ML20098E769
| ML20098E769 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Salem  |
| Issue date: | 09/20/1984 |
| From: | Liden E Public Service Enterprise Group |
| To: | Martin T NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20098E770 | List: |
| References | |
| IEB-79-02, IEB-79-2, NUDOCS 8410010369 | |
| Download: ML20098E769 (7) | |
Text
___
e-O PSIsG Public Service Electrij and Gas Cornpany P.O. Box 236 Hancocks Bridge, New Jersey 08038 Nuclear Depadment September 20, 1984 U.
S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission Region 1 631 Park Avenue King of Prussia, PA 19406 Attention:
Mr, Thomas T.
Martin, Director Division of Engineering and Technical Programs Gentlemen:
SUPPLEMENTAL RESPONSE NRC COMBINED INSPECTION 50-272/84-05 AND 50-311/84-05 SALEM GENERATING STATION UNITS NO. 1 AND 2 DOCKET NOS. 50-272 AND 50-311 During the subject inspection conducted on January 30 through February 3, 1984, a number of unresolved items were identified.
PSE&G hereby submits additional information on those unresolved items:
Item 272 and 311/84-05-02:
[icensee procedure for evaluation of pipe supports in response to IEB 79-02 enti' led " Criteria for Evaluating Expansion Bolt c
Loads with Plat Plate Supports".
The criteria defines a limit for the determination of flexible base plates.
Plates with ratio of overhanging plate dimension to plate thickness exceeding the value of (5) are defined as flexible.
Plates with flexibility ratio below (5) are considered as rigid.
The licensee did not provide justification or information regarding the source from which this flexibility limit was established.
This item is unresolved pending NRC review of this justification.
s&
The Enerav Pecolo I
(
8410010369 e40920 PDR ADOCK 05000272 9,y % g,m g G
~ Mr.' Thomas T.
Martin _9/20/84 Reply:
Thisferiterion is based on Technical Report TR-3501-1,
- Revision 1 issued by,Teledyne Engineering Services (TES) on j
August 30, 1979,'and transmitted to Mr. William Rutherford (USNRC),,Mr.
S. K..Chaudhary and-Mr.
L.
E.
Tripp (USNRC, Region 1) on September 7, 1979.
-Item 272 and 311/84-05-03:
)
With regard to the licensee procedure for IER 79-02 evaluation
-identified above, only one baseplate and attachment configuration has been addressed.
Further information is
. required as to the extent to which this criteria was utilized for evaluation of various base plate and attachment configurations.
This item is unresolved pending other licensee determination cf the extent of use on other configurations had NRC review of the results.
Reply:
- Although the (.riterion used for calculation of expansion bolt loads-pictoriellv depicted one configuration, this criterion was1 adequate for all configurations used at Salem, i.e.,
channel,-angle, pipe, and tube attachments to rectangular
- plates.with four, six or eight bolts.
Item 272 and 311/84-05-06:
Concrete expansion anchors were te sted for embedment depth by the licensee in: reinforced concrete floor slabs.
Although partial test results were supplied to the NRC inspectors, PSE&G has not provided an analysis of the test results.
Additionally,_the test sampling should provide assurance that the weakest' case where anchorage was-limited to'the 7 unreinforced concrete topping has been considered.
This item is unresolved pending NRC review of the completed test results.
Reply:
PSE&G. has evaluated the adequacy of ' certain floor-mounted concrete anchor bolts utilized in base plate type pipe sapports at Salem 1'and 2 (Attachment 1).
Mr. ThomasJr. Martin 9/20/84 Based on this evaluetion, the eighteen (18) supports which are determined to have anchor bolts embedded in finish concrete will perform their intended function, and no further response
_is; required.
Item 272 and 311/84-05-09:
' Criteria ' for. IE/BU 79-02 evaluation:
(a) A justification is required for the basis of ATI's (licensee contractor) base plate flexibility criteria.
(b) The base plate flexibility criteria f rom B&R (licensee contractor) is limited in its application to two configurations: other configurations analyzed should be identified along with the criteria employed.
This item is unresolved pending NRC review of the ATI basis for the criteria and a determination of the other configurations used by. B&R.
Rep'ly:
Associated. Technologies, Inc. ' ( ATI) used three dif ferent methods including manual calcuations, " Base PLT" computer program and "ANSYS" finite element _ computer program to evaluate-base plate flexibility criteria in accordance with the.ATI procedure provided as Attachment 2.
Burns & Roe (B&R) utilized a simplified "ANSYS" Finite Element program to evaluate angle and channel type connections.
However, for other configurations such as connection to flat plates, Teledyna's " BASEPLATE" program was used for
. evaluation.
B&M's letter, dated February 6, 1984, is provided 1as Attachment 3.
L Items 272 and 311/84-05-04'and -05 concern the use of U-bolts and straps as pipe hangers and anchors.
A revised specification for testing the capability of these components and for determining the stiffness coefficients was submitted to'you on May 21, 1984.
This effort is currently underway at the Franklin Institute Research Laboratory with completion of testing expected in approximately eight weeks.
4.--er vt F-s y
-=*
w
= rr ry w
Mr. Thomas T.
Martin 9/20/84-Should you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call
~
us.
Sincerely, E.. A.
Liden Manager - Nuclear Licensing and Regulation 1
Attachments (All)
C Mr.. Donald C.
Fischer Licensing Project Manager Mr. James Linville Senior Resident Inspector t'
y-h k
t
+ - -
,v--
m w-
+w-r
---ev---
r-,
,-~
v
-r-
,v-vnsr--,---<---
-,t'+-e-*=vav-ev-
ATTACHMENT 1 O PS a Page 1 of 3 S-C-MP00-MSE-256 Date May 14, 1984 Public Service Eldctnc and Gas Company P.O. Box 236 Hancocks Bndge. New Jersey 08038 yd::- C2:12:$
TITLE: ANALYSIS ON DETERMINATION OF EMBEDMENT DEPTHS OF CONCRETE ANCHORS USED FOR SIESMIC I PIPE SUPPORTS, SALEM GENERATING STATION UNITS 1 AND 2 AUTH. NO. T0060.0 1.0 PURPOSE This Safety Evaluation addresses the adequacy of certain floor mounted concrete anchor bolts utilized in base plate-type pipe supports.
2.0 REFERENCE 2.1 NRC Bulletin No. 79-02 dated November 8, 1979 " Pipe Support Base Plate Design using concrete Anchor Bolts"
~
Para. (4).
2.2 SGS/M-DM-112 " Program for determination and evaluation of embedment depths of concrete anchors used for Seismic I pipe support."
2.3 SGS/M-DM-106 Appendix I " Procedure for Test Loading Pipe Support Base Plates Employing Concrete Anchors."
2.4 NRC Inspection, IE Bulletins 79-02, 79-04, 79-07 and 79-14, January 30 through February 3, 1984.
NRC Docket numbers 50-272 and 50-311, dated April 9, 1984.
3.0 SCOPE Concrete anchor bolting in the scope of this evaluation includes those bolts with embedment within the finish concrete structure as opposed to being within the structural concrete.
This has only occurred in isolated cases on floor mounted supports where finish concrete cover was applied over structural concrete flooring.
4.0 DISCUSSION 4.1 As a result of questions raised during the reference 2.4 audit, an open item was identified with regard to adequacy of directly drilled-in Hilti Kwik bolts which had embedment in finish concrete as opposed to structural concrete.
To address this issue, the total floor mounted anchor bolt embedment length data determined per NRC Bulletin 79-02 was reviewed.
The total number of supports falling within the scope of this evaluation is:
13 supports on Salem No. 1 5 supports on Salem No. 2 E5/20 Tne Energy People EDD-7 FORM 1 REV 0 10 SEPT 81 n ma svo
^
ATTACHMENTIl (cent'd)
Page 2_
of 1 Dato:
May 14, 1984 4.2 ' Part of the. program for anchor bolt installation verifica-tion in.accordance with reference 2.1 consisted of a
~"
procedure for test loading a sampling of pipe supports employing concrete anchor-bolts as per referenc3 2.3.
This' test program called for applying by means of calibrated hydraulic jacks, test loads approximating design loads on.the structural attachment transmitting pipe loads to the base plate..During the application of this ce'st load, the bolt strain was measured with calitrated dial indicators and acceptance criteria was conservatively established on.the basis of the modulus of t h 'ticity..of steel.
Because the test loads were applied to u. - structural attachment on ~ the base plate as opposed to the bolts directly, the test methodology inherently included the bolt load application effects associated with bcse plate flexibility.
The-test load sampling included four (4) supports out of eighteeen (18), or approximately 22% of the total population for Units 1 and 2 found to exist within the..acope of this evaluation. ~All those supports load-tested had measured bolt deflections which were well within the test acceptance criteria.
4.3 The finish concrete in which these bolts are embeded is Nuclear Class and has the same strength as the structural concrete.(3500 psi minimum).
Appropriate quality controlled measures were taken and documented during the pouring of this concrete.
These included performing strength tests of the. concrete and witnessing the process of placement by Quality Control personnel.
4.4 To further address this issue, a detailed visual reinspection of thirteen (13) supports on Salem No. I was
. conducted. -All these supports were-found to be
- structurally sound with no evidence of concrete cracking or bolt loosening.
The five (5) suppcrts associated with Salem No. 2 will be reinspected at the first outage opportunity affording access to the supports.
No structural-instability is expected.
I
+
4 E5/20 EDD-7 FORM 1 REV 0 10 SEPT 81 i
i
..___,...__,..____,.,._.,_,__.,___,,___._,..m..
~
ATTACHMENT 1 (cont'd)
Page 3 of 3 Dato May 14, 1984
5.0 CONCLUSION
On the basis of load t :t data sampling, high strength quality concrete utilized in the floors, and satisfactory reinspection results, the eighteen (18) supports which are determined to have anchor bolts embedded in finish concrete will perform their intended function.
NM:cbp P
ES/20 Originatorf Verifier 6
Mb Piping, Mate [ials & Stress Group Head MEnager - Nuc. ear Plant Engineering systems Analysis Group EDD-7 FORM 1 REV 0 10 SEPT 81
._ _ -