ML20235H876
| ML20235H876 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Comanche Peak  |
| Issue date: | 09/28/1987 |
| From: | Terao D NRC OFFICE OF SPECIAL PROJECTS |
| To: | NRC |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8710010200 | |
| Download: ML20235H876 (7) | |
Text
'
%K Y4 ~atog\\
UNITED STATES
.8 NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
~
o c
WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 September 28, 1987 Docket Nos. 50-445 and 50-446 APPLICANT:
Texas Utilities Electric Company (TV Electric)
FACILITY:
Comanche Peak Steam Electric Station, Units 1 and 2
SUBJECT:
SUMMARY
OF AUDIT ON SEPTEMBER 2-4, 1987 - IMPLEMENTATION OF PIPING GENERIC TECHNICAL ISSUE RESOLUTIONS 1
On September 2-4, 1987, the NRC staff (D. Terao) and consultant con-ducted an audit of the implementation of large bore piping design criteria related to the Comanche Peak Steam Electric Station (CPSES), Units 1 and 2.
The audit was performed at the offices of Stone & Webster Engineering Corp-oration (SWEC) in Cherry Hill, New Jersey. A list of attendees at the exit meeting is included in the enclosure to this summary.
The CPSES large bore piping design criteria audited by the staff are documented in Comanche Peak Project Procedure (CPPP)-7, " Design Criteria for Pipe Stress and Pipe Supports," Revision 3 dated February 23, 1987. Previously, the NRC staff had reviewed the SWEC approach to resolving large bore piping generic technical issues as documented in a report entitled "Large Bore Pipe Stress and Pipe Support Generic Issues Report," Revision 1 dated July 24,1987(Piping GIR). The status of NRC's review was discussed in a public meeting held on September 2, 1987 (Meeting Summary dated September 25,1987). The SWEC ap-proach to issue resolution is implemented through the use of specific design criteria developed to address each issue and is included as part of CPPP-7.
The purpose of the staff audit was to track selected issue resolutions from the Piping GIR through their implementation in the piping and pipe support design verification activities.
For the audit, the staff selected a sampling of specific supports which had previous concerns associated with them as identified by external sources (i.e., ASLB hearings, CYGNA, allegations, NRC staff). A followup audit is planned to complete the staff's review of the supports examined during this audit and to review additional supports for which other external source concerns were raised.
The following is a summary of the issues audited and discussed at the exit meeting.
Support / Strut Anaularity - The staff selected three supports to ensure that installation tolerances and as-built conditions are being adequately considered to preclude significant deviations insupport angularity.
The staff is continuing its review of this issue.
k AD
[
A
b'.
2 Friction Forces - The staff selected one support to review the consideration of friction forces associated with it. The staff did not identify any open or unresolved items.
l-Support Mass Effects on Piping Analysis - The staff selected two piping systems to review the modelling of pipe supports for their effect on the piping stress. The staff did not identify any open or unresolved items.
Pipe Modelling - The staff selected two piping systems for review to ensure that the overall modelling of the pipe supports in the piping analysis accurately represented the installed system. The staff did not identify any open or unresolved items.
Richmond Inserts - The staff selected one support to confirm that the design guiaelines in CPPP-7 for Richmond inserts are being implemented correctly. The staff is continuing its review of this issue and will supplement the audit with additional supports using Richmond inserts in a future audit.
Pipe Support Generic Stiffness - The staff reviewed four supports to ensure the adequacy of the calculated support stiffnesses for use in the piping stress analysis. The staff also verified that the stiffnesses used in piping analysis have been selected properly.
In addition, the staff performed a followup audit of selected findings from the Comanche Peak Response Team Third-Party (TENERA) review which have been subsequently transferred to the TV Electric Technical Audit Program, The staff is con-tinuing its review of this issue.
U-Bolt Acting as a Two-Way Restraint - The staff selected two supports which use a U-boit to verify in the piping analysis that the U-bolts are modelled as a two-way restraint.
The staff did not identify any open or unresolved items.
Cinched U-Bolts - The staff selected four supports which previously utilized a cinched U-bolt design to review the acceptability of their modifications.
To complete its review, the staff will select additional supports to review in a future audit.
Wall-to-Wall / Floor-to-Ceiling-Supports - The staff reviewed the calculations for all eight wall-to-wall / floor-to-ceiling supports remaining in the service water tunnel to verify the actual stresses and the compliance of-the calculations to CPPP-7. The staff identified an open item related to the use of a 5/3 exponent in the interaction equation used for concrete expansion anchors. The use of the 5/3 exponent in the interaction equation was discussed at the exit meeting and TV Electric committed to providing the technical basis to the staff.
The staff requires that the technical basis be provided in order to complete its review.,
i
..i t
. Stability - The staff selected three supports previously determined to be unstable to review the acceptability of their modificatiorss. The staff will continue to review the modifications and will review additional unstable sup-ports in a future audit.
The staff is continuing its review of the large bore piping criteria imple-nentation. A followup audit to review responses to the above open items, additional supports and implementation of other issue resolutions will be performed during the week of September 21, 1987.
Upon completion of audits related to implementation of large bore piping issue resolutions, the staff will document its findings in a safety evaluation.
A total of 36 staff-hours were involved in this audit at the SWEC offices.
& DGt-o David Terao, Mechanical Engineer Comanche Peak Project Division Office of Special Projects
Enclosure:
List of Attendees cc:
See next page 1
g7
,'s; i
J ENCLOSURE.
LIST OF ATTENDEES AT EXIT MEETING SEPTEMBER 4, 1987
- NRC 3
D~~Terao
{
- l TU Electric D. M. Rencher SWEC D. Siskin S. A. Ali C. A. Fonseca S. Genca M. Gilman R. Klause'.
E. F. Lewis C. W. Morris F. Ogden Teledyne Engineering Services (NRC consultant)
G. Moy
-______m..__.
I i
W. G. Counsil.
Comanche Peak Steam Electric Station Texas Utilities Electric Company Units 1 and 2 f
CC*
Thomas G. Dignan, Jr.
Asst. Director for Inspec. Programs Ropes & Gray Comanche Peak Project Dielsion 225 Franklin Street U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Boston, Massachusetts 02110 P. O. Box 1029 Granbury, Texas 76048 Robert A. Wooldridge, Esq.
Regional Administrator, Region IV Worsham, Forsythe, Sampels &
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Wooldridge 611 Ryan Plaza Drive, Suite 1000 j
2001 Bryan Tower, Suite 2500 Arlington, Texas 76011 1
Dallas, Texas 75201 Lanny A. Sinkin Mr. Homer C. Schmidt Christic Institute Director of Nuclear Services 1324 North Capitol Street Texas Utilities Electric Company Washington, D.C.
20002 Skyway Tower 400 North Olive Street, L.B. 81 Ms. Billie Pirner Garde, Esq.
Dallas, Texas 75201 Government Accountability Project Midwest Office Mr. Robert E. Ballard, Jr.
104 East Wisconsin Avenue Director of Projects Appleton, Wisconsin 54911 Gibbs and Hill, Inc.
11 Penn Plaza New York, New York 10001 David R. Pigott, Esq.
Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe 600 Montgomery Street Mr. R. S. Howard San Francisco, California 94111 Westinghouse Electric Corporation P. O. Box 355 Anthony Z. Roisman, Esq.
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15230 Suite 600 1401 New York Avenue, NW Washington, D.C. 20005 Renea Hicks, Esq.
Assistant Attorney General Environmental Protection Division Robert Jabicn P. O. Box 12548, Capitol Station Bonnie S. Blair Austin, Texas 78711 Spiegel & McDiarmid 1350 New York Avenue, NW Mrs. Juanita Ellis, President Washington, D,C. 20005-4798 Citizens Association'for Sound Energy 1426 South Polk George A. Parker, Chairman Dallas, Texas 75224 Public Utility Committee Senior Citizens Alliance Of Ms. hancy H. Williams Tarrant County, Inc.
CYGNA Energy Services 6048 Wonder Drive 2121 N. California Blvd., Suite 390 Fort Worth, Texas 76133 Walnut Creek, CA 94596
- e',
.. s l'
W; G. Counsil'.
. Comanche Peak Electric Station Texas Utilities Electric Company Units 1 and 2 cc:
Joseph F. Fulbright Fulbright & Jaworski 1301 McKinney Street Houston, Texas-77010 Mr.-G. S. Keely Texas' Utilities Electric Company Skyway._ Tower -
400 North Olive Street, L.B. 81 Dallas, Texas 75201 Mr. Jack Redding c/o Bethesda Licensing Texas. Utilities Electric Company 3 Metro Center, Suite 610 Bethesda, Maryland 20814 William A. Burchette, Esq.
Counsel for Tex-La. Electric Cooperative of Texas-Heron, Burchette, Ruckert & Rothwell Suite 700 1025 Thomas Jefferson Street, NW Washington, D.C.
20007 James M. McGaughy GDS Associates, Inc.
Suite 450 2525 Cumberland Parkway Atlanta, Georgia 30339 Administrative Judge Peter Bloch U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.
20555 Elizabeth B. Johnson Administrative Judge Oak Ridge National Laboratory P. O. Box X, Building 3500 Oak. Ridge, Tennessee 37830 Dr. Kenneth A. McCollom 3
1107 West Knapp Stillwater, Oklahoma 74075 Dr. Walter H. Jordan Administrative Judge 881 West Outer Drive Oak Ridge, Tennessee 37830
September 28, 1987 1
' Stability - The staff selected three supports previously determined to be unstable to review the acceptability of their modifications. The staff will continue to review the modifications and will review additional unstable sup-ports in a future'ad,dit.
The staff is: continuing its review of the large' bore piping criteria imple-mentation. A followup audit to review responses to the above open items, additional supports and implementation of other issue resolutions will be perfurmed during the week of September. 21, 1987. Upon completion of audits related to implementation of large bore piping issue resolutions, the staff will document its findings in a safety evaluation.
A total of 36 staff-hours were involved in this audit at the SWEC offices.
(original signed by)
David Terao, Mechanical Engineer Comanche Peak Project Division Office of Special Projects
Enclosure:
< DISTRIBUTION.mo List of Attendees
",T
. Docket:F11e AVietti-Cook NRC PDR MMalloy cc:
See next page Local PDR CPPD-LA CPPD Reading OGC-Bethesda OSP Reading FMiraglia JKeppler/JAxelrad FJordan CGrimes JPartlow PMcKee ACRS(10)
JLyons RWarnick T
h' CPPD:0SP T2D C3PD:0SP J AD:t D:0SP DTerao: sam /cm MMalloy Vietti-Cook JLy'dn 09/2f/87 09/zf/87 09/28/87
_ - - - _.