ML17276B416

Forwards Final Response to IE Bulletin 79-02,Revision 2 & SER Outstanding Issue 5 Re Component Supports 3.9.3.3.No Further Action Necessary for Closure of Issue

ML17276B416
Person / Time
Site:	Columbia
Issue date:	04/22/1982
From:	Bouchey G WASHINGTON PUBLIC POWER SUPPLY SYSTEM
To:	Schwencer A Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
RTR-NUREG-0892, RTR-NUREG-892 IEB-79-02, IEB-79-2, NUDOCS 8204290335
Download: ML17276B416 (231)

Text

I REGULATOR) NFORMATION DISTRIBUTION S~'EM (RIDS)

AGCESSION NBR:8204290335 DOC.DATE: 82/04/22 NOTARIZED: NO ,

DOCKET FACIL:50-397 NPPSS Nuclear Projects Unit 2i l>ashington Public Powe 05000397

'AUTH, NAME AUTHOR AFFILIATION BOUCHEY>G.D. Washington Public Power Supply System RECIP.NAME RECIPIENT AFFILIATION SCHNENCERgA ~ Licensing Branch 2

SUBJECT:

Forwards final response to IE Bulletin 79-02rRevision 2 SER outstanding Issue 5 re component supports 3.9.3.3.No further action necessary for closure of issue.

DISTRIBUTION CODE: 8001S COPIES RECEIVED:LTR TITLE: PSAR/FSAR AMDTS and Related Correspondence ENCL ~ SIZEe NOTES: Q~

RECIPIENT COPIES RECIPIENT COPIES ID CODE/NAME LTTR ENCL ID CODE/NAME LTTR ENCL A/D LICENSNG 1 0 LIC BR 02 BC 1 0 LIC BR P2 LA i0 AULUCKg R ~ 0 1 1 1 INTERNAL: ELD 1 0 IE 06 1 1 IE FILE 1 1 IE/DEP EPOS 35 1 1 IE/DEP/EPLB 36 3 3 MPA 1 0 NRR/DE/CEB 11 1 1 NRR/DE/EQB 13 3 3 NRR/DE/GB 28 2 2 NRR/DE/HGEB 30 2 2 NRR/DE/MEB 18 1 1 ,NRR/DE/MTEB 17 1 1 NRR/DE/QAB 21 1 1 NRR/DE/SAB 24 1 1 NRR/DE/SEB 25 1 1 NRR/DHFS/HFEB40 1 1 NRR/DHFS/LQB 32 1 1 NRR/DHFS/OLB '34 1 NRR/DHFS/PTRB20 1 1 NRR/DS I/AEB 26 1 1 NRR/DS I/ASB 27 1 1 NRR/DSI/CPB 10 1 1 NRR/DSI/CSB 09 1 1 NRR/DSI/ETSB 12 1 1 NRR/DSI/ICSB 16 1 1 NRR/DSI/PSB 19 1 1 NRR/DSI/RAB 22 1 1 SB 23 1 1 NRR/DST/LGB 33 1 1 REG FILE 04 1 1 RGN5 2 2 EXTERNAL: ACRS 41 16 16 BNL(AMDTS ONLY) 1 1 FEMA REP DIV 39 1 1 LPDR 03 1 1 NRC PDR 02 1 1 NSIC 05 1 NTIS 1 TOTAL NUMBER OF COPIES REQUIRED; bTTR 64 ENCL 59

1 II e ~

IB H 't m

I I

D

f. l 0 \ V

Washington Public Power Supply System P.O. Box 968 3000 George Washington Way Richland, Washington 99352 (509) 372-5000 April 22, 1982 G02-82-394 SS-L-02-PLP-82-22 Docket No. 50-397 Mr. A. Schwencer, Chief @~eg~

Licensing Branch No. 2 gpss~

Division of Licensing @4'4g pg@ ~~8/~ i U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission ne~P+egr~ 0 Washington, D.C. 20555

'ear Mr. Schwencer:

Subject:

NUCLEAR PROJECT NO. 2 SAFETY EVALUATION REPORT OUTSTANDING ISSUE (5) COMPONENT SUPPORTS, (3.9.3.3)

Reference:

Letter, R.G. Matlock (SS) to R.H. Engelken (NRC),

"IE Bulletin No. 79-02, Rev. 2" (Attached)

The attached letter submitted the final WNP-2 response to IE Bulletin 79-02, Rev. 2. This bulletin is also Outstanding Issue,(5), Component Supports (3.9.3.3), of the WNP-2 SER, NUREG-0892. By submittal of the attached report the Supply, System considers the issue adequately addressed and no further action is necessary for closure of this issue.

Should you have any further comments, please contact Mr. R.M. Nelson, WNP-2 Project Licensing Manager.

Very truly yours, G. D. Bouchey Deputy Director, Safety and Security PLP/jca Attachment cc: Auluck - NRC R

WS Chin - BPA 0l Engelken - pO RH R Feil -

NRC NRC Site gl

Ab

(/ S 4

't

~l' M

4'4*-

II

Distribution QL Baird - 340 GD Bouchey - 370 GK Afflerbach - 988U RG Glasscock - 280 BA Holmberg - 906D RT Johnson - 917Q JD Martin -. 927M el'sen~905A~w/encl=.=-=-"--'-

CH McGilton - 906D AK Yee - 906D - w/encl RG Matlock - 901A AI Cygelman - 954M HA Crisp - 901A - w/encl PW Harness - 906D- w/encl AKY/1 b BAH/1 b CHM/lb RGM/lb sf 2 - 917B LD Noble - 9670

f j+

t

FINAL RESPONSE TO NRC IE BULLETIN 79-02, REVi 2 FOR WASHINGTON NUCLEAR PLANT (WNP-2)

HANFORD WASHINGTON BY WASHINGTON PUBLIC POWER SUPPLY SYSTEM R ICHLANO, WASHINGTON March 31', 1982 8204290335

TABLE OF CONTENTS ITEM . ~Pa e INTRODUCTION. ~ ~

1 NRC ACTION ITEM NO. 1 . 2 1.0 RESPONSE TO ACTION ITEM NO. l. ~ ~ 2 INTRODUCTIOiV . ~ ~ 2 1.2 ORIGINAL BASE PLATE DESIGN . 3 1.2.1 MNP-2 Original Design Method 1.2.2 Increases in Stress Allowable 1.2.3 Preload of Bolt 1.3 FINAL BASE PLATE DESIGN AND (}UALIFICATION. 5 1.3.1 Flexible Base Plate Analysis 1.3.2 Description of Analytical Model 1.3.3 Shear and Tension Interaction 1.3.4 Typical Base Plate 1.4 COMPARISON OF RIGID AiVO FLEXIBLE ANALYSIS. ~ ~

1.4.1 Conventional Rigid Plate Theory 1.4.2 Examples 1.4.3 Comparison 1.4.4 Summary 1.5 TESTING. 12 1.5.1 Description 1.5.2 Comparison of Test and Analytical Results 1.6 DISCUSSION OF CYCLIC LOADING . 1.4 1.7 MAJOR CONSERVATISHS. 14 1.7.1 Interaction of Shear and Tension 1.7.2 Seismic Load 1.7;3 Expansion Bolt Testing 1.7.4 Anchor Bolt Stiffness CONCLUSIONS. 16 NRC ACTION ITEM NO. 2 .

2.0 RESPONSE TO ACTION ITEM NO. 2. 10

2.1 INTRODUCTION

. 18 2.2 TEST PROGRAM . 19 2.3 TEST RESULTS . 19 2.4 ALLOHABLE LOADS ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ . 20 2.4. 1 HNP-2 Original Design Allowables Used By Contractors

TABLE OF CONTENTS CONTINUED ITEM ~Pare 2.4.2 Anchor Allowa'bles Used for Final Plate gualification 2.5 FACTORS OF SAFETY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 NRC ACTION ITEM NO; 3...............'...... 21 3.0 RESPONSE TO ACTION ITEM NO. 3............... 21 NRC ACTION ITEM NO. 4 . 22 4.0 RESPONSE TO ACTION ITEM NO. 4. . 23

4. 1 INTRODUCTION 23 4.2 ANCHOR BOLT PRELOADING Z4 4.2. 1 Torque/Tension Testing 4.2.2 Anchor Retorquing .Program 4.3 LEVELING NUTS. . 25 4.4 VERIFICATION OF INSTALLATIONS. 25 4.4.1 Contract 213A - Primary Containment 4.4.2 Contract 215 - Mechanical Equipment Installation and Piping 4.4.3 Contract 216 - HVAC and Plumbing Installation 4.4.4 Contract 217 - Fire Protection System 4.4.5 Contract 220 - Instrument Installation I

4.4.6 Contract 233 - Piping Supports NRC 5.0 ACTION ITEM NO.

RESPONSE

5.....................

TO ACTION ITEM NO. 5............... 30 30 6.....................

4 NRC 6.0 ACTION ITEM NO.

RESPONSE TO ACTION ITEM NO- 6,............ 31 31 NRC ACTION ITEM NO. 7 and No. 8 Not applicable NRC ACTION ITEM NO. 9 . 32 9.0 RESPONSE TO ACTION ITEM NO. 9. 32

9. 1 INTRODUCTION . 32 9.2 BASE PLATE ANALYSIS. 32 9.3 GENERIC ANCHOR INSPECTION CRITERIA 32

F CONTENTS CONTINUED

~ ITEM .

Pacae

10.0 REFERENCES

. . . .  ; . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ~ . . . . . . . . 33 LIST OF. TABLES Table 1.5 Comparison of Test and Analytical Results.....

Table 4.1 Contract 215 Retroinspection Program for Anchors Installed Prior to February 1978 . . 27 '4 Table I Allowable Expansion Anchor Loads Provided to Contractor.

Table II 'inal Design and gualification Expansion Bolt Allowables... 36 Table III MNP-2 Expansion Anchor Installation Torques and p reloads............ 38 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1.4.1 Comparison of Analytical Methods on Eight Bolt Base Plate Figure 1.7.1 Comparison of Test Results to Analytical Method . . 17 Figure I Field Test . 39 Figure II Bolt Load Comparison for Test 1. 40 figure III Bolt Load Comparison for Test 2. 41 Figure IV Bolt Load Comparison for Test 3. 42 Figure V Bolt Load Comparison for Test 4. 43 Figure VI Shear-Tension Interaction Diagram. 44 Figure VII Structural Responses . 45 Figure VI I I Structural Responses . '46 LIST. Of EXHIBITS Sheets Exhibit Exhibit A

B 3/4 Inch Leveling HDI Torque Values Nuts...

.. 1'hru 1 thru 8

11 Exhibit C NRC Bulletin 79-02 Inspection Requirements . 1 thru 3 Exhibit D NRC Bulletin 79-02 Inspection Requirements for C 215 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ e ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 1 thru 4 Exhibit E C215 Retroinspection Requirements (Revision 0) . 1 thru 23 Exhibit E C215 Retroinspection Reouirements (Revision 6) 1 thru 24 Exhibit F NRC Statistical Sampling Method and C215 Sample Retroinspection Program 1 thru 4 Exhibit G C215 Sample Parabolt Retroinsoection Program (C233 Installations) . 1 thru 10

INTRODUCTION he Nuclear Regulatory Commission IE Bulletin No. 79-02, dated March 8, 1979, directed holders of Nuclear Power Plant Construction permits to respond to the concerns of the NRC regarding the reliability of pipe support base plates that use concrete expansion anchor bolts in Seismic Category I Piping Systems as defined by Regulatory Guide 1.29, "Seismic Design Classification", Revision 1, dated August 1973, or as defined in the applicable FSAR. Revision 1 of the Bulletin, providing clarifications, was issued June 21, 1979. Revision 2 of II the Bulletin, providing additional clarification and new items of concern, was issued November 8, 1979. This final response supercedes the previously sub-mitted response and addresses the Bulletin>>Action Items" as given in Revision

~

2 of the Bulletin. Action Item No. 7 is not applicable to WNP-2 and Action Item No. 8 does not require a response. In this reply, the NRC "Action Ite'm" is first stated followed by the Washington Public Power Supply System response.

NRC ACTION ITEM NO. 1 Verif that i e sup ort base late flexibilit was accounted for in the calculation of anchor bolt loads. In lieu o su-ortin anal sis ustif in the assum tion of ri idit the base a es s ou e cons ere t ex e z e uns x ene s ance between the member welded to the late and the ed e of the base late is reater than twice the thickness of the a e. It s reco ized that this cr terion is conservative. Less conserva-tive acce tance criterion must be ustified an the usti ca-tion submitted as art of the res onse to the Bulletin. If the ase ae s e ermne obe ex e enreca cuae e bolt loads usin an a ro riate anal sis. If ossible this is to be done rior to testin of anchor bolts. These calcu a ed o t oa s are re erre o ereatter as e bo t esx loa s.

A descri t on of the anal tica model used o vera at e su ort base late flexibilit is accounted for in the calcula-on o an or o oa s xs . o e su m e w our res onse o the Bulletin.

It has la e ex'r been noted tin reportin time frame or w hach an an or o that the schedule for anal tical some ac of'ul t es ex en s e on 6 1979. For those es n . ro ram s re u re work on base e u facilities

.e.

e-su-ficient QC documentation does not exist the anchor bolt test-in roaram shoul not e e a e .

RESPONSE TO ACTION ITEM NO. 1 INTRODUCTION The NNP-2 Contractors affected by the Bulletin requirements are Primary Containment (C213A), Mechanical Equipment Installation and Piping (C215),

HVAC and Plumbing Installation (C216), Fire Protection Systems (C217),

Instrument Installation (C220), and Spray Pond Piping (C233).

Pipe Supports and their base plates have mainly been designed by these contractors and their subcontractors. The supports installed by C213A and C233 were designed by the Engineer.

The total number of Seismic Category I supports is approximately 16,000; one third support large diameter piping (above 2 inches) and the remain-der support small diameter piping (2 inches and smaller).

These Seismic Category I pipe supports are supported from structural steel, embedded plates, cast-in-place inserts or by expansion bolts.

Only the expansion bolt installations are the subject of this response.

Approximately 3,000 supports use expansion bolts of which nearly 2,000 were installed by Contract 215 and by C213A.

1 0

ll

1 n 1.2 ORIGINAL BASE PLATE DESIGN From an examination of the contractor's pipe support calculations, it is neg-clear that they used a rigid plate design throughout. Preload was lected in the design approach although the installation specifications required expansion bolts to be preloaded in excess of the bolt design load- Additionally, no concrete compression was assumed, and bending and torsion were resisted by the respective moments of inertia of the bolt group 1.2.1 WNP-2 Ori inal Desi Method ln the Original Design Method at NNP-2, the highest loaded (criti-cal) bolt is assumed to fail causing the remaining bolts to carry the loading.

First, the plate is analyzed as rigid and the loads are resisted by the moment of inertia of the bolt pattern. The bolts are assumed to carry all the shear, tension, and compression. No loading occurs between the plate and the concrete.

Next, the critical bolt is removed from the bolt pattern and the new center of gravity (CG) of the bolt pattern is located. The applied loads are transferred from the attachment to the new CG.

Finally, the plate is analyzed with the critical bolt missing for the new configuration and the remaining bolts are checked for adequacy.

EXAMPLE:

FOUR BOLT PLATE (Mx+My)

Critical Bo1t Fai1s Mx C.G.

0 BOLT LOAD = 5P + Mx + ~M IZ d zd,

V Shear is assuaged to be distributed equally among the bolts. This assumption receives support in the discussion for steel bolted con-nections of Reference 5. This text deals in its entirety with bolt-ed and riveted joints. For these steel bolted connections, shear is distributed relatively equally when the number of bolts on line is limited. For example, from Reference 5, consider four fasteners in line. The plate material is A36 and the fasteners are 7/8'! A325 bolts. The shear stress is'approximately 42 ksi for the two inside bolts and approximately 46 ksi for the two outside. The difference for four in line is slight. Ne conclude that the difference for three or less fasteners on line will be negligible. Our most fre-quent case is to have three or less on line.

The bolt loads (tension and shear) determined from this method were then combined in a linear interaction formula to account for com-bined effects of shear and tension on the bolts. The interaction formula was formulated as follows:

ft (actual tension) fs (actual shear)

F t al ow le tens on F s

a owab e shear Increases in Stress Allowable The International Conference of Building Officials (ICBO) report (Reference 2) permits anchor allowable loads to be increased one- .

third for short time loading such as wind or seismic forces. The Engineer and NNP-2 Contractors used the same design criterion.

Additional justification for this action is provided by the ASME Code f'r Subsection NF components such as base plates. This Code allows an increase of nearly 100 percent in the allowable loads for NF component under faulted (seismic) loading conditions.

Preload of Bolts 4

The advantages= of anchor bolt preload were neglected for design pur-poses. However, they were preloaded during installation to over 100 percent of their allowable tension load. Preload is fully-discussed in the response to Action Item No. 4.

4

1.3 FINAL BASE PLATE OESIGN ANO QJALIFICATION In response to the Bulletin, all flexible Seismic Category I pipe support base plates are being qualihed by flexible plate analysis. Factors of safety higher than those originally used are now being utilized. For maximum support load (typically faulted condition) a 33 percent increase in allowable anchor load is no longer permitted. The following is a dis-cussion of the current analytical method used for both design and final qualifiation at. WNP-2.

1.3.1 Flexible Base Plate Anal sis Base plates are considered flexible when the unstiffened distances between member welded to the plate and the edge of the base plate is greater than twice the thickness of the plate. Most base plates without stiffeners are categorized as flexible. Analysis of flex-ible base plates is being performed with a finite element computer program, ANSYS (Reference 4). If a computer evaluation is not per-formed, a comparision is made to a typical base plate with greater flexibility. Since these typical base plates were evaluated by ANSYS for flexibility, all subject base plates have flexibility in-cluded in the evaluation of anchor loading.

1.3.2 Oescri tion of Anal tical Model In the manner of assessment presented in Reference 8, flexible base plates are evaluated with a finite element computer program, ANSYS

'(Reference 4).

Consideration is given to plate and concrete stiffness, expansion bolt stiffness and proper dimensions of the attachment. The unique computer program capabilities are used to perform a static, elastic, non-linear finite element solution. Additionally, a preprocessor program is used to simplify the input.

The steel plate is represented by quadrilateral and/or triangular plate shell elements. This element, STIF 63, has six degrees of freedom at each node and permits both bending and membrane loading.

Located below each plate node is an element which simulates the concrete.

The concrete is represented by a STIF. 40 element type which has a spring constant and a gap. A STIF 40 combination element is used to-resist the compressive forces in the vertical direction between the plate element and the concrete. Since this element has gap capabil-ity, only compressive forces will occur. A non-linear iterative solution is therefore required to assure a converged and accurate solution.

The concrete spring 'constants, K, are calculated using elastic half space theory as follows:

Where:

G = the shear modulus of concrete Ro = the effective radius of the concrete area in contact with the plate v = 's the Poisson's Ratio of concrete A = is the effective contact area = mRo2 Attachments welded to the base plate transmit the pipe support load to the base plate. These attachments provide a stiffening effect (reduces out-of-plane bending) which is modeled as a rigid region on the coomon plate 'nodes. Since the applied loads occur at the at-tachment center of gravity, the plate model provides a collocated

'ode for applying loads.

The anchor bolt element is also simulated as a spring gap element, STIF 40. However, this element is modeled to support tension only.

As a two node element, one node is common to the plate mesh at bolt locations and the other node is fixed to ground.

The anchor bolt stiffness used is an important factor in determining the base plate load distribution and the final anchor bolt loading.

The primary factors which determine this anchor loading are the plate flexibility and anchor bolt stiffnesses. The anchor bolt stiffness is provided to the finite element computer program as a spring rate. Pull =tests performed on Site were used to determine realistic spring rates. At Hanford WNP-2, the shell type anchors (HDI's) are the most common expansion anchor type. Since test re-sults show this anchor type normally exhibits a constant stiffness (elastic characteristic) to ultimate load capacity, a bilinear spring rate simulation is not required.

For Hilti Super Kwik (HSK) type anchors, a ductile behavior is ex-hibited and the bolt stiffness is conservatively taken as the ini-tial slo'pe of the load deflection curves from Reference 3.

Table II provides the elastic spring rates conservatively used for each type of anchor.

Shear and Tension Interaction The basic tension interaction in conjunction with basic allowable shear interaction I

is combined with the following elliptical equation:

I4/3 I4/3 I4/3 (2)

Total Tension Shear Where:

Total Total interaction <1.0 Calculated tensile bolt load Or see section Tension owa e enslon o oa 1.3.4 for typical base plates Calculated shear bolt load Shear owa e s ear o oa It is to be noted that in this interaction formula, the flexibility of the plate affects only the tension portion of the formula not the shear portion.

1.3.4 T ical Base Plates Typical base plate configurations were analyzed on the finite ele-ment computer program. The maximum support loads found by solving individual load cases on four, six, eight, and ten bolt base plates with and*without stiffeners. The results were used to formulate an empirical equation to permit load combinations. An example of a four bolt base plate is shown below:

ITension Pullout Mx + M owa e Pu ou A owa e Moment Where:

, Tension Tension interaction Pullout Applied tensile pullout Mx and My Applied moments in the x and y directions Pullout Allowable = Allowable base plate pullout based on finite element evaluation Homent Allowable Allowable base plate moment based on finite element evaluation For base plates with larger attachments or thicker plates, less plate flexibility will occur and the interaction equation can be conservatively utilized.

1.4 COMPARISON OF RIGID.ANO Fl EXIBLE ANALYSIS Conventional Ri id Plate Theor The simplest method and perhaps the most common method for perform-ing base plate evaluations is to assume the plate rotates rigidly about one edge. Using all the bolts as active members, the maximum bolt load can be solved by static equilibrium. Although this method for erformin base late evaluations was not used for desi n ur-oses on WNP-2, the method is used only f'r comparative purposes w th the original design concept and the final qualification meth-od. This method is commonly used in industry.

1.4.2 ~Exam lea Flexible Plate Analysis Bulletin requirement {Cur-rent Evaluation)

WNP-2 Original Design Method One bolt redundant was ori-ginally used.

Conventional Rigid Plate Analysis: Common design by industry before Bulletin 79-02 To pzovide a fair means of comparison of analytical methods in the

, following examples, the tension expansion anchor allowable is con-stant at 4.53 KIPS for 3/4" HDI and shear loading is neglected.

T ical Four Bolt Base late Dimensions: '2X12X3/4 0 X

Bolt Spacing: 9" center to center

Attachment:

TS 3X3 0 0 I Allowable Allowable T e of Anal sis Plate Pullout {KIPS) Plate Moment { IN.KIPS)

Flexible Plate Analysis 14.0 66.9 WNP-2 Original Design I TQO I I aaa.a I Method Conventional Rigid 18.1 97.1 Plate Analysis Conclusion WNP-2 Original Design Method is conservative for this four bolt plate and most four bolt 'plates previously installed.

0 0 T ical Six Bolt Base late 0 0 Dimensions: 21X12X1 Bolt Spacing: 9" center to center

Attachment:

TS 5X5 0 0 Allowable Allowable T e of Anal sis Plate Pullout (KIPS) Plate Moment-X (IN.KIPS)

Flexible Plate Analysis 133.

WNP-2 Original Design D.9 Method Conventional Rigid 27.2 299.

Plate Analysis Conclusion WNP-2 Original Design Method has mixed results.

.0 0 0 T ical H ht Bolt Base plate X 0 0 Dimensions: 21X21Xl Bolt Spacing: 9" center to center 0 0

Attachment:

TS 5X5 or W6X25.

Allowable Allowable T pe of Anal sis Plate Pullout (KIPS) Plate Moment (IN.KIPS)

Flexible Plate Analysis 20.1 I 112.6 WNP-2 Original Design 25.0 173.6 Method One Bolt Redundant Conventional Rigid 36.2 318.

Plate Analysis

, Conclusion WNP-2 Original Design compared Method produced non-conservative to flexible plate analysis.

loading capability 0

Com arison The purpose of this section is to show conclusively that the design criteria used during final qualification of WNP-2 base plates satis-fies the bulletin's analytical concerns.

Figure 1.4 shows the bolt tensile load on a typical support with an eight bolt base plate. These curves provide an overview of analy-

-tical methods.

1) Curve A represents conventional rigid plate theory, which was the most common methods used by others prior to issuance of the Bulletin.

2) Curve B represents the WNP-2 Original Oesign Method used.

3) Curve C represents flexible plate theory without preload.

This curve is used to determine the allowable support load for a flexible plate since the only applied loading is pipe support loading.

Curve 0 represents a preloaded anchor bolt with flexible plate theory. Verified by test results (Section 5), this curve simu-lates the actual bolt load.

5) Curve E represents the theoretical behavior of a preloaded rigid plate.

~Summar The comparison study shows that for small plate up to 12X12, with four bolts and a minimum thickness of 3/4", the NNP-2 Original Oe-sign Method provided satisfactory results. However, as the plate gets larger and more bolts are included, the flexible plate ap-proach provides a more accurate method for determining bolt loads.

In addition, as shown in Curve 0, the actual bolt load increased only 1.0 KIP over preload when the design support load is applied.

Thus, the cyclic stresses due to alternating support loading is

. minimized and the Bulletin concern for alternating stresses due to dynamic loading is satisfied.

10 CD FsSeAe0 UJ 4i LiJ A)

Oi cn)

A)

I 0 2 APPLIED SUPPORT LOAD KIFS FIGURE 1,4 COMPARISON OF ANALYTICAL METHODS ON EIGHT BOLT BASE PLATE

~tt

" 1.5 TESTING 1.5.1 A series of tests have been performed at the WNP-2 Site under actual field, conditions to verify the analytical results for six bolt and eight bolt patterns. A typical hanger (see Figure I) was loaded in a manner simulating actual field conditions. The hanger was instru-mented to measure strain and deflections. Load sensing bolts were used to measure strain in Bolts Bl, B2, B3, and 84.

The 3/4 inch Oia Hilti Drop-In expansion bolts were torqued to pre-

,load of greater than the allowable design load. Then, tension load increments were applied by means of a hydraulic ram at a 36 inch eccentricity from the centerline of the plate. The applied loads were 1.33k, 2.76k, g Dk, 5.gyk, and ~0.67k.

1.5.2 Com arison of Test and Anal tical Results A comparison of the results of the loads in the expansion bolts from the analytical analysis and the test for a range below and above design load is presented in Table 1.5.

'I The analytical results typically agree with the test results to within 10X even when the applied support load is two times the support design load. A plot'comparing the analytical results with the test results for this test and three additional tests is summarized below.

1 t . ~IM. Approximate Maximum Loadin T e of Plate

.4x Design Eight Bolt III. 9x Design Eight Bolt IV 3x Design Eight Bolt V 2x Design Six Bolt During Test 2, the support load was increased to ultimate. The ultimate load was defined to be the point where the hanger would no longer resist the applied load due to excessive deflection in the support wide flanges. This ultimate load (26.0 KIPS) was approximately nine times the design load established for final qualification of WNP-2 base plates.

since the critical anchor (Bolt No. 3) apparently initiated slip at a support load of 17.5 KIP, a load redistribution occured and considerable difference between test and ANSYS predicted results occured. (ANSYS pre-dicted much higher loads.)

Test 3 and Test 4 results show similar correlation.

Table 1.5 Bolt Load Com arison lid d( IP9) 1t . t ~ltd' Xff Preload Only Bl 5.54 5.54+

B2 5.09 5.04+

B3 5.55 5.55+

B4 6.29 6.29+

1.33 Bl 5.54 5.59 1.0 B2 5.29 5.07 4.3 B3 6.34 5.75 10.3 B4 6.35 6.31 0.6 2.67 .Bl 5.60 5.72 , 2.1 B2 5.54 5.18 6.9 B3 7.01 6.61 6.0 B4 6.44 6.91 0.5 3.0 Bl 5.66 5.94 4.9 B2 5.80 5.80 9.4 B3 7.76 7.71 0.6 B4 6.49 6.52 0.5 5.33 'Bl 5.86 6.48 10.6 B2 6.21 5.78 8.4 B3 8.92 9.03 1.2 B4 6.60 6.81 3.2 10.67 Bl 7.28 8.75 20.2 B2 8.08 7.71 4.8 B3 14.90 16.25 8.5 B4 6.99 8.70 24.

+Analytical preloads were made equal to test preload values by using un-equal preload displacements on the ground nodes.

1.6 OISCUSSION OF CYCLIC LOAOING expansion bolts are preloaded to a value above

'he main reason that WNP-2 the bolt allowable load is to reduce stress reversals in the bolts sub-jected to cyclic loads. This preload procedure also ensures that each bolt is properly Installed and achieves a minimum load carrying capacity equaling the preload value. The preload is greater than the bolt allow-able load.

A similar approach is used in standard high strength steel bolted connec-tions. For high strength A325 and A490 bolts, (Reference 6), a preload to 70 percent of the ultimate tensile strength of the bolt is recommend-ed, but the allowable load of the bolt is only 60 percent of the yield point. The resulting ratio between the preload and allowable load is approximately two.

Generally, under applied design load the actual expansion bolt load be-comes sightly greater than preload. Since each expansion bolt is instal-led with a prescribed preload, it is assured that it can carry this load after installation..

In the analysis of the typical eight bolt pattern, it was found that uti-lizing the flexible plate approach in the determination of bolt load, the bolt load increased only one KIP over that obtained by (preloaded) rigid plate analysis. However, this increase occurs on one bolt of the group only, while the stress in the remaining bolts equal or slightly exceed the preload stress. Thus, while it is apparent that this one bolt is subject to a stress increase when flexible plate approach is considered, the remaining bolts in the bolt group are not.

Our results are similar to those presented'n Reference 5 for tension T-connections. In the T type, the bolt load increase above the preload bolt force due to applied loads is kept small. Thus, our results confirm results from standard steel practice.

1.7 MAJOR CONSERVATISMS We have presented results thus far for the effect of flexibility upon bolt design and how the consideration of flexibility provides a more ac-curate means of bolt determination in achieving a suitable factor of safety. However, there are additional major factors which contribute to insuring safety. These include conservatisms in accounting for shear and tension interaction, conservative seismic loads used in design, and high quality expansion bolt testing program. These conservations are discus-sed in more detail in the following sections.

I ~

1.7.1 Interaction of Shear and Tension The shear and tension interaction of an expansion bolt is conserva-tive in three respects. First, the interaction formula (Equation 1) combines the effects of shear and tension conservatively. Figure VI compares Equation 2 with the actual interaction (Reference 10) of shear and tension. Second, shear is distributed equally to all Jolts whereas for a flexible plate, each of the tension loads is not uniform. And while the use of the interaction formula will produce a result for the bolt with the highest tensile strength it should be pointed out that the strength of a pipe support is dictated by the capability of all of the bolts in the support and over emphasis should not be placed on the capability of one bolt where if any overstress occurs, there will be a redistribution of load to the bolts which are not as highly stressed. Third, the clamp- 'emaining ing caused by the preload gives frictional resistance which in-creases the capacity of the plate to carry applied shear.

1.7. 2 Seismic 'Load The seismic loads used in the hanger design are based on the follow-ing conservative seismic analysis of all Seismic Category I structures.

A lumped mass model representing a Seismic Category I building was used in computing the floor response spectra. In this model, the soil-structure interaction effects were accounted for by lumped springs and lumped viscous dampers. The damping coefficients of these dampers, conservatively calculated from the solution of a rig-id footing on an elastic half space, are given in the following table. Also shown in the table are the actual damping values used in the seismic analysis.'OIL DAMPING RATIO Elastic Half Space Actual Values Seismic Category I Theor Used in Anal sis er Buildin Hor z. Rock n Ver . Hor z. oc n .

Reactor Building 32 66 lo 5 10 Radwaste Building 65 98 10 5 10 Diesel Generator 63 10 5 10 Building The Building responses from lumped mass modeling are very conserva-tive because soil material and geometric dampings are purposely kept low.

A more realistic finite element modeling of the soil structural in-te'raction effect has been subsequently used to recalculate the building responses of the Seismic Category. I buildings. The compu-ter program, FLUSH, Reference 9, is used for this purpose. The geo-metric damping effect due to infinite boundaries and nonlinear soil properties for both shear moduli and material damping are properly accounted for in the analysis.

The structural responses from the finite element analysis are sub-stantially lower than those which have been used as input to the hanger design. Figures VII and VIII demonstrate the reductions in typical floor response spectra as discussed above.

Although this conservation is applicable to the majority of the con-cerned pipe supports at the WNP-2 Project, there is one exception to this, namely the pipe supports in the wetwell. For these pipe sup-ports, this conservatism is not available.

1.7.3 Ex ansion Bolt Testin Field testing of expansion bolts has been conducted at WNP-2 over of two years to provide a custom made criteria applicable to a'eriod the actual project site. The testing'program as discussed in our response to Action Item No. 2 has provided data as to capacities of the WNP-2 expansion bolts, 'and other chazacteristics, such as load deflection behavior and failure mechanisms.

1.7.4 Anchor Bolt Stiffness The essentially bilinear nature of the ductile behavior exhibited by the expansion anchor bolts used at WNP-2 has not been used in the analytical model of the flexible base plate. Typically, expansion anchor bolts exhibit some ability to slip but yet maintain their capability to carry load. This unique ability provides a load-limit feature for the critical anchor and permits a load redistribution "for the base plate. Evidence of'his redistribution was seen during the pipe support test perfozmed on site (see Section 1.5). When the support load reached approximately six times design load, apparent anchor slippage occurred permitting the support to reach approxi-mately nine times design -load without anchor failure. Figure 1.7 shows this comparison. Therefore., the factor of safety for a pipe support can more accurately be represented by the capacity of all the bolts rather than. that one critical bolt. As a result, the flexible plate analysis performed at WNP-2 induces considerable conservatism relative to the Bulletin strength requirements.

1. 8 CONCLUSIONS In response to the Bulletin's concerns, all flexible Seismic Category I pipe support base plates are being designed and qualified by flexible plate analysis. At WNP-2, the effects of flexibility on small (four bolt) plates is minimal compared to the Original Method of Analysis.

Where it is found to be significant on ber of bolts, additional stiffening of plates larger plates with a greater num-is being added to ensure that excessive bolt load does not occur.

~ ~

/

~O/

20 I l R ~v/

(+j ~ye I

g 15 l

ol <cy i

~l  !

t

~,o+~ I!

t C~

I I

~

<<Cf

'0 15 25 APPLIED 'SUPPORT LOMB KIPS FICURE 1,7 CAPARISON GF TEST PZSULTS TO NIALYTICPL IETHCD l

NRC ACTION ITEM NO. 2 Verif that the concrete e ansion anchor bolts have the followin minimum factor of safet between the bolt desi load and the bolt u tima e ca ac t e erm ne rom sta c load tests e.. anchor bolt manufacturer's hi h its muae e ns a a on z.e. e o concre e an ren th ro erties :

a. Four - For wed e and sleeve t e anchor bolts

b. -

Five - For shell t e anchor bolts.

The. bolt ultimate ca acit should account for the effects of shear ten-sion interaction minimum ed e distance and ro er bolt s ac n .

If the minimum factor of safet of four for wed e t e anchor bolts and ive or shell e an ors canno e shown en usta cat on mus e rov e . e e n ac ors o sa et were n en e or he maximum su ort load includin the SSE. The hRC has not et been rovide a e-ua e us ca on that lower factors of safet are acce table on a ion erm asks. ower ac ors o sare are a owe on an xn er m asks the rovisions of Su lement No. 1 to IE Bulletin No. 79-02. The use of reduced factors of safet n the actored oad a proach of ACI 349-76 has no e een acce ed b the (AC.

2.0 RESPONSE TO ACTION ITEM NO. 2

2. 1 INTRODUCTION At WNP-2 a factor of safety of four is used in final plate qualification for both the wedge type and the shell type anchors. Apparently, by re-quiring a factor of safety of five, the shell type anchor is being penal-ized for its typically brittle mode of 'failure while no reduction is re-quired to account for yield load (load at which the load-deflection curve departs from a straight line) of wedge type anchors. 'or the wedge type anchor to reach ultimate, the anchor typically will exhibit considerable deflection (slip). This characteristic of'/2" to 1-1/2" slip makes the ultimate capacity unusable for most anchorage systems which typically can only tolerate anchor movements in the range of 1/8" or less. However, the shell type anchor undergoes deflections of less than 1/8" to the ul-timate Load which means that this load capacity is truly available to the anchorage system. Thus, the advantages and disadvantages of each type anchor appear to cancel each other out.,

In .addition to the above reason a factor of safety of four for the shell type anchor is justified because of the extensive load test program per-formed on site. (See References 3, 13, and 15.)

2.2 TEST FROGRAM The WNP-2 load test program was initiated to establish realistic design tensile allowables to ensure a minimum factor of safety of four in anchor installations existing at the time the Bulletin was issued and in all future anchor installations. All testing was performed by an independent testing agency using WNP-2 standard production concrete (4000 psi mix design) as the test. medium.

Testing was conducted to determine the effects of different embedments, epoxies or amounts of expansion on shell type anchors and the effect of different embedment on wedge type anchors. This testing was required so that the ahchor allowables could be ad)usted for these irregular condi-tions if bulletin.

found in installations existing prior to issuance of the In addition, anchors were installed in strict compliance with manufac-turer's recommendations using standard construction techniques and tested to establish design tensile allowable for all anchors. These allowables were used for design of anchorage systems after the issuance of the Bulletin.

Five anchors of each configuration (i.e., different embedment or differ-ent amount of expansion) were tested. Each anchor was loaded increment-ally until failure occurred. After each loading increment was added, the total slip with respect to the concrete for that load was recorded. The anchor was considered failed when one of the following occured: 1) The concrete failed, 2) The anchor body failed, or 3) The anchor slipped 1/8" with respect to the concrete.

The following is a listing of the different type of drilled in concrete anchors tested:

Anchors No. Tested Phillips Red Head 290 Hilti Drop-In 170 Hilti Kwik Bolt 60 Hilti Super Kwik Bolt 10 Parabol ts 30 2.3 TEST RESULTS The results of the tests are documented in References 3, 12, and 13.

Typical failure modes were slip for Hilti Kwik Bolts, Hilti Super Kwik Bolts, and Parabolts, slip or anchor body failure for Phillips Red Heads and concrete failure for Hilti Drop-Ins. These test results confirm the typical brittle failure for shell type anchors (Red Heads and Drop-Ins) and considerable slip typical of wedge type anchors (Kwik Bolts, Super Kwik Bolts, and Parabolts) as previously discussed in Section 2.1.

These test data were used for establishing the ultimate and allowable tensile load values (Table II) used for the final qualification of flex-ible Seismic Category I pipe supports to satisfy the concerns of the Bulletin.

The results of these tests were used further to statistically establish that with a 95 percent confidence level less than 5 percent of the expan-sion bolts of the types tested will have an actual capacity smaller than their design load. This confidence level is as conservitive as the con-fidence level established by the NRC in Appendix A to the Bulletin, Revi-sion 2, entitled, "Sampling 'Methods".

2.4 ALLOWABLE LOADS 2.4.1 WNP-2 Ori inal Desi n Allowables Used b Contractors The allowable design loads for expansion anchors used by contractors has changed during the course of the job. Initially, the contrac-tors were directed to use a minimum factor of safety of four based on manufacturer's ultimate strength, but, this was subsequently changed and they were directed to use International Conference of Building Officials (I.C.B.O.) values (References /Pl and 82) early in the job before any major work was accomplished. Values for ultimate tensile loads for WNP-2 were developed through the extensive field testing program discussed in Section 2.2. A comparison of these ultimate values and the I.C.B.O. values are shown in Table I. In general, the use of the I.C.B.O. values by the contractors was con-servative.

2.4.2

~ ~ Anchor Allowables Used For Final Plate Qualification The allowable design loads for expansion anchors used for final plate qualification are based on the ultimate loads of the field testing program and a factor of safety of four and are shown in Table II.

2.5 FACTORS OF SAFETY One of the major reasons for choosing high factors of safety is the un-certain installation practices and incomplete documentation of many faci-lities. At WNP-2, there have been rigorously specified installation pro-cedures and documentation that check the requirements necessary to ac-hieve proper installation. Also, programs were initiated in 1978 to ver-ify the adequacy of all existing expansion anchors (see response to Action Item No. 4). Therefore,,based on the extensive field testing of expansion anchors and the strict installation and inspection procedures for expansion anchors a factor of safety of four for both shell type and wedge type anchors is justified. In addition, the major conservatisms discussed in Section 1.7 serve to increase the factor of safety beyond a minimum of four.

20-

NRC ACTION ITEM NO. 3 Describe the desi c c ic oa s e. .

re uirements se sm c oa if s an a licable for x

anchor bolts to withstand c c e o era zn oa s.

3.0 RESPONSE TO ACTION ITEM NO. 3 Preloading of bolts is required in the installation procedures for the installation of expansion bolts to assure that compression between the base plate and the concrete remains when subjected to cyclic loading, such as seismic loading and high cycle operating loading, so as to avoid fatigue failures or loosening of the expansion bolt assembly due to cyc-lic loading variations. All expansion bolts are required to be torqued so as to provide a preload greater than the allowable tensile load, or as noted in. Table III. This preload requirement assures that the bolt will be subjected only to small stress differences due to changes in load.

In the presented example of Action Item No. 1, for the eight bolt pat-tern, the maximum stress differences amount to only 6 percent of the ul-timate strength of the bolt. In the case of the four bolt patterns, the maxiaum stress differences amount to only 2 percent of the ultimate strength of the bolt.

In conclusion, the prescribed preload is the design requirement that al-lows the expansion bolt assemblies to carry cyclic loads, without fatigu failure.

t I I I NRC ACTION ITEM NO. 4 Verif from existin QC documntation that desi re uirements have been met for each anchor bolt in the fol ow n areas:

) clic loads have been considered (e.. anchor bolt reload is e ual to or reater than bolt desi load . In the case of the shell t e assure that it is not in contact with the back of'he sup ort late rior to (b) S ecified desi size and t e is correctl installed (e. . ro er e e en e If sufficient documntation does not exist then initiate a testin ro>>

ram a wx assure a man mum esz n re u remen s ave een me wi res ect to subitems a and b above. A sam lin techni ue is accept-able. One acce table techni ue is to randoml select. and test one anchor an ea ase a e .e. some su or s ma ave more than one base late . The test should rovide veri cat on of sub ems a an a ove. I he est ails all other bolts on that base late should be s ar es e . n an even e es ro ram s ou assure a eac Seismic Cate or I s stem will erform its intended function.

The referred test method to demonstrate that bolt reload has been "ac-com lished is usin a direct ull tensile test e ual to or reater than desi oad. Reco izin s me o ma e cu t ue o access n some areas an alternat ve test method such as torque testin ma be used. If tor ue testin is used it must be shown and substantiate a a corre a on between toraue and tension exists. If manufacturer's a a tor ' s ec c o use s no avaz e or s no use en site s ecific data must be develo ed b uglification tests.

Bolt test values of one-fourth (wed e t e) or one-fifth (shell t e) ultimate ca acit ma be used in lieu of individuall calculated of'olt bolt desi loads where the test va ue can e s own to be conservative.

The ur ose of Bulletin No. 79-02 and this revision is to assure the o erabilit of each Seism c Cate or I i n s stem.

ev ua on o con rm s stem o erabilit must be erformed. If a base In a 1 cases an late or anchor bolt failure rate is identified at one unit of a mul un sate wh ch threatens operabilit of safet -related that un t con inue o era son o i in s stems of e rema n n un' ha s e mus be immediatel evaluated and re orted to the NRC. The evaluation must consider the eneric aoolicabil t of the dent e a ures.

Ap endix A'describes two sam lin methods for testin that can be used.

Other sam lin methods ma be used ut must be us e . Those o mons ma e se ected on a s stem b s stem bas s.

Justification for omittin certain bolts from sam le testin which are in h ra ia on areas durin an outa e must be based on other testin or anal sis which substantiates o erabil t of he a ec e s s em.

22

I I Bolts which are found durin the testin ro ram not to be reloaded to a load e ual to or reater=than bolt des oa mus e ro er re oa e or mus e shown t at the lack of reloadin is not detrimental to c cl c oad n ca abi t . Those licensees a ave no ver e anchor o re oa are not re uired to o back and establish reload. However additional informat on should be submitted wh emons ra es e e ec s o re oa on e an or o u mrna e ca acr un er namxc oadin .

it If can be established that a tension load on an of the bo ts does not ex s or a oa n cases en no re oad or testin of the bolts is reeu re ~

If anchor bolt testin is done rior to completion of the anal tical work on base ate ex bi z. e o es n mus e per orme o a eas e or inal calculated bolt load. For testin ur oses factors ma be use o conserva ve es ma e e o en a ncrease zn e ca cu a e o oa ue o ase a e ex z . er corn e on o he ana tz-cal work on the base lates the conservatism of these factors must be ver ze .

For base late su orts usin ex ansion anchors but raised from the su-or n surface wzt rou p ace un er e ase a e or es n ur-poses x mus e ver t e a eve n nu s were no use . I levelin nuts were used then the must be backed off such that the are not n con ac wz e ase a e e ore a zn ensxon or or ue testin .

Bulletin No. 79-02 re uired verification b ins ection that bolts are pro er nstalled and are of the s eci ied size and t e. parameters wh c shou d e nc u ed are e edmen e rea en a emen ate bolt hole size bolt s acin ed e distance to the side of a concrete member and full ex ansion of the shell for she e anc or o ts.

If pipin systems 2 1/2 inches in diameter or less were computer-anal zed then a sos e must e treated o was use e same as e ar er i zn . I a c ar an-conser-me an zs me o can e s own o e x vative then the ro er installation of the baseplate and anchor bolts s ou e vera e a sam n zns ection. The arameters ins ected s ou c u e ose escr e zn e rece n ara ra . sma ia-me er i rovi in is not ins ected then ustification of s stem o erabilit mus e e .

4.O RESPONSE TO ACTION ITEM NO. 4

4.1 INTRODUCTION

Seismic Category I piping system supports have been installed with drilled-in concrete anchors at NNP-2 since about 1976. Our response to this action item addresses our program to assure compliance with the re-quirements of the Bulletiq for those anchors installed prior to July 1979 when definitive inspection'equirements were first issued in Revision 1 of the Bulletin. Those anchors installed after the issuance of the Bul-letin are discussed in our response to Action Item No. 9. It is noted here that the evaluation of the design adequacy and the installation verification of all small diameter pipe supports are addressed in the same manner as large diameter pipe supports.

The specific requirements of the Action Item are presented as follows:

Anchor bolt preloading is addressed first and is followed by a discussion of leveling nuts and a "discussion of verification of existing installa-tions according to contract.

4.2 ANCHOR BOLT PRELOADING A specific requirement of the Bulletin is equal to or greater than bolt design load." All anchor bolt preload is WNP-2 contractors were directed by their original specifications to preload anchors to a value greater than design load. However, documentation for this preloading was not complete. To deoenstrate that the anchors installed prior to issu-ance of the Bulletin were properly preloaded the method of torque testing recommended by the Action Item was selected.

4.2.1 Tor ue/Tension Testin The Bulletin requires that site specific data must be developed by qualification tests which substantiate that a correlation between torque and tension exists. In response to the Bulletin requirement this testing was conducted at WNP-2 for Phillips Red Head, Hilti Drop-In, Hilti Kwik Bolt, and Hilti Super-Kwik Bolt anchors. These tests established the torque versus tension relationship for each anchor type and size. (Reference 12). Torque values for Molly Parabolt are those recommended by the manufacturer. They agree well with the test results for Hilti Kwik Bolts, a similar type anchor.

Molly Parabolts had very limited usage on the project. The torque values, given in Table III, were utilized by all WNP-2 Contractors to preload anchors.

The testing confirmed the installation torques being used gave pre-loads ranging between 100 and 300 percent of the anchor allowable tension load, for all anchors except. the 3/4 inch diameter Hilti Drop-In. The torque value for this anchor was increased to provide the required preload. Installations using these anchors which were installed prior to issuance of the Bulletin were retorqued. (See Exhibit A.)

4.2.2 Anchor Retor uin Pro ram As a result of document deficiencies concerning C215 torque wrench calibration and to further insure the integrity of their anchor in-stallations all C215 Seismic Category I anchors are being retor-qued. (Reference 14) The anchors of the other contractors that installed Seismic Category I pipe supports (C213, C216, C217, and C220) have been excluded from this program because most were in-stalled and all have been torqued-after the implementation of the Bulletin requirements. See Section 4.4.6, for a discussion of the Parabolts installed by C233.

I I ~

0

4. 3 LEVELING NUTS A specific requirement of the Bulletin is leveling nuts were.not used. If leveling nuts

"... it used, were must be verified that then they must be backed off...<<

At WNP-2, two contractors installed leveling nuts under some Seismic Cat-egory I floor mounted pipe supports installed prior to August 1979. They were C215 and C216. After August 1979, their usage was prohibited for all new base plate installations, regardless of Seismic Category. (See Exhibit B.) All of the Seismic Category 1 installations performed by C216 have been reworked to remove or back off the leveling nuts. This rework included torqueing the anchor bolts to their full preload (see Table III) and inspecting for anchor pull-up, before regrouting the plates. Anchors which did pull-up were replaced.

Leveling nuts installed by C215 are being reworked in a similar manner.

However, one exception is being permitted. Base plates which are already grouted and the anchor tension loads do not exceed 10 percent of their allowable tension load require no rework. An anchor. tension load equal to 10 percent of its allowable load is only 2.5 percent of the anchors ultimate load. Engineering judgment dictates this small cyclic load will not be detrimental to the anchor performance.

4.4 VERIFICATION OF INSTALLATIONS In addition to the anchor preload and leveling nut requirements just dis-cussed, the Bulletin listed other'pecific items for the inspection of anchors: "... verification by inspection that bolts are properly in-stalled and are of the specified size and type. Parameters which should be included are embedm nt depth, thread engagement, plate bolt hole size, bolt spacing, edge distance to the side of a concrete member and full expansion of the shell for shell type anchor bolts.";",In the case of the shell type, assure that plate.

it is not in contact with the back of the support Documentation of satisfactory compliance with these inspection items was not complete. As a result, a program of installation verificaton was established for each contractor to insure base plate installation was adequate and satisfied the concerns of the Bulletin. The inspection re-quirements were implemented for all Contractors, except C215, by the di-rective of Exhibit C. The directives issued to C215 are given in Exhibits D and E. These directives covered both those anchors installed prior to July 1979, when these inspection requirements were issued in Revision 1 of the Bulletin and those anchors installed after July 1979.

The former anchors are discussed in this response and the latter anchors are discussed in the response to Action Item No. 9.

Following is a contract by contract presentation of the specific status of each veri,fication program.

l 0

Contract 213A - Primar Containment Contract 213A was responsible for the installation of Seismic Cate-gory I piping systems within Containment. Their supports were in-stalled exclusively with Hilti Super Kwik Bolts. Anchor installa-tions were begun in early 1978. All anchor installations have been or are being inspected, verified, and documented to show compli-ance with the requirements of the Bulletin in accordance with Exhi-bit C.

Contract 215 Mechanical E ui ment Installation and Pi in The C215 Anchor Inspection program developed to satisfy compliance with the Bulletin requirements consisted of three phases: a) re-inspection of all anchors installed prior to February 1978; b) re-inspection of a sample of the anchors installed between February 1978 and July 1979; and c) inspection of all anchors during instal-lation, after July 1979. The first two of these are discussed here because they pertain to anchors installed prior to issuance of the Bulletin. The third is addressed in our response to Action Item No.

9 of the Bulletin. In addition, a second program was initiated which prohibited the use of leveling nuts after August 1979 and required their removal from most existing Seismic Category I base plates. This was discussed in Section 4.3.

The first phase was devoted to a reinspection of all of the anchors installed prior to February 1978. (See Exhibit E.) During this period, the contractor installed Phillips Red Head Self-Drilling shell-type anchors and Hilti Kwik Bolt stud-type anchors. While this reinspection was initiated approximately one year before defin-itive inspection requirements were established by: the Bulletin, it included all of the Bulletin inspection items, except three. (See the Table 4.1.) These items were plate bolt hole size, edge dis-tance to the side of a concrete member and shell type anchor in con-tact with the back of the plate. When Revision 1 of the Bulletin was issued in July 1979 giving specific inspection requirements, the retroinspection program was revised to include all of them. Prior to implementation of this revision approximately seventy supports which utilized anchors were inspected; approximately sixty of these were installed with Red Head anchors and the remainder with Kwik Bolts.

While these three items were not specifically required as retro-inspection items the contractor had installation criteria for them.

Plate Bolt Hole Size was controlled by the American Institute of Steel Constructors and/or American Society of Mechanical Engineers codes as required by the Specification. These codes provided for the maximum plate bolt hole size as a function of bolt diameter and plate thickness. Further, the contractor specified hole size on the base plate drawing and inspected for it as part of the as-built hanger inspections.

Contract 215 Anchor Retrospection Program For Anchors Installed Prior to February 1978 Initial Direction Revised Direction Issued Dune 1978 Issued Jul 1979 Bulletin 79-02 - Ins ection Item PRH PRH HKB Torque X Leveling Nuts Qi 01 Specified Size X X Specified Type I Embedment Depth I Thread Engagement I

Plate Bolt Hole Size Bolt Spacing l x Edge Distance (Concrete) X Full Expansion of Shell XQ4 N/A XQ4 N/A Pulled Against Plate N/A X N/A I

PRH = Phillips Red Head Self-Drilling shell type anchor HKB = Hilti Kwik Bolt-wedge type anchor X = Anchor was inspected for compliance with this Bulletin item Ql = See Section 4.3 of. the zeeponee to Action Item No. 4 02 Required to be flush or below the concrete 03 Required to be 1/16 to 3/8 inch below the concrete 04 Inspected to expansion requirements established by the Engineer TABLE 4.1 27

Ed e Distance to the Side of a Concrete Member was controlled for all anchors by the requirements of the Inteznational Conference of Building Officials (ICBO) as required by the Specification. ICBO provided for the anchor edge distance as a function of the anchor diameter. It also gave a method for reducing the anchor allowable load should the edge distance be less than zequired.

Shell T' Anchor in Contact With the Back of the Plate was partial-y con o e y e requiremen s o as given y e Specifica-tion and by the retroinspection program requirements. It was re-quired that the Phillips Red Head Self Drilling anchors be flush or below the concrete surface'. Further, both the Specification and the retroinspection program required. the anchors to be preloaded by tor-.

quing. Thus, the anchors were first installed flush with the con-crete surface, in accordance with ICBO, and torqued, in accordance with the Specification requirement. Then in accordance with the retroinspection program, the bolts were untorqued and removed. The anchors were inspected for proper expansion, proper embedment (i.e.,

flush or below the concrete surface), proper torque and the other items listed in Table 4.1. It is extremely unlikely that an anchor which was loose enough in the hole to pull against the plate, could also meet the expansion and torque requirements of the retroinspec-tion program. This is borne out by the fact that severly underex-panded anchors tended to turn freely when being torqued or un-torqued. Further, the results of the retroinspection program carried out on supports after the inspection for pull-up was in-cluded showed far fewer violations than al'lowed by the accepted NRC statistical sampling method. (See Exhibit F.)

The conclusion is that even though these three inspection items were not included for the first seventy supports of the retroinspection program, the inspections performed did insure the anchor installa-tions are adequate.

The second phase of the C215 Anchor Inspection Program is devoted to a retroinspection of a sample of the Seismic Category I anchors in-stalled between February 1978 and Duly 1979. (See Exhibit F. ) This includes the anchors installed after the time period covered by the 100 percent retroinspection program, described above, but before the issuance of the Bulletin inspection requirements. During this per-iod, the contractors anchor inspection requirements evolved to in-clude all of those specified in the Bulletin.

The initial sample size for this retroinspection program was select-ed to be in conformance with the accepted NRC statistical sampling method. The program consists of a review of the selected anchor inspection records. In this review, the actual anchor inspection items, will be compared with those required by the Bulletin. A field inspection will then be performed on one anchor per base plate, for the Bulletin items not previously checked.

~ ~

Based upon these inspection results the sample size will be adjusted in accordance with the NRC statistical sampling method, if neces-sary, in order to show all Seismic Category I anchors installed dur-ing the specified period meet the Bulletin requirements. Those not in 'compliance will be reworked and zeinspected.

The final phase of the C215 Anchor Inspection Program involves new installations performed after July 1979. At this time, the,contrac-tor was directed to inspect 100 percent of his Seismic Category I installations to all of the requirements of the Bulletin. (See Ex-hibit C.) 'This program is fully discussed in our response to Ac-tion Item No. 9.

Contract 216 - HVAC and Plumbin Installation Contract 216 was primarily responsible for Heating, Ventilation, and Air Conditioning installation. However, two of the subcontractors installed Seismic Category I piping. The piping supports were in-stalled with Hilti Drop-In 'and Hilti Kwik Bolt anchors. All inspec-tions were performed after July 1979 and are documented to show com-pliance with the requirements of the Bulletin. (See Exhibit C.)

Contract 217 - Fire Protection S stems Contract 217 was responsible for the installation of Seismic Cate-.

gory I fire protection system piping. The piping supports were in-stalled exclusively with Hilti Drop-In anchors. All installations were performed after May 1980. The anchor inspections are document-ed to show compliance with the requirements of the Bulletin. (See Exhibit C.)

Contract 220 - Instrument Installation Contract 220 was responsible for the installation of Seismic Cate-gory I instrumentation control piping. The piping supports were installed exclusively with Hilti Drop-In anchors. Anchor installa-tions were begun in early 1978. All anchor installations have been or are being inspected, reverified, and documented to show compli-ance with the requirements of the Bulletin. (See Exhibit C.)

Contract 233 - S ra Pond Pi in Contract 233 was responsible for the installation of Seismic Cate-gory I piping supports in the spray ponds. They installed approxi-mately, sixty base plates with Parabolts prior to implementation of the Bulletin requirements. Some of the base plates were cast in concrete rendering the anchors inaccessible for retroinspection.

However, one bolt per base plate on the remaining accessible base plates is being retroinspected by C215 to show compliance with the Bulletin. (See Exhibit G.) Anchors which do not meet the retro-inspection requirements are required to be reworked.

~

~

NRC ACTION ITEM NO. 5 Determine the extent that ex ansion anchor bolts were used in concrete block masonr wa s oa ach n su or s n e smic a e or s s ems or sa et related s stems in Seismic Cate or I s stems or safet related s s-ems as de ne Revis on o IE Bu et n No. 79-02 . I ex ansion anc or 0 were use in concre e o wa s:

a. Provide a list of the s stems involved with the number of su orts t e o ancnor o ne size an w e er ese su or s are access e dur-in normal ant o era on.

b. Describe in detail an desi consideration used to account for this t e of ns a a ion.

c~ Provide a detailed evaluation of the ca abilit of the su ports includ-in the anchor bolts and block wall to meet e des oa s. e eva-ua ion mus seri e ow e a owa e oa s on anc or o ts n concrete o wa s were e ermine an a so w a ana ca me o was use o e ermine the nte rit of the block walls under the im osed loads. Also escri e e acce tance cr er a nc u n e numer ca va ues use o per orm i is eva ua on. Rev ew e e ic encies iden ied in the In-if formation Notice on the as i e su orts and walls at Tro an to determ ne ar siua onexss a our ac w rear to su orts us an or o s n concre e oc wa s.

d. Describe the results of testin of anchor bolts in concrete block walls and our ans an s e u e or an ur er action.

5.0 RESPONSE TO ACTION ITEM ND. 5 8y specification, no Seismic Class I piping system is to be attached to concrete block walls using expansion bolts. To provide further assurance that this specification requirement has been adhered to, all contractors installing piping were directed to review their installations and verify that expansion bolts have not been so used. This verification has been accomplished.

NRC ACTION ITEM NO. 6 Determine the extent that i e su orts with ex ansion anchor bolts used structura s eel s a es ns ea o ase a es. T e s s ems an nes reviewed mus be cons stent with the criteria of IE Builletin No. 79-02 Revision l.

I ex ansion an or o s were used as escr e a ove veri a e anc or o an s ruc ura s ee s a es in ese su orts were nc uded n t e ac-tions erformed for the Bulletin.

ave een inc u If these su orts cannot be veri ed o n e Bu e n ac ions:

a. Provide a list of the s stems involved with the number of su ports t e o an or o ne size an w e er e su orts are accessi le durin norma an o era on.

b. Provide a detailed evaluation of the ade uac of the anchor bolt desi n and nsta at on. The eva ua ion s ou a ress e assumed s ri u ion o pads on he anchor bolts. The evaluation can be based on the results of revous an or o t estn an prana sisw c sus ania esp er-ai o ea ece ssem.

c. Describe our lans and schedule for an further action necessar to as-sure the a fecte s s ems mee Te n ca Speci ca ions o era i re-quirements in the event of an SSE.

6.0 RESPONSE TO ACTION ITEM NO. 6 Attachments of structural steel shapes directly to concrete with expan-sion bolts is mainly confined to supports for small diameter piping.

Their use.is very uncommon for large diameter piping. However, wherever they are used, their effects are being assessed in the same manner as all other flexible base plates (see Action Item No. 1).

"J 0

NOTE: NRC Action Item No. 7 is not a licable to WNP-2 and NRC Action Item No. 8 re u res no res onse.

l ~

~

NRC ACTION ITEM NO. 9 All holders of construction ermits for ower reactor facilities are re uested o corno e e I ems 5 an or insta e ie su or s wi nin a s o a e o issuance of Revision No. 2. For ie su orts which have not wi et been in-s-

s a e acumen our ac ion o assure a ems E rou e sa ie . ain ain ocumen a on o ese ac ions on si e ava a e or NRC in-s ection. Renort in writ n withio 60 da s of date of ssuance o Revis on

o. o e rec or o e a ro ria NRC Rea ona 0 ice corno et on of our rev ew an escr e an ns ances no revious re or e in wn c ou no meet the revised R2 sections of items 2 and 4 and our lans and sche u e or reso u on. A cop o our repor s ou if necessar e sent o e n e a s uc ear Re a or Co ss on 0 ice o Ins ection and Enforcement Division of Reactor Cons ruct on Ins ection Has in ton OC 2055 5.

9.0 RESPONSE TO ACTION ITEM NO. 9 9.1 Introduction The response to previous Action Items discussed in detail each affected contractors program for showing compliance with the Bulletin evaluation/

inspection requirements for installations made prior to its issuance.

Installations performed after its issuance are discussed here.

9.2 Base Plate Anal'sis All Seismic Category I large and small diameter pipe support base plates, for all affected contractors, are being evaluated and qualified in accor-dance with the requirements of the Bulletin, by the Engineer. Our re-sponse to Action Item No. 1 presents a detailed discussion of the analy-tical,methodology being employed.

Generic Anchor Ins ection Criteria After Revision 1 of the Bulletin was issued in June 1979, generic inspec-tion criteria was issued to all the contractors installing Seismic Cate-gory I large and small diameter piping supports. (See Exhibits C and D.) These criteria included all of the inspection requirements for an-chor installations deliniated in the Bulletin. Anchor installations performed after this date have been and are being documented to show com-pliance with the Bulletin. Also, the usage of leveling nuts under base plates was prohibited by generic criteria issued in August 1979. (See Exhibit B. )

I ~

0 0

10'.0 'eferences lt tl lt 2895, November 1976.

f ftllglg'Off lit tgt I

~ ~ ) ~t" lt tl lt f 1372, March 1973.

fgllg'ggff'11(.t..g),~t" Noble, L. D., and Mead, W. M., Drilled-In Concrete Anchor Tests Performed at the Washin ton Public Power Su S s em Nuc ear Pro ec x e, March 1979.

ANSYS - En ineerin Anal sis S stem, UP190, Rev. 2, CYB 7600, by Swanson Analysis Systems, Inc., Elizabe, PA.

5. Fisher, J. W., and Struik, J. H. A., Guide to Desi Criteria for Bolted and Rivited Joints, John Wiley h Sons, New York, 1974.

6. AISC, Specification for Structural Joints Usin ASTM A-325 or A-490 Bolts, American Institute of Steel Construction, New York, NY, July 1976.

7. Hanks, Abbot A., "Combined Shear and Tension Testing - Kwik Bolt", Reoort No. 9059, April 15, 1974.

8.'iLuna, L. J., and Flaherty, J. A., "An Assessment of the Effect of Plate

'lexibility on the Design of Moment-Resistant Base Plates", ASME, August 1979.

9. Lysmer, et al., "FLUSH-A Computer Program for Approximate 3-0 Analysis of Soil-Structure Interaction Problems", Re ort No. EERC 75-30, November 1975.

R. O. Clatto and R. R. Boentgen, "Strength of Concrete Expansion Anchors Pipe Supports, Teledyne Engineering Services.

'or Chenault, O. M., "Rigid Plate Test Data Transmittal Report", June 1979, In-House Burns arid Roe 'Report..

12. Chenault, D. M., "Torque-Load Tests in Drilled-In Concrete Anchors", 'Aug-ust 1979, In-House Burns and Roe Report.

13. Hyde, L.L., Drilled-In Concrete Anchor Test Performed at the Washin ton Public Power Su S s em Nuc ear Pro ec 2 i e u emen a e or No.l August 1979.

14. Bechtel Power Corporation, Task Force Stud and Recommendations: Han er and Anchor Bolt Report, Letter BECMCL-82-0032, January 18, .1982.

15. Chenault, O.M., Drilled-.In Concrete Anchor Tests Performed at the Washin ton Public Power Suppl S stem Nuc ear Pro ec e, u emen a e or o., Sep e er 979.

TABLE I ALLOWABLE EXPANSION ANCHOR LOADS Prov e o Contractor DRILLING - SHELL TYPE

'HILLIPS RED HEAD SELF ANCHOR WPPSS Allowed Factor Manu. Allowed Factor Size Ult. Tension Tension Safety Ult. Shear Shear Safety In. KIPS KIPS 'IPS 'IPS 1/4 2.56 0.54 4.74 1.35 0.49 2.71 3/8 4.91 I 1-14 4.31 3.57, 1.10 3.06 1/2 8.0 1.72 4.65 6.72 1.75 3.84 2/5 11.11 2.25 4.98 11.90 2.02 5.89 3/4 10.67 2.57 4.15 I 16.20 2.57 6.84 7/8 12.44 2.90 4.29 18.45, 2.80 6.59

'I HILTI KWIK BOLT - WEDGE TYPE ANCHOR WPPSS Allowed Factor Manu. Allowed Factor Size Ult. Tension Tension Safety Ult. Shear Shear Safety In. KIPS KIPS KIPS KIPS 1/4Xl-1/2 2.89 0.54 5.55 2.61 0.49 5.55 3/8X2 5.15 1.14 4.52 5.11 1.10 4.64 1/2X2-1/2 7.30 1.72 4.24 8.32 1.75 4.75 5/8X3-1/2 9.53 2.23 4.27 11.56 2.02 5.72 3/4X4 15.10 2.57 5.88 17.13 2.57 7.22 HILTI DROP IN - SHELL TYPE ANCHOR WPPSS Allowed Factor Manu. Allowed Factor Size Ult. Tension Tension Safety Ult. Shear Shear Safety In. KIPS KIPS KIPS KIPS 1/4 3.90 0.64 6.09 1.78 0.49 3.63 3/8 5.55 1.33 4.40 ~

4.25 1.10 3.85 1/2 9.78 2.11 4.63 6.22 1.96 3.17 5/8 14.22 2.51 5.66 12.21 3.07 3.98 3/4 20.44 4.06 5.03 17.61 4.42 3.98

TABLE I (CONTD)

ALLOWABLE EXPANSION ANCHOR I OADS rov e o Con ractor HII TI SUPER KWIK BOI T WEDGE TYPE ANCHOR WPPSS Allowed Factor Manu. Allowed Factor Size Ult. Tension Tension Safety Ult. Shear Shear Safety In. "KIPS KIPS KIPS KIPS 1/2 X 3-1/4 9.99 2.50 4.00 11.44 2.86 4.0 1/2 X 4-1/4 14.78 3.70 . 4.00 11.44 2.86 4.0 1/2 X 5-1/4 14.57 3.64 4.00 11.44 2.86 4.0 1/2 X 6-1/4 15.15 3.79 4.00 11.44 2.86 4.0 1 X 6-1/2 34.97 8.74 4.00 27.54 6.89 4.0 1 X 8-1/2 49.81 12.45 ~

4.00 27.54 6.89 4.0 1 X 10-1/4 49.76 12. 44 4.00 27.54 6.89 4.0 1-1/4XS-1/8 42.70 10.67 4.00 41.45 10.37 4.0 l-l/4X10-5/8 I 55.65 15.42 4.00 41.45 10.37 4.0 I

MOLLY PARABOLT - WEDGE TYPE ANCHOR WPPSS I Allowed I Factor Manu. . Allowed Factor Size Ult. Tension Tension Safety Ult. Shear Shear Safety In. KIPS KIPS KIPS KIPS 1/2X2-1/4 4.61 1.15 4.0 7.35 1.15 6.4 5/SX2-3/4 7.76 1.94 4.0 13.50 1.49 9.1 314X3-1/4 12.90 3.23 4.0 21.75 2.10 10.4 7/SX4 18.75 4.50 4.0 30.00 2'.75 10.9 1 X4-1/2 23.00 5.75 4.0 39.30 3.30 11.8 1-1/4X5-1/2 35.00 8.75 4.0 63.50 4.66 13.6 35

~ ) I I I ~

II I I'

'I I I ) ~ ~

~ ~ ) ~ )

~ ~ ~ ~ I ~ ~ I II I~

I ~ I II I

) ~ 4 ~ ~ II I I ~ I

~ 4 I ) ~ 0 II

~ ~

I g I ~

I ~

I ~

~ ~ ~ ~ )

I~ ~ I ~ ~ I I~

~ ~ ' l ~

~

I

~ II I I ')I

~ I I ' ~

~ ~ II I' '

~ ~

I ~

I

~ J

~ I I~

I

~ I' ~ ~

I

0 TABLE II (CONTD.)

HILTI'WIKBOLT Ultimate Allowable Ul timate Allowable Tensile Shear Size

• Tension Tension Shear Shear Stiffness Sti ffness In. ki s ki s ki s ki s k/in. k/in.

1/2 x 2 1/2 5.52 1. 38 8.32 2.08 220 106 1/2 x 4 9.10 2.27 8.32 2.08 412 106 5/8 x 3 1/2 9.08 2.27 11.56 2.89 900 250 3/4 x 4 10.12 2.53 17.08 4.27 900 250 HILTI SUPER K'llIK Ultimate Allowable Ultimate Allowable Tensile Shear Si ze* Tension Tension Shear Shear Stiffness Stiffness In. kips ki s ki s kips k/in. k/in.

1/2 x 3 1/4 9.9 2.475 11.44 2.86 300 180 1/2 x 4 1/4 14.78 3.695 11.44 2.86 285 180

/2x 51/4 14.57 3.642 11.44 2.86 271 180

/2 x 61/4 15.15 -3.788 11.44 2.86 259 180 1x61/2 34.97 8.742 27.536 6..884 1165 500 1x81/2 49..81 12.452 27.536 6.884 1057 500 1 x 10 1/2 49.758 12.439 27.536 6.884 967 500 1' 8 1/2 42.7 10.675 41.479 10.370 2083 1000 1'< x 10 5/8 53.68 13.42 41.479 10.370 1817 1000 1'- x 13 1/8 64.992 16.23 41.479 10.370 1611 1000 HOLLY PARABOLT Ultimate Al 1 owabl e Ultimate Allowable Tensile Shear Size* Tension Tension Shear Shear Stiffness Stiffness In. kips kips kips kips k/in. k/in.

1/Z x 2 3/4 7.439 1.859 7.35 1.837 '040 106 3/4 x 3 1/4 12.90 3.225 21.75 5.437 1063 302 3/4 x 4 1/2 15;26 3.185 21.75 5.437 963 302 7/8 x 4 1/2 18.75 4.687 30.0 7.5 2556 300 7/8 x 4 7/8 21.667 5.417 30.0 7.5 1878 500 1 x 5 1/2 26.555 6.638 39.3 9.825 1766 500

• Size = Bolt diameter x embedment depth TABLE III MNP-2 EXPANSION ANCHOR INSTALLATION TORQUES ANO PRELOAOS Anchor Phillip Red Head Hilti Hilti Super Molly T e Self Drillin Kwik Bolt Hilti Oro In Kwik Bolt Parabolt Torque Torque Torque Torque Torque Size ft/lbs ft/lbs ft/lbs ft/lbs ft/lbs 1/4 4- 6 4>>6 4 N/A N/A 3/8 15- 20 25- 35 15 20 N/A N/A 1/2 30 >> 35 45 - 55 30 35 80 - 85 45 65 5/8 55 - 60 80 90 55 - 60 N/A 80 - 90 3/4 75 - 80 125 175 130 - 140 N/A 125 - 175 7/8 95 - 100 N/A N/A N/A 165 - 210 1 N/A N/A N/A 345 - 380 250 - 300 1 1/4 N/A N/A N/A 720 - 790 400 500 Average Average Average Average Average Size Preload Preload Preload Preload Preload KIPS KIPS KIPS KIPS KIPS 1/4 0.63 1.23 0.63 N/A N/A 3/8 1.51 3.79 1.51 N/A N/A 1/2 2.25 2.80 2.4 2.45 2.77

-5/8 3.2 4.45 3.24 N/A 4.66 3/4 3.2 8.47 5.80 N/A 7.74 7/8 4.8 N/A N/A N/A 11.3 N/A N/A N/A 15.3 13.8

-1/4 N/A N/A ~

N/A 20.8 21.0

EIGI'IT BOLT TEST 'PLATE SIX BOLT TEST PLATE TErr l.2,3 TErr 4 Bl Bl BQ B3,B2 PLATE 1" X 32" X 1'9' BQ B3 B2 0 x 33 ATlAaeENT Pu TE l" x 2l" x 1'9" N 6 x 25 ATTAcmENT I

I I

I I

I I

LoAD APPUcATioN I,

I I

I B3 B2 FIGUPZ I. FIELD TEST

- 39-

/B3

/

83

/

/ /

/ /

TEST DATA Pg.YS PZSULTS EIGHT POLT PLATE CO CD LLI a

10 APPLIED SUPPORT LOAD KIP~

FIRRE il - BOLT LOAD QNPARISON FOR TEST 1

/

j'5

/

A C)

TEST PATA NSYS WsvLTS EICHT HO1 T PLATE 5 10 35 A PLIED SvppoRT hAD - KIPS PI(j[IE f/J - POLT LOAD QNPARISON FOR TEST 2

9 TFST DATA NKYS PEsuLTs -"

A EIGHT BOLT PLATE o

2 4 6 3 Ao~LIZO SV. PORT LOAD KIPS FIRRE IV BOLT LoAo CmeARIsoN Fop TEsT 3

~ 83

/

B3

/

B2 B2 TEST DATA 5$ ($ RESULTS SIX HOLT PLATE 1 2 5 FIRPZ ~ APPLIED SUPPORT LOAD KIPS HOLT LOAD CAPARISON FOR TEST "

I ~ ~ ~

0 0

1,20 0.80 0,60 0,4 0,20 0

0 0,20 0,4 0,60 0 1,00 1,20 V/VYiAX FIGURE 6 SHEAR TBKIOH It'lTEPACTIBl DIAGPlf",

44

O Co tfl STRUCTURAL RESPONSE O

O FOR INPUT TO PIPE Co llANGER DESIGN O

O O

O foal O CD Q ~

M Pl 5ra oo 0

0 ~

STRUCTURAL RESPONSE FOR FINITE ELEf1ENT ANALYSIS.

CD CD O

CO-CD O

CD 0.000 0-200 0.400 0.600 0.800 1.000 1. 00 1.400 1.600 1.800 2.0DD 2. 00 2.400 NATURAL PERIOD - SECONDS MPP S HAHFORD NO. 2 REACTOR BUILDING, HODEL NO. 2 REV. 1 SSE {DBE) FLOOR SPECTRUH - CO!SINED VERTICAL BASS NO. 10, EL. 414'3.0". DAHPING = 0.005

I 1 ~

0 0

o o

Cl STRUCTURAL RESPONSE CCi FOR INPUT TO PIPE HANGER DESIGN o C R

x)

I oo o

U oo Q ~

H 5 o N

0 V ~

CV STRUCTURAL RESPONSE FOR FINITE ELEHENT ANALYSIS.

o o

CD o

CO o

CD CD o o.noo .200 0.400 0.600 0.800 . 1.000 1.200 1.400'ATURAL

1. 600 1. 800 2. 000 2. 200 2.400 PERIOD-SECONDS L4PPSS HANFORD NO. 2 REACTOR BUILDING, iiODEL NO. 2 REV.

1 SSE (DBE) FLOOR SPECTRUM) - HORIZONTAL ilASS NO. 10, EL. 414'-3.0". OAI1PING = 0.005

'I EXHIBIT 3/4 INCH HDI TORQUE VAlUES This exhibit is referenced in paragraph 4.2.2 of the response to the ulletin.

'i'he vehicle that is used at WNP-2 to provide engineering instructions to Contractors is a Project Engineering Directive (PEO). Even though generic instructions are issued which affect several contractors each contractor receives a PED with a unique number.

This exhibit consists of the PED issued to Contract 215. However, the instructions are generic and were issued to all affected contractors by the following PEDs:

Contract 213A Not applicable Contract 215 215-CS-1214 Contract 216 216-CS-0345 Al Contract 217 Contract 220 217-CS-0043 220-CS-0260

+IJ r.,'. g A N + ..

1 st asians.

PROJECT i 'iiPPSS

~

. ~

I~

'NUCLEAR PROJECT NO. 2 ENG INE E R IN G DIRECTIVE 5 I 2 I OATEi 5

'I sc ss 4! 5 I 4 I I

5 ~

7I ssl

~ 1 5 20 olsils2lsS's4lss 2sl PRIORITY I

REASON! I OR P.<.D.:, ltNFORMATION CONTRACTORS !swss- i oi M To revise the required torque values for the REFEREsVCES 3/4" diameter Hilti Drop-In (HDI) concrete anchor. '" '= 'gku laJT0iaa+~sJntl~is LOCATICi" ~g A~s ENG. SYSTEM Recent torque vs. tension tests performed on sttU SYSTERI th HDI anchors in response to I.E. Bulletin QUALITYCLASS 79-02 has shown that the reqIIired torque OR IGINATING is too low. DOCUMENTS r '3 REFERENCE DRALVIiNGS 0 iNG NO. - SHEET NO. - SUFFIX - REV.(

DESCRIPTIOiv OF WORK: I I i-(.!'(!

1 Contractor is to revi se his install ation r procedures to incorporate the new torque require for the 3/4" diameter Hilti Drop-In. The new

! value is given below.

3/4" Hilti Ol(i

~t(ft ~tt New Drop-In anchor 75-80 I 130-140 All 3/4" diameter HDIs installed from Sept. 1, 1979 on shall be torqued to the new value.

All previously installed 3/4" diameter HDIs 22 22 4 '2s 25' 24 ss $ 2ISslsa ssls 27 his must be retorqued unless it can be'hown that 0 ~

REFERiE S . PARAGRAPHS they meet the criteria below.. PARAGRAP PAGE The following 3/4" HDI anchors need not be RE'V'1 retorqued to the new values.

1) 3/4" HDIs directly substituted for 3/4" 8 smaller Phillips Red Head Self Drilling anchor or 3/4" or sma11er Hi 1ti Kwik 11SOI gg~

V jij 42145 44 4$ 4ts 47 44 so st s lss 4.51IS 4'5 'tI THIS PEO REVISES OIRECTION APPROVALS PR0VIOVSLY FROVIOEO BY T I7'I THE FOLLOWING PEOIS): SC 'NGliVEER DATE 3 THIS PtEO WORK SHOLILO BE ~l~ 7'I Lc~P EisIGX4EER GATE CCOROINATEC WITH KNOWN OTH=R CONTRACTOR S'ttORK ONCE R THE FOL LOW lb G P O'5; i

I CG '"'C NGR.

3 ~ HsS PEO OEPENOS ON THE PRiOR ":ST AL LATION OF S/ 'IA S 'fis4R.

TH- r i' OWING PEO'S ~

Exhibit A.

I vt ~

i tv J, Iel'0,

~ ~ t~

I I

If a contractor elects not to retorque any of these HDIs, he must compile a list of the supports on which no retorquing will be done.

This list shall be urnished to S 5 R Engineering by Jan'. 4, 1980.

On supports installed prior to Sept. 1, 1980, this PED applies only to HOI anchors which are Quality Class I (and Quality Class II 8 G which are Seismic Class I).

The retorquing is to be verified and documented by QC.

REF DOC PCN RFI VfPPSS NUCLEAR PROJECT NO. 2 R- SPEC SECTION'AGE PARA. BURNS AND ROE. lNC.

REF DVIG DWG. ZONE: 'PEDQ]~-. g I SH ~

~ OF ~

SCAPI.E.

CH((0 O*T{ J REVI&v60 ~ oATE g//T { / s% . ~ {C

{'-OP

((y oA ~ 6 (7/7(( GAPPY'0 0-Q ' Exhibit A

s EXHIBIT B LEVELING NUTS This exhibit is referenced in paragraphs 4.3 and 9.3 of the response to the Bulletin.

The vehicle that is used at MNP-2 to provide engineering instructions to Contractors is a Project Engineering Directive (PED). Even though generic instructions are issued which affect several contractors each contractor receives a PED with a unique number.

This exhibit consists of the PED issued to Contract 215. However, the instructions are generic and were issued to all affected contractors by the following PEDs:.

9~1999 December 1979 Contract 213A NA 213A-CS-0198 Contract 215 215-CS-1194 215'-CS-2075 Contract 216 216-CS-0355 216-CS-0381 Contract 217 217-CS-0050 217-CS-0084 Contract 220 220-CS-0265 220-CS-0320

l I ~

BURNS AIIID RDE INC. CODE PI)Q J). C T ENC IN E E II)NC 0) HEC ) V t PROJECT 2 1 Ic WPPSS NUCLEAR PROJECT ENGINEERING ) 4 1 ~ >1 >7 >> >4I>5 NO. 2 OI R ECTI V E DA I'E O~ < PHIORI I'Y

> <<~>>

REASON FOR P.E.D.: INFORMATION CONTRACTORS SHEET I OF To inform contractor that the use of REFERENCES leveling'uts on floor mounted base plates SUOJECT LEv'Eg, g~

g utilizing drilled in concrete anchors will j)IcJ7'NO.

no longer be permitted. SYSTEM SIU SYSTEM aUALITY CLASS

.@g OR I G INATING I

UMENTS REFERENCE DRAWINGS DRAWING NO, - SHEET NO. SUFFIX - RFV.

DESCRIPTION OF WORK:

This PED applies to all floor mounted supports that have not yet been grouted.

The contractor should revise the appropriate procedures to reflect this modification.

i E

..:T '.,( a

.I

~>

I

~4 ZZ a7 a+5 l0 Z7 2 ~ X% 50 5) 5Z 55 54 55 56 57 A> 3'E REFERENCE SPEC. PARAGRAPHS I

J~y . r> PARAGRAPH PAGE REV1

) ~ << '%

~ ~

r 4n 4> 4, 4J 44 45 46 4/ 4I) 5> BR 5) 54 5B)65 ~ I I. THIS PEO REVISES DIRECTION AP~ OVALS:

PREV IOUSLY PROVIDED BY THE FOLLOWING PEDI))' DISC" IN NG INEPR 6

THIS PEO WORK SHOULD 8'E COORDINATED WITH KNOWN LE A N IN R OTHF R CONTRACTOR '>VORK UNDER THE FOLLOWING PED'S'.

r NGR THIS PED DEPENDS ON THE PRIOR INST ALI.ATIONOF ThE FOLLOWLNG PEO'S.

PSI E>~IT PROJ. ENGR. Exhibit B

I ~

Other Re uirements This PED is applicable to all quality Classes of hangers. Hbwever, no retrofit is reouired unless specifically stated in the PED such as paragr aph 82 & >3 (which is for Seismic Class I only).

The rework required by paragraph -,";2 & 83 shall be completed by February 1, 19SO. Contractor shall supply a list of hangers reworked per paragraph 82 upon completion of work.

Contractor is reminded that leveling nuts may no longer be used, shims must be used instead per the attached procedure.

The procedure in this PED is intended to supplement the contractor's present, procedures, and not to replace them. Therefore, various items may be subject to another installation and inspection procedure e.g.

see paragraph 4.2.

REF OOC.. PCN kl /P RR 9/p, %GPSS HUCLMR PROJECT NQ.

REF. Ops..

REF. SP C. SECTION:

DR*w'N+

hJ /)b lg g Q

PAGE: PARA:

OWG. ZONE. FEo BURNS AHO ROE, lNC.

ZlS -qS-gb~ st. Q oF(

SCAI E; ~ d,t Dgy+ 4EVIEWEQ~ O*TE. /1/Jl/ F loom- ~0<

A~C ~Q DiTQ/ 4/,~

~ ~

~ ~

PROCEDURE FOR PLACING FLOOR MOUNTED SUPPORTS

1. General Notes 1.1 The base plate'for floor mounted supports may be placed directly on the floor regardless of whether the drawing or detail shows a grout pad. However, the requirements of Section 4.0 shall be met.

1.2 guality Class II hangers which are Seismic Class II and guality Class G hangers which must be inspected, need not he inspected by gC, instead Engineering may evaluate them. All other hangers shall be inspected by gC. ,(See Evaluation J

Checklist, Figur e P2).

2. Previously installed'8 grouted) base plates and/or equipment pads

. utilizing leveling nuts (Applies to Seismic Class I) 2.1 Chip out all grout.

2.2 Back off leveling nut prior'to removing threaded rod and nuts.

2.3 Install shims and level plate per Section 5.0 of this procedure.

Install nevi

'.4 threaded rod, nut and lock washer.

2.5 Torque each anchor'to the value shown in Table I.

2.6 Observe the location of the top of the anchor before and after torquing.

2.7 If anchor slips and moves to surface of concrete or above during torquing, anchor is deemed to have failed. gC .

shall make this check.

2.8 A failed anchor shall be replaced in accordance with Section 7.,

.2.9 If anchor does not move and sustains the torque it is

~

acceptable.

2.IO After all anchors have been accepted, support shall be re-grouted in accordance with Contractor's approved grouting procedure.

Page 1 PFD is -CS-Zo~z Sheet 3 of II Exhibit 8

3.0 Previousl install ed, unarouted, base ates and/or eouioment ads 1

utilizin levelin nuts (Ap lies to Seismic Class I han ers onl )

3.1 Place shims as required to maintain plate level (See Section 6.0)

,3.2 Back the leveling nut down untill there is at least a g'ap between the nut and the bottom of the plate.

3.3 Torque each anchor to the value shown in Table I.

3.4 Observe the location of the top of the anchor before and after torquing, make certain that a gap between leveling nut and plate is maintained during torquing.

If anchor slips and moves to surface of concrete or above

'.5 during torquing, anchor is deemed to have failed. gC shall make this check.

3.6 A failed anchor shall be replaced in accordance with Section 7.

3.7 If anchor does not move and sustains the torque is acceptable.it 3.8 After all anchors have been accepted, support shall be grou .ed in accordance with contractor's approved grouting procedure.

4.0 Floor mounted base plates laced directl on the loor (No grout

~ad 4.1 When desired floor mounted base plates mav be placed directly on the floor in lieu of a grout pad provided the following procedure is followed.

4.2 Concrete expansion anchors installed for this case shall be inspected per contractor normal installation/inspection procedure.

4.3 Prior to mounting plate directly on floor make certian that the pipe or equipment will be properly supported, i.e. make cer ain that everything will fit now that the baseplate is approximately 1 inch lower than it was before.

Place plate on floor and check, for proper bearing per Paragraph

4. 7. Grout if required per Section 6. Concrete anchors must be inspected or evaluated and accepted prior to grouting.

In order to obtain adequate b aring area, it is acceptable to remove any concrete surface irregularities by grinding. However, no grinding shall be permitted to exce d I/O" maximum dep h below the surface.

pED zt5 -cS- 'za75 Page 2 Sheet 4 of 1I Exhibit B

l 4.6 Clearly mark the As-Built indicating that the base plate is mounted directly on the floor.

~ 4.7 Grouting is required if the plate has insufficient'bearino as defined below:

1. Any gap that is equal to or exceeds 3/32" for a'istance of more than 1/2 of any side of the plate (the gap does not necess'arily have'to be continuous). The 3/32" is to be measured 1" under the plate.

2. Any gap that is equal to or exceeds 3/32" at two adjacent sides (corner) which when added together is greater than 1/2 the plate length (minimum length).

5.0 Shimmina Base Plates

5. 1 Snims shall be placed adjacent to (within 3/16") each anchor bolt.

For anchor bolts adjacent to the edge of the plate the shims may not be placed between the anchor and the edge of the

. plate. See Figure -;.'3 for clarification.

5.2 Shim size shall be limited to a maximum area of 1" x 1" at required thickness.

5.3 Shim stock may be of rion-traceable steel.

5.4 One shim is required for each anchor bolt.

6.0 Groutin o Han er Base Plates

6. 1 This section applies only to floor mounted base plat s per Section 4.5 of this procedure.

6.2 Concrete surfaces to receive grout shall be free of dirt, oil, grease, loose material, and laitance.

6.2. 1 A boundary or "dam" shall be formed around the base plate using Ebeco 636 grout and/or Sikadur Hi Nod Gel 390 mixed and placed strictly in accordance with the manufacturer's recommendations.

6.2.2 At, least one (1) air hole shall be placed on each side '.o allow trapped air to escape.

6.2.3 The boundary or "dam" material shall remain in place for a minimum of twenty four (24) hours after grout has been placed.

Page 3 PED z,l5-CS- Zc)~S Sheet 5 of 11 Exhibit 8

t ~ ~

6. 2.4 Placing grout shall be "Masterf low 814 Cable Grout".

6.2. 5 Storage and handling of the grout shall be per manufacturer's instructions.

6.3 Mi xing 6.3.1 The grout shall be mixed thoroughly. with an electric mixer per manufacturer's recommendations.

6.3.2 Only enough material shall be mixed to grout plates in an immediate area - in no case shall more than ive (5) pounds of- dry grout be mixed at a time.

6.3.3 Special precautions shall be taken when the temcera.ure falls, below 40 F or goes above 90 F. If below 40 F at the time of mixing and placing the temperature of the grout after placing shall be maintained at 40~ F or above 'for 48 hours5.555556e-4 days <br />0.0133 hours <br />7.936508e-5 weeks <br />1.8264e-5 months <br />. If above 90 F at time of mixing and placing water or iced water shall be added to bring grout tempera ure down to 50 F to 55 F.

6.3.4 Mixing and placing of grout shall be in one continuous operation once the mixing has started, the grout shall be properly mixed and placed as soon as possible.

6.3.5 When the mixed grout cannot be placed within 45 minutes, all such grout shall be removed from the work area immediately and disposed of'.

6.4 Placement of Grout 6.4.1 Grout shall be placed in accordance with manufacturer's recommendations and as stated below.

6.4. 2 Area to receive grout shall be kept moist prior to grout placement for the period recommended by the manu acturer.

6.4.3 Grout shall be placed by caulking gun or hydraulically from one side only.

6.4.4 Thin metal or plastic strips shall be inserted in the grou ing area repeatedly to eliminate trapped air.

6.4. 5 The exposed grout shall be kept moist by covering it with clean, wet rags for a minimum of'wenty our (24) hours.

Page 4 PED zi~ -CS-zo"-

Shast 6 of 11 Exgigig B X

I 7,0 Pemovi n and Reolacina Failed Anchors 7.1 If an anchor fails per the criteria of paragraph 2.8 or 3.6 it shall be removed by the following methods.

7.1.1 Remove plate and determine what type anchor it is.

7.1.2 Phillips Red Head Self Drilling anchor - remove it by inserting a threaded rod (the same size as the anchor) which wil'1 bear

.on the plug and pull on the shell. The threaded rod must either be machined on the end so that it can, be inserted past the threaded portion of the anchor shell or steel plugs of appropriate length shall be inserted between rod and plug.: By using a portion o pipe larger than the anchor diameter and a washer plate the anchor can be removed by turning he threaded rod and a nut attached to the rod, .thus holding the plug in place and pulling the shell out. See Figure 1.

7.1.3 HDI's - Remove it by drilling out the plug with a drill bit slightly smaller than the anchor size. A ter the plug has been drilled out the shell may be removed as in paragraph

7. 1.2 above or using a hydraulic jack.

7.1.4 Under no circumstance shall an anchor with the, plug intact be removed by hydraulic jack.

7. 2 A failed anchor Shall be replaced by one of the following methods. Replacement anchors shall be installed and inspected per normal installation procedures.

7. 2.1 Phillips Red Head Self Drilling Anchor - The hole must be reamed to the next larger size for an HDI. For example, a 5/8" Red Head hole should be reamed to'" diameter to allow insertion of a 3/4" HDI. For 3/4" & 7/8" Red Head anchors the only replacement allowed is .I" 5 I I/O" diameter Hilti Super Kwik Bolts.

7.2.2 HOIs,- An HOI anchor of the same size or larger shall replace the removed anchor.

Page 5 PED Zic, -CS-of 1I Zoos'heet 7

g '. g )

Qi ~1 ~ Exhibit B

P ~

~ I ~ I 8.0 WAlL ANO CEILING flOUNTEO SUPPORTS

8. 1 Check bearing area in accordance with paragraph 4.7.

8.2 If adequate bearing area cannot be obtained by grinding (see paragraph 4.5) then support is to be grouted in accordance with Paragraph 6.0.

TABLE I TORQUE TEST YALUES Phillips Red Head HOI Size Test Torque (ft-lbs) Size Tes Torque (ft-lbs) 1/4" 3/ A II 1/2" 40 1/2" 40 5/8 II 60 5/8" 65 3/ 4 I I

90 3/4 II 140 II 7 8 100 The above torque values are diTTerent than the normal values used and are for use on this PEO only.

WPPSS HUCt.EAR PRGJKC NO.

REF. OOC.. PCN RFI < t4 PAGE: PARA: 8URRS ARD ROE, 1HC.

REF. SPEC. SECTION: hf $ ee Zl5 -CS-'207'gT

~

OWG. ZONE PEo REF. OWG.: hf tA SCALE QRAWNg I

I> li 'Floor Yioor" d Exhibit E i r~ Pjflx r ~ g') /gf /~,

~ ~

s

/e /

XX ~

4 gl />

h

<'s ~ ~ s t

~ ~ ~s 4

~ .'..

~ Q>>, ~

4, s'1 gg. st >

t ~~ ~ >> i; 'sV ~ ~ e s>>s I e,

~ >>q p Ss ~>s ~ > ~ > ~ I e > ~ I

~ s s Ne,

~

>s ~

~

4

\ ~ ~s

$ ~

~ ~ s ~ >>,

THY, D, D:=(A'll 4 'oD

~ >>~t ~

. s

~ ~

"2 'P. W/ ly d.Q @~57..'go.t:E-

~ ~ ~

Ftsuzc P ae 7 I

RFF OOCPCN Q/p EYF'PSS NUCLEAR PRO JEC NO. 2 REF. SPEC. SEC7ION: g/p PAGE: PARA: BURNS AHO P>OE, IHC.

REF. OWG.: g P OWG. ZONE: PED Zj~~ t.g e ~g~ RHT. ~ OF, ~

5CA>-E: O * .~ ~g, OATS > IC(~q AEVIPrrEO I>.TC f ~

T

"'(QQv W Exhibit B 4>>fm 6s s

s IC~~O

A EVA UAT ION CHE K I ST HANGER tQRK -:",

BUILDING 5 ELEYATION

l. Baseplate is leveled 5 shimmed properly

2. Anchor did not move during test torquing

3. Torque wrench is properly calibrated

4. Proper torque has been applied

5. A gap exists between leveling nut and plate

6. Baseplate has been properly grouted

7. Baseplate has proper bearing Remarks Engineer Date Date FIGURE -:":2 j'IIA 5" ~ .)

lag( ~+I,T~

Page 8 ReF bQc. PcN Al/Q RFI P/SEE GPSS NUC <<AR PRO JEC S NQ.

sp c. secTIoN: p BURNS AND ROE, tHC.

ZONF'eb REF. p, pAGG PARA REF bWG.: DWG. zjc OAAwH QP P OAT SQ ASVISTIEO

~ AT ll/Pf TITLE:

-CS-zan'CALE

~~T ~ Pyhibit B

NUT W/ L. WASHER (TYP OF 4)

TOC i t

~

'~r l ~

~ ~ ~

i I,ifà ( a DRILLED IN CONCRETE SHIMS (TYP 0; 4)

FASTENER (TYP OF 0)  ;-,B f

~(4) HO'S I

Note: Shin shall be kept inside the bolt line except: no more than 1/2 of the shim may extend over the bolt line.

FIGURE -;3

>r~~ai IA Page 9 C ivy'.d Ret OOC. PC> Q / RFi JJ P"S NUCLEAR P OvHC '40 REF. SPEC. SECTiON: P(h- PAGE: PARA: BURNS AND ROF tPJC.

REF. OWG.: OWG. ZONE: ZfS- CS-

"- Ix I l!3h "': ~I Z075'A SQAI.E; lI QRAV&~o~g ~

illl +EV>EKED~ pi>~ W EXhihih B

EXHIBIT C NRC BUI LETIN 79-02 'INSPECTION REQUIREMENTS This exhibit is referenced in paragraphs 4.4, 4.4.1, 4.4.3, 4.4.4, 4.4.5, and 9.3 of the response to the Bulletin.

The vehicle that is used at WNP-2 to provide engineering instructions to Contractors is a Project Engineering Directive (PED). Even though generic instructions are issued which affect .several contractors each contractor receives a PED. with a unique number.

This exhibit consists of the PED issued to Contract 220. However, the instructions are generic and were issued to all affected contractors .

by the following PEDs:

Contract 213A 213A-CS-0087 Contract 215 See Exhibit D Contract 216 216-CS-0322 Contract 217 217-CS-0033 Contract 220 220-CS-0247

COOE I PROJECT FNGINEERING OIHEC IVh SURNS AND ROE INC.

WPPSS 2 1 -I PROJECT'NGlNEER tNG 1 I I 4 5 6 7 9 9 l0 II I+ II )4 f$

NUCLEAR PROJECT NO. 2 D I R ECT I V E OATE PRIORITY 2~0t l REASON FOR P.E.D.: INFORMATlnN CONTRACTORS I

ISHEET I OF ~

To clarify and upgrade in-process inspection REFERENCES requirements for installation of concrete expansion anchors as required by NRC Bul'letin 9- 2.

LOCATION itch '~ or- coi"ere ri +rom I ENQ. SYSTEM S/U SYSTEM aUALITY CLASS ORIGINATING DOC UM EN TS R E F E R ENCE D RAN INGS ORAWING NO. SHEET NO. SUFFIX RE)l'.

DESCRIPTION OF WORK:

Revise the specification requirements as shown on sheet 3 of 3.as noted below.

Paragraph 3.17.2.9, Page 15E-34a. Revise inspection requirements per page 3 of 3 and delete pull test requirement.

Note: 1. This PED applies to all Seismic Class I work and only to future work for Seismic Class II 8 G. Contractor shall revise and resubmit installation and inspection nrocedures to Engineer.

2. Contractor shall report in writing to Engineer the results of checking one bolt per plate per the specification 22 22 2+ 25 25 27 25 29 SVI5$ 12 11 54 15 16 17161 requirements for the first 100 plates REFERENCE SPEC. PARAGRAPHS checked. The report shall include the PARAGRAPH PACE REVJ number of anchors found to be unacceptable and the date the procedure was implemented.

3. Contractor shall provide in writing to the Engineer a list by Hark No.

of all Seismic I hangers utilizing shell type anchors which have been installed prior to implementation of this procedure. 60 452 45 46 47 66 50 51 52 55 $$ 6$

I, THIS PEO REVISES'DIRECTION APPROVALS:

PREVIOUSLY PROVIOEO BY 7/I (7I 7 THE FOLLOWING PEO(sI: DC3 C5 SCI I E GINE ER D~VE

2. THIS PEO WORK SHOULO BE ~~4/7>

W I

C COOROINATEO WITH KNOWN OTHER CONTRACTOR WORK r> ~- LEA~GINE R

'<+I t UNOER THE FOLLOWINC PEO'S: CO 0 T CJ ENGR. r Si THIS PEO OEPENOS ON THE S I ENGR. DATE'xhibit THE FOI.LOWING PEO'S.

S EN PROJ. E GR.

C

COOE Pl IOJIIC1 EIvllllNC.I: I!INI ~ Nlll':1.'IVF I)ATE I IIOJECT rNGINEERIMG DIIIEC'I!VE I

2)

I 1

>> 5 a I

-k'.I<i-tCl"~

4 JV~II.I II I>> I> Ia 7

15 c.T, 1P. 17 7I III 15l i/J

'VNN':I BURNP Y RQI. ING. '

PAGE~?OP

(

l ~ REFERENCE DRAWINGS REFERENCE SPEC. PARAGRAPHS I III DRA'RJINl NO - SHEET NO SUFFIX V REV PARAGRAPH PAGE REV, 5 "I 'II)4 5 L 5'4 SZ 55 5 &I IPt 4I'1 4 4$ 141.15 4Iv O'I 45 41' ~P 5I 5 5 54 55 5 This list shall also identify which hangers have been inspected in the retrofit program. For the purposes of developing this list (of installed Seismic Pipe Suppor ts ), a pipe support whi ch has not yet been inspected to the retrof i t requirements shall not be considered "installed".

4. The 20% inspection requirements for guality Class II 6 {non-siesmic I) are minimum and shall be increased if IE the ~ejection rate is unacceptable-Contractor's gA shall decide which 20/ of the anchors shall be inspected and the acceptable rejection rate. An acceptable method of sampling and acceptable rejection rates are given b low.

Note: Lot size shall be 100 anchors. { Lot means unit sample size)

Step:

1) Randomly select 20 anchors from a lot for inspection. l

2) If the number of failed anchors is equa'i to or greater than 6, go to step 4.,

3) If less than 6, continue on to the next lot and return to step 1.

4) Randomly select an additional 32 anchors from the same lot.

5) If the number of faile'd anchors is equal to or greater than 6, go to step 7.;

6) If less than 6, continue on to the next lot and return to step 1.

7) Inspect all remaining anchors.

8) Inspect 100" of the next two lots (200 anchors). If in the second lot, tne number of failures is equal to or less than 9, inspection may be reduced. Otherwise, continue 100% inspection unti ll this condi tion is reached.

9) Inspect 33% of the next lot of anchors than 5, inspect~on may be reduced.

if failure rate is equal to or less

10) Return to step 1.

P ~

Exhibit C

~ I

.8 If contractor elects to use a stud type insert (e.g. Hilti Kwik Bolt) as an approved equal it must have a length code stamped on the end ter ins taL1 ati on.

in order to readily determine the a

.9 In process inspection requirements for Class I and Class II installations a) Quality Class I (and Quality Class II 8 G which are SC-I)

All Quality Class I (and Quality Class II 5 G which ar'e SC-I) installations shall have the installation of drilled-in concrete anchors verified and documented by QC. Such verification shall include as a minimum, a check of embedment, torque, proper size, and proper type for stud type anchors (e.g. Hilti Kwik Bolt) and the relative dimension, distance below top of concrete, torque, proper size and proper type for the shell type anchors (e.g.Hilti Drop-In).

Contractor shall remove a minimum of one (I) bolt per plate on all shell type anchors that have been successfully installed (and torqued). QC shall verify that the anchor has not pulled out against the plate. All anchors that are found to be pulled out against the plate shall be rejected and the remaining bolts for that plate shall be removed and simil'ar ly checked. In a similar manner, one bolt per plate, whether stud type or shell type shall also be checked for proper thread engagement, plate bolt hole size, bolt spacing and edge distance (concrete edge). If an anchor fails to meet the acceptance criteria for any of these items all other anchors on the plate shall be checked.

it shall be corrected and If inspected anchor is acceptable the bolt or nut shall be reinstalled and torqued.

b) Quality Class II & G All Quality Class II 5 G drilled-in concrete anchors which are 'Seismic Class I shall have their installation verified and documented in accordance with the preceding paragraph.

In addition, 20~ of the remaining Quality Class II 5 G drilled-in concrete anchors shall have their installation verified and documented by QC. Such verification shall include as a minimum, a check of embedment, torque, proper size, and proper type for stud anchors (e.g. Hilti Kwik Bolt) and the relative dimension, distance below top of concrete, torque, proper size and proper type for the shell type anchors (e.g. Hilti Drop-In)..

15E-34a REF OOC, PCN RFI WPPSS NUC1 EAR PROJECT NO. 2 REF SPEC. SECTION: - . /g ~ 3 (., PARP, z BURMS AND'ROE, INC.

PP,GE (g REF QWG. ZONE +j-" ~ PEO~ O gg~) w~~ / SHT ~ OF SCALE n.;i By iP ~3 OATE ~

t 7/ REVIFWEO

+g DATE 7 l7/7$ "'LE'Zn 'ZC.i O~ ~

gy g OAT5 q/ PPV0 OATF'7]/f'WG.

P ~, ; Exhibit C

EXHIBIT 0 NRC BULLETIN 79-02 INSPECTION REqUIREHENTS FOR C21'5 This exhibit is referenced in paragraphs 4.4, and 4.4.2 of the response to the Bulletin.

(:OI)E'IIOJECT ENOINtERING OIREC IVE I

~

.M ~AN(> R(IE INC. PROJECT 2. I 9! l Ic- SI T/IOI /.

<IVII)>kk

~

ENG!NEER ING I I TI ll I'>(ill Ii 4 I i4 IE

~

~ ~

NUCLI.'AII k

I'i'l:.Iu)=.C T ~

N() Z DIRE"=CTlVE OA Tt. ~l PHIORITY I EL< 4+

I EASON FOR >.E.D IN) ORMAT ION '

I'ONTRACTORS I S)<f 'f T I k<l .l REFERENCES To clarify and upgrade in-process inspection requirements for installation of concrete expansion anchors as required by NRC Bulletin UBJECT ~nyp~c j<pe~~go ~cf~ .

79-02. LOCATION Anchors

~

ENQ. SYSTEM S/U SYSTEM QUA LI TY CLASS ~ p ZC c4 h ORIGINATING DOC UME N TS REFERENCE ORAWINGS ORAWING NO. - SHEET NO SUFFIX " REV.!II OESCRIPTION OF r<IORI(:

Revise .the specification requirements as she'i<n on Sheets 3 of 4 and 4 of 4 and as noted below.

1. Paragraph 3.20.3.8 Page 15/ - 30a. Revise inspection requirements per page 3 of 4 and delete.. pull test requirement.

2. Page 15q-49a Delete table 5-8. lj I~ 'l t

Note: I. This PEG applies only to future work.

Contractor shall revise and resubmit installation and inspection procedures to Engineer.

applies to al'1 small bore pipe as well as large It also bAre dlpe S ~Pf'Qr)~

2. Contractor shall r'eport in wrii;ing to Enginee the results for anchors pulled agains

'lates for theof checking first 100 shell type anchors 44 zx 44l;4 44 4% 14lli(34 slj 34IBEI'Ic st which are inspected and documented by gC. The REFERENCE SPEC. PARAGRAPHS report shall include the number of anchors fou.ld PARAGRAPH PACE REYi to be unacceptable and the date the procedure was implemented. Y >~o g I p'g'-,'Z O cI,I

3. Contractor shall provide in writing to the I 5'-! V,9 cq Engineer a list by Nark. No. of all Seismic I hangers utilizing shell type anchors ~hich have been installed prior to implementation of this procedure. This list shall also identify ~ II 4< ~s ~8 44 4< i4 4v so s'E 44 ss 4 which jlangerg~~g~>> sr'PPROVALS:

TH<s Pf 0 REv<sEs DIREGT(oN program. Cont. Page 2 PREVIOUS(.Y PROVIOEO BY THE POLI.OWING PEOIII (.5 "cT9' Ol CIPLIPj E INEER OATE THIS l -:0 PlORH IHOULO SS W ~fJJsc 7-3-7$

COORI)INATED WITH KNOWN QE E R OATE C

z OTHER CONTRACTOR WORK c bvJ IJNOt I< THC FOLLOWIN(i PtO'S. 86 C NT . T ENGR. CYA TE I'I<C

~ o j L I

i l

~

)

l

~ l l I

i I

I 2J "u24 25/"" 31 35~ 4O!41 ~ 14 4$ 4i.

43 1..> '13 4'5 ~g 51 3 5 54 5354.

l-or the purposes of developing this list (of installed Seismic Pipe Supports),

I a pipe support which has not yet been inspected to the retrofit requirements I shall not be considered "installed". f l

I

4. The 205 inspection requirements for guality Class II and 6 (non-seismic I) I ale minimum and shall be increased if the rejection rate is unacceptable.

Contractor's qA shall decide which 20~ of the anchors sha'll be inspected.and the acceptable rejection rate. An acceptable method of sampling and acceptable rejection rates are given below.

Note: Lot size shall be 100 Anchor's. (Lot means unit sample size)

Step:

I) Randomly select 20 anchors from a lot for inspection.

2) If the number of failed anchors is equal- to or greater than 6, go to step 4.

3) If less than 6, continue on to the next lot and return to step l.

4) Randomly select an additional 32 anchors from the same lot.

5) If the number of failed anchors is equal to or greater than 6, go to step 7.

X$ CeSS Aa.I f

6) Continue on to the next lot and return to step I.

7) Inspect all remaining anchors.

4JJ

8) . Inspect 100Ã of the next two lots (200 anchors).

the number of failures is equal to or less than 9, 'inspection may be If in the second lot, reduced. Otherwise, continue 100,. inspection untill this condition is if failure reached.')

Inspect 33" of the next lot of anchors rate is equal to or less than 5, inspection may be reduced.

10) Return to Step 1........ Exhibit 0

~ 0 LII I I v4 COD Jliaywwv ~ vo ~

Quality Class I (and Quality Class II 8 G which are SC-I) a)

All Quality Class E (and Quality .Class II F which are SC-E)

In the installation of drilled-in concrete anchors installations shall have as a Such verification shall inc ude verified and documented by QC.

torque, proper size, and proper type minimum, a 'check of the embedment, dimension, Kwik Bolt) and the relative for stud type anchors (e.g. Hiltitorque, proper size and proper type distance below top of concrete, Hilti Orop-In).

for the shell type anchors (e.g.

Contractor shall remove a minimumsuccessfully of one (1) bolt per plate torqued).

installed (and on all shell type anchors that have been the plate.

QC shall verify that the anchor has not pulled out against shall be All anchors that are found to be pulled out against the plate shall be removed and similarly rejected and the remaining bolts for that plate I

checked.'he anchor shall also be checked for proper thread engagement, plate bolt hole size, bolt spacing and edge dis.ance(concrete edge). Ef an anchor fails to meet the acceptance criteria for any of these items it shall be corrected and all other anchors on the plate shall be checked.

If inspected anchor is acceptable then the bolt shall be reinstalled and torqued.

b) Quality Class II 5 G All Quality Class II 8 6 drilleg in concrete anchors which are Seismic Class I shall have their installation verified and docum nted in accordance with the preceding paragraph. In addition, 20 . of the remaining Quality Class II 8 G drilled-in concrete accordance AIith anchors shall have their installation verified and documented by QC in the paragraph above.

3. 20.4 ZrZoedded plates Cast-'".-? lace Embedded plates:

.1 The s uctural information drawing o Sec ion lc o~ the Spe '='cation show ".". locatic." o embedded plates in sore areas o~ the reacto bu'ldi".- which a"e retarded =or the use or ir stal at 'on coI t 1 ors .Or hangers and seismic res-=a'n=s. The draw'-.cs shcw design loca"'ons =c ei-."edded pl =es a.d t}.e 'a's aI

,'on to3.erance "or these plates 's -'.3". Prior to ab 'cat'on, and a=ter approval, Contractor shall be usec "y ascerta'-'he exact location o= al l embedded plat s to installation ver'ing that the worst condi"'on c= lcadin=

spec'='ed herea"te, has been checked a." "es'=ned ror.

. The calculation shal l list the loads on each e6aedde plat~

15Q-30a REF OOC PCN RFI VIPP~S NUCLEAn PROJECT NO. 2 REF SPEC SECTION'Q PAGE. " PARA: 20 $ 8URNS ANO ROC, INC.

A PEF OWG DWG. ZONE: PEO 7 ~ gag sHT. 0F g SO*I.E np

~V

~

o'ATE AEVIEWEO OATE o+

CHIO Z) OAT E

~fT/7O APPVO 'fP ~ OATEN,g /~/ +@2~)

Exhibit 0

I ~

r~ ~

~ ~

m m C) 0 U) 0 m m 0 CI n n (DO lD0 th

% T C~ m o

n 0

z o o rior.t g (! 4~

ai m m Insert Installation & Testing Information & Reguirements TAAI.E 5-JL Il 0 Insert Size

(

m Hasonry Dit Diameter Relative Dimension Detwcen Top m Q for eredrillin rrole ne th of Insert and To of Set Plu N

o 0 z

3/0" 72" 577 1-3/4". O.GOO" 0 925" 1/2" .702" - .712" 2'-1/4" . 1.125" 1.250 43 063" - .073" 2-3/4" 1.375" 1 562" o o 1.020" -1 030" 3-.1/2" 000" I

~

2 2 187 m m 7/0" 1 145" -1 155" '3-15/16 " 2.312" 2 500" 0

o lh CO M C z zth C A

fn z C U

0 t 0 ~T m 0 Pl X z Ol A

O 0 z 0

~ ~ 1 EXHIBIT E C215 RETRO INSPECTION REQUIREMENTS 4

This. exhibit is referenced in paragraphs 4.4. and 4i4.2 of the response to the Bulletin.

1 This exhibit consists of the original Contract 215 anchor retroinspection procedure dated April 1978 and Revision 6 of this procedure which included all of the Bulletin 79-02 inspection requirements, dated July 1979. This

'rocedure was used for the, retroinspection of all anchors installed by the Contractor prior to February 1978.

~ ~

Revision 1. through 5 of the procedure did not change the inspection items given in Revision 0. Similiarly, .Revision 7 through 9 of the procedure

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

~

did not change the inspection items given in Revision 6.

~ ~ ~ ~

~ ~ I ~

'4 CODE PROJECT ENGINEERING DIRECTIV Bl P."JS AN.i) ROE INC. PROJECT CI O 1NPPSS NUCI.EAR PROJECT fNGINEERING ~ 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 il l4 15 DIRECTIVE DATE PRIOR ITY NO. 2 17 20 21 REASON I OR P.E.O.: IN FORM AT ION CONTftACTI)IIS SOFET I OI QSQt+6 ~8 thCLI~b")m Q67WCjr~ HEFERENCES AIJCH67C Iaa VJLLQAYIOQ PI0aOCC1aSOae

>~CJ-V>S Ab 45TIOWWL IalS~C~IP~ ~eyI~~~ SUBJECT)~g~O4/ 42m ~uLLI~- ) gC148 LOCATION /LI Fn I' S4%Th~~168~ 67'g I~~~ ENQ. SYSTEM A+ CQeuIeeb, SIU SYSTEM

.I .7 p QUALITYCLASS I

3 ~~ ~ OR IG IN ATING OOCUMENTS BIJC. ET'/4/ O 41 RENCE ORAIt'/INGS G N - SHEET NO. SUFFIX - REV.

DESCRIPTION l H6, *b>iTiOa$ 42,l I ah&P1 C. TI0 ILI RGGIOIl".E'HQ4W Az,s

1) CHHCW V67a, SK~S h,i~aaSCI"=.

USES  %<BIO~ (O.t-+ g~P t

2) CiisC'4 'Fa4, 184SK 1041%

6 Ch LAIL~Q.

isa'62L ASS SE Cmoa+ (a.'Z.l.la,) PAWNS tuata'X. Ib, p~g,8-, )CI AJL1b f,%+CgCi' 22 22 24 25 25 27 28 29 20 $ 1 $ 252 24 25 26 $7 8~

REFERENCE SPE C. PARAGRAPHS Ca~em,ct'a a sksu. sop wL.q ms PARAGRAPH PAGE REV

'Eucqasss aan.a a use aa i u Ciaas7-HAlAhdae$ LQ l8$ &l Gab, QSJISQa, -rEEES RCLW %49 P IY PC@ 44IRJ%H PRIE C

, IASC4SRF g&14J P I'755+ PER a 41 42 47 48 4$ $ 0 S'1 $ 2 SS $ 4 SS 16l THIS PEO REVISES DIRECTION P ROV S PREVIOIISLY PROVIDED BY 7 )l THE FOLLOWING PEOIS): IS CI e,y~q 4 4

2. THIS PEO WORK SHOULD BE UJ l COORDINATED WITH KNOWN EN4I E R OATE Z OTHF R CONTRACTOR WORK UNDER THE FOLLOWING PEO'S'E THIS PEO DEPENDS ON THE PRIOR INSTALLATIONOF THE FOLLOWING PEO'S'.

CO+ICQ S/U LI R .

ENGR.

Slt FNT PROJ. ENGR.

ENGR. /~AT Exhibit TE E

I ~ ~

DRILLED - IN CONCRETE ANCHOR EVAN.UAT'$08 PROCEDURE WPPSS NUCLEAR PRJJECT NUMBER 2 RICHLAND Wg(SHINGTON

'I REVISION 6.

Prepared By l ll lg Submitted By allalp~

Resident Project Engineer 7 gO 7 quality Assurance Manager .3.5+

Exhibit.E

DRILI ED - IN CONCRETE ANCHOREYALUATION TABLE OF CONTENTS

] o 0 PURPOSE ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o Page, 1 2..0 SCOPE ....:............'............................. Page 1 3:0 DEFINITIONS AND ABBREVIATIONS....................... Page 2 4.0 RESPONSIBILITIES FOR EVALUATION...-. ---- -. "-. - - - - -. Page 3 5.0 EVALUATION REPORTS............... ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .- ~ - ~ - " ~ - ~ - ~ Page 5 6.0 EVALUATION""."----".-"-".-....................Page 6 7.0 FINAL EVALUATION..........:......................... Page 13 8 .0 REWORK...........;...................................Page 14 ATTACHMENT I - ANCHOR EVALUATION CHECKLIST . ...............Page 15 ATTACHMENT II - TEST GAUGE................................. Page 16 ATTACHMENT III - GENERIC FIXES............................. Page 17 ATTACHMENT IV - FLOW CHART...;.........:................... Page 23 Exhibit E

I

~ ~

Ie 215 -c s - I ~ 5<

1; 0 PURPOSE The purpose of the evaluation is to check the adequacy of Installation of Drilled-In Concrete Anchors used in conjunction with pipe supports. A preliminary evaluation of pipe supports indicates a significant percentage of Drilled-In Anchors were not installed properly(improper epoxy used, anchor not fully expanded, etc.).

The purpose of this procedure is to provide specific instructions for evaluation acceptance, and any rework required of Drilled-In Concrete Anchors installed on pipe supports prior to February 1, 1978.

2.0 SCOPE All Drilled-In Concrete Anchors on pipe supports installed prior to February 1, 1978 sha11 be. evaluated.

The evaluation governed by this document shall be limited to a check for adequate concrete anchor installation and will not include a general ins~tion of the pipe support.

Page 1 Exhibit E

I ~ I g 3.0 DEFINITIONS AND ABBREVIATIONS The Engineer - Burns and Roe Engineering.

Quality Control - The Contractor's Quality Control Department.

Quality Assurance - Burns and Roe Quality Assurance.

PRH - Phillips Red Head Self-Drilling (Snap-Off) Anchor.

HKB - Hilti Kwik Bolt Relative Dimension - For Phillips Red Heads - Dimension from top of set plug to top of test gauge. Note that the relative dimension described here is different from that specified for new installations.

. Depth of Embedment - for Hilti Kwik Bolt - Indicates the length of anchor below concrete.

Page 2 Exhibit E

~ ~ I 4.0 RESPONSIBILITIES FOR EVALUATION (See Attachment IV) 4,1 TEAM The Evaluation Team shall be made up of the fo11owing personnel; one representative of the Contractor's Engineering Department, one representative of the Contractor's guality Control Department, and any Craftsmen necessary to provide labor. Representatives of the Engineep and the Burns and Roe guality Assurance. Department will be present on a part-time basis to monitor the evaluation process.

4.1.1 CONTRACTOR' ENGINEERING REPRESENTATIVE The Contractor's Engineering Representative shall direct the overall evaluation of the pipe support in accordance with this Evaluation Procedure. The evaluating engineer will util.axe whatever tools net'.estuary to perform engineering evaluation and will insure that the Checklist is propel ly filled out. At..the conclusion of the, evaluation. he shall. sign and date the Evaluation Report.

4,1.2 CONTRACTORS UALITY CONTROL REPRESENTATIVE The Contractor's guality Control Representative sliall be notified when an. anchor-.has been determined to be .ac ~table.

He shall=take the final .inspection meaCd-'ements and,rt.cord them.:on the..Fvatuation Checklist before any rework is done on "

t'e Hanger utilizing that anchor. At the conclusion of the inspection he shall sign and date the Checklist.

4.2 CONTRACTOR'S ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT The Contractor's Engineering Department shall be responsible for conrdinating the overall evaluation effort to ensure that it is carried out in an orderly and timely fashion. As "..Evalua-tion Reports prepared by the Engineer are received, the Contract-or's Engineering Department shall assign the pipe support to an Evaluation team, ensure that the pipe'support is ready for Evaluation (scaffolding for access in place, etc.), and ensure that the necessary craftsmen to provide labor for the actual Evaluation are available. After eval<<tion is complete, the Contractor's Engineering Department shall review the Evaluation Report for correctness. The Contractor's Engineering Department shall be responsible for providing As-Built drawings and initiating RFI's as required by this procedure prior to return-ing Evaluation Reports to the Engineer.

All Evaluation Reports completed in a given week shall be returned via letter to the Engi:neer by noon Tuesday of the follow-ing week.

4.3 THE ENGINEER c 6"~ iD-

For pipe suppor ts requiring evaluation the Engineer shall prepare Evatuation Reports (see section 5.0, Evaluation Reports; for. details) and transmit them to the. Contractor by letter."-

Page 3 Exhibit

I ~ ~ a P8o 2sg-c5-1 The Engineer shall be responsible for providing the Contract-or with Generic Fixes (see section 7. 2. 1 and Attachment II[ .

for details) to be used when anchor installation is found to be inadequate and rework is required. If a generic fix is not applicable (see section 7.2.2), the Contractor's Engineering Representative shall perform any necessary redesign.

4,4 UALIFICATION OF EVALUATION TEAM All personnel (excluding crafts), responsible for any part of this evaluation shall attend training sessions conducted by the Engineer to assure each member of the Evaluation Team is fully cognizant of his duties and responsibilities. Only evaluation Team personnel whose names appear on a list approved by the Engineer shall be allowed to perform evaluation work.

h Page 4 Exhibit E

rea Vs-cS-lo 5.0 EVALUATION REPORTS Each evaluation report will consist of a copy of the pipe support detail and an Evaluation Checklist (see Attachment I) for the Drilled-In Concrete Anchors in each plate, Items 1 through 8 on the checklist will have been filled out by the Engineer. These include th'anger number, building and elevation, hanger plate number, applicable generic fix numbers, anchor numbers, size of anchor, center to center spacing fot the anchors and a sketch of the anchor configu-ration on the plate. The anchors will be numbered consecutively, starting in the upper left hand corner and numbered clockwise around the plate. For plates on the ceiling or floor, North will be considered as up.

Page 5 Exhibi t'

~ a 1 ~

V II

6.0 6;1 'GENERAL HANGER EVALUATION 6,1.1 Compare hanger configuration to detail attached to Evalua tion. Report. Check critical dimensions crirdled on hanger detail. If the actual dimensions fall outside the tolerance listed oh the detail, then hanger configuration does not conform to the deta1. The tolerance fog center to center spacing of Drilled-In Anchors shall be -1/2" for all hangers.

Circle the appropriate part of Item 9 on the Checklist.

If the hanger configuration does not conform to If the deXOll, then refer to Section 6.1.2. the Hanger configuration does-conform to the detail, then proceed to Section 6.1.3.

1 6.1,2 If the hanger configuration does not conform to the hanger detail per the criteria specified above, calculations performed by the Engineer are no longer valid and a final evaluation of Drilled-.In Anchor installation cannot be made (see Section 7.3).

Evaluation of the pipe support may continue following the criteria in the procedure with the following exceptions:

In Section 6.2.1.1g, the relative dimension shall be measured and recorded but not compared to the maximum acceptable relative dimension listed under Item 15a.

The comparison in Section 6.2.2.3 shall not be performed.

At the conclusion of the eva1uation, Item 19d on the check-list shall be marked, and an as-built drawing of the pipe support attached to the Evaluation Report before it is returned to the Engineer. Note, that no rework is to be p rformed on the pipe support until final evaluation of the Evaluation Report and as-built drawing by the Engineer.

6.1.3 Check anchor spacing from nearby embedded items to ensure, that the following cri teria for minimum allowable distance for a Drilled-In Anchor from an embedded item am met:

Embedded Plates: 3"+~ of the center to center bolt spacing. This spacing is to be from the edge of the embedded plate to the center of the Dri 1 1 ed- In Anchor.

1>" Richmond Inserts: 6"+> of the center to center bolt spacing. This spacing is to be from the center of the Richmond insert to the center of the Drilled-In Anchor.

Page 6 c Czi44 Exhibit E

~ g 0

CIIIUCLlutu Ull I 0 I I UI ~ 0+g > >g Vl I lit I 'ClllrCI IU I Cfli Cl'+> 4(5 C spacing. This spacing is to be from the l'olt center of the embedded unistrut to the center of the Drilled-In Anchor.

NOTE: Bolt spacing referred to is the spacing listed under Item 7 on the checklist.'f the criteria are violated, note this on Item 10 with an "S". If another hanger is attached to the embedded item, note the type of hanger (pipe, cable tray, duct, etc.)

and hanger number if possible and mark up Item 8 showing the location of the embedded item relative to the anchors.

If the embedded item is a unistrut or strip plate, only report hangers attached within 12 inches of the anchor being inspected.

If the criteria are not violated, simply check Item 10.

. 6.1.4 Check that the anchor meets the following criteria for minimum allowable distance for a Drilled-In Anchor from free edge of concrete:

NOMINAL DIAMETER EDGE DISTANCE (in.)

g/2ll 3 3/8 5/8 If 3/4 II 4 3/4 7/8" 5 3/8

. If the criteria are violated, note this on Item 10 with an "S" and. mark up Item 8 showing the location of the free edge of concrete relative to the anchors.

If the criteria are not violated, simply check Item 10.

6.2 EVALUATION OF DRILLED-IN CONCRETE ANCHORS Using an acceptable type of marker , number the bolts on the plate exactly as they are numbered on the checklist, i.e. starting with No. 1 in the upper left hand corner and number clockwise around the plate (for plates in ceiling 'or floor, use North as Ilup II )

6.2.1 EVALUATION OF PHILLIPS RED HEAD ANCHORS 6.2.1.1 Visual Evaluation of Anchor 6.2.1.1a This operation should be done one bolt at a time, unless it can be established that removal of more than one bolt will not cause hanger to move.'f at any time during anchor evaluation the hanger assembly moves, so note under remarks.

c 4di Sharpie 3000 Felt Tip Marker as manufactured by Sanford, or approved equal.

Page 7 Exhibit E

~ ~ h reo ZiS'-CS, If any or all bolts to be tested cannot be removed because of interferences, so note under remarks.

Torque each bolt per Table I. Remove bolt from each anchor to be inspected. Fill in Item 11.using "PRH" for Phillips Red Head Anchor. Check that the anchor has not pulled out against pl.ate. If the anchor has pulled out against the plate, mark Item 12 with an "X" and note 'in remarks.

Check the nominal bolt diameter. If the diameter is different from that listed in Item 6, circle the diameter listed in Item 6 and record the actual bolt diameter next to the circled diameter Check the base plate bolt hole diameter. The bolt hole diameter may be a maximum of one-eighth:inch (I/8")

larger than the installed bolt if an approved welded

'washer plate is not used. If the bolt hole diameter does not meet this criteria, note in remarks.

6.2.1.1b Check location of top of anchor with respect to concrete surface. If the top of the anchor is approximately.1/16" to 3/8" below the surface of concrete, simply check Item 12. If the top of the anchor is above or flush with the surface of the concrete, mark Item 12 with an "X".

.6.2.1.1c After each bolt has been removed, visually examine anchor to see,if it has been modified (i.e..cut short at top), if it is loose in the hole, stripped threads are apparent, etc. If any obvious irreg- ,

ularities 'exist., mark Item 13 with an "X" and report details in remarks. If no irregularities exist, simply check Item 13.

If a star anchor has been used (as evident

'ote:

by the silver plug) it must be removed in accordance with Section 8.3.

6.2.1.ld Check the angle of the anchor with respect to the face of the plate by threading an 8" long (minimum) threaded steel rod of proper diameter into insert and measuring the smallest acute angle between the rod and the surface of the plate.

If this angle is greater than 85 simply check Item 14 on the checklist. If this angle is between 80 and 85 , a beveled washer must be used when reinstalling the bolt and Item 14 shall be marked with a, "M". If this angle is less than 80' mark Item 14 with an "X".

6.2.1.le Check bolt removed for length and thread damage.

Bolt must be long enough for a four (4) full thread engagement. If threads are damaged or .

bolt is short, replace with a new bolt.

Page 8 c G3'i%3 Exhibit E

Examine sllell interior to see it epoxy 1s present over top of the plug. If it is, it must be ground off or otherwise removed (so the metallic top of set plug is visible) to enable the relative dimension to be taken.

6.2.1.1g Check relative dimension from top of set plug to snap off line of anchor with test gauge (see Attachment II). Insert test gauge into anchor and obtain a four (4) full thread engagement. Insert a machinist's rule or other suitable measuring device into the central hole of the test gauge until it hits the top of the plug. Take the measurement to.the top of the test gauge and record it under Item 15b on the checklist. Compare the actual relative dimension

~ ~ ~ ~

~

I5b) to the maximum acceptable relative dimension

~ ~ ~

15a). If the actual relative dimension exceeds

~ ~

~

the maximum acceptable, circle the actual'imension.

~ ~ ~ ~

~ ~

6.2.1.2 TOR UING OF ANCHOR After visual evaluation is complete, replace bolt, in anchor and apply torque per Table I.

TABLE I Tor ue Re uirements for Philli s Red Heads Nominal Diameter ~Tor Ue 1/2" 30-35 ft-lbs.

5/8" 55-60 ft-lbs.

3/4" 75-80 ft-lbs.

7/8 95-100 ft-lbs.

If these torques cannot be obtained within one turn after bolt is seated on the plate, mark Item 17 with an "X". If the torque is reached, simply check Item 17.

6.2.2 EVALUATION OF HILTI KWIK BOLTS 6.2.2.1 Visual Evaluation of Anchor 6.2.2.1a This operation should be done one stud at a time unless it can be established that removal of more than one nut will not cause the hanger to move.

If at any time during anchor evaluation the hanger assembly moves, so note under remarks.

If any studs cannot be inspected because of inter-ferences, so note under remarks.

6.2.2.1b Fill in Item ll using "HKB" for Hilti Kwik Bolt.

Check nominal anchor bolt diameter. If the diameter is different from that listed in Item 6, circle the diameter listed in Item 6 and record the actual bolt diameter next to the circled diameter.

Page 9

V ~

ChecK tne oase piate ooic nuie viaiiit:it:r.. inc uuii.

hole diameter may be a maximum of one-eighth (1/8")

larger than the installed bol.t if an approved welded washer plate is not used. If the bolt hole diameter does not meet this criteria, note in remarks.

6.2.2.1c Yisually examine anchor stud to see if it has been modified, if. it is loose in the hole, stripped threads are apparent, etc. Check stud length to insure it penetrates base plate far enough for one full nut engagement and that nut is not bottomed on thr eads (i.e. unthreaded section of stud must not be above surface of plate.) If th'ese irregularities exist, mark 13 with an "X". If no obvious irregularities exist, simply check Item 13.

6.2.2.1d Check angle of anchor with respect to face of plate by threading a standard coupling onto the stud and measuring the smallest acute angle between the coupling and the surface of the plate. If this angle is greater than 85~ , simply check Item 14 on the checklist. If this angle is between 804 and 85~, a beveled washer must be install.ed between the plate and nut and Item 14 should be marked with a "W". If this angle is less than 80~ , mark Item 14 with an "X".

u 6.2.2.2 ULTRASONIC EXAMINATION FOR LENGTH 6.2.2.2a ~Eui ment The ultrasonic equipment used shall have a digital readout and a range from 0 to 12 inches.: The Contractor shall submit manuf'acturer's literature and specifications (on the proposed equipment) to the Engineer for approval prior.to performing ultrasonic testing.

6.2.2.2b '.Calibration The U. T. equipment shall be calibrated to a standard length Hilti Kwik Bolt specimen prior to inspection of each hanger and more often if, required.

6.2.2.2c Procedure Each Hilti Kwik Bolt on the hanger shall be U.T.'d for length unless it has a standard length code

'stamped on the end. Prior to applying the trans-ducer to the end of the bolt, ascertain that the bolt end is relatively smooth and perpendicular to the axis of the bolt. If needed, touch up with a file. Subtract the exposed length from the total length to get the embedded length and record the actual embedment under Item 16 of the Checklist.

Page 10 C Gui iud Exhibit E PSb Q.

6.2.2.3 MINIMUM ACCEPTABLE EMBEDMENT j

C/&C /d

~ >> I ~

Refer to Item 16 on the Evaluation Checklist.

Compar e the actual depth of embedment to the minimum acceptable embedment (Table II). If the actual embedment is less than the minimum acceptable embedment, then circle the actual embedment ( Item

. is).

TABLE II Minimum Acce table Embedment for Hilti Kwik Bolts

. Nominal Diameter Minimum Embedment 1/2" 2 1/2" 5/8" 3 1/2" 3/411 4 II In certain cases, the Engineer has determined that a Kwik Bolt should not be used for a particular Anchor. An Asterisk will appear under Item 16a if use of a Kwik Bolt is not. acceptable. If -.in-spection shows that a Kwik Bolt has been used, circle the appropriate part of Item 16a.

6.2.2.4 ~TOR UING After inspection is complete, apply a torque to the stud per Table III.

TABLE III Tor ue Re uirements for Hilti Kwik Bolts Nominal Diameter ~Ter ee 1/2". 45-55 ft-lbs.

5/8 II 80-90 ft-lbs.

3/4ll 125-175 ft-lbs.

If these torques cannot be obtained, try,to reset the anchor by redriving it into the hole.

torque values still cannto be obtained, mark Item If the 17 with an "X". If the torque value is reached, simply check Item 17.

Note: Only try.to redrive the anchor once.

6.3 LOAD TESTING 6.3.1 Procedure l. ~>> 'C C Uds3z The evaluation checklist when initially issued to the Contractor will indicate under Item 18 if a pull test is required and the applicable load. The concrete anchor shall be pull tested to this value and the amount of slip at that loading shall be recorded. If it exceeds 1/16",

Page 11 Exhibit E

~ I 'I ~

used on Phillips Red-Head Anchors if Item 15b is un-If Pull acceptable and torque requirements are met.

Test is found to be acceptable and all other items on Evaluation Checklist are acceptable, then Item 19A of the Evaluation Status should be checked. The load shall be as indicated in Pull Test Procedure.

6.3." 2 EcCEui ment The Owner will supply the initial test device. Contractor may also provide this equipment but it must meet the Engineer's approval. The pull test device will basically consist of a hydraulic ram with holder and pump gauge for determining hydraulic pressure and dial gauge '

indicator for determining the amount of slip.

6.3.3 Calibration All gauges and hydraulic system must be calibrated every six months, or when repairs are necessary, or there is any reason to doubt the accuracy of the gauges.

c 46(d~

Page 12 Exhibit E

~ J 4

7. 0 FINAL EVALUATION re xmas-cg-7.1 ~tt tl If none of the items or dimensions in Item 15 (relative dimension) and Item 16 (HKB use and embedment depth) are circled, the hanger configuration conforms to the attached detail for the criteria specified in Section 6. 1.1, and no X's appear under Items 12, 13. 14, 17, or 18, the anchor is acceptable and Item 19a of the evaluation status. should be checked. If any of the dimensions in Item 15 are circled, acceptance of the anchor will be based on the results of a Pull Test. See section 6.3.1.

7.2 ~AAA t tl If any of the dimensions in Items 15 and 16 are circled or any X's appear under Items 12, 13, 14, 17, or 18b or the bolt hole diameter does not meet the criteria specified in Section 6.2.1.1a or 6.2.2.1b, then the hanger requires rework (unacceptable anchors must be replaced).

7.2.1 Generic Fix If possible, 4

a Generic Fix should be used to rework the hanger'plate (see Item 4 on the Checklist and Attachment III for applicable Generic Fixes). The Generic Fixes are designed to be relatively simple modifications to the hanger plate that may be used during the evaluation and without having to obtain the Engineer's concurrence.

If a Generic Fix is to be used, mark Item 19b on the Checklist and record the Generic Fix Number in the space provided.

7.2.2 ~Redesi n If a Generic Fix is not to be used (none listed in Item 4, interferences, etc.), the support plate must be redesigned and Item 19c on the checklist marked. 'At some time after the Evaluation Report is returned to the Engineer (with 19c marked), an as-built of the redesigned hanger shall be furnished to the Engineer.

7.3 FINAL EVALUATION PENDING

'2 If the hanger configuration does not conform to the detail (per criteria outlined in Section 6.1.1), then a final evaluation cannot be made pending a review of the as-built drawing by the Engineer. In this case, Item 19d on the Checklist should be marked.

C bL}f jj Page 13 Exhibit E

~ L 8.0 REWORK J

8.1 Conformance to Procedures and S ecifications All rework, whether replacement of'an anchor, Generic Fix, or rework due to redesign shall be performed in accordance with the Contractor's approved procedures for field modification of hangers. All specification requirements shall be met unless the Engineer specifically waives these requirements by an RFI.

8. 2 Upon completion of rework, newly installed anchors shall be inspected as follows:

Replacement: If an anchor is replaced the new anchor shall be inspected to the latest approved revision of Work Procedure 65 8 85.

r.

Generic Fix: If a Generic Fix is applied to a hanger, only newly installed anchors shall be inspected. These new anchors shall be inspected to the latest approved revision of Work Procedure 655, 85. Anchors previously inspected, and found acceptable per this procedure, shall not be reinspected.

8.3 Re lacement of Anchors 8.3.1 Red Head Self-Drilling Anchors A Red Head anchor or star anchor may be removed by use of a pulling device which holds the plug in place and pulls

'he shell out. The hole must then be reamed out to the next larger size before it can be replaced with a Hilti Drop In or Hilti Super Kwik Bolt.

8.3.2 Hilti Kwik Bolts A Hilti Kwik Bolt may be removed by chucking the end of the stud in an electric drill and spinning it until the wedges wear sufficiently removed.

on the stud to allow it to be easily The hole must then be reamed out to the next larger size before it can be replaced with a Hilti Drop In or Hilti Super Kwik Bolt.

Page 14 Exhibit E

~ ~

Hanger'umber .Rev. 8) Anchor Configuration

2) Building/Elevation Hanger Plate Number Appli cable Generi c Fixes

5) Anchor Number

6) Anchor Size

'diameter)

7) Center to Center Spacina

') Hanaer Configuration Does/Does NOT conform to Hanaer Oetai1

10) Spacing from

'Embedded Item

11) Typ e of Anchor

12) Oeoth Below Concrete

13) A'nchor Modified

14) Angular Misaliqnment

15) Relative Oimension (PRH) a) Maximum Acceptable b) Actual a) HKB use acceptable

17) Torque Applied

18) Pull Test Required/Load b) Reject

19) Evafuation Status

. a) ~ Anchor Installation Acceptable b) ~ Anchor Installation NOT Acceptable')

- Generic Fix 8

. ~ Anchor Installation NOT Acceptable - Redesign d) C3 Final Evaluation Pending

20) Remarks

,(4'ws Engineer Date guality Control C OO 'i VO Date~

Page 15 Attachment I Exhibit E,

Headquaners Ot tice-oradell, N J.

W.O. No. eo Date Book No. Page No.

ng o.

8'raw Calce No. Sheet~Cont. on Sheet By Checked Approved t~>S+ - 4 c~~an 2 - 78+! bAo 1'ltle t PJo. JC9t

~,,

%TIVE QIMt=A$5rcrAJ e ... 0 E TEST GAUGE FOR .ORILLEO-IN CONCRETE ANCHORS

+4+l4l.h) E 5 .QVgP'ACG I

I t" '"'

I I ~C,g!ASKS, lBch~m.

~ - ~ 5 <aud h! +~~SR Sec WABt c d I=Qt l OhShhoO!P'lQ~v

.THQKata+

a.25 p Hot K ---

t BOLT SIZE . HREROS/ IN" NCHINEO BOLT SHANK OIA.

-'/2" - '-13 e

0 438"'"

5/8 II 0.500" t

3/4" 10 0.625" 7/ 8 II 0.750" e

C t'!3>56 5H l, IV OF gtig Page 16" PEb 2/4 Form BR 8002 2 (5/78)

Exhibit E

~ E 1

~ V ~ V Vi.O. No. Date Book No. Page No,

'Dta ioq No. Aj 4 Gale. No. 5:a2 Sheet~Caen on Sheet By Cheeked .]K la Approved Title WRY9 - AAJ/=aQ Al Cr ~ IPP r/PPoZi 5 4ll QK)dM'RlC. Fly 1-~Ca '&N~O~ ~ W\ A e )M~O~L.Q

,lu&Al.l Pb, Tat. Sg-.lV ..tVSam-,

4 4/ah/ e z~ukl IAI5=~(> YRj A I MC.%.~7.!

OR 2~2 +6 STi~~m ~.

hhQ+m9 '(Sm scat S Sm2) 4 B Ol 'T6> g HC g l ~P.

3'IZ n3 .FILL F'FVR}

A

.Ex/equi/Jg, 5uF./ om- iP g Exts7teeot lees-n-,s l'7 t }

PbnlT'lc aihl. 4S+ERT -g AbbrTtct 44AL.

lueCRT

~cs x'9 mes 1.l. 2<8>> z&

I

,i ~ ' e I I I

~ ~ ~ '.4".'

, ~ ~

Fiww R Sa<c (HE.I4<E~ ~+ , r,r

~

QoV F o'er R,ee TRPB cA. ~ ~

~ '

& ~ A'b>ITIOu4t

"'c lMS~ te c~a ~,

6Zi57 A-A hl Form BR 8002.2 l5/78)

F Q~s Se- &r.2 Exhibit E e 'e ~

~ l

~ ~

BUHNb APlU HUhr LNl .

' New Jea~y

~ New YOrk ~ Connectiaz ~ California SS89 Page /W 7'l7d Book No. Page No.

Oraiving'No. Calc. No. 2 Sh at + of Checked Approu&

~l

'Tirfa L Jf r S b Ala.2 ~ P8 5 6=risiric. Fix ~R su</oirT H 4/wpRoF'=sr@)'nr;Ace.Eo c ~-r~ ims~gT'i

'RIc s: I. Usa As s~ww ~ia. Ra~As~~~x oF'of 7S oM A S'88'. heal Z. C~sE'R A~y 5Z>Z o~ A~y at~=-" Q +rPov/DS&

i@a ~o~ 7P~~ Z-BoC.> S WW="D iu B=

PpoY~OZ S H~~~-'A'8AT.SIDZ

~~C=n y~

iA'a ylang'TO PV$ ~7Z blat 8~'A>V'f Pc.gpgS, pgVlN6 HoM T~W+ 4 &~I-iZ.

3. L/Ss" S~ 5/== APDiTiohi'ifL. Iw WCTU AS ~biz; l¹BR75 .

lS Z8cvu z MC 9<7.( /5 7o Ere uZ~g. g<+

c 63i58 Page 18 g~r. Exhibit E

~ 4, ~ ~

BVRNS AND ROE, INC.

Headquarters Of flee-Oredell, N J.

4IIC'0 4 v UI V Page No.

Draw n No.

By N A Date Checked Calc. No..

A Z f / 7&

Book No.

6. uZ Approved Sheet~'ont. On Sheet Title MAhlFalP A/o. PrPE SOPPoRT 9

- ..Q&'=-PIC .FIX,F~CZ 5uPPoar P gl-,a, /MPgC S'gL/

,liV67 Ahab...'2)J2/I l Eh - JiV IAJSr g7.

~ PbhiTloVAf lu5KQW f EXfSTwSP Ia5~5 KCS> f.i ere hhCG~'9 .

I

'/'

Q 4 8o I

W1S,4RCB 2-4 (zw 2 tg v /g 5 IF hlER H (SEE Ali~d 4)

~ ~ ~ 1 ~ ~ ~ F 1 ... AXIS r IQQ 5UF'~~~i vn L R I2"~9" 1

~ ~ 1 BENT'5

~ 1 ~

QaVFSr ., 8 USE SAMK 5/ 4D+niwMAL /N5FNi g5 EXIST pic /45M7, Q IQGr Ii'~7 EX !5TiM+ I hl 5 5 cr bio Sc Cowd oVGZf-<4bKh.

1 0+. tF;., ~xISYlag /~gÃ~g iBZCc~E'. OVEpf.c~.O m uSZ miX ud. I.

8 Q xQ < V8 QYrFrplEZ / /5 g adlRR aAJL

~Warn Mf" g v-7,I Io 1 dr BE V5Eh.

C 4di59 Page 19 r-111~ Og P61'),g ir1!'1g)

~ - ~ Exhibit E

1 ~

~ ~ 'Vs', No. + +< Date Book No. Page No.

I C=g g,/O.c.

Drawing No. MA Cate. No. 0,% heel +

Sy /r~% Checked Aop'oved r/ + ~ ~/

PP S~ nJc.x-Vite

/ -nr-R Rx s'oa pgfc.c.zu-i~ y S~i7s'IE s wooer 0 w Y~oPw/v j -"D o'¹T~M NG. 3 ggWOVg ZX(~ f, 9~/

C7vs.)

@ 8 Upp///2/ F.

(TV>>, /z

~(T YP1 CT YRD 4 ACD1Tionl4L r

/AM"g ww,a P..

(rn.) 8>//P////~

/~"x+ >i~/p. 8 St!Fr, 5 &v7-5'cryo</

EIC/ST/~G /At>~i~ (g /Fg r

NO/=: I ~ = 5uPPog7 / 7///ck//=5'g = fViug 4 7~/gKIJ OSP gS SHOWN Fn< fc'zP'R.~jhgP~) Pr g pg )g ov an g /~a<.

Fog i ouR Bc'

'JQQ Pg. S ~ ~CPA)c. bgQg E'- U "~Q O~

h//rq s/s=s ///= + ro RSP~~ /la-'~a./o0 @-'Ts /~ R=g'.

A c bii VsZ SwwF sash RPBz7-ro~HL Jn/SZR7s As 8 Exhibi t P~nn 9h

~ ~

0

~ ~ ~ ~

~ ~ ~ ~ '

~P 4 y 0 0 g

P ~ C r

'I e ~ ~

~ 0

~ ~ ~

rr

~ re

~L P

4P j

T

~

~

II I  ! C7 I

3

[ I 0 III I R

- Burns IO 0 0) 0 and I

.Contract Ebaluation .

R Coordi I I 0 Roe 215 I Engineering Evaluation PKGS Engineering ate'valuation Team i

Ia '

I I I I

i I I

I Ho Rework

~ w l I

I I I i I ~

I Req'd?

I I I I I ~

~

I I Yes X'.

~ I I. X I

A g U I Contract I KC OI EA

~

~

Contract I I I 0 O Cjl 215 I 215 Ye I j

QC Q.C. ! ~ I genei al- n Cl Inspection I Inspection jfiX? i 0p I I j I f~

No. CQ 0

Crt

~~

0 Si ned Eval u'ation 'pk s. z2 I

I ~ 'O

'0 0 j C I I I

I 0C I 0 I I O.

O Rework j Contract l ~g edesi n 21 5I I Group i I Q Engineer Q4 IO W I LJJ I

aIi) j I

C7 Rework Ck 0

~g

~ II R PI Pl X Burns and Com leted I g0

~o Roe va ua >on p gs.

Contract I

Normal in O

Engineering Process 215 i

~

I i Engineerin Drawings Inspection ~

. I I

As-Built' ~

i j

I I t 0 a iinos' I 1 I

I I

j s

i

r s N

~g \ grit IlriyI MEIUIE' \ EE ~ IUIl ~ '~U NhslllifGTOIEI PUBL[C PO)YElt &)'APPLY SYS l'EM C.C. Oesiqnation AIOI)I I'I(.'ATION Ol'X)i~'I'I(ACT 4 I P PACE OF EFFECTIVE OATK Tt O 4. UNIT NOtS) 2808-215 Vt'P-2 S ISSVEO SY C. AOMINISTEREO IfY tlf other then blOCk 4)

V4s)lingtort Public Power Supp)y System 3000 George Wsshington Vlsy P. O. 8ox 9tiG MtsP-2 Project Management Group R)ch)snd, )tfsshington 99352 7, CONTRACTOR NAME ANO AOORESS 4 fIEFEREt4CE OOCVMENTS lStrcet, c)ty, WSH/Boecon/GERI county, stele, A Joint Venture snd Z)P Code) P; 0. Box 1040 Richland, blashington 99352 4A, CONTRACT PRICE AO4USTMENT THIS CHAIIGE ONLY ts)

COOE Q

0 Cl ~

IIICREASE OECREASE 4 This uhllstcrsl Conlrsct h4odltlcstlon ts Issued pursusnt Io

$ 8+ CONTRACT SCHEOUt.C AO4USTtnENT THIS CHANCE ONI.Y Q

G ~

AOV fJELETE EEAYE ~

The Inoclticsllons set !orth In block II sre rnsde to the sEsore Ilurntl~ red contrsct.

Q 'The sboce numbered contrsct ls modllled lo rellect lhe sdmlnlstrstlee chsnges Iet Iorlh In block II.

This bilslcrsl Conlrsct Modltlcsllon )Supplementsl Aqrccnlcntt ls entered Into ourlusnt lo sulhnrltv ot tc) t' he t+rtt, modltlcs lha sbore numbered conlrsct ss lct torth tn block II.

II.'KSCRIPTIQN OF hlOOIF ICATION The Contractor i s to provide the following work i n accordance with the terms and conditions of the Contract:

Incorporate the attached "Drilled-in Concrete Anchor Inspection Procedure" into the the procedures renuired under Contract 215 Specification 15(, Article 3.21.2.

Q'Q gg .,P)',.4; p,~g>,

Er I ot I I I I sl hE'l '

~ '.

I~

h ~ ~ IE I'cd

.. Il:cr:ns Inc ten I 1 Ilh llht I IEI, 'OI Ell I+ ll II 't Itic OI I I su ~,Isst csc~pt c \ i";II

~:Crr I"'C "T 0 ts) COIITII CTOEl I NOT IICCtr:IIEQ TO SION THIS OOCUIAEIIT Iu

',I I CO.I fihCTOrl IS I:,VIII .U I'COPIES ~ ~ THIS OO TO AQI;III!StrlrlTIYCANO IESUltlC Of FICCS

~: RETV' NAMf OF COI4TfEACTOR IfE. YIPPSS lbl hstulc ol I'crloll sulllnEEIE'4 IEE ~ Inl IA lhorlrcEI nct.ivhrs;lrcl le NAMC ANO TITLE Ol'IC HER )Tyo ~ Or prllll) IS, OATf. SI Crt f 0 II. IIAMf.Of f VTHORIICO II CPRC nr prlEEI)

Er ATIVE Ils. Of TE SICNEI t Type Exhibit E

DRILLED - IN CONCRETE ANCHOR INSPECTION PROCEDUR HPPSS NUCLEAR PROJECT NUMBER 2 RICHLAND WASHINGTON R. VISION 0 Prepared By (~X-  % %M e1zi na Submitted By

-Resident Project Engineer (. ;z equality Assurance Manager Exhibit E

DRILLED - IN CONCRETE ANCHOR INSPECTION PROCEDURE TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 .0 PURPOSE ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Page 1 2 .0 SCOPE ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o ~ ~ o ~ ~ o ~ o ~ o o ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Pago 1 3.0 DEFINITIONS AND ABBREVIATIONS....................... Page 2 4.0 RESPONSIBILITIES FOR INSPECTION..................... Page 3 Bo0 INSPECTION REPORTS...................'............... Pag 5 6.0 INSPECTION ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o ~ ~ o ~ o ~ ~ ~ ~ Page 6 7.0 FINAL EVALUATION......;............ .. o...... o o o o.... Page 13 8 .0 REWORK...............................................Page 14 ATTACHMENT I - ANCHOR INSPECTION CHECKLIST .................Page 3,5 ATTACHMENT II - TEST GAUGE................................. Page 16 hTThf'UMCIIY

~ S ~ ~ s ~ OoOOO a ~ >a S all TT 7 nrI<t nts Ql Ill hi@

r sue

)LhCoi ~

o

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o ~ o ~ ~ ~ ~ o ~ o ~ ~ ~ ~ o Page }7 ATTACHMENT IV - FLOW CHART.....................-----.--.--.. Page 23

'xhibit E

~ ~

1.0 PURPOSE The purpose of the inspection i5 to check the adequacy of Installation of Drilled-In Concrete'Anchors used in conjunction with pipe supports. A preliminary inspection of pipe supports indicates a significant percentage of Drilled-In Anchors were not installed properly(improper epoxy used. anchor not fully expanded, etc.).

The purpose of this procedure is to provide specific instructions for inspection, acceptance, and any rework required of Drilled-In Concrete Anchors instal,led on pipe supports prior to February 1, 1978.

2.0 SCOPE All Drilled-In Concrete Anchors on pipe so ports with concrete anchor desion loads exceeding 50 of allowables shall be inspected.

The inspection governed by this document shall be limited to a check for adequate concrete anchor installation and will not include a general inspection of the pipe support.

The Engineer shall determine which pipe supports meet this criteria.

Page 1 Exhibit E

~ ~

~ ~

3.0 DEFINITIONS AND ABBREVIATIONS The Engineer - Burns and Roe Engineering.

Quality Control - The Contractor's Quality Control Department.

Quality Assurance - Burns and Roe Quality Assurance.

PRH - Phillips Red Head Self-Drilling (Snap-Off) Anchor.

HKB << Hilti Kwik Bolt Relative Dimension - For Phillips Red Heads - Dimension from top of set plug to top of test gauge. Note that the relative dimension described here is different from that specified for new installations.

Depth of Embedment - for Hilti Kwik Bolt - Indicates the length of anchor below concrete.

Page 2 Exll1 bi t f

l ~

i

4.0 RESPONSIBILITIES FOR INSPECTION (See Attachment IV) 4.1 INSPECTION TEAM The Inspection Team shall be made up of the following personnel; one representative of the Contractor's Engineering Department; one representative of the Contractor's equality Control Department, and any Craftsmen necessary to provide labor. Representatives of the Engineer and the Burns and Roe guality Assurance. Department will be, present on a part-time basis to monitor the inspection.

4.1.1 CONTRACTOR' ENGINEERIt)G REPRESENTATIVE The Contractor's Engineering Representative shall direct the overall inspection of the pipe support in, accordance with this Inspection Procedure. He shall.

monitor the inspection of:the pipe support .and ensure the Inspection Checklist is proper'ly filled out. At the con-clusion of the inspection he shall sign and date the Inspection Report.

,4.1. 2 COt)TRACTORS OAL ITY CONTROL REPRESENTATIVE The Contractor's quality Control Representative shall take all required inspection measurements and conclusion'f fill out the shall Inspection Checklist. At the the inspection he sign and date the Inspection Reoort, 4.2 CONTRACTOR'S ENGINEERING DEPARTMEt)T The Contractor's Engineerin Department shall be responsible for coordinating the overall inspection effort to ensure that

-t is carried out in an orderly and timely fashion. As Inspec-tion Reports prepared by the Engineer are received, the Contract-or's Engineering Department shall assign the pipe support to an inspection team, ensure that the pipe support is ready for inspection (scaffolding for access in place, etc.), and ensure that the necessary craftsmen to provide labor for the actual inspection are available. After inspection is complete, the Contractor's Engineering Depar tment shall review the Inspection Report for correctness. The Contractor's Engineering Department shall be responsible for providing As-Built drawings and initiating RFI's as required by this procedure prior to return-ing Inspection Reports to the Engineer.

All Inspection Reports completed in a given week shall be returned via letter to the Engrneer by nooq Tuesday of the. follow-ing week.

4.3 THE ENGINEER The Engineer shall be responsible for determining by ca1cu-lation which pipe supports require i'nspection For pipe supports requiring inspection'he Engineer shan] prepare, Inspection Repor'age 3 . Exhibit E

(see section 5.0,,Inspection Reports, for details) and transmit th m to the Contractor by letter on a system by system basis.

.The Engineer shall be responsible for providing the Contract-or with Generic Fixes (see section 7.2.1 and Attachment III for details) to be used when anchor installation is 'found to be inadequate and rework is required. If a generic fix is not applicable (see section 7.2.2), the Engineer shall perform any necessary redesign.

4,4 . UALIFICATION OF INSPECTION TEAM 8,11 personnel (excluding crafts) responsible for any par of this inspection shall attend training sessions. conducted by the Engineer to assure each member of the Inspection Team is fully cognizant of his duties and responsibilities. Only Inspection Team personnel whose names appear on a list approved by the Engineer shall be allowed to perform inspection work.

Page 4 Exhibit

~ 4

~ I ~ ~

5. D INSPECTION REPORTS Each inspection report will consist of a copy of the pipe support detail and an Inspection Checklist (see Attachment I) for the Drilled-In Concrete Anchors in each plate, Items 1 through 8 on the checklist will have been filled out by the Engineer. These include the hanger number, building and elevation, hanger plate number, applicable generic fix numbers, anchor numbers, size of anchor, center to center spacing for the anchors and a sketch of the anchor configu-ration on the plate. The anchors will be numbered consecutively, starting in the upper left hand corner and numbered clockwise around the plate. For plates on the ceiling or floor, North will be considered as up.

~ ~ ~ ~

Page 5 Exhibit E

6. 0 INSPECTION

6. 1 GENERAL HANGER INSPECTION 6.1;1 Compare hanger configuration to detail attached to Inspect-ion Report. Check critical dimensions cdrcled on hanger detail. If the actual dimensions fall outside the tolerance listed on the detail, then hanger configuration does not conform to the detai. The tolerance for center to center spacing of Drilled-In Anchors shall be -1/2" for all hangers.

Circle the appropriate part of Item 9 on the Checklist.

If the hanger configuration does not conform to If the deXCH, then refer to Section 6.1.2. the Hanger configuration does conform to the detail, then proceed to Secti on 6.1.3.

6.1,2 If the hanger configuration does not conform to the hanger detail per the criteria specified above, calculations performed by the Engineer are.no longer valid and a final evaluation of Drilled-,In Anchor installation cannot be made {see Section 7.3).

inspection of the pipe support may continue following the .criteria iii the procedure with the following exceptions:

In Section 6.2.1.1g, the relative dimension shall be measured and recorded but not compared to the maximum acceptable relative dimension listed under Item 15a.

The comparison in Section 6.2.2.3 shall not be performed.

At the conclusion of the inspection, Item 19d on the check-list shall be marked, and an as-built drawing of the pipe support attached to the Inspection Report before it is.

returned to the Engineer. Note, that no rework is to be p rformed on the pipe support until final evaluation of the Inspection Report and a'-built drawing by the Engineer.

6.1.3 Check anchor spacing from nearby embedded items to ensure that the following criteria for minimum allowable distance for a Drilled-In Anchor from an embedded item Embedded Plates: 3"+< of the center to center

~ met:

bolt spacing. This spacing is to be from the edge

'of the embedded plate, to the center of the Drilled-In Anchor.

13-" Richmond Inserts: 6"+Q of the center to center bolt spacing. This spacing is to be from the center of the Pichmond insert to the center of the Drilled-In Anchor.

Page 6 Exhibit E

~ i 0

Embedded Unistrut: 3>;" + ', of the center to center bolt spacing. This spacing is to be from the center of the embedded unistrut to the center of the Drilled-In Anchor.

NOTE: Bolt spacing re erred to is the spacing listed under Item 7 on the checklist.

If the criteria are violated, note this on Item 10 wiih an "S". If another hanger is attached to the embedded item, note the type of hanger (pipe, cable tray, duct, etc.)

and hanger number if possible and mark up Item 8 show-ing the lo'cation of the embedded item relative to the anchors. If the embedded item is a unistrut or strip plate, only report hangers attached within 12 inches of

. the anchor being inspected.

If the criteria are not violated, simply check Item 10.

6.2 INSPECTION GF DRILLED-IN CONCRETE ANCHORS Using an acceptable type of marker, number the bolts on the plate exactly as they are numbered on the checklist, i.e.

starting with No. 1 in the uppe'r left hand corner and number clockwise. around the plate (for plateQ in ceiling or floor, use Florin as "up").

6.2.1 INSPECTION OF PHILLIPS RED HEAD ANCHORS

6. 2.1.1 Visual Inspection of Anchor 6.2.1.1a This operation should be done one bolt at a time, unless it can be established that removal of more than one bolt will not cause hanger to move. If at any time during anchor inspection the hanger assembly moves, so note under remarks.

If any or'll bolts to be tested cannot be

.removed because of interferences, so. note under remarks. Remove bolt from each anchor to be inspected. Fi11 in Item 11 using "PRH" for Phillips Red Head Anchors.

Check the nominal bolt diameter. If the diameter is different from that 1'isted in Item 6, circle the diameter listed in Item 6 and record the actual bolt diameter next to the circled diameter.

Sharpie 3000 Felt Tip harker as manufactured by Sanford, or approved equal .

Page' Exhibit E

I x t ~

0 0

Check location of top of anchor with respect o concrete surface. If the top of the anchor is flush oi below surface of concrete, simply check Item 12. If the top of the anchor is above the surface of the concrete, mark Item 12 with. an",X".

After each bolt has been removed, visually examine anchor to see if it has been modified (i.e. cut short at top), if it is loose in the hole, stripped threads are apparent, etc. If any obvious irreg-ularities exist, mark Item 13 with an "X" and report details in remarks. If no irreg-ularities exist, simply check Item 13.

Check the angle of the anchor with respect to the face of the plate by threading an 8" long (minimum) threaded steel rod of proper diameter into insert and measuring the smallest acute angle between the rod and the surface of the plate.-

If this angle is greater than 85o, simply check Item 14 on the checklist; If is between 80 and 85 , a beveled washer must this angle be used when reinstalling the bolt and Item 14 shall be marked with a "W". If less than Rno, mark I+ 1$ .ritl a llvn this angle is Check bolt removed for length and thread damage.

Bolt must be long enough for a four (4) full thread engagement. If threads are damaged or bolt is short, replace with a new bolt.

Examine ~hell interior to see If it if epoxy is present over top of the plug. is. it must be ground off or otherwise removed (so the metallic top of set plug is visible) to enable the relative dimension to be taken. 4 Check relative dimension from top of set plug to snap off line of anchor with test gauge (see Attachment II). Insert test gauge into anchor and obtain a four (4) full thread engagement. Insert a machinist's rule or other suitable measuring device into.'De central hole of the test gauge until it hits the top of the plug. Take the measurement to the top of the test gauge and record it under Item 15b on the checklist. Compare the actual relative dim nsion (15b) to the maximum acceptable relative dimension (15a). If the actual rel-ative dimension exceeds the maximum acceptable, circle th actual dimension.

Page 8 Exhibit E

~ ~

6. 2. 1. 2 TOR UING OF ANCHOR After visual inspecti on i s complete, replace bolt in anchor and apply torque per Table I .

TABlE I Tor ue Re ui.rements for Phi lli s Red Heads Nominal Di ameter. ~oraue 1/2" 30-35 ft-1 bs 5/Q II f

55-60 t-1 bs 3/gll 75-80 ft-1 bs 7/8ii 95-100 i t-lbs If these torques cannot be obtained within one turn after bolt is seated on the plate, mark Item 17 wi th an "X". If the torque i s reached, simply check Item 17.

6.'2. 2 INSPECTION OF HILTI KWIK BOLTS 6.2.2.1 Yi sual Ins ection of Anchor

....,.6.2. 2. 1a Thi s operati on shoul d be done one stud at a time unl ess it can be established that, re-moval of more than one nut will not cause the hanger to move. If at any time during anchor inspecti on the hanger assembly moves., so note under remarks'f any studs cannot be inspected because of interferences, so note under remarks.

6.2.2.Ib Fi1 1 in Item 11 using "HKB" for Hilti Kwik 3ol t. Check nominal anchor bol di ameter. t If f

the di ameter i s di ferent from that 1 i sted i n Item 6, circle the diameter listed in Item 6 and record the actual bolt diameter next to the circled diameter.

6.2.2.lc Vi sual ly exami ne anchor stud to see if it has been modified, if it is loose in the hole, stri pped threads are apparent, etc. Check stud 1 ength to insure i t penetrates base

-pl ate far enough for one full nut engagement and that nut is not bo tomed out on threads exi st, mark 13 with an "X" .

irregularities exist, simply check Item 13.

'f (i . e. unthreaded secti on of stud niust not be above surface of. plate. ) If these irregularities no obvi ous 6.2.2.ld Check angle of anchor with respect to face of plate by threadi ng a standard 'coupl i ng maweiiri >>+ Exhibit E

~

'ngle between the coupling and the surface the plate. If this angle is greater than 85o, simply check Item 14 on the checklist. If this angle is between 80.o and 85o, a beveled .

washer must be installed between the plate of and nut and Item 14'should bema';ed with a "M". If this angle is less than 8Q ,

mark Item 14 with an "X".

6.2.2.2 ULTRASONIC EXAMINATION FOR LENGTH 6.2.2.2 ~Fi t The ultrasonic equipment used shall have a digital readout and a range from 0 to 12 inches. The Contractor shall submit manufactur-er's literature and specifications (on the pro-posed equipment} to the Engineer for approval prior to performing ultrasonic testing.

6.2.2. 2b Calibration The U.T; equipment shall be cal,ibrated to a standard length Hilti Kwik Bolt specimen prior to inspection of each hanger and more often if required.

6.2.2. 2c Procedure Each Hilti Kwik Bolt on the hanger shall be U.T.'d for length unless it has a standard length code stamped on the end. Prior to listt.

applying the transducer to the en'd of the bolt, ascertain that the bcl. end is relatively smooth and perpendicular to the axis of the bolt. If needed, touch up with a file. 'ub-tract the exposed length from the total length to get the embedded length and record the actual embedment under Item 16 of the Check-6.2.2.3 MINIMUM ACCEPTABLE EMBEDMENT Refer to Item 16 on the Inspection Checklist.

Compare the actual depth of embedment to the minimum acceptable embedment (Table II). If the actual embedment is less'han the minimum accept-able embedment, then circle the actual embedment (I tern 16),; .

Page 10 Exhibit

~ E ~ ~

TABLE II Minimum Acceptable Embedment for Hilti Kwik Bolts Nominal Diameter Minimum Embedment 1/2" 3ll 5/8" 3 pll 3/4 II 4ll In certain cases, the Engineer has determined that a Kwik Bolt should not be used for a particular Anchor. An Asterisk will appear under Item 16a if use of a Kwik Bolt is not acceptable. If inspection shows that a Kwik Bolt has been used, circle the appropriate part of Item 16a.

6. 2- 2. 4 TORQVING After inspection is complete, apply a torque to the stud per Table III.

TABLE III Tor ue Re uirements for Hilti Kwik Bolts Nominal Diameter TorcOue 1/2" 45-55 ft-lbs 5/8"'/4 80-90 ft-lbs II 125-175 ft-lbs If these torques cannot be obtained, try to tne anchor by redriving it into the hole. 'eset If the torque values still cannot be obtained, mark Item 17 with an "X". If the torque value is reached, simply check Item 17.

NOTE: Only try to redrive the anchor once.

6.3 LOAD TESTING

6. 3. 1 Procedure The inspection checklist when initially issued to the Contractor will indicate under Item 18 if required and the appl:cable load. The concrete Anchor a pull .test is.

shall be pull tested to this value and the amount of slip at that loading shall be recorded. If exceeds 1/16", mark Item 18 "reject" with an "X". No anchor it be pull tested unless it has been otherwise found Exhibit E Page 11

I ~ ~

acceptable.

6.3.2 Eoui ment The Owner will supply the initial test device. Contract-or may also provide this equipment but it must meet the Engineer's approval. The pull test device will basically consist of a hydraulic ram with holder and pump gauge for determining hydraulic pressure and dial gauge indicator for determining the amount of slip.

6.3.3 Calibration All gauges and hydraulic system must be calibrated every six months, or when repairs are necessary, or there is any reason to doubt the accuracy of the gau'ges.

Page 12 Exhibit E

l Y

7. 0 FINAL EVALUATION 7.! ~At 11 If none. of the items or dimensions in Item 15 (relative dimension) and Item 16 (HKB use and embedment depth) are circled, the hanger configuration conforms to the attached detail for the criteria specified in Section 6.1.1, and no X s appear under Items 12, 13, 14, 17, or 18, the anchor is acceptable and Item 19a of the inspection status should be checked.

7.2 Not Acceptable If ~an of the dim nsions in Items 15 and 16 are circled or if ~an X's appear under Items 12, 13, 14, 17, ui 18, th'en the hanger, requires rework (unacceptable anchors must b replaced).

7.2.1 Generic Fix I possible, a Generic Fix should be used to rework the hanger plate (see Item 4 on the Checklist and Attachment I.I for applicable Generic Fixes). The Generic Fixes are designed to be relatively simple modifications to the hanger plate that may be used during the inspection and without having to obtain the Engineer's concurrence.

..., If.. a Generic Fix is used, mark Item 19b on the Checklist and record the Generic Fix Number used in the space

' 7.2.2 provided.

~Redesi n If a Generic Fix is not used (none listed in Item 4, interferences etc.), the support plate must be redesigned and Item 19c on the checklist marked. At the sam time the Inspection Report is returned to the Engineer (with 19c marked), an RFI shall be initiated by the Contractor requesting a redesign f'r the hanger plate in question.

In order to coordinate the redesign, the RFI number shall appear on the Inspection Report and the Inspection Report number on the RFI.

The Engineer shall perform the redesign and return it to the Contractor via the RFI. The Contractor shall then re-work the hanger as required to conform to the redesign.

7. 3 FINAL EVALUATION.PENDING Ii the hanger confiauraiion-does. riot comform to the detail (per criteria outlined in SEciion 6.1.1), then a final evaluation cannot be made pendin'g a review of the as-.built drawing by the Engineer. In this case, Item 19d on the Checklist should be marked Page 13 Exhibit E

8. 0 REWORK 8.1 Conformance 4o Procedures and 5oecifications All rework, whether replacement'of an anchor, Generic Fix, or rework due to redesign shall be performed in accordance with the Contractor's approved procedures for field modification of hangers. All specification requirements shall be met unless the Engineer specifically waives these requiremen~s by an RFI.

1.2 ~R'i Upon completion of rework, newly installed ancnors shall be inspected as'ollows:

Replacement: If an anchor is replaced the new anchor shall be inspected to the latest approved revision of Work Procedure 65.

Generic Fix: If a Generic Fix is applied to a hanger, only newly installed anchors shall be inspected. These new anchors shall be inspected to the latest approved revision of Work Procedure 65. Anchors previously inspected, and found-acceptable per this procedure, shall not be reinsp cted.

~

'eues igll: A new inspection report wi11 accompany pipe support redesigns when they are returned to the Contractor via RFI.

A11 anchors on pipe supports that are redesigned shall be inspected as per this procedure.

Page 14 Fxhih~ 0

J > j 0

~ C s

1) Hanger Number Rev. 8) Anchor Configuration

2) Building/Elevation

3) Hanger Plate Humber~

~

.) Applicable Generic Fixes')

Anchor .Number

5) Anchor Size (diameter)

7) Center to Center Soacinq

9) Hanger Configuration Does/Does NOT conform to Hanger Detail

10) Spacing from Embedded Item Il) Type of Anchor

12) .Depth Below Concrete

13) Anchor Hodified

14) Angular I'sisalinnment

15) Relative Diri nsion (PRH) a) 'Iiaximum Acceptable ..

b) Actual

) Embedment Depth (HKB) a) HKB use acceptable

17) Torque Applied 18} pull Test Renuired/Load a) Amount of Slip b) Reject

19) Final Evaluation a) ~ Anchor Installation Acceptable b) ~ Anchor Installation HOT Acceptable - Generic Fix 8 c) ~ Anchor. Installation OOT Acceptable - Redesign - RFI ".

d) ~ Final Evaluation Pending 2O) Remarks Eng'.neer Date equality Control Date ATT'AreiFqT Exhibi t E

1 I

~

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ er e r ~ ~ r teer

~ r ~ ' New JerMy ~ New York ~ Connecticut ~ California l" - 'ook No.

W.O. No.

Drawing No.

By Q. 4 Date Checked

~pe Gale. No. Sheet ~et Page No.

amitie Pit.t sv.a TE.S'r (g e'h Approved R, +tert I tee TEST GAUGE FOR DRILLED - IH CONCRETE ANCHORS I.

I I

I l

4P Vl l. I co I

l I l

l I

I I l l q I

I rri ID Cji n

I i O

P r

rn Page 16 Exhibit E

elis:CI 1 Vf' SUNNY /J NU ROE, INC.

4 I

>I 4t New Jersey ~ New York Connecticut California W.6. No. " Page No.

Drawing No.

Date Calc, No.

Book No.

S eI ~O',

BY Tttfe

/rr Checked A/o, l

~c'pproved /P 5vP QEAIEielc Fl 4, FoR SoPPDRr > 4Ii'/'mPRoP~<Y DR]L,I ED -/A'w>ERI .

8/X /VG. /

ADO/ / O/4/4/ /~SW7 (TV+)

gfr l I j

~f]

i g z "Z 9 'ii-I. Pi (i 1PJ I 1 f

I g Bo//S, g.Hf5 I 1 (

Qx/s//+g

~ ScrPPoRi f E~s-ws asz<is(rrp>

ADDI740tVAI- IlVSER7 TVP lr,

~~

so v lt

(

IA

~

e lu al I

44

~ 0 I 7qlr g/4/

/ y/. p JA +gD/r IPAl+L, /~SERI

~

55'5'vPPo~r f hJ'O7a 8=a SS/r Z Exhibit E Fgg Pa9e,~

j Orle,LI C Ut 0 e ~ BURNS AND ROE, INC. 0 New Jere y ~ New York~ Connecficut ~ California Nt.0. No. 8 o >><< ~l>>Ad Book No. Page No.

Orawirig No.

Cele. No. Sheet + of BY Checked S her 1 Approved iw Title 4/PP5 0 A/O. 4r 6=&BRic. Fix ioR suRPoir;, 4'/iiyw'os Rip iir'rArc.sn

&RID,c Kl)-IH Ih/$ 8,+7,

~ ~

Nor gs: I. L'sz As smrvw Fo~ Rzir goziiroiyi oF Z 8or 'rs oM.A sing, p

Z. ><6'air i~y sins ow s~iy si E g +Rovingn 4o reZZ ra~ Z anC.iS aZZC r~ S=- Za+>~

Dhl THAi.&IDZ- P~ovtPE +Oa ~S'Af Bo' Jm< io INSET'S /Vo7 8Zlh/6 MLWcFD" 04 Pc.dl-gs gqVuvg WoZZ Iaz~ 4 BoI.rs, f

'3. IJ< 5'A-MP 'g! - r +ra 7- g . g ",p.

/hl sERTQ .

4 ~4'f DB uSEu ~R NEPg Acrmg qc.c. 4 8or rs o'a A 4 Bor7 A

r i Page 1C

.. Exhsbst E

4 BURNS AND ROE, INC. SHEET. 3 OF 6 i

New Jersey New York ~ Connecticut ~ Catirornia W.O. No.

Drawing No.

Oae Checked Calc. No.

8 Sook No.

m -".!", Y

/beet ~

Page No.

of Title Fcr4D o. 2, F'i z s>pro<> 4 >ii~PRocM4y w ~A~o Nlz c.ZC -mr WSEAT ~

C7X rvQZ

g. ADOf TlomCtL INSTR(

~

l4 g ggggl. />$ 241 S WC 3x9 A'o7-z<: /. Llst >c~c s~=~ g<zirig~gg )nu~y As &i+i.~~s~i 2, Cpa'p+7 ZX($7. lr'@SEAMUS DO iY'>i >=Co4=

o V8A'4o+uZa 9, /F Exis7-. /us'ER7s &'c~w< uv~R<o~o<g

@st 5/p /Vo. /

Page 19 Exhibit E

~ ~

~ ~

~ ~ ~ ~

~ r

BURNS AND ROE, lNC; bHtt,l b Ul 6 N w Jersey ~ New York' Connecticut ~ Ceiitornie 9 D.'Z,~ I , ~e W.O. Np.

Drawing No.

<iF Calo. No.

'~

l e Page Sheet ~et No.

By Title Cbecked r- Mo.

3 X- o Approved Sr 6& C R~C HX F'R Svppo/tcs T e ~'//)pgp)p/eJpg~~y

/n/ /ms~ T.

Z ST/PP./S. 'g SuPP/e/4'r /S Crrr) /tOO/e /oh/A4 l>SZR7 (~P.)

+lr L, dxS XI@

l.'7 Pa) g 400l7IN~I /~ <=+i .

7'f P, Jf< r ST/pp T/. FrV+3 TYP

~ Sueea~r g Exis7-St/PPoa/ PS A>$ 7 /h//e ///J SS R 7S (T)'P) g g sr/pp. P's

~SC S Sh1/E S/ A f . AOD/7/0/VA4 //t/Se'/t /

EXISTZW6 g~Sgg I

~. CHEcK 7+47 Exj$ 7. InlS:"+75'o wgi G~co&g

- OL~Zg~ o+oz u Page 21 Exhibit E

0 BURNS AND ROE, INC. SHEET. 6 OF 6 New ersey New York o Connecticut ~ Celilornia Date Book No. Page No.

Drawing No. S eef fe of By Checked LF 3 3 7 Aooroved itle oc2 PlPK 5u roEIIERI< IX I= SuppoRT lk w'plPRoIoEQI P IAIgrgiIErf ail e

L ~O- Iru'45$ +T-g g EXfS e, QoPP F~

/N'VO. 5 g rfIIffffe 4

( lz ~JA.

j AOal7VO&AC

/A'S'""g l 4 ieffIIeo Ir.

(~sP,)

i Rr+ o/A'ppy I g Exf. 7 Gg,lHQ I luS=-a l 5

'IS 5 Tlli rfe WSrll=~ 0 3X

~

o C7 vp,',)

4'<<s].,

'ws r. ~l Sod& P d

Suppoo.7 + jl FAl$ 7,

/hf SZg'l X

'/ ll FdR +~ ++,

s~<aa ~~>

>+orE:

I -'

7frf<uuoss op zxIsri+fs suRPoRf es )Ab~o 4 Z. Fi~ Way ae uSZu r~~ 2 Ca~icR .Ba<TS fo oIe 9 foeof 7 IZ 9, CHcCl< TFFAT PX)$ 7. /PflSZr27"5 DO lVOi cSZC'OA7Z OV8gC OADS=D.

Page 22 Exhibit E

0 Burns 8 Roe Contract Engineering Prepat ed 215 Coordinate + IASPectlon Final Evaluation Team C

Q V

Insp. Pkgs. Engineering Inspection CI 4l 0 M Rework Require l(o Signed Inspection Package J DRILLEO-IN CONCRETE ANCHOR

'es INSPECTION PROGRAM Q 0 Cl Cj O C. 'FLOW CHART z -' Rework

.ff 0 Group Yes Generic o"'"

~

QJ '

C

~ O Redesign O

I n~

J'.

No g Z

'einspection

.Contract 215 Engineering Burns It Roe Contract 215 Inspection Completed Engineering '.signed Insp. Team Engineering I'ackage Redesign Insp. Package Burns 5 Roe 0

z0 Engineering Of f:

fff

'XHIBIT F NRC STATISTICAL SAMPLING METHOD AND C215 SAMPlE RETROINSPECTION PROGRAM This exhibit is referenced in paragraph 4.4.2 of the response to the Bulletin.

NRC STATISTICAL SAMPLE METHOD Table 1 - Initial Sample Size to Assure at S5" Confidence Level 5" Defective Population Size Sample Size (with no failures) i 40 31 60 38 80 200 300 400 500 600 QO 57 1300-3000 Gr ater than 3000 60 Table II - Defectives Allowed Sample Size Allowable Ho. of Defectives 100 200 300 500 18 700 26 1000 3000 131 Exhibit F

CODE PROJECT ENGINEERING DIRECTIVE 8URNS ANO ROE, INC PROJECT 2 1 2 1 C S 2345 WPPSS 4 5 7 5 9 11 11 12 12 1+ 15 ENG INEER ING NUCLEAR PROJECT 0IR ECTIVE DATE c)

NQ. 2 171 19 20 ~1 INFORMATION SHE-T t REASON FOR P. E 0 NA Qt'OPIES

'o provide the necessary direction to the Contractor to perform a sample inspection of drilled-in concrete anchors which were installed between February 1978 and July 1979. REFERENCES SUBJECT Concrete Anchor Insoection LOCATION Vari ous ENG. SYSTEM Var> ous SlU SYSTEM QUALITYCLASSI 8 Seismic Cat. I ORIGINATING 8ECDR-F-81-0850 DOCUMENTS RFI 215-7429 DESCRIPTION OF WORK:

PED 215-CS-2401 provided retro-inspection requirements for anchors installed prior to February 1978. PED 215-CS-1019 provided inspection requirements for new installations performed after July 1979. It is the intent of this PED to initiate a sample inspection program of the anchors installed between these dates.

. Attached is a list of 69 hangers which are distributed through the plant.

The Contractor shall select 60 hangers from the list for this sample inspection program. The selected hangers shall be guality Class I, Seismic Category I and utilize drilled-in concrete anchors which were installed between'ebruary 1978 and July 1979. Also atta'ched is a form entitled, "Supplement to Hanger Inspection Checklist NF-237".

The g.C. Inspector shall first revieq the Hanger Inspection Checklist, form NF-237, in each selected hanger package. The inspector shall fill in the required information on the "Supplemental" form and check-off those items which were pre-viously verified on form NF-237. The inspector shall then, if necessary, field inspect, in accordance with Contractors current approved procedures, one of the drilled-in concrete anchors on each of the baseplates of the selected hangers for those items on the attached "Supplemental" form which were not previously verified on form NF-237. Use a separate form for each anchor. All items which do not conform to the requirements of the procedure shall be indicated on this form by the inspector.

..1. THIS PEO REYISES DIRECTION PREYIOUSI Y PROVIDED BY NONE THE FOLLOWING I'ED@):

DRAWINGS SP ECIF ICATION THIS P'ED VOIDS DIRECTION PREVIOUSLY PROVIDED BY PED 21 5-CS-2405 PED'S'tEYtS=:

THE FOLLOWING PEDI,I: EO 215-CS-3269 APPROVALS:

~ ~/l- 2 CO C 3 THIS PED WORK SHOULD BE DA'T" Dl IP -ENCI EFR COORDINATED WITH KNOWN oTHER woRK c2u C 215 UNDER THE FOLLOWING P 'PERYIS ATE PED'S'.

THIS PEO OEPENOSON THE S A ENGiNP:tt AT=

PRIOR INSTALLATIONOF $ /r 8z THE FOLLOWING IDENT PROJECT ENGINEER DATE REV 2 BR 803-2 Exhibit F

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ I ~

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

~ ~

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

0 l ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

~ ~ ~ ~ ~

0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 0

LIST OF HANGERS Han er No. Han er No. Han er No.

AS-114 MS-333 RHR-399 AS-132 MS-334 RHR-412 AS-153 MS-335 RHR-910N AS-166 "

MS-336 RHR-919N AS-182 MS-337 RHR-949N OE-6 RCC-324 RHR-973N DE-15 RCIC-6 RRC-2 DE-24 RCIC-79 RRC-6 OE-44 RCIC-920N RllCU-92 DE-58 RFM-63 R!'lCU-136 FPC-61 RF'll'-65 RI(ICU-137 FPC-64 RfM-66 RllCU-138 HPCS-43 RFW-67 RNCU-159 LPCS-28 RFM-69 RMCU-160 LPCS-901N RFH-73 R'!lCU-164 LPCS-902N RHR-6 RllCU-165 MS-28 RHR-11 RMCU-166 MS-29 RHR-37 R!

ICU-167'!JCU-229 MS-31 RHR-179 MS-33 RHR-209 RHCU-235 MS-36 RHR-245 RMCU-262 MS-275 RHR-328 R!lCU-272 MS-319 RHR-371 VR-8

~e: ooc ac~

SPEC, SECTION REt QWG, SO*I.E PAAPNg g

~ PAgE o*~a 'lr/~~

4t'i 215-7429 PARA OwG. ZONE ~so WPPSS NUCt.~~R PROJECT HO. 2 TlTLE.

BURNS ANQ ROE, INC.

215-CS-2345 sHr 3 os 4 gy S,~,~S CHaQ 0+>E I

/7/Pg Xc ~"~i th> Concrete<< Anchor Inspection

~ ~ wa ~~ ~ .v YV, ~ ~ a ~ ~ s vvH'v'7 lfh~ ~ s q y~

~

v ~

~ s '

a ~

vr nor v'r e ~ ~ ~

p Ravage v 'etaf 1 .'Vo.

~v fhev . Quality Csass H anger originally inspected to Revision of NF-237., Date ancnors > ns ta 1 1 ed

~ rchars oriafnally toraued with Nrench I.D.

!'.easure the torque required to just start tightening bolt/nut: Torque (h:nen less than proper torque, apply proper torque) Mrench I.O.

~ Inspect only those items not previously verified on NF-237 INSPECTION ITEH VERIFICATION ON Q.C.

Sign-Off NF-237 this form 0$ +ye I) Verify proper anchor type per hanger detail (Check one)

PRH HDI HKB

2) Verify proper anchor size per hanger detail 3e) Verify prop'er relative dfnensian (PRH on'Iv) 3h) Verify sett(no tool shanldered an aaahor (HOI only) 3c) Verify er..hed.-,.en de "tls ,in concrete (HYH onlv)

4) verify anchor no: pulled against plate(PRH K HDI onlv)

5) Ve. ify praper thread engagement

6) Verify proper plate bolt hole size

7) Verify proper free concrete edae spacing

8) Verify proper anchor spacing fram embedded items

) Verify anchor achieves proper torque after above inspection. Tarque flrench I.O.

• Check the correct column PRH ~ Phillips Red-Head Anchor, HOI ~ Hfltf Drop-In Anchor, HKC ~ Hflti Kwfk Bolt Anchor The drilled-in concrete anchor inspectian required by thfs checklist shall be performed in accordance with Contractor's current procedure.

Procedure used Revision Cew:ents:

Q.C. Inspector Date (Send a copy of thfs complete form and a copy of the form NF-237 fn the hanger package to L. Nable, B A R Engineering. Attach original of this form to form NF-237 in hanger package)

SKETCH 0= HA':".EP. BASEPLATE: (Show location of anchor being inspected)

Attac."=ent to 215-CS-2345 PEO Sheet 4 of 'xhlblg F

EXHIBIT C215 SAMPLE PARABOLT RETROINSPECTION PROGRAM (C233 INSTALLATIONS)

This exhibit is referenced in paragraph 4.4.6 of the response to the Bulletin.

Descri tion of Work 1.0 Contractor will inspect and test concrete inserts from the walls and slab of Spray Ponds lA 8 1B that were installed by Contract <<233.

')

From the attached drawings S533-S536, sheets 7,8,9, 5 10 of this PED, Contractor will select one bolt from each plate denoted by mark number. (i.e. Plate 13, Plate 14, etc.)

b) The selected bolt will be numbered (i.e. 1,2,3, or 4, etc.).

Bolt number 1 will be considered from'he north upper left corner of the plate. Numbers will increase consecutively moving clockwise around the plate.

c) Refer to item 2.0, this PED, for inspection and testing.

d) Submit results of inspection and testing to Engineer by letter on Exhibit "A" (Sheet 6 ):

2.0 Inspection and testing of the installed expansion bolts shall consist of the following:

2. 1 Results to be entered on Exhibit "A" (Sheet 6 )

2.2 The contractor will inspec the following items:

a. Proper size anchor

b. Proper type anchor

c. Embedment depth

d. Thread engagement

e. Plate bolt hole size

f. Bolt spacing

g. Edge distance

h. Torque 2.3 Torque Testing: A calibrated torque wrench shall be used

'for this test.

a. This test shall consist of applying torque in the tightening direction to the embedded anchor. Torque shall be applied until additional tightening of the nut is observed, or until the specified maximum torque value is reached, whichever occurs first.

is observed before reaching the specified maximum, this If tightening breakaway torque value shall be recorded and checked to assure that i t is greeter than .the'specified minimum torque, as shown on sheet '.

C bd'~DA REF OOC PcfN RPI WPPSS NUCLEAR PROJECT NO. 2 RE.= SPEC SECTION PAGE PAR*. BURNS AND ROE, INC.

REF OWG SCALE o re.

OWG ZONE REVIKWEO OATK PEC TITLE

+ gc P~+P~ I SHT Of Q A W'EN: ~

Z 7 o I'K Itc! gPEsv oMQ oArIt'Z. 77( Exhibit 6

4 Tor ue Ft-lbs.)

Size Minimum

~

I/2" 45 3/4 II 125 7/8" 165 II g 250 2.3 (continued).

b. Any turning, lateral and/or vertical motion of the embedded anchor, looseness of the'nchor system, or other farms of unsteadiness of the embedded anchor observed during the torque test shall be'ause for rejection. The torque test shall be performed without any special lubricant on the threads.

2.4 Edge distance: taken from the centerline of the bolt to the edge of the concrete. (Refer to Table III on sheet 5 ).

2.5 Bolt spacing: refer to Table III for minimum.

2.6 Plate bolt hole size: maximum I/8" larger than the anchor size.

2.7 Thread engagement: full thread engagement.

2.8 Embedment depth:

a) Refer to Table III for minimum.

, b) The ultrasonic equipment used shall be a NORTEC 131 CRT or approved equal.

c) The V.T. equipment shall be calibrated to a standard length Parabolt specimen prior to inspection of each mark number and more often if required.

d) Each Parablot shall be V.T.'d for length. Prior to applying the transducer to the end of the bolt, ascertain that the bolt end is relatively smooth and perpendicular to the axis of the bolt. If needed touch up with a file. Subtract the exposed length from the total length to get the embedded length and record the actual embedment on Exhibit "A".

S536.'U 2P9 Proper type anchor: Parabolt, concrete anchors.

MollyDATSUN

2. 10 .Proper size anchor: refer to reference drawings 5533, S534, S535, ~III'FF.

OOC Pci'I RFI %PPSS NUCLEAR PROJECT NO. 2 REP SPEC,SECTiOI+ , PAGE. PARA: BURNS AND ROE, INC.

REF DWG OWG. ZONE. Pfc ~

gg g~'H7 Q QF)+

SQAI E FAAIN / DATE AEVIEWED DATE 7I7LE~

Exhibit G DATE I'/V Iqq S.7g ~ f'BXCAK

2.11 If any inspected item fails to meet its acceptance cri ter i a, the anchor will be considered to have failed inspection.

2.12 If any anchor on a plate fails, all other anchors on the plate shall be inspected.

3.0 Rejected Expansion Bolts:

Rejected bolts wi11 be noted as such on Exhibit "A" and submitted to the Engineer ( 8 Im R ).

4.0

References:

Installation Procedure - Field Procedure FP-,EB-1 Rev. 3, Paragraphs 2.4 and 2>>5 (B 8,R File 233-00-0046) c 66< 0'i AEF OOC PCN RFI WPPSS NUCLEAR PROJECT NO. 2 REF SPEC. SECTION PAGE PARA; BURNS ANO ROE, INC.

AEF OWG DWG ZONE PEO I Q5 [q~~HT zz f QFIQ SQ+QE QEEAbvA'v AEvIEwEO DATE VFHZA(RAJYA.I EXhibit G I >>>>>> FA,

X l 0

TABLE III THREAD HOLE MINIMUi4l MINItlUM

• MINIMUM SIZE LENGTH DIAMETER EMBEDMENT SPACE BETWEEN EDGE DISTANCE BOLTS 1/4 II 3/4 II 3 II

/8 II 3/8'I 1 1/2" 1/2" 1 1 4" 1/2" 2 1/4" 6 II 3 II 5 8 II 5/8" 3 1/4" 4 II 3/4" 3 1/4" 7 8" 7/8 II 4ll 10 1/2" 4 1/2" 12" 6 II

• MinimUm space between bo1ts sha11 be as specified. above or as noted on B It R contract drawings (S533, S534, S535, S536).

RE DOC PCN RFI WPPSS NUCLEAR PROJECT NO. 2 RE. SP C. SECTION'AGE PARA BURNS AND ROE, INC. ~

REF DWG DWG. PED+I Q5- SHT ~ Ot' Q

+~~~~I ~~

ZONE.'CALE OA TbC RKVI&Vf.O, OATK TITLE:

ev 75 r~

~

Exhibit G CIN O OA F ~< T<~ APPV'O

~

OAT J7C'$

t

'I

o i I

~)