ML20136F383
| ML20136F383 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | 05000000, Vogtle |
| Issue date: | 10/19/1984 |
| From: | Bosnak R Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Adensam E Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| Shared Package | |
| ML082840446 | List:
|
| References | |
| FOIA-84-663 NUDOCS 8410240166 | |
| Download: ML20136F383 (2) | |
Text
.. y; 1
[
o UNITED STATES g
{
y g.
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 D
j
\\p
/
V 0071 g jgg4 g
j 1
g f r' o
MEMORANDUM FOR:
Elinor Adensam, Chief Licensing Branch #4, DL FROM:
Pober: J. Bosnak, Chief Mechanical Engineering Branch, DE
SUBJECT:
MEB CONFIRMATORY PIPING ANALYSIS REVIEW AND DESIGN C?'OiEN'iATION REVIEW FOR PLANT V0GTLE Confirmatory PipMg Analysis Review MEB has implemented a program of performing an independent confirmatory piping analysis for plants undergoing OL review.
For Vogtle 1 & 2 a confirmatory piping analysis review will be performed by our contract personnel at Pacific Northwest Laboratory. The purpose of this independent analysis review will be to verify that the subject piping system meets the applicable ASME Code stress criteria, supports are adequately designed for tiseir lo'ds, and vendor allowables have been met. We do not intend to resolvi. differences between our calculated stresses and loads and thases of the applicant unless Code criteria, support design loads, or y dor allowables are not satisfied.
This program will allow MEB'to verify on a sampling basis that the applicant has met the ASME Code stress requirements, has met vendor interface requirements, and has adequately incorporated the NRC regulatory guides and. review plans into their design.
l~
In order to initiate our analysis review, we will require certain in-i formation to be supplied by the applicant. We selected the Main Steam Piping System outside containment for our analysis. Therefore, the applicant should provide two copies of the following information during our site visit planned for November 8,1984.
i 1.
piping analytical and isometric drawings sufficient to model the t
system from containment penetration to turbine-2.
support drawings t.
t 3.
the piping system design specification 4.
valve weights and CG's 5.
appropriate seismic response spectra 6.
appropriate anchor point movements (thermal and seismic) 7.
any design notices not yet incorporated into the piping or support drawings (later DCN's should be forwarded as received) 8.
applicable equipment allowable loads 9.
piping and instrumentation diagrams (P&ID's) for the system
(
The result of our confirmatory analysis will be provided in the SER.
l
& lp 'a m< h e
. l.'.
l
. Design Documentation Review In addition, we are planning to perform an audit of the applica6t's design specifications and design reports as part of our licen' sing review under Standard Review Plan 3.9.3.
We plan to review the~ASME.
required design specifications for completeness and the design reports for assurance that the selected component meets' the condition stated in the design specification. Our review will include the design specification and the respective design report for the following ASME Code Class 1, 2, and 3 components:
1.
a pump 2.
a valve 3.
a piping system, and 4.
a component support.
We would like to discuss with the applicant the specific component design documents that are available for review.
Subsequently, we plan to meet with the applicant and Terrorm the audit in conjunction with the November 8,_,
1984 site visit. Subsequently, a detailed review of the design documents will be performed with any follow-up(questions to be discussed in con-junction with our draft SER meeting see memorandum from R. Bosnak to E.
Adensam dated 12/14/83) tentatively scheduled for the week of January 7, 1985.
The results of our design documentation review will also be included in our input to the SER.
fh Rob}ert J. Bosnak, Chief Mechanical Engineering Branch Division of Engineering l
cc: _J. Knight, DE I
M. Miller, DL H. Brammer, DE J. Alzheimer (3), PNL D. Terao, DE e
--