|
---|
Category:CORRESPONDENCE-LETTERS
MONTHYEARTXX-9924, Forwards Responses to Questions by NRC Re Application for Amends to Licenses NPF-87 & NPF-89,by Incorporating Changes Increasing RWST low-level Setpoint from Greater than But Equal to 40% to Greater than But Equal to 45% of Span1999-10-22022 October 1999 Forwards Responses to Questions by NRC Re Application for Amends to Licenses NPF-87 & NPF-89,by Incorporating Changes Increasing RWST low-level Setpoint from Greater than But Equal to 40% to Greater than But Equal to 45% of Span ML20217M5711999-10-20020 October 1999 Forwards Insp Repts 50-445/99-15 & 50-446/99-15 on 990822- 1002.Two Severity Level IV Violations of NRC Requirements Identified & Being Treated as non-cited Violations Consistent with App C of Enforcement Policy TXX-9923, Forwards Monthly Operating Repts for Sept 1999 for CPSES, Units 1 & 2,per Plant TS 5.6.4.No Failures of Challenges to PORVs of SV for Units Occurred1999-10-15015 October 1999 Forwards Monthly Operating Repts for Sept 1999 for CPSES, Units 1 & 2,per Plant TS 5.6.4.No Failures of Challenges to PORVs of SV for Units Occurred ML20217E7951999-10-12012 October 1999 Forwards COLR for Unit 1,Cycle 8,per TS 5.6.5 ML20212L2891999-10-0101 October 1999 Discusses Closeout of GL 97-06, Degradation of Steam Generator Internals. Purpose of GL Was to Obtain Info That Would Enable NRC to Verify That Condition of Licensee SG Internals Comply with Current Licensing Bases TXX-9922, Forwards Revised COLR, for Cycle 5 for Unit 21999-10-0101 October 1999 Forwards Revised COLR, for Cycle 5 for Unit 2 ML20216J5571999-10-0101 October 1999 Provides Final Response to GL 98-01,suppl 1, Y2K Readiness of Computer Sys at Npps ML20212G0721999-09-24024 September 1999 Forwards Rev 4 to Augmented Inservice Insp Plan for CPSES, Unit 1. Future Changes & Revs to Unit 1 Augmented Inservice Insp Plan Will Be Available on Site ML20212H0461999-09-24024 September 1999 Forwards Rev 6 to CPSES Glen Rose,Tx ASME Section XI ISI Program Plan for 1st Interval on 990820 ML20212F7481999-09-24024 September 1999 Forwards SER Authorizing Relief from Exam Requirement of 1986 Edition ASME Code,Section XI Pursuant to 10CFR50.55a(a)(3)(ii) for Relief Request A-3 & 10CFR50.55a(g)(6)(i) for Relief Requests B15,16,17 & C-4 ML20212F1041999-09-23023 September 1999 Requests That NRC Be Informed of Any Changes in Scope of Y2K System Deficiencies Listed or Util Projected Completion Schedule for Comanche Peak Steam Electric Station,Units 1 & 2 ML20212E6661999-09-21021 September 1999 Advises That Info Contained in Application & Affidavit, (CAW-99-1342) Re WCAP-15009,Rev 0, Comache Peak Unit 1 Evaluation for Tube Vibration Induced Fatigue, Will Be Withheld from Public Disclosure ML20212D9111999-09-16016 September 1999 Informs That on 990818,NRC Completed Midcycle PPR of CPSES & Did Not Identify Any Areas in Which Performance Warranted Insp Beyond Core Insp Program.Core Insp Plan at Facility Over Next 7 Months.Insp Plan Through March 2000 Encl ML20212A7601999-09-14014 September 1999 Forwards Insp Repts 50-445/99-14 & 50-446/99-14 on 990707-0821.Four Violations Occurred & Being Treated as Ncvs.Conduct of Activities Was Generally Characterized by safety-conscious Operations & Sound Radiological Controls TXX-9921, Suppls 981221 LAR 98-010 to Licenses NPF-87 & NPF-89, Clarfying Conditions of Use Re Analytical Methods Used to Determine Core Operating Limits,Per Telcon with NRC1999-09-10010 September 1999 Suppls 981221 LAR 98-010 to Licenses NPF-87 & NPF-89, Clarfying Conditions of Use Re Analytical Methods Used to Determine Core Operating Limits,Per Telcon with NRC ML20211P3761999-09-0707 September 1999 Ack Receipt of Ltr Dtd 990615,transmitting Rev 30 to Physical Security Plan,Per 10CFR50.54(p).No NRC Approval Is Required ML20211L9871999-09-0303 September 1999 Forwards Rev 31 to Technical Requirements Manual. All Changes Applicable to Plants Have Been Reviewed Under Util 10CFR50.59 Process & Found Not to Include Any USQs TXX-9915, Responds to 990701 & 0825 RAI Telcons Re Spent Fuel Pool Temp,Per LAR 98-008,which Requested Increase in Spent Fuel Storage capacity.Marked-up Page 4-1 of CPSES Fuel Storage Licensing Rept, Encl1999-09-0303 September 1999 Responds to 990701 & 0825 RAI Telcons Re Spent Fuel Pool Temp,Per LAR 98-008,which Requested Increase in Spent Fuel Storage capacity.Marked-up Page 4-1 of CPSES Fuel Storage Licensing Rept, Encl ML20211K2231999-08-31031 August 1999 Forwards Txu Electric Comments of Rvid,Version 2 ML20211J3801999-08-27027 August 1999 Forwards Corrected TS Page 3.8-26 to Amend 66 to Licenses NPF-87 & NPF-89,respectively.Footnote on TS Page 3.8-26 Incorrectly Deleted ML20211G7301999-08-26026 August 1999 Forwards Revs 29 & 30 to CPSES Technical Requirements Manual (Trm). Attachments 1 & 2 Contain Description of Changes for Revs 29 & 30 Respectively ML20211G1081999-08-26026 August 1999 Responds to NRR Staff RAI Re Util Mar 1999 Submittal for NRC Review & Approval of Changes to CPSES Emergency Classification Procedure ML20211G3441999-08-25025 August 1999 Forwards Response to NRC RAI on LAR 98-010 for Cpses,Units 1 & 2.Communication Contains No New Licensing Commitments Re Cpses,Units 1 & 2 ML20211B2861999-08-18018 August 1999 Forwards Insp Repts 50-445/99-13 & 50-446/99-13 on 990720- 23.No Violations Noted.Insp Included Implementation of Licensee Emergency Plan & Procedures During Util Biennial Emergency Preparedness Exercise ML20211C4661999-08-18018 August 1999 Discusses Proprietary Info Re Thermo-Lag.NRC Treated Bisco Test Rept 748-105 as Proprietary & Withheld It from Public Disclosure,Iaw 10CFR2.790 ML20210U3981999-08-17017 August 1999 Forwards Monthly Operating Repts for July 1999 for CPSES, Units 1 & 2,per TS 6.9.1.5.No Failures or Challenges to PORVs or SVs for Plant Occurred ML20211C0991999-08-17017 August 1999 Forwards Rev 3 to ASME Section XI ISI Program Plan,Unit 2 - 1st Interval, Replacing Rev 2 in Entirety ML20211C4571999-08-16016 August 1999 Forwards Omitted Subj Page of Contractor TER TXX-9919, Forwards Relief Request A-3,Rev 1 to Unit 1 ISI Program,Per Conversations Between NRC & Txu Electric on 9908021999-08-16016 August 1999 Forwards Relief Request A-3,Rev 1 to Unit 1 ISI Program,Per Conversations Between NRC & Txu Electric on 990802 ML20210R6561999-08-13013 August 1999 Forwards Response to NRR 990805 Telcon RAI Re License Amend Request 98-010,to Increase Power for Operation of CPSES Unit 2 to 3445 Mwth & Incorporating Addl Changes Into Units 1 & 2 TS ML20211A9501999-08-12012 August 1999 Discusses 990720-21 Workshop Conducted in Region IV Ofc,Re Exchange of Info in Area of Use of Risk Insights in Regulatory Activities.List of Attendees,Summary of Topic & Issues,Agenda & Copies of Handouts Encl ML20210S6411999-08-12012 August 1999 Informs That Wg Guldemond,License SOP-43780,is No Longer Performing Licensed Duties.Discontinuation of License Is Requested ML20210R2221999-08-12012 August 1999 Forwards Insp Repts 50-445/99-10 & 50-446/99-10 on 990510-0628.Violations Noted & Being Treated as Ncvs, Consistent with App C of Enforcement Policy ML20210N1101999-08-0404 August 1999 Provides Supplemental Info to Util 990623 License Amend Request 99-005 Re Bypassing DG Trips.Info Replaces Info Contained in Subject Submittal in Attachment 2,Section II, Description of TS Change Request ML20210L1461999-08-0303 August 1999 Informs That NRC Plans to Administer Gfes of Written Operator Licensing Exam on 991006.Requests Submittal of Ltr Identifying Individuals Taking Exam,Personnel Allowed Access to Exams & Mailing Address for Exams ML20210J2301999-08-0202 August 1999 Forwards Amend 96 to CPSES Ufsar.Replacement of FSAR Figures with Plant Process Flow Diagrams Meets Intent & Requirements of NRC Reg Guide 1.70,Rev 2 ML20210J6071999-08-0202 August 1999 Forwards line-by-line Descriptions of Changes in Amend 96 to CPSES UFSAR Transmitted by Util Ltr TXX-99166,dtd 990802. Replacment of FSAR Figures with Plant Process Flow Diagrams Meets Intent & Requirements of NRC Reg Guide 1.70,rev 2 TXX-9916, Notifies NRC That CPSES Units 1 & 2,improved TS Implemented on 9907271999-08-0202 August 1999 Notifies NRC That CPSES Units 1 & 2,improved TS Implemented on 990727 TXX-9918, Forwards CPSES 10CFR50.59 Evaluation Summary Rept 0008,for 970802-990201 & CPSES Commitment Matl Change Evaluation Rept 0003,for 970802-9906301999-08-0202 August 1999 Forwards CPSES 10CFR50.59 Evaluation Summary Rept 0008,for 970802-990201 & CPSES Commitment Matl Change Evaluation Rept 0003,for 970802-990630 ML20210K2321999-07-29029 July 1999 Forwards Insp Repts 50-445/99-12 & 50-446/99-12 on 990530-0710.No Violations Noted ML20210G5861999-07-29029 July 1999 Forwards fitness-for-duty Program Performance Data for Six Month Period of Jan-June 1999 ML20210J0121999-07-27027 July 1999 Forwards Summary of Methodology for Determination of NDE Measurement Uncertainty,In Response to Recent Discussions with NRC Re LAR 98-006 Concerning Rev to SG Tube Plugging Criteria TXX-9917, Provides Info Re Augmented Inservice Insp Plan,Which Requires Periodic Insp of Rv Head & Internals Lifting Devices at CPSES1999-07-26026 July 1999 Provides Info Re Augmented Inservice Insp Plan,Which Requires Periodic Insp of Rv Head & Internals Lifting Devices at CPSES ML20210F3121999-07-26026 July 1999 Responds to GL 99-02, Laboratory Testing of Nuclear-Grade Activated Charcoal, ML20210D8231999-07-23023 July 1999 Forwards Safety Evaluation of Relief Requests Re Use of 1998 Edition of Subsections IWE & Iwl of ASME Code for Containment Insp ML20210D3211999-07-21021 July 1999 Provides List of Estimates of Licensing Actions,In Response to Administrative Ltr 99-02,dtd 990603 ML20210C2931999-07-21021 July 1999 Supplements 880323 Response to NRC Bulletin 88-02, Rapidly Propagating...Sg Tubes, Non-proprietary WCAP-15010 & Proprietary Rev 0 to WCAP-15009, CP Unit 1 Evaluation for Tube Vibration... Encl.Proprietary Rept Withheld ML20209H0111999-07-16016 July 1999 Forwards Relief Request C-4 to CPSES Unit 2 ISI Program for Approval ML20210C3331999-07-16016 July 1999 Forwards Exam Repts 50-445/99-301 & 50-446/99-301 on 990618- 24.Exam Included Evaluation of Six Applicants for Senior Operator Licenses ML20209H2551999-07-16016 July 1999 Forwards ISI Summary Rept for Fourth Refueling Outage of CPSES Unit 2 & Containment ISI Summary Rept for Fourth Refueling Outage of CPSES Unit 2,per ASME Boiler & Pressure Vessel Code,Section Xi,Paragraph IWA-6230 1999-09-07
[Table view] Category:INCOMING CORRESPONDENCE
MONTHYEARTXX-9924, Forwards Responses to Questions by NRC Re Application for Amends to Licenses NPF-87 & NPF-89,by Incorporating Changes Increasing RWST low-level Setpoint from Greater than But Equal to 40% to Greater than But Equal to 45% of Span1999-10-22022 October 1999 Forwards Responses to Questions by NRC Re Application for Amends to Licenses NPF-87 & NPF-89,by Incorporating Changes Increasing RWST low-level Setpoint from Greater than But Equal to 40% to Greater than But Equal to 45% of Span TXX-9923, Forwards Monthly Operating Repts for Sept 1999 for CPSES, Units 1 & 2,per Plant TS 5.6.4.No Failures of Challenges to PORVs of SV for Units Occurred1999-10-15015 October 1999 Forwards Monthly Operating Repts for Sept 1999 for CPSES, Units 1 & 2,per Plant TS 5.6.4.No Failures of Challenges to PORVs of SV for Units Occurred ML20217E7951999-10-12012 October 1999 Forwards COLR for Unit 1,Cycle 8,per TS 5.6.5 ML20216J5571999-10-0101 October 1999 Provides Final Response to GL 98-01,suppl 1, Y2K Readiness of Computer Sys at Npps TXX-9922, Forwards Revised COLR, for Cycle 5 for Unit 21999-10-0101 October 1999 Forwards Revised COLR, for Cycle 5 for Unit 2 ML20212G0721999-09-24024 September 1999 Forwards Rev 4 to Augmented Inservice Insp Plan for CPSES, Unit 1. Future Changes & Revs to Unit 1 Augmented Inservice Insp Plan Will Be Available on Site ML20212H0461999-09-24024 September 1999 Forwards Rev 6 to CPSES Glen Rose,Tx ASME Section XI ISI Program Plan for 1st Interval on 990820 TXX-9921, Suppls 981221 LAR 98-010 to Licenses NPF-87 & NPF-89, Clarfying Conditions of Use Re Analytical Methods Used to Determine Core Operating Limits,Per Telcon with NRC1999-09-10010 September 1999 Suppls 981221 LAR 98-010 to Licenses NPF-87 & NPF-89, Clarfying Conditions of Use Re Analytical Methods Used to Determine Core Operating Limits,Per Telcon with NRC ML20211L9871999-09-0303 September 1999 Forwards Rev 31 to Technical Requirements Manual. All Changes Applicable to Plants Have Been Reviewed Under Util 10CFR50.59 Process & Found Not to Include Any USQs TXX-9915, Responds to 990701 & 0825 RAI Telcons Re Spent Fuel Pool Temp,Per LAR 98-008,which Requested Increase in Spent Fuel Storage capacity.Marked-up Page 4-1 of CPSES Fuel Storage Licensing Rept, Encl1999-09-0303 September 1999 Responds to 990701 & 0825 RAI Telcons Re Spent Fuel Pool Temp,Per LAR 98-008,which Requested Increase in Spent Fuel Storage capacity.Marked-up Page 4-1 of CPSES Fuel Storage Licensing Rept, Encl ML20211K2231999-08-31031 August 1999 Forwards Txu Electric Comments of Rvid,Version 2 ML20211G1081999-08-26026 August 1999 Responds to NRR Staff RAI Re Util Mar 1999 Submittal for NRC Review & Approval of Changes to CPSES Emergency Classification Procedure ML20211G7301999-08-26026 August 1999 Forwards Revs 29 & 30 to CPSES Technical Requirements Manual (Trm). Attachments 1 & 2 Contain Description of Changes for Revs 29 & 30 Respectively ML20211G3441999-08-25025 August 1999 Forwards Response to NRC RAI on LAR 98-010 for Cpses,Units 1 & 2.Communication Contains No New Licensing Commitments Re Cpses,Units 1 & 2 ML20210U3981999-08-17017 August 1999 Forwards Monthly Operating Repts for July 1999 for CPSES, Units 1 & 2,per TS 6.9.1.5.No Failures or Challenges to PORVs or SVs for Plant Occurred ML20211C0991999-08-17017 August 1999 Forwards Rev 3 to ASME Section XI ISI Program Plan,Unit 2 - 1st Interval, Replacing Rev 2 in Entirety TXX-9919, Forwards Relief Request A-3,Rev 1 to Unit 1 ISI Program,Per Conversations Between NRC & Txu Electric on 9908021999-08-16016 August 1999 Forwards Relief Request A-3,Rev 1 to Unit 1 ISI Program,Per Conversations Between NRC & Txu Electric on 990802 ML20210R6561999-08-13013 August 1999 Forwards Response to NRR 990805 Telcon RAI Re License Amend Request 98-010,to Increase Power for Operation of CPSES Unit 2 to 3445 Mwth & Incorporating Addl Changes Into Units 1 & 2 TS ML20210S6411999-08-12012 August 1999 Informs That Wg Guldemond,License SOP-43780,is No Longer Performing Licensed Duties.Discontinuation of License Is Requested ML20210N1101999-08-0404 August 1999 Provides Supplemental Info to Util 990623 License Amend Request 99-005 Re Bypassing DG Trips.Info Replaces Info Contained in Subject Submittal in Attachment 2,Section II, Description of TS Change Request TXX-9918, Forwards CPSES 10CFR50.59 Evaluation Summary Rept 0008,for 970802-990201 & CPSES Commitment Matl Change Evaluation Rept 0003,for 970802-9906301999-08-0202 August 1999 Forwards CPSES 10CFR50.59 Evaluation Summary Rept 0008,for 970802-990201 & CPSES Commitment Matl Change Evaluation Rept 0003,for 970802-990630 ML20210J2301999-08-0202 August 1999 Forwards Amend 96 to CPSES Ufsar.Replacement of FSAR Figures with Plant Process Flow Diagrams Meets Intent & Requirements of NRC Reg Guide 1.70,Rev 2 ML20210J6071999-08-0202 August 1999 Forwards line-by-line Descriptions of Changes in Amend 96 to CPSES UFSAR Transmitted by Util Ltr TXX-99166,dtd 990802. Replacment of FSAR Figures with Plant Process Flow Diagrams Meets Intent & Requirements of NRC Reg Guide 1.70,rev 2 TXX-9916, Notifies NRC That CPSES Units 1 & 2,improved TS Implemented on 9907271999-08-0202 August 1999 Notifies NRC That CPSES Units 1 & 2,improved TS Implemented on 990727 ML20210G5861999-07-29029 July 1999 Forwards fitness-for-duty Program Performance Data for Six Month Period of Jan-June 1999 ML20210J0121999-07-27027 July 1999 Forwards Summary of Methodology for Determination of NDE Measurement Uncertainty,In Response to Recent Discussions with NRC Re LAR 98-006 Concerning Rev to SG Tube Plugging Criteria TXX-9917, Provides Info Re Augmented Inservice Insp Plan,Which Requires Periodic Insp of Rv Head & Internals Lifting Devices at CPSES1999-07-26026 July 1999 Provides Info Re Augmented Inservice Insp Plan,Which Requires Periodic Insp of Rv Head & Internals Lifting Devices at CPSES ML20210F3121999-07-26026 July 1999 Responds to GL 99-02, Laboratory Testing of Nuclear-Grade Activated Charcoal, ML20210C2931999-07-21021 July 1999 Supplements 880323 Response to NRC Bulletin 88-02, Rapidly Propagating...Sg Tubes, Non-proprietary WCAP-15010 & Proprietary Rev 0 to WCAP-15009, CP Unit 1 Evaluation for Tube Vibration... Encl.Proprietary Rept Withheld ML20210D3211999-07-21021 July 1999 Provides List of Estimates of Licensing Actions,In Response to Administrative Ltr 99-02,dtd 990603 ML20209H2551999-07-16016 July 1999 Forwards ISI Summary Rept for Fourth Refueling Outage of CPSES Unit 2 & Containment ISI Summary Rept for Fourth Refueling Outage of CPSES Unit 2,per ASME Boiler & Pressure Vessel Code,Section Xi,Paragraph IWA-6230 ML20209H0111999-07-16016 July 1999 Forwards Relief Request C-4 to CPSES Unit 2 ISI Program for Approval ML20209G0721999-07-13013 July 1999 Forwards Monthly Operating Repts for June 1999 for CPSES, Units 1 & 2,per TS 6.9.1.5.No Failures or Challenges to PORVs of SV Occurred During Reporting Period ML20209F0681999-07-0909 July 1999 Informs That Effective 990514,TU Electric Formally Changed Name to Txu Electric.Change All Refs of TU Electric to Txu Electric on Correspondence Distribution Lists ML20209E0421999-07-0909 July 1999 Forwards Response to NRC Request for Addl Info on LAR 98-010.Attachment 1 Is Affidavit for Info Supporting LAR 98-010 ML20209B6021999-06-30030 June 1999 Submits Second Response to NRC GL 98-01,Suppl 1, Y2K Readiness of Computer Sys at Npps. Readiness Disclosure for Reporting Status of Facility Y2K Readiness Encl ML20195J6981999-06-15015 June 1999 Provides Addl Info Related to Open Issue,Discussed in 990610 Conference Call with D Jaffe Re ISI Program Relief Request L-1 Submitted by Util on 980220 ML20196A4921999-06-15015 June 1999 Forwards Rev 30 to Physical Security Plan.Rev Withheld,Per 10CFR73.21 ML20195J0491999-06-14014 June 1999 Submits Response to RAI Re Implementation of 1.0 Volt Repair Criteria ML20195J0651999-06-14014 June 1999 Submits Response to RAI Re GL 95-07, Pressure Locking & Thermal Binding of Safety Related Power Operated Gate Valves 05000445/LER-1999-001, Forwards LER 99-001-00, Some Electrical Contacts for RCS Pressure Relief Valves Were Not Included in Surveillance Testing Procedures. New Licensing Commitments Identified in Attachment 11999-06-0808 June 1999 Forwards LER 99-001-00, Some Electrical Contacts for RCS Pressure Relief Valves Were Not Included in Surveillance Testing Procedures. New Licensing Commitments Identified in Attachment 1 ML20195F0091999-06-0808 June 1999 Forwards Response to RAI Re Units 1 & 2 ISI Program for Relief Requests E-1 & L-1.Communication Contains No New Licensing Basis Commitments Re Cpses,Units 1 & 2 ML20207E1921999-05-28028 May 1999 Submits Updated Request for NRC Staff to Review & Approve Certain Changes to CPSES Emergency Plan Submitted in 981015 & s Prior to Changes Being Implemented at CPSES ML20207E1711999-05-28028 May 1999 Supplements 990526 LAR 99-004 as TU Electric Believes Extingency Exists in That Proposed Amend Was Result of NOED Granted to Prevent Shudown of CPSES Unit 1 ML20207D9841999-05-26026 May 1999 Requests That NRC Exercise Enforcement Discretion to Allow Cpses,Unit 1 to Remain in Mode 1,power Operation,Without Having Performed Svc Test,Per SR 4.8.2.1d on Unit 1 Battery BT1ED2 ML20195B6351999-05-25025 May 1999 Submits Response to RAI Re GL 95-07, Pressure Locking & Thermal Binding of Safety Related Power Operated Gate Valves TXX-9912, Forwards Txu Electric (Formerly TU Electric) CPSES Emergency Preparedness Exercise Scenario Manual for 990721-22,Graded Exercise1999-05-21021 May 1999 Forwards Txu Electric (Formerly TU Electric) CPSES Emergency Preparedness Exercise Scenario Manual for 990721-22,Graded Exercise ML20206U1981999-05-20020 May 1999 Forwards Form 10K Annual Rept,Per 10CFR50.71(b). Communication Contains No New Licensing Basis Commitments Re Cpses,Units 1 & 2 ML20196L1931999-05-20020 May 1999 Forwards MOR for Apr 1999 for Cpses,Units 1 & 2.During Reporting Period There Have Been No Failures or Challenges to Power Operated Relief Valves or Safety Valves TXX-9911, Forwards non-proprietary & Proprietary Responses to RAI Re LAR 98-010 by Incorporating Attached Changes Into CPSES Unit 2 OL NPF-89 & CPSES Units 1,OL NPF-87 & 2 TS to Increase Licensed Power.W & Caldon Proprietary Responses Withheld1999-05-14014 May 1999 Forwards non-proprietary & Proprietary Responses to RAI Re LAR 98-010 by Incorporating Attached Changes Into CPSES Unit 2 OL NPF-89 & CPSES Units 1,OL NPF-87 & 2 TS to Increase Licensed Power.W & Caldon Proprietary Responses Withheld 1999-09-03
[Table view] Category:LEGAL/LAW FIRM TO NRC
MONTHYEARML20055E2741990-05-0101 May 1990 FOIA Request for Investigation Rept 4-89-008 ML20042E3291990-04-10010 April 1990 Advises That Due to Clerical Error,Author Ltrs to NRC Re Insp Repts 50-445/90-05 & 50-446/90-05 Not Served.Repts Will Be Served to All Parties on Attached List ML20042E3311990-03-31031 March 1990 Advises That Open Issues Re Thermo-Lag Insulation Matl & Harassment & Intimidation of QC Inspector Not Addressed in Insp Repts 50-445/90-05 & 50-446/90-05.CASE Questions Whether Formulas to Mfg Thermo-Lag Changed ML20042E3351990-03-28028 March 1990 Requests Listed Info or Basis for Specific Action Re C Grimes 900208 Ltr to J Cahill Re Issuance of License NPF-28,specifically Why Temporary Exemption from Schedular Requirements Granted ML20042E4301990-03-26026 March 1990 Lists Questions Based on Review of Insp Repts 50-445/89-88, 50-446/89-88,50-445/88-88 & 50-446/88-88,including Contamination Problems Found Inside Namco Switches in 1989 & Aircom Fasteners ML20043B7341990-03-0202 March 1990 FOIA Request for Records Re Insp Performed by C Williams on 900207-0302 Concerning ASME Section III Compliance Review & Weld 12A ML20011F0091990-02-0808 February 1990 Certifies That Util Covered for Decontamination Liability & Excess Property Insurance,Effective on 900208 ML20012D6361990-02-0505 February 1990 Responds to Util 891221 Ltr to NRC Re thermo-lag Dispute ML20012D5951990-02-0505 February 1990 FOIA Request for Documents & Records Relevant to & Generated in Connection W/Insp Repts 50-445/90-05 & 50-446/90-05 on 900131 Re Therm-o-Lag Issues ML20005G5381990-01-10010 January 1990 Urges Resolution of Issues in Dispute & Matters of Concern to Case Prior to Fuel Load Decision.Issues Include, Auxiliary Feedwater Check Valve & Pending Enforcement Action & Station Svc Water Sys Enforcement Action ML20005G5481990-01-0909 January 1990 Forwards Analytical Evaluation of Station Svc Water Sys for Facilities by Case Consultant J Doyle Dtd 891231.Rept Submitted to Document Events Re Removal of Plastite Liner in Station Svc Water Sys in Spring 1988 ML19354D7631990-01-0909 January 1990 Forwards Rev 0 to Case Final Rept, Analytical Evaluation of Station Svc Water Sys,Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Station. Rept Contains Conclusions Applicable to Issues of Regulatory Character & Competence of Util to Manage & Operate Plant ML20005G6951990-01-0909 January 1990 Corrected Ltr Discussing K Doyle Rept, Analytical Evaluation of Station Svc Water Sys for Comanche Peak. Rept Concludes That Probable Cause of Failures of Sys Due to Inability of Util Personnel to Perform Accurate Analysis ML20005G6751989-12-12012 December 1989 FOIA Request for Documents Re Insp Repts 50-445/89-23 & 50-446/89-23 on 890405-0502 ML20006B8811989-12-0505 December 1989 Appeals Denial of FOIA Request for App B Records ML19332F4911989-12-0101 December 1989 Discusses NRC 891027 Ltr to B Brink Re Citizens for Fair Util Regulation 891016 Request for Stay.Nrc Must Be Consistent in Application of NRC Procedures Re Probing of Allegations.Improprietaries Should Be Sought from Case ML20005G5441989-11-29029 November 1989 Requests That NRC Independently Conduct Insp/Investigation of Dispute Between Case & Util Re Thermo-Lag & Thermo Science,Inc Qc/Qa Breakdown.Util 891116 Ltr to Case Re Results of Investigation of Inspector a Concerns Encl ML20011D1221989-11-20020 November 1989 Discusses Concerns Re Integrity of Regulatory Process as Affecting Plant ML19332D7371989-10-0606 October 1989 FOIA Request for Records Re Chronology of Events Beginning 1985 ML19332F3141989-09-27027 September 1989 FOIA Request for Documents Re 890908 Insp Repts 50-445/89-38 & 50-446/89-38 ML20247R0381989-09-23023 September 1989 Advises of Case Position Re Need for Regulatory Enforcement Action in Response to Mgt Process & Administrative Control Failures Evidenced by 890505 Event at Facility ML20248C2711989-09-23023 September 1989 Requests Reclassification of Violations Noted in Insp Rept 50-445/88-47 & 50-446/88-42 on 880707-0802.Informs Case Believes Further Insp & Enforcement Review Appropriate ML20245J9341989-06-30030 June 1989 Forwards Util Response to Cap Rock Electric Cooperative,Inc Request for Order Modifying Antitrust License Conditions ML20248D6571989-06-16016 June 1989 Ofc of Inverstigations Subpoena to Jj Macktal,Nrc Investigation 4-89-008.* Requests Leave of 5 Days to Respond to Request Filed for Enforcement of Subpoena & to Brief Commission on Issues Re Subpoena ML20246K3781989-05-22022 May 1989 Requests Status of NRC Determination of Pending Fee Waiver Requests for FOIAs 89-47 & 89-52 ML20245A0381989-05-12012 May 1989 Forwards Request from Cap Rock Electric Cooperative,Inc for Order Enforcing & Modifying Antitrust License Conditions & Certificate of Svc.W/O Request ML20244D8701989-04-0606 April 1989 Forwards Endorsement 27 to Nelia NF-274 ML20246K3621989-03-30030 March 1989 Responds to Responding to Appeal of Denial of Fee Waivers for 890301 FOIA Requests.Justification for Fee Waiver Provided ML20246K3401989-03-0101 March 1989 Appeals Denial of Two Requests for Fee Waivers Re FOIAs 89-47 & 89-52 on Behalf of Jj Macktal & SM Hasan.Purpose of Requests to Examine Process Utilized by EDO & NRC for Revoking Confidentiality of Allegers ML20244D8771989-01-26026 January 1989 FOIA Request for Records Re Settlement Negotiations & Agreements in Licensing Proceedings Effectuated During Jul 1988 ML20246K2061989-01-25025 January 1989 FOIA Request for Records Re Revocation of Confidentiality on 890123 by V Stello & Requests for Info by Third Parties Which Concerns SM Hasan or Jj Macktal &/Or Respective Allegations About Facility ML20205D1401988-10-14014 October 1988 Forwards State of Tx Public Utils Commission Substantive Rule 23.66 Re Wheeling for Cogenerators ML20151U5971988-08-0808 August 1988 Requests Withdrawal of Portion of 860131 Filing Re Case Request for Imposition of Fine,For Suspension of Const Activities & for Hearing on Application to Renew CP ML20150E1411988-07-12012 July 1988 Forwards Suppl Filing of Response of Applicant to Motions to Stay,To Intervene & for Sua Sponte Relief Filed by Various Parties ML20150E2061988-07-10010 July 1988 Clarifies Relevant Issues Raised in LC Clark Re Recent Filings by J Doe.W/Supporting Info & Certificate of Svc ML20150D5031988-07-0808 July 1988 Forwards Motions to Intervene & for Sua Sponte Filed on Behalf of Citizens for Fair Util Regulation & Individual Residents ML20150D5091988-07-0707 July 1988 Forwards Substitute Pleadings of Petitioner J Doe ML20150D5261988-07-0606 July 1988 Forwards Motion for Permission to Withdraw Pleadings W/O Prejudice & W/Leave to File Substitute Pleadings within 48 H ML20151Y6221988-04-29029 April 1988 Forwards Wg Counsil Transmitting Errata to Project Status Repts for Mechanical Suppl a - Sys Interaction & Mechanical Suppl B - Fire Protection. Related Correspondence ML20151T7141988-04-26026 April 1988 Forwards Applicants Answers to Board 14 Questions Re Action Plan Results Rept VII.a.9.Checklists Used for Reinsp/ Documentation Review for 81 Items of Equipment & Matl Not Included W/Answers Due to Vol Amounting More than 1,000 Pp ML20151E9771988-04-0808 April 1988 Informs That Applicants Notified Board & Parties of Availability in TU Electric Document Room of Matls Ref in NRC Sser 14.W/Certificate of Svc ML20148M0221988-03-30030 March 1988 Forwards Exhibit 18 Introduced to Record by Counsel for co-owners During Williams 880218 Deposition & Pages 190-195 & 464-465 of Transcript,Representing Entire Contents of Deposition Re Exhibit.W/Certificate of Svc ML20148K3681988-03-24024 March 1988 Forwards Excerpts from Form 10-K Filed by Util W/Security & Exchange Commission.Excerpts Contain Financial Disclosures Re Facility.Info Provided to Keep Board Apprised of Matters Re Facility ML20150D0151988-03-21021 March 1988 Forwards Transcripts of Meeting Held on 871217-18 & 880218 Between Case & Util.W/O Encl.W/Certificate of Svc ML20150D0201988-03-18018 March 1988 Informs That on 880314,CASE Filed Tenth Progress Rept W/ Board & Urged Board to Review Transcript of Public Meetings Held Between Case & Applicants in Which Walsh/Doyle Issues Discussed.W/Certificate of Svc.Related Correspondence ML20148G1411988-03-17017 March 1988 Forwards Ltr of Even Date from Util to NRC Which Transmits Copies of Errata Prepared for Project Status Rept Re Cable Tray & Cable Tray Hangers & Conduit Supports Train C 2 Inch Diameter & Less ML20150D0381988-03-14014 March 1988 Forwards Util Informing That Licensee Still Collecting Documents for Files Containing Documentation for Result Rept VII.a.9 ML20196D5001988-02-0808 February 1988 Forwards Wg Counsil Transmitting Project Status Rept for Civil/Structural, Rev 0.Related Correspondence ML20195J0621988-01-15015 January 1988 Forwards Wg Counsil to Nrc,Transmitting Project Rept for Electrical, Rev 0.Rept Also Sent to J Ellis & Cygna.Related Correspondence ML20147D5771988-01-14014 January 1988 Forwards Util Form 8-K,current Repts, & 1214,filed W/Securities & Exchange Commission.Documents Forwarded as Part of Parties Efforts to Keep Board Apprised to Matters Re Facility.Related Correspondence 1990-05-01
[Table view] |
Text
hb i
'O LAW OFFICES OF F i,C, C'; ~ l. 3." , N D EN CE BIS H OP, LIB ERM AN, COOK, PU RCELL & R EYNOLDS 1200 S EVE NTE ENTH STR E ET, N. W. IN NEW v0RM WASHINGTON, D. C. 20038 BISHOP. LIBER MAN & COOM (202) 857-9800 26 BROADWAY New voRn New v0Rn looo4 TELEX 440574 INTLAW UI (2 2) 246-69oo TELEM 222767 July 11, 1984 ..
- -(y\Mk'hN n
,;y "
Geary Mizuno, Esq. l/ T- ,
Staff Counsel 'l ,,
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission I ' ' 'm 7735 Old Georgetown Road, Room 10107 . b o c -.. - ,
Bethesda, Maryland 20814
Re: Texas Utilities Electric Company, et_t l.
(Comanche Peak Steam Electric Station, Units 1 and 2), Docket Nos. 50-445 & 50-446 L
Dear Geary:
Enclosed are Applicants' responses to questions posed by the NRC Staff regarding the motions for summary disposition submitted as part of Applicants' Plan to Respond to the Board's December 28, 1983 Memorandum and order (Quality Assurance for Design). Additional information will be provided shortly.
Sincerely, A RI 0. k& LOR William A. Horin A Counsel for Applicants rem Enclosures Hand Delivery cc: Juanita Ellis - Overnight Delivery (with encs.)
l Remainder of Service List (w/o encs.)
i i
?
l i
I l
9407130257 840711 PDR ADOCK O$000445 O u.
G om TS00
Q Clarify margin of safety for Richmond inserts in a manner similar to that employed for the Hilti bolts in the Affidavit for Gaps.
Two sizes of Richmond inserts are used at CPSES: 1 inch and 1 1/2 inch inserts.
In most instances the inserts employ SA-36 rods, but there are 47 inserts which utilize high strength bolts / rods. Of the 47 inserts which use high strength rods, 15 are 1 inch inserts. Of these 15,only 4 have bolt holes which are 1 1/8 inch in size. The remainder of the 1 inch inserts have bolt holes equal to 1 1/16 inch. All 1 1/2 inch inserts utilize bolt holes equal to 1 1/8" in size. This includes only those bolts with 1 1/8" holes loaded in shear. The remainder of the 1" inserts have bolt holes equal to 1 1/16" or are not loaded in shear. All 1 1/2" inserts utilize bolt holes equal to 1 1/8".
The margin to failure for the various Richmond inserts, computed in a manner similar to that used for the Hilti bolts on pp. 8 and 11 of the Gap Affidavit is assessed in this answer. First we will address the inherent safety factor for the 1" inserts.
There appears to be some misinterpretation of the 4-19-84 Richmond Insert Test Report (Attachmnen: B to the Affidavity)regarding the load. deflection chart for shear on 1 inch inserts (bolts were A-490). In the curves there are two load deflection lines for each specimen: one represents the deflection immed-intely af ter load, and the other is the deflection two minutes af ter load.
In the chart, point 16A for example is the deflection of specimen 16 at failure.
Point 16B is the two minute deflection of specimen 16 one load level below the failure load. Thus the only points of interest when discussing ultimate deflections are the A points. In this light the ultimate deflection for the 1 inch inserts with A-490 bolts in shear are:
l Speci=en Ultimate A Remarks 16 0.22" 17 0.332" This is a 2 min defl. before uit. 1 ad, since defl. at uit, 18 0.40 was not recorded l 19 0.270" l 20 0.270" l Thus the minimum deflection for all tests was 0.22" and the average i deflection was 0.2984"
s The allevable shear for a 1-inch insert with high strength bolt is 11.5 kips.
The test indicate that the corresponding deflections would range from 0.001" to 0.036" with the average being 0.0186".
A review of Unit 1 and Common supports that utilize 1= inch Richmonds with high strength bolts yielded only 4 such supports where the bolt holes are 1 1/8 inch, and the inserts are loaded in shear. None of these supports are in Containmq3t. A worst case analysis of the above would indicate that the safety factor based on deflection would be 1.37. A more reasonable approach would be to use the averages. Based on average deflections the safety factor is 2.08. This would apply to 4 support only. The following is a summary of the situation as it applies to each of thses supports.
L Bolt pattern is 4 Richmond inserts in a square pattern. Total shear load of the joint is low entough that two bolts can take all the shear and remain below allowables
- 2. Bolt pattern resisting shear is 8 Richmond inserts (5-A36 and 3-A193).
It is not reasonable to assume that any one bolt will have to deflect 1/8" before another bolt begins to share the load.
- 3. Bolt pattern resisting shear consists of 14 Hiltis plus 4 Richmonds.
Samec(clusionasin2above.
- 4. Bolt pattern resisting shear is 24 Richmond inserts (22 A36 and 2 A193).
Samecojlusionasabove.
It must be stated that the Richmond insert tests were conducted is shear with A-490 bolts. The high strength bolts actually used in the 1-inch inserts in the fifid are A-193 Grade B. This material is 14-25 % more ductile than A-490.
Having defined the inherent safety factor for the limiting case of the Richmond inserts, i.e the 1 inch inserts with high strench bolts and 1 1/8 inch bolt holes, it is appropriate for completeness to define the safety factors for the other Richmonds.
There is no test data for the 1 inch inserts which utilize A-36 rods.
However there is test data comparing the 1 1/2 inch insert behavior in shear when employing high strench and A-36 rods. This data (see Att. A of Richmond Affidavit) shows that deflections of inserts using A-36 rods are approximately twice those experienced by the inserts with the high stranth
i .
bolts at the sans load (this .is true whether one compares the stiffest connections or the averages). Assains that a similar behavior would hold true for the 1-inch inserts, the safety factor computed on a deflection basis for the 1-inch insert having a 1 1/8 inch bolt hole and an A-36 rod would be a minimum of 2.23 or an average of 3.68. For those 1 inch
- inserts utilizing 1 1/16 inch bolt holes, the safety factors based on deflection j would be 2.33 minimum and 3.68 average for high strength bolts and 3.27 minimum or 5.98 average for A-36 rods.
In the same manner we can derive the deflection based safety factors for the 1 1 1/2 inch inserts. For the 1 1/2 inch inserts, the ultimate deflections in shear were the following (for high strenth bolts):
i l Specimen Ultimate Defl. Remarks 1 0.510" Not Failed a
2 2 0.770" 3 0.540" 4 0.550" 5 0.585" j The minimum deflection for all tests was 0.510s and the average was 0.591".
} The allowable pshear for the 1 1/2-inch insd is 27 ' kips (when a low
, strength rod is used the allowable shear load is determined by the rod and is equal to 17 kips).
At this load (27 kips), the smallest deflection is 0.u12", and the average deflection is 0.046". For the 1 1/2 inch inse rt utilizing high strength rods, the minimum safety factor on the basis of deflection would there*.
fore be 2.32 and the average safety f actor would be 3.46.
For the Richmond inserts using A-36 rods, shear deflections at failure are not available since the tests were not run to f ailure. However, if we use the deflection at the highest load utilized, and [rnly the stif fest connection ofthosetested,wefindthatthefactorsofsafetyonadebectionbasisis 0.821)(0.125'+0.130')=3.22.
Q Verify tolerances for Richmond bolt. holes. Verify material employed for the Richmond bolts. . Verify whether Richmonds ;
are used in a pattern either by themselves or jointly with Hiltis. j The answers to these questions have been provided as part of the previous answer.
i F
i l
r i
i l
I l
i 6
. - . _ . . . _ . _ . . , _ . _ . _ _ _ . _ _ _ . . - _ , _ ~ . _ . _ _ _ _
~ . _ _ _ . __ _ _ _ _ - _ . _ - _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ . _
I . a Q . Address the questtion of importance of reber la regard to.the safety factors of Richmonds via the method of ACI349. ,
ACI 349 utilizes a factor, 9, equal to 0.85 in the formula which computes !
1 ultimate tensile capacity of the insert (see affidavit p.8), for inserts s, .
j I
i . embedded beyond the rebar layer, and a factor 9 = 0.65 for plain cor. ,
crate (ie no reinforcement). If one makes the conservative assumption that the influence of the reinforcement on Richmond insert performance is equal to that predicted by ACI 349, then the minimum factor of safety f in tension produced by the Applicants' tests is 3.26 x 0.65/0.85 = 2.50.
Although this answers the question posed by Mr. John Fair we do not see j the direct relevance of the question to the issue of Richmonds' safety ,
j factors. The factor of safety recommended by the manufacturer, ie
[
F.S = 3.0 was developed from tests which employed reinforced concrete. '
4 The placement of inserts at CPSES utilizes concrete which is reinforced. l The rebar utilized in the latest series of tests is the minimum type of f aurface reinforcement encountered in the field (#7 grade 60 bars at 10 i inches on center in each direction near the surface) (see Affidavit at I f
! p 14). !
1 Thus there is no instance at CPSES where the insert would be embedded in unreinforced concrete. [
l I
Applicants, derived the factor 9 = 0.84 from the manufacturer's test data., (see Affidavit at p. 8), rather than employing the 9 = .85 of ACI 349 for inserts embedded past reinforcement or 9 = .65 of ACI 349 f for unreinforced concrete. Thus Applicants recognized that presence f of reinforcement has a significant effect (or else we would have used <
f '/=.65). e i i i
s' We think that perhaps our statement..(and the Staff's) on p. 17 of the Affidavit
" The amount of rebar is not a significant factor."
"~
.- . . may have caused confusion and thus generated this question. What that statement is intended to address is the concern of CASE over differences in reinforcement.
It is not intended to imply that there is little difference between no reinforcement and reinforcement, but simply that there is little difference between types of reinforcement, is 2 layer vs 4 layer, rebar size chosta . ,
6 L
e t
Q Frovide additional information on appropriateness of interaction formula and acceptance criterion for bending in the Richmond
{
insert bolt, including consideration of fatigue.
.s To address this question Applicants have derived the interaction formula by modelling the bolt as a solid bar having a diameter (h) square equal to four tines the effective tensile area divided by l
. , is 1
4 -f A. w- 7 j
t i
The ASME Code, section NB 3232.2 permits the stress intensity of e ,
bolttoequaltheyieldstress,g, ;
. l s
Under the combined tension and bending loading, the principal stress !
S,in the direction of the applied tension is given by f e Y J2 // .
Y" l
kh Q.b)'
- I The Mohr circle indicates that the stress intensity, when shear is ;
the only other applied load is given by S g -5 where Sg and 5 2 2 are defined below
/ !
, So " I a.
') S
, ,$ /
5 1s A y '
J S. x a 2f + Ss 4 'M '
't/t St i
Here S,6- shear stress = )6 k where S is the shear load. -
NN _-
f r
i
_ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . . _ ---- s
1
. i
'thus we write a7t#)% sl T
e a 3-
?)a, s
- 9W Substituting for S we have p
Y __ + JZ W $' g f' "tu Wl)') ;
However, the allowable shear - . , tension 4 , and moment *:., are given respectively by l SA** 0* Y ' ) /
4
- O' b " ) ,' 4'? (j l Therefore, the interaction formula can be written as O./4 +
M **W /4 g p, ,g f~
f For cr nsistency with the approach chosen in theAf fidavit, the coef ficient l
of the moment term is reduced by a factor of 1.3 to account for the fact that the finite element analysis predicts lower bending stresses than ,
the Mc/I formula by a factor of at least 1.3. With this change the inter-
, action formula becomes !
l
//L[] t (o,7127 y + 0.7C4 f f 4 /.*71~ (t) l The interaction formula provided in the Affidavit (p. 27) can be compared with this formula.
+f t 4 /,75- (2) f
Here the factor of 1.75 is used, since this is the factor above which we have indicated we would conduct further analysis of the Richmonds.
Two conclusions can be established by comparing formulas (1) and (2):
a) The interaction ratio of 1.75 does correspond to t!ie situation whereby the maximum stress intensity will equal but not exceed the yield stress. i b) The second formula predicts higher interaction' ratios, and is thus.
conservative for' all combinations of tension, shear and bending. except ,
for the case when th'e bending moment is very small, i.e. Mh! A 0.1 and the j
shear is high, S/SA > 0.9.
This case does not occur since high shear loads for the bolts and inserts is accompanied by high bending moments, and conversely, if the bending mo- ,
ment is small, it would not'be considered explicitly, but would be coupled out as increased tension in the bolt, and this interaction formula would not be used. '
Thus the interaction'formu.1: employedintheAffidav[irisindeedconservative' i for all the cases in which it needs to be applied. ,
[
As a further notz it is germane. to state that the reason that the.ASME. Code .
does not consider the combination of shear, tension and bending in holts, except when the shear occurs as torsion in the bolt, is due to the fa'ct that at the point where the moment stress is maximum, the real shear stress is zero, and viceversa, as long as the entire section remaint elastic. Iothe ,
preceding Mohr circle analysis, we have assumed that the maximum' shear stress occurs coincidentally with the maximum bending momeal, and hence we have again been very conservative. ,
Since the Applicants have conservatively derived the i$teraction formula -
for shear, tension and bending in the insert bolt by allowing the outer fibers of the' bolt to reach yield, a question was raised.regarding low -
cycle fatigue capability of the bolt. ,
On rigid seismic supports and snubbers, the OBE and SSE loading conditions govern design, with normal operating conditions stresses being much, much lower. The alternating stress in the bolt is conservatively assumed to be equal in magnitude to the yield stress. (The worst- ~
conditions from a fatigue standpoint, would occur if all'of the stress were alternating, i.e. the bolts were loaded in pure bending. This is not the case, since the connections have combined shear, tension, and bendig). l Utilizing the fatigue analysis methods of ASME NB-3222.4(e), with an alternating stress equal to the yield stress and a stress concentration
,/
i 1
factor of 2.5 fro = reference 1, as permitted by the ASME NB-3232.3(c), the total number of cycles is. computed to be in escess of 1000. This number l is larger that the combined number of cycles of SSE and OBE, which is 720 ;
per FSAR Section 3.7B.3.2. !
Considering the conservatism of the assumptions made for the fatigue analysis !
Applicar.ts conclude that employing the interaction formula given in the
~f- Affidavit provides the necessary protection against fatigue failure.
I i
i.
1.'1" Design of Machine Elements", V. Faires, McMillan.& Co., New York, 1949.
4-s, Y I
<J s > .
j *# ,*
_ <f _m.Q '
v 7 4 ww vP
, g e,
/4 i
j(# , ,, y
'~
- i 'i ,,.
'} ,.*
o 2- Q w ,
W*y g .J ,
a o
. ' ,%- h Gf y ys 5
9
' / /, )
y
}- , ~, ,
J v
- 4 ,/ y
- r, J $
hl ,
, 4 -
, -_e ,.__.._w . , , , . , . - - _ ,
... , -c- , - - _ - . ,
.-_.r- - --
.) F
. i f
I Q, Provide Additional information on modelling of connection, i.e. j appropriateness of releasing M and retaining M moments, for larger f size tube steel, i.e. larger than 4'.
_______________________________ _____ i l
We are providing the answer in two parts: ;
l
- 1. Larger tube steel size. The rotation of a simply supported beam i
at the point of support is inversely proportional to the moment of inertia. l Therefore tube steel larger than 4x4x3/8 would have smaller end rotations. [
The potential of the tube steel connection developing a prying force is directly dependent on the product of the end rotation times the tube steel ,
f size. Since the moment of inertia increases exponentially with respect to !
t the tube steel sizes, the product of the rotation times the tube steel size !
would decrease with increasing tube steel size. Therefore the 4x4x3/8 tube steel represents a worst case with~ respect to potential prying. [
In addition,'due to the increased bolt length and more flexible walls on lar- i
. ger tube steel, the joint would deflect more under load and therefor e be able to accomodate more end rotation before prying would develop. t 2.' Greater spans. The finite element analysis was based on a 20" span l between inserts. In some cases the inserts are spaced up to 24" apart.
To check this case Applicants calculated the increased rotation due to the larger span and determined that the clearance between the tube steeel f and the washer is sufficient to accomodate the increased rotation.
A-survey of approximately 3000 supports has revealed that a few cases where {
the tube steel spans between two non-adjacent inserts resulting in spans of !
t 48". Utilizing 4x4x3/8 tube steel, the maximum load that the member ;
.can be designed for is 9.7 kips. If 9.7 kips are loaded at the point which ,
i- produced the maximum end rotation, the end reaction would be 5.6 kips.
If one considers only the flexibility of the tube steel, the bolt elon- '
gation and the compressibility of the concrete, and assumes that the rotation ;
' produces prying, the 5.6 kips reaction would increase to 8.9 kips due to ,
prying action. Since the 1 inch insert is capable of 12.1 kips, the prying action would not overload the bolt (or insert). r
, I 6
, - , .- ,-.s, . , 9.-..m._-. -
, , . , , _ , , . , ,, ,.-.,,,,v.-...,...m, .,,,,,.%,,,,, , ,,_w_,-,, ,c,_.,,, , y,r..,_.,w,y- ..y.,,
Q Provide explanation on possible effects of . angularity of . Richmond inserts.
Figure 1 represents the most probable worst case condition of the misalignment of a Richmond insert bolt in the holes of the tube steel. Misalignment res-ulting in bolt inclination exceeding one in thnty is not permitted without bevelled washers, and even such misalignment is rare. For holes 1/8" large'r than the bolt, it can be seen that before any shear can be transferred through the bottom flange, the bolt has to be deflected 1/8" at the top flange !
(0.2 inches for a one. in tepty angularity). This situation is not unlike 1
the situation involved in the distribution of shear to a ditibolt connection. I lt is well recognized in that situation that some bolts in the connection, or some other part of the connection, may yield in order to bring all bolts int o the shear reaction, so that ultimately all bolts share. The bolt shown in Figure 1 has a misalignment that is within the normally accepted constru-ction tolerances. As the shear load on the connection is increased, a bending moment will be induced in the bolt. At some point, however, the bottom flange will be brought into contact with the bolt, and in the ultimate condition, the majority of the shear force will be transferred through the bottom flange, just as it would in a connection with no misalignment.
69' 7:ba %/ T I
I n
C
- - - - D,r'edte~ oS
-EE' s L u a.
t -
r -
h
-=~
M is & _\
l l A I N
~ '
., ca,,wed The question which must be Answered is whether the bolt has the flexibility to close the 1/8" gap before failing. Looking at Attachment A to Applicants'
e Richmond Insert Affidavit, one can see that these connections have typically quite ample flexibility. .The smallest ultimate deflection of any bolt in that series of tests was 0.56". It should be noted that these tests were conducted with a test plate only. The bolt deflection of interest would have been higher. These tests were for 1 1/2 inch . inserts. Similarresult/s were obtained from the 4/84 tests on Richmond inserts (Attachment B to the same Affidavit). For the 1 inch bolt in these tests, the' smallest shear test deflection was 0.22". However, assuming that this was the asilection at the top of the test plate (1" from the co,Erete), the deflection at the top flangeofFigure1(about5"fromtheconcrete)wouldbeconsiderabl)b larger.
These tests confirm that the Richmond inserts, even when used with high strength bolts (all prior deflections were obtained for high strength bolts) have the flexibility necessary to accomodate the misalignment of bolts in the field. An inspection of the results of Attachment F to Applicants'
~
Richmond Inserts Affidavit indicates clearly that the use of an A-36 rod with the Richmond insert (the most common practice at CPSES) will also allow
. quite ample flexibility to account for these construction tolerances.
These effects ar e well recognized in the AISC Code. Pages 5-14 and 5-15 of the AISC, 8th Edition describe Type 2 construction (i.e pinned joints),
which is the type of " simple framing" assumed in the design of the Richmond insert-tube steel structures. 3$se pages state " Type 2 and 3 construction j may necessitate some inelastic, but self-limiting, deformation of a structural I steel part.
l
r 4
9 Q Address the Board's concern with adequacy of safety factors of Richmond inserts regarding cyclic loads.
The adequacy of the Richmond bolt regarding cyclic loads, i.e. fatigie, has been addressed conservatively in the answer to question 9(b). Here we provide the analogous answer with respect to the fatigue capacity of the insert proper.
Unlike the bolt, for which we could assume that at the maximum load, the max-imum alternatin stresses could be no larger than the yield stress, thence analytically derive the number of cycles which the bolt can accept at such maximum load, the insert is not amenable to similar analyses, since the state of stress in the insert proper and the concrete is not precisely known. However, examination of the load deflection data collected by l
Applicants'(see Affidavit, Attachment B) shows that generally at the l
rated loads of the inserts (11.5 kips in shear and tension for 1 inch inserts, and 27. kips and 31.3 kips in shear and tension respectively for 1 1/2 inch inserts) there is no significant departure from linear beha-vior. This indicates essentially elastic behavior of the insert below rated loads. This behavior is shown particularly vividly in the load-defle- ;
crion curves of the combined shear-tension tests, and the_ tension tests.
Shear load deflection curves are not as clear. In fact for the 1 inch inserts, some shear load-deflection curves seem to indicate departure from linear behavior at about 5 kips. However the combined shear-tension ,
load deflection tests do not confirm this behavior, 1
One can than assume that if there was a proportional limit for the inserts, it would be above the rated load. Hence any cyclic load alternating between the rated loads, would elicit elastic behavior of the insert.
Alternating loads at the full rated capacity of the inserts would only occur for SSE and OBE events. The number of cycles of these events is 720. By analogy to the bolt case, we would expect that elastic cycling of the inserts would also cause no fatigue failure at this number of cycles.
f a
,- - -- ,- -,, , , , - , .--g-, ---n ,_ .-,,-.n.y-.,---,e- - - - ---g m , -..,--,n,r- - - ,,, --