ML20209D776
| ML20209D776 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Sequoyah  |
| Issue date: | 01/27/1987 |
| From: | TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20209B481 | List: |
| References | |
| 215.2(B), 215.2(B)-R01, 215.2(B)-R1, NUDOCS 8702040546 | |
| Download: ML20209D776 (17) | |
Text
_ _ _ _ _ _ _
TVA EMPLOYEE CONCERNS REPORT NUMBER: 215.2 (B)
SPECIAL PROGRAM REPORT TYPE:
SEQUOYAH ELEMENT REVISION NUMBER: 1 TITLE:
CIVIL / STRUCTURAL DESIGN Cut Rebar Control PAGE 1 0F 16 i
REASON FOR REVISION:
1.
Revised to incorporate SRP and TAS comments; to add chronology and Section 10, Corrective Action, and CATD list.
PREPARATION PREPARED BY:
D E!D C 1[2.o [97 SIGNAlURE g
/ DATii BEVIEWS m
Eh EVIEW C0fHI11tE-1blll1x I-Zo-27 SIGNATURE (/ '
7 DATE k
, hhN/
/*?.72f2 i / - //> /
SIGNATURE '
DATE CONCURRENCES N, (x _
f,2 2-t 7 8702040546 870129ADOCK 05000327 R
CEG-H: hNW
/-22 -P 7 SRP:h
/ - 3 7-ffy SIGNATURE DATE
/
SIGNAT g DATE APPROVED BY:
MW&tok-
/-1747 alx ECSP MAN E R DATE MANAGER OF 'NJCLEAR POWER DATE CONCURRENCE (FINAL REPORT ONLY)
- SRP Secretary's signature denotes SRP concurrences are in files.
TVA EMPLOYEE CONCERNS REPORT NUMBER: 215.2 (B)
SPECIAL PROGRAM REVISION NUMBER: 1 PAGE 2 0F 16 1.
CHARACTERIZATION OF ISSUE (S):
Concerns:
Issues:
IH-85-297-005 a.
Cutting of rebar in reactor
" Structural integrity of con-containment and the crane walls tainment and crane walls in the inside the reactor building reactor building is in question could have weakened the structure.
because of over 2000 known released to core drill / cut b.
There are over 2,000 known releases reba r.... "
for core drills.
l IN-85-868-004 c.
Procedural control /as'iessment of cut "CI stated that cutting of rebar to ensure structural integrity rebars in crane walls RB-1 and of concrete is in question.
RB-II for penetration of ducts, conduits and pipes could have weakened the overall structure.
CI declined to provide additional information...."
2.
HAVE ISSUE (S) BEEN IDENTIFIED IN ANOTHER SYSTEMATIC ANALYSIS? YES X NO Identified by NRC ISE Date April 22,1986 Documentation Identifiers:
Investigation Report Nos. 50-327/86-27 and 50-328/86-27 L44 860506 542 - Deficiency D4.3-1 3.
DOCUMENT NOS., TAG NOS., LOCATIONS OR OTHER SPECIFIC DESCRIPTIVE IDENTIFICATIONS STAltu IN ELEMENT.
Concern applies specifically to containment crane walls in Reactor Building Units 1 and 2, and, by implication, to Category 1 structures in general.
l l
l I
1 1
l 1067d - 01/20/87
TVA EMPLOYEE CONCERNS REPORT NUMBER: 215.2 (B)
SPECIAL PROGRAM REVISION NUMBER: 1 PAGE 3 0F 16
!=
4.
INTERVIEW FILES REVIEWED:
The interview filds for concerns IN-85-247-005 and IN-85-868-004 were reviewed on 10/02/86 as indicated by RFI SQN #607 (10/02/86).
The files contain only the K-Form and Generic Applicability Sheets.
i 5.
DOCUMENTS REVIEWED RELATED TO THE ELEMENT:
See Appendix A.
6.
WHAT REGULATIONS, LICENSING C0l#1ITMENTS, DESIGN REQUIREMENYS, OR OTHER l
APPLY OR CONTROL IN THIS AREA?
See Appendix A.
7.
LIST REQUESTS FOR INFORMATION, MEETINGS, TELEPHONE CALLS, AND OTHER DISCUSSIONS RELAltu TO ELtatNT.
See Appendix A.
8.
EVALUATION PROCESS:
a.
Sought program to control jobsite rebar cutting, record cuts, and forward records to engineering for evaluation.
b.
Reviewed engineering process of recording and evaluating the effect of such cut rebar - both single cuts and cumulative effects.
c.
Reviewed licensing / project commitments for rebar cutting.
9.
DISCUSSION, FINDINGS, AND CONCLUSIONS L
Chronology:
11/07/84:
NRC transmits 18E inspection reports regarding cutting of plant features embedded in concrete 12/13/84:
TVA responds to 11/07/84 NRC ISE inspection reports 05/30/85:
QTC forwards K-form on IN-85-297-005 to TVA j
07/19/85:
QTC forwards K-form on IN-85-868-004 to TVA i
04/22/86:
NRC transmits 18E inspection reports regarding cutting i
of reinforcing steel (rebar) 07/28/86:
TVA responds to 04/22/86 NRC 18E inspection reports 1067d - 01/20/87 L
~
TVA EMPLOYEE CONCERNS REPORT NUMBER: 215.2 (B)
SPECIAL PROGRAM REVISION NUMBER: 1 4
PAGE 4 0F 16 1
i Discussion:
The structural dekign basis of Category I structures is described in FSAR Section 3.8.
The FSAR does not explicitly address the control of cut rebar.
However, it is implicitly addressed by the commitments of the in-place structures to meet design basis criteria, applicable codes for specified loads and load combinations.
During construction activities following the facility structural design, routing and attaching of various plant commodities will necessitate cutting of concrete and reinforcing steel (rebar). The structural capability of the reinforced concrete ele'nients is not generally sensitive to such cutting since the sizing of most members is based on shielding considerations and, thus, reinforcing selection is frequently based on temperatureAninimum reinforcing rather than structural requirements.
However, cutting must be controlled to identify potential weakening of the structure.
Accordingly, construction cutting of rebar requires control to ensure that the design basis is not compromised.
The NRC inspected activities at SQN, as documented in NRC 18E Inspection Reports 50-327/84-27 and 50-328/84-27 were transmitted to TVA by NRC letter from 01shinski to Parris (11/07/84). One violation was cited following a Licensing Event Report which recorded the cutting of an embedded electrical conduit which made a valve for the upper head injection system inoperable. This instance does not relate to rebar cutting specifically, but does relate to embedded electrical conduits and other embedded plant features.
TVA responded to this violation via a letter from Domer to O'Reilly (12/13/84) which stated that AI-17, " Drilling, Cutting. Chipping and Excavating," had been reviewed and revised to improve engineering review prior to core drilling or chipping.
The TVA response also indicated plans to purchase an attachment device to the drilling machines to help preclude any inadvertent drilling of embedded metal. Based on evaluation team discussions with TVA i
personnel (App. A, 7 9) a portable, reliable radar based rebar locator was purchased in 1985 which has been effective in imnroving rebar cutting control.
1067d - 01/20/87 f
-7 m_.,
-__._.__.__._,w_.,m_m.__,__.
- c. _, _
.n
...m_
TVA EMPLOYEE CONCERNS REPORT NUMBER: 215.2 (B)
SPECIAL PROGRAM REVISION NUMBER: 1 PAGE 5 0F 16 The evaluation team's review of AI-17 finds that it requires engineering review.for only electrical and mechanical disciplines; civil review is not required prior to concrete excavation.
The review also finds that AI-17 does not reference specification G-2 requirements (TVA specification G-2, Section 8.3 contains ONE/0E requirements for cutting of rebar), does not require prior DNE/0E approval for cutting rebar or caution against cutting without it, and does not reference a procedure or instruction addressing how such DNE/0E approval is obtained. NCRs 2975 and 2836 are examples of lack of Civil Engineering Branch (CEB) prior approval.
The NRC performed a special inspection of Gilbert /Conponwealth's Technical Review of SQN Modifications dated 03/03/86 and perfomed an additional independent review of TVA.
The results of this inspection are documented in NRC I&E Inspection Reports 50-327/86-27 and 50-328/86-27 transmitted to TVA by NRC letter from Taylor to White (04/22/86). As a result of this independent audit, Deficiency Report D4.3-1 was generated which indicates that there is no documented evidence of CEB evaluation in the structural calculations of cut rebar effect for ECNs L64S5 and L5202.
TVA's response to Deficiency D4.3.1 is contained in TVA letter from Gridley to Grace (07/28/86) which states in part:
"The reinforcing bar cuts were approved, reviewed, and verified by engineering judgment by engineers familiar with the design and TVA design procedures. Any previous reinforcing bar cuts which would have effected [ sic] the approval of these cuts are documented on the design drawing.I By documenting the rebar cuts on the design l
drawing, the ability to assess possible effects from accumulated rebar cuts is provided. The approval noted that design calculations would not be revised.
The drawings were then updated to reflect the degraded condition. Future analyses would include any 'as-constructed' configurations on the design drawings. Therefore this issue does not pose a safety problem."
Based on deficiencies cited by the NRC in its reviews prior to April 1986, TVA Policy Memorandum PM86-04 (04/25/86) was issued directing that future use of engineering judgment be documented by providing technical justification for any engineering topic.
1.
Evaluation team discussions with TVA personnel indicated that this is only appifcable to reinforcing bar cuts made after initial plant operation.
1067d - 01/20/87
TVA EMPLOYEE CONCERNS REPORT NUMBER: 215.2 (B)
SPECIAL PROGRAM REVISION NUMBER: 1 PAGE 6 0F 16 The evaluation team had discussions with TVA DNE personnel responsible for evpluating the structural effects of rebar cutting as noted in App. 'A, 7.d and 7.e.
These discussions indicated that the TVA response to Deficiency D4.3.1 was only applicable to rebar cut after initial plant operation (post-1982). No formal logging system was found; however, a personal log for tracking rebar cuts since late 1985 (App. A, 5.s) and TVA design drawings (App. A, 5.1) were reviewed. These documents record the rebar cuts that have been tracked. The. log entries and the drawing approvals indicate the engineering assessment of possible effects as stated in the TVA letter from Gridley to Grace (07/28/86).
The evaluation team reviewed all crane wall drawingi;: The drawings with asterisks shown indicate rebar cuts due to core drilling at these revisions:
41N722-1 R8 (11/28/84)*
41N722-5 Rll (09/23/75) 41N722-1 R7 (06/18/84)*
41N722-5 R10 (10/22/74) 41N722-1 R6 (11/10/83)*
41N722-6 R7 (01/28/76) 41N722-2 R6 (11/10/83)*
4 41N722-7 R3 (05/08/86)*
41N722-3 R7 (12/09/75) 41N722-7 R2 (03/12/85)*
41N722-4 R2 (07/03/74) 41N722-8 R1 (10/23/73)
The drawings with revisions in the 1980s document rebar cuts and show log numbers, number of bars cut for each log number, and the location of the cut. These 1980s revision drawings show l
approximately 15 cuts for both units.
No rebar cuts due to core j
drilling are shown on these drawings prior to 1982 revisions.
In addition, the evaluation team reviewed TVA procedure M&AI-10, i
" Testing of Expansion Anchors Set in Hardened Concrete." This procedure states that no rebar shall be cut without prior DNE/0E approval unless otherwise called for. However, it does not l
reference specification G-2, Section 8.3 requirements for cutting l
of rebar nor do M&AI-10 and AI-17 reference each other.
1067d - 01/20/87 i
TVA EMPLOYEE CONCERNS REPORT NUMBER:
215.2 (B)
SPECIAL PROGRAM REVISION NUMBER: 1 PAGE 7 0F 16 Findings:
The alphabetic iddntifiers below correspond to the list of issues in Section 1.
a.
The issue that cutting of rebar in reactor containment and the crane walls inside the reactor building could have weakened the structure is a valid issue that needs to be addressed.
The evaluation team, however, could not determine if such cutting has adversely weakened the structure because of the lack of procedural controls and cumulative assessments implemented by TVA.
b.
The issue that there are over 2000 known releases for core drills is a valid issue that needs to be addressed.
The evaluation team, however, could not determine the extent of rebar cutting that has taken place or adversely weakened the structure because of the lack of procedural controls and cumulative assessments implemented by TVA.
c.
o No documented procedure or program for processing, evaluating, documenting, and controlling cut rebar was found within SQN DNE.
o Rebar cuts during the construction phase of SQN (pre-1982) are not included on the cumulative assessment of the effects o. rebar cuts.
o Administrative Instruction AI-17, " Drilling, Cutting, Chipping and Excavating" re; ease form does not require review by a Civil Engineer prior to concrete excavation. AI-17 does not require prior DhE/0E approval for cutting reinforcing steel or caution against cutting without it.
o Neither Administrative Instruction AI-17 nor Modification and Additions Instruction M&AI-10 references Specification G-2 which has DNE/0E requirements for such cutting in Section 8.3, or a procedure or instruction which addresses how such DNE/0E approval is obtained, or each other.
==
Conclusion:==
TVA's procedures are not sufficiently developed or cross-indexed to provide an effective program to control and document rebar cuts or to evaluate the effects of rebar cuts. Thus there is no assurance of compliance with licensing commitments or design criteria for structures.
1067d - 01/20/87
TVA EMPLOYEE CONCERNS REPORT NUMBER: 215.2 (B)
SPECIAL PROGRAM REVISION NUMBER: 1 PAGE 8 0F 16
- 10. CORRECTIVE-ACTION:
TVA's corrective ' action plan (CAP) assesses cut rebar to ensure structural integrity of concrete members in general and of the Reactor Building shield wall and crane wall in particular-(App. A, 5.u).
This CAP addresses past (both before and during commercial operation of the plant), present, and future assessment of cut-rebar. This CAP, along with that for Sequoyah Element Report 215.6(B), " Hanger Loads on Structures," constitute the total action to evaluate the effect of cut rebar and takes into consideration the reduction of member capacity as well as increases due to additional hanger loads. This CAP is for both pre restart and post restart activities.
I Pre Restart These activities will include reviews, evaluations, and criteria changes or hardware fixes as required.
In addition, plant procedures will be revised and developed to describe the process for review, approval, and documentation of cut rebar.
a.
Procedures 4
Existing plant procedures M&AI-6, M&AI-10, M&AI-17, and AI-17 will be revised to ensure coordination between plant i
operations and DNE and to ensure that cut rebar are reported to DNE.for its subsequent evaluation. A new documented procedure for processing, evaluating, documenting and controlling cut rebar will be developed by SQN DNE.
i b.
Reactor Building Cut rebar.within the Reactor Building were documented by a series of TVA memoranda during the construction phase of SQN prior to plant turnover to operational personnel. A baseline map of these cuts will be developed based on this information and in-plant inspection to form a basis for the assessment of the cumulative effects of rebar cuts. As the Reactor Building shield wall and crane wall are specifically cited in the employee concern and are the structural features more likely to be significantly affected by cut rebar, they have been selected for detailed evaluation prior to plant i
restart. The evaluation team considers the selection of these two walls to be appropriate for the reasons stated l
above.
f j
1067d - 01/20/87
,-e e
nw ar-
.a.
,,,,-n,,---.--.w----
_.--,,,--,--,,,,,,r,-,--,---,.w,
9 TVA EMPLOYEE CONCERNS REPORT NUMBER: 215.2 (B) i SPECIAL PROGRAM REVISION NUMBER: 1 4
PAGE 9 0F 16 A field walkdown will be made to verify general consistency between the baseline map and the as-built plant configuration for.these Walls.
These walls will then be evaluated for combined effects of cut rebar (215.2) and hanger loads (215.6) to ensure and document that they meet the design criteria and FSAR l
commitments.
c.
Auxiliary Building Slabs TVA has reviewed the floor slabs of Category I structures at SQN and has concluded that Auxiliary Building' floor elevations 714, 734, and 749 are the most critical slabs for.
evaluating cut rebar as they are sized for the prescribed loadings rather than shielding and are most likely to have cut rebar.
The evaluation team concurs with this selection for the reasons stated and because these slabs represent the majority of Auxiliary Building slabs which are typically the most heavily loaded and reinforced slabs and are susceptible to have cut rebar.
TVA will compare drawings of SQN and WBN to utilize WBN completed cut rebar data. A general field walkdown of SQN will be made to verify data compatibility and make data modifications as necessary. This approach will establish a i.
gross percentage of cut rebar and location for use in the detailed assessment to ensure and document conformance to design criteria and FSAR commitments.
If the results of this first assessment do not meet these requirements, the l
analytical techniques will be refined, the applicable floor live load will be lowered or hardware fixes will be i
provided. However, results of TVA's evaluations to date.
l though not finalized, indicate favorable results. Thus there is reasonable assurance that this assessment is a documentation effort rather than a structural integrity issue.
This is consistent with evaluation team experience on other nuclear power plant applications.
i 1
4 i
1067d - 01/20/87 a
TVA EMPLOYEE CONCERNS REPORT NUMBER: 215.2 (B)
SPECIAL PROGRAM REVISION NUMBER: 1 PAGE 10 0F 16 d.
Auxiliary Building Structural Walls TVA reviewed'the structural walls of the SQN Auxiliary Building for the most critical structural elements and selected the U-Line wall between columns A13 and A15 for detailed evaluation. This wall has heavy loads magnified by the seismic events and is most likely to have cut rebar. The evaluation team concurs with this selection for the reasons stated.
TVA will compare drawings of SQN and WBN to utilize WBN completed cut rebar data. A field walkdown of SQN will be made to verify data compatibility and make data modifications as necessary. This approach will establish a gross percentage of cut rebar for use in the detailed assessment to ensure and document conformance to design criteria and FSAR commitments.
If the results of this first assessment do not meet these requirements, analytical techniques will be refined or hardware fixes will be provided and additional walls will be assessed.
e.
Auxiliary Building Shield Walls TVA reviewed the shield walls of the SQN Auxiliary Building and found that there are approximately 250 walls in ten size i
groupings of such walls from 12 inches thick up to 30 inches thick and greater. The majority of these walls are in the larger size groups (approximately 173 are 24 inches thick or greater). TVA will base the critical shield wall for each size grouping on boundary conditions, spans, and loadings.
For each critical wall of each size, TVA will use the same i
process as described for structural walls.
The evaluation team concurs with this selection and l
evaluation process. However, the evaluation team cannot reach any general conclusions as to the results of this i
j process except to note that previous experience indicates j
that relatively thicker walls generally become a documentation effort rather than a structural integrity issue. Thinner walls may be both, i
l l
l 1067d - 01/20/87 i
TVA EMPLOYEE CONCERNS REPORT NUMBER: 215.2 (B)
SPECIAL PROGRAM REVISION NUMBER: 1 PAGE 11 0F 16 Post Restart TVA SQN will perform a detailed review of WBN cut rebar data and evaluations because of extensive plant similarities and because this activity is complete for WBN. This review will be performed for Category I structural elements other than the Auxiliary Building floor slabs for which an adequate data baseline will have been completed during prerestart activities, and the Reactor Building for which the rebar pattern of SQN differs from that for WBN. The baseline for these other structural elements will be based on available SQN data in addition to the WBN data. For the Reactor Building additional information will be gathered for cut rebar after building turnover to plant operations. 'All such gathered information will be formally documented, evaluated in a manner as described for prerestart activities, and used as a basis for future cut rebar requests.
TVA will also revise the SQN FSAR to clarify Section 3.8 on the use of later ACI code editions which contain newer design or assessment methodologies which are appropriate for use in cut rebar and hanger load evaluations. This revision will make the FSAR consistent with design criteria SQN-DC-V-l.3.3.1.
TVA will base evaluation of future rebar cut requests on procedures developed during the prerestart effort and will document such information on calculations and design drawings.
The evaluation team concludes that the pre-and post restart activities of the stated CAP are an acceptable resolution of the concerns and should also preclude recurrence of findings.
l l
l l
l 1067d - 01/20/87
(
1 TVA EMPLOYEE CONCERNS REPORT NUMBER: 215.2 (8)
SPECIAL PROGRAM REVISION NUMBER: 1 PAGE 12 0F 16 APPENDIX A 5.
DOCUMENTS REVIEWED'RELATED TO THE ELEMENT:
a.
Letter from John A. Olshinski, NRC Director Division of Reactor Projects, to H. G. Parris, TVA Manager of Power and Engineering.
Subject:
"NRC Report Nos. 50-327/84-27 and 50-328/84-27," [L44 841113 013] (11/07/84) b.
Letter from J. A. Domer, TVA Nuclear Engineer, to J. P.
O'Reilly, NRC Regional Administrator.
Subject:
" Inspection Reports 50-327/84-27 and 50-328/84 Respon,se to l
Violation," [L44 841213 806] (12/13/84) c.
Letter from J. A. Olshinski, NRC Director Division of Reactor Projects, to H. G. Parris, TVA Manager of Power and Engineering.
Subject:
" Inspection Reports 50-327/84-27 and i
50-328/84-27." [L44 850114 119] (01/02/85) i d.
Letter from J. M. Taylor NRC Director of Office of i
Inspection and Enforcement, to S. A. White, TVA Manager of Nuclear Power.
Subject:
"NRC Reports 50-327/86-27 and 50-328/86-27," [L44 860506 542] (04/22/86)
\\
e.
Letter from R. L. Gridley, TVA Director of Nuclear Safety and Licensing to J. N. Grace, NRC Region II Administrator.
Subject:
" Inspection Reports 50-327/86-27 and 50-328/86-27.
Response to Deficiencies and Unresolved Items,"
[L44 860729 801] Deficiency D4.3-1, (07/28/86) f.
TVA memo from P. R. Wallace to Those Listed.
Subject:
"Sequoyah Nuclear Plant - Administrative Instruction (AI-17)
- Release (Permit) for Drilling, Cutting, Chipping, and Excavating," [SQN 841001 004] (09/28/84) 9 TVA memo from J. A. Nichols, Project Manager, Seguoyah Nuclear Plant, Construction, to P. R. Wallace, Plant Manager, Sequoyah Nuclear Plant NUC PR.
Subject:
"NCR 2975, Rev.
0,"
[S53 841013 063] (09/25/84) h.
TVA memo from H. J. Fisher, Manager Nuclear Services Branch, QC, E-10 DSC, Sequoyah Nuclear Plant, to H. B. Rankin, Manager, Design Services, E-7 DSC, Sequoyah Nuclear Plant.
Subject:
" Transmittal of NCRs 2925 R0 and 2975 R0 for OE Disposition," [C23 860211 011] (02/11/86) 1067d - 01/20/87
TVA EMPLOYEE CONCERNS REPORT NUMBER: 215.2 (8)
SPECIAL PROGRAM REVISION NUMBER: 1 PAGE 13 0F 16 APPENDIX A (continued) 1.
TVA memo ffom J. P. Vineyard, Project Manager, Sequoyah Engineering Project, OE, DSC-A, Sequoyah Nuclear Plant, to H.
- 8. Rankin, Manager, Design Services, ONP, DSC-E, Sequoyah Nuclear Plant.
Subject:
"NCR 2975 R0," [B25 860321 013]
(03/21/86) j.
TVA memo concerning concrete drilling and drilling 2
restrictions from the Project. Manager.
(Reference from NRC Report Nos. 50-327/84-27 and 50-328/84-27; [L44 841113 013]),
I (09/20/84) k.
TVA Procedures:
i o
Administrative Instruction, AI-17, Rev. 10. " Drilling, Cutting, Chipping, and Excavating," (12/03/85) o TVA Modifications and Additions Instruction, M&AI-10, Rev. 11. " Testing of Expansion Anchors Set in Hardened Concrete," (08/01/86) o TVA Quality Assurance Topical Report TVA-TR75-1A, Rev. 8, (11/13/84)
Operational Quality Assurance Manual, (10/12/84) o o
TVA Engineering Procedure EN DES-EP4.52 R.1, (04/24/84)
TVA Engineering Procedure EN DES-EP2.03 R.6, (04/24/84) o 1.
TVA Drawings:
o SNP Drawings 41N721-1 R.18, 41N721-2 R.7. 41N721-3 R.0, and 41N721-4 R.1 (Concrete Crane Wall Outlines) o SNP Drawings 41N722-1 R.8, 41N722-2 R.6, 41N722-3 R.7, i
41N722-4 R.2, 41N722-5 R.12, 41N722-6 R.7. 41N722-7 R.3, 41N722-8 R.1 (Concrete Crane Wall Reinforcement) o SNP Drawing Nos. 41N700-1 R6 and 41RS722-1 through -12 i
i I
t i
i 1067d - 01/0/87
TVA EMPLOYEE CONCERNS REPORT NUMBER: 215.2 (B)
SPECIAL PROGRAM REVISION NUMBER: 1 PAGE 14 0F 16 APPENDIX A (continued) m.
TVA Specifibations:
G-2 Rev. 5 " General Construction Specification for Plain o
and Reinforced Concrete," (11/01/85)
G-32, Rev. 11. " Bolt Anchors Set in Hardened Concrete,"
o (01/31/86) n.
TVA FCRs:
o SNP FCR 3923 and ECN L5599.
(Reference from memo J. P.
Vineyard to H. B. Rankin, [B25 860321 013]) (03/21/86)
SNP FCR 1464 (Ref. from NCR 2836, SQN 830404 600) o o.
SNP ECN No. L6439 and FCR 4018 [B25 860117 507 and o
S07 860306 888]
SNP ECN No. L6495 and FCR 3915 [B25 860404 517 and o
S07 851209 989]
p.
TVA NCR 2975, Rev. 0 [SQN 841015 606]
o TVA NCR 2836, Rev. 0 [SQN 830404 600]
f o
SNP General Design Criteria SQN-DC-V-1.3.3.1, Rev. 4 q.
" Additions 'After flovember 14, 1979 - Reinforced Concrete, Structural, and Miscellaneous Steel," (09/04/84)
TVA Civil Design Standard DS-C1.7.1, Rev. 3, " General r.
Anchorage to Concrete," (11/16/84)
Mark Adams's personal log for rebar cut evaluations (Mark is s.
the responsible civil engineer on SQNP for documenting and evaluating cut rebar.)
t.
TVA Policy Memorandum PM86-04(DNE) from W. C. Drotieff,
[B20 860424 001] (04/25/86)
TVA ECEP-SQN Restart Program - Corrective Action Plan (CAP) u.
for Element 215.2(B), TCAB-060 (01/17/87) 1067d - 01/20/87 l
TVA EMPLOYEE CONCERNS REPORT NUMBER: 215.2 (B)
SPECIAL PROGRAM REVISION NUMBER: 1 PAGE 15 0F 16 APPENDIX A (continued) 6.
WHAT REGULATIONS, LICENSING COMITMENTS, DESIGN REQUIREMENTS OR OTHER APPLY OR CONTROL IN THIS AREA 7 a.
FSAR update through Amendment 03 3.1 Conformance with NRC General Design Critoria 3.7 Seismic Design 3.8 Design of Category I Structures 17.0 Quality Assurance 1
b.
SRP Section 3.8, " Design of Category I Structures," Rev. O, (11/24/75) l c.
TVA Specification G-2, Rev. 5. " General Construction Specification for Plain and Reinforced Concrete," (11/01/85) d.
10CFR50, Appendix B, effective 10/11/71 l
7.
LIST REQUESTS FOR INFORMATION, MEETINGS, TELEPHONE CALLS, AND OTHER DISCUSSIONS RELATED TO ELEMENT.
a.
RFI SQN #517, all, (08/28/86) b.
RFI SQN #518, all, (08/28/86) c.
RFI SQN #525, all, (08/28/86) d.
TVA/Bechtel meeting minutes between H. Adams /D. Siebald and A. Rather/D. Siebald on 08/21/86 and 08/22/86, respectively, BLT-090,(01/05/87) l f.
Telecon, from D. Siebald, Bechtel, to A. Rather, TVA, IOM #274, (08/28/86) g.
Telecon from J. W. Benkert, Bechtel, to N. A. Liakonis, TVA, IOM #434 (12/05/86) h.
Telecon from N. A. Liakonis and R. W. Alexander. TVA, to J.
W. Benkert, Bechtel, ION 525, (01/09/87) 1067d - 01/20/87
TVA EMPLOYEE CONCERNS REPORT NUMBER: 215.2 (B)
SPECIAL PROGRAM REVISION NUMBER: 1 PAGE 16 0F 16 CATD LIST i'
The following CATDs identify and provide corrective actions for the findings included in this report:
215.02(B) SQN 01 (01/15/87) 215.02(B) SQN 02 (01/15/87)
?
\\
l I
i i
1067d - 01/20/87
3 til l'
REFERENCE
- ECPS120J-ECPSI21C TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY PAGE 83 FREQUENCY
- REQUEST OFFICE OF NUCLEAR P0HER RUN TIME - 12:57:19 ONP - ISSS - RHM EMPLOYEE CONCERN PROGRAM SYSTEM (ECPS)
RUN DATE - 12/02/86
' I LIST OF EMPLOYEE CONCERN INFORMATION CATEGORY: EN DES PROCESS & OUTPUT SUBCATEGORY 21502 CUT REBAR CONTROL S
GENERIC KEYNORD A 3
H APPL QTC/NSRS P
KEYNORD B CONCERN SUB R PLT BBSW INVESTIGATION 5
CONCERN KEYNORD C NUMBER CAT CAT D LOC F L-Q R REPORT R
DESCRIPTION KEYNORD D
)
.IN 297-005 EN 21502 N HBN YYYY SR STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY OF CONTAINMENT DESIGN REVIEN T50227 REPORT AND CRANE HALLS IN THE REACTOR BUILD DESIGN RELATED ING IS IN QUESTION BECAUSE OF DVER 2 CIVIL
)
000 KNONN RELEASED TO CORE DRILL / CUT CONCRETE d
REBAR. CONSTRUCTION DEPARTMENT CON CERN.
CI DECLINED -TO PROVIDE FURTHE R INFORMATION.
y IN 868-004 EN 21502 N WBN YYYY SR CI STATED TNAT CUTTING OF REBARS IN KDNCONFORMANCE T50245 REPORT CRANE HALLS RB-I AND RB-II FOR PENET
- DESIGN REVIEN RATION OF DUCTS, CONDUITS AND PIPES CIVIL
)
COULD NAVE HEAKENED THE OVERALL STRU REBAR
' I3 '
CTURE. CI DECLINED TO PROVIDE ADDIT IONAL INFORMATION. CONSTRUCTION DEP ARTMENT CONCERN.
)
2 CONCERNS FOR CATEGORY EN SUBCATEGORY 21502
}
.}
j
)
)
b
?'
i j
e
~
,