ML17192A836

Engineering Criteria/Procedure for Review & Resolution of As-Built Deviations, Revision 2

ML17192A836
Person / Time
Site:	Dresden, Quad Cities
Issue date:	03/07/1980
From:	Snyder T EDS NUCLEAR, INC.
To:
Shared Package
ML17192A837	List: ML17192A836 ML17192A838 ML19330B147
References
PROC-800307-01, NUDOCS 8007300498
Download: ML17192A836 (11)

Text

e

~*

., :r(J/WcJ-EDS NUCLEAR INC.

PROJECT INSTRUCTIONS TITLE: 1. O Engineering Criteria/Procedure for the Review and Resolution of As- Built Deviations CLIENT I PROJECT: ___ c_omm_o_n_w_eal_th_E_di_*s_on_ _ __ JOB NO.: 0590-003 REVISION: 0 REVISION RECORD Revision Date Prepared Approved 1 ,

10/5/79 t:~-#~~L-- .; //

. v A<

q:'d;t-~;&1 ~ .

f 3/7/80 7::K~~

2 .,:;,, * - , I '

_,,,,,..:.. ~~ '._..'-- -r!/

/'

Page 1 of 11

~8007 30:0~9 'O

EDS NUCLEAR INC.

ECT INSTRUCTIONS CU ENT I PROJECT: Commonwealth Edison Revision: 2 Engineering Criteria/Procedure for the Review and Resolution of TITLE: As-Built Deviations Page 2 of 11

1. 0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Purpose This document provides the engineering criteria and procedure for the analytical review and resolution of As-Built deviations from design. The discussion parallels the flow

. diagram. .(see Attachment

. A).

1. 2 Scope This document is applicable to the safety-related piping systems of Dresden 2 and 3 and Quad Cities 1 and 2 as defined in NRC Bulletin IE 79-14. The scope also includes the ultimate resolt..iion of all deviations.

2. O DEFINITIONS

1. Deviation - Any difference between the As-Built and As-Designed data.

2. Insignificant Deviation - A deviation which is within the tolerances specified in the Deviation Criteria (see section 4. 2)

3. Acceptable Deviation - A deviation which results in piping stress levels and support loads which are within the FSAR/Code of Record limits as shown by hand calculations and/ or analysis.

4. Potential Nonconformance - A deviation -which potentially results in stress levels/ support loads which exceed the FSAR limits.

5. Nonconformance - A deviation which results in stress levels/support loads that exceed the FSAR limits.

6. Operability Limit - The stress limit of 0. 5 ultimate tensile strength is considered the stress level at which operability .is no longer justified for operating basis loading conditions.

3. 0 INPUT INFORMATION 3.1 Design Input The design input documents which define the design of the piping systems are provided by either CECo, Sargent and Lundy, or General Electric. £ The information is used in conjunction with the field inspection package

l'. .*.

EDS NUCLEAR INC.

_PROJECT INSTRUCTIONS CLIENT I PROJECT: Commonwealth Edison Revision: 2 Engineering Criteria/Procedure for the Review and Resolution of TITLE: As-Built Deviations Page 3 of 11:

for -the evaluation of the a.s-euilt piping. The following is a list of these documents.

1. Pipiilg Specification - .The piping specification provides information pertaining to pipe size and schedule, material type, fitting type, pressure ratings and other similar data.

2. Insulation Specification - This document provides the insulation types and respective densities.

3. P & ID - These drawings are schematics showing a complete piping system~ The P & ID provides data such as flow direction, valve numbers, pipe sizes and designations, and the piping class breaks.

4. I?iPing Composites - These drawings show the overall l~out of a piping system and are considered to be the base design document.

5. stress Reports and Computer Outputs - These two items provide stress levels for the As-Designed system and thus serve as tools for making evaluations on the As-Built system. A stress isometric should be included in the stress report.

6. Valve Drawings-: These drawings provide the valve weights and dimensions required for analysis.

7. Valve Operator Drawings - These drawings provide the weight of the valve operator. These drawings are to be used in conjunction with item 6.

8. FSAR - The Final Safety Analysis Report provides the rµethod of seismic analysis and state the Code of Record.

-*-.. 9. Response Spectra - The response spectra curves define the seismic loading on the piping system.

10. Hanger Details - These drawings show the design of the hanger and are considered base design documents. '

. *~* . *- ~,. --- **- *.* ......... . ..... **-.~---**....--*~*I{;"".. ~--'"'""'*-**--..:-**** .. ... -* - --*~**~ --:***-**** --- .,. .

• EDS NUCLEAR INC.

\ PROJECT INSTRUCTIONS CLIENT I PROJECT: Commonwealth Edison Rev.ision: 2 Engineering Criteria/Procedure for the Review and Resolution of TITLE: As-Built Deviations Page 4 of 11

3. 2 As-Built Inspection Input Bechtel has the responsibility of performing the field inspection and providing the As-Built information to CECo and EDS. The As-Built package contains the necessary information to comply with the Bechtel inspection procedure.

The EDS liaison reviews the Bechtel As-Built package for compliance with

. . the inspection procedure. The As-Built package will contain a combination of the following documents.

1. Stress isometric - Available stress isometrics will be used to check the As-Built piping configuration. Any differences between the As-Built and the stress isometric will be indicated on the isometric.

2. Inservice Inspection Isometric - The !Si's are used whenever the.

stress isometrics are unavailable. Since the ISi includes only piping up to the class breaks, supplementary sketches may be included in the package to show the non-ISi piping. The non-ISi piping is required, since its seismic response may affect the response of the ISi piping.

3. Field Sketch - If piping isometrics are not available, as is sometimes the case of piping qualified under the Blume Criteria, a field sketch will be made.

4. Hanger Detail - The hanger detail drawing is the design document for the hanger. It provides information such as the Bill of Materials, support orientation, and load carrying capacity. Any difference found in the field inspection concerning hangers will be marked on the hanger detail drawing. If a support does not have a hanger detail .

drawing associated with it, Bechtel will provide a complete hanger sketch.

5. Valve and Valve Operator Drawings - As part of the As-Built package,

• valve information is required.* Bechtel at Dresden and CECo at **

Quad Cities are responsible for obtaining this information.

CLIENT I PROJECT: Commonwealth Edison Revision: 2 Engineering *criteria/Procedure for the Review and Resolution of TITLE: As-Built Deviations . Page 5 of 11

4. 0 IDENTIFICATION OF POTENTIAL NONCONFORMANCES 4.1 Field Identified In the course of the Bechtel field inspection, potential nonconformances .

may be encountered.* These potential nonconformances are items such as miss-ing or damaged- supports and must be rep0rted to CE Co and EDS immediately. --

In addition to the reporting of the potential nonconformance, Bechtel is to provide any additional field data required by EDS to make an operability

• assessment of the problem~ Once this data is provided an operability assess- I ment is initiated as described in Section 5.1. &: 1

4. 2 Review of As- Built Packages Potential nonconformances may be identified during the review of an As-Built package. As an aid to the identification of these potential noncon-formances, the following Deviation Criteria was developed.

Deviation Criteria The deviation criteria described below is intended to account for changes that would result in numerical differences in stresses and loads of mag-nitudes which fall within the overall accuracy of the analytical methods and stress limits originally used.

1. Variations in pipe geometry and/or hanger location of one pipe diameter or 6 inches, whichever is greater, is considered to be insi~cant on the overall piping and hanger design. Thus any As-Built package falling within these dimensional tolerances is considered acceptable.

2. Changes in valve weights equal to~% of the weight of the span that the valve is located within are considered to be insignificant on the overall piping and hanger design.

3. The valve operator orientation within a tolerance of _+/-loo from the drawing orientation is acceptable. However, if the valve body is aligned in a vertical direction with the operator in the horizontal plane, an angular tolerance of _:t-22. 5° is acceptable.

• ., 'PROJECT* .

L EDS NUCLEAR INC.

INSTRUCTIONS CLIENT I PROJECT: Commonwealth Edison Revision: 2 Engineering Criteria/Procedure for the Review and Resolution of TITLE: As-Built Deviations Page 6 of 11

4. An angular deviation of +22. 5° is acceptable for pipe routing.

5. An angular deviation of ~10° is acceptable for single directional snubbers or struts.

A deviation which exceeds the tolerances of the Deviation. Criteria shall be identified as a potential nonconformance. Further assessment is required to determine if the deviation is acceptable or a nonconformance.

All systems with identified potential nonconformances will be subject 1£ to analytical evaluation as described in Section 6. 1 below .

. --#. --- ..,,.. ....... --- -r**---**-r:..**-*-*-*-;t"'""'r--*----~*,~:-~-*---- ... -*-*** **-----**--*-..--: *:-*

• ' EDS NUCLEAR INC.

\ PROJECT INSTRUCTIONS CU ENT I PROJECT: Commonwealth Revision: 2 Engineering Criteria/Procedure for the Review and Resolution TITLE:. of As-Built Deviations Page 7 of 11

5. 0 EVALUATION OF POTENTIAL NONCONFORMANCES 5.1 Operability Assessment of Field Identified Potential Nonconformances If a potential nonconformance is identified during field inspection, an ini-tial operability assessment shall be made within a two-day (48 hour5.555556e-4 days <br />0.0133 hours <br />7.936508e-5 weeks <br />1.8264e-5 months <br />) period.

The piping system shall be examined to determine if the* piping stresses or support stresses have exceeded the operability stress limits. This asses-ment shall be based on engineering judgment generally supported by hand I calculations or more. rigorous analyses. Associated assumptions and calcu-lations will be documented.

6.0 ULTIMATE RESOLUTION OF NONCONFO:RMANCES 6.1 Analytical Evaluation Potential nonconformances identified during the review of as-built packages I will be subsequently evaluated by analysis. In accordance with the IE 79-14 1 bulletin, such evaluations of As-Built piping are to be made using the same analytical technique(s) used for the As-Designed system, or by less complex 1 techniques provided they can be shown to be conservative. l I The general approach to be utilized in the analytical evaluation of noncon:-  !

formances will be as follows: &_ Ii

1. Wherever possible, utilize simplified analysis techniques (which can be ;

shown to. be conservative) such as hand calculations to demonstrate i that piping and supports are performing within the FSAR limit.

2. If the use of simplified analysis techniques is not feasible or appropri- I, ate, the piping system and supports will be reanalyzed using the same 1 analysis technique that was used in their original qualification.  !

- --- --1 The systems will first. be* analyzed for 'as-built' conditions determined  ;

\

during the field inspections. Comparisons to operability stress limits will be made and any exceedances found will be immediately reported to CECO along with necessary modifications. Additional analyses, as necessary, will then be performed to ensure compliance with the FSAR criteria. Modifica-tions, if required, will consist of new supports, relocation of supports or repair of damaged supports.

The remaining portions of this section detail the analytical techniques used in the original qualification of Dresden and Quad Cities piping .

. .... . ~ . .,. . -* ... **.~.- .. ***-,*--~:-r--- *-----!'-****

EDS NUCLEAR INC.

PROJECT .INSTRUCTIONS

.No.:

CLIENT/ PROJECT: Commonwealth Edison Company /.

Revision: 2

• Engineering Criteria/Procedure for the Review and Resolution TITLE: of As- Built Deviations Page s of 11

6. 2. 1 Dresden Units 2 and 3 Three methods were used in the seismic qualification of the Dresden Units 2 and 3 piping. The methods are as follows:

I) Mode superposition using a floor response spectra II) Static analysis using conservative static coefficients ill) Blume Curves A complete description of the above analysis techniques and the piping systems on which they were used may be found in the FSAR. A few of the key points, however, are discussed below.

Method I - Mode Superposition using response spectra The mode superposition method was used in the dynamic. analyses of the I*

. main steam, feedwater lines inside the drywell, and the recirculation I

'-./

system lines. The square-root-sum-of-the-squares (SRSS) method was 1 I

used to combine the modal response of the pipe. For the dynamic respons~

of the piping, the x, y and z direction spectra were applied individually. i The stresses due to the X direction earthquake spectra were combined by I absolute summation with the stresses due to the Y direction spectra 1 (vertical). Similarly, the stresses due to Z direction spectra were com- !

bined (ASUM) with the stresses due to Y direction spectra. *The most severe stresses of the /X/ + /YI or /Z/ + /YI combination were used, and the most severe of the loads from either combination were used in the design of supports. The horizontal floor response spectra were I based on one-half percent damping, and the vertical spectra was a constant:

2/3 of the maximum ground acceleration for all periods and elevations. 1'

/

2. \

Method II - Static analysis with static coeffiCients .:......;;..,\

This method was used for the analysis of Class 1 piping systems greater than 10 inches in diameter. The static coefficients were determined *for the horizonal and the vertical directions. The horizontal static coefficient was applied in each of the horizontal directions (X and Z) and in the vertical direction (Y). The results from one horizontal direction combined

. \ by absolute summation with the vertical direction was compared to the results of the other horizontal direction combined (ASUM) witti. the vertical direction. The larger of the two was used for the evaluation of the piping .

......... *-*~- ........ -*------ .... ~.--~***-..- ... *--~----- --* ~- .. . . . **- ... ,, ............ --* **-.r**--. *******.

EDS NUCLEAR INC. e PROJECT INSTRUCTIONS

,No.:

CU ENT I PROJECT: Commonwealth Edison TITLE:

Engineering Criteria/Procedure for the Review and Resolution of As- Built Deviations I Rev.ision: 2 Page 9 of 11 Method ill - Blume Curves .

The Blume Curves were used primarily to evaluate Class I instrumentation piping and Class I piping systems which are 10 inches in diameter or smaller. The curves provide guidelines for the evaluation of the lateral supports in a piping system. The curves were based on simple spans and consider such factors as the period of the piping, deflections, stresses, and support reactions.

6. 2. 2 Quad Cities Unit 1 and 2 Two methods were utilized in the seismic qualification of the Quad Cities Unit 1 and 2 piping. The methods are as follows:

I) Mode Superposition using floor response spectra II)

• Blume Curves A brief description of these analysis techniques is provided below.

Method I - Mode Superposition using response spectra The response spectra method was used on Class I piping systems which are 10 inches or larger in diameter. The modal combination was by SRSS. The response of the piping system is evaluated by considering the two combinations of spectra as follows. The X and Y response is com-bined by absolute summation and compared against the combination of the Z and Y response. The more severe of the two combinations is used.

The spectra were based on one-half percent damping.

.. J- ...

~ . EDS NUCLEAR INC.

.. PROJECT INSTRUCTIONS CLIENT I PROJECT: Commonwealth Edison Revision: 2 Epgineering Criteria/Procedure for the Review and Resolution of TITLE: As-Built Deviations Page ioof 11 Method II - Blume Curves The Blume curves are applicable to Class I systems which are 8 inches in diameter or smaller. The curves are different between Quad Cities and Dresden, but the application procedure is the same for both plants.

7. 0 Reporting/Documentation Several types of transmittals will be prepared for CECo. A summary of these transmittals is given below.

1. A Mechanical Deviation Evaluation Report (MDER) will be provided for:

(a) reporting the results of the* initial engineering judgment of deviations; (b) reporting the results of the analytical evaluation of deviations.

2. A review package summary which summarizes the acceptability /unacceptability of the review of each seismic lin~.

3. For piping analyzed/supported by the Blume criteria, documentation for the application of the Blume criteria will be provided.

4. For piping requiring reanalysis, a piping analysis/support design summary will be provided.

8. 0 Quality Assurance All of the analytical work shall be performed in accordance with procedures set forth in the EDS Quality Assurance Manual.

I

... .,. **-***--- -~**--***** .. - ... ***--- . **---..-~- - ... ' t ......... *........

• *\ /

• EDS NUCLEAR INC.

~PROJECT INSTRUCTIONS CU ENT I PROJECT: Commonwealth Edison Revision: 2 "T'

• Engineering Criteria/Procedure for the Review and Resolution of Tl 1 LE. ..l. s- Built Deviations Page .11 of 11

.J

~

':::i

~

~

~

~

j 1--:,

I >-.:

I ~

,.. ~

• 1

~~ ~

~

I ~~

-1

\...j *,.._'

~-?::::-

~:

~

~

'"';

\ ~;:.

~~,

. r- -* - .