, ccmpenents.
a_' - A!' derner & Laca va .able sonne un.ts are fu-oshec w:th a nameo'cte. Trave'stc::s f as ternis5ec upcn recuest var.ab:es. a e ava.:atae in tn ee (3) senes tc a tra' me.eme-t O se.e-(7,:nchn. m twent, three 123) sees :c a r arm r" ioad c' 5417E poe.cs anc e se,e .- T'* e no cua=*e Sa'nc u"5 e FIG. 568 4P*5 '* vo"= 5"uc* 6"8c*en"e:W'e m e"t5 a.'au..Se on specie. o' der. vanab'e srnec nonce s a e turn shee witn u~e par e as a stanca e tn.sn ., TYPE A SELECTIOh. OF A VARIABLE SPRING When encosme a va iatie spnng. a determ:nat.cn of sce. ser.es anc type rust be mace. Size a-c senes a e chosencey basec c'. mcsement and tcad consicerat cm as c.tanec ce Page 5-4. Tne ti;c et spr:r.g to be usec :s ncrmay dete~nmec c, the p*'.ysica! charactenstics o' the structure to which the hsnger assembly wm oe a"acnec. 4 TYPE D n'FE E
*Y P E A T, My ue a re e T,' TYPEB
- or se **'e4
'[ TYPE 'c' ae C ** e's _ . - Fr ut ane e
- c ' .se ** e +
-e se nc.s'c t !.
etys .c ree; r',earo:- ten . et arasFe te cea ei ca - ce : A j
). ec oc .> avataDie ) [ neacce .. .:e:
et- e ra. n.swe: .* a r s* ec
- r :u i rce c* a w :
%( ..'*'.a-( .:
ae m e a caca e i a-- i .a. t< ceva wea+55 t it 7,* . r e ne ce: .;s hea: w aca:! - 7* : ac r e : :* ' a: .r e-D.e 10 aate t% or a s r c e '
**e s r ; s :e e? .
;e s:r r.; a* a see- I we ce:Lg Ole 'ce .de a t' 5'*E! e ** 0- S'4? e * :*
* *.c e es aS0* 'a Ee&Ody a:52'a- F0 Aci We'?e t, e f ' uf e * ** T L 'g 0* FiC 414 a*C. t **.T S.: te f a :*i 5.
D?* *; ret te ha*@f f 45- l D ate aac Lug pC9 a; 5:ee S e'*,D y A b; FiQ 401 Weide0 V W t-- fre:.eatty used Bea- Ara:9-
, !O D # :Ctoe reeM O' E9 4 * .' j._ g -
un cseee'6 P 4'e ar c E.en"
.- w e. ve s we- r-~ '
\ 1 4 y
+ 3 j
** * * ~ ~
.y. .
I TYPE G TYPE F g EC* J f *
- t ~
bC' 'Jbe When : aa:c r.a a
,' g 5 tne so .r; is :c Se*r . rs *e 4,
,'g be IC
, l l m ... e_a*ed u9-
.n- _e:*.e near -
mg
- =.
e F m. s,, .c...er all
. ~
1-
- w. s .
e Ccener 6 Lada Co.,inc.
- . 3
bCh m e vd c; SIZE AND SERIES SELECTION f a sp'ing and is measuremer.! of tne percentage change in suppo ting force catcutated from the formuta' Hot Load - Colq Load _ t,anacibty - Ho: Loa'. f q rn The cold ioad is caicutated :y ademg sto up moveme rac: ce .Dwould o'suttrac:m; be to use 25% fc-'fc' down mov time movened ! or from 1% hot Icac. It an adowabie va'iatitey is r.c! speof.ec. goo p non cr.ticai pt r.g and 10* for criticai pon; TO SIZE A SPNNG.them 1. Ca:ce: ate the cold load and check :nat botn not a' d cote icads fM wcu the we%ng rance i Calcu! ate the mammum ahowable spnng rate ' rom the fo-mua 5. If this condson as not met, move tc an ad>'a:er: s :e
- Vanab,ei- r Hot tr.ad and reworr.
Sprina nate = - bement !! load. movement, var:ste.f. or avadable space < 1:a-" 2 Determine the s;ze by finding the rat toad in the,a cha'a P'omte the use of a variab'e spag. the use of a cc 3 S:a/ ir.that s;2e cc4mn anc cno:se tne ser.es w; surpe-: shou d be consiceres ave spmg ra:e equa; er :ess mar e e va'ue calcuM!ed at f I y W$m f Debt-M-HANGER $12E , j' i , e a' 1 a a : n j ,;h. .P. ,.];;
.7 a i , . 2 a t c 7' s e e u u n,u ,
,.}
j P.n' .a "n.tP O .f . L .... .... .... ..
~
..l
....=,
. . ::C M . : ad" i. f -
c.
- e. ::: . . - . e -.
c
- - v.
.2
- m. ; n. . . - --r. . - w. . ---m s e; .' - ;si ::: WL M ..r r~- --
'[ ::
--..-*.?*---
g - : e: . r- . .. e . . .gy p - ;--- ' --
.- '__a
. . v. . . ~E" ~. . .-+r*-"-m-r---g--**+-
t 'a - .
. ;-m. . . . . . -
. .-m. r
. . =. .~
s,-
--w7 ** ' - - '.'n-,-2--~w.,----.r.:-
'. , . . e y '7 ven
', . - ! . he- -, -r- . .
t G, . .. f/ rt,u th*a r * ; !
.I N4cu r. r. g -r
-c....
< .As. -
- e. . . ... :. . u. , -. .. s. - <w, 3
; c:. .s .- . ... . s. ~. s - -=. *? .
~ ~ .g .-} __\
- r. s. s. s. ... - .. ?: . . . . .. . . _
C
'- ';- ~;
'& :,?Q ; p ~ - L_':._ -_. .,. _. . . e, . .. :-
,, ' , :_.:q ,. ;.: : ::. ' '. 4 !:
. . . ..-g .. .... .y. . . . . .. -
O~) - .
- f. .. ... . . .- ..? . . . .
^
_,w.
,, , ... - - .3
. I: .
[: -
-r- .
p: ' 'W . . .
.n,.-.-
- N
- ~ - -
_..-w.--;. Q Lu ' v _... . ,- -_.,. ;_r...,-. . S :: .:-p ; =..{ L e .. e .. m..
= ' , ~. W- :.: - m ::_. = -- . g y p..'I^~'^ - . . .. :. X.._ .. ...
~* * " ~ '
- f. -
-:._ _: - - ' Q' ' i._.
a f
- : : w "'='m .=. :.: _.
ie i. - t - - .- - . ..
* - ' ' - ~ -
- . t om. . c 4. . . . y ;~T."~-"---' .
'- ~
' h t: ':: M, C .
. TD. g. h .-~..
.- l'---
/{
;i y: . .. numm.au.
- -- ch.,Y". . :.>~~~'"[ .
~~i'.i ', c. N I,7 [
$- f-'~
i.
=
p
.N.- $4 i.d.- S.. N. .. .. u . '
- -' .- .u-:y- . '-.; ?.: f ':S H : : . : '
..'.,1,I .g. - .- m t .
t , ..
']
--y--E ;--:-929' .: .
g
- 4. m;. ' ~-
,, , x .-. 3' ~ ' ' . - - . . - ..
_ -- ._R !
-g .
-' ...' p-;.. f.: .*: ' . ~, . .: 7 Q .:.. 5:.:-7v .. .
7, ': .
- n; .*> n
~
.g. .;.;; ';q-+ .= : = . ..;;.:.w. : .. . ;-y:t .. ... . . . . . . . .. . . . .
. :-w sm. : .=.:: = . =. ,
.e... ,... ... .,. ..
.... . . n. ..
3... ...
.f..
...c ...a, .h........l.,..,.. ... .. .-
. - . ..- . . . ... . ... -. . ... . . .r- .:r- 1:
3 .t.
~ .. - 1. 6 . ' . 32:2 ... W:. h
... 3 .
s . s. .- .-t. .. . ..... -
.50,16 .. .: - ' . . . . ;, .. .
38 ;5 t .:: .E- b; ,
...,. 6. . .- 3. .. . . . .
a .. , . 6.. i .
; ,'t . . c.
. x. - .... t..
3 ,
... .. . . ..y ...,m.. e.
.,.4 .
t.- ........ .c. .. . 6. g..-. g......-.t.p...... n.
. .-' i.. <:. .- ;; s .- . y. : ... .
. .. ,s
..L li:: ::' :::. C:: c':: . .i'i : % .:::: :~ c..... ,...?. :':r:.w%:s M. -4
- 'n.. M
, ., .. t .,
. . . _. !P ..!........A..
...- ,. ~ . .
e: . ' .. . . 3. ...rt
.< . . . ..tat n. .-r. , c: .
-- ,-i.- f 46 *3 * - .-
e . ,E .t
..t.
v
.g.h.
,-..cf.. ,'- .'
.e.
r. t 4 . .t a-
*.-r .
,-rs--..
.ru .x .
. -- t i D. . . $
..t-I
.. i- i OL th t: . .. . .t.
- 6? CM. ..... ...-..r. .
. . . . g ..
T. E ..
.....E '
.W . .... . . . . .
. . - - .. ' . . . . . . h .ww . .
y ' [
.M .s ...r .x..- ..
~ :a<
* = .
-.I[.
**'[}
.h.
. ,1 .L: - it- .. ..;..
.t d . '. R O :
P.
.,7 !E % ' it ' -' ' ' ' ' '
.}
- (- . . r T. ' h . .*
; lti: - -
i l 2 tC [r 'I L:
- c. . 9 j
[: Sp ing Rate - pcunes per inen of ceficcticn * . .. l .. .. . ,, . t .,, u. * .. .. .
;: . , ;1 :n : -
- ' 3 c. 4 6: .S ' ' '
3 N 1%~ L-4 l 5- It: 3
-- ; . :' r **5 ".- G 4.'
i _
' M R. ".
7 N D U ^?
"RTELEDYNE ENGINEERING SERVICES INDEPENDENT DESIGN REVIEW SHOREHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION CONTROLLED DOCUMENT ICR NO.
5633- 5
Reference:
RRF No. 5633- L Date: 3/4/83 PMR No. 5633- 2 Final Classification of Item: Closed Reviewer Signature
- s. $ k '
ImmitteeChaimanSignatNe D.E Mss Project Manager Signature
TME ENGNEERING SERVICES ICR No. 5633-5 10 SUMARY During the initial field survey to determine actual plant configuration on June 14, 1982, all supports were checked. The spring can on support 1E21-PSSH-043 did not have a nameplate installed making verification of as-built information impossible. On September 3,1982 a subsequent field survey indicated the nameplate was still missing. Since SWEC Specification SH1-68 requires each spring to have a nameplate a violation existed and ICR-5633-5 was issued as a Finding on November 2, 1982. The SWEC response indicates the following: (1) Support originally inspected and accepted by SWEC Field Quality Control on February 10, 1981. (2) The FQC Inspection Report indicates the nameplate was present and stamped correctly. (3) The support was turned over to LILCO start-up in March of 1981. (4) Between March 1981 and June 14, 1982 (date of TES field survey) the nameplate was removed. (5) Issue 10 of IE21-PSSH-043 dated July 20, 1982 resulted in a Phase III rework request E21-205 datc.d August 20, 1982. Issue 10 was a modification to the support and the Phase III rework was not generated for replacement of the nameplate only. (6) The support modification was completed and signed off by FQC on October 5, 1982.
TME EPGNEERING SERVICES ICR No. 5633-5 - (7) The subsequent field survey by TES on September 3,1982 was prior to actual modification of the support. TES inspected this support again on February 16, 1983 and found that the nameplate was in place and the modifications required by Issue 10 of IE21-PSSH-043 were accomplished. The FQC inspection report of October 5, 1982 was also reviewed and found to be acceptable. A concern still existed at TES that this nameplate would not have been replaced if Issue 10 of the support had not been issued resulting in support modification. During 6 meeting at SWEC on February 15, 1983, SWEC Procedure STP No. 811 "B0P Systems-Thermal Expansion Testing" was reviewed. This procedure requires that all spring hangers be inspected as part of the thermal expansion testing program and hot and cold settings be checked for compliance with design documentation. Since the specific support of concern has been corrected by the normal construction process and since adequate procedures (STP No. 811) exist to detect. this type of problem for spring hangers prior to plant start-up, this item should be Closed. i n
T F W NE ENGNEERING SERVCES Technical Report TR-5633-4 A3.4 ICR No. 5633-9 TES issued ICR No. 5633-9 on November 30, 1982 as a Finding on the approach used to calculate friction forces on supports. Two procedures were available to TES and provided different criteria. Further, there wasn't sufficient definit. ion of what forces were used in calculating friction effects. l LILC0/SWEC issued .a Disposition Response on January 24, 1983 which indicated that Engineering Division Memorandum EMD-80-3, " Friction Forces for the Design of Pipe Support Guides and Restraints" provided guidance for friction force calculation and replaced existing procedures. EMD-80-3 was made available to TES for review at a maeting at SWEC offices on March 15, 1982. EMD-80-3 was less conservative than one of the existing procedures, defined what forces were to be used in calculating friction effects, and is a reference in the Shoreham Design Criteria Document. Further, EMD-80-3 is a reflection of current nuclear industry practice. Since EMD-80-3 clarifies the definition of forces to be used in calculating friction effects and is referenced in the Design Criteria an adequate procedure was in place and this item was Closed.
WTF1 prWNE ENGJNEERING SERVCES Enclosure (1) EP-1-017 Independent Design Review Shoreham Nuclear Power Station Internal Comittee Resolution Form ICRNo.7 5633-
Reference:
RRF No. 5633-g4/ Date: ///2V[// PMR No. 5633- M 7'/fg in !pr n m, / Internal Committee Resolution: Ca,,,,,,; Nee a yors wii4 -Hoe ve vie wasfr e , d % je c 4 s Aa .c da.d A re view a f +/re e a/en/< 6 s Ma na sv. !"consitAd
.pja. ,,,e /], al a-of e hotea d iod is
$$ClTW foyo c ff(, *or Y!*'! *e Insjyne $ hke a os ca o i,,,p c. / ne deya es o/ de 'De siv ~ ,
Classification of Item after Comittee Resolution: N#1 'hj i W a 6 d.l bm h-]bn Com ProjehanagerSign$ture8 be[ChairmanSichte itte N ember I nature A . [Comittee Member Signature
,- , , - , , - , ----,. . .n. , . - - - ,c-
ENGINEERING SERVICEF f'] QC{ y* TELEDYNE ENGINEERING SERVICES CONTROLLED DOCUMENT TES PROJ. NO. 56.G3 DATE _ [ RECORD COPY Independent Design Review "' Shoreham Nuclear Power Station Reviewer Report Form ' RRF No. 5633- g Reviewer Name: Eg,c h ea cate: fj _g _a2 Classification of Item: Cpm rr m Reference Documents:
' 89r bTans 8ee-Suppea.y Mo Du cT bo9Po&7 C Aefm.4 Fo 2 ' r~r S - L Nue m 'Pa m Sr.<riou.
Sow y c % .7, s % u /e2,_es.ofe , e a,. as,s 1
/ 6A t - PsA, o to
/ e31-Ps4 oS*1 iggg. pse off i e~Ao - Psa. cif Description of Item: / 62/-PSA o4 7 b utPak r5 PSk olb, PSG-of7, PSRobf cAccucaYe FRtcTo o^I f5Y ' u s ,a c, o.2 s (omy # 7 my,ay ,
$vpeos.ys PSAcot., Psao2.o, PS-(6 2 g PS R d67 caccut.47s c=sseroaa a v oss as o 1 x %~ Voa.ee:
Sei s~ moonem in au- uses ne <%l.
'3 d7 99 oc aDuSG~ 00e5 N OT S(Dec t=f tuI+c=7*//9L tuo w c r ca cr S *u'O oucY iS e~ 4o A o A c 7'o (o O tSecacGnaeM occ cha S c Q-- T o 7sec. L c40 3.
PT Ytm r Reviewer bignat.ure
g p hesteese, P.Pr suMws.f , A.e on c./ supQ 4.5.2 Friction gg4 g gg $ m yogg g g ' sterm .a
' j!
In cddition to the given components of the individual load types, -
,r l
friction forces will be introduced at sliding surfaces wherever !i}.
- 3 gl they may be considered to add a significant additional load on thm component being designed. Friction forces shall be 'id f
calculated when the maximum pipe motion in the unrestrained i. ! 3 direction is in excess of 1/16 in. These forces are limited by ~ I tha maximum normal force and friction coefficient at the sliding 'j surface. They are also limited by pipe motion in conjunction i The s with support stiffness in the unrestrained direction. & :) cvarage value of the frictional force shall be taken as 0.30 w eeem- r5=
~
l i. , [. m sn.W m wwwaseenemwIn the case of sliding surfaces using ] l timas the normal force. m asseemaneummansaame j lubrite, a coefficient of 0.15 may be used. Refer to Reference .
,' i 42 for a step-by-step procedure for determining fr'iction force. ,f
\ ,, ( Fcr supports designed prior to the issuance of Reference 42 ') f
! (March 6, 1980), requirements for calculating friction forces are
'd given in Reference 39. When a pipe support calculation utilizing q.2 the W
~ this earlier friction criteria is updated for any reason, YI (il
. procedures given in Reference 42 may be utilized in recalculating th
. friction forces. c:
( !l! b
; 4.5.3 Load combinations l
; Within each loading condition there exist a number of loading i
combinations. These load combinations arise because of the fpossible variation in the signs and magnitudes of the earthquake . 2, and 3-way _-- and other occasional loads, and in the case of 1, l { l
SPTF1 FrVNE ENGNEERNG SERVCES Enclosure (1) EP-1-017 RECORD COPY Independent Design Review g PRO 1. NO. v b Shoreham Nuclear Power Station CONTROLLED Project Manager Resolution Form DOCUMENT TES PROJ. NO ( kgM DATE o 2C82 PMRNo.4 5633- 16 Reference RRF 140. 5633-169 Date: li[tS[81 Description of Resolution: THis AtcEe556b to lag.F W . S633 -M M iTeu ts N UN 8T IE"Li - MIE W . [T APPEAR.S THWT sextir coa 3posio4 EMiSTS wit 14 assperW Tb Tiff di'h'dCIEtT@EiA. IM IOM6
#5a3'T.
' CMet Tth! TOTAL FDece t 5 05eb (M OThest tT
'True To 3eTe94.ics ettETt+eE
~ TEiS HAs o mT s h'. ti w!!i s ALL88CA#te sioce iT Ao'f soprosys ta,: loo @ WT AMiMET ts 7.eQuimen APPEA94 A Pettytou icird Jo s.T t Pica T ioAJ appu cAsse PeoM G T W 4tTH mes,Pec:7 TO Ttela PlitoCebuIEE. Classification of Item after Resolution: DTCCT (kL YlOQld i Reviewer Signature f/. S Project Manager Signature ~~
INDEPENDENT DESIGN REVIEW , TELEDYNE ENGINEERING SERVICES (TES)
.l A N 2 619R3 PROJECT 5633 SFOREHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION Teledyne kngineering Services teCs system TELEDYNE ENGINEERIN Dispos 1 TION Resp 0NsE FORn CONTROLLED g DOCUMENT DATE ICR NO. 5633- 9 RECORD COPY pnR NO. 5633-164 REV. O RFR NO. 5633-164 REV. 0
/> ) , ,wsg SWEC Responsible Tngineer/date
/ hs+l0La,I h, as.
Engineer /date Sk C Projsc
%% % / u LILCO Projec - Enginelr/date[
ICR NO. 5633 - 9 Rev. 0 CLASSIFICATION: Finding REFERENCE DOCUMENTS
- 1) Pipe Stress, Pipe Support and Duct Support Criteria for the Shoreham Nuclear Power Station
- 2) Support calculation packages:
- a) 1E21-PSR018 d) 1E21-PSR002 b) IE21-PSR057 e) 1E21-PSR020 c) 1E21-PSR065 f) .1E21-PSR025 g) IE21-PSR067 TES STATEMENT OF FINDING Supports PSR018, PSR057, PSR065 calculate f,riction by using 0.3 x (Dwt. and Thermal). Supports PSR002, PSR020, PSR025, PSR067 calculate friction by using 0.3 x Normal Force. Seismic movements in all cases are 41/16" but procedure does not specify whether normal force should only be load acting at the time displacemnt occurs or total loads.
TES CONCLUSION OF FINDING The internal committee agrees with the reviewer and Project Manager. A review of the calculations shows that the method and choice of load is inconsistent and impacts the design process and, therefore, can impact the adequacy of the design.
RESPONSE
The design practice empinyed provides a design of supports appropriately addressing those criteria necessary to result in a quality design. The following data have been used to calculate frictional forces for the (7) supports mentioned: , Normal Force Support No. U DL + Thermal DL + Thermal + Seismic PSR002 .45 X i PSR018 .3 X PSR020 .3 X PSR025 .45 X PSR057 .3 X PSR065 .3 X PSR067 .3 X 4 B9-314-K
,w. , , . . - - - - . . . , - . , - , , . , . - , , . - -
r 2 The frictional force is calculated by: F = EN Where F = frictional force, Ib y =. coefficient of friction (dimensionless) N = normal force, Ib The Shoreham Design Criteria Document - (page 4-9, paragraph 4.5.2) states: When a pipe support calculation utilAzing this earlier friction criteria (SH1-068, page 1-21) is updated for any reason, the procedures given in Reference - 42 (EMD-80-03) may be utilized. This permissive methodology allows selection of the criteria by the engineer / designer performing the -
. calculation. The intent is to provide this individual with a choice of acceptable techniques that may be applied where appropriate. EMD-80-03 represents Stone & Webster's current criteria for calculating frictional forces (refer to RFI-17). The following statements are extracted from EMD-80-03:
- 1) )" Friction forces are only considered significant for signed loads;
, friction forces from cyclic loads may be neglected."
2)- "For those areas where pipe motion in the unrestrained direction is negligible ( <1/16") the friction force is.also negligible, and does not have to be considered." In reference to (1) above, a) PSR002 and 025 make use of a coefficient of friction p= .45 and include seismic loads as part of the normal force as specified in SH1-068 because both were qualified using the results of past analyses done prior to the issuance of EMD-80-03. This is allowed in the present revision of the Design Criteria Document and is consistent with the method used at the time. b) PSR020 and 067 use the coefficient of friction specified in EMD-80-03 but include seismic loads as part of the normal force. This exceeds i the requirements of EMD-80-03 and is conservative and acceptable. c) PSR018, 057, and 065 calculate frictional forces based on the requirements of EMD-80-03. In reference to (2) above, no pipe motion comparisons were made and frictional forces were used to qualify all (7) supports. This exceeds the requiremnts of EMD-80-03 and is conservative and acceptable, i The methods used as outlined above make use of past and present criteria as allowed by the Shoreham Design Criteria Document and meet or exceed the requirements of EMD-80-03 and are conservative. l CORRECTIVE ACTION None required. Compliance with Shoreham design criteria is demonstrated above. B9-314-K
3
- PREVENTIVE ACTION None . r'equired . . Inconsistencies noted . are - allowed by Shoreham design criteria. .
COMPLIANCE DATE None. Full compliance exists. SAFETY IMPLICATION None. Existing designs are adequate and in accordance with Shoreham design criteria. J s 5 1 2
- I e
i B9-314-K 4
= , -emw y .-, * -,,--pry r-
<y,avy > .- e.- ,g7,y.--., ,-,.w,,n,, ,---,vs--7 , y ,,~m,w w,, w,,we,,,,%,,w- , ---,,v,-wir ,--,-,,v -,cv-=,.
I l
'RTELEDYNE ENGINEERING SERVICES INDEPENDENT DESIGN REVIEW SHOREHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION CONTROLLED DOCUMENT ICR N0.
5633- 9
Reference:
RRF No. 5633 164 Date: 3/10/83 PMR No. 5633 164 Final Classification of Item: Closed A Reviewer Signature D. ' s CommitteeChairmanSihture M7AS, Project Manager Signature
"&TELEDYNE ENGINEERING SERVICES ICR No. 5633-9 _1_
1.0 SUMARY During the initial review cf pipe support calculations for the Core Spray System, an apparent inconsistency in the methods for calculating friction forces was noted. At this time only two design documents governing the calculation of friction forces on supports were available. Specification No. SHI-68, Rev. 2, specification for the design and fabrication of nuclear power plant piping support and pipe stress, pipe support, and duct support criteria document for the Shoreham Nuclear Power Station (DCD). The procedures in the DCD supercede the procedures in Spec. No. SHI-68 which raise the initial concern of why the procedure for calculating friction forces was changed. Also of concern was what forces were used in calculating friction forces. The DCD states "the average value of the frictional force shall be taken as 0.3 times the normal force," but does not explain what loads the normal force is composed of. Seven supports were reviewed which contained calculations of friction forces. In these calculations two different methods were used for calculating the normal force. For supports IE21-PSR018, IE21-PSR057 and IE21-PSR065 only the deadweight and thermal loads were used to calculate the normal force. Supports IE21-PSR002, IE21-PSR020, IE21-PSR025 and IE21-PSR067 used deadweight, thermal and seismic loads in calculating the normal foce. Since the spec did not specify whether seismic loads were included in the normal force, the discrepancy was a possible violation of the spec and was issued as a Finding on November 30, 1982. SWEC in their response to this Finding, ICR No. 5633-9, referenced Engineering Disision Memorandum No. EMD-80-3 which is titled "Frictior, Forces for the Design of Pipe Support Guides and Restraints." This document was also made available to TES for review at a meeting on March 15, 1982 at SWEC offices.
'RTs 1 pry /NE ICR No. 5633-9 ENGINEERING SERVICES
-2_
The friction criteria in the DCD was taken from EMD 80-3 and this replaced Spec. SHI-68 to provide a more exact method for calculating frictional forces and to be more representative of industrial practice. Spec. SHI-68 is more conservative then EMD 80-3 in both coefficient of friction and definition of normal force. Therefore previous calculations need not be redone and when revisions are made to the calculations the new procedures may be utilized. EMD 80-3 defines what is included in the normal force as " friction forces are only considered significant for signed loads; friction forces from cyclic loads may be neglected." Signed loads are defined as loads acting in one direction such as deadweight and thermal or a dynamic load which does not change sign for a significant portion of its duration, such as a safety relief
~
valve discharge. Based on the information from EMD 80-3, all the support calculations meet the design criteria and those that include all seismic loads or have a higher friction coefficient are conservative. This procedure agrees with methods currently used in the nuclear industry for pipe support design and is acceptable to TES. Since EMD 80-3 clarifies the definition of normal force and is a reference for the design criteria originally reviewed this item should be closed. k
'#TF1 PTVNE ENGINEERING SERVCES Technical Report TR-5633-4 A3.5 ICR 100. 5633-10 TES issued ICR No. 5633-10 on November 30, 1982 as a Finding on the SWEC procedures establishing review methods of vendor calculations and the implementation of these procedures. A disposition response was received from LILC0/SWEC on February 10, 1983.
The major issue raised by TES was failure by the vendor to con-sider the cantilever bending mode in determining acceptability of the fundamental frequency design of valves. This concern was raised during review of a specific valve (1E21-MOV-035) design report. The LILC0/SWEC response indicated that a procedure was in place at SWEC to review valve vendor reports and designs and that the Reviewer could have accepted the specific valve under question without having a vendor analysis for cantilever bending. This acceptance could be based on engineering judgement and/or calculations performed by the Reviewer. SWEC computed the cantilever mode for all 27 Category 1 valves supplied by the vendor responsible for supplying the valve in question. All valves had frequencies above 33 Hz. TES Reviewers went to the SWEC offices on March 22, 1983 to review all procedures and sign-off sheets related to acceptance of valve vendor design documents. Further, valve design documents were reviewed. The purpose of this review was to determine whether a deficiency in the design process existed which could have resulted in failure to demon-strate valve frequency design adequacy. This subsequent review by TES personnel indicated that such a deficiency did not exist and the process in place at SWEC was acceptable and this item was Closed.
W F W NE ENGINEERING SERVCES Enclosure (1) EP-1-017 Independent Design Review Shoreham Nuclear Power Station Internal Comittee Resolution Form CONTROLLED DOCUMENT ICR No. 5633_fp
Reference:
RRF No. 5633- 2. 7 Date: ///2 W/pg PMR No. 5633- 2.7 Internal Comittee Resolution: /-Md In e en no } a 9 ver w o /h +h e. we e, ewe n C o ,e m ; H e e d o e s or /be Periec h Manaser, r/em L a n d 2. sl'
+he RRF ha<n. been c la 1.ri Aec/ a .s a. f,*n hng t/re ferls /desa i,y +As rc since /de o om mi
./wp , Jem s can impas/ -fAe ede.p.aoey sl Ne
' Des;9n t/.$ /em 3 o / fle R EF hes be en cla ssikeel a .t an oJ.iervd,on j, f},e rc.
Classification of Item after Comittee Resolution: [/F1 'r/J i ~ 94Ald. 3.E Me Comittee Chairman Signabre Project Manager Signature x 2:L,, .
' Co e Member aturc C [ ittee Mem M gnature
"WTELEDYNE ENGINEER!NG SERV!CES Enclorure (1)
EP-1 017 RECORD COPY retemwr m.., , ,,.u (' g g' ,,' s,,' ' - . O "'"!rCEs PROJ. NO __ 9:M L w ure.a] T6 PeiGJ. no.- .,, : s DNc ::, ._ Independent Design Review Shoreham fluclear Power Station Reviewer Report Form RRF No. g, /[g iteviewer flama: j , ( ' i SaccN)#0in # f Date: 7- Z d - 7'2.- Classification of Item (Per 3.8.1): 0b54v-vcb s, Referec.ce Docu.nents: O)<<,sw,.c_(b.l9s,3yS uvi, Arcl./Lwlis',)\hl~e ,E5*:%-3 (2 ) f-w) {pn ((sc M i e IJo . C M1- M,)4D , 6 e i u w, (_, s o - 2 1 - V Dacrip; ion of Item: 1o' Qol,, Q\vs 6 21 MOV - obs , C 5 it .- 7g fciyc9 g h 9ed O') - i k s, b clN-evmm e Mst lowesk p,ivve ( (v o,,uttr1 wcat ks.
<, u pwa,uw(qu +. ag
'rL IcM vt (,1,cs e,L.v~ .,.; ,4ce L 4, a ,s Q ,, c.12l f_c v.&
, [v hv<po've g 04 49 Ha. T6 sif ,t(,n 1 b sp,c d,., J ,,u ,~
' ') 6 N M h (G'{ '2')) . Th, r tkcsu cloes nci sw p.cd 4 lu cd> ",0.
d u d ssi w bol 6 t sip.(.cc. ce vi d uc 4c c hiw pu<4'<c
- 2) Q M tL) uses c_ lou 1 <Jlo, L L< Mcs ,
lun. rb 2d N o L 1,cb % ( c r .f.,t 6 ufo r ca GJe Chu 2 %. s disa q ~ < 3 As ad i-pd wL <byu ) # 1 J,, t>,t kc.; acp,.6co.<< win 4~c 4 o relic ~ b l< em e J uv<: , gant wee _ w on m o u_ [ov e'c)
)C tear
a e aeggSys cJ J uc . a .+ ay ,
-<4.- e< <- 4. s 2 e w au w.~ c3u 3+,4 L ss-s _4 m m , . h m.c ao ~+ - e <+
64 -; 6 siy.f,c t tl ^Je 70<< y J i docq w lx4ive % Jnnu pn. c m , < e . 4
.- j l
'A'TF1 FD(NE ENGNEERING SERVCES Enclosure (1)
EP-1-017 Independei.t Design Review Shcreham N> clear Power Station Project Mr :ager Resolution Form PMR No. 5633 t*7 , Reference RRF No. 5633 11 Date: 8[25/8t Description of Resolution: 39,,F g MiW5b k NECM3LdG COMC.LO 5tCWC %M i M oV-ost ts noT ( O A G R.e f t>J/ ItetteWeTE. TO ACHF90A<>l b3T iMPet.TTb totTH EetPet.T 6 MPeoPet. , w ts c AmteAc4 11 h,0w4un N EEV16cEA % Ota (uu t Tbh5 AMb VMer is AVfQUATe . HeuJeise, MPeeAca \% pot pgcPeL AMD "Nf W T SHCCW hdif 1LcHLSeb 14ct eta 8*Li. M *t e' t!s ec e.s Ibo r (3) EdP0ATioc5 Adb 4ATH 1h54 A9tir W s401FtCAcT (.ogy. Re19eLT PecSA9L.T GG L Te Dr.e50LTS. Utebr 9ftodt D AF*I treblFisb totteM (i) ArMb (t) AS*VEI ANiseb- ) Classification of Item after Resolution: OMATlOd TELEDYNE ENGINEERING SERVICES . , CONTROLLED DOCUMENf RECORD COPY J Re v i ***' E$ignature TES FRO). NO.uTfJ, J~ nej. so. <2' R ? DATE _ AL _'_' . k. ' Project Manager Signature
.,._,,,,..y , , . . . , -. ., , . - - _ . - . .
1
~
Yb NE 1 ENGNEERING SERVICES TELEDYNE ENGINEERING SERVICES Enclosure (1) EP-1-017 CONTROLLED DOCUMENT TES PROJ. NO._hn _ Independent Design Review DATE- .a 4s2 _ Shoreham Nuclear Power Station RECORD COPY Project Manager Resolution Form
-]
PC.'L Of 2 PMR No. 5633- 21 Reference RRF No. 5633 't."1 Date: $[7.5/8 t Description of Resolution: VAWEs, Ach044ED "b4 (4.) A 1EEN64 o f= ALA Tae ear g e nemmed m T.ePoET tooote EE A PPfECP E LA T E.
~.
d Classification of Item after Resolution: $g((g7//fg l _ 0 - Reviewer Signa"ture b . E A sa Project Manager Signature
DSM E$ FEB 101983 INDEPENDENT DESIGN REVIEW
&3.3 Teledyne Engineenng Sem. ces TELEDYNE ENGINEERING SERVICES (TES)
, PROJECT 5633 SHOREHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION LPCS SYSTEM DISPOSITION RESPONSE FORM ICR NO. 5633- 10-1 PMR NO. 5633- 27 REV. _ 0 RRF NO. 5633- 27 REV. 0 YJ C Responsible Engineer (Date agCPIojectEngineer/Da k - !O . 3 utCO ero;ect waineer/Dat B9-11600.02-100-T
FC9 ? 019R3 G - ICR NO.'5633- 10 ~ Rev. O~ Iten 1 4 Ielodyne Engineering Services CLASSIFICATION: Finding-REFERENC2 DOCUMENTS: 1) Seismic Analysis' Report, Anchor / Darling Valve E5836-8 4
- 2) SWEC Specification No. SH1-8 SAD
- Revision 1, 10-29-91 j
TES STATEMENT OF FINDING 7 Re ference (1) fails to determine the Icscst natural frequency mode for the yoke support. ,The lowest frequency calculated is cased on frame bending mode (B7.2 Hz). The cantilover bending mode results in a natural frequency of PJ H3. This satisfies the specified minimum value of 33 Ha (Reference 2). This item does not impact the adequacy of the design but has signifi-canct relative to design practice. TES CCHCLUSIO!! OF FINDING The committee does not agree with the internal reviewer or the Project Manager. Items 1 and 2 of the RR7 have been classified as a finding by the i IC, since the committee believes these two items can impact the adequacy cf f the Design Process. Item 3 of the RR? has been classified as an observa- { tion by the IC. i l'
- I s i
RESPONSE
f The valve vendor considers dynamic characteristics of the assembly in both h* principal directions of the cross section. The fundamental (lowest frequency) , modes in each of the two directions are referred to as the " frame" mode and the "cantilover" mode, as identified on Attachment 10-1A. In the frame mode the two separate portions of the cross section daform in double curvature analogously to two columns in a rigid frame. In the cantilever mode, the two separate portions deform in a single curvature analogously to a canti-i- levered beam. In the seismic qualification report referenced herein, the vendor has only calculated the " frame" mode. The vendor supplies one qualification report for each valve model and nize. For Shorcham, there are 27 Category I valves frcm this vendor, representing i-11 different models and sizes. The vendcr'c calculated frequencies for thece 11 types of valvc: are shown in r tachment 10-19. In cases whare the vendor calculated frequencies are cloce to the Shcreham minimun requirement of l 33 Ha, SNEC would verify the vendor frequency calculation. As a result f l this finding, in those cases where the cantilever frequency w ta not cul-culated in the vendor report (denoted by an asterick) SWEC has re-calculated this frequency by the vendor's method of Attachment 10-1C (SWEC may have l performed this calculation during the initial review of the vendor report, I however_this would not be documented on a SWEC vendor review form). The ' actual details'of this calculation by SWEC for the unbiect valve cantilever frequency are presented in Attachment 17-ID. It is evident that none et thase frequencien are b.-dow 33 fiz. l no t v n.) 09 inn-T 1
4 In order to demonstrate that the lower frequency for this valve would not have a material ef fect on the piping analysis, we have re-run the analysis using the lower frequency value. The results of this study substantiate the original acceptance of the valve. These results show an insignificant difference from the_ analysis of record. A review of all other Category I motor-operated valves (regardless of supplier) .shows that the vendors either tested to determine or calculated by analysis the frequencies for both the frame mode and the cantilever mode. SWEC review of vendor technical documents is carried out in acco'rdance with EAP 9.2 and EMTP 8.22 which requires verification of compliance with all aspects of the specifications. Vendor analysis reports demonstrating that ;
- their equipment can withstand the specified dynamic environment are reviewed with respect to design input, method of analysis, modeling, acceptance criteria, and general credibility of the conclusions. The results of SWEC's review of this analysis are reported on a SWEC form (Attachment 10-lE) delineating additions and corrections required for approval. This form and the vendor's qualification report, stamped and signed by the reviewer, are returned to the vendor for appropriate correc-tive action. The resubmittal is reviewed for compliance with any defects noted in the form.
In addition to the reviews noted above, a final review of the qualification documentation has been conducte.1 in accordance with the guidelines of
) Standard Review Plan 3.10 (SQRT Qualification Program). This final review developed the as-built record and provided added assurance that the equip-ment will perform its safety function during and af ter a required dynamic event.
1 CORRECTIVE ACTION None required. The review of vendor qualification was carried out in accordance wth SWEC procedures. Our program is geared toward verifying 4 that the vendor designed valve meets the Shoreham minimum requirement of 33 Hz. As demonstrated in Attachment 10-1.B and discussed above, all Category 1 motor-operated valves meet this requirement. PREVENTIVE ACTION None required. SWEC program for review of seismic qualifications described [ above provides assurance that the design process is adequate and properly implemented. As discussed above, a review of Category I MOVs confirms SWEC i acceptance of the Vendor qualification reports.
- COMPLIANCE DATE j Not applicable. Valves cited are in accordance with specification require-
- ments.
SAFETY IMPLICATION t None. As demonstrated above, both the valves and the process of reviewing seismic documentation are adequate. B9-ll600.02-100-T 2.
ATTACHMENTS: , ' 10.1 A. Valve Yoke Cross Section 4- 10.1 B. .V' endor Frequency Calculations 10.1 C.- Example of Vendor Cantilever Frequency Calculation I 10.1 D. " Cantilever" Mode Fundamental Frequency Calculation for Valve IE21*MOV 035A, B' l 10.1 E. Review of Suppliers Technical Docunent Form a 1 t , i t 4 i i i l i 4 h I- .B9-11600.02-100-T 3. p..-,, . --ry,. y- .--,,--n- y-.,,y.%., gy,p., .-,,,.y.. - - ---n.,3-,- ,,m.y.,.,,,m%r-_y._~my,,,__-w-. ~,mw-,m,m--,w,.m-,m, . . , , . ~ . .
~
A4tachment 10.- t . A Valve Yoke Cross Section Axis of " Frame" Mode k
\'%
.l ,%
\
Axis of
" Cantilever" Mode i :
~
\
g^t
\
. ,k /
\ l -
i e e i Figure 1 , i h l - - - . . i
- - - - - - - - - . _ . _-- ~~
Vendor Frecuency Calculations kMmgd [Q-l,6 Calcu3ation Valve Model Frame - Hz Cantelever - Hz 88AD-1 10"-300 # globe ** 67 33 ' 88AD-2 10"-300 F angle globe 86 62 88AD-3 14"-150 # gate 114 79 88AD-4 14"-900 # gate 78 52 88AD-5 16"-300 ft gate 114 101 x 88AD-6 18"-300 # gate 79 59
- 88AD-7 20"-150 # gate 67 42
- 88AD-8 20"-900 # gate 146 149 88AD-9 22"-900 # gate 124 113 8 SAD-10 24"-900 # gate 86 81 88AD-11 20"-1500 # gate 232 270 i
** Subject Valve
- Calculated by S'n'EC following Vendor's me.thod.
f
C fl}+fY L & () V V Giv//O IC' ' " YV&JU L L L */ftc.04 >Ff?UN b&7~7lLWt C -
~y R- 7 '~'D Dr te P'/bb 5' Shee: Q er 4.t "
Cheched cy 0I*" Daze G/? 'r'7:/ T? s- /:~ l i ~
^Ps pit t p-] C l <-
l ! ! S.:t - res t - V :
,)l;g g pg,q A i 49%-Cfoi (f.ed. A) l ,N y -
\. '
T t 8 S
//
X=N 5 I i I i j i I i
- 2. Natural Frequency Ca r/4CVCA AbOE Assume yoke to be built in st the end connected c the valve and the other is grJ.ded as a cantelever bes=.
The mass (V; op + 1/3 W; ycte) is acting on the base er operator. Natural frequency, f = 1 1 k ) cps 27 6 E K - Spring constant and M = mass L AOQShmevd lO ,- 1.C
By O!*A _ _ DL~s ?!v ? '
;19e k ;' $
..heckec by Ca h! *a:e "/9' 7 F 6
Moman cf In= -ia ef C::rvec Yeke '_ees , 7 n = width of yoke legs ,
? ' Y R3 = outsice radius 1 s Ri = inside radius '
Rm = mean radius Ye g y, I e - R, = R$ + Ro I ; . X 2 lj gg\ ;
'\-
\
Rm l i Rg
'll/
\ N. I ,',' /
~. .
> /
Csc.+t rs O- b The cross section of the yoke legs is shown in the sketch. Since the cross section is symetrical aeout both the x-x and y-y axes, point 0 is the centroid of tne area. The moment of inertia about x-x is: I xx = Ipda
= //y rdrde2 y = rsine
= Ilr: sin e rorde
= //r sin 3 2 drds r varies from Rt to Ro ; e varies from -6 to +6 So:
r3 sin 2ee733 Ixx = 2 / If
= 2 i.' sin:e r"~ E o '
de 4 Wg i
>=*6mm .% ,, ,
..m
5; b~ Da:e Y/ pc?ad!4
- u- a LC' Che::ke:: ::y ,. Oa e
- 2 1,,=R[-R((* Sins:E 2
= Ro "- R,(-4cotesine+he{
2
=R,f.-R[-hcosesine+48-(-scos(-6) sin (-s)-sc 2
0 Since sin e= h/2 . 90 Rm . . sin (-e)=-sine cos(-6) =,cose Thus: 1xx=R"-Rj"e(.0174)-sinecose) o 2 sine = .73(3 e = gr_o coss=.44f I,, = (5,*/K)"-(%/IM" ( 4? 0)x.0174-(4$)(4/f) I xx * *!b I"* Natural Frequency (f):
= 1076x10 6 ( PT,/5) = f'7/SY/T 1b[ft K = 36EIxx L* i MP E = 29.9x105 psi Weightofoperator(Wop)=/S64 lbs. (/Ad4'b5 I b Weight of y'oke legs (Wyt)= /05 ins M = (Wap + .1.Wyt) + 32.2 = z/0 09 slugs
$ , h ps> 2 3 eps f = 0.159 =0.159j e
G WuumuD m
STONE E Y/EBETER ENGINEERING CORPOR AT!Otv CALCULATION SHEET
*= kNOchmed to-1.D C ALCULATION IDENTIFICATION NUMBER J. C. O R W.O. NO. DIVISION 0 GRCUP CALCUL ATION NO. OPTIONAL TASK CODE PAGE
/ / 6 0C.o'L. Y '7 7"~s. :-so /
t NT'i! g vet if(a e t -f.iao& EW <Y.- FrfCug,.*=/.
. Ca .'. : s M o ,.e ;=e e 1/,4 a.sc.- / E 2. / 5 i n e / 4 'l s A d /
S hd MDA. bAA 44NC hpon 9~ sWo. /0-3coGL. llER
, hf5V -
j* - I'3 _ M3,
/%mear ow LennA of Yak.c les Gsess- Scenarv
~
is Ar/: . /- ,,
'%.-t Levin. Phat
~
,. ~, L; as is j o ,
, p f
i, /'- / - - (
... ._ . 4 = 4. *1 ( -
. g. , v. . . .
. 2'* y .= .----l..f- .s.. .f.Q).[9 .
.c;*Jr-aosc)
.~_~.~ di
- wt_ q.,c c) (.,.-si4,ic c, >)
. ~ M F,; z,3 /~4
~
30 NFFHCZ: C l,.; f - _ . _ j-- . .--krx x(wi.Y %.a 4 , ')'
=
..-..h, p. n p L ll 8 **$ W'CE M ***=
~ ~ ~ '
, ,g Mst,.( ea m av yek< t.<q: m es,mm. er fuvi eP sa bPfr#$lysJrC Cem't%rtl1, h
^
42 bb t.f h7/C t/ 6-C W W G A/ es ' . 2
< - 2 72.
'3 Y W-
. ic 0. ,(2. ,oi.
\
h.l s . i. I 9. s.ll .:~--~ c.: l c,
~. a. -t=
a p-, ,v-+y-.-.- g, ~w q-www *w-w-vw ,,aeme
.o AnoscAnmeot f ,_f a STONE 6 WEBSTER ENGINEERING CORPORATION REVIEW OF SUPPLIER'S TECHNICAL DOCUMENT A 5040.SI B # AGE OF SUPPLI ER P.O. NO DOCUMENT TITLE DOC.I D. NO R Ev. DATE DATE RECIEVED SPEC.NO./ DATE REV. ADDEN. SPEC. TITLE D NEW SU8MITTAL D RESU8MITTAL GOVERNING CODE (S) L DATE(S) SPECIAL REOutREMENTS DWG WERENCE(S) '
S&W SUPPLIER PROJECT J .O. MO. RESPONSISLE ENG l.DCATION EXT. DATE. SPE CI ALIST COMM ENTS: STON( & WE35t[R i_ _ _ . _ . .
- w. . ~. w...m am . .a.,
amas,ts as measu 22 tot SMC:Tr.atta weaccerras a moves as arvm O aa seners a sua secs, arntwas J. O. N3.
$9(C. NO.
a
~ ~ - - - - - - - - ~ ~ ' - ^ ^ ~ ' - - -
- Aw*
- RESUBMITTAL Rt. QUIRED W
D YES O NO REVIEW ER DEPT./ Div. DATE LOCATION EXTENSION
._ =
. . . = .. -e.
~-e. -
INDEPENDENT DESIGN REVIEW pgg 7,01983 TELEDYNE ENGINEERING SERVICES (TES) Teledyne Engineering Services PROJECT 5633 SHOREHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION LPCS SYSTEM DISPOSITION RESPONSE FORM ICR NO. 5633- 10-2 PMR NO. 5633- 27 REV. O RRF NO. 5633- 27 REV. O b S ' Responsible Engineer /Date ySCEC '12fo' ject Engin 2 7 ff l- LILCO Project EngineMr/Date
- B9-11600.02-278-P
ICR NO. 5633 10 Rev.'O Item 2 CLASSIFICATION: Finding REFERENCE DOCUMENTS: 1) Seismic Analysis Report, Anchor / Darling Valve E5836-8
- 2) SWEC Specification No. SH1-88AD, Rev. 1, 10/29/81
'TES STATEMENT OF FINDING Reference (1) uses Class 1 allowable stress values. The Reference (2)
' Valve Data . Sheet specifies this valve as Code Class 2. This discrepancy does not impact-the adequacy of the. design but has significance relative to :
applicable procedures. TES CONCLUSION OF FINDING The internal committee does not agree with the reviewer or the Project Manager. Items 1 and 2 of the RRF have been classified as a finding by the IC since the committee believes these two items can impact the adequacy of the Design Process. Item 3 of the RRF has been classified as an observa-tion by the IC. i i RESPONSE The valve ' vendor qualified the valve by appropriate analysis. SWEC review of the qualification ' report confirmed the acceptability of the valve. The vendor. did however incorrectly label the stress allowable, Sm, which is unique to ASME III, Class 1, -instead of, S, corresponding to a Class 2 designation. In spite of this " typographical error," the allowables used (for the yoke) in the vendors report were Class 2. (See table below.) This is in accordance with the requirements of the specification. i
'For those portions of the valve not classified Class 2 (see ASME III NC 1131 (b)), the vendor used ASME III Class 2 allowable (s) from NC 3521 for forgings and Appendix III-3210 for bolting (1/4 Su). The use of Code allowables for non-Code applications is common industry practice because it provides an easily referenced, broadly understood basis for acceptance of materials under stress. Note: This exceeds the requirements of the speci-fication.
i i i l B9-11600.02-278-P 1 h
N COMPARISON OF ASME III CODE, SPECIFICATION, AND VENDOR ALLOWABLES Specification Critical Class I Class 2 Vendor Sill 88AD Point Material Allowable Allowable- Allowable Allowable F50 Sy)
. 1. Yoke SA-216-WCB 35000 psi 28900 psi 28900 psi 32500 psi (1.5 Sm) (1.65 S) (1.65 S)
(1) (2) (2)
- 2. Bolts-Yoke A574 50000* 42500* 42500 psi 137000 psi to Bonnet (1.0 Sm)- (k Su)' (k Su)
- (3)' (4) (4) 4 3. Bolts-Yoke A574 50000* 42500* 42500 psi 137000 psi to Operator (1.05 Sm) (k Su) (k Su)
(3) (4) (4)
*Not an ASME III material for bolting. Allowables estimated from ASME III material of similar yield and ultimate strength.
Notes: (1) refer to NB-3222 (2) refer to NC-3521 (3) refer to Appendix I11-2120 (4) refer to Appendix 111-3210 In summary, the review of the vendor qualification report for the valve in question was conducted in accordance with EAP 9.2 and EMTP 8.22. This review confirmed that this ' valve was in conformance with specification requirements. CORRECTIVE ACTION None required. SWEC concurs with the vendor's use of ASME III, Class 2 allowables as they are more restrictive than the allowables in the specifi-cation for non-Code equipment. The " typographical error" noted above of using S in lieu of S is not significant enough to warrant reissue of the vendor r,eport. PREVENTIVE ACTION f None required. Reviews of vendor qualification reports are conducted in accordance with existing programs. COMPLIANCE DATE
'Not applicable. Valves cited are in accordance with specification require-ments.
B9-11600.02-278-P 2
SAFETY IMPl.lCATION None. Use of ASME III Code for acceptance criteria is more restrictive than non-Code allowables. ATTACIDfENT: Valve Sketch 89-11600.02-278-P 3
Alve S k e.fc.h rQR [ SPA MOTOR C EREMOV^l p EFOR
/~ OPERATOR R E*d is eis mov- o aS" /
,o - s. o~ v."'
p'. 4 =**
--~T g
q l ' ' _ gg
-/4 = -2BT i 62 -312 i 32
_-r-3 M . m 4 f
,&- ty
,-c P~~ '
I ii N_ _.I ._
, 4
-- 1 N ii _
x II I I g p O ' a 2SA ,P ti*Ml i _ i _) 2SB k s-3'
,,,; ]h 1
, t 25 +1 I r- / 2 y
}
k ,b
-3o u,1 o
gh 2.. 2-' 2-t0 N
- lu.t, _J / -
- y. u -
m
*p*. >
-i
\
s, j'
& mgW), d, r; '
'Q -
{
,, u jai 'N,
-re, I ii i
,) -
=1 Mf 3/
- s T A AV EL i
j; w a i p t, - l-~ .W4 A 'i ); t q{ i;y G \ b , top'-'yQsa,,,#4 a i
.; -i r.. w m_ k e Q.
D INDEPENDENT DESIGN REVIEW gg gg TELEDYNE ENGINEERING SERVICES (TES) bb Teledyne Engineering Services SHOREHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION TELEDYNE ENGINEERING SERVICEb LPCS SYSTEM DOCUMENT DISPOSITION RESPONSE FORM TES PROJ. NO. _ :S$3 DATE b - lO'M RECORD COPY PROJ. NO. bM ICR NO. 5633- 10-3 PMR NO. 5633- 27 REV. O RRF N0. 5633- 27 REV. 0 3 C Responsible Engineer /Date spPfofect Engineer /Dat,6 Sb J ) LILCO Project Engin& r/Date L[') i B9-Il600.02-270-J
- - , , - . ~ - . - - , ,
ICR NO. 5633 - 10 Rev. O Item 3 CLASSIFICATION: Observation REFERENCE DOCUMENTS:
- 1) Seismic Analysis Report, Anchor / Darling Valve E5836-8 TES STATEMENT OF OBSERVATION The Ref. (1) calculations of yoke section properties and stiffness contain errors. These errors do not impact the adequacy of the design but may be significant relative to design practice.
TES CONCLUSION OF OBSERVATION Committee does not agree with the internal reviewer or the Project Manager. Items 1 and 2 of the RRF have been classified as a finding by the IC since the committee believes these two items can impact the adeuqacy of the Design Process. Item 3 of the RRF has been classified as an observation by the IC.
RESPONSE
We have evaluated our design practice with regard to vendor design reports and conclude that existing practice is effective and being appropriate?y implemented. SWEC review of vendor technical documents is carried out in accordance with EAp 9.2 and EMTP 8.22 which requires verification of compliance with all a.cpects of the specifications. Vendor analysis reports demonstrating that
. their equipment can withstand the specified dynamic environment are reviewed with respect to design input, method of analysis, modeling, acceptance criteria, and general credibility of the conclusions. Early reports from a new vendor receive very close scrutiny including a complete numerical check. As confidence is gained in the vendor's competence in the analysis of this particular type of equipment, subsequent detailed arithmetic reviews may be limited to a spot check of any critical results such as a low margin of safety for stress or frequency. Our program allows for 1 acceptance of the vendo; report without correcting or documenting a minor arithmetic error as long as the error has no effect on the conclusion of the calculation. Errors, however, that affect the calculation conclusion would be cause for correction of the calculation under our program.
The results of a review of a Vendor's Qualification Report are reported on a SWEC form delineating additions and corrections required for approval. This form and the vendor's Qualification Report, stamped and signed by the reviewer, are returned to the vendor for appropriate corrective action. The resubmittal is reviewed for resolution of any comments noted on the form. When necessary, SWEC visits the vendor to resolve misunderstandings about our stated concerns. B9-ll600.02-270-J 1.
1 In the case at hand, we have conducted a recheck of the Vendor's Report. From this we concur with TES that the minor arithmetir errors noted have no impact on the adequacy of the design. Therefore, the Qualitiration Report remains accepted. CORRECTIVE ACTION None required. Calculation was again reviewed to reconfirm that the cited arithmetic errors had no effect on the calculation conclusion. It should be noted that this was specifically the purpose of the original review. In accordance with our procedures, the vendor report still does not require revision. Therefore, no corrective action is required. PREVENTIVE ACTION None required. As discussed above, minor arithmetic errors that have no effect on the calculation conclusion do not require correction as a condi-tion of acceptance of the vendor report. Conversely, if the calculation conclusion is affected, our program requires correction of the vendor report. COMPLIANCE DATE Not applicable. As demonstrated above, full compliance exists. SAFETY IMPLICATION None 4 t B9-11600.02-270-J 2.
. "WeTELEDYNE ENGINEERING SERVICES INDEPENDENT DESIGN REVIEW SHOREHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION CONTROLLED DOCUMENT ICR N0.
5633 10
Reference:
RRF No. 5633 27 Date: 3/15/83 PMR No. 5633 27 Classification of Item: Additional Concerns A A sm --4 d RevieherSignadre r 0. onrnittee Chairman Si[ture
. L44 kb Project Manager Signature
'A'TA FTT(NE ICR No. 5633-10 _1_
ENGNEERING SERVICES 1.0 St# MARY During the review of the seismic analysis report for Anchor Darling 10" Globe Valve, IE21 M0V-035, the reviewer noted that: (1) Cantilever bending mode not computed (2) Some Class 1 allowables were used in the evaluation for the Class 2 valve (3) Yoke section properties calculations contained mathematical errors LILC0/SWEC in their response stated that: (1) Vendor technical documents are checked and reviewed for compliance with applicable specifications and documents and the results of the review are reported on a SWEC form delineating additions and corrections required for approvals. (2) The cantilever mode was computed by SWEC for all 27 Category I valves supplied by vendor. The results of this analysis show all frequencies were above the minimum of 33 Hz. (3) Vendor used Class 2 allowables for yoke and based non-code bolt material (A574) allowable values on Code procedures (1/4 Su). i l The SWEC response satisfies the TES concerns regarding the adequacy of the Anchor Darling valves in question. However, concern remains relative to SWEC procedures establishing review methods of vendor calculations and implementation of those procedures.
it'F WNE ENGNEERING SERVICES ICR No. 5633-10 SWEC has stated that review of vendor technical documents is carried out in accordance with EAP 9.2 and EMTP 8.22 and the results of this review are reported on a SWEC form (Attachment 4.2 of EAP 9.2). TES requests that SWEC submit to TES EMPT 8.22 and the completed review form (Attachment 4.2 of FAP 9.2) for the following calculations: 88AD-1 88AD-5 88AD-2 88AD-6 88AD-3 88AD-7 TES also requests submittals of other relevant procedures or technical guides addressing SWEC review of vendor valve calculations. The completion of the review and the final classification of this item is contingent upon the receipt of the documents cited above. A i
"A'TELEDYNE ENGINEERING SERVICES INDEPENDENT DESIGN REVIEW SHOREHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION CONTROLLED DOCUMENT ICR N0.
5633-10. Rev. 1
Reference:
RRF No. 5633- 27 Date: 4/6/83 PMR No. 5633- 27 Final Classification of Item: Closed M_> ? --s e) ReviewerSign(ture
% 04 Committee Chairman Signatur k candfu Project Manager Signature l
l
'MTFI Pr?/NE ICR No. 5633-10, Rev. 1 ENGINEERING SERVICES
_1_ 1.0 SumARY Referenced Documents: (1) TES ICR No. 5633-10 (March 15, 1983) (2) TES Trip Report No. 1683 (March 22, 1983) (3) SWEC EMTP 8.22-0, Engineering Mechanics Seismic Report Standard Review Procedure During the original review of the seismic analysis report for Anchor Darling 10" Globe Valve, IE21 MOV-035, the TES reviewer noted that: (1) Cantilever bending mode not computed
-(2) Some Class 1 allowables were used in the evaluation for the Class 2 valve (3) Yoke section properties calculations contained mathematical errors LILC0/SWEC in their response stated that:
(1) Vendor technical documents are checked and reviewed for compliance with applicable specifications and documents and the results of the review are reported on a SWEC form delineating additions and corrections required for approvals. l (2) The cantilever mode was computed by SWEC for all 27 Category I valves supplied by vendor. The results of this analysis show all frequencies were above the minimum of 33 Hz. (3) Vendor used Class 2 allowables for yoke and based non-code bolt material (A574) allowable values on Code procedures (1/4 Su).
'MTELEDYNE ICR No. 5633-10, Rev. 1 ENGINEERING SERVICES
-2_
2.0 RESOLUTION The Reference (1) disposition raised questions relative to SWEC procedures establishing review methods of vendor calculations and implementation of those procedures relative to Shoreham, and requested certain documents be made available for further TES review. The Reference (3) procedure provides general guidelines to the SWEC reviewer of vendor seismic qualification reports. A checklist (Form 5040.51B) provides broad guidance for items' to be checked, such as, consistency with specification requirements, appropriateness of analytical techniques, assumptions, etc. More specific review aspects are determined by the reviewer whose assignment is based on SWEC internal assessment of the reviewers qualifications. The Reference (2) trip report documents the purpose and scope of the subsequent TES review and summarizes the information obtained. The review seeked to establish whether the " apparent" omission of the cantilever mode frequency check by the SWEC reviewer was indicative of an inherent deficiency in the SWEC design process as applied to i Shoreham, which may have directly caused or contributed to the omission. l ! This subsequent review indicated that such a deficiency does not exist. i TES considers the Reference (3) approach to be sufficient for general application in the design process and not a direct cause of the original finding. However, the circumstances would indicate that an oversight in the specific review aspects occurred by failure to consider and/or record the lower cantilever mode frequency. The significance of this oversight has been assessed in Reference (1) to the satisfaction of TES and this item should be closed.
WTF1 FrWNE , ENGINEERING SERVICES Technical Report ! TR-5633-4 A3.6 ICR No. 5633-12 TES issued ICR No. 5633-12 on November 30, 1982 as a Finding on the use of a vibra check baseplate for pressure switch PS012B because it was in a region of the plant subjected to a radiation dose of more than 100 MREM /HR which violated SWEC Specification SH1-343. A Disposition Response was issued by LILC0/SWEC on February 5,1983 which stated that the maximum allowable radiation dose rate referenced in the SWEC Specification refers to the dose rate during normal plant operation. During normal plant operation the radiation dose at the vibra check
' baseplate in question is less than 5 MREM /HR .
SWEC has issued a design change to clarify Specification SH1-343 by indicating that the maximum allowable dose rate is based on normal plant operating conditions. Further, a survey was performed by SWEC to , verify proper application of vibra check baseplates for all instrument mountings. Based on the above, this item was Closed. 1 l
+
S l
"#Tn AWNE ENGNEERING SERVICES Enclosure (1)
EP-1-017 Independent Design Review Shoreham Nuclear Power Station , Internal Committee Resolution Form CONTROLLED DOCUMENT ICR No. 5633_g
Reference:
RRF No. 5633 __ D J,gev,/ Date: u/24//2 PMR No. 5633-$ Rev.1 Internal Committee Resolution: 74d Tep pra 4 / Como,1' Nee a g ete s woYb lbe veview AnS p o se d Ma n <<e <. w e d o ,, H,e info ~ b'" eaa I~'/'" e / M* l 6 da /, #4, ;4 , h 3 8519as A Ye $an cf
- l l
l. Classification of Item after Committee Resolution: bM "
'M8
/ /u bllw a0 C hairmanSignakI r
ProjhManagerSignature[
/$' ~ /
[ommit r Signature db.Y ' Committee Member Signature
~
ENGINEERING SERVICES
" lp?g;" (0 RECORD COPY PROJ.NO. 6 -
TELEDYNE ENGINEERING SERVICES CONTROLLED
. DOCUMENT Independent Design Review TES PROJ. NO.. klb Shoreham Nuclear Power Station DATE Reviewer Report Form RRF No.
5633- I 3'5 Reviewer Name: g Date: a)-po 61 Classification of Item: Qg -rm Reference Documents. y~w' C)veusmeArorw SA c.c.*W Fo t- 9 S. OI4 6 l s pec s H i-34/3 i PsAr4 T as c , 3 .n.s.-1 i Q g ess- re A Fs. 4 / / Description of Item: Ausow swren oa a is suppaa.-rso av a Sious Des c RsBGo nu sesc sai-3qs. L E6 s rhvo AS
/s everuis s' q7, o r- var rues s v4ao S i <v es-Plp-re i5 B PSe A. t/< ista.+ c a-scs." 6 A se-SPEC. Ns' w **
Pam P AS P etM Ae'YJ B Y WS~ Sp-ss-PU17 v5 Go s NGC-. sp Y.s # utaM cHetx. "" l Tw No'T SG~ "S60 ' * ' A*' A"*'*~ k c totG9M Tc . l 5 ykuL- /oci~ AL/Htt. W# est t t.- Gycsuc l" l g99,4.r,cw 1m 'Tsaur 3.it ,s 2-l acoc>
- . rae- MDia w aa w ai 7t*~w *I* * " '-
lJccw.:rseu F5AA y srcr m SPnt~<!='C M D'A~?~' W ? l Q l~.~.L. * /) 6ilGGUMf@ tMo2.G" fM pyo uc caee sePM PmF 54 Y?a(, i-r* /s ou7 oj: sur 3
'"j"""9"'"
c
' ~7'NG'fAcSfo4'o'='D - - - - - -_ ~ " * ' ~-m.y ,
9PTF1 FrWNE ENGNEERNG SERVCES TELEDYNE ENGINEERING SERV CES.
$'j%"W CONTROLLED DOCUMENT TES PROJ. NO._ , [6 )
DATE Independent Design Review Shoreham Nuclear Power Station RECORD COPY Project Manager Resolution Form FQg PMR No. 5633_d1] Reference RRF No. 5633- g Octe: /4-zr-72 Description of Resolution: go k W M & M McW7 $ 3
$E7 7YYEATE8 X'G~ /Vt'E'O /972 7#/J 3f12M47/od To M / W 7HF Cyp a cryA4s.
Aeview of Atasuse .Cw?re oit's, wg SWEg . W/E/76~ A6Y/rtsW' g' To f f-H N/7W 4/4W h Y & N 7/A fd" W 5 5 f"7 MA C/7/Alfr-4&cys-A29t.s ad . 6 i Classification of Item after Resolution: fY Reviewer Signature M* Pro' Manager Signature D
'/PTFI WNE ENGINEERING SERVICES .h -
Enclosure (1) EP-1-017 -21 , r;1 :r ,
., i.; 3 -
- INFORMATION REOUEST I 'T * ""
- \* K I! il !
uj 1 SHOREHAM INDEPENDENT DESIGN REVIEW ' h.ict:,.'. ..- ' PROJECT: E633 CONTROLLED DOCIPdFMT I REVIEWER: E bo DATE. B - n -a t f0y%0,Lg DOCMETT
' CALC.f: NM REY. :. "
.. LILCO I I SUPT.f:- - REV.: -- .
DWG. NO.: NA- REY.: RFI: 5633-if .
- (-.
5.g
. . . ;. x -
e
~
DESCRIPTION: -
' , y ;].}.. ; # $ . .I PAGE I 0F (
. .[ ~~ -
l lM - y = l LGL4fES Ah!-Qu"o "n%s?" urac~ Scgpf p u, p ~ O yp, w g.
'O hhv r oPcPE Anou A^'C S G Mm CPMDW
.J
~
REPLY SY: PHONEI I TELECOPY TO FOLLOW i j MAIL l l The above request is outsidd the scope of work tiefined by' the Long Island Lighting Company for. the.in' dependent design review of the Shoreham Nuclear Power Station. r
.f /
L.J ATTACHMENTS e ' (i[Qujjj' SIGNATURE , DATE /M 8 2-
SeTF1 AWNE ENGINEERING SERVICES Enclosure (1) EP-1-017 g INFORMATION REQUEST p.10V 151982 SHOREHAM INDEPENDENT DESIGN REVIEW dh Teledyne Engineering Services C01:T7.C' LED DOCUMENT PROJECT: 5633 CONTROLLED DOCUMENT REVIEWER: E $.11 A DATE: /n-7d-87 TO: s & wg CALC.#: A/A REV.: LILCO % SUPT.#: //4 REV.: OWG. NO.: A/44 _, REV.: P.F I : 5633-// M ,/, DESCRIPTION: PAGE /CF / A:s99st Aent/bf 7MF M4g/ main, fCngg7to) /. n e t c / ^ ) 7M vi6A!!TY ac w c es o ssswypwap, asnua pi4nir
$b $YYM WWON* $~$ D&M47/dh/ /f /\/MS$/ N W [&yN Neu W W MONl-Agyieu,
- A9Ezran swren siza.
REPLY BY: PHONEI I TELECOPY TO FOLLOW l l MAIL ! i The above request is outside the scope of work as defined by the Long Island Lighting Company for the Independent Design Review of the Shoreham Nuclear Power Station. 4 R ATTACHMENTS SIGNATURE DATE ch/f t
ENGINEERING SERVICES n. Enclosure (1) ~17-
] EP-1-017 RECORD COPY c . -, ,
P Independent Design Review 5 F r G SERVICES 7ELC0Y 4E Shoreham Nuclear Power Station CONTROLLED Reviewer Report Form DOCU h]ENT,,., TES PROJ. NO. S 47 y DATE e 3" " RRF No. 5633- /33 Adul Reviewer Name: 6Aec ccA Date: fi/to/d1. Classification of Item: Por, ,,. Fooio6 Reference Documents: R(RF (33 C'C'*- 9 5 0 A Qmsp.c a rw PhltA &G
%9ac. S H I ~ 393,P \-3(*,( A t recewo)
FsNR. Wace 3.n.z-f 745"' 3 ' ~I ( ATf5"Oi 0escription of Item: 0 6 T A l*U L= D Pkm XOR.0v4(a To IV/PfAkh 7w^-) THe- .5rgxio Por Spec- SHl '3'/3 14No "fl+ G FSMR-is irv Digecr vtoc,4 7?pr/ blat TcH- PS att3 ? Pl2essultE 7st/S 7fi ce- CP 3PSC St%=C Stra c6 ( 7%G~ iw rai.s ete e>4 - cha 'u'" Bc=- u 5so I PLo rw o . i Reviewer dignature
w .. _ SNPS-1 PSAR TABLE 3.10.1b-1 (CbNT
- D) l
- ---DESCRIPTION--------- tsTHERS OF SA!!E TYPE St.ISMIC ***
ITEM NO. NAME vet: DOR M ENVIRONMt.NT488 I?e SAM 6 ENVIRONMENT } 1 }, 121-F015 Globe Valve MO 2 Area II.S. $ 3 3 E21-K600 Power Supply GE 2 Area v. 2.5 2.5 2.5 E21-b001 Press Trans Bailey Meter 2 Area 11.5. 10 10 10 L21-N003 Flow Trans Rosesaount 2 Area II.S. 2 2 2 E21-N004 Ditt Press Ina Switch barton 4 Area II.S. 5 10 10 E21-N006 Flow Ind Switch Barton 2 Area II.S. - 15 15 15 i 121-N007 Press Switch Barksdale 6 Area II.5. 29 29 29
. . . . , a , ,
[.121-N010 Press switch !. Robertshaw 2 Area II.5.1 *
; .s Note *,"?. ~.'.
.v, . .uf,0. 2 k8'
~?
.t : ,
-s , . . a E21-N011 Plow Switch 2 Area 11.5. Note sa E21-R001 Press Ir.d Robertshaw 2 Area 11.5. 4 4 4 SYSTEM TITLE - HIGH PRESSURE CCX)LANT Iti7ELTION E41-C001 Pump Pacific Purap 1 Area II.4. 1.5 1.5 10 E41-C002 Turbine Terry Turbine 1 Area II.4. 1.5 1.4 '".14 E41-C003 Line Fill Pump 1 Area II.4. 2 2 2 tA 1-D003 Rupture Disc 2 Area II.4. 0004 Note 82 E41-F001 Gate valve MO 10 Area 11.4 F003,F004,F006,F007, 3 3 3 -
F011,F021,F042,W 79, F080 E41-F002 Gate Valve MO 2 Area I.2. F097 3 3 3 E41-F005 Checx Valve Ib Area II.4. F009, Fo 19,F030, F045, 3 3 3 F046,F048,F049,F052, F057,F066,F076,F077, Fud3,Fone,F087 E31-F008 Globe Valve MO 3 Area II.4 F012,F059 3 3 3 E01-F018 Reliet Valve 4 Area II.4. F020,F050,F082 3 3 3 J t 3 3 3 N* E41-F035 Press control Valve 1 Area 11.4. b
=
6 of 10 Fevision 21 - May 1961 U! , 1
k SNPS-1 FSAR TABLE 3.10.1B-1 (Cohrep3 Notes:
.s. .
g.
. Refer to Tanle 3.11.1-1, 3111.2-1and3C.3-9. I (SD ca) Special provisions made lor environmental protection un accident conditions.
(53 Classified as Pressure Integrity Instrument; seismic qualitication not required.
" 5./ w . 6 .
r
% 'ud ydrostatic test only :requi' IE
- F.s M b ed _for qualification.
Indicates item was tested or analyzed to tne ag' level shown. Typically, instrumentation / electrical equipment was (53 tested and mechanical equipment was analyzed. (*3 Refer to Tacles 3.9.28-1 through 3.9.2b-21. (83 Refer to Section 3.78. 483 Comparison of floor response spectra with !!Cu seismic test results confirms adequacy ot !!CD installation on Shoreham. (*3 Seismic qualification is based on calculations performed Dy General Electric. Calculations show that operating basis ASME boiler seismicL2kewise, forces cause additional stresses f ar below vibration tests demonstrate that the material yield limits imposed by Section III of theinsignaticant error contributio code. Therefore, the sensor assembly is qualified to operate under the conditions l result under worst case seismic conditions. imposed. o on Tests were satilstactorily . performed in accordance with MIL-STD-167, since the chatbers were designed initially tor Naval shipboard applications. (653 Check valves witnodt operators are qualified seismically as part or the piping analysis. d oa3 No seismic requirement. N m ? Revision 21 - May 19s t 10 of 10
t } I SMPS-1 FSAR TAniz 3.u.2-1 ENDO?MDrtAL OCNDITID16 (PIJuff OPERATIONAL) Tempe r- Relative i Pressure ature limidity Radiation Operating Ibse Rate (l) Integrated Ibse Design Basis Accident (h) l g (As Noted) F $ Type Plant operational systen Operational Normal (2) Accident (3)(4) g Dose Rate (1) I. Primary Contairrent 0 i 1. Area above chield wall o to 1 rsig Ik6 max 50 Gamma 25 - 8.8 x 106 10 WCA 3 x 10 6 g to top of drywell 127 avg Neutron 5 x 10 - 6.3 x 1013 0 7.0 x 107 3 x 106
- 2. Ragion adjacent to o to 1 psig IL6 eax 50 Cama 200 - 10 WCA core Neutron 6.6 x 105 .
8.3 x 1014 3 Urater reactor pressare o to 1 psig 146 max 50 Gmera 7.2 - 2 5 x 10 6 go8 IDCA 3 x 106 vessel,insid . of shield Neutron el - 1 3 x 109 vall
- k. Vicinity reeirculation O to 1 psig 146 max 50 Gamma 50 - 1.8 x 107 100 mCA 3 x 10 6
p ap motors Neutr'n 2 x 103 = 2.5 x 1012 5 Sw pression pool o to 1 pass 146 max 50 Gama o.1 - 3.5 x 10 411 108 14CA . 3 x 100 Neutrca 2 x 102 . 2 5 x 10
- 6. suppression chamber o to i pcis 146 max w G umia 0.1 -
3 5 x 10 4 10 0 IDCA 3 x 106 air space neutr m 2 x 102 2.5 x 1011 7 Within sowr cmer pipe: 0 to 1 psig 146 rax 9 Gena 0.0 - 0.0 100 WCA 3 x 106 containt r4' sqrre ssion pool water
- II. Secondary Contair
- rer:s r
- 1. General ~05to0Inchs 60 to los 50 Gama 0.005 -
1.7 x 103 105 14CA 6 x 10 2 i floor area water gage, st ;* i static pressure
, e e.-
1
- 2. RW3J System 1
- a. Heat eretangers Game as above 60 to 104 50 Gama - 0.6 2.1 x 105 105 loCA 6 x 102
- b. Pump ro m Same as above 60 to 104 50 Gama -
0.3 1.1x102D 10 5 14CA 6 x 102
- c. Filters and tanks same as above 60 to 104 50 Gama -
370 1.3 x 10 105 mCA 6 x 102 . 3 Fuel pool coolinc system Same as above 60 to 104 % Gama 0.O'f 5.0 - 1.8 x 106 105 IDCA 6 x 102 . heat exchalver l 4. ICPCI and RCIC aren Game as above 60 to 104 50 Garaa 0.005 0.20 1.8 x 103 105 MCA 6 x 102 4 j S.' BJGt core spray Same as above (4 to 104 50 Capua 0.005 I.0 I 1.8 x 103 105 +. '[gacI[ h.-
- 6 x 10,2 area .. ,
e - %. . .. ; e
; ,i i
1 of 3 4 i
4 SNPS-1 75AR , TABLE 3.11.2-1 (ODirr'D) i Temper- Relative Pressure sture Humidity Radiation A,ren r Cperating Ibse Date(1) Intearated Ibs* 7 (As Noted) F $ Type Plant Operational Design Basis Accident (le) systm operational V. Control Enom Normal (2) Accident (3)(4) g Dose Rate (1) 0 to 0.05 inches 75 50 max comma <0.0002 water gage, - 7 0 x 10' 45 NA m static pressure I . 1 1
- (3) Garma Dosa Rate Neutron Flux Bad (carbo / hour Beutrons/ -see
(?) Gamma Dose Neutron Fluence Rads (earbon) j ICormal Co,nditions Neutrons /cm2(NVT) Integrated over 160 years = 100$ load factor at rated power 4 ( 3) Gamma Dose Neutron Fluence Rads (carbon Accident Conditions Neutrons /m2)(NVT) Integrated over 6 months ('s) The aress, for which the integrated accident dose and the design basis accident type and dose are listed as Not Applicable , are not(M) exposed to the accident envirornent occurring in the contairment bec.use of their location outside of the secondary contairunent. ( i) Whenever tha required to maintain the ambient tauperature listed. residual heat removal an.1 core spray motor and the emergency core cooling system are running, during test periods, are ii 1 1 I l 4 4 3 of 3 .
- 1 j l t
^ j ,8t gg g up+gge.g g. an
- eg7 % *9
- i i
4
1-36 (LN1'"7.) J ~( K 30 3 't b i dicconnect, removal, and subsequent remount and reconnect without 30.39 ) retort to cutting, burning, or welding. Locally mounted safety-related instruments shall be 30.41 j mounted in accordance with 11600.02-K-243 through 11600.02-K-253. , F Bolting material shall be A307 ungraded or_ minimum quality, 30.42 b commercially avaijable steel t."_th a minimum yield opb,vo6 s1. All torquing values are plus or minus 5 percent except wherE 30.43 notcd. Any model numbers not found on sketches shall be sent to 30.45 engineering for mounting details. Nonsafety-related instruments 30.46 located in seismic areas may be installed using these details or g. alternatives (i.e. , plate versus pipe mounting), but torquing requirements shall be as shown on Sketch E5. j1 I I,nstrument racks, stands, and mounts shall be located in 30.48 a manner which will c_onserve floor space and will not obstruct 30.49 wnikways or equipment handling areas such as monorail hoistways, heat exchanger tube bundle removal areas, or spaces tor equipment 30.50 disassembly and removal. Instrument supports shall not be mounted on or connected 30.52 to handrails, stairways, machine bases, plant piping, or to any 30.53 - equipment subject to severe vibration, sway, or movement under load.
. When
~ nons'eismic'instrumenS"raEksfEnd,rs tag s 30.S5
-on'the::same support- floor. ~orInoorfuT)6amsy.--aEhdi@ gar [f, mounted r
rfoYa'tT 3 30.56 equipment ~ i with ~(hoYeiet ciner'Yaging}rjatM%{ngd,grgfihj0{ r:ciprocating equipment with a horsepo_werg,jrat ny :30.57
",,anj30.58 J 200 hp, and are~ lodhEed wiihin E ftaoftthe Mgi ianys:/
^
such 'equipmentZ then ~Ehsse- rhcks - oristaIcis?sliliil'fn,gsd2b4be%MountedI'on? [3 vibration absorbing mounts ~.' See Sketch No. 11600.02-K-177. When 31.2 the stands shown on Sketch Nos. 11600.02-K-169 and 170 are used for seismic requirements and are located within 5 feet of such 31.3 equipment as described above, then " Vibra Check" shall be used; 31.5 6 however, l The sketen. the ma::imum weicht limit shall be 1/2 of that shown on i b
- " Vibra # Check"r. shall - noembd6dEddiS3nidYeTwh*e7dfdW31.7
,_ maxi. mum allowable radiation.. dose..rateris.rabove~100? mrem /hrwg r When installing " Vibra Check" in seismic AREA's, the 31.9 anchor bolts shall be installed and inspected (including torque) -
in a ccordan ce uith ficld anchor bolt installation procedures I taing a spccer ia its place. Once complete, " Vibra Checka snall 31.10 .; be installed and torqued in accordance with 11600.02-K-177. 4 Instrume:1t stands or racks shall not be mounted on the 31.12 same raiEed c_oncrete pad of any rotating or reciprocating 31.13 4 equipment, regardless of the horsepower rating. y-11600.02-112c' 04/18/8'O 035
WTF1 FrVNE ENGNEERING SERVICES Enclosure (1) EP-1-017 RECORD COPY Independent Design Review PROJ. NO. _ l TELEDYNE ENGINEERING SERVICE Shoreham Nuclear Power Station CONTROLLED l Project Manager Resolution Form DOCUMENT TES PROJ, NO. D C DATE___ ___ PMR No. 5633-I B R W 8 ) Reference RRF No. 5633-1 B Jtdv. f Date: It f t3l81 Description of Resolution: AvAILA 'e' MO e4 "ThE WTA k SiaPECAflCATINE VIERA cW 1 pas Pt. ATE 15 To TES THE os,# cF A cert A u,o o e b ist.Aos,e oF TMF EeatATID4 N MP80*D 4 Tiitr FSAE. S o c.e Sk W eiLL oeg teessee Yo Tms l19A WiTu no1rE 1HETAitED j dFo41ATIOM C O R. D I E8S'IC M gos,7 se 15Atet oc tuteuATiou og twad. T4 cmceed is Td*T W6 STsocroEAs #ee90M of Tate soPmpT igd MIR M GMftiib. YttIS tst,0G W c RVio0s W A ' borgot. LSSOtii AMb IS Tt%EREFORJc, 5083eCT TO T860 DE W.8 CESS
- Classification of Item after Resolution: "POTEMpAg,,,, PMbn3C Reviewer Signature Project Manager SignaftTFE ~
cc91019PG Nd3 Teledyne Engineering Services INDEPENDENT DESIGN REVIEW TELEDYNE ENGINEERING SERVICES (TES) TELEDYNE ENGINEERING SERVICES PROJECT 5633 CONTROLLED SHOREHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION p LPCS SYSTEM DATE O 10 83 DISPOSITION RESPONSE FORM RECORD COPY PROJ.NO. bb _ ICR NO. 5633- 12 PMR NO. 5633- 133 REV. 1 RRF NO. 5633- 133 REV. 1 Tb SWECResponsibleEng(neer/Dat'e
*/kO l
]_h fY SEEC Project Engineer /Ddte fb
-N Y d s. p 1 LILCO Project EngineeT/Date l
L i l f
ICR NO. 5633 - 12 Rev. O CLASSIFICATION: Finding REFERENCE DOCUMENTS: Specification for Installation of Tubing and Instrurrent (SH1-343) FSAR Table 3.11.2-1 Response to RFI#11 TES STATEMENT OF FINDING According to information obtained from the FSAR and Specification SH1-343, the stand for pressure switch PS012B is in direct violation of the Specifi-cation since this type of baseplate cannot be used in this area. TES CONCLUSION OF FINDING Based on the data and specification available to TES the use of " Vibra Check" baseplate is not allowed because of the radiation level defined in the FSAR. Since Stone & Webster Engineering Corporation (SWEC) will not respond to this item with more detailed information, our decision must be based on information on hand. TES concern is that the structural adequacy of the support will be effected. This is obviously a Design Control issue and is therefore subject to the IDR process.
RESPONSE
SWEC believes that this finding stems from t, misunderstanding of the requirements in Specification Sill-343. Specification SH1-343, Rev. 3, states on Page 1-38, lines 31.18 and 31.19 that " Vibra Check" shall not be used in an area where the maximum allowable radiation dose rate is above 100 mrem /hr. It is intended, and understood by construction, that this dose rate is for normal plant operating conditions as specified in the Figures of FSAR Section 12.3.1. FSAR Table 3.11.2-1 entitled, Environmental Conditions (Plant Operational), also provides radiation dose rates for normal plant operating conditions, as well as for accident condition.* The Figures in FSAR Section 12.3.1 are [ easier to use since they graphically show the plant radiation zones and use i the terminology maximum allowable dose rate. Although these Figures are not identified in Specification SH1-343, construction has utilized them as the basis for using " Vibra Check". An E&DCR has been issued to include the identification of these Figures in SH1-343. Since PS012B is located in an area having a dose rate of 5 mrem /hr during normal plant operating conditions, as shown in the Figures of FSAR Section 12.3.1 as well as in FSAR Table 3.11.2-1, the use of
" Vibra Check" in its mounting stand meets the requirements of SH1-343.
- It - should be noted that the 2000 mrem /hr in FSAR Table 3.11.2-1 is B9-11600.02-281-B 1
for Core Spray System operation which is an accident condition. A survey has been performed to verify proper application of " Vibra Check" for all instrument mountings. Attachment. 1, attached, identifies all nuclear sa fety related instrument stands using " Vibra Check"; all are located in areas of 100 mrem /hr or less, during normal plant operation. In summary, the above demonstrates that our engineering and construction process has functioned appropriately as " Vibra Check" base plates were only installed in areas permitted by the specification. Additionally, it should be pointed out that the environmental qualification of equipment and materials is the subject of increased industry and regu-latory attention. As a result, separate' programs have been established on the Shoreham project for addressing this area; viz, the " Environmental Qualification Program for Class IE Equipment" and the " Mechanical Equipment Environmental Conformance Program." Specification SIII-343 is included in the latter program. CORRECTIVE ACTION None required. As discussed above, a comprehensive survey of all " Vibra Check" uses throughout the plant demonstrated that none were installed in inappropriate locations. PREVENTIVE ACTION In order to preclude future specification misinterpretations in this area, an E&DCR has been issued to clarify specification Sill-343. SAFETY IMPLICATION None. Use of the cited raaterial in the area noted in accordance with the applicable Shoreham specification. Attachments: ? Safety related stands using " Vibra Check". l l i f l l B9-11600.02-281-B 2 i
l SAFETY RELATE 9 STANDS USING VIBRA CllECK TES 12 ATTACIIMENT 1 INSTR LOCATION 1E21*PS012A EL 8'-0" AZ101 (React) 1E21*PS013A 1E21*PS012B EL 8'-0" AZ255 (React) 1E21*PS013B 1E41-PDI151 EL 8'-0" AZ198 (React) IM50-FIO83A EL 63'-0" Col 12-L (Control Bldg) IM50*FT053A 1M50-FIO83B EL 63'-0" Col 16 1/8-L (Control Bldg) IM50*FT053B 1B21*PT153E EL 40'-0" Col C-3 (React) IB21*PT153L EL 40'-0" Col C-3 (React) 1E11*PS134A EL 8'-0" AZ 100 (React) 1E11*PS134B EL 8'-0" AZ 260 (React) 1E11*PS134C EL 8'-0" AZ 100 (React) 1E11*PS134D EL 8'-0" AZ 260 (React) 1E11*PS135A EL 8'-0" AZ 100 (React) IE11*PS135B EL 8'-0" AZ 260 (React) 1E11*PS135C EL 8'-0" AZ 100 (React) 1E11*PS135D EL 8'-0" AZ 260 (React) IM50*FIO87A EL 63'-0" Col 13 7/8 - L (Control Bldg) IM50*FIO87B EL 63'-0" Col 13 7/8 - L (Control Bldg) 1E21*PDIO21 EL 8'-0" Col C-10 (React) B9-11600.02-281-B 3
"RTELEDYNE ENGINEERING SERVICES INDEPENDENT DESIGN REVIEW SHOREHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION CONTROLLED DOCUMENT ICR NO.
5633- 12
Reference:
RRF No. 5633-133 Date: 3/4/83 PMR No. 5633-133 Final Classification of Item: Closed Reviewer Signature 7.0 a ef n
]mmitteeChairman3hnature l
3.E We as Project Manager Signature l l [ 4 l
TN ENG2EERNG SERVICES ICR No. 5633-12 1.0
SUMMARY
During the review of pressure switch PS012B the single leg stand which supports PS012B was also reviewed. Since this stand is within 5 feet of a pump base a Vibra Check baseplate is used. SWEC Specification SHI-343, which governs the installation of these stands and baseplates, stated on Page 1-36, " Vibra Check shall not be used in an area where the maximum allowable radiatioc dose rate is above 100 MREM /HR." According to Table 3.11.2-1 in the FSAR the radiation level for the Core Spray System, while operating, is 2,000 MREM /HR. This was determined to be a direct violation of SHI-343; therefore Finding ICR-5633-12 was issued November 30, 1982. SWEC, in their response stated that the " maximum allowable radiation dose rate" refers to the dose rate during normal plant operation. Since the Core Spray System only operates during a plant accident condition the 2,000 MREM /HR dose rate would not hpply. Radiation levels during normal plant operation are shown on the figures in Section 12.3.1 of the FSAR. These figures show radiation levels to be less than 5 MREM /HR in the area in which this baseplate is located. Since SHI-343 does not clearly state that only normal plant operating conditions are used to determine radiation levels, SWEC has issued an E&DCR to clarify the specification. Also a survey of all safety related stands using Vibra Check baseplates was performed by SWEC and all were found to be in compliance. Since the specification has been clarified and all safety related Vibra Check baseplates were found in compliance this item should be Closed.
W P W NE ENGINEERING SERVICES Technical Report TR-5633-4 A3.7 ICR No. 5633-13 TES issued ICR No. 5633-13 on December 8, 1982 as a Finding on the effect of attachment of small bore supports to the shield wall and the installation of small bore supports which did not comply with the SWEC standard. A Disposition Response was issued by LILC0/SWEC on January 28, 1983 which indicated that formal notification of the Boston office when ati. aching small bore supports to the shield wall was not required. All supports attached to the shield wall are specifically called out on E&DCR F-39716. This notation is important since it imposes specific NDE, Field Quality Control inspection and documentation on the support. Further, a study was made by SWEC in 1980 which indicated that the shield wall design is controlled by large bore pipe supports and pipe rupture restraints which are attached to the shield wall. Small bore supports cannot transmit loads much greater than 250 pounds while pipe rupture restraints transmit loads in the order of 10,000,000 to 12,000,000 pounds. With respect to the use of small bore supports that do not comply with the SWEC standard, E&DCR's are available which provide for substitutions of tubes for angles and for the deletion of a baseplate when an embedded plate is utilized. Since all items were clarified to TES satisfaction, this item was Closed.
WMNE l ENGNEERNG SERVCES Enclosure (1) EP-1-017 Independent Design Review Shoreham Nuclear Power Station Internal Comittee Resolution Form CONTROLLED ICR No. DOCUMENT 5633_f_3_ Date: ~3)f c 8* 8'3 Is S92
Reference:
RRF No. 5633 _/_f_2 PMR No. 5633- /62 Internal Comittee Resolution: a ,ed +L., as<ees l/4 fle PMR. , , I c. Rs <t e.~ , har n ;ha may ;-p aa / tAe l I ede p ,<,af /de d w yn hoeen. Classification of Item after Comittee Resolution: [~,* n s rig GAha A eg G? moban signuUra Proj t
&lW lanagerSignatuM i
mittee MeMignature s k. ' Tomittee Member Signature
i ENGINEERING SERVICES 1 TELEDYNE ENGINEERING SERVICES Enclosure (1) CONTROLLED EP-1-017 T DOCUMJ)A TES PROJ. NO. . t DATE ___ _ "9 RLcudo COPY i PROJ. NO. /? ! Independent Design Review Shoreham Nuclear Power Station Reviewer Report Form RRF No. 5633- g Reviewer Name: [, cg4 Date: /0[/1/d ?. Classification of Item: OPe/u /4% Reference Documents:
&PPota T 0ALcu L A TwN
//-Q / ~ PS Q-$0.()
/62 )- P SR -Dyy Description of Item: !
GS6 ~/~s~ aO $ U W & Y,5 hL.# l To 7NG~ SN/a'Lo '4A'L- N W 20 ^ T* * *~ '. b77A CM6D FOLLW W fW $fo^) 0FG oc e E oc R. 19cw mac, 7>eu M l snauto ae ivor+ac
@F3 37 po EA Oc(2.'sac m37, l Te~ l i
I ! I I t Reviewer dignature
- = v ,e.
Fc :E::::: .= . . e a ::. . wAch M ~ / 6 4-
;UBJECT - - - - -
ATTACHMENTS TO ?? tMARY S!!!ELO 'lALL .DATE October 31, 1980 SHOREHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATICN UNIT 1 LONC ISLAND LIGHTING COMPANY FROM AWona:mv/s TO cc Css 2csn ro-csm S(w CAtc No. ll GOO.OZ-NF5r1621-MW-M Ceneral nles A 77AC U M O . ' N C. ~d DURFOSr em rz RECORD COPY 5 - Ths procedure presented herein is intended to expedite the desiv.n c'f":Ea n'y' 4 lightly loaded attachments to the primary shield wall for varioun reasons. PROCEDURE TELEDYNE ENGINEER)NG SERVICES CONTROLLED
- 1. Identify the need for the attachment. g. . , ,
TES PROJ. DOCUMENT,[ NO. M
- 2. Check for interference at proposed location.
Try t[selecc iccanon when there are stiffeners at the 'back. 3. Determine the loads at the surface of the outer shell.
- 4. Check if the requirements are met.
5. If all the requirements are met, initiate design at SEO and forward a copy of E&DCR to Boston Office. 6. If any requirement is not met, inform the engineer on the project responsible for the shield wall. REQUIREMENTS SHIELD wnLL
=
. . 1.l M ~1ke t : Ec n crJ 7.* LY IWWER 1
Suu.2 a -
. X.
g/ . . . . O
,. O '
*m*
a
-. ~~ -
.5HEL L
WTF1 mYNE ENGNEERING SERVCES Enclosure (1) RECORD COPY EP-1-017 PROJ. NO 5G33 Independent Design Review M6E$ CONTROLLED Shoreham Nuclear Power Station DOCUMENT Project Manager Resolution Form TES PROJ. NO. _ N3 h DATE_ . PMR No. 5633- f 2. Reference RRF No. 5633- M T Date: //-g f- % j Description of Resolution: i NfU Y S$?$ [}&~3.N f A?7$$Fb M M '?F f58t pigs p(y g e' LH+'ny' D?Meb Asindmau 7a ymm A * " b " W/ W W M NI Fsrx /inearge wc of E4,DM 70 Stu)2017>>; gb g A?FI / M F 7b 7u /Ar-rt,33-27, wat G 5747FZ 7/Af7 AfD /JN/edE fp bcf(S EpuJy L S/^rcF W J u d 2 E & T J t yff)p)E 71 y - S7khMA ent # 9.c. Classification of Item after Resolution: g 7g7g[ gj g g b Reviewer Signature Projec M-
- nager Sic] atu~re ~
1 l
"#eTF1 PTVNE ENGINEERING SERVICES Enclosure (1)
EP-1-017 , g OCT 191982 INFORMATION REQUEST Teledyne Engineenag Smices SHOREHAM INDEPENDENT DESIGN REVIEW l PROJECT: 5633 REVIEWER: 4~. Secc 4 DATE: 9-7-62. T0: 3&w CALC.#: A/A REV.: LILCO I I SUPT.#: PsR.rNy, P.54-fof 7 REV.: DWG. N0.: 'REV.: RFI: 5633- S7 DESCRIPTION: PAGE / OF / Puensa sano o es,sa wo/sa. anc ea ., m ,,
# YM# SMCW OT7o9CHL'D To r H G~~ .5 HiL*z.O in) A t t ,
REPLY BY: PHONE I I TELECOPY TO FOLLOW I l MAIL l l In that these are standard EMTP 9.5 supports, no unique E&DCRs , design calculatiens or crawings exist that show attachtient to the shield wall. Specific surport standard; utilized are reflected on hanger table shown on isonctric K0162-4 wh cP is forwarded for your use. Standard support detail is shown in E:~rP9.5 for the specific type used. I t ') f- i ATTACHMENTS ' h p SIGNATURE j DATE 9/2p [L
/
l 206ic KplGa-4
" o"7 DA d
h. FEB 219R3 2 INDEPENDENT DESIGN REVIEW J Teledy gineenna Sem.tes TELE' 'NE ENGINEERING SERVICES (TES) PROJECT 5633 TELEDYNE ENGINEERING SERVICES CONTROLLED SHOREHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION DOCUMENT LPCS SYSTEM TES PROJ. NO. f Q, f,83 OATE___ DISPOSITION RESPONSE FORM RECORD Cop, PRO), no. ICR No. 5633-13, PMR NO. 5633-162 REV. _0__, RRF No. 5633-162 REV. O
' 'YS)
SWEC Respons le Engineer /Date SWE6 Project Engineer'/ Datd f$ l
\dE\ . 4 // I 1.II.C0 Pro lec t Enni ~er/D(t l
l i B9-11600.02-278-L 4 . , _ - . , , - - . . - .- ~ . , , - .
. . . _ , n , .n-.e-.
ICR No. 5633 ,12 CLASSIFICATION: Finding REFERENCE DOCUMENTS: Support Calculation 1E21-PSR-5057 1E21-PSR-5144 4 TES STATFliENT OF FINDING A . conflict exists between the attached procedure for field design for
-lightly loaded attachments to primary shield wall, which calls for forward-ing of E&DCR to Stone & Webster; and the response to TES RFI-5633-37, which states that no unique E&DCRs exist since the subject supports are standard EMTP 9.5.
TES CONCLUSION OF FINDING The ICR agrees with the PMR. Based on the IC Review, this item may impact the adequacy of the design process.
RESPONSE
' The " procedure" referenced is a draf t memorandum prepared by a structural engineer assigned to the project which was never issued as official direc-tion. The " procedure" ' is not an of ficially sanctioned project procedure nor does it come within the procedural system of SWEC. In view of this, an E&DCR required by the " procedure" would not likely be found in project records. None has been found.
In response to RFI-37, SWEC states that standard small bore supports are i not shown on unique E6DCRs. Although not stated in the response to the a RFI, these supports are in fact , included in the design documentation appropriately authorized by Engineering via E&DCR F-39716 and its revi-sions. (Appropriate pages of that'E&DCR are attached.) This ESDCR identi-fies the pipe support by number, type, the reference piping isometric for location, and a notation that the support attaches to the shield wall. This notation is important from a construction perspective in that it l indicates that the attachment is controlled (NDE, FQC inspection, and i documentation) in accordance with Specification SH1-396 and FQC I Procedure 13.9. These documents impose controls on shield wall attachments. Regarding the load input to the shield wall by small bore supports 1E21 PSR-5057 and 5144 which were installed in 1979, an evaluation of the shield wall conducted in 1980 included the application of large bere piping l- supports and pipe rupture restraints attached to tN wall. This evaluation showed that the shield wall design is controlled by these large heavily loaded attachments rather than the lightly loaded attachments of small bore piping supports. The small bore support loads are insignificant (see below) when contrasted to,the governing loads. In summary, the supports cited are standard supports designed and installed in accordance with issued procedures. The load these supports input to the interiscing structure is insignificant. For example, typically, a small l B9-11600.02-278-L
bore pipe support- inputs a load to the supporting structure of approxi-mately ' 250 lbs, whereas a typical pipe rupture restraint inputs in the
- order of 4000 to 6000 times this load. There are approximately 200 small bore supports and approximately 50 pipe rupture restraints attached to
- . .the shield wall.
CORRECTIVE ACTION l None required. The supports cited were properly designed and installed. As part of our final processing of pipe support calculations, SWEC will remove-the cited memorandum from calculations. PREVENTIVE ~ ACTION None required. The memorandum cited was not an officially sanctioned project procedure. The de;ign process is adequate and consistent,- resulting in acceptable designs in accordance with applicable procedures. 3 COMPLIANCE DATE, Not applicable, full compliance exists. Supports cited are in accordance 3 with Shoreham Design Criteria. SAFETY IMPLICATION, None. The existing design is acceptable and the interface between the pipe support design and the shield wall design is in accordance with Shoreham design criteria. The design process defined above resulted in acceptable , design. { ATTACHMENTS (1) Pages 1 and 362 of E&DCR F-39716A i l t I B9-11600.02-278-L
. - . _ . _ _ _ . . . , - - _ _ - . . . - _ . . _ _ . . . _ . . _ , . _ _ . _ , . - _ . . . . _ _ _ _ . _ . - _ . _ .._ _ - ~ _ ..
6 5210 498 \@ .', PAGE I 0F f./g g., j STONE C CEBSTER ENGINEERihG CORPORATION \l /" ENGINEERING E. DESIGN COORDINATION REPORT *
" / //5'k j PROJECT / CLIE NT: sHOREHAM NUCLE AR POtP E R ST AllON UNil i JOB No i LONG ISL AND LIGHTING C OMP ANY 11MO O'l hN/Ydy' ~$k $Ql PZOB LE M DESCRIPTION: l
[ ff/[S7"S Yl l$ h's$ fl ?-- i gj,,-gu-e-r/r;ee M r f f "' N '" RECEIVED . TE L E C OPY DATES ' JUL 2 3 im, (REQUESTING PARTY;I Seet. REPRODUCh0i4 Rev d-R:grai.d e j- Degt. or Die. T.ie E s t. Datf j heeded 8,
. Sd'ir/ / [ , /d/ f " t/s'yt [t-3 hb 7/? E/2n. pd f,G f P'.00 L E M SOLUTl0H: 'fs~Y/f CC/!OM/MASO'>*'N M /^'tY/ 6 / Vt'sy /W
#/ r0 /~ .3f~// (r
$ /W $4/fJr7-f f//tfpsy(, fh Wd//T/E/A $' dl If~
,pr ,c/ d e p a n -si l k e s m / w n v A " ~'
-.~ /,5 /ff ff.l t;c.xsS '
q ; ppy;*ff*f- g /?I/b'C Xf 7/ lA'Y W E k. ~V/d L cis w so- YV? s4 W ')
~
% *'M Q) $$/ /57//yts c/ $c/7'S/W/W4' 55 (0/J7~/s,f.//E o 7D @ Y A l'c~K% f,)
TELECOPY DATES ArFECTS WORK UNDER SPECIFICATION SH 1 #O /
,/ 6*"
\ 015 VERIFIED BY IMPLEMENTATION VERIFICATION REculRED , p e ,'d -
\ Fcrtished By: Dat : Leod Engr. Date
\~ .
fl//f& /h< /' d EAthW-29'd f/2 ~/f'I.- O INFOR M ATION ONLy Ps.ne+4- te sig's Engr. Date F
/
O DRAWING CHANGE Equipment Specialist Date C L,1E NT APMOVAt - - 4 SPECIFICATION CHANGE ~ O PROCEDURE CHANGE O' Rehuwed ' M Noi R'ad.' O ENG. SE RV. SCOPE 0F WORK CHANGE Qual. Sys. Div. or Eng. Assur Div. Date 0 'toinMI Date . . Chinge erial O ne lacorporated in it, g/' + g ,,,,ne, i l I Jwell not ,E f ollowing documents , Joterials Engr. Date it: r" ', I
- ON M/M 'N M- IENT S'M'euYidGiENT xEAmin OE en
,5WucleN Sofety Reloted (QA Col. I) Project agineer Approv'ol & Date gg g D p .
8 Not Nuclear Saf ety Related QA Col. II " /! ' O - Q A Cat m Y N')W O' '
~
HEADQUARTERS ; e FIELD DJSTpBUTION CONST. SUPE RvlSOR S RPrt). Engr - O C hief E ng r - OWinotor S/77///#/(o??" Client QA Mgr/__ B#7WJ<ptit_ O Structural O - 3Drei Des. Engr O ch.ef _ Des. E nge. - O Mechanicet O - JRRisp E ng r. O Sup) Const. Serv _ O Client Const lnsp E#s6'/Mc _ O Electrical _ O -- DEquip Spec.. - OCh Engr-E A Div _ ELSCW Foc _ BJ 'W_ O Piping O _ Outt'Is Enge _ js'/ft,*ru/r/t4%=' ,R$GW Res. Engr _ ST/~ M j _ O weld.no _ O _ O oA-Ouat.Sys.D. _ O O Fid Des. Engr - BM O instrumen' O -- OQ A - PCC De v. O
^*r"I'at0 - EFJ##,g O Planning - O -
Ooa-FoC D.v. - g / Y /i //// % ,15 y4 y ,B 6 #c W W --_ O O - 2 e
O A m$aIIII5DCRN0.E:33% A (' h SYS Ih* h'49 Q _gqACJo rt ARE A - IdANGGC REVIEW PrcocycAm ' tes a
~
e--' g MA4c P RIMARY- K- LINES
, 4 ANGec Reviewi'DESiqu DocuvitMTATietJ ' ggg g-me : -
T$o MGTraic COMSTft.DOCtlM6TIOd - g NO- T.D. (ie c.t.TTYPE R.) D A.TE. 1.c.C. E4DCFA l O'C* Il1DCR sTA O' is sus esbMQ~), /974 gy37 4 '"'7-'"'jsfD.IA PSR 4/g79 " MY55 to suistovvw
$0l(oi.:k- ( l K0163- f- $ $' Y
% MI N inu-m-ss+6 9TD. lA 4/ i ;
93 KO)(o3-L 4 esa /ZM% , .l K ss mue RQ}{p3.L ~[ -5 Y D@6R)
\/-1496 F 'A'#l
'au-m-side jsw. goo.5 "^'^5 yeb
,(0%3 1 PSR 4!16 p, pf 4'
'E8 '* 7s-5:43 Mn l4 jR 0 g Kouo3 4 } ess ,u,/,p"-*605 '
*s 221- PSE- Fl?F go, g.o{ggA )T~5 E
Rol51- 5 F g psg 77/y' 2 w-eens t.- 8 7 10 SVtEAD WA
, -y wer.
av::
< ,, , ,: .s. a e
I l
'RTELEDYNE ENGNEERING SERVICES INDEPENDENT DESIGN REVIEW SHOREHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION CONTROLLED DOCUMENT ICR NO.
5633- 13
Reference:
RRF No. 5633- 162 Late: 3/4/83 PMR No. 5633- 162 Final Classification of item: Closed Reviewer Signature Coannittee Chairman Sign < re 3.E m%c}% Project Manager Signature
WME ICR No.-5633-13 l.0
SUMMARY
The calculations for support IE21-PSR069-2, which is .a small bore support attached to the shield wall, contained a procedure governing the field design of l'ightly loaded attachments to the primary shield wall. This procedure states to "... initiat'e design at SE0.and forward a copy of E&DCR to Boston Office." In the calculations for supports IE21-PSR-5057 and IE21-PSR-5144 there was no mention of any E&DCR. RFI No. 5633-37 was written to request these E&DCRs. In the response to the RFI SWEC responded that no unique E&DCRs exist. Since this was in violation of the procedure and there appeared to be no controls on attachments to the shield wall, this item was classified as a Finding in ICR no. 5633-13. In their response to this Finding, SWEC stated "The procedure is not an officially sanctioned project procedure nor does it come within the procedural system of SWEC." Because of this SWEC is removing all references to this procedure from the calculations. Additionally, the SWEC response to the RFI and subsequent discussions at a meeting with LILC0 and SWEC on February 15, 1983 further clarified this situation. There was concern on TES' part with the effect of small bore support loads on the shield wall. The
- procedure attached to the original calculations covered this by
! requiring generation of an E&DCR and subsequent review by the Boston office. Deletion of that procedure raised this concern. I SWEC indicated that a study had been done in 1980 to address this situation. Essentially, small bore supports, by their design, can only transmit a given maximum load. Since large bore supports and pipe whip restraints are also attached to the shield wall they control the design capacity. For example, the load from these supports is 4,000 to 6,000 times that of small bore supports.
, , - - - -- , - - - - , . - , . ,y m,, -- - - - - - , , - - - . ----v- u,,, - - - #----
t 1%' N NE ICR No. 5633-13 TES was still concerned with local effects on the shield wall and the difference in-load cited above.would not be appropriate unless large bore supports were also located on panels between stiffeners. A review was performed and some large bore supports are located between stiffeners. For _ example, support IE21-PSSH036 is not located on stiffeners and the load on the shield wall from this support is 9,500 lbs and a normal small bore support applies approximately 250 lbs. The concern of TES with respect to local effect on the shield wall is satisfied. Also of concern was the design of the small bore support. The calculation packages for PSR 5057 and PSR 5144 show the supports as standard supports, which consist of a baseplate and bolts with back-to-back angles car.tilevered off the plate. The actual support is a 3 x 3 tube welded to the shield wall but no unique drawing was generated. E&DCR F-24523 covcrs the substitution of the tube for the back-to-back angles. This E&DCR contains standard substitution for which no drawing has to be generated. E&DCR F-16785A covers the deletion of the baseplate and welding to an embedded plate instead. Since all items have been clarified TES is satisfied this item should be closed. l L i i 1
WTF1 FrWNE ENGINEERING SERVCES Technical Report TR-5633-4 ' A3.8 ICR No. 5633-14 TES issued ICR No. 5633-14 on December 8,1982 as a Finding on the fact that a dissimilar metal weld exists at the core spray nozzle on the Reactor Pressure Vessel that was not included in the Class 1 pipe stress analysis. A Disposition Response was issued by LILC0/SWEC on January 21, 1983 which indicated that an E&DCR was issued on the drawing in question which eliminated the dissimilar metal weld. The only remaining dissimilar metal weld on the nozzle was not in the SWEC scope of work and was accounted for by the reactor vendor. The E&DCR was made available to TES and satisfied our concerns. A further issue was raised concerning the incorporation of E&DCR's to their affected FP drawings in a timely manner. This subject was discussed at a February 15, 1983 meeting at SWEC offices. .SWEC personnel described a revision to the process of incorporation of E&DCR's. Essentially FP drawings are no longer updated and are replaced by IC (as-built isometric) drawings. TES requested and SWEC submitted a supplemental response on February 25, 1983 describing this process in detail. The supplemental response presents detailed documentation concerning the revision to the SWEC process with respect to updating of drawings and this item was Closed. l
'#TELEDYNE ENGINEERING SERVICES Enclosure (1)
EP-1-017 Independent Design Review Shoreham Nuclear Power Station Internal Committee Resolution Form CONTROLLED DOCUMENT ICR No. 5633-d
Reference:
RRF No. 5633- E j Rev I Date: /2-3-82. PMR No. 5633-]1.3/gy,1 Internal Committee Resolution: 74g yc a9e### w//d f$d y e viewer} e on eer n . The a a 1 9 rit
,, ), g , ,, ,;),,, +4e dis sim,'}a a ceP*"lb de*'me al 50in13 l
Classification of Item after Committee Resolution: [ s'A y
%w _ G. $$e gnaWe k b havA%
Cor~ t- - Project Manager Signature r amm
- Mem M ignatere Committee Member Signature
1 )
'#TELEDYNE ENGINEERING SERVICES Enclosure (1) RECORD COPY EP-1-017 . . , , ,
'^
PROJ. NO. s '7/ ' TELEDYNE ENGINEERING SERVICES CONTROLLED DOCUMENT TES PROJ. NO. 7^,'] Independent Design Review DATE P2" Shoreham Nuclear Power Station Reviewer Report Form RRF No. 5633- 12'5 Reviewer Name: bbk cd D \e Aciv'kcv1 Date: (_\ -7A -22. Classification of Item (Per 3.8.1): OPEN Reference Documents: NTLoAD TZuw Ruo*t(H4L Evesr ~7.17 rJ' L'PV Mo taz Description of Item: h e_ld M6P c ckov, t v1 C_l t c cdca M cad' i tio'n i e ot, RP\/ in -d a ic il e om e4 c cl . tex <a h5 - ani k c% ino'i'I f e ko t>N w e_k e) Cuc e.0a% wwem- i F so addi bm> m t cdmceuMao.bu cuu ,F L,e. c.cmsidc.ed NNahlIdiu,! Reviewer Signature
'RTF1 FnYNE ~
ENGNEERING SERVICES TELEDYNE ENGINEERING SERVICES or e (1) EP-1-017 CONTROLLED DOCUMENT TES PROJ. NO. b) Independei,t Design Review DATE ,. Sbcreham Ftciear Power Station RECORD COPY Project Mr:ager Resolution Form pgo; so. h.h PMR No. 5633- 12'5 Reference RRF No. 5633-125 Date: 9[28[63 Description of Resolution: FABWCATrod W ri MQVEST PIPE SPpA>f PIP (04 AT RN @ E'F-oF cae ~ taoa: ALE, 12:PV EErfoeS7 bETAILs of CoReSPf2M RMOST "Te5T YevisioN oF Sce
- u -io sos -- t i
f Classification of Item ,1fter Resolution: og Reviewer Signature Project Manager Signature
'RTF1 ATWNE ENGINEERING SERVICES Enclosure (1)
EP-1-017 g . INFORMATION REOUEST orq p 19g SHOREHAM INDEPENDE4,T DESIGil REVIEW Teledyne Engineering Services PROJECT: 5633 REVIEWER: G uJhcu bow If' DATE: 9-7_B-81. T0: s a w [pgl CALC.#:ilW.ot-AA- tcA-t REV.: LILC0 I I SUPT.#: REV.: DWG. NO.: REV.: RFI: 5633 - 57o DESCRIPTION: PAGE 1 0F ( hleecl c1eAa d/. oC EPV vio 7, I e- d-o
~ '
i pe j une_ ti r.v. 4 . Q.unews/ons' mcd .,md cu-t ch ob bN ppe mcf vio g g I e . NC. M vid dck ftf G ELLlav'tC.c &, NVothMgs wc.$ Y e- ( CL L %W rfVe sootd oW d m in g u - e a c q - r$ REPLY BY: . PHONE L-.] TELECOPY TO FOLLOW l l MAIL l l See piping specification SPEC-171 for Class 1502 pipe. See GE Spec. No. 21A9242, Section 5.2.3, for nozzle material (attached) . See GE Spec. No. 21A9242, Section 5.2.11, for welding materials (attached) . Details of RPV and pipe junction, see SWEC drawings 5.18-72A, 5.01-24B, 5.18-77A, 5.18-68B (attached). Attached drawing M-10309-8 (FP-100-8). G.. . L_} ATTACHMENTS L COC:sf. sA# SIGNATt[RE DATE /M2-f2
' '#TF1 I:rWNE ENGINEERING SERVICES 5 Enclosure (1) 3 EP-1-017 RECORD COPY PROJ. NO. I 1 TELEDYNE ENGINEERING SERVICES Independent Design Review CONTROLLED Shoreham Nuclear Power Station DOCUMENT Reviewer Report Form TES PROJ. NO. ib b ac < w g RRF No. 5633- 11 3 fcv / Reviewer Name: b r4Nuzw 'D.h!aneToN Date: / ?_- 2 -f2Z Classification of Item (Per 3.8.1): b e m n au' R aime, b Reference Documents: LITwAcs 1 T2_UNb R lL04 b 44 7_ 6'v6NT- 7./ )
/2 E 6033-50s h a c_. h t; s slB --7 2 A . S .o1 7_9 r6 . 6 1B-7 7A . S. t S - CBd $PE(__ m4I -l~7 ) C,6 6PEC_ Z l M 7_% 2 Description of Item:
M .uc, Illo c a . a 2. - FP- JOC. - 8 n l40t.a s I 2 Piec e. msa'E-07' '35m eN LEw.> %Ec_. %PC w E'D GL m UahLL G. % *DMAw s MC:.6 l'oN T'A t N GC, \u ;z y 2 e:j_,2;g.. S y, 6 NCitJLJ C'. A lE G O N 6T GEc._ 6 AFC END. 7 4i$ C2.(2E ATE s 4(d ~D E W EL D TN AT A Dl6C.csN rl NmTY K4os r M E. ANAuv as D. Y / m
'RTF1 prWNE ENGINEERING SERVICES Enclosure (1)
EP-1-017 RECORD COPY PRO).NO._. [ ]
- independent Design Review TELEDYNE ENGINEERING SERVICES Shoreham Nuclear Power Station CONTROLLED Project Manager Resolution Form DOCUMENT TES PROJ. NO. ,h [o M DATE E d ' S2 i
i PMR 5633 1No.T S , N 'I f Reference RRF No. 5633 123*g M*l Jare: 11!![81 Description of Resolution: bl 5Si nAlt. Aft- ge7A usan exters, t AJ Ttf6 bM se=< w s* T m
- war adev * $t**r'd -
Tsie one4 ett>=mce Tes ans Te*iT THt<, cooiariaN l t2." 1s46 PieG *F- SC ST' W"* FEMTS IS. W To Twins C. 'STL SAmF e@ . Iths 12" 4 o44 5' 5 TL. c Pt Par is sitow u og M# n % _, t ,,, PP- i ot. - 8 , Ylh 5 3 t55 t n46t Ae. sostD w u.r. W. Mar A 5 ice iR t.AC'T tMPAc.T *ar T M STitees M b FAT W G W^ w* Tt d-Classification of item after Resolution: pot @B AL Fiobsce, Reviewer Signature
% F l ~ Asa Project Manager SigninirJ~~
l l INDEPENDENT DESIGN REVIEW a 4 NO O M d TELEDYNE ENGINEERING SERVICES (TES)
$33 Teledyne Engineering Services PROJECT 5633 TELEDYNE ENGINEERING SERVICES CONTROLLED SHOREHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION DOCUMENT LPCS SYSTEM .NO $0M
\ M o ,3 3 DATE_
DISPOSITION RESPONSE FORM RECORD COPY PROJ. NO. _ - db ICR NO. 3633- 14 PMR NO. 5633- 123 REV. 1 RFR NO. 5633- 123 REV. O
- o. .. T C n. c A. tlaitts SWEC Responsible Eng esr/Date m t w 41-In cProjepjEngineer/Date .
LILCO Project Engine /Date[ B9-11600.02-242-Q
ICR No. .5633 - -14. Rev. O CLASSIFICATION: Finding REFERENCE DOCUMENTS: Specification SH1-171 HTLOAD RUN R 1649442 Event 7.17
~RFI 5633-56 1 GE Specification 21A 9242
[ SWEC Drawings 5.18-72A, 5.01-24B, 5.18-77A, 5.18-68B TES STATEMENT OF FINDING l Drawing 11600.02-FP-10C-8 shows a 12-in. piece of stainless steel pipe i welded to nozzle. Nozzle drawings contained in RFI-5633-56 show carbon steel safe end. This creates a discontinuity at the weld that must be analyzed. i TES CONCLUSION OF FINDING , l i- The IC agrees with the reviewer's concern. The analysis report-does not consider the dissimilar metal weld joints. , RESPONSE l We have reviewed the concern reflected in this finding and have established that the as-installed condition agrees with the piping analysis. l l SWEC Drawing 11600.02-FP-10C-8 shows the piping which is SWEC responsi-
- ' bility and the interface with the RPV nozzle. The RPV is outside of SWEC's scope. The re fo re , the dissimilar metal weld should not be in SWEC's f
analysis. [ The SWEC drawing indicates a dissimilar metal transition piece [ (carbon steel to stainless steel) to provide the piping connection to the L RPV nozzle. The drawing indicates a " Hold" on the transition piece because the final details of the RPV nozzle were not available when the SWEC l drawing was issued. The final details of the RPV nozzle became available in May 1977 and are reflected on ' GE Drawing 6-CN621. A copy of the GE drawing with materials and interfaces highlighted is attached. The GE drawing shows a low alloy carbon steel extension included as part of the nozzle with a low alloy j carbon steel to nickel chromium transition weld within the nozzle assembly and within the GE scope of supply. The TES field inspection that detected the presence of a noncarbon steel material presumably acknowledged the GE supplied nickel chromium transition piece. Upon receipt of the final nozzle details, SWEC revised SWEC Drawing 11600.02-FP-10C-8 by issuing E&DCR F-7513-P to remove the " Hold," to delete the dissimilar metal transition piece, and to replace the transition piece
~
l I i . . B9-11600.02-242-Q.
i' l l with carbon steel pipe. This E&DCR was inadvertently omitted from the ! response to RFI 56. I The SWEC piping analysis includes all piping up to the interface point with the nozzle assembly and appropriately does not include a dissimilar metal weld. The stress interface between SWEC and GE is controlled in that GE provides allowable nozzle loads which may not be exceeded as verified by the SWEC piping stress analysis. (Reference GE Specification 22A 4907 and 22A 4907AD.) CORRECTIVE ACTION None required. Compliance with specification requirements is defined above. PREVENTIVE ACTION None required. Conformance to requirements precludes necessity for preventive action. COMPLIANCE DATE Not applicable. Compliance already exists. SAFETY IMPLICATION None. Interface between the SWEC-GE scopes of supply have been appropiately controlled by issuance of proper design documents. ATTACHMENTS
- 1. Marked-up GE Drawing 6-CN621
- 2. E&DCR F7513-P
- 3. GE Specification 22A 4907
- 4. GE Specification 22A 4907AD.
l \ \ I B9-11600.02-242-Q r l . - - - - . - - . - --. - - . , - - - - - - - . -
t
}'
j-~:~:.
-$--h2-
~
~. .
%,.;%,f.7eg.:k,f'f.G'l'~.v,.$,9f.'l',"n.y
; . w: , c .
; .,M.'
. , n f.
.D y
.g ,b,.d','
5-t.f 6 hg-- - lj l s 3 fq % z
- .; ,. gy -
., ., n ; ,
l o q
- , , 'p t . 9
- e. ,6 p e., 4 W.
i
> l . .
rg ?. . - . '. 3 -P I Hc ,.t,,-J. s .- s p.u .t ggy I
.r..
i o.
- g. .r
.t . . .
h k
~
b.,
* ~
e h I N '
'f.'de , .w t vfdi
.,- ~
*' l -
c
- h va . 2 h.i ..5e h a.:>,
'.I i ., 11
- :; 7a,g- 4
; e i
- a ::z.-
*,.ilse.gaij p
, . , a
_._ _.- fe, ,3
! Hiy,H "<p?-
~
2 ,M, t'~ ! s e l i d : ^..C .., i 4 ).
! lh ; '
' .$ 3i as <
i8g 6 ;.' - - n.Yl8.,h. .-_.--. 0".i h<t y.51$$.33 se a g
) 3 3
,:s >. ur 1 i 4
..e.z og c h , r..
- e.
MLguO t, . 5
.: c .
. b3 tc2 ;
2 . Ih ' e t ,,
., .w. . .,*,:,
. , , ;r1,3..
I J 3 2 .t .gn ., g g.,4 -li . b jfg,.- f, % a
- ;). .:;~1
,,, r .
t ,?.:'.5 ayl
- t. y~~3.f n ,
~.- ,
wo _st ry a,. m r.,. I $I I I I
.s
-f,r
) m.]'y- (W;; ill' f ,, ,j % '
c .i (nwua s' * . - o O -
'fe,n .. '
k p,I a'i ', - i i U . I
,,,j
..{.Ih m . ( u c.
8 lIil et I. E , . , % 9
. t .
g
-- - T
.. ,a?d. -
L.---- 3
^1 ~~ ,
t)-.&
- ; pyg.-)%. .$ ;'y.9 y m 'e O .,.a %
- 1 p 23 1 .
-~1e
(.7 I
.,. 4 c> N, %.H ,..-!
'l. *
.)-
- ;".,: .r2.:q
..,1I
' 1 wtot k d O* ',
- h.O l
. N 's l
oJt' ,l:A:; -s- qi[4} l p( . .
s .I
.:' g 4 ,
e.c
.m.,. ..e -
..r, ' -
M. z -
.J -
784 *l i; Q i i 4 ' : ' __ , t I- '
. un . ,w, si .
I I .E .e
., % . - ) ' ..
t h.&. p 3 E e-- m gI. . . . .3 n . .,. m, %, 9
.- m.n m. .
* * " '4 j .:
y\ I ..pii)fna ,..., p , ;.:
. ,}}