ML20213D405
| ML20213D405 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | 05000000, Sequoyah |
| Issue date: | 10/28/1986 |
| From: | TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML082401853 | List: |
| References | |
| 222.6-(B), 222.6-(B)-R, 222.6-(B)-R00, NUDOCS 8611120067 | |
| Download: ML20213D405 (9) | |
Text
'
d TVA EMPLOYEE CONCERNS REPORT NUMBER: 222.6 (B)
SPECIAL PROGRAM REPORT TYPE:
SEQUOYAH ELEMENT REVISION NUPEER: 0 v
TITLE:
PIPE SUPPORT WELD DESIGN AISC Minimum Weld Criteria PAGE 1 0F 7 REASUN FOR REVISION:
PREPARATION PREPARED BY:
w NJn b,aAw b
/0-3-86 SIGNA}UREr(
/
DATE I
REVIEWS PEER:
SIGNATURE DATE
~ $Y G/k
/E) lh SIGN /,TURE DATE CONCURRENCES WC
/d-f-8C CEG-H:
N 8-/4 //
4 SRP:
SIGNATURE DATE SIGNATURE DATE anannwen av.
8611120067 861105 PDR ADOCK 05000259 P
PDR ECSP MANAGER DATE MANAGER OF NUCLEAR POWER DATE CONCURRENCE (FINALREPORTONLY)
TVA EMPLOYEE CONCERNS REPORT NUMBER: 222.6 (B)
SPECIAL PROGRAM REVISION NUMBER: 0
'v PAGE 2 0F 7 1.
CHARACTERIZATION OF ISSUE (S):
Concern:
Issue:
IN-85-109-003 AISC minimum weld criteria was not "AISC Minimum Weld Criteria is always followed.
violated by Memo E440ll-01.
Names are known."
2.
HAVE ISSUE (S) BEEN IDENTIFIED IN ANOTHER SYSTEMATIC ANALYSIS? YES X NO Identified by TVA (WBNP)
Date 12/01/81 Documentation Identifiers:
NCR No. WBNYCP 8101/R1 (SWP 81 1201003) 3.
DOCUMENT NOS., TAG NOS., LOCATIONS OR OTHER SPECIFIC DESCRIPTIVE IDENTIFICATIONS STATED IN ELEMENT.
Specific memo E440ll-01 cited in the concern could not be located by TVA as the reference identification number is not in TVA's document control system.
4.
INTERVIEW FILES REVIEWED:
Per TVA review of interview files, no additional information, other than "K" form and generic applicability sheet is contained in this file (App.A,7.b).
5.
DOCUMENTS REVIEWED RELATED TO THE ELEMENT:
See Appendix A.
6.
WHAT REGULATIONS, LICENSING C089 FITMENTS, DESIGN REQUIREMENTS OR OTHER APPLY OR CONTROL IN THIS AREA?
See Appendix A.
09/2d (10/03/86)
TVA EMPLOYEE CONCERNS REPORT NUMBER: 222.6 (8)
SPECIAL PROGRAM REVISION NUMBER: 0 y
PAGE 3 0F 7 7.
LIST REQUESTS FOR INFORMATION, MEETINGS, TELEPHONE CALLS, AND OTHER DISCUSSIONS RELATED TO ELEMENT.
See Appendix A.
8.
EVALUATION PROCESS:
a.
Review SQN Pipe Support Design Criteria and Licensing Commitments regarding AISC minimum weld requirements.
b.
Review applicable codes.
c.
Review pipe supports and calculations to verify if the code requirements and commitments are met.
d.
Evaluate findings.
9.
DISCUSSION, FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS v
Discussion:
The CI has indicated that AISC minimum weld criteria is violated.
SQN through its Pipe Support Design Manual, Section 7.15, paragraph 7.15.3 and FSAR paragraph 3.8.4.5.2 is committed to meet AISC requirements for minimum weld size based on the thickness of the parts being joined.
AISC references AWS Dl.1 as the welding code to be used for structural welding. Minimum weld sizes shown in Table 2.7 of AWS D1.1 apply when prequalified welding is perfonned. This provision is intended to ensure sufficient heat input to reduce the possibility of cracking. The fillet weld sizes are related to the welding heat input and the base material's ability to dissipate heat. This minimum weld consideration was developed in the early 1940s basically to minimize the possibility of underbead cracking.
However, the use of low hydrogen electrodes, now common in the industry, minimizes the possibility of underbead cracking and therefore does not require adherence to the minimum weld size requirements.
The ASME code similarly recognized the need for a minimum weld size in the early 1970s.
It adopted a minimum weld size requirement which was based on the AWS requirements. Because of lack of relevance between this historical weld size requirement and the current technical requirements, ASME issued code case N-413. The
~
0972d (10/03/86)
TVA EMPLOYEE CONCERNS REPORT NUMBER: 222.6 (8)-
SPECIAL PROGRAM REVISION NUMBER: 0 y
PAGE 4 0F 7 ASME code case N-413 " minimum size of fillet welds for subsection NF linear type supports" also permits fillet and partial penetration weld sizes smaller than the size listed in Section III, Division I, Subsection NF, provided that the allowable limits of Table NF-3324.5(a)(1) are met and weld. size is'specified on the design drawings.
TVA has performed qualification tests (App. A, 5.e) to the requirements of AWS 01.1 code, which serve to qualify the use of fillet weld smaller than the minimum size. On the basis of this qualification and in accordance with code case N-413, fillet welds of any size capable of carrying calculated loads may be used for joining materials listed in group 1, Table 4.1.1 of AWS Dl.1 code.
l To independently verify if SQN did violate the AISC minimum weld j
requirements, 34 pipe supports (listed in App. A, 5.d) selected from the following systems were reviewed.
o Main steam o
\\d_,
Fuel pool cleaning o
Safety injection o
Condensate o
Upper head injection o
Blow down o
Chemical volume control Twelve supports (listed with asterisk "*" in App. A, 5.d) do not meet minimum weld requirements. This indicates that SQN did, in some cases, violate AISC/FSAR commitment for minimum weld requirements.
However, ASME code case N-413 as discussed above permits weld size smaller than AISC minimum weld provided design load and allowable stress limits are properly considered in the weld design.
To verify the above requirement, calculations for 4 out of 12 pipe supports were selected. The. review team was unable to obtain these calculations as they were not available in SQN records, 4
i i
An analytical verification for the supports identified with an asterisk in App. A, 5.d. should demonstrate compliance to ASME code case N-413. Based on the results of the qualification tests 1
performed by TVA, this verification can be completed post startup of SQN.
wr i
0972d (10/03/86)
TVA EMPLOYEE CONCERNS REPORT NUMBER: 222.6 (B)
SPECIAL PROGRAM REVISION NUMBER: 0 y
PAGE 5 0F 7 The conflict between the practice and the procedural / licensing commitment of adherence to AISC minimum weld requirement can be resolved with revision to the subject commitments.
Findings:
a.
SQN did not, in all cases, meet the AISC minimum weld requirements as committed to the design criteria and FSAR.
b.
Pipe support calculations were not available for review to verify if ASME code case N-413 can be applied.
==
Conclusion:==
The concern is valid as SQN did not, in all cases, meet the AISC minimum weld requirements. However, ASME code case N-413 permits weld size smaller than the minimum size required per AISC provided appropriate design loads and allowable stresses are considered in the weld design.
S v
0972d (10/03/86)
~
TVA EMPLOYEE CONCERNS REPORT NUMBER: 222.6 (B)
~
SPECIAL PROGRAM REVISION NUMBER: 0 y
PAGE 6 0F 7 l
APPENDIX A 5.
DOCUMENTS REVIEWED RELATED TO THE ELEMENT:
a.
General Construction Specification, G-29C, Rev. 7, (12/21/81) b.
SQN FSAR Section 3.8.4.5.2, Paragraph 1, Rev. 2; Section 3.8-29, Paragraph 4, Rev. 2; and Section 3.5-54, Paragraph 5, Rev. 2 c.
SQN Pipe Support Design Manual (PSDM), Section 7-15, Rev. 0, (04/22/83) d.
SQN Pipe Support Drawings 1-MSH-77(H1-17)/R2 2-CCH-372(2-H10-372)/R2 1-MSH-130(H1-77,78)/R1 2-CCH-374(2-H10-374)/R1 1-MSH-165(H1-120)/R4 1-CSH-44(1-H21-44)/R904 1-MSH-300(1-H1-300)/R905 2-CSH-14(2-H21-14)/R906 1-MSH-301(1-H1-301)/R904
- 2-CSH-15(2-H21-15)/R905
- l-MSH-357(1-H1-357)/R905 1-FPCH-505(H50-505)/R901 y
1-MSH-503(H1-503)/R4 1-FPCH-527(H50-527)/R2 1-AF0H270A(H3-280A)/R5
- l-RCH-134( l-H36 -134)/R905 1-AF0H-369(H3424)/R906
- 1-RCH-136( 1-H36-136)/R4 1-FDH-45(H4-43)/R1
- l-RCH-138(1-H36-138)/R1 1-FDH-201(1-H4-201)/R1
- 2-RCH-242(2-H36-242)/R903 2-UHIH-144(2-H45-144)/R02 1-SIH-365(1-SIH-365)/R2
- 2-UHIH-145(2-H45-145)/R905 1-CH-78(H6-78)/R2
- 2-SGBH-70( 2-H47-70)/R 1 2-CVCH-614(2-H34-614)/R904
- 2-SGBH-72(2-H47-72)/R1
- 2-CVCH-615(2-H34-615)/R4 2-H10-352(2-H10-352)/R1 2-CVCH-806(2-H34-806)/R902 l
- 2-CCH-367(2-H10-367)/R1
- 2-CVCH-813(2-H34-813)/R0 Pipe support drawings with an asterisk do not meet AISC minimum l
weld criteria, e.
Memorandum from J. A. Raulston to J. C. Standifer,
Subject:
Clarification of Welding Requirements, (01/20/84) f.
American Institute of Steel Construction Manual, 7th Edition g.
Structural Welding Code - Steel AWS Dl.1, (1984) h.
Final Report of Nuclear Performo..ee Plan (NPP), Volume II, Rev. 1, (07/14/86) n 0972d(10/03/86)
TVA EMPLOYEE CONCERNS REPORT NUMBER: 222.6(8)
SPECIAL PROGRAM REVISION NUMBER: 0 y
PAGE 7 0F 7 i.
EN DES-EP1.14,
Title:
" Engineering Records - Retention and Storage," Rev. 10, (05/13/83) 6.
WHAT REGULATIONS, LICENSING COMITMENTS, DESIGN REQUIREENTS OR OTHER APPLY OR CONTROL IN THIS AREA?
a.
SQN FSAR Section 3.8.4.5.2, paragraph 1, Rev. 2; Section 3.8-39, paragraph 4, Rev. 2; and Section 3.8-54, paragraph 5, Rev. 2 b.
SQN Design Criteria SQN-DC-V-24.1, Rev. 0, (06/23/86) c.
SQN Pipe Support Design Manual, Section 7.15, Rev. O, (04/22/83) 7.
LIST REQUESTS FOR INFORMATION, MEETINGS, TELEPHONE CALLS, AND OTHER DISCUSSIONS RELATED TO ELEMENT.
a.
RFI #SQN-515, (08/24/86) b.
RFI #SQN-607, (10/02/86) c.
TVA Transmittal No. 102,(08/29/86) 0972d (10/03/86)
ECTG C.3
(.
Attachment A Page 1 of 1 Revision 2 - A V
ECSP CORRECTIVE Action Tractima Document (CATD)
INITIATION 1.
Inusediate Corrective Action Required: W, Yes O No 2.
Stop Worlt Recossmended: 0 Yes M No 3.
CATD No.
22 2. ot.
_smu of a.
INITIATION DATE to-2-Ad 5.
RESPONSIBLE ORGANIZATION: buE 6.
PROBLEM DESCRIPTION: In QR O NQR CONpLn r Asruness n essa u o mnem>4
,/ 1:nu c ius.
ennausrueur AUh A e rdAL MMT 22 A06 MS AONRAANLM TD M1 Abt L unun u du anset o Asavaamusu r1.
o O ATTACHMENTS 7.
PREPARED BY: NAME!a1 C 4-2 /5sC/ KA DATE:
re-t-dd 8.
CONCURRENCE: CEG-H h M.WM &
DATE: AO -lo n 9.
APPROVAL: ECTG PROGRAM MGR.
DATE:
CORRECTIVE ACTION Q-10.
PROPOSED CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN:
O ATTACHMENTS 11.
PROPOSED BY: DIRECTOR /MGR:
DATE:
12.
CONCURRENCE: CEG-H:
DATE:
SRP:
DATE:
ECTG PROGRAM MGR:
DATE:
VERIFICATION AND CLOSEOUT 13.
Approved corrective actions have been verified as satisfactorily implemented.
SIGNATURE IITLE DATE b
~
I RCTG C.3
(.
Attaciument A Pa4* 1 of 1 Revision 2 - A ECSP CORRECTIVE Action Tractist Document (C&TD) s INITIATION 1.
Immediate Corrective Action Required: 0 Yes K No 2.
Stop Wort Recomunended: 0 Yes M No 3.
CATD No.
222 nc au oi 4
INITIATION DATE f o _t -ac.
5.
RESPONSIBLE ORGANIZATION: AAtf 6.
PROBLEM DESCRIPTION: E QR O NQR PfM
_tdACltht y l*Ar eda.ATA0NsL nantM AndT Ah!A1LA k LA Aiet DA n//f W Af WALA MAA A/ R TD EA09ft* V of AeM9 d* dad CAff Al-dit FAM Af AROLifh.
O ATTACHMENTS 7.
PREPARED BY: NAME E f-1 ' /SSC/_
DATE:
to
- 8.
CONCURRENCE: CEG-H M:s h if % M DATE: /d -ArpJL 9.
APPROYAL: ECTG PROGRAM NGi".
DATE:
t.
CORRECTIVE ACTION G
10.
PROPOSED CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN:
O ATTACHMENTS 11.
PROPOSED BY: DIRECTOR /MGR:
DATE:
12.
CONCURRENCE: CEG-H:
DATE:
SRP:
DATE:
ECTG PROGRAM MGR:
DATE:
VERIFICATION AND Ct.OSE0tJT l
13.
Approved corrective actions have been verified as satisfactorily implemer.ted.
SIGNATURE TITLE DATE y
e
-