ML20094A480
| ML20094A480 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Comanche Peak  |
| Issue date: | 10/03/1984 |
| From: | Williams N CYGNA ENERGY SERVICES |
| To: | Ellis J Citizens Association for Sound Energy |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8411060436 | |
| Download: ML20094A480 (156) | |
Text
_ _ - - _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
g',, _
101 Cahfornia Street. Suite 1000. San Francisco, CA 94111-5894 415 397 5600 October 3, 1984 84042.030 Mrs. Juanita Ellis President, CASE 1426 S. Polk Dallas, Texas 75224
Subject:
Responses to Cygna Design Control, Pipe Support, and Pipe Stress Questions Comanche Peak Steam Electric Station Independent Assessment Program - Phase 3 Texas Utilities Generating Company Job No. 84042
Dear Mrs. Ellis:
Enclosed please find copies of additional responses to Cygna design control, pipe support and pipe stress questions.
This should complete the transmittal of responses received to date for the Phase 3 Independent Assessment Program. We sh-11 be transmitting responses associated with the Phase 4 Independent Assessment Program in the near future. Feel free to call me if you have any questions or wish to discuss the enclosed documents.
Very truly yours, IN N. H. Williams Project Manager dmm Attachments cc:
Mr. S. Treby (NRC), w/ attachments
- Mr. S. Burwell (NRC),~w/ attachments Mr. D. Wade (TUGCO), w/o attachments Ms. J. Van Amerongen (TUGCO), w/o attachments Mr. D. Pigott (Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe), w/o attachments i
8411060436 841003
.9 PDR ADOCK 05000445 g
1 sg7u f pcl l
A PDR a
ya
((b l
San Francisco Boston Chicago Richland L
Mrs. Juanita.Ellis Page 2 84042.030 October 3, 1984 Attachments 1.
L. M. Popplewell (TUGCO) letter to N. Williams (Cygna), "CPSES Cygna Review Questions (Pipe Supports)," June 28, 1984.
2.
L. M. Popplewell (TUGCO) letter' to N. Williams (Cygna), "CPSES Cygna Review Questions (Pipe Supports)," July 2,1984.
3.
R. E. Ballard (G&H) letter to J. B. George (TUGCO), GTN-69245, "Addi-tional Response to Cygna letter 84042.007 dtd. 6/23/84," July 12,1984.
4.
L. M. Popplewell (TUGCO) letter to N. Williams (Cygna), "CPSES Cygna Review (Pipe Supports)," July 12, 1984.
5.
R. E. Ballard (G8H) letter to J. B. George (TUGCO), GTN-69250, " Followup Information from G8H," July 13, 1984 6.
R. E. Ballard (G&H) letter to J. B. George (TUGCO), GTN-69249, " Pipe
~
Stress Review - Mass Participation," July 13, 1984.
7.
R. E. Ballard (G&H) letter to J. B. George (TUGCO), GTN-69296," Cygna IAP Phase 3 Report," July 27, 1984.
8.
R. E. Ballard (G&H) letter to J. B. George (TUGCO), GTN-69303, " Tapered Transition Joint SIF," July 31, 1984.
9.
R. E. Ballard (G&H) letter to J. B. George (TUGCO), GTN-69316, " Revised Mass Participation Fraction Sensitivity Study," August 3,1984 10.
J. T. Merritt (TUGCO) memorandum to J. B. George (TUGCO), "CPSES Document Control Center," September 6, 1984.
11.
R. E. Ballard (G&H) letter to J. B. George (TUGC0), GTN-69369, "Transi-tion Joint SIF at Equipment Nozzle Connections," Au9ust 23,1984.
12.
R. E. Ballard (G8H) letter to J. B. George (TUGCO), GTN-69368, " Mass Participation," August 23, 1984.
13.
R. E. Ballard (G&H) letter to J. B. George (TUGCO), GTN-69373, " Mass Participation," August 24, 1984.
14.
R. E. Ballard (G8H) letter to J. B. George (TUGC0), GTN-69339, " Mass Participation," August 10, 1984 15.
L. M. Popplewell (TUGCO) letter to N. Williams (Cygna), " Comanche Peak Steam Electric Station, Phase III Action Items," August 29, 1984
~
Mrs. Juanita Ellis Page 3 84042.030 October 3, 1984 16.
J. B. George (TUGCO) letter to N. Williams (Cygna), CPPA #40439,
" Comanche Peak Steam Electric Station, Cygna Phase III, Independent Assessment Program," August 16, 1984.
- 17. - R. E. Ballard (GAH) letter to J. B. Geor9e (TUGCO), GTN-69454, " Mass Participation," September 14, 1984.
18.
R. C. Iotti (EBASCO) letter to N. William.(Cygna), 3-Z-17 (6.2), ETCY-1, "U-Bolt Cinching Testing / Analyses Program - Phase 3 Open Items, Additional Information as follow-up to Meeting of 9/13/84," September 18, 1984.
19.
R. E. Ballard (G8H) letter to J. B. George (TUGCO), GTN-69359, "Transi-tion Joint SIF at Equipment Nozzle Connections," August 17, 1984.
l i
d
,--e e_._
_._.,,y.7
c ENM N h
TEXAS UTILITIES SERVICES INC.
. o.
ex -.m.
ose.m s,-
n han.i rJ /AlldebElob CYGNA CYGNA Diergy Services 101 California Street JOB NO :
San Francisco, CA 94111 N/p[Pf./
DATE LOGGED:
Attention:
Ms. Nancy Williams, Prc jgOt; gepager 2///9m CfE FILE:
n / &c. CAS&
CROSS REF. FILE a ~
(X)MANCHE PEAK S'1 m t.Lt.LTn1C bTATION 0
CPSES CYGNA REVIEW CUESTIONS (PIPE SUPPORTS)
Reference:
- 1) June 26; Telecon between D. Bencher (TUGCO) and J. Minichiello (CYGNA),
Dear Ms. Williams:
Below is TUGCO's response to the above referenced telecon.
Telecon of June 26 Regarding Support MS-1-003-iO4-C72S:
%e question of structural acceptability of the 1"x7"x12" washer plate (item 17) is still open. In lieu of performing detailed calculations and finite element analyses to denonstrate acceptability, the problem will be simplified by makire two (2) conservative assumptions:
- 1) Assume the washer is 1"x6"x6" and is centered over the insert.
Se rear bracket to plate to tube steel connection is separate.
- 2) Assume there is to weld between the 1"x6"x6" washer and the tube steel.
With the above assumptions, Table 7 of Section 20 of the NPSI Structural Design Manual (attached) may be applied directly. %is table states that a 1" thick plate may be used for insert tension loads less than or equal to 17.5 kips. Based on the detailed calculation performed by NPSI, tension in the insert is 18.2 kips.
Wis apparent slight overload is acceptable, however, for the following reasons:
- 1) Because of installation tolerances, skew angles of less than 5*
are generally not considered in support design. Consideration of the 2.3* skew on this support increased the tension load in the insert from 15.8K to 18.2K.
15.BK would have been perfectly acceptable to use for design.
)
r-. -
t
- ^. *
-(.
4 I
-(
June 28, 1984-Page 2
- 2) Conservative assunptions were made by NPSI in their sizing calculations for washer plates (e.g.:
point load at center of plate and neglecting stiffening affect of tube steel).
. Actual stress in a 1" plate subjected to a 17.5K load is well below allowable limits.
- 3) Conservative assunptions were made on this support (see items (1) and (2) in first paragraph).
Based on the above reasoning, the 1"x7"x12"' washer plate on MS-1-003-004-C72S is capable of performing its function as intended.
'Ihis is further demonstrated by the fact that the support is in-stalled and continuously subjected to its full design load arxi has not shown any signs of high stress.
If there are 'any further questions or coments, please contact Mr. George Grace at extension 500.
Very truly yours, TEXAS UTILITIES GENERATING CDMPANY j
c L. M. Popplewell Engineering Manager GG/and
PRDET FILE TEX AS l"I'll.lTIES GENER ATING COMi%NY t1GNh~
,pj)hbuban
~~
41' gg:2-
/
JOB NO :
DATE LOGGED:
6 /M LOG NO,:
,8 6 M
( 'h CYGNA Energy Services s
FII.E :
7/ / S,A M San Francisco, CA 941 IdROSS REF. FILE N / bh' 84 (04 ~
, Quy n
101 California Street
~
y 'W
/
ATTEtlTION:
Ms. Nancy Williams, Project Manager COMAriCHE PEAK STEAM ELECTRIC STAT!0f!
k CPSES CYGNA REVIEW QUESTI0t:5 (PIPE SUPPORTS)
Re ference :
- 1) June 29; Telecon between D. Rencher (TUGCO) and J. Minichiello (CYGNA)
Dear Ms.
Williams:
Below is TUGCO'S response to the above referenced telecon regarding Flare Bevel Welds.
CYGNA Questions:
a)
It is our interpretation of existing weld standards that the ef fective throat of a flare bevel weld (te) is 5/16R.
Assuming R=2t, then te=5/3t.
What justification does TUGC0 have for using te=t in flare bevel weld design?
b)
Please provide documentation which instructs engineers how to calculate the effective throat of a flare bevel weld with a fillet cap.
TUGC0 Response:
a)
Per AWS 01.1, 19/9 edition, figure 10.13.1.3B, an ef fective throa t o f t is specified (see attached).
Based on the geometry of the joint, te=t is a reasonable value.*
b)
Calculation of weld effective throat (in any joint) is based on the short-est distance from the root of the weld to the face of the weld.
Fo r a flare bevel with a fillet cap, the engineer uses this approach in calculating te.
The example supplied to CYGNA for MS-1-003-013-C72E, shows this calculation is done.
i l:p E:3
~
_./.. i.._......[...
....s TEX.\\S ("ril.lTIES (;ENElt\\ TIN (; C(Bil%NY j
l'.
O lu)N 1*w 2 Gl.F N H( ol.
TVNAM Trg 41 l
l
- Please note that the AStiE code does not address flare bevel weld d esign.
If there are any further questions or comments, please contact fir. George Grace at extension 500.
l Very truly yours, l
TE.XAS UTILITIES GENERATING COMPANY
/'
f <%c - p1 L. M. Popplew 11 Enaineering Manager hll GG/jr\\
f
'e'.!A' k
)
..)
I
7 r4 -.
u.t-4 q..c
,,,,.- g 7
,_-"?
. p.,.. y,
s
,uo; v
4 6
170 l DE5tGNOFNEWTUBtAAASTRUCTUltiS
, t'
..r~.
.. e:.
-^
.y.<.~
l -.,,
P
. a.
N
,s cat *tu
-im
'. e.r.ca rre-w r
e
~.
/
r
/-
i s e>..
.s....+
- t.
..-...,,e e,
m
~
% N-.., ;... :~ \\... - n.D
~. 9%d.).R~i:o4'._y.,.-
. D:' ' Y
" Ti v.': i -
ge
- +-
/
{/
=
[
Q.e;i M @.~,1 i j
(
/
\\
/
i.im,nin
,.r
=
~
E side s;de comer (matched connectionsi r
transition transition 5
L w
.)
E
_ t _.
i.im t
N 5
f L
B A
E
- 5' =ia f.,
A
.s min
$$h E
l jfk.
l f$+,.- - -,
m F
f f
f P
Ei
_i.im-
.i.im w>+>r min min Too Side Heel
=
(stepped conne.tions)
E Notes E
- 1. t = thickness of minner sectum h
- 2. Depth of bevel = t g
1 Moot opening 0 to 3/i6 in.14.3 mmi E
- 4. Not prequalified for 9 under F 7
- 5. Effective mroat = t
- 6. Joint preoaration for corner weids shall provide a snoom trans. tion from one detait to another.
uE Wedding shall be carried continuously eround corners. with corners fully built up and all starts and d
a
. : w. min n. face me-tr/
Fig.10.13.1.3B-Partialjoint penetration prequalified box codnections made by shielded metal art, gas metal arc, or flux cored arc welding U
s
i-i---
--i--i----mi i
Y Gibbs S Hill,irsc.
- hh o
eiw
- Wrk, Wrk10001 2127so-4438 Telex:
- W8 g@
fj j '
Domestic:127636/968694 Intemahonal:428813/234475 A Dravo Company
{
h 1
['kN2 P July 12, 1984 CYGNA 4
ON JOB NO :
GTN-69245 A
DATE LOGGED:
Texas Utilities Generating Company j,l' LOG No. :
Post Office Box 1002 2 / / S72 M
Glen Rose, Texas 76043 FILE:
O'
/ /A bf CEOSS REF. FILE Attention:
Mr. J. B. George Vice President / Project Gen. Mgr.
Gentlemen:
TEXAS UTILITIES GENERATING COMPANY COMANCHE PEAK STEAM ELECTRIC STATION G&H PROJECT NO. 2323 ADDITIONAL RESPONSE TO CYGNA LTR E4042.007 DTD 6/23/84 REF:
GTN-69190 DATED JUNE 29, 1984 In Gibbs & Hill's response to CYGNA Energy Services letter of June 23, 1984, via the referenced letter, we indicated that we were continuing to search files for documentation supporting Concern No. 2b of their letter.
We are providing the following addi.tional response concerning Management Review Evaluation Reports.
CYGNA's Finding 2b.
Management Review Evaluation Reports could not be found for the time period from 1974 through 1976.(1)
This requirement has been established since September 1974 in G&H Procedure QA-4...it appears that these activities form an integral part of the G&H, corrective action system.I2)
Please determine if documentation exists for.., Management Review Evaluations from 1974 through 1977(1) as required by G&H Procedure QA-4.
(Emphasis Added)
?
TRA)lSMITTgp BY ttI200PlFR b
Y - lb ~ 5 _ '
OravT e
=
Gibbe C HIII. Inc. July 12, 1984 GTN-69245 (1) and (2) above are Gibbs & Hill's Response - Statements somewhat misleading, since they give the impression that:
No management review was performed during the period 1.
1974 through 1977.
There is also inconsistency between the dates mentioned under Statement (1), as reported by CYGNA.
The Management Review function forms an integral part of 2.
This implied Gibbs & Hill's corrective action system.
that the corrective action system was not duly performed or completed.
In response to item (1), it is to be noted that the requirement to perform the management review function was included in G&H Accordingly, the Procedure QA-4, Rev. 3 dated September 1974.
first round of management reviews was expected to take place in This was (i.e., within a year of issuing the procedure).
1975 Although we have been unsuccessful, so done in August 1975.
far, in retrieving this 1975 Report, we can demonstrate that By examining the 1975 management review was indeed performed.
the cover sheets and part of the check lists of the 1976 manage-ment review reports (see attached copies), it is stated:
"Date of previous management review:
August 1975.
This demonstrates that the 1975 review was indeed performed.
Also, it is to be noted that the checklist used for the manage-ment review included a provision to check and verify corrective This was done, as evidenced in the actions of previous reviews.
In other words, any action which was recommended 1976 Report.
as a result of the 1975 review was verified in the 1976 review.
This completes the action and demonstrates that this function was done as required by the G&H Program.
(i.e., 1976 and Further, manage--nt reviews of successive years were performed and the reports are on file and were presented later) to CYGNA's representative.
In response to item (2), the statement that "those activities form an integral part of G&H corrective action system", this statement misrepresents the intent of the management review It function and discredits G&H's corrective action system.
further implies that G&H did not correct those activities.
Since this is not the case, we would point out that correction of deficiencies identified by audits, surveillance or any other means, were dealt with, corrected and verified as part of G&H's The audit / surveillance program which was already in place.
ove4C
Gibbe C HIII,Inc, GTN-69245 July 12, 1984 management review objective was to assess part performance to
-improve future operation, under the QA program, and strengthen the preventive action measures.
With this response we believe that we have addressed to our satisfaction all concerns raised by CYNGA's letter 84042.007.
If we can provide additional information in this regard, please advise.
Very truly yours, C
BS &
Inc.
7 Robert E. Ballard, Jr.
Director of Projects REBa-MSM:Ic 1 Letter + 1 Attachment CC:
ARMS (B&R Site) OL + lA
\\
dahev/Wh NJ. Williams (CYGNA, Calif. ) lL +1A S.
Bibo (CYGNA, MA) lL +1A D. Wade (TUSI Site) lL +1A OTON
~
~
T ~ '
..??
??,
}+*
otrARTMcuT MMch neswEucunep.m.
4
/l.J > [
AuoIT wo.7l,- 1 oATE.- )L'1 7 6, G 7 (,
Oc.T.19 197 (, gey-y PAGE 1 OF 5 I
r.,.,.
- .. ~
.,., :'I ' lfl. lla**
DEPARTMENTAL' MANAGEMENT AUDIT
- .
- .. ; } :e,'..
s
.c.4,, ".;.,-. :...
. e..
.s.
.DATE OF PREVIOUS AUDIT:
AtJC01T 2 ~7, I9 7 6~
4, J ' '.NE.XT..,. AUDIT SCHEDULED FOR:
MA'1 N l'7 PERSONNEL AUDITED AND TITLE:
OP S Jii &
S O D't. N E t.u. b).P.,H h " C.
.c..
N. F m E p. - $ c..
I f C ?,M nl F r o.
b. Ir4 0.m ?.o '_a - LF. % % <.M L'~ r 'd d
'M'?..
. c.
..z 1,
.a REFERENCE AUTHORITY:
GIBBS. & HILL QUALITY ASSURANCE MANUAL PROCEDU'RE
-QAI-G O
- e e,
e e,
- 8 g
g y.,.
.n n s.....
l**
DEPARTMENT M 7 011/.'18 r t. L b .inI E C p, nJ(
- [, ' * ':
AUDIT NO. /[. - l DATE ' OL*t 2 b, N
- O r.*T. 't-% 1 D b
-'c, PAGE 3 OF 5
- * *;l:,',
. -
- u i-
.c 1
NEW ITEMS OR SUGGESTED IMPROVEMENTS (Ses FAW 3 A R F 8M G *f# A bil 7,'.Y. :C.
- )
' ~; n.o. e. x ); a s & g., - 2.'. k w t;. a, A
,~I i.ccu'.. f L-tL L2. Dld n n.,il s....) A n, s
~
- a A tl '7; Il %ttL (a:.bt?!..YL7:L "2.2 n
'. 2-tAbf 2.! ont-ta.f(u.:rm. a-zh2.AL...ac) p.
,v s.
2 i_.
~
vMe A.o.,:.]a g.,
f.n js t 1,_,..y
, m we.
..Q
/.
, h.
- r..,..
sa c.s s
(oJTeks LZ db-2.2Qd.-
D.
PREVIOUS AUDIT STATUS:
YES NO l.
WE'RE DEFICIENCIES OF THE PREVIOUS AUDIT
. SATISFACTORILY RESOLVED?
~
O
"""^^*"'~
2.
WAS NECESSARY CORRECTIVE ACTION TAKEN TO PREVENT REPORTED DEFICIENCIES?
- ^*
. n.-
REMARKS:
0 z
IS ADDITIONAL CORRECTIVE ACTION REQUIRED?,
/
. 3.
REMARKSt.
I.J.g F l e et d.
.s y 6
l D
e 8
g,.
u. - -~ ~
- m.
A'
p -.. - _
IEPARTMENT ElGctrical oD=
AUDIT NO.
2 DATE 10/12/76 PAGE 1 OF 5 x
~ DEPARTMENTAL MANAGEMENT AUDIT DATE OF PREVIOUS AUDIT:
1975
~
NEXT AUDIT SCHEDULED FOR:
1977 PERSONNEL AUDITED AND TITLE: L.E. O'Brien - Senior Electrical Engineer J.A. Walsh - Lead Design Engin
- - ~
c..
Engineers & Designers ( Electrical)
OPPD - Fort Calhoun 2 Job No. 564 REFERENCEAUTHdRIk'Y:
GIBBS & HILL QUALITY ASSURANCE MANUAL PROCEDUdE QAI-G I*
E
'*P
,ED--
g
-.e e e,, g, e p p p __ _
.u'..
- i
~
DEPARTMENT Electrical
\\
AUDIT NO.
2 DATE 10/12/76 j
PAGE 3 OF 5 C.
NEW ITEMS OR SUGGESTED IMPROVEMENTS:
1.
(3.0B)
Procedure QAII-B.7 should be amended to ensure that a copy of the SAR sign-off record'is given to the job engineer.
2.
(3.5D)
QAII-B.6 para. 6.4 (d) should be clarified to resolve the dif-ference in interpretations between OA and encineering.
3.
QAII-E provides for distribution of ' pecs and addenda to all but the s
(cont'd on back)
D.
PREVIOUS AUDIT STATUS:
YES NO 1.
WERE DEFICIENCIES OF THE PREVIOUS AUDIT
~
SATISFACTORILY RESOINED?
N/A REMARKS: There were no deficiencies in Audit No. 1.
i 2.
WAS NECESSARY CORRECTIVE ACTION TAKEN TO PREVENT REPORTED DEFICIENCIES?
N/A REMARKS: There were no Corrective Action Requests in Au.dit No. 1.
3.
IS ADDITIONAL CORRECTIVE ACTION REQUIRED 7 X
REMARKS: Yes, as a result of new deficiencies found and noted here-after.
l i
l C _ ___ ~
y-5'-
s E,*
DEPARTMENT StructurCl
- ,e 2
AUDIT NO.
DATE June 1976
.g.
PAGE' 1 OF 5
e l
DEPARTMENTAL MANAGEMENT AUDIT DATE OF PREVIOUS AUDIT:
August 7, 1975 NEXT AUDIT SCHEDULED FOR:
January 10. 1977 Job Engineer PERSONNEL AUDITED AND TITLE:- I.K.
Shah Senior Encineer -Valdecaballeros s
C Job. Engineer J.G. Ortiz, Senior Engineer - Ft. Calhoun'2 Squad !.eader C.S. Chen, Senior Engineer
.Ft. Calhet.n 2 Squad Leader A. M. K'enkre, Senior Engineer -Comanche Peak O
g REFERENCE AUTHORITY:
GIBBS & HILL QUALITY ASSURANCE MANUAL PROCEDURE.
QAI-G h
8 e
e e
D k=
s, e.
h* J.
- DEPARTMENT Structurni AUDIT NO. 2 DATE June 1976 b
~
^ Pact '.2 or 5
~
~
MANAGEMENT AUDIT REPORT
=
A.
SUMMARY
OF THE AUDIT ANALYSIS:
'Valdecaballeros and Ft. Calhoun were fully audited.
comanche Peak was audited as a review of the previous management audit
.Of August 7, 1975.
A. M.
Kenkre for Comanche ' Peak, I.
K.
Shah for Valdecaballeros and J. G. Ortiz and C.
S. Chen for Ft.
Calhoun 2 were interviewed.
Conformance within the Department to the QA Manual was found satisfactory as regards procedures and understanding.
Valdecaballeros and Ft. Calhoun 2 are'in a stage where all procedures are not yet auditable.
i 3.
QA PROGRAM REVIEW:
s
(,
IN VIEW OF "THIS AUDIT AND REVIEW OF THE QA PROGRAM AND CORPORATE PROCEDURES:
A.
IS THE QA PROGRAM ADEQUATE TO MEET THE
,- YE3 jiO_
t G&H'S MANAGEMENT POLICIES, GOALS AND
+
OBJECTIVES?
y REMARKS:
i I
i 3.
ARE THE EXISTING PROCEDURES ADEQUATE AND f
IN SUFFICIENT DETAIL TO MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF APPLICABLE REGULATORY GUIDES, CODES AND STANDARDS FOR NUCLEAR SAFETY-RELATED SYSTEMS STRUCTURES AND COMPONENTS X
M RKS:
m l
.g*
- g.:
c l
e a
y a
~
~.-... _
t; a
L.
NM Ihl TEXAS UTILITIES GENERATING COMi%NY P_ _ O. BOX 1002 CI TN flOSE TFYAM MDAT i
July 12, 1984 MON
~~
JOB NO :
O
!W
/t
[
DATE LOGGED :
M bb CYGNA Energy Services LOG NO. :
g
[bM gg
/),[4) M' 101 California Street FILE-San Francisco, Califo gi 9g y,j hdQ ~
a Attention: Ms. Nancy Williams
-C Proj,ect Manager COMANCHE PEAK STFM ELECTRIC STATION CPSES CYGNA REVIEW (PIPE SUPPORTS)
REF: 1) April 19, 1984 letter to N. Williams (CYGNA) from L. Popplewell (TUGCO)
- 2) July 11, 1984 Telecon between J. hunichiello (CYGNA) and J. C. Finneran (TUGCD)
Dear Ms. Williams:
This letter responds to CYGNA's concerns regarding " bumpers" on supports on the main steam line and on weld calculations for composite sections.
As previously discussed in Reference 1 above (Page 8, Question 3), TUGC0 believes that these support configurations are acceptable and we do not agree with CYGNA's assessment of these supports. However, in order to satisfy CYGNA's concerns, we have re-analyzed the stress problems for the pipes with these supports completely removed from the analysis. This evaluation results in no over-stressed piping or supports. Therefore, in the event these supports would behave in an unstable manner (which TUGC0 does not believe will happen)and in the event that the bumpers wuld not perfom their intended function, there would be no detrimental effects on these piping systems.
Per Reference 2 regarding the main steam supports with composite sections, the calculation packages for these supports did not consistently include a calculation of the appropriate stresses in the welds between structural mcmbers and cover plates for composite sections. However, all the subject welds were acceptable for all stresses.
In order to satisfy CYGNA's concerns in this regard, we have reviewed all supports on the 18'.' feedwater lines and 30" service water lines to detemine if composite sections were utilized.
We only found one other support on a feedwater line where a composite section was used. The weld stresses in this support were acceptable.
If there are any further questions regarding the above issues, please contact Mr. J. C. Finneran at the site at Extension 521.
A f)f t #N #f t.% # 8F TFK A N l'Tf Lille'en e.'t.) f"I ftif ' 4 't e.tt f*4.v,'
r
. g' 'iM
.CYGNA Energy Services Page 2.
July 12, 1984 Very tnaly yours, TEXAS UTILITIES GENERATING CGIPANY ENGINEERING DIVISION L. M. Popplewell Project Engineering Manager DfP/JCF/GG/cp cc:
D. H. Wade J. C. Finneran I
l-
.,.. a,m,,
_ PROEf (JtE 3,
11 Penn Plaza r
i New wrk. New Ybrk10001 g
ex Dornestic:127636/968694 N
Intematonal.428813/234475 A Dravo Company hl V/os2 PF July 13, 1984 CYGNA 42 JOB NO -
NN GTN-69250 W
DATE LOGGED:
Texas Utilities Generating Company J '4 y LOG No.,
Post Office Box 1002 O /*# #g Glen Rose, Texas 76043 FILE:
~
CT;OSS I1EF. Fil.F.
Attention:
Mr.
J.
B.
George E
Vice President / Project Gen. Mgr.
Gentlemen:
TEXAS UTILITIES GENERATING COMPANY COMANCHE PEAK STEAM ELECTRIC STATION G&H PROJECT NO. 2323 FOLLOWUP INFORMATION FROM G&H REF 1:
CYGNA COMMUNICATIONS REPORT DTD 7/2/84 REF 2:
GTN-69233 DTD 7/10/84 By copy of this letter to Nancy Williams of CYGNA, attached please find a response (to supplement that given in ref. 2) to question 1 of the referenced CYGNA Communications Report.
Should you have any questions, please contact either Steve Lim or Henry Mentel.
Very truly yours, BS &
Inc.
e
<k DL REBa-Me:lc Robert E.
Ballard, Jr.
1 Letter + 1 Attachment Director of Projects CC:
ARMS (B&R Site) OL + lA N. Williams (CYGNA, Calif. ) lL lA (telecopied)
G. Grace (TUSI Site) lL lA D. Wade (TUSI Site) IL L. Weingart (CYGNA, Calif. ) lL 1A
~~
Dravo
i-
)
SUPPLEMENTARY RESPONSE TO ITEM 1 OF CYGNA TELECOPIED QUESTIONS ON JULY 2, 1984 In reference to the minor differences in snubber loads reported in the computer printouts and the calculation book, the analyst in his or her judgment deemed the load changes to be small and as such would have no impact on the support 8
designs.
As a consequence, the calculation book was not updated to reflect these new loads and these minor load changes were not reported in the pipe support vendor certifi-cation.
I l
l i
WB#M _.
- = " "'~-
11 Pem Plaza New Wrk, New Ybrk 10001 212 764 4438 Telex:
Domeste:127636/968694 9
- Intemational:428813/234475 A Dravo Company 5
J"1" CiUN "
GTN-69249 JOB NO :
@/o. /W DMEMGM Texas Utilities Generating Company f
Post Office Box 1002 LOG NO..
Glen Rose, Texas 76043 B'!' /
' " ~
FILE-
[./ M C O'? lof Attention:
Mr. J. B. George CROSS REF FILE Vice President / Project Gen. Mgr.
Gentlemen:
TEXAS UTILITIES GENERATING COMPANY COMANCHE PEAK STEAM ELECTRIC STATION G&H PROJECT NO. 2323 PIPE STRESS REVIEW - MASS PARTICIPATION REF 1:
CYGNA LETTER 84042.008 DTD 6/24/84 REF 2:
GTN-69176 DTD 6/29/84 -
MASS PARTICIPATION FRACTION SENSITIVITY STUDY By copy of this letter to Mr. Leo Colborne of CYGNA Energy Services, attached is one (1) magnetic tape of the input files for those problems selected per reference 2.
The tape has been prepared according to the format specified in reference 1.
CYGNA will verify that this tape is readible and will contact Gibbs & Hill regarding G&H personnel traveling to their Boston office.
It is presently anticipated that Henry W. Montel and Steve Lim will be making that trip.
Henry Mentel should be contacted regarding travel plans and if there are any questions.
Very truly yours, I BS & Q LL, Inc.
e T.')
n REBa-HWMe:lc Robert E. Ballard, Jr.
1 Letter Director of Projects CC:
ARMS (B&R Site) OL L. Colborne (CYGNA Boston) lL + Tape T12779 G.
Bjorkman (CYGNA Boston) lL P N. Williams (CYGNA Calif.) lL Dravo ~~ D. Wade (TUSI Site) lL G. Grace (TUSI Site) lL
05bb3 S N5$$> lt1C.
- t 11 Pem Plaza J,
New Wrk. New Wrk 10001 ggg gjg 06 $ 4 UM M gN 4438 i
iYnr $
' sNb fe a
A Dravo C ggggo ;
[hy g y,2,,
hW DATE LOGGED:
8
[W g g*gff LOG NO.
J(,9 July 27, 1984
~~ ~-
- b. 5p,21m FILE:
__0 l-l $ r. (/C
~'-~)
CROSS REF. FILE M'[
. M b#7 GTN- 00200 Texas Utilities Generating Company Post Office Box 1002 he ((,442M Glen Rose, Texas 76043 1rvon PF Attention:
Mr. J. B. George Vice President / Project Gen. Mgr.
Gentlemen:
TEXAS UTILITIES GENERATING COMPANY COMANCHE PEAK STEAM ELECTRIC STATION G&H PROJECT NO. 2323 CYGNA IAP PHASE 3 REPORT Gibbs & Hill has performed an overall review of the Phase 3 Report with particular focus on the Results and Conclusions Section and with an eye towards established action plans for problem resolution.
In view of this we offer the following comments:
1.
Section 5 - Results & Conclusions -
Page 5-10, Last Paragraph Regarding NCR's - Gibbs & Hill does not review NCR's on a routine basis; only when presented for our review via formal correspondence or as part of a DCA/ CMC request.
2.
Section 3.3 - Develop Checklists -
Pages 3-2, 3-3 Establishes the checklist identifiers, i.e., PI-mm where mm = 05 to correspond to Stress Problem 1-023A.
In Appendix 1, the identifiers have been used as the stress problem numbers in several cases.
I4JJ.NC.T'.D M F M N "'
7..
U... W. _.
(DidbhNs (3 54ffi, fhM.
GTN-69296 July 27, 1984 Example:
Checklist No. PI-05 Problem No. AB-1-005; Rev. 1 i
AB-1-005
-Should be AB-1-023A.
The problem numbers referred to on the. pipe stress checklists should be reviewed and corrected accordingly.
Please advise of any questions.
' /'
very' truly yours,
'S & H L, Inc,.
1 pe
. \\
v Robert E. 'Dallard, Jr.
Director of Projects REBa-SMMa:lc 1 Letter CC:
ARMS (B&R Site) OL
- a.-Williams (CYGNA CA) 1L D. Wade /G. Grace (TUGCo Site) lL (tel'ecopied) l 1
1 L
FRBET FILE as... a u,,,.,,,..
11 Pom Plaza f
New Wrk, New Wrk10001 CYGNA
- e NOTED AUS 06 $84 uur 6
212 760-
~
hM,dN5 N4Yse$ I 7ga :
3hg WW we A or-comuny g/(,/e/
DATE LOGGED:
[
,/J[4 d /d O LOG NO. :
l2.f./Qg CA Q-.(&gh.CA(dt..
()'0l KC4%
GTN-6 930 ;. caoss REF, FILE m u2y 31, 1984 u
p,w.&
Texas Utilities Generating Company Post Office Box 1002 Glen Rose, Texas 76043 gg,*q pf Attention:
Mr. J.
B. George Vice President / Project Gen. Mgr.
Gentlemen:
TEXAS UTILITIES GENERATING COMPANY COMANCilE PEAK STEAM ELECTRIC STATION G&ll PROJECT NO. 2323 TAPERED TRANSITION JOINT SIF REF:
GTT-10424, DATED 7/11/84 Subsequent to the G&ll intentions outlined in referenced GTT, G&ll has completed Part A of the plan of action pertaining to the Stress Intensification Factor (SIF) for tapered transition joints at equipment nozzle connections.
The results are as follows:
1.
Problem AB-1-6_lC, Rev. 0 - CYGNA's sample considered node points 370, 420 and 439.
The G&ll node points where stress intensification factors (SIF's) were input are 377, 419 and 438.
Node 377 represents the end of a flange and contains an SIF of 1.9.
Nodes 419 and 438 represent the end of an elbow to flange connection and contain SIF's of 3.5 and 4.271 respectively.
Therefore, the analysis contair.s the appro-priate stress intensification factors at the squipment nozzle connections.
2.
Problem AB-1-151B, Rev. 0 - CYGNA's sample considered node point 1 which represents an embedded portion of pipe and not the piping to equipment nozzle connection for the spent fuci pool cooling water pump.
Node point 1 does not require an SIF.
The node point at the equipment nozzle connection is l
l OTO VO
-gn.-...~n.
-~
=
Gibbe C Mill,Inc.
GTN-69303 July 31, 1984 node point 83 which represents the end of a flange and contains an SIF of 1.9.
Node 1 is the node point of the
)
discharge nozzle connection for adjacent problem AB-1-151A.
Therefore, the analysis contains the appropriate stress intensification factor at the equipment nozzle connection.
3.
Problem AB-1-57, Rev. 0 - CYGNA's sample considered node points 76 and 116 which are at the equipment nozzle con-nections to the reactor coolant drain tank heat exchanger and the excess letdown heat exchanger respectively.
Due to the weld configuration, a stress intensification factor at these locations is not required.
Westinghouse equipment drawings 501B572 and 501B574 indicate that these 4-inch nozzle connections utilize a butt weld end prep configuration.
G&H Specification, 2323-MS-43B, requires that "all sharp changes in sections of any_ weld shall be eliminated" which results in a flush weld between the equipment nozzle and the adjoining pipe.
Figure NC-3673.2(b)-1 of Subsection NC to Section III of the ASME Code states that for a butt-weld that has been reworked flush, the SIF is equal to 1.0.
Thus, the stresses are not intensified at these equipment nozzle connections; justification for not considering an SIF at the said locations is therefore provided.
4.
Problem AB-1-167-B, Rev... - CYGNA's sample considered node point 204 which is the piping connection to a flexible connector.
This connector is made out of neoprene and utilizes stainless steel clamp assamblies to connect the adjacent piping.
An SIF at this connection is therefore not required.
5.
Problem AB-1-40, Rev. 0 - CYGNA's sample considered node point 34 which is the equipment nozzle connection to the regenerative heat exchanger.
Due to the nozzle weld end configuration shown on Atlas Industrial Manufacturing equipment drawing D-4313-7, a stress intensification f actor at this location should have been considered.
However, the nozzle weld end configuration can be considered as a tapered transition and when the associated SIF of 1.9 maximum (per Figure NC-3673.2(b)-1 of Subsection NC to Section III of the ASME Code) is applied at this location, the stress results are still within the Code allowables and are as follows:
prmJ3
O Gibbs S Mill,Inc, GTN-69303 July 31, 1984 7184 psid;17,200 psi Eq. 8
=
8141 psiac20,640 psi Eq. 9 (upset)
=
8786 psiec30,960 psi Eq. 9 (emergency)
=
5185 psidf27,800 psi Eq. 10
=
Eq. 11
= 12369 paidC 4 5,000 psi omission of the SIF at the equipment nozzle connection does not adversely affect the analysis.
6.
Problem Ab-1-150G, Rev. 0 - CYGNA's sample considered node points 1 and 17.
Node point 1 is at the connection to the thermal regeneration demineralizer and node point 17 is in the vicinity of the resin fill opening.
Due to the nozzle weld end configuration shown on Westinghouse drawing 271C900 and the flange arrangement shown on drawing FSM00143, a stress intensification factor at these locations should have been considered.
However, when an SIF of 1.9 maximum is applied at these locations, the stress results are still within the Code allowables and are as follows:
Node Point 1 2047 psi 4.17,200 psi Eq. 8
=
Eq. 9 (upset) 3035 psi dL 20,640 psi
=
Eq. 9 (emergency) 3387 psidL 30,960 psi
=
Eq. 10 2369 psidL 27,800 psi
=
Eq. 11 4416 psi dL 45,000 psi
=
Node Point 17 Eq. 8 1215 psiac 17,200 psi
=
Eq. 9 (upset) 1215 psidL 20,640 psi
=
1215 psidL 30,960 psi Eq. 9 (emergency)
=
0 psid' 27,800 psi Eq. 10
=
Eq. 11 1215 psidL 45,000 psi
=
Omission of the SIF's at the said connections does not adversely affect the analysis.
l In conclusion, G&H agrees that three (3) of the ten connections do not contain a stress intensification factor.
The analyses involved are AB-1-40, Rev. 0 (node point 34) Ond AB-1-150G, Rev.
0 (node points 1 and 17).
Based upon our findings, G&H will 1
Orm35
Gibbe C Mill Inc.
I GTN-69303 July 31, 1984 perform Part B of the plan of action outlined in the reference GTT.
In order to complete this review in a timely manner and since it involves considering a formidable amount of analyses (approximately 272) the following methodology will be followed:
1.
Determine which analyses contain equipment nozzle Connections.
2.
Determine if a stress intensification f actor was or was not considered at the connection.
3.
If the analysis contains equipment but no SIF was considered, the stress results at the applicable node point will be multiplied by the appropriate maximum SIF.
4.
It the resulting intensified stresses remain within the allowable limits, the analysis will remain acceptable.
5.
If the resulting intensified stresses exceed the allowable limits, the piping to nozzle mismatch will be considered to arrive at a decreased SIF.
6.
If the stresses still exceed the allowable limits, equipment and weld end prep detail drawings will be reviewed to obtain possible relief.
Results of the above plan of action should be available by August 17, 1984.
If you have any questions, please contact H. W. Mentel (x6302) or F. A. Colucci (x5203).
Very truly yours, GIBBS & HILL, Inc.
/
R.
E. Ballard, Jr.
Director of Projects
-.af* C REBa-HWM/FAC:1c 1 Letter CC:
ARMS (B&R Site) OL D. H. Wade (TUSI Site) 1L A-Williams (CYGNA CA) IL G. Grace (TUSI Site) 1T.
OravTo
~
I Gibbs C Mill. Inc.
A
/b3 11 Pom Plaza New Wrk. New Wrk 10001 Rd OU L JOB NO -
212 760-4438 b!/ d / eW stic:127636/968694 DATE LOGGED:
Intematonal:428813/234475 M/j ~/ t/
LOG NO. :
A Dravo Company 2 1 I }nt.. C/'
I F1te:
/Og/
2/e #C CROSS REF. FILE O
August 3, 1984
)
GTN-69316 Texas Utilities Generating Company Post Office Box 1002 Glen Rose, Texas 76043 Attention:
Mr. J. B. George Vice President / Project Gen. Mgr.
Gentlemen:
TEXAS UTILITIES GENERATING COMPANY COMANCHE PEAK STEAM ELECTRIC STATION G&H PROJECT NO. 2323 REVISED MASS PARTICIPATION FRACTION SENSITIVITY STUDY REF 1:
GTN-69162 DTD 6/26/84 REF 2:
GTN-69279 DTD 7/20/84 REF 3:
GTN-69176 DTD 6/29/84 Attached please find the revised plan of action regarding i
Mass Participation along with a listing relating functional schedule milestone dates.
Should you have any questions, call this office.
Very truly yours, GIBBS & HILL, Inc.
Irg, ps. D.c ~ r Robert E. Ballard, Jr.
Director of Projects
$YYo Approved:
_ _M.A. Vivirito Vice President Power Engineering
?p2/A-REBa-HWMe: 1c G. Bjorkman (CYGNA MA) lL1[A 1 Letter N. Williams (CYGNA CA) lL CC:
ARMS (B&R Site) OL D. Westbrook (TUSI Site) lL lA L Wade (TUSI Dallas) lL lA (telecopy)
D'*M Westbrook (TUSI Site) lL lA (telecopy)JAA594U*TY2 NY T &
I a
--REVISED MASS PARTIC.[PATION FRACTION. SEHSITIVITY STUDY
~GTN-69162. dated-June 26, 1984 establisheu the Gibbs a Hill plan
- of action for the Mass Participation Fraction Sensitivity Study.
Item 3 in that GTN stated that upon completion of the re-analysis of the five (5) selected problems a preliminary report would be issued and an assessment made with-regard to sa6itional required work.
The status report issued under GTN-69279 outed July 20,
-1904 generalized as to.the type'of additional. work or followup actions required.
Those followup actions were:
a.
Need for an expandeu review (more problems) b.
Further re-analysis of the five (5) selected problems (with refinements to reduce loads)
Submittal of revised loads to PSE to check supporL adequucy.
c.
Based upon the preliminary information gathered to date, Gibbs a Hill has oeemed it appropriate to expand the review of the piping analyses.
In essence the original plan of action is now revised
-with changes being made in review criteria and in the scope (number of problems)-of the Study.
The revised plan of action for the Study is as follows:
1.
The scope of the Study will be expanded be. yond the originally selected five (5) problems.
A representative sampling will be made of those problems which are consiaered to contain the extreme parameters in regards to.high frequency response.
In GTN-69176 dated June 29, 1934, Gibbs & hill presentea Charts 1, 2& 3 highlighting the mass particiation percentr.ges calculated for the
'x',
'y' and
'z' directions for the 200 stress problems in its initial survey.
A review of these Charts show that 18 problems exhinited an
'x' mass fraction under 10 percent, 28 problems a
'y' mass fruction under 10 percent; four (4)-problems a
'z' mass fraction under 10 percent.
An initial representative sample will be drawn from these worst case percentages with the following additional parcmeters being considered:
a.
The first natural frequency and number ot modes considered in the original as-built analysis b.
The pipe size, schedule and weight c.
The number of anchors and pipe supports d.
Concentrated weights in the analysis, i.e., valves c.
The building (s) to which the piping is supported f.-
The Responso Spectra utilized (refined versus unretined) 9
fT:-
.6 2 9 Scismic anchor movements.
A selection of the actual problems to be analyzec considering
~the above parameters is being prepared anu will'be submitted on-August C, 1984.
2.
.Tne problems in the representative sample will be re-analyzed utilizing the ADLPIPE computer program version C (consistent with the version usea in the' original as-built analysis).
Introduced into this re-analysis will be a static selsmic analysis based upon the respective
'x',y' and
'z' Zero Period Acceleration (ZPA) associated with the stress problem.
ite loads obtaineu in this' manner will be ecmpared with those originally derivea in the dynamic analysis pcrformed during the as-built program (which utilized a frequency cutott ot 33 Hertz).
The two (2) sets of loads (original dynumic/ZPA) will be compared and the higher values usou to check the support designs.
The above. method outlined is currently an. acceptable inaustry
. method of checking the adequacy of the piping system and its
~
support designs in regard to high frequency responses.
In addition in a telephone conversation with Nancy hilliams of CYGNA Energy Services placed on Tuesday, July 31, 1984, Ms.
Williams concurred that this type of check oi the effect of
' PA was the method used by CYGNA's reviewer during 4
the
. independent audits, and is acceptabic to CYGNA.
3.
With the results of the re-analysis Cibbs a hill will follow a 10 pcrcent acceptance criteria.
If the new total support load is within 10 percent of the original no further work will be performed.
For those cases above a 10 percent increuse in load Gibbs & Hill will make refinements to the analysis.
Such refinements will consist of:
Use or refined response spectra, if not originally a.
utilized b.
Use of a more specific ZPA (for the tactoring or i
resultant loads).
Presently the acceleration associateu with the cutoff frequency of 33 Hertz is being conservatively utilizea as the ZPA.
There can be u
reouction in ZPA at higher frequencies.
Besides a more accurate ZPA, credit will be taken of the relative location of the piping system supports being analyzed with respect to the supporting building (s) to lower any undo conservatism inherent in tne envelopea Response Spectra curve.
Use of refined seismic anchor movements.
c.
d l
1 1
. ~
F 4.,
With the'refinedLre-analysis a check will be made of the support design load margin for. those. supports still-having a
- greater than 10 percent total.lood increase.
Gibbs &lhill is optimistic that utilizing the above step;by stop avaluation of the ZPA eftect on the worst case representative sample will dispense with the mass participation issue..Following is a simplified summary of the recommended actions.
For each of the problems contained in tue worst case representative sample (mass. fractions less then 10 percent):
Step 1 - Analyze the ZPA ef fect Step 2 - Compare the resulting looos with those oL the original dynamic analysis (as-built) a.
If the original support design loads urc higt.er, no further evaluation is required b.
If the ZPA associated loads result in a total design load increase of less than 10 percent, no further evaluation is required c.
If the ZPA associated loads constitute a greater than 10 percent increase in total loads proceed to Step 3.
Stcp 3 - Perform a refined analysis of the ZPA effect (more specific ZPA and sad)
Step 4 - Same as Step 2, a & b -- no further analysis; if c -- proceed to btep 5 Step 5 - Evaluation of the design loud mcryin in the supports.
Deptnaing on the outcome of the results of the Joove anclyscs, edditional sa:apling analysis may be requirec.
I t
e I
., e MASS PARTICIPATION SENSITIVITY STUDY - FUNCTIONAL SCHEDULE MILESTONES
~1.
Problem Selection / Data for Refinement (note 30 problems)
August 3, 1984 - August 8, 1984 2.
Reanalysis Incorporating ZPA Effect for comparison (first 15 problems)
August 8, 1984 -' August 15, 1984 4
3.
Reanalysis Incorporating-ZPA Effect for Comparison 4
(second 15 problems)
August 15, 1984 - August 22, 1984 4.
Refined Reanalysis as Required August 22, 1984 - August 30, 1984 5.
Report to PSE - Supports with Load Increase to Check Margin August 17, 1984.- August 31, 1984-9 E
9 j
i
.?.:'-
( TPp b ys k TEXAS UTILITIES SER ICES INC.
hh orrlcr wtwonANouw 7.
J. B. George
,%w% 3 6 6, isa5
, Ul t
g,,
s W t -_
COMANCHE PEAK STEAM ELECTU C STATICN cmDv1 CP5ES DOCUMENT CONTROL CtYtiR W
DATE LOGGcD:
- 71 Loct:0..
[].).k1 W r:Lc:
A -l be u2. Loy gr genw ri g gir; the The following is submitted.in response to yet, r
historical path and current status of the project document control program.
.In May of 1982, project management directed the re-evaluation of the CPSES document control system in an effort to strengthen the system and improve its overali efficiency. The first step in this process was a realignment of supervision with an initial charge to evaluate DCC in tems of efficiency with respect to the total control and
. distribution process..
The immediate results of this evaluation were to. increase efficiency by the proper organization of DCC manpower. These included establishing priortties, specific task sequences, and job descriptions.
In.paraTiel, equipment inventories were re-evaluated considering capability, cost effectiveness, operator t-aining,esults, when implemented ir conjunction and maintenance (including history and contract comitunts). The r with new equipment purchases, enabled DCC to recover sere dccument control functions previtrusly managed outside DCC,.and effect current file retrievability, reproduction, and distribution.
The second phase of the evaluation consisted of an integrated review of the total distribution process. It was clearly recognized that cen-tralizing drawing and design change control would strengthen the system and provide a more positive means of control.
In late 1982, the concept of managing these controis by a limited number of DCC-managed satellites was originally proposed, The " satellite concept" -- although ii1 preliminary outline fone -- was j
observed during the CAT investigation by NRC personnel. Although the DCC effort was not found by CAT to be deficient, the team corrented the satellite approach would minimize the " general risk" inherent to the 1
existing program and sinfultaneously enhance positive control.
The first satellite was implemented in May of 1983 to support the Startup l
and Startup Support Groups.
Full implanentation of the satellite prograr was acceeplished August 1,1983, with the operation of five (5) total l
satellites supporting CPSES.
I
\\
Blu steet
g s
j.
a J. 8. George Sept. 6,.1983 Page 2 During the implementation phase of the satellite system, CYGNA began their Independent Assessment Program at Comanche Peak.
Several observa-tions were noted indicating inconsistencies in DCC's design change records. The inccnsistencies resulted, in part, from start-up diffi.
culties of the satellite system and from human error. Additional confusion was created because of the Tack of understanding initially.
by CYGNA, of the function of the Design Change Tracking Group (DCTG).
The DCTG is the engineering group charged with maintenance of the CHC/DCA Master Index used for tracking /statusing the engineering / design review of design changes. This group is also the prir.ary Engineering-to-DCC interface.
The original CMC /DCA Master Index was maintained by Gibbs & Hill to track their internal design review effort. Because of the manner in which this index had been maintained, a comparison of applicable design changes in that document would aopear, at face value, to be discrepant with DCC's manual design change logs.
The DCTG is currently reviewing each design change for cor pleteness and accuracy with regards to the status of design changes and the proper drawing references. When this purging effort is cortpleted, a computer data base will exist such that DCC's manual design change tracking systarr. may be eliminated. The merging of the two systerns is scheduled to occur on October 15, 1923, and will eliminata all discrepancies from the past.
Until such time as the merger is made DCC's manual design change tracking systet renains as the controlling mechanism ~for design changes.
In order to assure that identified discrepancies are corrected and that positive controls are in place, an independent ironitoring tear which reports directly to DCC Management, has been established. This team constantly rotates within the DCC systere assessing and " auditing" distribution control. The team's scope includes each drawing, specification, pro-cedure, and essociated changes entered in the control systect. These personnel have been delegated no production responsibility except auditing.
The abcVe actions, all combined, will ultimately result in a strengthened DCC system and will provide the positive controls that are necessary.
{
/
/
g
- i. T.\\ he
.t J r. '
i Lsst. Proj ct Gener Manager JTM: pew 11
~ ~
. r.
r
/&c.rfp pgy K
~
L.-
1 hi$&
Gibbs a Hm. Inc.
2%.%,wa, u.40.azuva eo/e 212 760-4438 stic:127636/968694 b
' Intematonat: 428813/234475 A Wan Company 7,
l
(, (,yg x '
T@yAPP August 23, 1984 C\\'.
~
t *~
.ron a CA/n t/D-
[,M D/IC 1.0GGra ;
?
Texas Utilities Generating Company
,0c No..
-M-7 7,,
Post Office Box 1002 i
Glen Rose, Texas 76043 FI m M.*1 FILE [, *!
- M CROSS HE?.
Attention:
Mr. J.B.
George
/ '/ L4. M @ gj Vice President / Project Gen. Mgr.
Gentlemen:
TEXAS UTILITIES GENERATING COMPANY COMANCHE PEAK STEAM ELECTRIC STATION G&H PROJECT NO. 2323 TRANSITION JOINT SIF AT EQUIPMENT NOZZLE CONNECTIONS REF:
GTN-69359 DTD 8/17/84 By copy of this letter to Nancy Williams of CYGNA, attached is a copy of the Gibbs & Hill Calculation 2323-EQ-SIF referred to in the above reference.
As can be seen all nozzles are acceptable.
In those instances where a cal-culation check was performed it should be noted that the taper transition SIF of 1.9 was applied across the board I
without account made for the pressure term or for the.75 factor in equations 8, 9 and 11.
This across the board application was done for expediency and due to the low magnitude of stresses found in the majority of cases.
In several instances this approach was not applicable hence the pressure and.75 factor was accounted for.
l t
Drav7 i
rf r
- Gibbe B HIII. Inc.
7 GTN-69369 August 23, 1984 e
Gibbs & Hill feels that this calculation more than adequately completes the plan of action on this item.-_ Note that not included with this transmittal is the calculation attach-ments to 2323-EQ-SIF which are copies of the related ADLPIPE analyses microfilm.
These can be made available upon request.
g Very truly yours, GIBBS & HILL, Inc.
w~
Robert E. Ballard, Jr.
Director of Projects g4 REBa-HWMe:lc 1 Letter CC:
ARMS (B&R Site) OL N Williams (CYGNA, CA) lL lA
~
D. Wade- (TUSI Site) lL G. Grace (TUSI Site) lL l
l l
L I
l Drav%
~.
2l3
' G i b b s S H ill,lr u::,
Calculation CoverSheet G&HJob No.
ase3 - o6
" Client rusi Calculation Number a 3 e 3 - a ca. - s i w Nu'mberof Sheetsin Originalissue 8a Subject r o,p. ce et r r-i n s. +.o n To: n + s.r. F. A -+ Ep;pment E NuclearSafetyRelated O Non-NuclearSafety Related-QA Program Applicable O Non-NuclearSafetyRelated Sheets Sheets Sheets Job Engineer Deleted Added Revised Signature Date Original X X
X ffKM sh /sv
,a
- c. 2 can 0,-
.l CYGNA 15 JOB NO :
g,y ;
DATE LOGage :
8/27/j g/
LCG No. :
___$ Qj3 1
FILE:
))./ !
Q,
{
~
CROSS yry, y; 3g JAf./
,,g
)
l F-167,4-81
~
Gibbs S Mill, stic.
Job No. 2 sa3 -o4 s C5ent rust
' Sfk:s r. pe r d tr= n s.4 i e n To. n + s.T. v=. A + s, s.' p m e n+-
('.ah dahnn Number a s a 3 - E at. - E t F SheetNo.
1 nw osa nov.
one nu one mm osse n
on w
m I
X X
X X
X Preparer-e c.
s/nlu C- --
9MA 1/r//34 I
= 4 + h'i s c=teui
-&ien i s + o T w e.
p o r pos e.
m e n4 n o 2. s i c.
P u r p o s =_ :-
-+ w4
-+ w e.
s-t re s s e. s
=+wire. p.p + 5 o 4 n c_
c ver; fy S - -% i s 4
-i-b c_
re men A 5 M 7.:
Ceae cm llawe tot e.S
( sg de /s ases r "2).
c o n n e e. i. n s S b e e_ -h-N o.
To bl e_
o 3E-Co n -4 e n 4 s 2
t)
R c. 4 c.r e o C e S a)
En4orme4 ion M o -k r i y, 3__.
Re.su1+S Il S} Ana ly sis B ?-
4)
Conclus io n 5)
Ce\\cw\\=4 son A + += c. h m e n -M S m
e e
e g
e e
6 W
m a
e e
emo m
een 6
w g@
9 O
O O
uh.
esWe e
eu, m.
-m e
e em g
ene M
h
.e en-e r
i 6
F-166,7-82 CheckingMethod #
d:::h-m::m ::.= - _
.=__
' es C Hi#, hecr.
Job No. es a 3 - o4 c C5ent T u s )
Subject
- r. p. e cl r e= a s..+.. n :To 4 + S.T. F. A+ E gu;p m n-t-
%% Number e a r's - s at - s i F ShostNo.
2.
Rowsman T
Dess Rev.
Dese Rev.
Dana Rev.
Date Rev.
Dans IMM i
X X
X X
X W6=c-eInles W WEIR 4
'R s 4 re.v.ce.s :
1)
AS M E.
code see-% son E
( 8t 14
- 1) G 77 - 10 4 24 D /?T ED 7 l"l9 4 ~
" M"'
- F
' ' T'* v no o ers sec cao<~~r s.,,+<
- c. -,<<e v n u.o
- ff $~
re d S **C'f*" A 7' W e/*
$4 f74/b$
foe / 1" / **' s # fid # 7#w f st c 9 s st' fof sq f /sd /*9**c4 f#AMs ivenn
.) e t d !"o r
$) G.1N - G 1 *b o ~3 D M'ff0
- )fb/fBf t* M
- 7
- A o F-
^
,, i. n ~ a r. a o pas sn.a-4-
6 74 ~ fo 9 'n s g D M14 0 g lt e /% 4 -
3 '/ s9'? d s sP f Woor y i
l Checking Method # j cc:a:::l2m F-166, 7-82
. 5 :.' O W. M -
)
L...
..._.__m._____....
I
' Gdanbe a MW, Arscs.
Job No. z 52 5-o 4 s.
Clort rus) ilhfp-f T a p. r u.d T ro o s i 4 s n Toi ni S.~E.1:. At E5 v i p en a n t halndatinriPANTd38r 2 'h 2 'S - E G.- S t F.
M No.
=,
n a-nw one nw nw one nm newman ir
""1 X
X X
X X
j Papeer,As c.
e/, sis 4 c-_
"Awm sys>ppe I
i
~
]~] ~~
~
' n 4e t rn a-i s o q M a + c'i y.
Comroe.n-is S.2. F.
N o.
Pro b, Eguipme.nt S.T. F.
E M ec+
A en -
Acc m +=d F o r-
/#
A ccow a-te.d O $I6 M Al AnALYoh po c.
i-i Yc5 YeS N/A N /A.
.2 i - 2.
Y e.s yes N/A N/A 3
t-3 N o. S Yes N/A
.N / A 4
1-4 TeS Nes N/A N/A.
r i-s Ye.S Y e.S N /A N/A t-G Nes Yes N/A _.
N/A N/A 7.
lI
.N c 5 NeS N/A
,. _. N /A _.
8 t-B T*S Tc5 N/A
-9 l-9A No N/A N/A N /A
' to 1 't B No N /A N /A N /A si t -9 c.
No N/A N/A N. /A ____
N N/A N /A.
Ye/A
- se l-90 No S
N/A N /A sA l-10A-I Ye.S i4 l -lo e No N/A N/A
. N /A is t-lo c No N/A N
N /A
- is 6-800-1 Ne.S No Me/A s
Sea.caIc. Page. I I P e g e. I 2.
- 7 I-Il A N t. S No T e.5 s e. e.
Ce tc.
18 t - i l Eh Y e. S No Nes see.c ic. p.4 e 13 Y e. s Yes N/A N/A is t-lic.
to t-1EA-l Tc.S YeS N /A
. N /A al t-ste No N/A N /A N/A _.
ae t -i2 D No N/A N/A _
....N / A 23 t-i2 E No N/A N /A.
N / A _ _..
- 24 i-iq A YeS Nes N-/A
.N A._,
..N/A.
.N 2r I-19 B Nes
.Y e s 8/A N
A.
N /A 2G..
l.-19 C.
.No TeS.
N/A.
N/A 27. _ l - 2.t - t Tc5
' 28 __
l-23A No N /A N /A
. _. _.. N / A.. _._.
- 29._ _ t.-a s Eb No N/A N /A
. _.._.. _ N /A
~>
l-E 3 C No N/A.
N /A
.. _.._.N. /A.
_. _... N / A
'3 t - t 2, b No N /A.
N A
. N / A
__ 84 l
.N A
'2a.
1 - c.4
.No
_ N /A.
- 34 t 1 YeS
.No.
..Mes s. a. c a l c..
P.se
- 33 6-a7-1 Yes N o.
.N S.
G e s.
ca Ic.
P 3e.17 3r I -29 K, No M/A N A N/A 36 t -29 L No N/A N A N /A 37 i-e9 n No N /A N A.
N /A F-166, 7-82 i
CheckingMethod# j CE*a:2s::.=::::.= -
3
'Gibbs S Hill,irsc.
JobNo. e3es-e4 s Cient Tust
&mes To p r e d Tr-ns'.-+ ion so. e + s. r. F. A4 E$ uIpm e n Y Cah dainiNumber 2 3zs-e at - s i V:
SheetNo. 4 naisen T
omm nw one Rw osse nw omne nw omm M
i X
X X
X X
Properw,e. c-si,,Is4 Om We gM/64 i
S. I. F:.
S '2. F.
C.o m m e n + 5 7uipment No, Pr o b.
E A6-Accova4* d E-4-fec.-t-P o <- / N Accowac.d oRos ra nL Hnews p a,.
se i-29 N- !!
No N/A N/A N/A 39 i-a9o No N/A N/A N/A do i-89 P No N /A N/A N/A 4i t-e9 s No N /A N/A
. N /A de i-E*1T No N/A N/A N A N A 4s
-aci u No N A N/A d4 1-29 V No NA N /A NA ds i-a9w/
No NA N/A N/A as t-a9X No N A N A.
N/A di i-e9Y No N /A N
A N/A 4s i - an t so N/A N A N/A
- 49 1-30-1 Yes N o..
N e.s See ca Ic. P a s c., a o so i
~5 1 Y e.S No Ye s.
S e c.
Ca ic..
Pag e.
El si i - 3 2.
Nc3 Nes N /A N/A
- 53 1-34 A Y e.S No_.
Ye/A N/A re i-33
%s YeS N
s S e e-ca ic. F g c.
EE.
I s4 i-34 6 4cS Tes N /A N/A
~23
- sr i - 34 c.
Nes so Yes s e c.
caic.
- p. 3 c-N/A _
sc i-asA No N/A N/A s1 i-ss E-1 No
.N/A N/A N/A E9 I - as C_
No N/A N /A N /A 59 i-3r o No N/A N/A N/A
'O i-S S E.
Mo N /A N /A
- N/A 61 l-sr F No N/A.
N/A N/A 42 l-3G No N/A N/A N /A 63 1-376
.No N/A
.N/A N /A 4s.
s-37 y No N/A.
N /A N /A
- 64.. - ri w-i N o.
N/A N /A
.N / A 6 6... i-5>Y No.
N /A N/A
. _. _ N /A.
o; i-37 c No N /A
. N /A
_.. N /A GT M c.9 3o3,7/3r/d4 Ge 1-4o Y c. s No Tes Sc.
- 69 l-4aA Nes No.
Nes S e e. Ce tc.
Pa3 c.
24 7o i-A a B No N/A N/A N/A'
' 71 t -45q Nes Nes N /A N /A 72 1-drR Nes
.Nes N /A N /A 73 i-4ss Nes Yes N /A N /A 74 t 4sT Tes Yes N /A N/A F-166, 7-82 Checking Methoc:# j m::::: m
. E; =W.=
Gibbs S H#f,inc.
Job No. a s e.5 - o 4 6 C8 erit Tus)
I t
Sub>ct -;. pe r e. d r co n s +.'a n a oi n+
s. r.. F.
A.t 153v.pmea+
cabdatinn Number e 1. a 3 - e et - s i p.
SheetNo. F w.ma ir" o==
an o==
an osa n=
omm an om.
IDdllll1 8
X X
X X
X w~e a e.
el.olen CW F*
4 h f /s4-5v.pmen+! 6. r. F.
S. T. I:.
Co r n m e n 4 5 No Prob.
E A6-A ccou n-h d.
e.4 4 e c+
F: o r-
/#
A c.co u a4 c. d l
OWIG MM A*M%
F*r 15 i-4cA M e. s Nes N/A N/A iG i - 4 6 E.
Nss No Ye.s G e c.
Ca tc.
Page 2 S' 77 i-478, Ye.E No Tc5 S e c.
Ca ic.
Page. 26 is 1-5:A Mes N =.s
.N/A M/A 79 a-s i A Y c.s Yes N /A N/A ce t-s ic-3 No N/A N/A N /A ei i-e t o Nes NeS N/A
.N /A P2.
E-s io-l Nes Yes N /A m
8.3 t - 5 2-E.
Nes icS N /A 4~
i
%.k.he.aI p)/A W
- eA i-saq Nes No Nes S e c.
e s-
- 7. -S E L.4 N c5 Tes N /A f
E6 1 -5 2 V-1 Y u. S Ncs N/A M
9 -)
l-SEU Yes Nes N/A N/A ee i-sax Yes Yes N /A N/A 69 l-SEY No N/A N/A N/A Ne/A N/A N/A N
9o I-S a 'iF No 9I t-crA Yes s
N/A N /A 9a t-rs o Nes Nes N/A N/A 93 i -ss c.
Nes Nes N/A N/A 94 i-rso-i M e. s Nes N /A N /A 95 i-s 7 Nes N/A N /A se e. c, r s G9 so3,,/s gs4
-96 i-58 Ye.s No Nes s e e. c.oi i c.. P a.3 e. a s 9;
i-59 A Ye.s NeS N/A N/A 98 l - s%
Mes Ne5 N/A N/A 99 i - 59 c.
Ne.s Ne. s N/A N/A
- ioo
-s9e W3 No Yes s.
c ic.
P= c e-so
- s ol_
1,- G O MeS.
No Nc5 Sec. C. i c. R>g e.
.io a 1-cia-a Yes No Mes s = =.
c,. i c.
P o n e. 3J io3. i-sia-i Yes Yes N/A
_._N/A.
1o4 E-s i e>
.Yes Nes N/A
_.. N /A los
-cic.
N=. 5 Tes N/A S ee. GyN 69 3ot, 7)3fl 94
. s oc i-si o Ye. s
.No Mes se
- c. t c. P.3 e 39 to; i -s i e.
Ye. s Nes N/A N/A".
. log 2 -G I E.- l Yes
.Nes N /A N/A 109 i - s i le No N/A N/A N/A ilo l -c zA Ne.s Nes N/A N/A til i-c. e s-Yes Ws M/A N/A
{
Checking Method # j = :::2, p.166,7-82 I
. C ll:. M E = -
i
!Gibbs O Hitl. Arno.
JobNo. a 3 a 3-o4 c C5ent i us \\
g Sthject T pe r e d Tro n s o-t-io n Toi n -t-S.T. F. A% E3 vipm e nt CahdatirviNumber a s a a-a a.- s i F-SiestNo. 6 Rowmen T
Delo Rev.
Does Rev.
Dean Rou Due b
Date M
i X
X.
X.
X X
Preparar-+= c_
el,,Is4 0-
@m-s hf /9f N o.
Pro b.
Eg uipmen-t S.T. F.
S.T. F.
C-o m m e n4,5 AB-Accou n-t e.d E 4 S e c. G= a t-W AecourAed ego own pamnts s= o r-1i2 i-sec-Nes NcS N/A N /A li3 t -s c o-1 Nes N e. s N/A N/A 11 4 a-sa o Nes No T e.S Gee _ c, ic. P 3 c., 4 o 18 5 t-G a P_
Nes Nes
.N/A N/A p.3 e 4 its t -s a 5:.
Nes No Nc3 s e c_
c., i e.
Ir7 I-s 2G
.No N/A N/A.
N/A iI8 I-szX-1 Nes Yes N /A N/A 11 9 l - 82.Y No N /A N /A N/A tao t-Gaz-l Nc5 Nes N /A N/A 32 1 l-83A Nes Nes N /A N /A
" i k 2.
t-G3 6 Te5 No Mes Sas Ca te.
Pea e. 4 2.
IE3 2-c38 No N/A-N/A
- * ~' " ' ' * * / A* ' + " # '* - ' ' ' 3 N
12 4 1 -s 3 c.
No N/A N/A ser i-s a o Yes Nes N /A N/A tas t -s4 A Yes No M e.s s c. c. ca t c. Pac 43 12*7 l 44B No N/A N/A N/A.
tag t - s4 c.
No N /A N/A N/A.
tact 6-44 0 No N /A N/A N /A
-iso I-84 E.
No N/A N /A N/A e3 t-64 F Nc3 No Nes S e c.
Ce tc. P3c 44 t o e.
- -s s-Nes M.s N /A.
N/A i33 i-esA-1 Yes Ne.s N/A N/A e34 t-G4 B-t Tss
..Nc5 N /A N/A._
iss t-s s c.
Mes Nes N /A N/A 13c i-si r No N/A.
N/A N/A 137 a-4ir No N/A N/A N/A
- 838 t-s ;u No
.N/A N/A N /A 837 l-G tv M e.s Yes N /A N/A l
14 o I-67x No N/A N/A
._ __N/A N/A N /A
. _. _. N / A 14 1. 2-67x No N
N/A
_N/A Y c/A.
14 2 t-6 7 Y No
.s N /A
.N /A i43 1-s75!:
Nes 14 4 t -ssT N o.
H/A N/A N/A
-145 2-s eT No N /A N /A N /A 14 6 t-se u-t No N/A N/A N/A 14 7 i-sev-t N e. s N c.s N/A N /A 14 8 i-sex No M/A N/A N /A Checking Method #
d::::2.--,
F-166, 7-82 m.w==r= _._
-.-n -=
. = - = = - - - - -
- - - - - - -. - - - - - - = - ~.
.Gibbs C Nfff. inc.
Job No. e sas - o 4 6 Clerit 1 u s 1
~
i Subject ra per e. cl tra n s.-4..n
-T.. a + s. r. v=.
A + E3 v. p m e n i-t' aire datinri Number e3e2-a ca. - s i i=.
SheetNo.
7 nween ig' osse nov.
one nov.
omne nov.
osse nm omne IIL"1
/
X X
X X
X maperw,.4. c_
e1.,in4 gros sMk.
M o.
Pr. b.
sp.pm n+
s.T. F.
S. r. F.
C. o m m e n 4,5 As-Ac.c. u.A=.d Ef4ec+
For sa Accounded o RtGto M Ae A Yars 1= o e-149 2 -s S X No N/A N/A N/A 850 1-48 Y No N/A N/A N/A ISI l-68E Nes Nss N /A N/A, j
i s a.
i -s.9 N=.s Nes
,N/A N /A 1s3 i so Nes Nes N /A N/A 154 l is A Nes Nes N /A N/A sg5 t jib Nes N <. s N /A N/A 156 l 72.
No, N/A N/A N/A 15 7 t 73 No N/A N /A N/A 158 l-74 No N/A N/A N /A N
N/A Ye/A 159 i is-Nes N e,s s
see.c tc. Po3e %
i
- iso i is A N c.s No l
861 l-76 8 No N /A.
N /A.
N/A 16 2 t -7 1 Nc5 Nes N /A N /A 14 3 l 78 Nc3 Yes N /A N/A I64 1 79 A No N/A N/A N/A.. _. _ _
16 5 l lia No N/A
. N /A N/A 16G t-79 c.
No N/A s/A N/A 161 l 19 D No N/A N /A N/A.
16 8 l 79 E No N/A
.N/A
. N /A 169 l-7'l F Nc5
.. N c. 5 N,/A N/A,
- l 71 t-s o a Yes
.No
-Yes -
M /A 110 1-boa No N /A
..M/A See Coi n c.
Po3,_ 4 8 l 72 t-so c.
N o.
M/A N /A M /A I7.3 1-8o o No
. M /A N/A N/A t74 t-81 N *.5
.N es N/A N/A N /A 17 5 t-as A Nes.
Nes
. N /A M /A-
_l.76 l-SC S No N/A N/A
._ _ H lA..
l D1 1-8Gc-No N/A N /A
.._,. N /A
-- 17 s_ t-aiA Nas.
Nes
. N /A
.__..N/A i79 i-s la No N /A N /A ieo t-n c-1 Mo N/A N /A
..N/A l
161 l-St'C.
TeS No Ne. S S e e.
Ce t cf.
Pc.3c 43 le2 t -te o Nes
.N*S
. N /A N /A i
I83 t - s e E.
Nes No
.Nc5 S.- cale.
P-e S'O 194 t-sew No N/A N/A-N/A I 85 t-esy Mo N/A N/A N /A Mrig Method #
alllh p.166,7-82 m.=::::. = _
G N b b e C M ill. 4 3 c.
Job No. 23 as - o4 c CEent 4
Sestr4 "T a pe r a. d T r a n s W ion 3 oin t S.7. F.
At E 3 vip m e n-i-
%datinriNumber 2 3 2 a - a ca.- s I p=.
SheetNo.
8 Asneen T
Dene Rev.
Rm Dean Rm Dane An Dess M
/
X X
X X
X 7.; :
c_
eInla4 G--J-ff**
<( W A'4
$ u.pmen-t s.T. F:.
E.T. F.
c e m m e n 4,3 N o.
Pr = b.
E AB-A ccowa4 d E f f ec+
F or-14 Acccew n 4cd ORIGa* A t neALYl>4 F o r-Ie6 i-BsY No N/A N/A N/A 887 l-e8E No N/A N/A N/A
- I BB l-sq Ns No Mes se _ c. tc Po n e. 5 2.
P } e. 56 189 l-9o Y e.5 No Nes sec. c= tc.
i9o I-91 No N/A N/A N/A 191 l-92A Nes No N e.s S e e_
CeIc.
Peg c. 40 1 9 2.
1-92 8 No N/A N/A N/A 193 i-93A Yes No Y e. s S e e. Ca ic. Pose _ st 194 l-9 S E N c.s Mcs N/A N /A 195-l-94
.No N/A N/A N/A
- liG t - 9 5-Nes No Nes S c._ cm te.
Pc 3 c 63 19 7 l-9s A No N/A N /A N/A 19B l-9c8 No N/A N /A N/A 199 l - 9 ' C-No N/A N/A N/A 20o 1-94 D Mo N/A N /A N /A zol I-974 - l Yes Nes N /A N /A to e.
t-*l7 6 No N/A N/A N/A 203 l-97 c.
Mo N/A N/A N/A 2o4 l-97O No N/A N /A N/A 2 es-2-970 Yes Ws N/A N/A 2oG t*9A Na5
. Y e.s N /A N/A Bo?
a-ii B Ne5 Ye.s N /A N./A aos I-t wA -1 No N/A N/A N/A 2e9 l-issa
' No N/A N /A N/A.
l 2Io I-I ss c.
Nes Nes N /A N/A 2I l-135 0 Nss Yes
.N/A N/A ata t-iss e-1 Nes Yes N/A N/A 213 1-13E F Te.5 Yes N /A M/A
-"" 2 14 l-ISO F Te.S No ics Sea. Cm\\c. Page G4 2IS.. 2-u oF TcS No its S e 3. Cetc.
P 3 c.. e,s
.E IG l-f roG Tc5 No ics See GTM 69303, //3 /84
~~ 217 2-150G Ye.S No Tes Co r r a \\e 4 e d -to A B-t-15cCv als i-iso H Yes No Y e. s s.
c.ic'.
Gs 219 2-15c M Tc5 No Yes Cerra l.4 d -to A e-t- tso H
.220 t - iso 7.
Nes
.No Ne. s See ca ic.
P= 3 c.
ro Ncs s e e.
c., re.
P c e_ 7 2.
ee) e-iso r Ne.s No 222.
1-150.T Tc5 No Tc5 S e c. Ca l c. P o s e-74 F-166, 7-82 Cheddng Method # j Wl=:.M :
M--
. i!
L ;=::. -
i l
)
. Oldito C1 Hill,Inc.
Job No, a s 2 s-o A s Cient rus\\
Sitioct To pe < c.d T ca n si-4-ion s o;n + s. m. T=.
A-v s q o ; pm o n-g-Csdrs datiriri Number z 32 s - E Q - S i F-SheetNo. cf Revtson gll" Det Rev.
Does Rev.
Dune Rev.
Date h
Date M
I X
X X
X X
Paperw.dra c_
s /eila4 CP-*- Wre4 eWf/w s.r. p.
S.T. F.
C o m m e. n-t s ap.pmed N o.
Pro b.
AB-Accounded Effect 7:o v-N Accoun4c.d oesswu nent.v:,
s= o,-
22.s 2 -isoT Nes No Yes s. e.
ce t c.
P 3 c. 76 ee4 i-isiA
.Nes Ye.s N/A N/A
- 2 " s-i-is B Nes Nes N /A se e. ccr N s9 sos # i/se/a4 rag i-is ic.-i Yes Nss N /A N/A
.a 27 t-isio-i No
.N/A N/A N/A 2aF I-15 2.
NeS Ye.s N/A N/A
- 229 t-is3 Ves No Nes S e e-ca ic. P.3 c.
78 23o i-is4 Ves Yes N/A N/A _
2.s t 1-155-Nes Nes N/A N/A est t-is6 Yes t4 o Yes s e e. caic..Pa3e. 19 ass t-is iA No N/A
. N /A N/A a34 l-is re Nes Mes N /A N /A tar t-is sc N o.
N/A N/A N/A E 3G l-isS A No N/A N/A
.N/A 237 t-iss &
Ves Yes N /A N /A a38 t - i s ec.
No N/A N /A-
. N /A 2 39 l-iss-t Yes Nes N /A N/A e4o
-iss A-t Nes Nes N/A N /A 2.41 I-Is s B-i Ye5 Tes N./A N/A 242.
t-Iss c.
NeS
.Yes N/A N/A_
- 243 l -is s o Nes
'V c. s N /A N /A a44 i-is s e.
Ne.s Nes N./A
.NjA a4.5-i-is s s:
Nes Yes N/A s /A 24G t-isss Nes Yes N /A N /A E47 l-lGSM Yes Tes N/A N/A 2.4 8 l-t&& A No N/A N/A N/A l
TA9 l-Isc 6 No
. N /A N /A N/A 250 l-lgs c.
No N/A N/A N /A t51 l'IG6 O No N/A N/A
.. _.._ N /A 2 5 2.. 1-1674-1 Ye.S N/A N/A Sa me. a s A B-i-ic7 8 - t 253 1-as7er-3 Yes N/A N/A See. G.T H. 69 303 1/3'f 84 7
254 l-86 7c.
Yes N/A M/A sa me. a s A B-t - 15'7 B - 1 l
255 s-1670-1 Yes N/A -
N/A Sa m e. a s AB-i-t' 1 B-t 2sG i-Is 1 E.-
Ne.s N/A N/A s me, a s A e-t-Ic 1 B-l 251 t-16 V -l
.Nc 5 N/A N/A Sa m e a s A o 187 b-I l
2ss t-iss No N/A N/A N/A 253 i-agS N.
N/A
. N /A N/A Checking Method # y :=L - -
F-166,7-82
. MMW.~ ---.,
GAedys G Mist,inc.
Job No. as e 3 - o 4 c C5ent -tm s i Subject T o p = r c. d i eo e s i +1on r o.'n + s. r. 5:.
A+
E q u ;p en e n 4 CalruilsdinriNumber 2 3 2 3-E G.- S I y=.
SheetNo.
io Rousen T
Does Rev.
Does Rev.
Osas Rev.
Deer Rev.
Osse M
i X
X X
X X
Properor,ed c.
efnlgA Chamar Md8 ^ s As%f N o.
Pro b, Eguipment S."I. 5:.
S. I. 9:.
C.o m m e n +.s AG-A CC*u^ 4 5 d E'94ccY fro r-A ccou n4 c.d gasonon Msw2 F o r.
2Go t-i 7o No N/A N/A N/A 26I i-13(
No N/A N/A N/A 26a t - i a.
No N/A N/A N/A 2c3 l-i'74 No N/A N/A N/A ac4 No N/A N/A
. N /A 26.5 l-reA Ye5 Nes N/A N/A 2GG t-n as Yes No Yes s e e. ca le.
P 3 t_. B o EG1 i-87 9 No N/A N/A N/A 2G8 t-s eo No N/A N/A N/A 2G9 2-18 I Yes Ws N/A N /A 27o i-tes No N/A N /A N/A
?. 7 ?
l-18 8 No N/A N /A N/A E ~) 2.
- - M No N/A N/A N/A I
l l
t Checking Method # j 1*.**e--
F-166, 7-82
. Ell;%%WJ:::;;::. --
Sib 6s S Hidi,inc.
Job No. 23 a 3-o4 &
CEent Tust
& Hart ra pa re. d T em n s i-t so n -To k + s.2.F.
A -+-
G.,u sp y
.. +
cahdannn Number asz s-ma-s i v.
Sheet No.
it Reneen T
Does Rev.
Does Rev.
Det Rev.
Does Reu Deas m
i X
X X
X X
2
-_" ^ t--
01:s104 chemer e
//.//v5 i
. Pre bl e. m.., A o 1. t o O - [
- EAXIEE STRESS RESULTS Plant Allowable Calculated Condition Equation Stress Stress flode S. I. F. Description Sh
'I'9 E\\E G G81
\\'
ICOOO DI3 Normal and 1.2 53 Upset 825 687 I9 ieooo Emergency 9
1.8 s
=
1 h
42E4
'87 t9 t ') o o o Faulted 9
- 2. 4 sh 4af4 6 87 19 36000 Normal and 10 S
2Ul g
U set P
54 l 7 68/
t.9 22500
!!ormal and
~* 'i G 9 l
Upset 11 Sx+ 5 3 gg4; 37,,q 3/50o
/
Checking Method # ln::e m m F-166, 7-82 7....--.
_. 3;::T.;;=W.~:
7
,@lbbs OHits,inc.
Job No. 2 3 2 3 - o4 6 Cient Tust Subject T a e= re. d Tra a s i-4 'an
-T a'm -t-s 2 T=.
A -+- EE 9 u s
~. c.. +
o r ah dannn Number a 3 a 3 - m.a-s i F=-
SheetNo.
i t.
l m
iza one n=
oom nw o=
n=
om nw oom m
i X
X X
X X
r.
=c ehsles Checher SVe*
gA//yf i
i il A
,. Pto bl e m.,. A 6 - t I
F.hXIMG STESS ESULTS i
Plant Allowable Calculated Condation Equation Stress Stress Mode S.I.F. Description Sh 5e3 i
]
No 1 and 8
y ggg qq g,$
UP,, t I s'oo o d
9 ' ?-
Normal and 1.2 Sh 9
Upset gggg cy e, g, cy
\\ecoo Emergency 9
1.3 S D
h EoS 6 37 l *I 27eco Faulted 9
2.4 Sh 2o86 3'I I9 t"?ooo Normal and 10 S
63D g
Upset 12 5 E 1 99 g. c]
22 foo Normal and 7' 7 G 8+8 h A
13634 99 i-1 Upset 11 37 soo l
f Checking Method # j Wem F-166, 7-82
? " * # * ** * * ""
l
.....y.
,Gibbe S Hill,Inc.
Job No. as e 3-o 4 &
CEent Tusl Subject Ta p. re. d Tra n s i so n. To ' n + s.2. T=.
A+
ta, u :p, e. A--
P.nh dahmi Number a 3 a 3 - a ca. - s i p=.
SheetNo.
is w
3lc-osa n=
osm n=
o.m i n=
om.
nw om M
i X
X X
X X
Preparw e4c sleste+
cnesa
- 9HWA s/:oM
, Pro bl.em... AD.I - Il B
--2-..
'EAXIMUM STRESS RESULTS Plant Allowable Calculated Condition Equation Stress Stress Mode S. I. F. Description 5"
Sh l
No.al and 8
I O Cl 6 5'06 l9 Up, t igooo Normal and 1.2 sh 9
Upset 4 39 q 506 19 iBooo Dnergency 9
1.8 Sh SEl4 fog l *l E-) oo o Faulted 9
- 2. 4 sh I6
- f. 9 52\\A
'3 G C O O Normal and 10 5
t 4 75-A Upset go 3 so6 l9 32500 Normal and 2 #3 S+S h A
~
yeog 5o6 87 Upset 11 37500
^
... 2..
l l
Checkin jmm
..g Method #
F-166, 7-82 m,
M = M*~ 5 - m ~ ~ *=~ ~
O l b d e B H ill,i n o,
Job No. c.s 2.3-o A s. C5ent
\\ vS\\
9fp-4 Tax pe r-d Tra n s i -t ; o n "Jo'i nt S.T. F. A.& E g u '. p r e n Y cahdatir=1 Number 2 s2 s-e at-s i s=.
SheetNo. t 4
%n w
oen nw nw one nw pen nw osa M
i X
X X
X X
Prepaw-3 "c.
s/n/s4 ct_
wew seht/w
..-...--.=.:--:-.---
._ P.ro b I a. m. A. 6 - i. y 2. 7, R e. v. 1 _,_._ _..... _.. _.
7.AXIMUM STRESS RESULTS Allowable Cale'ulated Plent Cond2 tion Equation stress stress Mode S. I. F. Description
' erg 33 4
gg g
g,g No 1 and 8
UP,, t iGGoo
- 059 Normal and 1.2 53 9
Upset 77l2 g
Iq g cg 7,g o
~~
Emergency 9
1.8 sh 8449 1
19 270eo Faulted 9
2.4 sh I
t.9 8449 oct 84 o f
Normal and 10 s.
IC6 3 g
a4oo i
1.
Upset 27G5o
'i 7 i *J i
Normal and s+s n I
l.9 a
Upsat 11
? O 6 ro 4425o n...
l t
F-166,7-82 Checking Method #
2:nc%.
lELOh.h%
l
.2 2..
- e. - n mm..., - _
l Gibbs O Hist,inc.
Job No. a aa 3-o4 s.
CEent rus1 M "Y 9p py_ y. pere d i r. n s s -4 s o o go
,4-S'. I. F A+
E 7"'F hah datinriSkmig e 3 2 3-E. Q.-
S t F-SheetNo. is-m T
Does Rev.
Does Rev.
Dane Rev.
Does k
Dane M
i X
X X
X X
Properw S - C.-
8/ss /84 C _= ;
% ? "-
6/s/f6+
y t.
' _hh h % ~ t ~ 2-O*U A.
m EAXn M. STRESS RESULTS i
3 Allowable Calculated Plant Condition Equation Stress Stress Mode S.I.E Description Sh ggg gg g,g Norypal and 8
Ups,ct i6 GOO d
'~
1.2 Sh Normal and 9
bpset 946O 5~l I * #l t c) T 20 5 'o E
Emergency 9
1.8 Sh Io i n 8 5- )
l *1
- e. *1 e e o a.
Faulted 9
2.4 Sh IOtt8 FI I9 3984o C
Normal and 10 S
3-51 1.]
Upset g3gq E7GSO H 2 7 l' Normal and 8+8 h 5-l
- 1. 9 A
Upset 11 g3g3 A A 2 50 l
(-
F-166,7-82 l
Checking Method # !' ced::::2-w.==. =
n... -.
s as\\
Gibbs C HIII,Inc.
Job No. 2.s 22 - op c.
Cient
&Nare T
- o. r e d.
i r., s. +i e n Ta i, + S. t F.
A+
E v' e m
,+
l Cahdehnn Number 2 s 2 3 - s.a_- s i F:.
SheetNo. t ro n,
n y
ones nu Den am Does an Date am Does M
I X
X X
X X
r,r da c-slo is4 c;
duVed l _: _i -
i Tr~d(IAM A 6- \\ - 27, Re v.1..
.... l T
F.AXIMUM STRESS RESULTS i
3 Plant Allowable Calculated Condition Equation Stress Stress Mode S. I. F. Description Sh 1/77 Norh.aland 8
3g g c) 7I76 UP.s,6t 16 Goo a
1693 Normal and 1.2 53 9
Upset 7408 31 l3
\\ c1 ci 2 0 y
Emergency 9
1.8 Sh 7452.
31 I. C C
ElB80 bn c 2 Faulted 9
- 2. 4 sh
- 4st 3a 19 3T840 3-e94 Normal and 10 5
Upset 3g i, q l
E7 6 50 Normal and 4 C ~7 I S+S d 3g
,, c)
A Upset 11 44Ero
)
-... _p _. :--
... i.. _ _!. _L,r--.
._a..
ma:::h F-166,7-82 Checking Method #
!' c".,,..MW."'""
1.
. _ _. ~ _ _. _ _ _.. _. _
G ibips O Hist,sn c.
Job No. 2 3 a 3-o 4 4 Clont rust
'9m ra p=.ce. d rra a sWi e n Ja' n +
S.'r. p. A -y s3 u p m,-+
caindashn Numhar a 3 n-e.a-s i F SheetNo. n neman T
Dane nw ll Osse nw oms now.
Den nw asse qlllll3 i
X X
X X
X
%=c--
eInInA c; =
FM' s'M/s4
_...----,.u.----
Pr-ble.m
.A G> 2'B, R
- V-4 5
~
EAXIMW. STRESS RESULTS Plan; Allowable Calculated Condition Equation Stress Stress Mode _ S. I. F. Description l 53 c52G pqq q
g,g Norpal and 8
Upset i c, c, o o 2817 Normal and 1.2 53 9
4t lG Upset 5390 i99go t
Emergency 9
1.8 S
~' ~~
h EG8l 41 I3 E9eso C M 't O Faulted 9
2.4 S3 s c, e 1 41 19
'S9 84 o tm Normal and 10 Sg.
Upset 41
{,g 64 Il 27eal S *f O I Normal and Sx+ S 3 gg g,q Upset 11 t
g, 444El
)
j F-166,7-82 Checking Method # j mmm
. mLW :;,a l
,Gibbs C Hill frH::.
Job No. 2. 5 e3-o4 6 Clont TusI mil--M ra pe r s.d ~T rea Wii+i o n 3on+ S. T. 1:.. A + E g v' p m e d
('.nh 6thnri Nt,..t+: e s z.3 - a cL-s i v=.
SheetNo.
ie Romersi 17 Dane Rev.
Due Rsu h
Rou Dess Ru Dane M
X X
X X
X Proper =
E a c.
e /,1s4 C- _-
9@
6 ft!Y64
.:. - - L -
P ry.b l e.m A B-t - ?. S
@*V. 1
-...2.
j l
l y.Axn;Ur. STRESS RESULTS l
4
-i Allowable Calculated I
conb$Eg y
lon Equation Stress Stress Mode S. I. F. Description E458 Sh l
I Norpal and 8
' OI lI 7O l
Ups,et gqgoo I
'M5 f
Normal and 1.2 S3 gog i.g l
Upset g g.7 g I CI 9 '2. 0 Emergency 9
1.8 sh 50\\
I *]
552o 2.cl 8 8 o Faulted 9
2.4 Sh GS2O 50I I *l 3984O OM Normal and 10 53 Upset 50t I. c}
2782.)
l
'"'? 3 I Normal and 8+8 h A
ri 5'o 1 lq Upset 11 4442)
. 4 _.._
.....+,..._.r.
.i.
-7 F-166, 7-82 Checking Method # !' W::m m -a m =. =. _ -,.
5Nbtie C Mill,Inc.
JobNo. a s a s-oA c Ciert 1 uS\\
l RNar*
ra p =. <-c d T r, n s 1 -% n 3.; A S. I.i=. A -t E q.W p
.c.n +
l r.ah natinn Number a 32.3 - m at - s i F:.
SheetNo.
t et m
=
o.m nu.
t-nw om nu om nu one X
X X
m X
X Preparoue c._
eb,le4 c=
W
, ru % <
. P r b 1.c. m A tb - 1
- a. s, R = v. i
- EAXIEE STRESS RESULTS P.lant Allowable Calculated Concition Equation Stress Stress Mode S.I.E Description 2GCO Sh f.
1 and 8
831
- ,c}
gg t66oo
.j "i0C7 Normal and
- 1. 2 Sy, 9
83) g,g Upset 7g i *1 *I n O
\\
'O # " O Emergency 9
1.8 S,y B31 1'
7406 2986o
<.... c
'~ ~
~
Faulted 9
2.4 Sh 7 4 O (o OSI l9 3*!84 o Normal and 10 SA*
a 5&
g3g gq Upset E 7 8 2. I 41CI Normal and S+Sh 9MO 83\\ I.9 3
Upset 11 444al
...._.b
. 2. _:
2.
F-166, 7-82 Checking Method # jco m m -
. 2.22-
_ _ -- _ " " "_' _._ _.~ _ _.
G ib b s S H ill,in c.
Job No.
- 2. 32.3-o4 c C3ent Tusl Subjed Ta p= rc. d Tr. n s i-4-i., tow + s.m. T=.
A+
u,u ;p. m.. +
cahdasinn Number z.sa3-ee - s i p=
ShootNo. 2.o mm m
om an omm n=
can nw om nw oen m
i X
X X
X X
7 _, --.: c.-
ehsles O ech r
($$P4 gff ff(
.. Pro ble m. A Cb - t - 3 0 - )
~
- EAXIMUM STRESS RESULTS Plant Allowable Calculated Ccndition Equation Stress Stress Mode S. I. F. Description 870 Sh Norgel and 8
IGG 6 4i I* I UPs,et (66oO Normal and 1.2 Sh 9
Upset ggg4 44
- i. 9 t 9 42.o Daargency 9
1.8 S t
h 3245-44 1 *l a ct 8 00
^
Faulted 9
2.4 sh AA
- 1. *l sug 39 e 4 e 1
Normal and 10 5
'M4 A
Upset 2G30 44 I3 a'1 c s'o Normal and e 2G t S+8 h A
4 E9 6 4
i' Upset 11
.A A 2.S D Checking Method #
jn:: c ' e _ m F-166 7-82 M M 5 " m'*"" m ~= ~ ~ * ~===
=. =:.-.
n.....---
G ib b s O N /ft,In c,
Job No. n s a 3 - e4 &
Client Tust Subject r ci p re. d T en a s i-H e n Je h+ s.2 T=.
A -+- TE, u. p m e n +
Cakulabon Number 3 3 a 3 - aa-s i s=
SheetNo. e.t w.
Dem w.
osa w
w one w.
oan su omm M
i X
X X
X X
Prepwor-drec_
F/'(194 ?
w mm spiys+
1 L.._
I. L. ; :....
...i...-.
hl-
.-.----r '.:
.Pr bl.e. m...Atb..t "S 4 EAXn:UF. STRESS RESULTS Plant Allowable Calculated Condition Equation Stress Stress Mode S. I. T. Descriotion Er2 S3 Uorpal and 8
iGai 19 Upset i GG N 2ed7 Normal and 1.2 53 9
g gq 44 i. c}
Upset l 'T 9.E O
(
Emergency 9
1.8 Sh 7 l'7 8 44 l *)
a9eso i
Faulted 9
2.4 Sh 797B 44 l *)
sele 4o Normal and 10 S
47i6 l
A Upset eqso q
g,g e.1 s s o Normal and 6"7 8+8 h osst 44 lI A
Upset 11
~
AA25O
... -... __ 7. _.
.-;-.--,-.-.2.
s I
- r... : i t-i--
i_._..
. l.....
. '6
- t i
.i i.i i
.... a.1.
s
.a _n F-166, 7-82 Checking Method #
! C '! O.* R E " a~1!~ tar -
Gib6s E Hill.inc.
Job No. 2 32.3 -o A &
C5ent iust Sutiect i c p e r c-d r t o n e i-+- ; e. roi n e. r. F. M E i - r:. - e - +
rairs dahnn Number r. sa 3-s.m.- s i p=.
Sheet No. 22.
moon 33ll=
Dem Rev.
Does Rw.
Does Rw.
Den Rev.
Dem Mi i
X X
X X
X Preparer _e. c_
e /,3 t u
'QV9M' s,.;/1* /4 4
~ ~ ~
. Pro [bte.-n, A Gb 3 4 A
'F.AXD;LK STRESS RESULTS Plant Allowable Calculated Condition Equation Stress Stress Hode S. I. F. Description
'*5 Sh Norpaland 8
i3,7 gg t,9 Upset 18 M O Normal and 1.2 53 9
Opset 222f 2~76 I.'}
- 2. t 9."G 0 1
Emergency 9
1.8 Sh 243i E'7 6 l3 S2.940 Faulted 9
2.4 Sh
'S
'9 2134 4 3 't 2. o 333I Normal and 10 S3-Upset 6329 70 I*l E8 07E i
\\
l Normal and 4
'i 8+S h 276 1.9 A
Upset 11 7636 4637S-1
~
..s.
Checking Method # jcomm-F-166, 7-82
.M.M ?%"M - - m m e
esMs C Mill.inc.
Job No. e3 a 3-o4 c.
CEent i usi EsNard tapere d Tre, s i4 i en To..d S.I. F M E -
- p - e et C.nindannr1 Number a 3 a 3-a ct-s i p=
SheetNo. e.3 m
T Dans nu n a-Rw Does Rw Dans Aw Due M
i X
X X
X X
Pfeper" ?'G G l'1 l FJ C^~
W/2//64 "PhElem. A C: - l - $ 4 C.
- EAXIMIE STRESS RESULTS Plant Allowable Calculated Condition Equation Stress Stress Hode S. I. F. Description
?
Sh c
^
I*l h,"
2 5 '2 3 t
tGGoo P,
d T
- #~
Normal and 1.2 Sh 9
.0 C i,e)
Opset 11 Goo I CI 'lh o 1
Emergency 9
1.8 S h
^
aciOBO
'3893 Faulted 9
2.4 Sh
- EO 13899 l 'l gef 8 4 0
'OO 3
Normal and 10 S3-
.c) 4 go Upset i
.p_ g 3, _]
E'1 G 50
' C- ' i Normal and 8+8 h 4 60 19 A
Upset 11 2398O 4 4 2 5'd i
.I
.2 F-166, 7-82 Checking Method # j cwa:::6
.m.w3,.*.% h -.
i
- a. e wn. io aoeNo. 23z3-ou cw ru s i
@ "Ti:4 pe re d TfA 6 S [-i- (o.,
T o~i n -t-B. T. F:.
A+
E n u lp y,c,,
l'ah dahnn Number a 3a 3 - eo.- s t F SheetNo. a4 n.,-
e om m
om.
nu em nu o
nu om.
M i
X X
X X
X Pmperw -d*C S/r5/M owner e sys/Ar
~
f[okiem.,h%-t.A2h "F.AXIMUM STRESS RESULTS Plant Allowable Calculated Condition Equation Stress Stress Mode S. I. F. Description 51 N S3 UDZ7 pal and 8
9l
- 1. 9 I o ?. 3 o U set P
t5900 Normal and 1.2 Sh
~
9 Upset g gqq g 9{
- t. 9 19 o 6 0 Emergency 9
1.8 Sh 91 19 E 86 20 Faulted 9
2.4 Sh i347I 91 I9 3816o Normal and 10 S
' 'f A
Upset 9l 19 I t 69 a7 4 7 5-Normal and E 9 ' ' l 8+8 h 9l l.9 A
Upset 11 11398 i
l 43377 l
g e
me i
Checking Method # ;cc'd:::::L
~
F-166, 7-82
- i c====== -- - -- -
,Gibbs E H1/1,Inc, Job No. e.s a3-o4 o Client Tust
' Subject rm p. ce. d rea a s i+ io n To W + s. r. i=. A -t-E, u lp m e.d-Calculabon Number a s a 3 - m.m.- s s 5.
SheetNo. 2F Rev: son T
Date Rev.
i Date l Rev.
Does Rev.
Date Rev.
Date M
i X
X' X
X X
Preparer-ata c-8h4/s4 c~m w Wm o M 's +
I
'...;. *... L._
._.._L..._.
.. _. 2_. : _ __t.
-.P.ro_bl e. m.. A ch - 1. 4 6 8 s
'EAXIMtE STRISS RESULTS Plant Allowable Calculated Condition Equation Stress Stress Mode S.I.F. Descriotion
- I Sh forhaland 8
i 12 8 19 5ec Up et gggoo 47E Normal and 1.2 S3 9
Opset 12 8 19
'1 1 A S LCl4$0
\\
Emergency 9
1.8 Sh 848o 12 8 l9
- 2. Cl l G O 4Acm Faulted 9
2.4 S3 8480 12 8 19 38980 Normal and 30 S
id1r l
g Upset S4 87 12 8 l. Cl 2.~155O Normal and H: 'G S+S h A
gggo ig g l, c7 Upset 11 A31Sb l
.;.3 r..
. i, i -
h...
-, -.c 1..
-.-----.i i -. '-..
. i I
l
.i.-t
- 1..,
l
.i k..
,..I j;
.e
' i
!.i i _J. '
Checking Method # jcan*P?~
F-166, 7-82
.c!.*m?n%%
- ~.....
Apib b e C H IFI,In c.
Job No. 2323 -o4 re, Client Tusi Subject r ci p. re. d Tra n s i se n -To'in + s.m. v=.
A +
E., u sp m e m +
Caiculation Number a 3 a 3-a at. s i p SheetNo. aG Reneen W
Date Rw Dem n Rw Does Rou Det Rw Dale X
X X
X X
M Propeer.,a.c.
stois4 chemer W s/ v/vft l
l
.L m... _. w
.. i..
....- ~
..s-.
- ~~-.*-w-*
_8.bI.O. M... b.h " k
- 7b
.._,._.-,-1I--.-...---+--d---
7.AXIMUE STRI:SS RESULTS Plang Allowable Calculated l
Condition Ecuation Stress Stress Mode S. I. F. Descrietion Sh 2A M Iorpal and 8
6g 2G E 19 Ps,et M200 i
5305 j
Normal and 1.2 53 9
i Upset eq g.9 IcoSo 4
20640 t
1, l
Emergency 9
1.8 Sh 1IS9e 2ce.
i9 So9CO i
l l
Faulted 9
2.4 Sh 2 G 2.
l.g r
I i 5' 9 8 412.8O Normal and 10 5
73EO I
A Upset l4a38 2GE I.C[
2.7B00 1:ormal and 1'l57 S+8 h A
Upset 11 2CE l. ')
4.roo O
.,._._......... _..: a _. ;_.....,.
...._. 2.
i i 2.
.. _ _e..
+ - ' -
r- - - -. - -
--'3 i
- . i..
.. i i
'1 i.'
i.,
. i..!
Checking Method # ' E*,a:::2.m F-166, 7-82
.i L m,. ~. ~. -. ~...
e v e m m w m. m ~ ~...
- e em::~~. -
m----
GNbes C Mill. Anc.
Job No. ast 3 - o 4 &
CEent Tust Subject r a p. c=. d T ra o s -+. io n
-T ='sn-t-s.~n. F:. A -t-E, u ip m e., +
cahdesinn Number a s2 s - m.m-S t F ShootNo. 27 M
i X
X X
X X
Pmpeer-e-c sh3/m cnoner W e11iM Pro ble m., A rb-I - 5 2 4 3
'NAXIGK STRESS RESULTS Plant Allowable calculated 1
Condition Equation Stress Stress Mode S. I. F. Description I
Sh Mf No., 1 and S
gggg ggoo g, q D,, t 17800 4
i Normal and 1.2 Sh J O Opset
,,gy iioo g, c}
21 $G O 8
Emergency 9
1.8 Sh l
11 5 5-110 0
- 1. '1 32o4O Faulted 9
2.4 sh i
11 F F 1100 l.Cl l
427E0 Normal and 10 5
O A
Upset i
O ll oo 19 269So Uorma1 and uC6 8+S h A
g i oo I.3 Upset 11
. 44150 l
u..._.
t..
?
J e
Checking Method # j' 4. &-- - -
F-166, 7-82 m
=.m - - ~~.- -.
.Gibbs O Hill. Inc.
Job No. t 3 as-o4 G Cient Tu s t
'RNarv r., p. e e. d Tre s i +. n so i e -N-s. c. v=. A + E y. p -
-t-cah datinn Number a 3 2 3 - tsc.- s t F-Sheet No. ae Rowman gll=
Dese me Dess Rw Dans Reu Dese Row.
Dane M
i X
X X
X X
.n
- 6c elr1iM We'- t h ifn+
J _.. _ - -_
P r_e.b t s. m
. A rS - l - 78
- EAXIMG; STRESS RESULTS
~
Plant Allowable Calculated Condition Equation Stress Stress Mode S.I.F. Description "C
53 o]1and 17 2.9 9'7 li 8
P.,.
15'o o o i
g Normal and 1.2 sh 9
Upset 36G7 Cf7 l.9
\\8000
,,c ~e <
~
Emergency 9
1.8 sh 5o45-9'?
i.9 27000 Faulted 9
2.4 Sh E0 4 5~
9I l. ')
"3Goco
!4f Normal and 10 53 go3 gg i,g Upset 2esco
'##f Normal and 8+8 h A
p_7 6 5~
9 ~J l.9 Upset 11 1
375o0
.....2..'
Checking Mcthod # lcea::::L-F-166,7-82
. W.% T ':0.", ".4
,Gibbs O Hill. kno.
Job No, a s 2 5-o4 6 C5ent Tus1
)
Subject ra p. ee cl r r-e c. -k n 3o.4+ s.r.F.
A+
h u
- p m e n-t-P. airs dehnn Number 2 3 2 3 - E ct - S i F.
SheetNo. P.cl newman
3l
Dans Rev.
osse neu osse neu ones now.
osas m
I X
X X
X X
prepam-d-c-- *Ia Its vve A 4 hlN+
I 1
J t
Pr 41=-m A e
.l-ES
--_J..
EAXIMLE STRESS RESULTS Plant Allowable Calculated Condition Equation Stress Stress tiode S.I.E Description Sh
'D3 No. 1 and 8
, 3q3 gy g,q Up, t is ooo 4
' ?, C !
Normal and 1.2 83 9
Upset 0 5~
I'3 2586 IBcoo Emergency 9
1.8 S h
'S c ol l 6f l. '}
P_ -) o c o Faulted 9
2.4 Sh 3 o c) l 6 S-I. '}
36o00 Normal and 10 5
W2 3-Upset I4 iO CT l.3 E E FOO Normal and 8 'I 7 f i
8+S h Cy l,}
A Upset 11
- 2. 8 o 3 375o0 I
- 7.
eo
=
\\
l 2.
t-
... a l
Checking Method /' j med::::::Lm F-166, 7-82
. = _ =. _ _ _
[~~----~~~~.--~~~-
/
Gibbe S HIII. Inc.
Job Nu. z s 2 3-o A G.
Cient Tus1 nNart Ta pc ee. d Tem n s -H,n T o '. n -t-s. r. 1=.
A -+- EE9 u in w..., +
r.nh natinn Number 2 3 2 3 - u.at.- s i p:
SheetNo. 3o Revaan ig' Dem Rw Does Rev.
Duas Aw Data Rm Does M
i X
X X
X X
w& c-shsist Chomer 9,*e c
, A f/**
pF. bie. h. A e> - i-s 9 o
~
~
~
~
- EAXIMUM STRESS RESULTS
^
Plant Allowable Calculated Condition Equation Stress Stress Hode S. I. F. Description Sh 435E Nor; pal and 8
1.425 4406 Ups,et igooo Normal and 1.2 S3 14o33 9
Upset 4 7E 1.425 I O 2O I iBobo Emergency 9
I*8 8 h
4 JE i.425 2 -)o o O 2'W ic 4 e G Faulted 9
2'48h 4 72.
l.4 25 S6000 EI I
Normal and 10 S
c1oeo g
Upset 4~/E I.9 17 119 EErco Normal and i336E 3 + gh ME I'3 3
Upset 11
.g g 5 g y g.425 37500 D ege.as a i tow. bt
. s = =. n ey +. p a.s e.
P re s s u r e.
S-t re ss u.
P O.,
2 5o 0) (, t. 9 )
4 226. psi.
4 -t n.
) (. a st) k: 2500p's.
(.i. 9 ) (. 75) = 1 4 25' O. s l'.'1 e n,
S.I. F
-4. e U
8.49
=
p
-t n.
. a s i
.a.
5.T. F.
fo r Eg Io 8
19 S it e
E ya+E 7 E
to cm F-166, 7-82 Checking Method # ('sm.'dlll:::L--.
f Gib53 S Hill,Inc.
JobNo. 2 ses-oA s C8ent Tust mhiar* rei p. re. d Tc= n c i + *. n.To '. n -t-s. r. y=.
A+
E, u ;p m e d-CakxJiation Number a 3 a 3 - am.- s i p SheetNo. st w
w Dem nw osa ma one new.
osse men osse M
X X
X X
X n -
,- c e/n/s4
^
e 7m
.As/svi I
.....L,,._....._...._....._..___. ;_,_,....
. P r.. b l e.,v i., A S E*I C)
'.c..
. 4.r,eq p.p en.s,n = 4 c h -t o...b +or.n :. ci, r v s e. 4 S4r=ss T n% e a s -C.*c. +.*. n 7:. c.+. r-
~
'F.hXIMLK STRI:SS RESULTS Plant Allowable Calculated l
Condition Equation Stress Stress Node S. I. F. Description 435E 8h
=
Norpal and 8
43 4 72 1293 Upset isooo
'"33 l
Normal and 1.2 53 9
4 yg
- i. gq 3 Upset isoop I' 9 G
t Emergency 9
1.8 Sh i
4'72 1 293 aco76 e rooo ic 4 e c l
Faulted 9
2.4 Sh 4 Ja
- i. 2=i s t
Eco7 8 i
3gooo i
Normal and 10 (2) 5
"'o I
3 1
Upset 47E
, 72 4 1
15 5 % 3' i
earoo i
'33'E t.724 i
Normal and S+Sh 4 '? 2.
A i, gg,3 i
Upset 11 1.9 9 E E i'
3; goo l
.S..T. F.. s J. S + o.. o o.3 G
.O.s-t. S ' - d-.. -(. ^ 5 E.., C - d c.
8 *
- 4 ' n 1*. '/s t..a Tn
'__... E,..'d.U U*Swa NC l
52.Fs 13 t o..OO.n 6(#._.
. ) +.*b. 6
.o.313' L,_i_,_t,"I't.4 Fe$ tic ~4G 13, ECN-I
. _1. "I
.e..a j
- a.,i n F
.=.ic i.
,(,t.7 24 ) (.. i s),j, j,....i ! ',.' e '., j ;.
.L.I l
D.2,F.P l*7.z4 ;
j
.l
=.,.. a i s -
l_..... i. I l
.s.r. m
-c. c my o 4 9, s
J.;a4 m
ggy :g l 3 +, y g o,1 ;,,j ! ;
S. 2. F 4,c E 9 io s F-166, 7-82 Checking Method # j ct::'c%
c. M 2 a*,*J.'.
.sibbs O Nus. Ano.
Job No. r_3 a3 - o 4 G. Cient w 5i gf ;_j Top,ee d Tr ns,4...o T.. e + e.2. F. A+ - E g p m e < t cahdesinriNumber a 3 a 3 - e c.- S t F SheetNo. 3 ?
a a-nw r--
nov.
oman nov.
osse nu osse w
q3ll=
X X
M i
X X
X Piepam e = <--
thmfu Cheeker 9M W /hh 1
e
. P r* \\a t e m A t h.\\ - C o
~.. -
f MAXIHbK STRESS RESULTS Allowable Calculated Pignt Condition Equation Stress Stress Mode S. I. F. Description Sh No{t g 3q 4-}
(,cg
. 1 and S
UP,,
ggooo
~=
Normal and 1.2 sh DPset 4333 47 g. c}
l0ooo s
Emergency 9
1.8 Sh 4742.
47 l9 E "? 0 0 o t t, " c Faulted 9
2.4 Sh 4 7 4 2.
4 ~7 I Cl SGooO UL Normal and 10 53 Upset gcgg 4g
- 1. c}
l 22500
E
- Normal and 8+8 h 47
- 1. ')
A Upset 11 g377
~37 5 o o 1.
l 4
l.
F-166, 7-82 Checking Method # g mmm.,..
. !!:;l:fLW.=ll::::l. -
Gib5>s O Hill. inc.
Job No. e 3 23-og 6 Cient t u s i sh Nace rn, p. r A
r c. a s. + s. n :re. e + s.r.7. A.+ q w.* p -, +
cain desinn Number a 3 2 3 - E. G. - S 1 =
SheetNo. 33 nenman T
osse nw osse Rw asse mm ones naa osse M*"1 8
X X
X X
X prepamr,d. c._
e/ aft.4 c-W
+hfA*
.. : L....
_ ~ _,
. P er b t e m
. A 6-l- C o.
- EAXIMbK STESS ESULTS Plant Allowable Calculated Condition Equation Stress Stress Mode S.I.F< Description
'* M Sh Norp.al and 8
37E?
I I9 Upsjt 15000 E M
Normal and 1.2 S3 9
Upset 39 5'G I
I9 ieo6o t
i Emergency 9
1.8 sh 4toa i
i9 E7000 Faulted 9
2.4 Sh 4to6 l
I3 36ooO ti E t Normal and 10 S3-Upset gg44 l
g,q C2500 3'40 Normal and 8+8 h A
Upset 11 OC6 I
ld 3'?roO
(
- 7 l
4 6
F-166, 7-82 Checking Method # 3gce::::::=.==--..-r---.
@ibbs O Hill, fac.
Job Nn. n, a 3 - o4 c.,
C8ent rusl 9 9 r,per d. 7 raas.+ -o
- 3*a+ s.r. f=.
A + s p ;p,,,
,, +
~
cah
- Number 2 3 2 3 - E.G.- S t F=.
SheetNo. '54 Amenon T
9 Rev.
h Plov.
Osas Asv.
Dean Asv.
Dess 9
1 X
X X
X X
Properor,4,c c.
of,t134 Wh^
N'sf/s #
. a -...L i- -
A(b-\\-4o
_ Pre _%fa m
- EAXIMbK STESS ESULTS Plant Allowable calculated Condition Equation Stress Stress Hode S.I.E Description
'"I Sh 37, 4g g,cy No al and 8
Up,t t.T o o o
,a
?"D Normal and 1.2 53 9
Opset M29 48 I* cI IE000 Emergency 9
1.8 Sh 4o98 48
- 1. 9 2"?000 l
Faulted 9
2.4 Sh 4 egg 48 1.9 SGooo
'~66 Normal and 10 S
6 g.
24oF
- 8
- 1. 9 Upset 22500 Normal and Upset 11 Ex+ Sh 4g g,q
,tg 37500 l
. 2. 1..
. _. L *..
l i
-.q 3.
Checking Method #
c*d:::::6 F-166, 7-82 a:=.=
@ &pdes O Him.koc.
Job No. e s a 3-o4 c. C8ert T w a t
' ilhNard "Taq p er d i re e s -t *
- n C*i n+
S.2. F.
A+ E.i w. p e e 4
~
r'.mirn AntinriNurfter a 3e.3 - e.a.- s t 5:
M No. 3 s-n-a-neu Dess Rou Does Rau Dess Asu Das m
g
""'1
/
X X
X X
X Pseparer Ec Oh jad r __
W s,
(/ fNt
..._...--L.
, Rre..ible m., A tb-t - C C EAXI %E STRESS RESULTS Plent Allowable Calculated i
Condition Equation Stress Stress Hode S. I. F. Description 2eq Sh No 1 and S
's4I I* 9 35 3E UP,, t iFooo 2
1 1.2 sh Normal and Upset 43gg iS4i t.9 18 coo i
Emergency 9
1.8 S h
472'3 IS41 t9
- 2. ~7 00 0 t a s e.
Faulted 9
2.4 Sh 4 7 2. 3 8541 l.3 36000 "M
Normal and 10 53-Upset Arg7 1541 t.9 22500 j
- # D
Normal and S+5 h 3 4 g, g ig4g i, og A
Upset 11 37.5"o O l
...--....t s
i.
... s...
F-166, 7-82 Checking Method # l'cc m -5::::.'4.7? W - -..
/
Gikke C HEII,Inc.
Job No. 2 3 23-oA r.
Cient m s 1 kers r - p r, a t c - s. %,;.n Te..,+ s.~x. F. A
- E p ' e -
-+
r.nhdaewiNumber 2 32 3-act-s i p SheetNo. 3 6 Renmon T
Does Rev.
Dans Rev Dune Rev.
Dese Rev.
Date M
i X
X X
X X
r.,- -& c_-
rh its 5pe>
s'hi//v cr- -
7
. P ro % \\ e nn h 2.~ \\ ~ C O
. l 1.-
- E A X I M L F. S T E S S R E S U L T S Plant Allowable Calculated Condition Equation Stress Stress Node S. I. F. Description Sg 25es No 1 and 8
4qgg
- p4 g,q P,j isooo M"O Normal and 1.2 53 9
Upset 758l l'F4
- 1. Cl 1800o
- see, Emergency 9
1.8 Sh 9 2 8 2-174 n. c) 27000 At: 5 Faulted 9
2.4 S3 C1 2 8 2.
- 4 t,q SGcoo Normal and 10 5
P*4 3
Upset 6GEo 13 i.3 22Soo "C'
!!ormal and 8+8 h A
i 3. g g i-74 g, q Upset 11 3"75"o O
.I i
4._J.
Checking Method #
at: :::::L-F-166, 7-82 w = =
.. ~... -.. _ _ _
Gibt>s S Hill.inc.
Job No. 2 3a 3-o4 G C5ent Tust Subject T a p re. d Tra a s i-Hon -T o'in + s. C. F.
A -t-Es u
- p m e... +
l r.ahdatinn Number a 3a 3 - e a.- s i s=.
SheetNo. 37 nommon T
cans nw osse nw case nw asse new osse m
i X.
X X
X X
- .,==sc el,sIu o ncher f/* *
</nyr +
V/ lle m. A S - l - G I A - 2_
~
EAXIMLK STRESS RESULTS Plant Allowable Calculated Condition Equation Stress Stress Node S. I. F. Description Sh E72 B 1
. 1 and 8
Ft e3 l
19 1500o 1o!O Normal and 1.2 S3 9
Upset 5ygq g
,,q 18 coo
~
Emergency 9
1.0 S h
EOOA I*
E~ poco 2## 7 Faulted 9
2.4 Sh 58E4 l
ll 36o00 Normal and 10 S
S '! 9 l
A upset j
-; g g
,, g eesoo l
!!ormal and
O7 S+S 3 l
A i
Upse't 11 q
l, T7so O Checking Method # j2:Wa::::1--
F-166, 7-82 W W " "
'Gibbs 8 Hist. Inc.
Job No. 2 323-o4 6 CEent Tusl Sutject T a po re. d T ra n s i-4-ion -To ~i n + s.2.T=.
A+
s, u ;p ~, e.. +
nah datirvi Number a 3a3 - Ea.- s t v=.
ShootNo. 3 e I
Renman T
Osse Rw Date Rev.
Osas Am Date Rm Does M
f X
X.
'X X
X Properor,&c ebs fe4 cr --
5Wa4 Mr PA "PIr' 5L e. M. A'6 G l A - 2_
._.I
~
~
~
~
e
- EAXIMLE STRESS RESULTS Plant Allowable Calculated Condition Equation Stress Stress Mode S. I. F. Description Sh 1724 Norp.'al and 8
Ups,let 15'ooo 3'#E Normal and 1.2 Sh 2"7 9
UP*
31 2 "")
2q l. *)
I e o:co Emergency 9
1.8 Sh gyooo 398E 24 19 Faulted 9
2.4 Sh E
39 8 E 24 f. c) 3r,ooo Normal and 10 S
466 A
Upset 809 29 19 2 2 5'o 0 Normal and 2 29 E 8+8 h Upset II A
4gg 2q 17 i
31500 L
Checking Method # [ cat;'a::::2.--
F-166, 7-82
. W.Wa=,h-. _ - ~_.
G i b b 's O H il!. J a c.
Job No. 2.3 a 3 - o4 c. CEent rust sh ers r. p. r e.d T e-e s. +.. n T.,+ s.rt s=.
A+ e.y 'e-e a+
r.nh dahnn Number a 3 a 3 - e a. - S t p=.
SheetNo. S9 m
y osa nw.
osa nw asse nn one aw oss m
i X
X X
X X
wr6-c s/ ole 4 C&
VM
- if*+
js.e S t m A th - t - G n O EAXIMIN. STRESS RESULTS Plant Allowable Calculated Condition Equation Stress Stress Hode S. I. F. Description E#33 Sh Nor7 pal and 8
4683 442 89 Ups,et igooo Normal and 1.2 Sh 9
Upset sg 34 44 2 19 t 8 0'D 0 Emergency 9
1.8 S EB30 y*
462 19 g 3 77 2 7000 eeao Faulted 9
2.4 Sh 5'377 462.
I. *l 36000 E4 Normal and 10 S3 4 6 2.
- 1. 'l Upset 54/
22.500 Normal and 8+8 h 4 c2.
l. C)
A Upset il g;gg 37500 Checking Method #
2:t mm F-166, 7-82 m WA=, - - -
Gibbs E Hill,Inc.
Job No. e s e 3 - o4 6 CEent Tust Subject T a e= re. d Tra a s i+ io n -To W + s. r. y=.
A _,. i=,,, p, e, +
Calculabon Number 2 3 23 - E c. - S i p:
SheetNo. 4o Rev axm W
Date Rev.
Date l Rev.
Does Rev.
Date Rev.
Date lll::l;1 l
X XI X
X X
Propu w.@ c-ehs/g4 l cnocner We Wi1/W l
_._.-_.'.L.
, P r_o. ble. m
. A lb-E.C 2. O 2-
'F.AXIGE STRESS RESULTS Plant Allowable Calculated Condition Equation Stress Stress Mode S. I. F. Description 7e2 S3 florp,tal and 8
1486 2 los t.i Ups,e t 5'00 0 b540 Normal and 1.2 S3 9
Upset 48E6 2l03 t.$
\\booO t
Emergency 9
- 1. 8 S:
- 2. M G S E ll 2l03 l9 2"'J ooo EN Faulted 9
2.4 S3 g a t -}
2303 l'I
~3GCOO Normal and 10 S
4E I
3 Upset 23E Elos 17 e a Soo
!!ormal and Moi Upset 11 Sx+ S_h 20 L7 375o 0 u._....
I '
a,_.
i
.s
....i J Checking Method # j !:::WC,%-
F-166, 7-82
.c.;Ju n t'.=f
~
- 94bbs C Hill,frec.
Job No. e 3 23 -o4 6 C3 erit Tusl Subject Ta P* re. d Tra n e i+ son -To'in t G.2.F.
A+
E,uspw...+
rah dahnn Number a 3 a.3 - es a-s i F:
SheetNo. 4 i Rennen igl*
Dem Reu Dom k
Due Rou Den Rou Dom M
i X
X X
X X
Wo-c
- brie 4 enemer SMA 4/n'/e+
~ ~ ~
Pro b l e. m, A th - t - G 2. F-
~ ~
- EAXIMLX STESS ESULTS Plang Allowable Calculated Condition Equation Stress Stress Mode S. I. F. Description Sh
'7 6 L Norpal and 8
g2eg g,q Ups,et isooo I82 8 Normal and 1.2 sh
'd2' 9
Upset 1E96 1.]
t9000 Emergency 9
1.8 S
' ' ' '9 h
I296 19 27000 3ao3 Faulted 9
2.4 Sh E'
'E 9 6
- 1. }
G6 coo ggog Normal and 10 S
i96 3 g
Upset iggg g,q 5g 5 o 2ESoo
!!ormal and C9E5
~
S+S h Upset 11 A
gg g
1296 l.7 375c o e....
g.
.m.
e $
e e
O e
e e
4 J.
Checking Method # l2::rmm F-166, 7-82
.====== - m - ~~
elb6a C H4ss,inc.
Job No. z 3 e s -o4 s Client Tust Subject ~T a p. ce d Tra a s i-H..,
-T o'n + s. r. T=.
A+
E.9 u lp...
r.nh datinn Number ase s-E o.- s t 5=
SheetNo. 4 2.
manen izl-osa nw om, nw om nw o.m nw om.
M i
X X
X
'X X
Pape=r-&c ehsle+
crw
,We era +-
i 1
3 Pro ble.m A tb - t
. 6 ~5 c./ 3
'KAXI%K STRESS RESULTS Plant Allowable Calculated Condition Equation Stress Stress Mode S. I. F. Description Sh 90F Norpal and 8
17 E O I
I9 UP.s.et I5ooo a
Normal and 1.2 sh
'
- S 'I Opset
- 2. o o 6
,\\'
ieoco Emergency 9
1.8 s
cq h
- 2. ) o 7
\\
I1 2'700 o Faulted 9
2.4 sh l
2107 5
h3 gg,og Normal and 10 S
tc3 g
Upset 30b I*!
225oo 1:ormal and Iic 6 8+8 h A
Upset 11 l
I3
? \\of 37 S~o o i
I l
Checking Method # jce
< c = p= =. = = = m
-- -~
p.166, 7-82 m.,
. - =.
'91 s C Mill. Inc.
Job No. e 3 e 3-o4 s C3ent Tusi Subject n= p. ee. d T ca n s i -Hon To'm t s 2 i=. A -t-En u lp w. e.. +
cahdatinn Number a 3 a3-e ca.- s o=.
SheetNo. 4 3 w
w can nu osa nw o..
nw osa n=
om M
/
X X
X
.X X
w& c--
shslu cnemer
%m itn'fo Pr ble.m, A 6-t-G4 A i
+
'EAXIMIE STRESS RESULTS i
Plant Allowable Calculated Condition Equation Stress Stress llode S.I.F. Description Sh 7EE to al and 8
, q g g, ggo g,q P,,
t 15000 d
Normal and 1.2 53 I549 9
Upset 2M3 760 I'}
IBodo
C 4 Emergency 9
- 1. 8 S,y 3238 7Go l*)
E7000 Faulted 9
2.4 sh 760
- 1. c) 3238 26 coo Normal and 10 S
I o ey g l
A Upset 2o73 76o l. c) 225"o0 i
IIormal and E Ci 3 8+S h A
Upset 11 gggg 7go l,g 3,soo CheckingMethod# lW.WMR %-,-
cm~
F-166, 7-82
Gibbs O Hist, Ano.
Job No. a 3 a 3-o 4 s.
CEent Tust
' Sutset Ta f.= ce d Tca n s i -i-i.,
To'. n-t-s.x. v=.
A -+- sa y o :n,.,.. +
f'ah % Number a sa 3-e et - s i F:
SheetNo. 44 mensen T
Dans nw Does Rev.
Dess mm Due mm Dem M
I X
X X
X X
Pmpeer-+ c-e/esla4 c=-
wm snuw Pro ble.m A b G 4 F:-
' N o 4 c.
S tre sses
-t==L4en 4 ro m n o d e.,
g c 6 -)
- F.AXIMbK STESS RESULTS
[
Plant Allowabic Calculated Condition Equation Stress Stress Mode S.I.E Description Sh
1 Norpal and 8
3346 1066 l.9 Ups,et ggeoo Norr.a1 and 1.2 Sh E
?' 7 9
Upset 3e7o to66 19 lSodo Emergency 9
1.8 S 2
h 4t84 lo68
- 1. 'l
?'-
Faulted 9
2.4 sh 4 ie4 lo66 l. 'l 36oco Normal and 10 S
5229 l
g l
Upsep 233F lo6s 19 l
Easco t
I l
Eormal and E"I 8+8 h A
Upset 11 i
g683 1068 13 3~/ 5~o O
_a l
e a
Checking Method # j h**- e- -,-
F-166, 7-82 l.. _... _....
.. a.%CMM -
y -- -
t
'Gibbs S Hill,Inc.
Job No. aszs-o4 6 Cient Tust Subject Ta e= re. d Tra a s M ion C o k -t-s. 2 T=.
A t=i, u :n m e.. +
r.nhdatinriNumber e 323 - e at.- S i F.
SheetNo. 4r neveen T
osse Rw can Rw osa mm l om nw osa m
i X
X X
X X
~
&c -
sbsis4
~
WA 5m /s4
~, Pr.o ble m.. A tb-l- G4 F i
M e -& e:. :
Giresses
% %sn 4 ro m n acLs.
F 8 3. 7.
- EAXIMUM STRESS RESULTS Plant Allowable Calculated condittoa Equation Stress Stress Mode S. I. F, Description i
Sh
'877 Norp'al and 8
ress 11 U s6t 3566 P
15~ o o o Normal and g
1.2 sh 2i93 DPset sa3s i.g l'
4 tBooo Emergency 9
1.W Sh 4 F el 8 5838 89 t 7oo o L
Faulted 9
2.4 sh l
4gg g 5838
't 9
~S G c o o Normal and 10 S
e7 Upset g
533g g, ci I655-I 2Esoo Normal and 2746 S+S h
- 836 I9 Upset 11
~
A 52a) 37s o o l
l e
t
.-vr---
w e-
,-w e---ww
-w---e
,ew-w1u.,-
m-ww-r.--
3
,w amer w-w-e w
- - - - - -w 7
=
Gibbs S Hiss,inc.
Job No. z se3-o 4 s, CEent Tusl Subject Ta f.= re d Tra n e i + io n To ' n + s. r. F.
A+
EE n u l p w,.-.. +
r'ahdatinn Number e3 : 3. s at - s i n SheetNo. 4 6 nemen T
om n=
om n=
om n=
o n=
o M
I X
X X
X X
.3 = c.
e/,5/ 4 c=
TM-
- w4-
' P ro 5 t e. m. A o-l- 7 6 A
- EAXIMG STRESS RESULTS Plant Allowable Calculated Condition Equation Stress Stress Mode S.I.F. Description Sh 527G Norpaland 8
g o o 7, Foo I. c[
Upset Is ooo
-l Normal and 1.2 Sh 6
Upset
,o39g Soo 19 i e o o.o Emergency 9
1.3 S s 7 ct 7 ti014 600 17 p.....
I Fa'.u 'i sd 9
2.4 Sh
.l1 C G O 2.
25844 500 y
brmal and 10 S
~
, Upset 3
i3 p 3 j
2 6 4 9 p_ #- Soo I9 E P So o Normal and I9 a i1 S+85 Upset 11 A
500 I')
3ssiq;,
m roo Y_
IE u o-\\ s o n 10 CYCe e N e k h o w c o c.c e g u c ks o.o, t t lS Iess kca q 37Sco
{SI,
" T h e r c. O r e.,
o K.
I,=,* _ m m F.18A 70 A9 N
I s.
Gibbs S Hits,inc.
Job No. e 3 a3 -o4 s Cient Tusl Subject Ta e= re d Tra n s i+ ion T o 'i n + s. 2 i=. A -+- E.sutome.A-
%W Number a ses-s o. - s t y=.
Shoot No. 47 mensen T
Dane an osse aw omne noe osas new one E
i X.
X X
X X
cr_-.d=c ehs/s4 r.
w sis us+
. Pro bl e. m. - A 6-t ~/G A khXIMUM STFISS RESUL'tS Plant Allowable Calculated Condition Equation Stress Stress Mode S.I.F. Description i
Sh "M
1 OT)?al r.nd e
zGo l,4 gg ps,et i 5' oo o Normal and 9
1.2 sh
- 58' Upset 2Go g
I.425 1 8 c o. o
\\
Emergency 9
1.s sh cl838 2Go I.425 27000 Faulted 9
- 2. 4 sh 260 lA25 h&OOo 2 6 *7 G 3 Normal and 10 S
I413I g
Upset 2 6 BM+
260 l9 225oo i
Normal and i E iC G 19 8+8 h 2so j
Upset 11 A
I'43#
gggoo 3 iO 2.4 t
l
, E)ua + io n to
- c. y c e e. d e_cl h o we v t-(j e q u e -h i o n il 15 I'TS ps
. T h e r c 4 e r t...o. K..
. -t h a n 31 ro o i
Pr e ss u r e.
s-A r e ss 3.r o o p s i E y el =.
E 5+
Ep. l o y
s.Gibbs S Hfft,frec.
Job No. e 3 a 3 -.4 6 Cient Tust
&Nart Teie. re. d Tra a s M so n T o ~i n -t-s. r.. T=.
A+
Es u lpm e n +
Cak:ulabon Numbar a3 z3 - e a.-
s i p.
SheetNo. 4 s Roween T
Date Rev. I Date Rev.
Date Rev.
Does Rev.
Date M
i X
X X
X X
r., --2 -c_
s/wis4 L
C - _-
Gm s'/sifM '
.. L,... -. - - -.
Pr.o ble. m.
A CS - t - s o 8 S' *l 0 8 N. 4a. -
S + c = 5 5 =. s & V. n @m n,4%
~
-EAXIMtM STRI;SS RESULTS Allowable calculated Plant Condition Equation Stress Stress Mode. S. I. F. Description
- #7 Sh
'7 '7 l 7-.
I'1 t
g g.og 461E Normal and 1.2 S3 9
gar i,q Upset ggag l8000 t
Emergency 9
1.8 S
'I ~# = 2--
h S cl 7 2, 59o5~ I. 9 t'i ooo 1
Faulted 9
2.4 Sh 8972.
590f 17 3C000
}
Normal and 10 S
L e 'f L A
ggg sqcy 13 Upset 8t.500 575 E Normal and S+8 h g o g g,3 rior i,3 A
o Upset 11 235o0 I
t t
.w..'.
I..
..- s -. - p..... -- - e-r-
... - - 7. -.-. -
.., -, ;.. I - 7.-
i L.-_.....
.! ; -. = !.-
n-
..r !-.. i f :
eJ. -j- -
u....
l..,..;
7 7....
{-
4-:-.
.i
..! I i
- . i '...... i._i. -
F-166, 7-82 Checking Method # i2:1 u.m 12l::l::.ill:::::;P.2;;;-J.
Gibits S Hill,inc.
Job No. t 3 e 3 -o 4 s CEent Tusl Sutiect T a p. re. d Tea n s i-t-so n To k + s.2.i=.
A+
ta, u p m e., +
r.ah datinn Number n a 3-E o. - s i m.
SheetNo. Acf i
m w
oen nw osa nw omm nw omm nw een M
/
X
'M X
X X
, - 4c B/erla4 O ncher 6/m
- 4/n'N +
.. P ro bl e m. A th-i - 8 8 C-.
- F.AXI)M* STRESS RESULTS p
Allowable Calculated Conb$$g1on Equation Stress Stress Mode S. I. F. Description Sh
' ' 'I 'I Nor; pal and 8
?240 l
l *l Upset
- 7 goo Normal and 1.2 sh 2
6 9
Upset 44 g
g,eg 2 i 3h o Emergency 9
1.9 s 573 h
1 i
~6 2 0 4 0
?5D Faulted 9
2.453 4 e S c[
l
- 1. C) 42720 l
Normal and 10 S
Si 17 A
Upset g
g, a'18 s o Normal and
- 1 ? 7 C 8+8 h A
Upset 11 g3 4 g
g,q A 5'l SO e
l Checking Method # 'm i
al::::lL-F-166, 7-82 mm
G i b ai a S M ill,iss o.
JobNo. a s e 3-o 4 6 CEent rust S M T a p r e. d s ra n s. + i e n Tc. e + S.I.F.
A+IE 5uip m e n-t-i cahnatinn Number e s a s-e o - s i F SheetNo. so Revemon
g*
Does Rev.
Dane Rev.
Dans Rou Dans Rev.
Does M
i X
X X
X X
m _. - 3:c siaIsa WM*r ift1/ W
~ph~Et~ ~
A e>
.1
.8 6 E.... _.
2.
- s. m.
- F.AXIMUM STRESS RESULTS Plant Allowable Calculated Condition Equation Stress stress Hode S. I. F. Description sh Norpal and 8
,d 2 O G I
Ii UPs,et gggoo Normal and 1.2 sh 9
Upset 4 C B Cl 8
- 1. *l 21360 s
Emergency 9
1.8 s 4F h
SEIC 1
f.9 32040 2,a5 Faulted 9
2.4 sh F2iG i.3 42720 Normal and 10 s.
ME7 g
Upset G I9 2_
i
! Cf
~
e.7 9 so Normal and 44Eo 8+S h A
g g
g cy Upset 11 45'1SO
?
I O
Checking Method # j m e- -
F-166,7-82
. W.L%h= -
. ~... - -
-e s
a
_r m __.,
GibNs S Hill, fac.
Job No. z3 e s-o4 6 CEent Tusi sh N ar*
r ip.c d m a ns. + i.n
- ro. A+ s.r. r=, A+
E 3oip~en+
r.miendalian Number a 3z 3 - ea.- s i F=.
SheetNo. s t t
Memelon T
Dese Rev.
Dune Rev.
Date Rev.
Duas Mm Duas m
/
X X
X X
X Properor,& c.
eh3Je4 e
57nw4 I
,. P r:o M e.cn A tb
.1 - B B E._
MAXIMUM STRESS RESULTS l
l P14nt Allowable Calculated
. Condition Equation Stress Stress Mode S. I. F. Description
""4 Sh 2 2 6 Cf 4 09 I9 Nor) pal and 8
Ups,et gggoa 19 4 i Nermal and 1.2 S3 9
Upset 34gg 4og gg Et3GO Emergency 9
1.8 S 2 "
h 397l 4o9 t.]
32040
' e,~
Faulted 9
2.4 Sh 3911 409 19 4
42120 A
Normal and 10 53 4 cc}
i,g Upset g
y
~2 7 cf 50 2 D Normal and 8+8h A
33 g 4og g,g Upset 11 A535O
._'_.-t.
\\
i ccm F-166, 7-82 Checking Method # j =:::".f='l::r.=
8
i
~
s g;g,epy,p g3 M"*" TSP -
M.-..r t
Gibbs S Hill.Inc.
Job No. a 3 2 3 - o4 G CEert T u s 1 99 rm p r = cl Tra ns,+i,n T o. d - s. r. V:.
A+
% wipmea+
Calculabon Number a 3z s-s G.- S I F:-
SheetNo. K 2.
m T
Does Rm Does Rev.
Does Rn Does Aw Deae 3"ll1
/
X X
X X
X Properor-@ c_
S/,3/s4 checker M
$/a r'/V8-
......,....-.-.--,...------L--.-
, %.Pcp.ht m
.A B.-l-SCf
'F.hXIMUM STFISS RESULTS ha 41 k
P Allowable Calculated Conknt tion Equation Stress Stress Mode S. I. F. Description
.s" g3 sc 3 5-7; Norp 1 and 8
g ej g7 65o g.9 Ups,et ggaoo 4
Normal and 1.2 Sh 9
Upset eeqg Sto
- 1. c}
2134o
\\
Emergency 9
1.8 Sh e33g 810 l *I 32040 Faulted 9
2.4 Sh 2 3 ~6 I 910 3*}
4 ? ~7 2. 0 Normal and 10 53 nS9 Upset Sto I.9 2'7C) T O Normal and DH S+8 h 8to 13 Upset 11 A
g 3 o cy 4r750 w.
o g *. e ee.ee
_GD. -. b
_. a
,.1 6
..J..
_.. % Method # ;cetllll::;6 F-166s 7-82 --
- e
.. a :. x r -- =ww==--
m v~
r
~.. ~
Nibbe S Hill,Inc.
Job No. t 32 3 -o A c C8ent 'Tust RNars r. pe r e A Tra n s'. -t i.o llre.n t s.z. F.
A g.
IEi:, u *p - e nt cahdannn Number a 3 a 3 - e ca. - s i r SheetNo. s3 Revemon T
E=
Rev.
Dese Rev.
Dsse Rev.
Dese Rev.
Dass 9
/
'X X
X X
X Pmperer-.0 = c.-
8hsIs4 1
c+ ^ - ^
Q**.- sIsf/54
\\
.....a-...-,..
Pr.* %\\c m
.A s-\\~.09
'EAXIMUM STRESS RESULTS i
Plant Allowable Calculated
. Condition Equation Stress Stress Mode S. I. F. Description "4L Sh Norjpal and 8
g g,9.
g _y,y g W***
\\~1 8 O O
.i
'M O Normal and 1.2 Sh I
I*3 Upset 259O E 1 ~36 O
\\
'50t Emergency 9
1.5 Sy' I
l9 gggg 32o4o Iso Faulted 9
2.4 Sh e a 5 E.
I l.9 4 2"72 O 7eG Normal and 10 S3-
,433 g
i,3 Upset a '7 9 5 o l
Normal and 8 -) a 9 8+S h I
I3 A
l Upset 11 3 2. 8.T As'750 t
e.4-i i
. -... 9..
O s. 1...
e s
.a
-35Ner#x%v&L N N F-16,6 7-82
I b
e B HIII. Inc.
Job No. e sa1-o e s C8ent - <us\\
&W T= pe r e. A T r. ns.4i,n re. A +
- s. r.7:.
A+ E p' p m e &
Cak:ulation Number e 's a 3 - a at - s i f=.
SheetNo. s s-Rowmen T
Date Rev.
Does Rev.
Osas Rev.
Dem Reu Dem M
/
X X
X X
X
- 7.. _. A sh3/e4 W
shife+
t
, P ee.% \\ a. en A (b - \\ ~ S Cl F.AXI%K STRESS RESULTS Plant Allowable Calculated Condition Equation Stress Stress Mode S. I. F. Description Sh 9 17 Norpal and 8
(44
[.9 g4g U skt q g oo P
Normal and 1.2 Sh ti2 3 upset gg34 g44
- 1. c}
'EI360
\\
t' 7 5 Emergency 9
1.8 sh 2238 34 4
' ' 'l 32 c4 o H76 Faulted 9
2.4 Sh a 2 'b8 I44 I '}
4272o
' Normal and 10 S3-le29 Upset g44 g.g 2'7950 Eormal and 2i4C S+S h iq g,g A
Upset 11 l
45750 l
l
...-v..
l
~
l s
w
'm F-166,7-82 l
Checking Method # ismo m m w- --
hib a E Hill,inc.
Job No. e s a 5-o4 6 CEent ius1 Sa *dard
- r. p-re A Tr.ns'.-+.e n 7* ' n+
s,2. 7.
A+
s,,;p m e..t.
c.mindatinn Number a sa s - a ca.- s i f=
SheetNo.
s%
V namon T
osse w.
osse nn ones an osse mm osse m
i X
X X
X X
. e-elaten e
54w s.
g/n754
..,.-..J----J.,-
.L _. _ _
' T.re%\\s m A(b-t-S9
- EAXD M; STRESS RESULTS Plant Allowable Calculated
.Condit2on Equation Stress Stress Mode S.I.E Description Sh 7#6 Norpal and 8
43 19 Upskt
- goo Normal and 1.2 Sh DPset 2565 43 19 2.1 S ig,o Emergency 9
1.0 s 0
h 2 8 6.5-43 lI 32040 Faulted 9
2.4 Sh l
2 B G S-43 f.1 4a7zo 7M Normal and 10 S3 Upset
,3 q 43
- . cl
- 2. 7 9 s o 14 4 C IIormal and 8+8 h 2736 43
!*3 A
Upset 11 l
4575o
.....,. 3 G
2 F-166, 7-82 awkingyeM# L2rMw.-
}
l
.. Gibbe S HIII.Inc.
Job No. e s2s-o A a Cient T u s t l
.ctifnard rm pe re.d Tra n ai-+io n.Te i nt S.Z. F.
A-t E5viemert i
FahdatinriNumber 2 32 3 - E ca. - S i F:-
SheetNo. s7 Reason T I Dem m
osse m
com m
one m
com IEL'"5
/
IX X
X X
X Preparer - e-c.
s/ots4 Cr= ^ -
9m -
sin (s4
. P r. b t e m. A 6-I.- S T
' MAXIMUM STRESS RESULTS l
Plant Allowable Calculated Condition Equation Stress Stress Mode S.I.E Description ME Sh 222, t.9 Norpa. and 8
,7 g 4 Ups,4rt iygoo
'7 6 Normal and 1.2 sh 9
2 2 2.
- i. 9 Upset 2iTGo 2423 Emergency 9
1.8 s I591 h
'2. G 4 3 2 2 2. l.9 3ao4o I
Faulted 9
2.4 Sh 2 E2-I'3
'E G 4 3 42.720 l
l 4E7 Normal and 10 S3 Upset gig 22E i.cl E 7 cf s o I
9i Normal and S+Sb 222. l.9 3
Upset 11 2o;3 45-750
.s i
2, -
F-166,7-82 I
Checking Method #
I's:m:na::::
-3sn.
@lbbs S Hill. inc.
Job No. 2 ?., z s - o 4 c.
Cient T u s l Subject "T = Pe r e.d i r= a s i -W. o "Tein + S.1 F. A+ E g u* p m e 4 l
enin datinn Number a 3 z s - es. a.- s i s=
ShootNo. S a l
m g
Does Rev.
Dese Rev.
Date Rw Dane h
Dese 9
i X
X X
X X
ed = c-shale 4 cneener ye g/d h+
'. P re % \\a m A s t ct O
- kAXnM; STRESS RESULTS Plent Allowable Calculated Condition Equation Stress Stress Mode S.I.E Description 8
a Sh Norgaal and 8
lE24 I l ~/
l9 Ups,et gg4oo Normal and 1.2 Sh 9
Upset g7 o g i l'l I.9 2 2. c'8 0 1
Emergency 9
1.8 S 1
h 1784 Ill 19 3312.0 Faulted 9
2.4 Sh
- -) 8 4 11'7 l 'I 44160 8
Normal and 10 Sg-l Upset I6CI{
ll'7 I-l 2.8i00 IN Normal and 8+S h 3gir 11 7 l. *l A
l Upset 11 46500
. _ - - + -.. _.
F-166, 7-82 l
_ Checking Method # ]' ct*."mm,C ' M U N * - M *
- M "*" ?_....
l
l Slbs S Hill,inc.
Job No. z s a 2 -.o 4 s Cient - t u s i Subject r pere 4 Tv.n s.+i.o cro. ~n+ s. r. v= A+ q u ip <n e nt Cairn datinn Number a sa s - u.ca. - s t F=-
SheetNo. E9 neween iEl=
cans nw osse nw osse nw asse nu osa m
i X
X X
X X
Propemru ao r__
elesis4 i
Chesdier gr:M t -
a__...--._
, Pro ble en. A tb- \\ - 90
- EAXIEE STRESS RESULTS 1
Plant Allowable Calculated
. Condition Equation Stress stress Mode S.I.E Description sh
'97 No al and 8
g 3. ; g p
g,q UP,, t gg4og
- 1 E B Normal and 1.2 53 9
Upset i8ao 64 l *1 2 2 c' o S
Emergency 9
1.s s
'3 h
t 9 c 5-84 I9 3 312 o Faulted 9
- 2. 4 sh
'0'3 l
Bi t. C) l I *l a S-4416O Normal and 10 s.
ii 2 o g
Upset gggg 84 l. cy EBioo Normal and I9'8 s+sh i
g4 g,cy x
Upset 11 ACs~oo l
.., _...... _. J. r --
l
...o_.
l Checking Method # j 2:ta"e--
F-166, 7-82
.E;:.LWJ::::::l.
elb s S Hill,inc.
Job No. z 3as -o 4 6 C8ent ru s i
' p uare w pe r=.1 Tr i n s. -+ '.n reie + s.r.,:.
A+ sp ;p m e n+
P. ales delinri Number 2 3 2 2 - e at. - s i t=-
SheetNo.
- c. o neman T
Dess mov.
Dese Rm Dess Rw Dess Rw Dese i
X X
X X
X
' - s-elalan thiM4
.. Pre u=. m A o-t- M a A..
EAXIMW: STRESS RESULTS i
Plant Allowable Calculated
. Condition Equation Stress Stress Mode S.I.E Description ec4 Sh Norypal and 8
iF28 5 es
- t. et Ups,et g7 goo 9
4 Normal and 1.2 Sh 508
- 1. C}
I Upset i, i g 2 O G'4 0 1
Energency 9
1.8 sh 588 19 i 1 eg g So9GO I
Faulted 9
2.4 sh 666 l*l 1797 41260
'N Normal and 10 53 Upset 3 5 5 cy 588 l. CJ
- ? l B 0 0 E ' '7 7 Normal and 8+S h 606 I'3 A
Upset 11 5o86 4 S~OOO
.,...]
3 F
F-166,7-82 Checking Method # V' ccdlllllll2.m mm
Gibbs S Hill Inc.
Job No. e 3 a s -o4 s Clont T u s t Sutinct Ta per a Tre s -Ho n To'i n + s. r. v=. A+ m 3 v ; p m m +
Cales datinn Number a s e 3-e a. - s i v=.
SheetNo. 6i newman W
Dans ew Dese nw case nw nees nw case HlE1 X
X X
X X
Paperor.,d c.
sAsIs4 W
gh a th> Art
........-s.-.
. P r. b is.m A 6-t - 9..'5 A l
I
- F.AXIMUE STRESS RESULTS l
l l
P14nt Allowable Calculated Condition Equation Stress Stress Node S.I.F. Description ni s' 6 Sh Norfjnaland 8
387 g,q g,q UP,s,et gygoo 7409 Normal and 1.2 Sh 9
387 19 l
Upset g4o 77 213(:,0 Emergency 9
1.8 S B cl 5 3 h
se; l9 g ;o g g 32040 Faulted 9
2.4 Sh 387 l9 iyo l
A t~1 to l
l 478 Normal and 10 53-Upset qog 3 s 'y 19
't'7 9 50 i6 3r Normal and A
3 8'?
I9 8+8h 3io y Upset 11 45250 l
r-s i
..a..
F-166,7-82 Checking Method #
k' m m m,hWM,o me
Dibbs S Hill,inc.
Job No. 2 32 3-o 4 s Clerit r u s )
&*swd Ta pe re. cl. Tr a n s i4io n -To N + S..r. F. A + % vie m e.n +
Cab dahnn Number a 32s - e.at.- s i f=-
SheetNo. G 2.
w om, nu om.
nu om n=
om n=
om M
/
X X
X X
X
-. sc-ehslen
~
^
- %'*A 6fitf64 Pre _ _% t e.m A tb - \\
- f 'b h l
F.hXIMIE STRESS RESULTS
)
Plant Allowable Calculated Condition Equation Stress Stress Mode S.I.E Description 12 3 b Sh Nohland 2 'b + 3 4'A3 l9 8
Upset i, e oo Normal and 1.2 Sh Upset l4 iso 433 19 aisio Emergency 9
1.8 Sh 17262.
433 l.9 3204o cl a e f Faulted 9
2.4 Sh IIaG2 4 33 3. *l 427a0 I4 %
Normal and 10 53 Upset 2 Bo4 433 I3 27 I50 7 6 Normal and 8+8 h
- g. g 4 g.
433 19 A
Upset 11 4s750
_.__.i_._.,
l Checking Method # L' ed:::2--
F-166, 7-82 w -2 n
i
'Gibbs S Hi!s,inc.
Job No. e s a 3 - o 4 6 C5ent Tust 9psve r a p= cc. d T ca a s i+ ion Toi n + s. r.y=.
A -+. s, u ;p m....+
l Cab datinri Number a.3 2. 3 - E a. - s i p.
SheetNo. G3 w
w oen nw oen nu om nw om nw oom m
i X
X X
X X
W6=c--
ehsles checker 9e M ure
~
~
Pro ble m. A @ - l
- f f
$.~. ~
F.AXIMIE STRESS RESULTS Plant Allowable Calculated Condition Equation Stress Stress Ho6e S.I.F. Description Sh E
Nor) pal and 8
2075 IU Il Ups,et i5ooo Normal and 1.2 sh Upset 3.5 q g fo t.]
l 5 OC$ O Emergency 9
1.8 Sh 3*148 70 l3 27o00 Faulted 9
2.4 Sh 7o
- 1. }
3948 SGooo Normal and 10 5
3456 A
Upset G> s 6 6
~7 0 I3 22500 Hermal and d5dB 8+8 h A
Upset 11 3'1 S' O O
-gg4g 7o l. ey e
e e
6
- O e
l l
ISJb s E HEII.En c.
Job No. 2 s a 3 - o4 s Client rusl Subject Ta pe re. d Tra n s i+ ion Co W + s.2 1=. A -t-E9 u i p w. r.. ".-
nahdatintiNumber e s a 3 - e m. - s i v=.
Sheet No. e 4 w
w om nw.
om nw.
o.m nw.
Den nw.
om M
i X
X X
X X
rn;- -it-c s/rs ts4 checker Wn v/n/5+
Pco bte m, A s-s- i so F
- KhXIME STRESS RESULTS Plant Allowable Calculated Condition Equation Stress Stress Mode S. I. F, Description in e
=
gh Nogaland 8
g756 I
l #I UP, set i8 /60 Normal and 1.2 S3 MM 9
U set P
4393 g
g,q P_ 2 4 t 2.
Emergency 9
1.8 Sh 5'388 i
g cy 33768 Faulted 9
- 2. 4 sh 5388 4fo24 I
g~g Normal and 10 S
W g
Upset g744
- 2. 8 i et o Eormal and
- 21 s+sh x
Upset il g go 7
,,9 4 6 oi ro 1
Checking Method # W icmm:::::6
.. _. - -.F-166, 7 _82. _.-. -
m
&Gitibe S Hill,lanc.
Job No. a1a s -o A s CEent rust Subject Ta e= re. d Tra a e i-4-ion To's n -t-s.2. i=. A -+- E.9 u. p w, e. +
Cab datirv1 Number a 3 a 3 - e.a. - s i f=
SheetNo. G s-Ranman a2lll' Dane Rn Duas Rm Due Rn Due Rw Date M
/
X X
X X
X r..
', - c she/a4 mener 75%.
Shi/w-P r;> bl e. rv i... A r$- t..i r o F:
I l
- EAXIMW: STRESS RESULTS i
Plant Allowable Calculated Condition Equation Stress Stress Mode S.I.F. Description 33
'2
- 5 h*
2303 17 I. l 8
P,, t ie7so Normal and 9
1.2 sh
I Upset g,q 2 2. S*t 2 23o9 17 Emergency 9
1.8 s h
Z3 i]
i' 33768
'I Faulted 9
2.4 sh 23o9 t -)
19 4 gg Normal and 10 S
o A
Upset g
,3 O
2869 o Normal and n ' 5-s+sb a
Upsat 11
- 2. q l'7 17 46350
(
.... :.. __.;. L_ '...
2
__. _ 7..,.
.7
. Checking Method # L' 2c'm-F-166, 7-82 l
-~-
I
'Gibbs S Hist,Inc.
Job No. 2 3 2 3 - o4 s CEent Tusl Subject Ta f.= re d Tra a e i -t-se c.
-T o ' n -t-G. 2. F. A E., u lp w. e..,
t c.ah dahnn Nurrber a 3 2 3 - E G. - S1F=.
Sheet No. 66 Revoon T
Does Rw Does Rev.
Does Rw Does Rw Dem ii.= >
/
X X
X X
X n -- - L = c-thsis4 w
checker We v/p y, r P r.. bl e. m, A D-a. - i. ro F..
'F.AXIMG* STRESS RESULTS Plant Allowable Calculated Condition Equation Stress Stress Mode S.I.E Description Sh
' *l "# E
!o 1 and 8
g g,q P,,
as 7so Normal and 1.2 Sh 9
Upset 7,
,,q 225i2.
Emergency 9
1.8 s h
33768 I
~
Faulted 9
2.4 Sh cses l
l cl A so a4 Normal and 10 5
i et 7 3
~2 2. 7 4 l
- l. (J E 8 I cf o
!?ormal and 3 ' G 't S+8 h Upset 11 A
g g,
46ct5o
.1
.p m
e L
Checking Method # ji::2 m m,,
F-188. 7-Ap
l l
Gibbs S Hist,inc.
Job No. e 3 z 3-o4 6 CEent Tus1 Subject T eie= r d Tra n s i + io n -To 'i n + s.2. F.
A+
Eq u ip m., +
P.nhdatinriNumber a s2 3 -
E:.Q.- s ip=-
SheetNo. G 7 l
Reneen igl" Dess Rev.
DWe Rev.
Dess Rev.
Does Rou Dese M
i X
X
~X X
X e& c-e/,4 / e4 chemer M*h zVnfe4 ll
\\
P ro ble. m, A tb-2.-- 1 so F.
j
'MAXD;W: STRESS RESULTS Plant Allowable Calculated Condition Equation Stress Stress Node S.I.F. Description Sh
'*'I No 1 and 8
- 2. 3 0Cf l')
- 1. *T up, e ieygo Normal and 1.2 sh
'2'T Upset 239 17 l9 E E d i 2.
Emergency 9
1.8 sh
'1'T E3 'I 33768 Faulted 9
2.4 sh
'2'f 2So9 1'7 l-9 4go34 Norr.a1 and 10 5
0 3
Upset O
28 l9 o N
l.7 Normal and
- 2, r S+S h A
Upset il 3
g,5 46950
._7 Checking Method # 3:gge F-166, 7-82
.Gib6s E HIII,Inc.
Job No. 23 2 e,- o4 6 Client rust Subject Tc pe rc. el Tre a s i + io n To ' n -t-s.2. T=.
A -t-En lp m e,, +
Calculation Number a 3 2.2, - e.a.- s i v=.
SheetNo. c a Revisson T
Date l Rev.
Date l Rev.
Date Rev.
Date Rev.
Date F4;;;a
/
XI Xi X
X X
Preparer.d.c shg /p4 -
cnocker G*r vi shih+
l c
._L--
,.Pr_o b l e. m.. A 6 - l - I S o H
. - -,..,-.. : c..._.
i F.AXn:LK STFISS RESULTS Plant Allowable Calculated Condition Equation Stress Stress Mode S. I. F. Descrintion s3 m ro S ^? A 3
'I I'3 P., t n a oo I
Normal and 1.2 S3 2G f
9 Upset Fl 2 6
{
q aceA o t
_. a g -
Emergency 9
1.8 S h
3 0 *f G O 1
i I" # 1
~
Faulted 9
2.4 S3
~
5 i
i'I 41280 Normal and 10 S
ii c 9 l
A E"*
- 2. ?_ 2. l l
l.]
?'78oO Normal and
~1 i d o S + S *n_
A Upset 11 bb 4S000
\\
s s,
L.
1._. s -.
.a.-;...
,_L.--
.., g....
t.__. _
,,_m_
..._,___._.-r-----
, I
.t y__..
..1..,.
l
....._....)
, -.i. t.i i.
j --
i i 6
_i..l.
Checking Method # ;h%T h -
F-166, 7-82
- ~ h u
+~
~
p,.
+,;.
[
' Gibbs S Hist,Inc.
Job No. e 3 z s-o4 6 C5ent TusI j
mm T a pe re d t rw s i-4-ion To 'i n -t-B.2. F.
A+
E9 u ip m., +
d M m m a323-E.Q.- Sipr-SheetNo. G7 o,,,
o.
=
o.
=
o
=
=
g i
X X
X X
X N= & c-ehs ten c-gm.. M2iH I
Pre 6Ie m, A 1;b-2 1 E
- Y'
- F.AXIMUM STESS ESULTS Plang Allowable Calculated Condition Equation Stress Stress Mode S.I.F. Description Sh 12 ' f Norh1and 8
g 3 oc7 gy g, eg
%f.'t t87G0 Normal and 1.2 Sh
'2'T 9
@ set 2 3 o cf 17 l 'I E E.II ?
Emergency 9
1.8 Sh
'1'T 7
I 337s8 E3 *1 Faulted 9
2.4 Sh
' 2 ' )~
4gog4 2 Soy I ~)
l*}
c Normal and 10 S
O Upset A
O 28 l et o D
l. cl Normal and t 2, 5-Upse~t 11 8+8 h A
2 30Cl 1/
l.7 469so 1
4
[
L JG ib b s S H 111,In c.
Job No. 23 23 -o4 6 Client rusi i
Subject Ta pa re. d Tec a s i+ ien Co ~i n + s. r.T=.
A -+-
E, u ip m e,, +
Cak:ulation Number a 3 2.s - e.c.- S i v=.
Sheet No. c. 8 nm.on w
o.=
u n v.
oei. I nev.
oei.
n.v.
osi.
n.e osi.
Fra
/
X XI X
X X
properor..e.
s A, f,4 c-Sk**
- W/s+
.,_.L/__.._,........... !__L_:__
.P.r_e b I e. m... A (b i So H
._.!_ r..._.
I i_,_....
.., :. ' -i j J
....; ; _ !._ ' _. L _.. ;..._
..._z.
- EAXIMUM STRESS RESULTS Plant A11owable Calculated Condition Equation Stress Stress Node S. I. F. Description I " ~7 o Sh Norhaland 8
743 1
t.9 Ups.et I"7 2 o0 Normal and 1.2 53 2G9e 9
i Upset 5 i 2 c, i
13 206 A O
\\
l Emergency 9
1.8 S
=T h
1 Ff90 l
I'l l
S o *f G O j
Faulted 9
2.4 Sh
- E 6F90 l
l9 l
41280 Normal and 10 S
iic9
)
A Upset azal l
l-1 278co Normal and 2#4o 8+S h Upset 11 A
F *1 C G l
I.7 4f000
.~
_,. a.._..y ' L
_...u...
7_ _, _, _.,_., _ _i J. r.
t_.._.
..._..__7_
...._._7......._
,.. J _.J..i._...;._
.____ _!.i.
,_7.i
. i
...i _ ;. 4. - -, q.... J..,....
i i
.i..!
- 1... A _
. 1. i 4.._1. L :
'C5ecking Method # m' e m F-166, 7-82
Xpibbs E Hi/I,Inc.
Job No. 23 z.3 - o4 s CEent rusi Subject Tm ee re. cl Ten a s i+ ien To 'i n + s. r.i=.
A+
E., u ip m e,, +
Calculation Number a 3 a3 - e.a - s i v=.
Sheet No. 6 9 Revtsson T
Date Rev.
Ca!e l Rev.
Data ~~
Bev.
Date Rev.
Date ki
/
X1 Xi
'X X
X Pww&c shs/sa. l l
l checew 4's 5 hs/s4.J l
l l
l
.....-,. L l_.!
..Pco.bl e. m. A Q>.1 - ( 50. H i
[.. I._.
-.'. J. 2.
- .!._. c.
'EAXIMUM STRESS RESULTS
~
Plant Allowable Calculated Condition Equation Stress Stress Mode S.I.E Description S3 I215 Norhaland 8
Ups.'et 2303 O
l '}
1")200 Normal and 1.2 S3 12 ' T 9
Upset 230*l
(
l9
'E 0 G4 0 t
'T Emergency 9
1.8 Sh 2
i1 i'
309GO Faulted 9
2.4 Sh
I 2309 l]
t. c}
41280 Normal and 10 S
0 i
A Upset O
ll I. *)
27800 Normal and
'? ' f S+S h A
Upset 12 q
g 4 S*00 O h....
..-p;..;p_..
., _ ; s _. r......
t__..
7..t.,_ L.. _.._ g.J l.'._v.
..z._.L.-.'.
I l
1 t
e p..._
j. s. ; _..;
- .. t
.,l..
4
- 1
- 1.. !
I
+
i Checking Method # ; e,1Th-F-166, 7-82 l
lPMra"' m
c G166s S HIff,Inc.
Job No. z sa 3-o 4 s Client Tust l
Subject T e ee ce. d Ten n e i A son Co 'i n + s.m. F.
A -+. m.,,,, ;, m e +
Calculation Number a 3 a3 - a a. - s i p=.
SheetNo. 7 o I
' Revisen T
Date l Rev. l Date l Rev.
Date Rev.
Date Rev.
Date ks I
Xi X\\
X X
X mwec
- A,/s41 cneew 9&
- 144 I
I
/
l
-,.......,-.-......1=.s
..Pr_o_bl e-m...A 6 Iro I.
.. _L _' J._ _. !.. _..._.... L..L..' _,....
a._.
7..._.
'F.AXI.$;UE STRESS RESULTS Plant Allowable Calculated Condition Equation Stress Stress Mode S. I. F. Description S3
'n s c Norg.al and 8
36'?8 l
I9 Ups.et 17200
/
Normal and 1.2 S3 2c7e 9
Upset 20GMO oe8 I
M
\\
Emergency 9
1.8 S i
h F f 6 5-I l1
'U9 Faulted 9
2.4 S3 5 565-
)
17 4teso Normal and 10 S
I4 64 l
U A
pset 2.92.o.
a.18co l
l-7 tiormal and 342o S+S h I
Upset 11 A
c498 i.
4 s ooO l
.-.--.y.--_-.
-3.-...-
i.,.
l l
i..,.
......i...
5
..nt$
.s s
Checking Method # ; E %* m %,
e.
F-166, 7-82
~~. c.
~. %, -
_ __ Cog.re enn.4 es.s a cowe weh 4
.t!Dib#s E Hill,Inc.
Job No. a 323-o 4 s, Client Tust Subject Tm ee ee. c1 Tea a s i-Hon To 6 -t-s. c F.
A -t-
% u sp m e n -i-Ca!culation Number a 3 2.3 - e.a.- si y=.
Sheet No.
i i Revison W
Date Rev. l Date l Rev.
Date Rev.
Date Rev.
Date
..W
/
X XI X
X X
Preparer.e c_
s/,s/s4 cnocker SA gh Ms+
..'...___.__._._...i.w'--
' _ __ u !_ _ _. ___.
_.._._.J.,.__*__'_.L___.__._.2 i.
' P.r.o b t.e. m.. A S
..l. -. 15.o I_
i i
l i
EAXIMLE STESS ESULTS i
~
l 5
Plant Allowable Calculated Condition Equation Stress Stress Mode S.2.F. Description Sh
T Norgial and 8
2 3c3 Q
t. c}
Ups,et g goo Normal and 1.2 S3 (2 e f 9
Upset 23%
ll I 'I 20640 I'
t Emergency 9
1.8 S
'I h
I* 9 3 o *l 6 O
'I Faulted 9
2.4 Sh 4l280 Normal and 10 S
o l
A Upset O
s -)
s.9 2"? Foo Normal and i 2 i.5-S+S h A
Upset 11 a Sog 17 l.7 l
45000 i
l
^
l
\\
!0
._. _._.'...._. _..... _.,..e 3
B n
i_._......
. '. l [_ L._ ;. _, _ j ' ',. ! _L_.
L. 5,........
o _.
,..,, i i.
.i l
.._.. 1
'l I
.2 !. I l i
Checking Method # ; i~eC, c.2h. -
F-166, 7-82
~
m 4 CNe e.mt:..T 'en ib os criwee we runww srst reesis of onest asens
l Gibbs B Hill,Inc.
Job No. 2 :.,e s - o A s Chent rus1 Subject Ta ec re. ci Tra n c i-H a n Co W + s.7-F:.
A+
En u ip m e,+
, Calculation Number a 3 z3 - e at-s t 5:
Sheet No.
i z.
Rawson T l Date l Rev.
Date ! Rev.
Date Rev.
Date Rev.
Date C%1
/
Xi XI X
X X
Preparer e.c of /s4I Checker 9A ighsA41 l
..@Co_I>l.e. M.
.A D
.?..160 T 1
..:.... _.. _ :... l l _.._._ _ _. d. 1__ ' -.--
3..i...i._'
. i
.m 7.AXIMUM STRESS RESULTS 1
Plant Allowable Calculated Condition Equation Stress Stress Hode S.I.F. Description B
53 M50 1
Norpal and 8
MOf
.I I'
U s,'6t l?Eoo P.
4 e
Normal and 1.2 S3 E5Io 9
pset 4 7 g c}
g
,, c}
2OGfO
\\
Dnergency 9
1.B s 47 h
Socf60 Faulted 9
2.4 S3 2/47 6 2 I *I I
l'}
~
4,gg Normal and 10 S
iU6
}
'~
3 Upset 2367 i.
278o'o 15ormal and 388C 8+S h A
Upset 11 F3 I
I*
A roco 1
. r i --
_.1.._? _ 7 1
e.._
p_..
._I i I (
i i
- j. ! ' :..
i i
6
.}
a.1 i
s
_J..l.
a.
i.
Checking Method # ; r,ees::':h-F-166, 7-82 L"
1Gibbs S Hill.inc.
Job No. 2 3 2 s-o4 ( Client rust Subject ra p= re. d Tre n s i-Ho n Co ' n t s.2. v=.
A -+-
EE.., u sp m e,, +
Calculabon Number G sa 3-etca. - e i i=
SheetNo. 7 3 l
Ro m ~T Date l Rev.
Date l Rev.
Date Rev.
Dale Rev.
Date M
/
XI X
X X
X Preparer-s6-c.
e/ss/s4!
cnemer w
<si/n7s4 Aro. bI e.m.. /% S-E
.I 50 "T-
..._. 2. _. _.... L.! n -.-.;. I 2 ' _, _.
'.,i
- -,i -.... -
A- - -..
...c
.,3 EAXIMUM STRESS RESULTS Plant Allowable Calculated Condition Equation Stress Stress Mode S.I.F. Description i2: 5 S3 Ucrp>al and 8
23o9 t
i.9 Ups,et i 72 oo d
l Normal and 1.2 Sh
I 9
Upset 23o3 1
l-R oG4 0 t
Emergency 9
1.8 Sh 23o3 Il 1-7
- bo9so
"'T Faulted 9
2.4 S3 2309 Il I9 4,
Normal and 10 S
C l
g Upset O
l1 l9 278co Normal and ieif S+S h A
Upset 11 O
I-
- 2. S o 4roco
....:.. l.:
. h...
~
e-
..0-.
- -
- 4. w d. - S=~~
.- f.
i
>ii
-. ~ ~ ~ p s
._ t.
'.1 1 -, t _.. ; _..
7 s
s
'i i
.J..!..
i i
Checking Method # j P3m--
F-166, 7-82 5%'MM -~ ~ ~ * =~ e.-
- Gibbs S Hitt,isso.
Job No. a 3 a 3 - o4 s, Cient Tust rg ru pe re. d T t a n s i+ ion Ta 'i n + s.3 F.
A Eg u ip m c..+
CahdatinriNumber a 37 3 - m.ca.- s i,=
Sheet No. 74 n.non it-osa nw omm nw one nn osa nw osa M
i X
X X
X X
r.
., 2 c._
e/rc / +
Checker W74 y/si A+-
Pr.o ble. m A O-I
.t So T i
- EAXDM; STRESS RESULTS Plant Allowable Calculated Condition Equation Stress Stress Mode S. I. F. Description Sh n'3 Norpal and 8
3787 g
g*g Upset
- 7 goo Normal and 1.2 Sh 273) 9 Upset g g g, c)
EoG:4} o Emergency 9
1.8 S Z1 ' I h
l FG 41 I
t. cl l
309Go l
Faulted 9
2.4 Sh
'D I
41280 Normal and 10 S
I i 5 2.
A Upset 2 l BCf l
- l. 3 E7800 Eormal and 314i 8+8 h A
Upse't 11 g
45000
.J..!
Checking Method #h' i-Xalll2-F-166, 7-82 m
' 'Gibbs S N111,Inc.
Job No. a3 a3_ os c CEent Tust Subject ra p re. d Tea a s i-Hen 7='m + G.2 F.
A -t-SE, u lp m e. A-
).
CalculabonNuni4W e323-e_a.- sip.
Sheet No. 7 s--
moon T
Date Rev.
Den Rev.
Dem Rev.
Does Rou Date M
/
X X
X X
X
&c e/,4/e checmar v+a 44 44
.. _... : _ _. l.. _ _
Pro b l e. ev i. A O..) - 150 "T
......___.a.__
)
i
- EAXIMUM STRESS RESULTS Plant Allowable Calculated Condition Equation Stress Stress Hode S. I. F. Lascription Sh
'E'3~
NO27,nal and 8
Upset 2.309 17 1.9 g y 7, og Normal and 9
1.2 sh Upset 299 O
l.9 ECG4O Emergency 9
1.8 s
'T h
?' S 7
i'1 30960 Faulted 9
2.4 Sh 4;g go 2M 0
\\R Normal and 10 S
O Upset A
2'l800 O
O I3 1:ormal and 12 5 8+8 F Upset 11 A
A 50c o
-2 So cy 17 1.
r e
J.!
CheckingMethod# 1W,ee2.m.
-. EeR5ute
hIbbs S Hitt tric.
Job No. a sa 3 -o4 s Clerit rus1 Subject Ta pe re d Tra n s i-4-ion To ~m + s.2. v=.
A + E,uipme,A-i Calculation Number 2 s 2 3 - a ct-s i p SheetNo. 'tG Reesion T
Date Rev.
Date l Rev.
Date Rev.
Does Rev.
Date EA' l3
/
X XI X
X X
Properor,@ c.,
s/,s/se Cnecker WANa dhth4
~
l
.. _.. _. ;_. a _.; J _ __..
'.Pr_e.bl e.m., _A B - t-l.5~.O.T~
.,_,..j i.i. L.;.'_.,_..._...'._ L '.._.
i
- F.AXIMUM STRESS RESULTS 1
'I Plant Allowable Calculated Condition Equation Stress Stress Mode S.I.F. Description ano S3 Norraal and 8
g j
Ups'et g12oo a
2533 Normal and 1.2 S3 9
Upset 4g,3 g
g, q
- L c G.*A o
\\
Emergency 9
1.8 s 27 7 h
S E S'7 l
l. c}
gog go I
Faulted 9
2.4 Sh
~
5257 l
l. c}
412eo I
Normal and 10 S
h
- 2-A Upset E E G 5' -
l*3 276co i
Normal and 33 8+8 h 1
A Upset 11 c oio I
l.3 j
45000 y _:. 4. _L _ _7......
... : a...
, _ r -.......
6 l l t i.
i
_._._.-.,....._i_._.., s.7. -...
t.
1 o
1 s.
.4
.. h.
3
.......>.l.-
_..._e
-i..l..
t g.1 i
e i
8
.e
.5 4 Checking Method # gh
,i, ____. _.. _. _ _ _. _. _ _. _. _
F-166482,_ _ _
' (Gibers S H/ft, frec.
Job No. 2 a23-o4 c Client Tust Subject r a po re. d T ca n s i -i-ion -To k + s. x. T=.
A -+. n, u ;, m e., +
Calculation Number a s a3 - s.ct - s i y=.
SheetNo. Ty n
on T
on=
nw.
osm sw.
o=
nw.
oen nw.
o.=
i M
i X
X X
X X
Preparer,6. c.
ehsfe4 o
cr e W:
9M/s4 l
.&.:._'_..__W._..___._i a-.t Er bi e. ev.m. A..e - E - % SV.T
._'_.t
..,_:___-,-r
- e i i t
_i_ w_.._.
..,_4
...i_
i
- EAXIMUM STRESS RESULTS Plant Allowable Calculated Condition Equation Stress Stress Mode S.I.E Description 4.
Sh Norgial and 8
2 3q l'I l9 Ups,et G200 Normal and 1.2 S3 12ef 9
Upset i
g-23o9 20G N.O t
i Emergency 9
1.8 s h
a 3o9 Il I.Cl
'3, o ct 6 O
'I Faulted 9
2.4 Sh E309 O
l1 Normal and 10 S
o A
Upset O
Iy I. '1 E"7 Boo Normal and nr S+5 h A
l-Upset 11 230 l'?
l9 45000 I
I
.....g.,....
.,...+...e
.p...
.._......_...s.
i_.
1._l
- 2. _....
_ g._ m _...
7
]
.+',.
i
,.__._,.,_,__..t L _. _.
t..._
7 7._t
- g. i i.. -..
i i
I
.., ;... l.3....
+
t.
z...
- i.!
1..,
!t t
...._J. !
.i Checking Method # ;B:h %
F-166, 7-82
- bb6s S Nfft.Inc.
Job No. 2 3 as - o 4 c CEent T u s i A+ e u 4 m e e+
Subject Ta e'r *. =L vra n s.'+ io n. r. o -t-s. r. T :.
s caindatinn Number a 3 2 3 - m. a. - s t y=.
SheetNo.
7 8 m
igl=
com nw one aw omne nw omm nw Dem m
i X
X X
X X
Preparer-d+c ehslu owner frw.- eMM P es h t e m A rb - t-15'3 i
'MAXIMLK STRESS RESULTS (1)
Plant Allowable Calculated Condition Equation Stress Stress Mode S. I. F4 Description I
Sh Nor) pal and 8
cyg g g l{51 13 Up,et i s.c o o Normal and 1.2 Sh 512 4 9
upset q.7 3 g llst 17 18o4o Emergency 9
1.8 S 525')
h o1992_
iist I 'I 27000 Faulted 9
2.4 Sh a I et ; cy I i st I.9 3G000 i
Normal and 10 5
IA45I 3
Upset g 74 gg
- g, cy l
teroo l
Normal and iI322 S+8 h A
Upset 11 3G7IE I I S'I I *l 31foo io e y c e e d e. d h e w e v.e. r q u e4 s on,.ll ;-.i s. t e ss
- E7ua-4 ion p
4 hn n 315 oo pst. The ee fore _
- o. K t
i 1
l
.1 F-166, 7-82 l
CheckingMethod# Rec =l=,
- i @ ib b s S H 111.In c.
Job No. a s t 3 - o 4 s Client Tust
&W Ta pe re d Tra n s i-i-io n T o~m t s. 2. T=.
A+
1s., u ;p m e., +
Calculation Number a s a 3 - e.at.- s i F.
SheetNo.
79 n
on e
one i w.
o.m I w.
o=
w.
one w.
o.m tan
/
XI Xi X
^X X
Prep. Mere c sh4/g4i Cw w
thiM-
~
I
,,;,i i
. Pro ble.m. _ A 6-M l F G y. ! - -.,,
a~+-
'EAXIMUM STRESS RESULTS 4
Plant Allowable Calculated Conda. tion Equation Stress Stress Mode _ S. I. F. Description tc 8 3 S3 s,
2:orypal and a
3 i3 a 698 19 Ups,et igooo a
22H Normal and 1.2 53 9
Upset 4 P. B 6 698 l.}
l 8 ocio i
Emergency 9
1.s sh A GIS G98 I.9 ogg s
U" Faulted 9
2.4 S3 46if 698 l-3
- hG00O Normal and 10 S
90
}
g Upset 96 O G98 q 22sco IIormal and
'M9 S+S h A
Upset 11 8823 098 I cy SJSCO
.-.....(,-
..,. --. ; -., s...-.. ; -,. q.. H. l-. -.
. ;... 1 r-l.
-r..
5 r- --- -
j
- 1... I
-1
.... f - - a d
e
....- {.. I. ; '
2 L -.'- -
t
-s
...Ii.,
.. u _. u.
Checking Method # jmc*.rn.,m F-166,7-82
- fa'n'l'Nt,%._..
c
l l
- ' *Gibbs s Hist. inc.
Job No. a 32 s - o 4 s Client rust Subject Te p. re. d ~ Tre n e l-H e n To'm t s. A i=. A %u s me n+
o Calculation Number a a z. 3 - m. cL - s i P SheetNo. 8o n.w n T
om. I nu one I su o=
nw o=
nw om.
m
/
X!
X X
X X
Preparer,dc oh,f34 i i
checmar fM%
- 6 f/,f L :-- ! _.2 -, -_.
_. C 2. _....
- _._ l,.,_. _ _:_ L l... _._ a
..P r.o..ble. m.,.A S -t.t*7 5.6 i_..__.....
i
'F.AXD;G: STRESS RESULTS f
Plant Allowable Calculated Condition Equation Stress Stress Mode S. I. F. Description s3 29G Nor/ pal and 8
g. 6 P_
238 l. C)
Ups,et 1500O 4
Normal and 1.2 S3 E 'l 6 9
Upset gg 7 23g g,q
= l 8 000 l
\\
Emergency 9
1.8 S 7~ 1 G h
S'6 ?_
236 l3 E90 Faulted 9
2.4 S3 56 E 238 l*l 36000 r
Normal and 10 S
O l
A Upset C>
'238 l7 22500 Hormal and 296 S+S h 238
(.3 A
Upset 11 37500 E
I.
...._. _ ; _4 v... _
_.1.
_...._ __ r.
t, ;
j _..
i
. i
- 'i
. i
..a l
l Checking Method # Tmmm F-166, 7-82 K cwww-
. ~.
.. t s
.. Gibbe S HEII. Inc.
Job No. a s 2 s-o 4 c.
Cient rus1 m_ _m_,_ _ _ T a p=. re. d Tea n s i + io n To 'i n +
s.2..i=.
A -+-
1E, u s m e., +
o, Calculation Number z a,23-u.GL - S \\ F.
SheetNo. 8 i i
w iga Dem Rn Date l Rw Dee Rw Dem Rw Dee j
m i
X X1 X
X X
l
^:-
" a c.-
ehelan cnocner es>= <e'h /M l
i i
t
. l..
l
,..P ro.b l e. m... A O. k..G 8. 6 t_'...:_. L,'_;_..
!_2_._._ - !
1
,. 4
- MAXIMtE STRI;SS RESULTS Plant Allowable Calculated Condition Equation Stress Stress Mode S. I. F. Description Sh E"O IIorynal and 8
g 23)
).9 UPs,et igoco d
0"C Normal and 1.2 S3 9
Upset g.6 2 E31 I*3 i B o o.o t
Emergency 9
1.8 S 21' h
E6 2.
23) l3 27c00 90 Faulted 9
2.4 Sh 23) 13 5 6 2.
%GOOO l
Normal and 10 S
O l
A i
Upset 23l I'3 O
22500 Normal and 7: 9 G S+8 h.
A g3I g,c)
Upset 11 i-
,5 6 2.
37500
,-..,.--...--f.-;'..',-.-..
_._._....a i
i i
, T '.~ '
T'~'~~~~'
L.
7....-..
p......
i i.
- r. p }:-. -,
y_
i i.j
../j..
i.... ;_;... ;; ;,
,-.t Checking MebW# iL*'-m m -
F-166,7-82 __ _
~ Gd4ibe S Hill. Anc.
Job No. 2 323-o4 6 CPerit Tusi Subject rwpec d rro ns;+ien To;o + s.2. F. A+ Esaiern=n4 rahWNumber a s t s - e a.- S I F ShootNo. 8 ?_
nuson izr om n=
om nw om n=
om n=
om
""1
/
X X
X X
X 8% pen & c.
einfo4 checker MA gy/sq Conclusion :
occep +o btt.
T h e.
ce su 14 5 oT
"**b's C a I.c w l a - h o n o r c.
and re s po n s'i v e.
-+ e -+ % e. pur pos o o -f -& hl s c. icu t a-4-io n _
o a4 e+
p S
1 l
Checking Method # ' mcmm F-166, 7-82
.i hc - - -
. 7
&' (/.27fy Gibbs S Mill.Inc.
11 Pem Plaza New Wrk. New Wrk 10001 212 760- 4438
$ste:127636/968694 wemationai:42ss13/234475 A Dravo Company
'lwww August 23, 1984
_CY"n w (p,
i GTN-69368 JOB NO:
W g)[f '.4, j
DATE LOGGC9:
O/9 7/PC/
Texas Utilities Generating Company Post Office Box 1002 LOG No -
eg 79 Glen Rose, Texas 76043 pyng:
g /./ Jgg, p 1,
[ / Mr. cA go[ )
Attention:
Mr. J.
B.
George CROS F-c n
Vice President / Project Gen. Mgr.
6 Gentlemen:
TEXAS UTILITIES GENERATING COMPANY COMANCHE PEAK STEAM ELECTRIC STATION G&H PROJECT NO. 2323 MASS PARTICIPATION REF 1:
GTN-69316 DTD 8/3/84 REF 2:
GTN-69339 DTD 8/10/84 With regards to the outlined plan of action in reference 1, attached is the supplement to the problem sample established in reference 2.
Attached is a list of the additional sample (15 problems).
Whether or not these 15 problems will be utilized is dependent upon the results of the first sample.
Should you have any questions, contact either Henry W. Mentel (x6302) or Steve Lin (x5212).
Very truly yours, GIBBS S HILL, Inc.
fW W
REBa-l!WMe:lc Robert E.
Ballard, Jr.
1 Letter + 1 Attachment Director of Projects CC:
ARMS (B&R Site) OL D. Wade (TUSI Site) lL G. Grace (TUSI Site) lL M Williams (CYGNA CA) lL 1A G. Bjorkman (CYGNA MA) lL 1A
~
Dravo f
- <;,. 7; fl.,:.3 o-i Attachment to GTN-69368 PROBLEM NUMBER PIPE SIZE (S)
BUILDING (S)
MF CURVES NUMBER OF SUPPORTS X
Y Z
A/B AB-1-11C 6, 8, 10 S
.249
.123
.522 A
25
~
AB-1-29K 6
C
.186
.585
.195 A
15-AB-1-37h 6, 8, 10 C
.603
.182
.573 A
22 '
AB-1-45Q 3/4, 1-1/2, 2 RI
.202
.120
.272 A
18 AB-1-51C-1 3
S, A, C
.043
.157
. 234 A
22 AB-1-52Z 1, 2 S,A,C
.625
.133
.155 A
34 '
AB-1-64A 12, 8, 6, 4 S
.430
.111
.186 A
51 AB-1-68V-1 10 S
.150
.635
.559 A ~
6".
AB-1-86B 10 F
.497
.123
.156 A-5 AB-1-90 3, 4 A
.597
.189
.161 A
29 AB-1-92A 3, 4 S
.207
.120
.181 A
12 AB-1-96A 2
S
.265
.023
.118 A
9 AB-1-150I 3, 6 A
.451
.108
.174 A.
2 AB-1-166C 1-1/2 S
.085
.002
.213 A
5 AB-1-174 3/4, 4 S, C
.604
. 141
.334 A
8 263 Notes 1.
S = Safeguards C = Containment RI = Reactor Internal Structure A = Auxiliary F = Fuel 2.
A = Unrefined Response Spectra
~
~
B = Refined Response Spectra
h p g4./
9, -
' Gibbs S Hill. Inc.
i' 11 Pem Plaza New Wrk New York 10001 g
2 60 4438 Domeshe:127636/968694
,h Intemahonal.428813/234475 s o,.- en.,
g g
D'lo% PP August 24, 1984 CYGNA GTN-69373 3
JOB NO :
,Y U f)(j w -
Texas Utilities Generating Company DATE LOCGED:
8/37/PL/
Post Office Box 1002 Glen Rose, Texas 76043 LOC No.,
W PO
~ ~ '
PILE:
J. /. / hc. cg[
V ce r sid n Project SSJ$F. FILE _ O / b(. GR (
Gentlemen:
TEXAS UTILITIES GENERATING COMPANY COMANCHE PEAK STEAM ELECTRIC STATION G&H PROJECT NO. 2323 MASS PARTICIPATION REF 1:
GTN-69339 DTD 8/10/84 REF 2:
GTN-69368 DTD 8/23/84 Attached for review by TUGCo Pipe Support Engineering (PSE) are the results of the Mass Participation Fraction Sensitivity Study for 15 of the problems from the referenced samples (14 from reference 1 and 1 from reference 2).
These problems are as follows:
AB-1-88X AB-1-71B AB-1-165F AB-1-19B AB-2-52U AB-1-166B AB-1-27-1 AB-1-61F AB-1-167E-1 AB-1-29U AB-1-96C AB-1-178B AB-1-29Y AB-1-156 AB-1-51C-1 Marked on the printouts attached are those support mark numbers which require PSE review.
Note that only those supports identified with the mark numbers require review and that it is only these which see'a load increase (Note - support called out regardless of the magnitude of the increase).
The loads to be utilized by PSE from the printouts are those labeled "ZPA" next to "U" (Upset) and "E"
(Emergency) to the right of l
each mark number.
~
Oravo
___.~-
6 -
,,, ~
Gibbs S Hill,Inc.
a GTN-69373 August 24, 1984 Based upon a cursory review, Gibbs & Hill feels that these load increases should not present a problem, however during the PSE review for design load margin if such is not the case, Gibbs & Hill should be notified for the purpose of consideration of additional refinement.
At the completion of the review it is requested that the attached printouts be returned along with PSE documentation verifying the acceptability of the load increases.
Very truly yours, GIBBS & HILL, Inc.
,k W'A Robert E. Ballard, Jr.
Director of Projects REBa-HWMe:lc 1 Letter CC:
ARMS (B&R Site) OL J. Finneran (TUSI Site) lL + Printouts D. Wade (TUSI Site) lL G. Grace (TUSI Site) lL
-- n. Williams (CYGNA CA) lL G. Bjorkman (CYGNA MA) 1L i
r Drav%
Slim,) 'chler/CMJan, PTHun
~
KLSch;ppalc 'MAVivirito, R" 11crd, HhMantel
- *" pMl10rtn3/ d
, TDHLwkinc/
pinig, Outgoing e
MCP TYM
/
Insemational:428813/234475 A Drave Company 1
August 10, 1984 GTN-69339 p,
p
/// /
Texas Utilities Generating Company jh 64) // N Post Office Box 1002 Glen Rose, Texas 76043
, gjpgf g i
/ (4/ 6/M h M M Attention:
Mr. J. B. George Vice President / Project Gen. Manager hO %[P 1
j Gentlemen:
I TEXAS UTILITIES GENERATING COMPANY CONANChE PEAK STEAM ELECTRIC STATION G&H PROJECT 110. 2323 MASS PARTICIPATION REF: GTN-69316 DATED B-3-34 i
l Mith regaros to the outlined plan of action in the reference GTN, f
the initial problem sample (15 problems) has been performed.
Attached is a listed of the problem nurt.bers.
Note the following 1)
Of the fifty (50) problems exhibiting a mass fraction under 10 percent (IDX, 2SY, 4Z) there are 39 unique problems.
From these 39, 15 were selected for tne first sample.
2)
These 15 problems cover a range of pipe sizes from 3/4 inch up to and including 24 inch.
3)
The auxiliary, containment, fuel and safeguaro buildings are considered; with all original analysis being performed with unrefined response spectra curves.
4)
A total of 320 supports are contained in these 15 problems.
CYGNh 4
f4 l/O_( b
<cn t1a M I 7 4)f.9 B i 'I M '* # #
J0D NO :
N
[ r /O '
O N/
DATE LOGGED:
LOCHO.:
2 -lL&W. dA FILE:
~
Dravo I
k / AM. C/ -
?
CROSS REF. FILE v
m
) j
Git ~bs S Hill,Inc j
' ~, * '-
cTu 69339
' ' '1
)
- August 10, 1984 The next set of 15 problems is being prepared.
-Should you have any questions, contact either Henry U. Mentel (xG302) or Steve Lim (::5218).
j.-
Very truly yours, GIBBS & HILL, INC.
hQr 1
Robert E.
Ballard, Jr.
Director of Projects REBa-HUMe-SL:sce 1 Letter, 1 Attachment cc: ARMS (BhR Site) OL D. bade (TUSI Site) IL D. Westbrook (TUSI Site) IL G. Bjorkman (CYGNA Ma) lL, lA ts. Williams (CYGNA Ca.) lL, lA G. Grace (TUSI Site) IL praw"3
s.;
c+
1 Attcchment to GTN-69339
'?,
Problem MF Number Pipe Size (s)
Bldq (s) y Curves 2 Number of X
Y Z
A/B Supports AB-1-88X 4
C
.373
.003
.547 A
5
.~
TAB-1-1957 4, 13, 1.5 C&S
.693
.071
.416 A
52 r_ fan-1-27,17 16, 10, 6, 4
S
.818
.023
.717 A
46 AEP4=G 9U/
6, 4
C
.170
.000
.328 A
46 IAB-1 4 3Y 1 8,
6 C
.264
.010
.236 A
42 AB-1-71B 6
S
.355
.097
.600 A
10 ABel-52U P 2
A
.057
.082
.756 A
18 gan eine 10 A
.020
.332
.198 A
7 An 1-u ic-11 10 F
.556
.099
.112 A
6 ram-1 yect 2
S
.240
.259
.045 A
9 Pd SWDf FAB-1-1357 12 S
.356
.026
.284 A
5 iAe-i-ledEr 3,
2, 3/4 S
.087
.000
.101 A
26 p1=116M 1.5 S
.099
.001
.217 A
5 an 1 le ss-ip' 24 S
.015
.208
.280 A
4 AB-i~-17 8 N 12,6 A&C
.462
.058
.270 A
39 5/18 12/28 1/4 320 Notes:
- 1) A= Auxiliary, C= Containment, F= Fuel, S= Safeguards
- 2) A= unrefined response spectra B= refined response spectra
e f(),
TEXAS UTILITIES GENERATING COMPANY gg P. O. BOX 1002 GLEN MOSE. TEXA5 70043 3-August 29, 1984 bOH CYGNA Energy Services I
,{ g g p %
101 California Street Suite 1000 San Francisco, California 94111 gg tafL Attention: Ms. Nancy Williams', Project Manager
Subject:
Comanche Peak Steam Electric Station Phase III Action Items.
Reference:
- 1) Phase III of the CYGNA Independent Assessment Program
- 2) TUGC0 letter dated August 16, 1984, from J.B. George (TUGCO) to N.H. Williams (CYGNA)
Dear Ms. Williams:
In reference 2, TUGC0 committed to review and to provide a schedule of imple-mentation for all recommendations proposed by CYGNA in Phase III of The Inde-pendent Assessment Program. These are provided below.
CYGNA Recommendations:
CYGNA suggested that the pipe stress group send all changes in support loads to the pipe support group.
TUGC0 agrees that if any reanalysis or calculations are conducted by the Stress Analysis Group all load increases will be transmitted to Pipe Support Engineering.
A change will be made to the 'as-built' procedure to ensure compliance.
CYGNA stated that pipe support designers note any simplifying assumptions when doing support designs.
TUGC0 believes an engineer should list simplifying assumptions that are sig-nificant to the design of the support.
The test of a well designed support is the capacity of the support to take the load, not the ease with which the design calculations can be followed.
Nevertheless, ne will reiterate to our engineering personnel the desirability of stating simplifying assumptions in the calculations.
~
CYGNA 4
NOG /S JOB NO :
b// N DATE LOGGED :
8b LOG NO. :
A l / k. Cib Fuz.
[' lh [M CROSS REF. FILE
(
r
-t In addition to the above comments CYGNA had suggested making changes to six hanger drawings.
All of the changes suggested-except' one had discrepencies cf such iminor' nature that no changes were deemed warranted.
(The change
-was completed for drawing MS-1-002-004-C72K.)
If thereLare any questions with the above recommendations, please contact
' Ms.
J.' Van Amerongen at (817) 897-4881, ext. 500.
.Very truly yours,
-Texas Utilities Generating Co.
Engineering Division eyO L.M. Popplewell Project Engineering Manager CC:
J.C. Finneran-H. Harrison D. Wade J. Van Amerongen H. Mentel LMP/GG/bh 4
l I
1 CPPA #40439
~
TEXAS UTILITIES GENERATING COMPANY P. O. BOX 3003 GLEN ROSE. TEXAS 19043 t-CYGNA jog No :
pf Annnot 16, 1984 DATE LOGGED:
NS0 CYGNA Energy Serviceston No. :
Cal rnia St.
2./,/ fac. (A?,
g San Francisco, Calif )Ca(4s iWill)ILE 2 / M' M j7)JW
}c< war Attention: Ms. Nancy Williams, Project Manager
Subject:
Comanche Peak Steam Electric Station CYGNA Phase III h
Independent Assessment Program gg 4
Dear Ms. Williams:
TUGC0 has reviewed the CYGNA Phase III Independent Assessment Program Report and is providing the following general comments:
First, it is TUGCO's position that the Phase 3 review and resulting report should be independent of other CYGNA activities.
Any reference in the Report to further CYGNA activity to be conducted as part of the Phase IV review is inappropriate.
These are two seperate phases with independently defined activities. The documents that result should be comprehensive of the activities that were conducted for each phase (or previous phases), not activities that will or may be conducted.
All references in the Phase III Report to Phase IV should, therefore, be deleted.
More-over, CYGNA's reference to TUGCO's objectives in conducting an Independent Assess-ment Program, and references to SIT or CAT reviews, are outside the scope of CYGNA's evaluation. TUGCO's position is that all discussions relating to the program objectives should be limited to the objectives of the Phase III Report only.
Second, the report does not present a consistent position regarding CYGNA's
" programmatic" findings.
CYGNA states on page I-5, "Except as reflected in the PFR's, CYGNA did not detect any type of a programmatic breakdown on the Comanche Peak Project." Then, in the conclusion, page 5-20, CYGNA repeats the statement from page I-5 and also states, "CYGNA did not find any evidence of a programmatic breakdown at CPSES."
It appears CYGNA intends to state that they found no evidence of a " programmatic" breakdown at CPSES, although some isolated instances of potentially unsatisfactory technical judgements which require further analysis to resolve, were noted.
The cited references should be revised to state clearly CYGNA's position.
Third, in Appendix E.CYGNA did not specify which of its review criteria were TUGC0 licensing committments, which were developed by CYGNA based on requests or suggest-ions from the ASLB hearings or which were based on CYGNA's own judgement. The ad-ditional criteria (including those derived from tha Walsh-Doyle allegations) which were not specifically part of the CPSES design criteria resulted in several "unsat-isfactory" marks on the checklist. However, none of these unsatisfactory checks resulted in a potential finding and only four were raised to an observation of which two were considered isolated and one was not considered a valid observation. This indicates that CYGNA believes TUGCO's design practices resulted in acceptable designs, irrespective of their satisfaction of additional criteria which were
i I derived from the hearings. Accordingly, we recomend that. CYGNA provide specific conclusions regarding the validity of the additional criteria resulting from the Walsh-Doyle allegations and the unsatisfactory checklist items that resulted from I
these additional criteria.
Finally, all recommendations proposed by CYGNA will be reviewed for appropriate action. The exact action to be taken and the schedule of imnlementation will be provided to CYGNA.
4 In addition to the above coments, a number of specific comments were identified during the review and are included in the attached list.
Very Truly Yours, A.-
j-h 3 l~ ff J.B. George ( /
Vice Pres./ Project Gen. Manager cc: David Wade George Grace Bill Horin John Finneran ARMS JBG/GEG/jf 1
1
-.m.
.y -
ATTACHMENT
' ITEM -
(PAGE)
DESCRIPTION-1.
(1-4)
The time period encompassed by the IAP indicated re-
_ quires further clarification.
Calculations and draw-ings for pipe' supports, for example, were provided to CYGNA with dates that preceded 1980.
2.
.(Exhibit 1.4)
PS-02.
The main steam supports that were identified.
(6 of 8)-
with bumper supports that were considered unstable -
(p. 5-8) were those without cinched U-Bolts, that is support (p. 5-19)
MS-002-003-C72R and MS-004-003-C72R, on stress prob-
-(PS-02,Att.
lems AB 1-238 and AB-1-23D, respectively.
TUGC0 A,1 of 1)-
considers these support configurations isolated be-
- cause there were only four of these type of supports in the plant.
This concern.is identified through-out this report.
3.
(4-4, Exhibit The quality assurance program reviewed was TUGCO's, 4.4)~
not TUSI's.
4.
.(5-6)
Reference to observation PI-00-01 is incorrect in this discussion of the pipe support review.
PI-00-01 4
-is a pipe stress observation, not a pipe support item.
1 5.
(5-13)
The sentence stating that " trending of the audits i
was performed by TUGC0 on a quarterly basis" is unclear as to the exact action being considered.
Reference should be made to Appendix G, not F.
6.
(AppendixC)
Item (d) did not include Mr. Wheaton as an affiant (p. 13) of this affidavit.
7.
(Appendix E) 3.1.
The correct code of record is ASME BPV Code (5 of 19) section III, sub-section NF,1974 Edition through Winter 1974 Addenda.
8.
(7 of 19)
No stiffness requirements must be met at CPSES in designing a class 2 and 3 pipe support. The appli-cable criterion is the 1/16" deflection guideline.
The review criterion used here is not a requirement at CPSES and should be identified as an additional criterion that CYGNA developed.
Furthermore, the criterion that was used is an acceptable industry standard.
l 9.
(7 of 19)
The criterion used at CPSES is that the allowable i
total diametrical gap for rigid frames is 1/8" plus or minus 1/16".
In addition, the last sentence regarding proper thermal tolerances requires further clarification.
It is unclear as to what CYGNA
]
intends to state.
i
._ _-.-__.__ _.___--___.-_,. _._ _ _ _,-_...-~,_ _,__,-_-_..-_ _ _.-_._ _ _.-__,.._.
l q
~;
xp
, =J ITEM (PAGE)
DESCRIPTION (8 of 19) 4.1.5-At CPSES, the criteria for rod hangers is thgt
- 10..
the maximum swing angle is equal to or less than 5 c
- Offsetting of the hanger is done to accommgdate the
~#
pipe movement if the swing angle exceeds 5, not if the total movement of the pipe is two inches.
.11.
(8 of 19)
- 4.1.6-For snubbers, offsetting is done to accomgo-date pipe movement if the swing angle exceeds 5,
p not if the total movement of the pipe is two inches.
Midpoint of thermal. travel is not required to be at i
the midooint of the snubbers total travel.
4 12.
(11 of 19) 4.2-CYGNA states that'the friction load is the product of a friction factor and the dead and thermal loads, but cannot be less than the dead load. TUGC0 disagrees with this statement because the product can be lower than the dead load.
Loads generated by thermal expansion include temp-E eratures from maximum and minimum operating condi-tions, not the normal operating temperatures as CYGNA has stated.
13.
(Appendix G)
Attachment E should read EE.
(PS-01,1 of 1) i 14.
(PS-08)
The requirement that is referred in this obser-(1 of 1)-
vation is not part of the committed to ASME Code
'74 Edition through Winter '74 Addenda.
15.
( Appendix J)
CYGNA states that TUGC0 and NPSI committed to re-(Note 1) viewing each welded attachment analysis against final pipe support loads. The committment made in item 3 of the June 8th Telecon is not being done as a result of a CYGNA request, but rather as part of the normal design practice performed by NPSI.
(Note, the referenced communication report is in j
error.)
f 16.
(Note 12)
Typographical error in item (d) which reads
'T=1.45"',
l 1t should be 'T=1.25"'.
l 17.
(PS-05)
- 25.
Unsatisfactory is marked without explanation l
as to why the MS-46A specification was not met.
(PS-024)
- 4.
Gaps considered unsatisfactory, but no ex-18.
(2 of 10) planation was provided.
19.
(PS-036)
- 4.
Gap considered unacceptable without explanation.
20.
(3 of 10)
- 6, #7, and #8. Support is a rigid support.
These items are criteria for spring supports, rod hangers sind snubbers and should be marked "N/A".
- .t.
ITEM (PAGE)
DESCRIPTION l
21.
(PS-069)
- 2. This support is considered stable without (1 of 10)
" bumpers" since the U-Bolts are cinched. See comment 2.
22.
(PS-070)
- 2. This support does not have " bumpers", there-(1 of 9) fore, there would not be any calculations for the
" bumper" portion.
23.
(PS-071)
- 21.
Engineers were directed to decrease the (8 of 10) section properties by 5%, not increase them. All 12 effected supports were reviewed and are satis-factory.
24.
(PS-080)
- 4.
Gap accommodation for thermal and seismic move-(2 of 8) ments in the unrestrained direction is not applicable to a trapeze support.
CYGNA has marked this criterion as unsatisfactory without an explanation.
25.
(PS-081)
- 24.
Unsatisfactory mark indicated without explan-(9 of 9) ation regarding whether the appropriate buckling lengths was used in the calculation.
j 26.
(PS-083)
- 25.
Item 25 explanation refers back to itself.
(10 of 10) 27.
(PS-087)
- 1. Sketch is accurate.
Plan elevation is center-(2 of 10)
.line of pipe.
28.
(PS-089)
- 10.
U-Bolt was satisfactory in accordance with (4 of 9)
ITT-DRS-1375 which is an acceptable method for qualifying the U-Bolt.
29.
(PS-099)
- 2.
U-Bolts are cinched; therefore, bumpers are not (1 of 8) required for stability.
See comment 2.
30.
(PS-099)
- 14, #15.
These items regarding standard embed-(5,6, of 8) ments and support attachments were considered unsatisfactory and the comments referenced Item I which stated that a higher applied load was used for design, a conservative assumption, please provide appropriate explanation of these unsatisfactory marks.
31.
(PS-100)
- 1. is part of an NCR and is used only (1 of 9) as a reference document in the calculations. There are actually two welds 2-3/4" long, so the designer used a 5" wald length as a conservative input for the calculation.
32.
(PS-106)
- 18. No explanation of unsatisfactory mark re-l (7 of 9) garding inclusion of inertia loads.
l
r
& O k.
ITEM (PAGE)
DESCRIPTION 33.
(PS-106)
- 20. Stiffness is not required to be determined J
(7 of 9) for a spring support..
g
'34.
(PS-107)
Typographical error: checks are not aligned (7 of 8) correctly.
35.
(8 of 8)
- 24. Typographical error: checks are not aligned correctly.
36.
_(PS-115)
- 11. Hilti-bolt was qualified with a factor of (5 of 9) safety of 4.8, not 4.0.
r^ " '
I 9
/
c
/
s k
-~
s
. ~.. -
,u.. ~ m,
,,a Gibba C Mill,lh C
i in pemman 3 "
[
,N N""
- e r 1x cto.
O hb 4, B_6---
(
w.
- w.,-
w MM* M1 MIS
& $Q t ]& g A - l* I h C.. Y -
+
. x' !*I?M* !!L N0ff
>tr g
GTN-6945 4 September 14, 1984 s
Texas Utilities Generating Company
\\
/
^
Post Office Box 1002 Glen Rose, Texas 76043 j
ALWdluxuo Attentions Mr. J. 5. George
~
Vice President / Project Gen. Mgr.
1 Gentlemen, FEt PF TEXAS UTIIdTIES GENERATING COMPArt h
PI N COMANCHE FEAX STEAM SLECTRIC STATION f
G&H PROJECT NO 2323 b
NASS PARTICIPATION REF'It CYGNA LTR 84042.016 DTD 8/25/84 r-REF 2:
GTN-69316 DTD 8/3/84 REF 3:
GTN-69279 DTD 7/20/84 f
By copy of this letter to Nancy Williams of CYGNA Energy
{
Services, please find attached the plan of action for the s
review of the overall effect of low muss participation fractions.
This plan was verbally discussed with Nat.;y Williams on Friday, september 7,1984.
Should you have any questions, call this office.
[
Very truly yours, a
GISBS G HILL, Inc.
s erk.
4% %
RBa t,-
sic Robert E. Ball'ard, Jr.
1 Letter Director of Projects I
D. Wade (TUSI site) lL 1A (telecopied)
R. Iotti (Ebasco NY) lL 1A f
H. Williams (CYGNA CA) lL 1A F
mE. Bjor)cnan (CYGNA MA) lL 1A i
H. Levin Q'ENERA Nd) IL lA (telecopied)
Approved ___
M' N
g H. A. Vivirito 7
VP Power Engineering i
[
46)CM,.T3.s@ %
uM "' L.
szteGir
/
',' t' 6
_/
t I \\
gf _ 3 -
1P e
e
^d SEISMIC ANALYSIS OF PIPING
}'(
EFFECT or HIGHEB ORDER MODES / MAS $ PARTICIPATION j
8 i
j Plan of action for review of the overall effect of low mass 4
participation fractions.
I' Based upon CYGNA's response (CYGNA letter 84042 016 dated August 25, 1984) to Gibbs & Hill's revised mass participation fraction sensitivity study. (outlined in CGH letter GTN-69316 dated August 3,1984) Gibbs & Hill haa elected to revise its plan of action, with various expansions in detail and scope, as detailed below.
The pertinent facets of the plan are:
A)
That, as opposed to a sampling approach, Gibbs & Hill intends to perform a full scale evaluation of all of the large bore piping stress analyses originally in Gibbs & Hill's scope of as-built analysia (272 stress problems) 7-a)
These 272 stress problems will be selectively screened and accounted for as detailed belew, 1.
J C)
All subsequent analyses will be performed on Gibbs & Hill's A
IBM ADLP1PE Veraion D, which is automated 'to account for the j
(.
ef fect of higher order modes (specifically the "3PA" effect).
The detailed steps of the plan are as follows:
=
7 1)
Evaluation of the sample of five (5) problems established in 4
GTH-69176 (utilizing unrefined response spectra curves for
{
comparison with the original as-built).
a 2)
Based upon the results of these first five (5) pecblems, develop preliminary plots correlating percent increase in 3
support loads with percent mass participation.
. 3)
Completion of verification of Gibbs & Hill's IBM ADLPIPE Version D.
2 4)
Expand the sample of five (5) with approximately 30 representative problems (essentially those established in GTN-69339 and 60369), including a full-range variation in j
mass participation, pipe size, geometry, location, etc.
s4 N
=
2 l
J a k
[b
_11 E V~
O O
'1' 5)
Usinfondincreaseversus.fapproximately35 problems,finalise the total sample o the mass participation plots.
Based upon consideration of this data and support margin infor-mation, criteria' will be developed including parametera such 4
as minimum mass necessary to include 90 percent of response, line sizes / support types with aufficient margins, adegins due to other loads / load combination, to screen all large bore problems and identify candidate supports requiring additional review.
l 6)
Those problems /sup Teview would be reports identified as requiring additional run using ADLIPIPE Version D to evaluate the significance of potential load changes (runs would be m>de utilising the refined response spectra curves).
7)
If potential problem supporta are. identified, further refinement is possible in the applicable responsa spectra, i.e., use of localized curves relative to the specific piping and piping support location, as. opposed to floor elevation response spectra.
The above plan will answer the global question of the effect of low mass participa' tion on piping supports since all piping stress problems and their related supports will either be screened out as not being a probism or be fully evaluated.
N e
b i
fp
..co naw " "
" "^ " "
EBASCO Two World Trade Centet. New York. N Y.10048 September 18, 1984 f
,d 3-2-17 (6.2)
ETCY-1 l
4(.4O Miss Nancy H. Williams Project Manager f
CYGNA Energy Services 101 California Street to i
Suite 1000 g
WGPf San Francisco, California 94111-5894
Subject:
Comanche Peak Steam Electric Station U-Bolt Cinching Testing / Analyses Program-Phase 3 Open Items Additional Information as follow-up to Meeting of 9/13/84
Reference:
Letter 84042.015 from N.H. Williams to J.B. George dated August 23, 1984.
Dear Miss Williams:
Enclosed please find the information which we agreed to provide as follow-up to the meeting of 9/13/84 et the 'Ebasco offices in New York.
The information is provided in the form of three attachments.
Attachment A is a numerical example of how the stresses in Tables H,I,N and O of the Affidavit were obtained.
This example was discussed during the meeting and provides an answer to question 1 of the Attachment to the refer-enced letter.
Attachment B is a sumary tabic of the maximum element btresses obtained by the finite element analyses. The stresses are given for all load cases and for all specimens analyzed. This table is necessary to perform calculations such as that given in Attachment A for all other pipes /U-bolt specimens.
Attachment C is a copy of the friction test data handed out during the meeting, which is provided in reply to questions 14 and 15 of the Attachment to the referenced letter.
Finally, we would like to clarify an item in your question 12.
For the 10" sch 40 stainless pipe u-bolt specimen, your referenced letter quoted a value of preload of 3606 which is very low for the applied torque of 100 f t.
lbs.
This value of preload was obtained from p. 66 of Attachment 1 to our Affidavit.
If you refer to p 64 and 65, articles 5.0 and 6.0 you will note that the creep test was performed right af ter the ther==1 ay a ' = *m*"*Hf
- terquin;; th; p,
1 CYGNA
//ao i.
JOB NO :
DM DATE LOGGED:
LOG NO. :
FILE:
b/'!
CROSS REF. FILE
.;?d W &
[
Gd n ?m %:j/Q~axf$f '
- a. 2d..'
iilk N 1
. u-bolt ie the u-bolt nut torques placed prior to the thermal cycling test were maintained at the beginning of the creep test. The torque correspond-ing to the value of 3606 lbs is therefore not 100 ft-lbs but whatever torque remained at the end of the thermal cycling test which was begun with 100 f t.
Ib torque. Therefore, the 3606 lb preload should not be included in the variation of preload with torque.
Please call if you have additional questions.
Ve truly your;;,
/
'?fh(
f Robert C. Iotti Chief Engineer Applied Physice RCI:ab cc: Mr. D. Wade (TUGCO)
Mr. J. Van Amerongen (Ebssco/IUGCO)
Mr. R. Ballard (G6H)
Mr. W.H. Ilorin (Bishop / Cook)
J. Finneran (TUGCO)
W. Lapay (Westinghouse)
{
l l
i
ATTACHMENT A 1.
Please provide a detailed numerical breakdown of how the stresses in Tables H, I, N and 0 of the Affidavit (reference 3) were obtained The easiest way to show how the stress intensity is obtained is to
-refer to the figure VII-2 of Attachment 3 of the Affidavit which defines it as the maximum of either the absolute difference between the major principal stress or minor principal stress and zero, or the algebraic difference of the two principal stresses, and to apply this figure to an actual example. The example chosen is the 4" och 160 pipe. For the elements having the largest circumferential and longitudinal stresses,the finite element analyses determined that the principal stresses are. virtually identical to the circum-ferential and logitudinal stresses (see Attachment 3 of Affidavit at page 57). The longitudinal,circumferential, major and minor principal stresses for the highest stressed piping element of the 4" sch 160 pipe are given for both the inside and outside surfaces and for the ma.:inum load case in the table of p. 58 of Attachment 3 to the Affidavit. These values are reported below:
Princ. Stress.(ksi)
Long. stress (ksi)
Circum. Stress (ksi)
Major Minor 4" sch 160 inside 10.49 44.79 44.78 10.50 Outside
-26.65
-34.07
-26.63
-34.08 where the negative sign denotes compressive stresses.
A confirmation of the max. circumferential stress can be found in the table of page 71 of Attachment 3 of the Affidavit for element 627.
Note that on that table, there is no distinction regarding the surface at which the maximum stresses occur.
For instance, the 44.79 ksi tensile circumferential stress occurs on the inside surf ace, while the -26.65 ksi compressive longitudinal stress occurs on the outside surface of element 627. To the local stresses computed by the finite element analysis one must add the longitudinal equation 9 pressure and piping moment stresses.
These are available from the table on page 56 of attachment 3 of the Affidavit.
They are:
Longitudinal Pressure Stress 4.8 ksi l
EQ. 9 Piping Moment stress f 12.146 ksi EQ.12 Piping Moment stress
! 22.49 ksi Adding the longitudinal pressure to the stresses previously tabulated we obtain:
t Principal Stresses l
Major (Circumferential)
Minor (Longitudinal)
I 4" sch 160 Inside 44.79 15.29 Outside
-34.07
-21.85 To add the piping moment stresses to the longitudinal (minor principal) stresses, we choose the sign which will produce the largest stress intensity.
This is seen,in a:Mohr circle depicted below, where inside surface stresses are used.
i
, e -~
s 9
}
- WW. **f
- fy, p erf 9
-n.es La m 0~
\\
~
1 x....
Thus the total stress intensity is given by 44. 79- (-19. 346) = 64.136 ksi, which is the total stress intensity given on page 59 of Attachment 3 of the Affidavit or in table H of page 60 of the Affidavit.
For comparison purposes the stress intensity derived for the outside surface is:
NWj. Prine. (Circumferential) stress = -34.07 Minor Princ. (Longitudinal) stress = -26.63 + 4.8 + 12.146 + 22.49 =-56.466 The max. stress intensity is thus 56.47 ksi.
Using the alternative signs would have produced a stress intensity of 34.07
+ 12.8 = 47.5 ksi which is lower.
- As shown above, the highest stress intensity occurs on the inside surface.
To determine the primary and secondary stress intensities, several alternatives are available. The most straightforward determines the primary stress intensity from the principal primary stresses and derives the secondary stress intensity by subtraction of the primary from the total. For the example chosen we pro-ceed as follows:
(i) The secondary portion of the circumferential stress is obtained as the i
stress due to thermal expansion by subtracting the circumferential stress l
due to preload + thermal given on page 59 of Attachment 3 of the Affidavit l
as -39305 psi, from the circumferential stress due to preload alone, which is given in the preceeding page as -26091 psi. These occur on the outside surface. The primary circumferential stress becomes -34.07 + 13.214= -20.856 ksi.
l l
2 w
y-r-
m.g y
,r.
r
\\
=
(ii) The primary longitudinal stress is similarly derived by considering only the. equation 9 piping moment stress, le neglecting the equation 12 stress and subtracting the difference between the longitudinal stress due to preload + thermal and that due to preload only which equals -6.5 kai. The longitudinal stress thus becomer -21.85 -
12.146 + 6.5 = -27.496 kni.
-(iii) Thus the prisary stress intensity is -27.5 ksi and the secondary stress
. intensity becomes 56.47 -27.5 ='28.97 ksi.
Similarly we-obtain the primary and secondary stress intensities for i
the inside surface.
(i) Primary circumferential 44.79
'.0.81 = 33.98 (10.81 is dif ference between preload + thermal and preload only circumferential stresses for inside surface and these do not appear in any table, but are available from the computer output)
(ii) Primary Lengitudinal = 15.29 + 12.146 -4.24 = 1.096 where again 4.24 is the difference between the longitudinal stress due to preload
~
+ thermal and that due to preload only.
Please note that the primary stress intensity is thus 35.1 ksi instead of the value of 31.6 reported on page 59 of the Attachment 3 to the Affidavit.
(iii) The secondary stress intensity then becomes 64.14 - 35.1 = 29.04 ksi instead of the 32.54 ksi reported.
The difference between the numbers occurred when inadvertently the outside secondary circumferential stress was subtracted fro = the inside total cir-cumferential stress.
To explain the values appearing in Table N and 0, we again will use. an I
example and will employ the 4" sch 160 specimen as the example.
To determine the primarymembrane portion of the U-bolt preload, push,and pressure stress, the stress state at the inside and outside of the pipe element surface is averaged. This stress state includes the mechanical longitudinal stresses due to the other (non-local loads).
l As previously explained the primary circumferential stress on the outside surface is -20.856 ksi, and the corresponding primary circumferential stress on the inside curface is 33.98 ksi, with an average circumferential stress of 6.56 ksi.
3 I
a The. primary longitudinal stress on the outsid k
that of the inside surface is -2 096 kei e surface is -27.496 ksi and of -14.296 ksi.
,resulting in an average stress The resulting stress intensity is then comp t d f ue rom the stressblock
-i
- -.N 4.
b-ty2ft~
and hence is equal to 20.86 20.99 reported in table N.Round off errors in this calculation res l u ts in the difference from the The values listed in Table 0 are Equation 10 plus secondary stress intensities derived on thvalues and include primary are noneyclic in nature need not be considered. e basis that loads which derived previous *-
stress that is due to preload.for Table I are amended to subtractThus the stress intensities the portion of the For the 4" sch 160 inside surface the ci stresses due to preload alone are given in th 3 of the Affidavit as +21.76 ksi and +818 k ircumferential and longitud e table on page 68 of Attachment face they are -26.091 and -13.47 s
respectively (for the outside The stress block for the outside surface can be modified to read k
~
--56. 466 +17. 4 7=
-39.0 l
I
--- J
% -34.07 + 26.09 = -8 With the stress intensity (eq.10) bei ng -39.0 ksi.
The stress block for the inside surface i s then
=
- 44. 79 - 21. 76 = 23.03
.r i
i 1
-19.346
-8.18 = -2 7. 5 7 4
I-
.ATTAODIENT B Tabulation of Inside and Outside Surface maximum stresses for all Load Cases I
find 9 s/ress uwel lo cle<<& >KrW/ sed-rof / rtr' tss 44/es et At/ed Je/a in/ Osc '
Se* Gc.c f ka /$ yus 6: /0220M!32WSVse 6e c.w e zu, Cac Le h 4 'Ca3
)
_ Pra-/rnc/ (P) 7xsdc 8./8 21 74 8.83 3 8, 71 S.11 23.02 J.9o ' 3.s1 Ov/W/r
-13.97 - 2 6.61-2C2r-YS53 -M17 -29.99 -3.Y/ -Y91 P+14awal(TN) %dt 12.4 2 32.s7 II.16 19 09 8 74 17.6 8.35 Its7l
@/sdr
-11.4 7 -31.3 -33.n-4044 -R,4j -M%-IY91 -1I.57
\\
13h'sPassx$ Jo.1;de 12.9C 42 9I ll.S9 'St.S'l 4'10.12.% 11. s 3 3y.19 whide
-20ss -31. 41 -Hn-S945 -$ff -50% -ti.91 -ttt3
?+ TH+PL + Pu.s4TH.1ik/e b.11 W.')f 10.7 8 22.7I b.1% V.iA 17.5B 4 7.17 Odside
-24.5 -3 W -48.4 -7% -3 0.274BS -3).01 -MIO I
avT"0" 0*T E C"C8 8'
0*TE carc 8' o*TE arv.
arv.
No.
DaTE WEStahGMOWSL F omw 343130 l
~
ATTAQDENT C
Subject:
_ Friction Test Preload Data Presented below are the preloads measured at th torque values during the friction tests.
! t.
the sum of preload in the two U-bolt legs. Data re; -,
~*
i.:
Use en of value indicated to approximate preload per leg.
P
(
~
t l .
j r
i Thus the stress intensity equals 50.60 ksi. The value reported on Table 0 is 50.8 ksi.
i 5
'?
l 10" SS TORQUE PRELOAD 10 ft-lb 1358 lb 20 2209 30 3459 40 4131 50 4804 60 6661 70 8743 80 9448 90 9736 100 10920 110 12458 120 13354 130' 15373 130 16654 130 17934 32" CS TORQUE PRELOAD 40 ft-Ib 736 lb 60 603 100 1981 120 1507 140 2583 480 3618 200 6503 220 7493 240 8785 700 26422 1170 34019 i
l..
f V.
em o
..n e.
e c.
i E
5 t
C.
.J w
u c
C C
C e
- ~
u e
w c.
w c_
w C=
5-o
,c_
_e
>=
a w
C*
5 z
C
=
.e e
e I '~
l t
I
=
e n
=.
e.
e.
0 :t r 5;*.. : - ?..:. : NOI.Dlbi d '
i i
40
(f
\\
e 2
5 3
t i
{$
)
Fi C
,, W f
o
<.C w
Cm C
tr c
orc?
e C
C C.
-?
J w
e C
y C
a C
~.
c 6
.=
=
E t
=
=
=
c c
c e
a c
n o
w a
r eO c
r w
1 e
vz a
\\c T+
c AE
\\.
F GP
\\
s i
x l
l c
c 1
M' tu
=
l 1
- ... 52.%d - 3: : : : AT; :: : d175 XW
)
i
__,_-----9'"N'
---g
.u I 11 A
e
.2 o
~,
o C
o v
C iE E
O l
u Cb r
e
\\,
E I
- 4. ~C.
C Cc t
e e
e o
w m
5 E
w cr a
o u
+-
z_
o q
m
>=
d m
C CC T
o e
e r
o C
F.
C r.
o o
C C.
~
0:
--T-t, ' :. :t: d :15 s <.~
r f.,
e 4
e l
9 3i
,,g PF8 u
e e
v.
c E
a E
C.
-u a
E 1
C
\\
E S
m
>=
k m
w=
E 5'
G e
e t-
=
c r
c
=
eC m
W U
a 1
o
.E
\\
i
~
m
? =~n.
l Ii
(
i r
K o.
6 h.
~c.
'c
~
'o.
'e.
c.
e c-e
~
e
~
1 03:. ~ '.
- 1:iE::..;::b: d:15 VYr.
I t
i
~>
c l-embeDNnko.
ww.
PS0IESIIiii m we...
8e # 4438
=
n x ww tenermL4151&W43 AbueCueur AJ.C-i du)&
J/% ck oo August 17,19844&M aid '
OfW-69359 ft
' Fik ;
i g,g Texas Utilities Generating Company Post Office Box 1002 Glen Rose, Texas 76043 jCYGNA 9 Unco 2.,._/[c Attention: Mr. J. B. George f' car tocccc:
ics no :
dY
-l VicePresident/ProjectG% )gr.
W 73 Gentlemen:
nts -
U I S" '
- d h4 %l caoss arr. ntt TEXAS UfILITIES GENERATING COMPANY-00MANCE PEAK STEAM ELECTRIC STATION G4H PROJECT NO. 2323 TRANSITICH 301RT SIF AT EQUIPMENT N012L 1
REF 1: GTN-69338 DATED 8/10/84 REF 2: GTN-69303 DATED 7/31/84 By copy of this letter to hncy williams of CfGNA, please be i
and all issued analyses are found to be ac Gibbs & Hill has reviewed all the as-built analysis problem that 119 analyses do not.contain gipme
.not require that an SIF be considered. ADLPIPE computer in considered stress intensification factors a i
nozzle connections and are acceptable, i
Additional hand analysis was required on 44 problems which i
determined to be acceptable. The results are contained in ca t
culation 2323-EQ-SIF to be issued by August 22,1984.
For expediency, equipment and weld end preparation de were not reviewed.
additional hand analysis performed might have
.._y.
L.
..--_.,,,,--,--m_~..~
I Gbbe G Minc.
Cni-69359 August 17,1984 h remaining nine (9) analyses were found to be acceptable, either by correlation, veld type or by the use of flexible typ connectors (see reference 2).
checking of the calculation is now in progress. A copy of the calculation will'be provided upon completiola of the ch If you have any questions please contact it. W. Mentel (x6302) 1 or F. A. Colucci (x5203).
Very truly yours,
@B5 &
Inc.,
V.
o Robert E. Ballard, Jr.
DirectorofProjects EBa-lpDie-FAC:1c 1 Letter CC: ARMS [BER Site) OL D. H. Wade (TUSI Site) IL (telecopy)
N. Williams (CYGNA CA) IL (telecopy)
G. Grace (TUSI Site) lL
- ~
, = ~.
7 I
To:.
De c.o mea T CoATR.ot l
F(La m :. 3. S 8 arvae //
xx7s c s.
l Cy p %:& {Phd sh Co%cke. Ped 3 o >J e.c.T :
y A % ch / is de A llearn3 decu.m e.nf :__
OcTc/rer S,t7 8 %
__. F V o(/ 2, o 3 0
=R 6a... cyg n a D es.3 m Ccnferl,h q S ype a n se s.
p cT'..
[
I f,'g e. 3 7 h s s Q m f % s C p (Wi//,ws) R CASE (E///d _.....
.t i
7
~
l 4
l
-. - ~, - - - -
n,
~r
-,.n
+e--
e
-