ML20235V259

Change to Notification of 870902 Meeting W/Util & S&W in Cherry Hill,Nj to Discuss Resolution of Generic Technical Issues for Large Bore Piping.Meeting on 870903 Dropped & Time of 870902 Meeting Changed.W/Attendees List & Details

ML20235V259
Person / Time
Site:	Comanche Peak
Issue date:	08/31/1987
From:	Vietticook A NRC OFFICE OF SPECIAL PROJECTS
To:	Charemagne Grimes NRC OFFICE OF SPECIAL PROJECTS
Shared Package
ML20235V179	List: ML20235V177 ML20235V259
References
NUDOCS 8710150067
Download: ML20235V259 (10)

Text

- - -- - _ ___

1 ENCLOSURE 1

, p ragg'o UNITED STATES

?

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION gg o

WASHINGTON, D. C. 20655 August 24, 1987 Occket Nos.: 50-445/446 l

MEMORANDUM FOR':

Christopher I. Grimes, Director Comanche Peak Project Division Office of Special Projects Hans E. Schierling, Assistant Director THRU:

Comanche Peak Project Division Office of Special Projects M

FROM:

Annette Vietti-Cook, Project Manager Comanche Peak Project Division Office of Special Projects

SUBJECT:

FORTHCOMING MEETING WITH TV ELECTRIC AND STONE & WEBSTER Date and Time:

Wednesday, September 2,1987 = "

'" : :,, h;t:22:

, 19 ?

w Beginning at 9:00 :.;. c e e y + _

I O a c> %. m,

Location:

Stone & Webster Engineering Corporation 1

Cherry Hill Operations Center 3 Executive Campus Cherry Hill, New Jersey i

I

.To discuss resolution of generic technical

Purpose:

issues for large bore piping

Participants:

NRC Applicant C Terao D. Woodfan, et al.

Consultants (Teledyne) x

, g(c%'

Annette Vietti-Cook, Project Manager Comanche Peak Project Division Office of Special Projects Members of the public planning to attend should contact:

A. Vietti-Cook or M. Malloy (301)492-4555 (301)492-7624 cc:

See next page 8710150067 871005 PDR ADOCK 050 5

Piping Generic Technical Issues Meeting at Stone and Webster Engineering Corporation Cherry Hill, hew Jersey September 2, 1987 l

Name Affiliation David Terao NRC l

Edward J. Siskin SWEC l

Syed A. Ali SWEC Ron Klause SWEC Fred Ogden SWEC l

' David Rencher TV Electric John Finneran TV Electric Leif Dietrich SWEC Michael Gilman SWEC - QA George Moy TES Bob Hookway Teledyne Fre.nz Schauer GDS Associates David Garlington GDS Associates Anthony Marvay TU Electric Owen Lowe TV Electric A

4 r

______.__m_

p l

l-t

~

The details and status of the piping generic technical. issues as discussed in

]

the'. September 2,1987 meeting are described below-1.

Richmond Inserts - The staff discussed the modification to long tube

~

steel member frames which are attached to the building structure with Richmond inserts. The tube steel connected members would'be limited to a maximum length as specified in CPPP-7. The staff selected a long tube steel frame consisting of several supports (Figure 1, attached) to review as part of its design verification audit.

The staff raised a question regarding the qualification of Richmond inserts.

This item will remain open to be addressed in the staff's civil /

structural review of anchorages.

2.

Local Stress in Pipina - The staff raised a concern regarding the local bending stresses and thermal gradients which would occur in integrally I

welded attachments :(IWA) on the main steam and ~ feedwater piping. The

-i staff reviewed an internal letter from R. P. Klause (SWEC) to l.. D. Nace fTU Electric) dated July 24, 1987 in which the results of a fatigue i

analysis including thermal gradients at worst-case locations at weided attachments were provided.

Based on its review of the results presented in the study, the staff finds that the maximum fatigue usage factors for IWA on the main steam and feedwater piping are 0.840 and 0.344, respectively.

Based on its discussions, the staff determined that SWEC's approach to issue resolution is acceptable.

The staff identified the need to review the local stress in piping for an anchor design utilizing opposing trunnions in its upcoming verification audit.

O

d

't j;<ik 40

'l v'

[

I

.,4' d'

I s

3.

Wall-to-Wall / Floor-to-Ceiling Supports - The staff identifiec nc,oper, or-unresolved items in.the approach to issue. resolutions in this area. Tne vi.

staff.will review the stresses calculated for-these eight supports as part-of.its audit.

4.

Pipe Support / System Stability - The staff identified no open or unresolved 4

' items in SWEC's_ approach to issue resolution.

The staff will review the '

j modifications to trapeze supports utilizing U-bolts'and their calculations

.j wili be reviewed as'part of its design verification audit.

5.

Pipe _ Support' Generic Stiffness -

The staff discussed the SWEC approach.

l for establishing a reliable sample size for developing the generic stiffness 1

values that are representative of the pipe supports at CPSES and the cri-teria used for establishing the minimum acceptable values.

Based on the-discussion, the staff' determined that SWEC's approach to issue resolution is acceptable.

The staff will review implementation of the generic stiff-

}

ness values in the piping analysis as part of its design verification audit.

i 6.

Uncinched U-Bolt Acting As a Two-Way Restraint - The staff discussed what rneasures are being taken by SWEC to ensure that all uncinched U-bolts on j

large bore piping have been replaced.

SWEC is using checklists which have i

specific items addressing the use of U-bolts in pipe supports.

Based on its j

i discussions, the staff determined that SWEC's approach to issue resolution is acceptable.

-)

i l

i i

i

l' l

0

(

l 7.

Friction Forces - For dynamic loadings, SWEC clarifiec that friction forces are being calculated for unidirectional forces (i.e., " signed" I

icads) such es those resulting from open discharge systems. Based on our discussions, the staff determined that SWEC's approach to issue resolution is acceptable.

E.

AWS vs. ASNE Code Provisions - The staff identified no open or unresolved items in SWEC's. appecacn to issue resolutior,.

C.

A500 Grade 6 Tube Steel - There were no open or unresolved items identified by tne staff on SWEC's approach to resolution of this issue.

10.

Tube Steet 'Section Properties - There.were no open or unresolvec items

)

1 identified by the staff on the approach to resolution of this issue.

11. U-Bolt Cinchina - There were no open or unresolved itercs identifiec by the staff on SWEC's approach to resolution of this issue.

The staff wilt review selected modifications of trapeze supports which used cinchec U-bolts as part of its design verification audit.

IE.

Axial / Rotational Restraints - There were no open or unresolved iterrs identified by the staff on SWEC's approach to resolution of this issue.

13.

Bolt Hole Gap - There were no open or unresolved items identified by the staff on SWEC's approach to resolution of this issue.

14. OBE/SSE Damping - There were no open or unresolved items identified by t

the staff on the approach to resolution of this issue.

f 15.

Support Mass in Piping Analysis - There were no open or unresolved items j

identified by the staff on SWEC's approach to resolution of this issue.

l

\\

\\

4 l

~-

--,_,~-__

WjlV&, w Ln ;;

,a,

'~~

~~-

" - - - - ~ ~ ~ -

l@kf s

[ N O 'k' fl{.lyt

,e E

,g,

,v:

i' t

b 16.

Iterative Design --There were no open.or unresobed items identified j

n.

p, by. the staff on SWEC's approach to resolution of this issue.

17.. Mass-Point Spacing - There were no open or unresolved items identified

~

byfthe staff on-SWEC's' approach to resolution of this issue, n

i.

.18.

High-Frecuency Mass-Participation - The staff discussed how high frequency loadings.(30-50 bz) were considered in'the piping stress analysis.

SWEC-

.uses the _ pipe stress ' computer program NUPIPE is used in accordance with CPPP-7 Section 3.10.6.8 with a mocal cut-off frequency of 50 hz to ensure.

]

that seismic response-spectra with high frequency peaks are adequately j

L i

I considered. Based on the disussion, the staff determined that SWEC's-approach to issue resolution is acceptable.

19. Fluid Transients - A discussion of this issue was postponed to a later date due to the specialized nature of the technical details involved.

j 20.

Seismic Excitation in Pipe Support Mass - There were no open or unresolved items identified by the staff on SWEC's approach to resolution of this issue.

4 21.

Local Stress in Pipe Support Members - There were no open or unresolved items identified by the staff on SWEC's approach to resolution;of this i

I

)I issue.

22.

Safetv Factors - There were no open or unresolved items identified by the 1

y staff on SWEC's approach to resolution of this issue.

l oI;,

l 23, A36 and A307 Steel - There were nc open or unresolved items identified by o

I the staff on SWEC's approach to resolution of this issue.

1 iI J

i l

I l

i 1

pv c; -

[

p(

5-j g

h7

{[,

NN $1@211.I.61!S..$1EE

• Wre We"e ne opp or unresolved items identified by Lthe' staff'on: SWEC's aooreach te resciution of this issue.

The staff will

[,1 review selected suppcets which have been modified to eliminate U-bolt-J twisting as part of. cur design. verification audit.

Yalve Modelling/0 qualification There were no open or unresolved items

'25.

identified by the staff on SWEC's approach to rasolution'of this issue'.

26.. Pipe Modelling - There were no open or unresolved items. identified by the-staff on the approach to resolution of this' issue.

The staff will' review as part of its-design verification audit selected piping systems to ensure that SWEC is,a'dequately; implementing the pipe modelling guidelines.provided

.in'CPPP-7..

27. Welding - There were no open or unresolved items were identified by the staff.on.the' approach to resolution of this issue.

28.- -The staff raised a concern cn the use.cf a 5/3 exponent in the concrete expansion ancnor'b'olt interaction equation.

In addition, because of the.

open items involved in the CYGNA civil / structural area concerning concrete anchorages, this issue. remains open and the staff will review it as part -

of its ~ review of civil / structural issues.

J i

Strut / Snubber Angularity - There were no open or unresolved items identified 29.

The staff by the staff on SWEC's approach to resolution of this issue.

'will review the treatment of support angularity including installation tolerances in the piping modelling as part of its design verification auG1t.

L

'30.

Component Qualification - There were no open or unresolved items identified by the staff on SWEC's approach to resolution of this issue.

1

F : -

L

'31.; SSER-8' Review - There were no open or unresolved items identified by the staff on the approach to resolution of this. issue.

32.

SSER-10 Review - The staff raised a concern.that existing procedures do not clearly prohibit the use of seismic design of non-seismic piping in the turbine building.

SWEC issued a Project Memorandum PM-203 to eliminate this potential' error. Based on the issuance of PM-203 (copy attached), the staff determined that SWEC's approach to issue resolution is acceptable.

The staff will continue to review selected analysis of seismic /non-seismic' interface anchors to which piping systems in the turbine building are connected.

'33.

SSER-11 Review - The staff discussed the basis for the stress intensi-fication factor (SIF) used in design to account for excessive radial shrinkage in girth butt welds.

SWEC used the results presented in a paper by S. E. Moore and E. C. Rodabaugh entitled, " Stress Intensifica-tion for Girth Weld Joints Including Weld Shrinkage and Mismatch and

.l Tapered Wall Transitions," NUREG/CR-0371, dated 1978. Based on the discussions, the staff determined that SWEC's approach to issue resolution is acceptable.

The staff raised a concern regarding the implementation of the criteria since it was r,ot clear how the piping analysts obtain the necessary information from the field to develop the SIF using the equations provided in CPPP-7 Attachment 3-15.

The weld shrinkage in girth butt welds l

L will be a matrix attribute in the Post-Construction Hardware Validation i

Program (PCHVP).

The staff will review this item as part of its audit i

uf the PCHVP.

-i I

s g

u.

a es,,.,,

.g

~

^ %.= m es.* *en..

[*

g as

't d'

d 'a,

<<....r.-

l

~,. h't n

i

?

~

l y,

,*g p-T

b. i, C?l fh....., '

' ': ['

.P x

e k *y. \\,

• * '9

. l,

'f

. )

54 M

a i

L

~.

,, 8

,m:.,I h so :.

E.I Y

i-

=:q,n M.s,0, 1

e tm,-I

_.,-J:.',,.',*,.*.

_ n,a r

1. [. * * *

{l.*

4,

. ~'

.: m

-d 3

J

. f.':

• s i

l

• k,!

9.,>..

e f

g o-y__ ~ DE * ' 'jQ

[

l,

e 6

I y

y h*

g 3

& s..,

%,s

.\\*

'f,

H s.m8 f h (e e

el I

- - -,,,.. ' ~~

J i

M r,

l

^

I 4 2---g=m n ;kf.

n p<h_.s

&..-Q Yrd t

- b W dlhG N.e.

'. l l 3

n s kt1 -

r's l

"I N

G,Q, %.

l 6 =1 v

f8 62

y.,

,k..Y.,-

[j

('%

u r>,

+

,a Loj g,

, ' -J.

r,.<

,u

([l-

• ^

f

,MF c=.,

-i l

m m.-

}. 'i l

-'e' I. [' ~ b gh

.A

<g 1

- e.'

.===

+-.........,g3, 7

j I

e l

, ' , p '

)

g l

-'-~ *'

,p q a

f

)

2' f

jq I gt

\\

. 3..

lQ

i..

\\. [ U.5 5. dO M '

t

)

_ :k b

" " ~ -

,m i

$MG g )p l li

's a j g.

O

.\\ (q v e w )

_I

.N

~l,"

E

"' (j Mg

\\\\

i i y

i 1 i s A7 i i

i 3 i

l

%og k.9

r-i s Mhb.b.bt<)>g&Q

,i o

g p,,..-. _.....',. ',C Q.,N t i i i i amee C

a S

\\

Do*

g e n

t 9 ? i t--

e W

t

'\\

'k i'

m ce o

lNi g

e se I

~'

.=...S,~.~.'

l Idi o

?

i >

, 8

'T u.. z....

l

u. ' -d 2

-u 9

vJ l

y a~

t

.l.

+~

~ " - ' ' - - -._

STO'NE & WEBSTER ENGINEERING CORPORATION CHERRY HILL OPERATIONS CENTER PM 203 INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM Q R$

15454/15616 4.

.u

/

SUBJECT PROJECT MEMORANDUM NO.PM-203 DATE September 4, 1987 COMANCHE PEAK STEAM ELECTRIC STATION UNITS 1 AND 2 FROM RPKlause: LAW CLARIFICATION FOR CPPP-7, ATTACEMENT 4-10 TO DESIGN METHODS FOR INTERFACE ANCEORS CC Job Book M3.1 Job Book M3.2.7 To All CPPP Manual Holders PMiktus -10 of CPPP-7 delineates several methods of designing interface anchors.

Two of the methods (Section 1.5 and 1.6),

require upgrading l

of. supports on the nonseismic side of the interface anchor as the means of developing the loads on the anchor from the nonseismic side.

This memorandum is issued to emphasize that the use of either of the above referenced methods for the design of interface anchors requires that all piping and supports subject te such upgrading are located in a seismically designed structure.

(Ref. CPPF-28. Section 2.0 and 5.2.1).

All applicable calculations shall be reviewed during final reconciliation for compliance with this requirement.

This PM will be incorporated into the next revision of CPPP-7.

j.

W R. P. Klause Project Manager

_