ML20198K908

Submits Approval of Proposed Criteria for Selection & Review of Analyzed & Field Routed Piping & Pipe,Tubing,Conduit, Cable Tray & Duct Work Supports.Reply W/Any Rev to Sample Plan Needed to Address Availability of Calculations

ML20198K908
Person / Time
Site:	Millstone
Issue date:	01/08/1998
From:	Imbro E NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned)
To:	Curry D External (Affiliation Not Assigned)
References
NUDOCS 9801150124
Download: ML20198K908 (5)

Text

.

paatogk.

UNITE 3 STATES y*

}

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. 3G ".4-00M 3anuary 8,1998 Daniel Curry Project Director -

Parsons Power Group inc.

2675 Morgantown Road Reading, PA 19607 2 ::a I2 E

Dear Mr. Curry:

5 b:

TI EfO The staff of the Special Projects Office (SPO) of the Office of Nuclear Reactor Reg @intion

(NRR) has reviewed the sampling criteria that you provided in your September 29, M97 sut>mittal. As described below, this letter approves Parsons' proposed criteria for tri6,seI5ctiorn and review of analyzed and b J-touted piping and pipe, tubing, cenduit, cable tray and 8Bct C I

work supports. During the NRC inspection of the Independent Corrective Action V$c@n Program (ICAVP) implementation, you noted that Northeast Nuclear Energy Company had not provided the calcu!.itions necessary for you to implement the subject sampling plan. You should reply to this let;er with any revisions to your sample plan that were needed to address the availability of calculations.

1.0 PIPE STRESS CALCUl.ATIONS 1.1 Large Bore (greater than 2") Piping Stress Calculations Parsons proposed a two-level process for the design review of large bore piping systems. They wl: perform the first level review for the whole population to ensure that the design parameters, as documented by the calculations, are consistent with the applicable licensing and design basis criteria. The second level review will include 20% of alllarge bere pipe stress calculations. Of the 20% selected, half will be a random sample and the other half will be a smart sample. Parsons will select the 10% smart sample based on engineering judgment with con 5Heration for: (1) identif;:ation of the organization responsible for the calculation, (2) identification of common attributes between the calculations which will allow grouping, (3) identification of mort critical calculations, (4) sections containing motor operaterd or air actuhted valves which the pipe supports, and (5) consideration of system multiple train design. Parsons' second level review will verify the repetitive tasks of the computer analysis portion of each calculation. Parsons defines repetitive tasks as modeling of the piping system, preparing the piping computer code input, analyzing and obtaining computer output, and verification of the computed stress values against Code allowable stresses. Parsons indicated that this review will verify that the design information is correctly and accurately entered into the piping analysis computer code and that the computer output results support the conc!usions of the calculation.

The staff finds Parsons' proposed two-tier approach to the review of large bore pipe stress calculations to be acceptable t

PN 0

Lililllllyll11m11 150001 9001150124 990108 PDR ADOCK 05000423 P

PDR 1

4 -,

- F.

Daniel Curry l 2-1.2 Small Bore (2" and under) Piping Stress Calculations Parsons proposed a 20% random sample design review of small bore piping stress calculations containing computer analyses, and a 20% random sample design review of field-routed and supported small bare piping systems. Persons will review a minimum of three small bore piping stress calculations and three field-routed pipir'g systems.

The staff finds Parsons' proposed approach to the review of small bore piping stress-L calculations and field-routed and supported small bore piping systems to be acceptable.-

t 1.3 Tubing Stress Calculations Parsons proposed a 10% sample design review of the total number of tubing stress calculations and/or design documentation. Parsons' sample will include one of each group of redundant '

. transmitters that initiate system operation.

t

The staff finds Parsons' proposed approach to the review of tubing stress calculations and/c,r design documentation to be acceptable, p

1.4.

Vent and Drain Stress Calculations Parsons proposed a 10% random sample review of the total number of vent and drain stress calculations and/or design documentation. Parsons' sample willinclude one of each interface type that is applicable to the system.

U n

The staff finds Parsons' proposed approach to the review of tubing stress calculations and/or design documentation to be acceptable.

2.0 PlPE SUPPORTS Parsons notes that pipe supports generally fall into the following three categories: (1) component s'upports, which consist of pipe clamps with a spring, snubber, strut er out standard components from vendor catalogs with a structural steel or baseplate-to-concrete i

attachment, (2) supports built of structural steel, such as built-up box frames consisting of W-shapes or structural angles with U-boks or straps, and (3) standard supports, that are generally provided in a design criterion with maximum loadings provided for small bore pipe and tubing.

2.1 Component Pipe Supports Parsons proposes to group component pipe supports by support type, such as variable springs, snubbers and struts. Parsons will categorize the supports within each group by parameters such as critical loading, thermal movements, stress, and geometric configuration. Parsons will then screen each group and select 20% of the total number of supports within each group for reviewJ Half of Parsons' 20% selection will be based on a random selection ano half will be'a representative selection based on the most critical suppott parameters and engineering Judgment. The sample willinclude some' supports at pipe rupture locations. Parsons wol select a minimum of three pipe supports from each group for review.

e

.,m.+.e-

,wn-

---

,e,m,

-,,e wee,..-,;

e,,

.r w--.m4m-s

--.-.,e4 e-,w e-r-wr w.:

..w-s

--er

-mw a, w-9

%W ' y '

[

~

~~~

^'

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ - ~ ~ - ~ -

~

+

3 '- L i

~-

Daniel Curry '

[The sistf finds ParsonsYoposed approsch is the revicw of component pipe' supports to bei j

+

w

%_g,,

ecceptable j

s m

.u j

a 2.2 - l S.tructural Steel Pipe. Supports ;

1 y

A IParsons' ge;-::iispproach to group, sategorize and' identify a 20% population of structural;

+

. steel pipe supports for review, including selecting a minimum of three pipe supports from each_

group, is identical to Persons' proposed review apprunch for component pipe supports. The -

i staff finds Parsons' proposed approach acceptable. ;

j l

1 A-

21; - Standard Pipe Supports

-i 7

4 Parsons' proposed approach to group, categorize and identify a 20% population of standard j

pipe supports for review; including 0 electing a minimum of three pipe supports from each group, q

is identical to Parsons' proposed review' approach for component pipe supportsFThe staff finds

. Parsons' gs;-:::1 approach acceptable. (

y,

,~

a 3.0 '

TUBING SUPPORTS:

t N

j

, g;

~

- Parsons riotes that each standard and nonstandard tube support configuration may be used

? multiple times within a tubing system! Parsons' proposed approach to group, categorize and

-identify a 20% population of tubing supports for review, including selecting a minimum of three l tubing iupports from each group, is identical to Parsons' proposed review approach for

. component pipe supports; The staff finds Parsons' proposed approach acceptable.

t (4.0 L CONDUlT, CABLE TRAY AND DUCTWORK SUPPORTS

. Parsons' proposed approach to group, categorize and identify a 20% population of conduit, cable tray and ductwork supports for review, including selecting a minimum of three conduit, -

cable tray and ductwork supports from each group, is identical to Parsons' proposed review

(.

approach for component pipe supports. The staff finds Parsons' proposed approach acceptable.

If discrepancies are identified in review of the sample selected, the NRC will evaluate the -

~

necessity to expand the sample size. If you have any questions or comments please contact 4

1 1me at (301) 4151490.

4 Sincerely, -

1 Eugene Imbro, Deputy. Director ICAVP Oversight g~

?

Special Projectr Office Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation l

' : cc: See next page

' DISTRIBUTION.

i Docket Files (Docket 50 423)

RArchitzel RMcIntyre PUBLIC -

WTravers s

' DMcDonald :

,'4 SPO R/F :

' PMcK_ee HEichenholz:

PNarbut-m 1 DOCUMENT NAME:1G:\\NAKOSKl\\SAMPLPAR a.

~

~,.~

OFFICE ICAVP/SPO.=

E=

LA --

f,,

ICAVP/SPO ICAVP/SPO EVimbro ${ -

NAME JANt*am LBe SR s

jpg3,7 31

[ j,7; -

y f%7

[ f pfgy &

- f -- fg7

^

onyg,

OFFICIAL RECORD COPY,

=~

s 7

A

~J j

.-..,-.J-----,

, o Northeast h' miser Energy Company Millstone Nuclear Power Station Unit 2 -

oc:

Lillian M. Cuoco Esquire.

Citirons Regulatory Commission Seniorifuelear Counsel ATTN: Ms. Susan Perry Luxton Northoest Utikties Service Company 180 Grost Neck Road P. O. Bos 270

- Waterford, Connecticut 06385 Hartford, CT 061410270 Mr. F. C. Rothen Mr. Kevin T. AiMcCarthy, Director Vice President Work Servloes

. Monitoring and Radiation Division

. Northeast Utilities Service Company Department of Etevironmental P.O. Box 128 Protection Waterford, CT 06385 79 Elm Street Hartford, CT 06106 5127 C5 artes Brinkman, Manager Washington Nucle! Operations Mr. Allan Johanson, Assistant Director ABB Combustion Engineering Ofnce of PJlicy and Management 12300 Twinbrook Pkwy, Suite 330 Policy Development and Planning Rockville, MD 20852 Division 2

450 Capitol Avenue M3 52ERN Mr. D. M. Goebel PiO. Box 341441 Vice President Nuclear Oversight i

Hartford, CT 061341441 Northeast Utilities Servios Company P. O. Box 128 Regional Administrator, Region l Waterford, CT 06385 4

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission L

475 Allendale Road Mr. M. L Bowling, Jr, l

King of Prussia, PA 19406 Recovery Officer Millstone Unit 2 Northeast Nuclear Energy Company First Selectmen P. O. Box 128 i

Town of Waterford Waterford, CT 0638ti i

F Hall of Recorde L

200 Boston Post Road Senior Robident inspector L

Waterford, CT 06385 Millstone Nuclear Power Station l

clo U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commissl:m l

l Deborah Katr, President P. O. Box 513 1

Citizens Awareness Network Nientic, CT 06357 P. O. Box 83 Shelbume Falls, MA 03170 =

Mr. David Amerine i

n Vice President Nuclear i

Mr, Wayne D. Lanning -

Engineering and Support Deputy Director ofinspections Northeast Utilities Serviot Company o

_ Spooiel Projects Ofhoe P. O. Box 128

475 Allendale Road Waterford, CT.06385 i

. King of Prussia, PA 19406 1415 Burimpic Electric Department j

Mr M. R. Scully, Executive Director clo Robert E. Fletcher, Esqi Connecticut Municipal Electric 271 South Union Street Energy Cec +e,As Burlington,VT 05402 R

30 Stott Avenue Norwich, CT 06360 i o

n.

i l

)

1

.-+,--#,,,

- e r nr wr-

.-y

-3,-

e*,-+

' - rr w 1r 4'-r+e**'-*

eme--+

i Northeast Nuctaar Energy Company Millstone Nuclear Power Station Unit 2 oc:

i Mr. W618iam D. Meinert Mr. John Buckingham Nuclear Engineer Department of Public Utility Control Massachusetts Municipal Wholesale Electric Unit i

Electric Company 10 Liberty Square P. O. Box 426 New Britain, CT 06051 Ludlow, MA 01056

. Mr. James S. Robinson Ernest C. Hadley, Esq.

Manager, Nuclear Investments and 1040 B Msin Street Administration P.- O. Box 549 New England Power Company West Wareham, MA 02576 25 Research Drive Westborough, MA 01582 Joseph R. Egan, Esa.

Egan & Associates, P.C.

Mr. B. D. Kenyon 2300 N Street, NW President and Chief Executive Officer -

Washington, D.C. 20037 Nuclear Group Northeast Utilities Service Company The Honorable Terry Concannon P. O. Box 128 Co-Chair Waterford, CT 06385 Nuclear Energy Advisory Council 4

Room 4035 Mr. M. H. F rothers Legislative Office Building Vice President Operations Capitol Avenue Northeast Nuclear Energy Company Hartford, Connecticut 06106 P. O. Box 128 Waterford, CT 06385 Mr. Evan Woollacott Co-Chair Mr. John C. Markowicz Nuclear Energy Advisory Council Nuclear Energy Advisory Council 128 Terrys Plain Road g Susan Terrace Simsbury, CT 06070 WatcrforJ. CT 06385-3515 Ms. P. Loftus Mr. Don Schopfer Drector. Regulatory Vice President and ICAVP Manager Northeast Nuclear Energy Company Sargent & Lundy P, O. Box 128 55 E. Monroe Street Waterford, CT 06385 Chicago,IL 60603 Mr, J. A. Price linit Drector - Millstone Unit 2 Northeast Nuclear Energy Company P. O. Box 128 Waterford, CT 08385

--r-n-

~

r-

- ~,, e

---

,re---e

---

w

-, - -,--=

~

~-.g-

,,v 4

w

+, -~~