ML20234B983

Summary of 870619 Meeting W/Util in Bethesda,Md Re Util Proposed Program for Regeneration of Nonretrievable Pipe Support Calculations & Verification of Technical Adequacy of Existing Calculations.Attendees List & Util Handout Encl

ML20234B983
Person / Time
Site:	Sequoyah
Issue date:	06/26/1987
From:	Mckenna E NRC OFFICE OF SPECIAL PROJECTS
To:	NRC OFFICE OF SPECIAL PROJECTS
References
NUDOCS 8707060295
Download: ML20234B983 (29)

Text

___

e ...

'/ UNITED STATES li

]o' E

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 j

%*****/ June 26, 1987

~

Docket Nos. 50-327/328 i

LICENSEE: Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA)

FACILITY: Sequoyah Nuclear' Plant, Units 1 and 2

SUBJECT:

MEETING

SUMMARY

FOR THE JUNE 19, 1987 MEETING BETWEEN NRC AND TVA REGARDING NON-RETRIEVABLE CIVIL CALCULATIONS On June 19, 1987, a meeting was held in Bethesda, Maryland between NRC staff -

and representatives of TVA to discuss TVA's plans regarding pipe support cal-culations for Unit 2. Attachment 1 is a list of attendees. Attachment 2 has handouts from TVA which were used during the meeting.

TVA described its proposed program for regeneration of non-retrievable pipe support calculations and for verification of the technical adequacy of existing calculations. The scope encompasses rigorously analyzed Category 1 (large bore) piping. TVA presently estimates that there are 6000 support calculations altogether. About 2000 calculation packages are available; thus about 4000 calculations would need to be regenerated. As part of this review, existing calculations will also be screened to ensure that the calculation packages are complete.

l TVA informed NRC at the meeting that they had just received some records from IMPELL (formerly EDS) which, although not maintained and control _ led by IMPELL as design calculations, include drawings and calculation files and thus may assist in the review program. This may reduce the number of non-retrievable calculations.

In the regeneration effort by TVA to date. 929 calculations have been redone.

Of these, 688 were found acceptable on initial analysis. More refined analyses 1 were performed on 89 of the remaining cases and 10 supports have been identi-fied as requiring a modification. Based on this effort, TVA has identified attributes which can be used to screen the cases to identify those for which modifications are most likely to be required (referred to as the Category B i pcpulation). In this first set of calculations, support modifications were l needed for cases where loads had changed after the original design or with srecial geometric configurations. Category A calculations would be the other or non-category B calculations.

f 8707060295 870626 DR ADOCK 05 g7.

a i

• June 26,1987 This screening process would be used to prioritize the review such that the Category B calculations would be performed first because they are more likely to result in modifications. However, the completion schedule has been established by TVA such that all calculations would be finished prior-.to plant restart. This is re(:: ired by NRC.

TVA noted that three different sets of pipe support calculation acceptance criteria have been used at Sequoyah: one set up to 1979, one set from 1979-1986 and one set from 1986 forward. Existing calculation packages would use the criteria specified in the calculation whereas the regenerated calculations would be performed with the newest criteria.

Once the need for a support modification has been identified, the implemen-tation schedule will be determined by TVA using the approved restart criteria.

The staff stated that TVA should submit a report describing the calculation program and explain the different calculation acceptance criteria and where NRC staff approval has been. issued. At the next FSAR update, these criteria should also be incorporated therein. The staff also noted that the current d acceptance criteria and recalculation program should address other issues that have been raised on pipe supports, such as base plate flexibility and friction.

Following the meeting on pipe support calculations, a status report on cable pulling testing was provided and discussed (see Attachment 3).

LA /7LRG Eileen McKenna, Project Manager TVA Projects Division Office of Special Projects Attachments:

1. 1.ist of Attendees

2. Handout - Pipe Support Calculations  ;

3. Handout - Cable Pulling l l'

cc w/ attachments:

See next page

r 1

-2 June 26, 1987 This screening process would be used to prioritize the review such that the~ Category B calculations would be performed first because they are more likely to result in modifications. However, the completion schedule has been established by TVA such that all calculations would be finished prior to plant restart. This is required by NRC.

l TVA noted that three different sets of pipe support calculation acceptance criteria have been used at Sequoyah: one set up to 1979, one set from 1979-1986 and one set from 1986 forward. Existing calculation packages would use'the ,

criteria specified in the calculation whereas the regenerated calculations would j be performed with the newest criteria.  !

Once the need for a support modification has been identified, the implemen- i tation schedule will be determined by TVA using the approved restart criteria.

The staff stated that TVA should submit a report describing the calculation program and explain the different calculation acceptance criteria and where l NRC staff approval has been issued. At the next FSAR update, these criteria should also be incorporated therein. The staff also noted that the current i acceptance criteria and recalculation program should address other issues that have been raised on pipe supports, such as base plate flexibility and friction. I Following the meeting on pipe support calculations, a status report on cable J pulling testing was provided and discussed (see Attachment 3). {

1 Original Signed By Eileen McKenna, Project Manager TVA Projects Division Office of Special Projects Attachments:

1. List of Attendees

2. Handout - Pipe Support Calculations .

Handout - Cable Pulling i

3. 1 cc w/ attachments:

See next page i

i DISTRIBUTION l Docket File NRC PDR l Local PDR Those on attached lists TVA:0SP(') TV pQ TVA/AD/P CJamerso TfA26$P]:as EMcKenna hohew JZwolinski 6/2'I/87 6/Je/87 87 6/f/87

,. j ;

y

- gr I

I l

~

DISTRIBUTION FOR MEETING

SUMMARY

DATED: JUNE 26,'1987 Facility: Sequoyah Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2*

4 1

'D6cWEEROc NRC & Local PDPs

. Projects Reading SQN Reading J. Keppler/J. Axelrad j S. Ebneter- ,

S. Richardson J. Zwolinski J. Donohew E..:McKenna T. Rotella I S. R.lConnelly

' C. Jamerson 0GC-Bethesda F. Miraglia E. Jordan  !

J. Partlow ]

I B. D. Liaw  !

G. Zech, Region II  !

I J. Clifford J. R. Fair R. Architzel -

R. Hermann G. Imbro E. Goodwin A. Marinos ACRS(10)

Hon. M. Lloyd Hon. J. Cooper Hon. A. Gore Dr. Henry Myers  !

Mr. R. King, GA0 P. Gwynn-J. Meyer >

J. Austin J. Milhoan C. Ader TVA-Bethesda

• Copies sent to persons on facility service list

. Tennessee Valley Authority Sequoyah Nuclear Plant General ~ Counsel Regional Administrator, Pegion 11 Tennessee Valley Authority U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 400 West Summit Hill-Drive 101 Marietta Street, N.W.

E11 B33 Atlanta, Georgia 30323 Knoxville, Tennessee 37902 Resident. Inspector /Sequoyah NP Mr. R. L. Gridley .c/o U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Tennessee Valley Authority 2600 Igou Ferry Road SN 157B Lookout Place Soddy Daisy, Tennessee 37379 Chattanooga, Tennessee 37402-2801 Mr. Richard King ' '

Mr. H. L. Abercrombie c/o U.S. GA0 Tennessee Valley Authority 1111 North Shore Drive Sequoyah Nuclear Plant Suite 225, Box 194 P.O. Box 2000 Knoxville, Tennessee 37919 Soddy Daisy, Tennessee 37379 Tennessee Department of Mr. M. R. Harding Public Health Tennessee Valley Authority ATTN: Director, Bureau of Seouoyah Nuclear Plant Environmental Health Services P.O. Box 2000 Cordell Hull Building Soddy Daisy, Tennessee 37379 Nashville, Tennessee 37219 i

Mr. D. L. Williams Mr. Michael H. Mobley, Director i Tennessee Valley Authority Division of Radiological Health 400 West Summit Hill Drive T.E.R.R.A. Building W10 B85 150 9th Avenue North' Knoxville, Tennessee 37902 Nashville, Tennessee 37203 .i

)

County Judge Mr. S. A. White Hamilton County Courthouse Manager of Nuclear Power Chattanooga, Tennessee 37402 Tennessee Valley Authority 6N 38A Luukcet Place 1101 Market Street Chattanooga, Tennessee 37402-2801

i ATTACHMENT 1 JUNE 19, 1987 MEETING 4

NAME AFFLIATION J. Donohew NRC/OSP E. Fotopoulos SERCH Licensing, Bechtel E. McKenna NRC/0SP J. A. Zwolinski NRC/OSP/TVA B. D. Liaw NRC/0SP/TVA J. W. Clifford NRC/NRR/0SP B. Hall TAV/DNSL/ SON J. R. Fair NRC/0SP R. E. Architzel - NRR/RSIB R. A. Hermann OSP/TVA G. Imbro NRR/RSIB J. Kirkebo TVA/ Engineering S. Ebneter NRC/0SP/TVA R. Meaders TVA/DNSL/SCN T. S. Rotella NRC/0SP/TVA K. S. Seidle TVA/DNE/CEB B. Pennell TVA/DNE/E&TS A. Banerjee SWEC R. E. Roemer Stone and Webster l T. A. Ippolito TVA - Consultant E. F. Goodwin NRC/OSP 1 K. W. Brown TVA/DNE/EEB 'j S. S. Chitnis Bechtel - San Francisco A. Marinos OSP i

1 I

l l

\

ATTACHMENT 2 l J 1

TENNESSEE' VALLEY AUTHORITY SEQUOYAH NUCLEAR PLANT 1

REVIEW AND REGENERATION OF 4 PIPE SUPPORT CALCULATIONS 1

l RIGOROUSLY ANALYZED PIPING:

I UNIT 2 & COMMON SYSTEMS PRESENTATION TO

~ THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 19 JUNE 1987 l

i l

[:: .

e I 2 j 4

l l

l AGENDA:

1. DEFINITION OF SCOPE OF CALCULATIONS ,

2. BACKGROUND AND PROBLEM DEFINITION

3. INITIAL ESTIMATE OF SCOPE OF CALCULATIONS l

4. REGENERATION OF SUPPORT CALCULATIONS FOR POST-OL ECN's

5. REVIEW AND REGENERATION PROGRAM FOR CAT.1 CALCULATIONS I

6. COMPLET!ON PL.AN 1

I

7. PIPE SUPPORT DESIGN CRITERIA i

---

n- - - - - - - - . - - -_.-.-~.-__u_ ____ _______

3 CALCULATION REVIEW AND REGENERATION PROGRAM OBJECTIVE:

o TO EVALUATE / REGENERATE ALL CATEGORY 1 RIGOROUSLY ANALYZED PIPE SUPPORT CALCULATIONS o TO ENSURE THAT THE TECHNICAL ADEQUACY REFLECTS CORRECTION OF PROBLEMS IDENTIFIED IN THE TVA CALCULATION VALIDATION PROGRAM FOR SUPPORTS i

PROGRAM SCOPE:

o PIPE SUPPORTS FOR RIGOROUSLY ANALYZED PIPE o CATEGORY 1 PIPE PRIMARILY LARGE BORE PIPE

• i 4

c 'a i\

BACKGROUND r I o MOST PRE-OPERATING LICENSE SUPPORT DESIGN BY:

EDS - INSIDE CONTAINMENT BASIC ENGINEERING - OUTSIDE CONTAINMENT o SOME PRE-OL SUPPORT DESIGN BY TVA l

I i

o MOST POST-OL SUPPORT MODIFICATIONS WERE DESIGNED BY TVA (CALCULATIONS ARE AVAILABLE)

~

.. f

+u l 5

t' PROBLEM DEFINITION i

l o SIGNIFICANT NUMBER OF PIPE SUPPORT CALCULATIONS HAVE NOT j l

BEEN RETRIEVED o TVA CALCULATION VALIDATION PROGRAM RESULTS FOR PIPE SUPPORT CALCULATIONS  !

l o ESTIMATE OF SCOPE (21 MAY 1987) l

• TOTAL NUMBER OF SUPPORTS: 7500 l'

• RETRIEVABLE DOCUMENTATION: 2500

• NON-RETRIEVABLE DOCUMENTATION: 5000 s

1 i

6 REGENERATION OF PIPE SUPPORT CALCULATIONS l

1 l

l l

CURRENT STATUS:

i l

TOTAL: 929 ,

1 NUMBER ACCEPTABLE (FIRST PASS): 688 l NUMBER REQUIRING FURTHER EVALUATION: 241 NUMBER EVALUATED: 89 (79 ACCEPTABLE)

POTENTIAL MODIFICATIONS: 10

I t

7

)

i LESSONS LEARNED l j

100-l l 90 -

l 80 -

m 8 70 -

i~ ,

5 60 - i a

3 4 I o 50 -

H ;1 E GROUP 2 40 - )'

$ A m

u. 30 - POTENTIAL o MODIFICATIONS 20 -

GROUP 4 10 -

B

~~~~~ ~

0 TOTAL ACCEPTABLE REQUIRE CALCULATIONS (1ST PASS) FURTHER ANALYSIS

4 8

l CALCULATION REVIEW AND REGENERATION i

l PROGRAM RATIONALE: }

l l

o ORIGINAL DESIGNS WERE ADEQUATE o POST-DESIGN CHANGES

-LOADS

- GEOMET AY o SCREEN TO ISOLATE SUPPORTS WITH CHANGES o REGENERATION POPUL.ATION

-GROUP A (PRODUCTION ANALYSIS)

-GROUP B (ADDITIONAL ANALYSIS REQUIREMENTS)

9 CALCULATION REVIEW AND REGENERATION PROGRAM APPROACH:

o OUANTIFY AND DOCUMENT TOTAL SCOPE o PRIORITIZE OVERALL SCOPE i

o SCREEN SUPPORTS o PRIORITIZE REGENERATION o EVALUATE EXISTING SUPPORT CALCULATIONS o REGENERATE NON-RETRIEVABLE OR INCOMPLETE CALCULATIONS l

l

i

• 9A

- .- Srquoyah Nucl 2r Plant Unh 2 & Common PIPE SUPPORT CALCULATION REGENERATION LOGIC DIAGRAM l

{

TOTAL SCOPE 1 I FUNCTIONAL VERIFICATION I DATA COLLECTION f

I SUPPORTS WITH SUPPORTS WITH EXISTING CALCULATIONS MISSING CALCULATIONS 4 f if SCREENING FOR LOADS / CONFIGURATION, PRIORITIES I

YES CALCULATIONS < f COMPLETE &

CLOSURE AVAILABLE 7 "O a i

REGENERATION OF CALCULATIONS 1

4f )

YES

ACCEPTABLE 7 i CLOSURE l NO ,r l

MODIFICATION ENGINEERED CAOR )

1 I

10 DOCUMENTATION AND QUANTIFICATION:

NUMBER OF PIPE SUPPORTS ,

1. MARK UP FLOW DIAGRAMS

-SSAM1BOUNDARIES

- CATEGORY 1 BOUNDARIES

2. IDENTIFY STRESS ANALYSIS ISOMETRICS IN SSAM AND 1

CAT.1 BOUNDARIES

3. IDENTIFY PIPE SUPPORTS ON STRESS ANALYSIS ISOMETRICS

4. CCRIS2INPUT UPDATE 1 SAFE SHUTDOWN ACCIDENT MITIGATION 2 CALCULATION CROSS REFERENCE INFORMATION SYSTEM 1

NUMBER OF PIPE SUPPORTS 8 ACTIVITIES AND INFORMATION FLOW ANALYSIS ISOMETRICS FLOW DIAGRAMS 1

' a n ..

ep W

~

j ,

} g

~ /

RIGOROUS ANALYSIS CALCULATION LOG 1 c -

M" l 7 y 'g EE <

STRESS ANALYSIS f I; -

~

PROBLEM CONNECTIVITY l 4" g {

DIAGRAMS (PCD's) [^Q L -

CATEGORY 1 BOUNDARIES ' /  ;

/ ~ '

SSAM BOUNDARIES i RECORDS INFORMATION 9 MANAGEMENT SYSTEM PIPE SUPPORT 4 t, NODE POINTS d -A

'f y I

~

CCRIS 3 COMPUTER -

PROGRAM l

4 .

l 11 i i

l l

I COMPLETION PLAN SCOPE GROUP B GROUPA TOTAL d

SUPPORTS PRIORITY SUPPORTS PRIORITY  !

f I.C. [SSAM) 600 1 1500 5 2100 ]

l.C. [ CAT.1 - SS AM) 200 2 400 7 600  ;

O.C. [SSAM) 700 3 1800 6 2500 0.C. [ CAT.1 - SSAM) 200 4 600 8 800  !

TOTAL 1700 4300 6000 l.C. = INSIDE CONTAINMENT l i

O.C. = OUTSIDE CONTAINMENT l

l

4 - $ 6 12 i

PIPE SUPPORT SCREENING PURPOSE:

IDENTIFY SUPPORTS WHICH WILL PROBABLY REQUIRE ADDITIONAL l l

ANALYSIS l 1

i BASIS OF APPROACH:

REVIEW OF 928 SUPPORTS OF WHICH 241 REQUIRED REFINED ANALYSIS DURING REGENERATION OF SUPPORT CALCULATIONS.

l l

METHOD:

TEAM OF SENIOR EXPERIENCED SUPPORT ENGINEERS ASSEMBLED:

o UNDER THE SAME SUPERVISION i

o IN A SINGLE LOCATION l o USING THE SAME SCREENING ATTRIBUTES

13 H

PIPE SUPPORT SCREENING PRINCIPAL SCREENING ATTRIBUTES o TUBE STEEL TO TUBE STEEL CONNECTIONS o SUPPORT LOAD INCREASES l

o UNUSUAL CONNECTIONS o UNUSUALLY LONG MEMBERS o ANCHOR BOLT LOADS i o BASEPLATE EVALUATIONS o MULTIPLE SUPPORTS

]

o NON-STANDARD USE OF VENDOR STANDARD SUPPORT COMPONENTS o ANGULARITYOF STRUTS / SNUBBERS o SNUBBER AND SPRING MOVEMENTS o DIRECTION OF RESTRAINT o INTEGRALWELDED ATTACHMENT

14 1

i PIPE SUPPORT DESIGN CRITERIA l

o EVALUATION OF EXISTING CALCULATIONS:

CRITERIA APPLICABLE AT TIME CALCULATION WAS GENERATED o REGENERATION OF CALCULATIONS: SON-DC-24.1 l

11l1i 7l l_

a y g, .,,e

~_

-  : o D _

e tl - N _

- M-

- LE v

=,.i. .0 4

0 9l 1

v

= , ' __

a N m2 l rlll O

1 o

T I C o

T 5 "

A l

S "

R M l

^

E E T 8 2

I y,,, -

NS S Y -

S EN 1

- C L

G ONO l l'llIl,{Ill IiI}

2 A Av C .-

ET I

G =

M Mo N 7 E 1 T ,

RAM 9_ l I

E 3 Il,g1ll ,iI1 -

t l

N T

P lI/ , .

L O a .

D U E MT u ,S - .

C S EA 0 I

z EC 0 ,ME .

N C D 7 l C

4 ' .

1 ,R N L A L A

/

O o

,L

,A s

M' WA 1

2 o

,~N l I 3

T "dNU o m r ECI N t

s o m

V T I

c

,,l1yis=CLs 4

U 2l _7 f y/l l,l 0

ER T -

T Il ,t 4 1

RON P A R

R X

t 7l 1 _r hyl ,l

}-

S

= a /

=c c 00 A C L 4ru W**b

P P M

• 6 =

L A

C T 9 0

3 EU R ol t

"c ,s i A 9 .! o E x x LS UE E

L c

r /

O0 . "c i s

/

T A

R ik i ,4O . E C

3 l

& 60 *_5,fJ 0l, 6 n ,

t D

EI P U N

l C 49 .

0 0

0 1

E , a.

, 'f N HP H A

7 2 t hr

/

1

. W= 1 1 3

1 3

./

CF Y r a

S' ...

SOO U f f '

T Q T.

0 3 l

,I gl

,l,I

,I$

W D

,' o X I E

E E t D

J S (

S I l

_7 G

R A

T 4 [

%UfiIf =g d -

l 9 l W 'i w 2

2 M~h T J m O

V Y" b l

2 RE t

n N  %'

B e ,i l1 I t Am J 6 l Vt 1 Tr GI v

WT mr o A e

G

2 1

/

0 1

S N 8 2

O I

T A

= /

9 0

L U

C L 4 A 1 C /

T S 9

R 0 T

O N P

P E

M U E 1

S 3 E

P R

I U

" ^

/

8 0

I P Q E

F O

R " -

L 7 N 1 O E I

N -

/

T -

8 A N 0 R O ,

E S N R - -

E E 3 P -

0 G

E /

R 8

0 D  :

N A -

0 W 2 E

I /

V -

7 E 0 R

6 Z 0

/

7 0

\

2 2

\ /

6

- 0 0 0 0 0 0 o 0 0 0 0 0 0 g 6 5 4 3 2 i a!

a ,' #F#

! w WN u j I

• a ya f ATTACHMENT 3 j M TG A>KC/7v8 t

/

Jp; 1 --

t g-

, 4 1i -

-s ,

a f 2 4 * - , t -

-?11.1 f it; I i

i .r . i -- l l

l 1

r:i..: ,2 -

-o i s +

1

- - i M. -u -

./re i , ,  ;

4 S , 8 g

• l 4

l 1 i

I

. i  ; .

f . ,2 l i .

i f , _' if. t ,

y <

4 9 8 6 e b l ) 6 l

i i , >,

- 4, : t 4 f j , w 3 *1 _

f'*' ,

t7

.i e

. . . s.

[

4 1

. - . - - ---__---_.--______.-.s

-nm

• O O $ r g e

'b i

,I i . .

v l *' f .

'E<

O t

.g .,

.,- ' - d t

.,) "y l

4

-. - _ - - - . - - , - . - - . _ - -,-.--r----,v. - - , - - , - , - - -

s e e J . O '$

1 1

e k  %* A:

'.9...

0

• . f.$ .

---.7 k, ee -

J. e- s' s i..g

< ~ l ,

)* y s

a 1

.i 1

~k

.I

. 1* j .1 j _ _ . - - s 4i  ; i6 . l

. -J l

1 1

s

. 1

1. #tI m 4 f "h e

5 ,  ! l . . .ey I' a l$ - 4 1 s

. n. I e i

i t

a l

l 1

i 1

i

. .? ,e l e  %

\

e

,l A. Fitzpatrick W. S. Raughley i f

June 8, 1987 I

CABLE TASK FORCE . OUTLINE OF CHARTER 1

1. Establish task force of experts in cable, testing, qualification to be paid through SWEC.

2. Determine the minimum acceptable DC field test voltage that will not induce a f ailure but defect an incipent f ailure.

3. Determine whether water needs to be used to establish an adequate ground plan.

4. Develop response to NRC questions endorsed.

5. Re-evaluate technical basis of NRC recommendations as presented in TER as f a result of TVA experience to date.

}

6.

Are NRC statements in TER relative to industry concensus correct?'

7. Substantiate so - no So acceptance criteria.

8. Re-evaluate need to do jamming tests.

9. Look at vertical cable in conduit f ailure locations in raceway.

10. Evaluate University of Connecticut tests.

1 i

r i

u?j s" A -

A e* ,{rY" q l r

= A gi wA r

w s f y ~

r#

s <

\ t s g f ( g r -

,,V r a r

f b A

v l o

~

si

=

1

~ g

• 7 A/s w

c. 1l

1x$

4 a ? y ui .I fib f 4 r

'- s

"" e .*

• • m wf cT ^

s *s

"" (n c 'C 7

1. ' u/* eA s

Ayr s

• u iA 3ry L Y

c s a xe c

• r m s e r f_

e r e r- r *

u. x o r

e r a, we

e. m s

s[

u c

c ohV. zaM .

m.wm% em M 7

i y

z r *e ra 6 e r 4

• s s n

de g

w sta o w r

7e p

n A

- ohp w t. e e

r a

n d f ec x e . a n

& t x

s mreons e

a od3 f

i n

i eb Mfe~er,e

. wM a gF h m

A i

Ta x

- o 7

5sas r ua r s- /

e 7-r e4 0

3 e Df y e l 1 r

rx*o e e

z s 3 mt N e a es Tw r

• wa e na s

u 1 3

7

/

M s x 9 7 w*P h aA n u7 e r c t

ws hwsuW 3

0-nn g D A K m.

e d & Fe X r e

lN W fn

]s S

,>2

/>f P FA

_ ' . ' ' [ ' 7 -