ML20090F922
| ML20090F922 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Beaver Valley |
| Issue date: | 07/17/1984 |
| From: | Woolever E DUQUESNE LIGHT CO. |
| To: | Knighton G Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| REF-GTECI-A-36, REF-GTECI-SF, RTR-NUREG-0612, RTR-NUREG-612, TASK-A-36, TASK-OR 2NRC-4-107, NUDOCS 8407240086 | |
| Download: ML20090F922 (4) | |
Text
,
- A
'Af
( 12 87 514 Nuclear Construction Division Robinson Plaza, Building 2, Suite 210 Telecopy Pittsburgh, PA 15205 July 17, 1984 United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555 ATTENTION:
Mr. George W. Knighton, Chief Licensing Branch 3 Of fice of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
SUBJECT:
Beaver Valley Power Station - Unit No. 2 l
I Docket No. 50-412 NUREG-0612, " Control of Heavy Loads at Nuclear Power Plants" l
Gentlemen:
Your letter of 17 January 1984 transmitted the Technical Evaluation i
Report (TER) for the Phase I review of control of heavy loads at Beaver Valley Power Station, Unit 2 (BVPS-2).
On June 15, 1984, this was the subject of a meeting between our staffs. This letter forwards the Duquesne Light Company responses to the issues identified in the TER.
DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY By l
E.V. Woolever Vice President SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO -BEFORE:ME THIS
/UI DAY OF b /q 1984.
d xo
/
' Notary Publi.c ANITA ELAINE REITER, NOTARY PUBLIC ROBINSON TOWNSHIP. ALLEGHENY COUNTY KAT/nml MY COMMISSION EXPIRES OCTOBER 20,1986 Attachment cc:
Mr. H. R. Denton, Director (NRR) (w/a)
Mr. D. Eisenhut, Director Division of Licensing (w/a)
Mr. E. A. Licitra, Project Manager (w/a)
Mr. T. Novak, Assistant Director Division of Licensing (w/a)
Mr. G. Walton, NRC Resident Inspector (w/a) 8407240086 840717
[h8 PDR ADOCK 05000412 1d A
pop t
j'
r.
.Unitsd Statac Nuclesr Regulctory Commission Mr. Gaorga W. Knighton, Chief Page 2 COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA )
)
SS:
COUNTY OF ALLEGRENY
)
/[ d day of 4
/[
, before me, On this
/
0 a Notary Public in and for said Commonwealth and County, personally appeared E. J. Woolever, who being duly sworn, deposed and said that (1) he is Vice President of Duquesne Light, (2) he is duly authorized to execute and file the foregoing Submittal on behalf of said Company, and (3) the statements set fo rth in the Submittal are true and correct to the best of his knowledge, d
d Notary Public ANITA ELAINE REITER, NOTARY PUBLIC ROBINSON TOWNSHIP, ALLEGHENY COUNTY MY COMMISSION EXPIRES OCTOBER 20,1986 "y
t' e
.4 k
y
Response to Issues Identified in BVPS-2 TER (Phase I) on Control of Heavy Loads (COHL) 1 l
The following issues were raised by the BVPS-2 COHL TER and are responded to as indicated below:
1.
In Section 2.3.1, Paragraph C, the TER states the following:
1.
The applicant has not fully satisfied the intent of this guideline in that no comment has been offered regarding floor markings of the load paths.
2.
If floor markings are not practical, alternat ive ways. of path marking should be developed.
An alternative means of marking the load path. during a load trans fer might be the use of temporary ribbon barriers.
3.
The applicant should indicate his alternative to parmanent floor marking of the load paths, 'if an alternative is neces-sary.
Response
BVPS-2 will utilize a procedure similar to that - used on BVPS-1 for control of heavy loads.
This procedure. will comply with Guideline 1 of Enclosure 2 to the 17 January 1984 letter from Mr. G. W. Knighton by permitting two options:
1.
Prior to a lift, the appropriate load path is temporarily marked (rope,-pylon, etc.)
2.
A second member of the load handling crew (not crane opera-tor) is responsible for assuring the safe load path is fol-lowed by directing the craneman.
The two options will preclude the need for permanently marking the safe load paths.
II.
In Section 2.3.4,. Paragraph C, the TER states the following:
EG&G concludes that the applicant has not adequately addressed this section.
The devices have not been designed in accordance to the requirement of ANSI N14.6-1978, and there ' is not enough information to make a comparison of the AISC design. specifica-tion to that of ANSI-N14.6-1978. -The safety factors indicated will not meet those specified by N14.6-1978.
The aptlicant should review the design of the-lifting devices to
~
N14.6-1978 as indicated in Section 2.3.4B.
. Response:
Duquesne Light Company has engaged Westinghous to perform a point-by point review of the special lifting devices to ANSI N14.6-1978.
The applicable results of this review will be pro-vided to the NRC when complece.
III.
In Section 2.3.5, Paragraph G, the TER states the following:
EG&G concludes that BVPS-2 is not in compliance with the intent of NUREG 0612 Section 5.1.1(5).
The applicant should addres s this guideline in a separate sect ion.
The section should include both the maximum static and dynamic load stress of each loading device compared to calculated and tested load strength.
Also any load limitat ion, specific crane usage restrictions or any limiting factor should be properly assessed for each sling.
Each sling should be properly identified.
Response
BVPS-2 will derate slings similarly to the method used on BVPS-1.
This will comply with Guideline 5 of Enclosure 2 to the 17 January 1984 letter from Mr. G. W. Knighton in the following manner:
In order to account for dynamic loads, the derating factor will be determined by multiplying sling rating by 0.5%
times the hoist speed (ft/ min).
If the derating factor is found to be small-(<15% of the rating), then the original sling rating may be utilized.
IV.
In Section 2.3.6, Paragraph B, the TER states the following:
EG&G also wishes to call to the applicant's attention that spe-cific plant' operations may require alteration from ANSI B30.2-1976; for example, periodic inspections may not always be possi-ble as scheduled. Therefore, alternate proposals are necessary, and they must be approved prior to being put' into ef fect. EG&G concludes that the applicant has - satisfied the intent of this guideline.
Response
Duquesne Light Company agrees that some alternative proposals to ANSI B30.2-1976 may be required due' to plant specifics. -
Duquesne' Light Company will' notify the NRC of any alternatives so identified.
, +
,-- +
, ~, *. -
4