ML20151H734

Summary of 880630 Meeting W/Util in Rockville,Md Re Criteria of IE Bulletin 79-14 Resolution at Facility

ML20151H734
Person / Time
Site:	Browns Ferry
Issue date:	07/21/1988
From:	Gears G NRC OFFICE OF SPECIAL PROJECTS
To:	NRC OFFICE OF SPECIAL PROJECTS
References
IEB-79-14, TAC-00015, TAC-00016, TAC-00017, TAC-15, TAC-16, TAC-17, NUDOCS 8808020026
Download: ML20151H734 (23)

Text

. _ _ . ____ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __

[yuam*o,,

• UNITED STATES

. 8' 3, a NUCLE AR REGULATORY COMMISSION l W ASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 k, . . . . . # July 21, 1988 Docket No. 50-260 LICENSEE: Tennessee Valley Authority '

FACILITY: Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant Unit 2

SUBJECT:

MINUTES OF THE JUNE 30, 1988 PEETING WITH THE TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY ON THE CRITERIA 0F IEB-79-14 RESOLUTION AT BROWNS FERRY (TAC 00015,00016,00017)

On Thursday, June 30, 1908, a meeting was held at the Office of 3pecial Projects (OSP), NRC headquarters in Rockville, Maryland with the Tennessee i Valley Authority (TVA). The meeting was held as a follow-up to a June 16, 1988 OSP/TVA meeting. A list of attendees is attached as Enclosae 1.

l The purpose of the meeting was to discuss a new propesal icy TVA for the large bore piping seismic evaluation program. The NRC staff had provided its provisional acceptance of the overall program plan for resoiving IE Bulletin

79-14 in a meeting with TVA on March 17, 1988. Since TVA's propa:ed program plan projected that approximately 50% of the IE Bulletin 79-14 analyt.is effort would be completed prior to the Browns Ferry Unit 2 restart, the staff made i:s acceptance of the program contingent on the re;ults of the completed analyses.

The staff planned to audit this effort when the analysis was approximately 20%

1 complete. TVA indicated that it had approached the 20% completion milestone j and TVA requested a June 16, 1988 meeting to discuss its proposal for the evaluation techniques.

d During the June 16, 1988 meeting. TVA identified nine factors involved with J the Browns Ferry pipe and pipe support seismic design rethodology for which TVA requested staff acceptance and approval. According to TVA, these nine factors generally involved seismic analysis methods that were not clearly specified in the Browns Ferry FSAR. The staff agreed to review these factors and to provide TVA with its position in a followup meeting (the subject of this Meeting Summary). TVA agreed to provide additional infonnatiot. to support the technical adequacy of the nine factors.

TVA's proposal for addressing the technical adequacy of tne nine factors

, involved a sample analysis effort. The details of TVA's proposed sample analysis were presented in the meeting slides certained in Enclosure 2. The proposed sample involved the corparison of the results of an analysis of five piping problems using current analysis rethods and acceptance criteria with

the results of an analysis of the same five problems using the proposed Browns 1

Ferry analysis rethods. During the TVA presentation, the staff questioned

' whether scre of the proposed methods used for the sample met current licensing criteria and analysis techniques. In addition. TVA was proposing acceptance 4

criteria to evaluate the sarple results which were less conservative than current i licensing criteria accepted by hRC. TVA had previously propcsed to use a set of interim criteria similar to the interim criteria used at Sequoyah to determine the pipe support modifications required for Browns Ferry restart 0l t

8808020026 880721 \

4 PDR ADOCK 05000260 1 O PDC

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ .-_J

9

. 2 (Meeting Sumary dated January 19,1988). These interim criteria would be used with the old analysis methods. Based on these considerations, the staff did not endorse TVA's newly proposed sample analysis techniques. .

The staff presented its position on the nine factors involved with the Browns i I

Ferry pipe and pipe support seismi: design inethodology. The staff's position

• was based on criteria in Browns Ferry's FSAR, the staff's original SER; or.

where explicit Browns Ferry licensing guidance was not available, accepted NPC  ;

staff practice or guidance from previous licensing reviews, The staff's  ;

position on the nine factors is summarized below:  !

FACTORS

• BF ORIGlhAL OST STAFF RESPONSES (

DESIGN BASIS

• l

1. Vertical Seismic 0.07g OBE Not Acceptable c Response Input 0.13g SSE Not Acceptable l

2. Suismic Damping 0.5% Acceptable s OBE/SSE f Not Acceptable

3. Peak Broadening No (

4. Seismic Anchor Some Should be included in fation (Between buildings and analysis; not acceptable source pipe movenent) to exclude ARS Elev. of Input C. G. Not Acceptable j S.

ZPA Effects No Not Acceptable

6. l Combination of Modes SRSS Acceptable  :

7.

Combination of Dir. Acceptable l l

8. Closely Spaced Modes No Not Acceptable Rigid Range 20 Hz or Acceptable 9.

l 30 Modes i (*As proposed by YVA - See Enclosure 2)

TVA indicated that it would require time to review the staff's coiments. The f proposed OSP piping audit scheduled for July 18-22 was placed on hold pending  ;

i TVA's responses to OSP coerents.

\ G,d E. Gears, at,Project-Manager t Gdfra' [

j i

WA)rojects DiVlsion ~

' Office of Special Project [

l  !

Enclosures:

1. Attendance List I 2. TVA P6ndout j i i.

! cc w/ enclosures: See next page

[

i

Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant Units 1. 2, and 3 CC:

General Counsel Regional Adninistrator, Region II Tent.essee Valley Authority U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comissien 400 West Semit Hill Drive 101 Mariette Street, N.W.

E11 B33 - Atlanta, Georgia 30323 Knoxville, Tennessee 37902 Resident inspector / Browns Ferry NP

' Mr. R. L. Gridley U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comissien Tennessee Valley Authority Route 12. Box 637

$N 157B Lookout Place Athens, Alabama 35611 Chattanooga, Tenmissee 37402-2801 Dr. Henry Myers. Science Advisor Mr. H. P. Porrehn Comittee on Interior Tennessee Valley Authority and Ir. sular Affairs Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant U.S. House of Representatives P.O. Box 2000 Washington, D.C. 20515 4 Decatur Alabama 35602

$ Mr. M. J. May Mr. S. A. White l Tennessee Valley Authority Senior Vice President Nuclear Power Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant Tennessee Valley Authority l

j P.O. Box 2000 6N 3BA Lookout Place 1 Decatur, Alabama 35602 1101 Market Street Chattanooga, Tennessee 37402-2801

Mr. D. L. Williams Tennessee Valley Authortty J

y 400 West Sumit Hill Driva

kl0 BBS knoxville, Tennessee 37902 Chairr.an Limestone County Conenission 2 P.O. Box 188 l Athens. Alabama 35611 Claude Earl Fox, M.D.

State Health Officer

• State Departinent of Public Health State Office Building I'ontgomery, Alabama 36130

r___________-______.

ENCLOSURE 1 LIST OF ATTENDEES JUNE 30, 1988 TVA/NRC MEETING Name Organization S. M. Kane . TVA - Licensing A. W. Chan TVA Censultant J. R. Fair NRC/OSP T. M. Cheng NRC/OSP '

T.C. Cruise TVA G. Gears NRC/OSP P. Polk TVA B. D. Lidw NRC/OSP J. McCall TVA John Eidinger TVA - Consultant Karl S. Seidle TVA t

1 TVA - Ter.r.essee Valley Authority NRC/OSP - Nuclear Regulatory Commission /0'fice of Special Projects  ;

t I

.- Enclosure 2

f i

j

. l I

l SROWSS FDAY SVCt. EAR FIM T l

. t t

I i

SEISMIC EVALUATION t

FOR  ;

1.GGE BORE PIPING I i

i l

f f

6 l

r PRESDTED TO:

SUCLEAR REG'JLATORY C0bHISSION STAFF FRESBTED BY:

TBNESSEE VALLEY AtJI110R',TY JUSE 30, 1938

. . , t t

AGDTA .

i BACKGROUND / PURPOSE SCOPE OF EVALUATION J

, EARDlQUAKE GROUND FOTION

'l I

LOAD GENTRATION 1

PIPING ANAL.YSIS

\

PIPE SUPPORTS a.

I RESULTS COMPARISON 4

1

)

I i

)

)

- . , , - - - - _ . _ . - .-,- , - , , , - - - , - , - - - -.-,,--,---n..,,

BACKGROUND /PUR NSE TVA A.ET WIT 11 NRC Cti JUNE 16, 1988 I

TVA DESCRIBEI) BFN PIPING ANALYSIS MEniODOLOGIES IN TODAY'S MEETING,1YA WILL OUTLISE 'DE

[

SEISMIC EVALUATION IROGR#1 /OR LARGE t BORE PIPING i i

{

l i

I l

i l

I I

i a

i h

~

e L

l BROWSS FERRY PIPE AND PIPE SUPPORTS SEISMIC DESIGN MEIl0D0 LOGY i i

t i

i FACTORS Bf ORIGINAL i

DESIGN BASIS t

1. Vertical Seismic 0.073 OBE 0.13g SSE l Response Input 1/2)

2. Seismic Damping  ;

OBE/SSE [

I

3. Peak Broadening N0 l

4. Seismic Anchor Motn. Some (1)

I

5. ARS Elev. of Input C. G.  ;

L

6. 2PA Effects MO  !

l 7, Combination of Modes SRSS )

Combination of Dir. i

! 8. Closely Spaced Modes NO

, i

9. Rigid Range 20!i: or  ;

i 30 Medes i i

l 8 i

m_

1 1

(1) Between tuildings and source pipe movement. .

1 l t l

l, i  !

l l

I 4

i r ll l I EROWNS FIRRY PIPE AND PIPE SUPPORTS ,

SEISMIC DFSIGN ML'nODOLOGY 1

I l . t ,

! l i

FACIORS  : BF ORIGINAL .

ADDRESSED f 6

i DESIGN BASIS (Y/N)  ;

l  !

1. Vertical Setssic f 0.07g OBE Y  !

Response Input 0.13g SSE

2. Seismic Dx ping 1/2%

i Y  !

i OBE/SSE i 4

3. Peak droadening NO Y l

4. Seismic Anchor Motn. Some (1) Y

! 5. ARS Elev. of Input C. G. Y I

6. :PA Effects NO ,

Y  ;

I 7 l

i 7. Combination of M es SRSS Y r Combination of Dir. l 4 s S. Closely Spaced M es NO j Y  ; ,

1 I i  !

20H or

~

9. Rigid Range Y j l 30 Modes l '

i I t  !

l I

i (1) Between buildingt and source pipe movement, j L

1 4

i

! f i

(

I I 1

i t

I i

____--___- ___-_-__ _______--______________________--____________ _ _ L

I r

i r

SCOPE OF ASSESSMINT ,

7 t

i t

i TVA WILL SELECT FIVI! REPRESENTAThE LEGE l BORE PIPE PROBLDG  !

l 1

i I

I-i i

[

i l

J

• 1 t

I i

1 l f 1

l 1 f

i i

i

i i

?

i t I

i f 1

1

! t t

i l

4 ,

t I

t

l EARUlQUAKE GROUND )DTION .

I 1

DE PIPING EVALUATION IS FOR DE $BE CASE }

l l

k DE GROUND 50 TION USED WILL BE THE SITE  ;

SPECIFIC RESPONSE SPECTRA (SSRS) SIRPE ,

FOR A ROCK SITE 1

5 DE SSRS IS TAKEN FROM SEQUOYAH, l

AIUUSTED TO 0,20G (ZPA)  !

VilS 50 TION IS FOR DiIS EVALUATION, AND j

NOT FOR DESIGN BASIS i

[

t 50 TION IS SDt!LAR TO BFNP El CL'IRO WID{ i ABOUT 75% FORE DBGY FOR 111G1 FREQUENCY  ;

RANGE (5-15 FC) DIAN 110055H i

i l

I I

f f

I f

l

! t i  !

i U

LOAD GENERATION TVA WILL DEVELOP REALTOR BUILDING' FLOOR SPECTRA USING SSRS i.

r SME BUILDING .WDEL AS ORIGINAL DESIGN WILL BE USED (SINGLE STICKW . DEL) i DIRECT GENERATION METrl0D WILL BE USED r

7% DM! PING WILL BE USED i

I i

i l

FLOOR SPECTRA IN T1REE DIRECTIONS WILL BE l

DEVELOPED - '

t l

t i

i f I l Y

i 1

I i

< l l

l PIPING NiALYSIS t

RO1YSIS Will BE PERF0DED USING SUPERPIPE \

l l

MIIN USING RESPONSE SPSCIRA TEON!(UE, PVRC D#tP:NG IS USED MIIN USING TDE HISTORY TEO{NI(CE, R.G. l 1,61 DM: PING IS USED '

I i

ALL 50 DES TC RIGID RANGE (% IC, LESS IF FLAT SPECTRA) s f

(

t St!SSING ht\SS INC1)JDED (:PA EFFECTS)

I l

PEAK SHIFTING WIll BE USED, + 10) ,

l l 3 DIRECTIONS OF SOTION COMBINED BY SRSS I t

i r

HIQilR DetPING STAY BE USED !F NST!FIED, i l

i CASE BY CASE  !

[

h l

l PIPE ACCEPTANCE CRITERIA WILL BE 11 STMIN  !

(CM EON), 2% STRAIN (STAIN 1ESS) t i

s I

5 PIPE SUPPORT l

• t

. I

! STEEL: LEVEL D LDi!TS (I,;Syh 20% INCREASE IN (

1 A\HAGE YlELD STRESS; OR )DDEST MOUNT OF j 4

NONLINFAR BDlWICR i -

1 I

EXPANSION ANQ10RS: F,S, = ]

1 -

1 f

i

! i

RODS

ACCEPTANCE FR31 TEST DATA 4

i

(

l UNISTRUT: ACCEPTANCE FR051 TEST DATA

! i j  !

EFFECTS ON PIPE FOR ANY 0\B LOADED (

]

SUPPORT WILL BE \BIFIII i

i

)

i QCECKS WILI. BE .AtGE FOR VAL \T.S, No::LES,

ETC.

1 ,

t 4

i i

i I

1 1

I l

l i i l i i, l i

l

t a

. .. j i

I l

t RI5ULTS C@TARISONS l i

t l

i CGTARISONS WILL BE M@E BET 4EIN EVALUATION" AND BFN P! PING METiODOLOGIES r

IF C@tPARISONS ARE OK. T1(IN BFh' MEDODOLOGIES

• i ARE AFFROPRIATE FOR DIE L'ESIGN OF BFNP PIPE  !

SYSTDt3 h

8 i

l f

r i

PIPE ANALYSIS MEIHODS RESP 0flSE SPECTRA ANALYSIS: MODES, LEVELS, SAMS COMBINAIIONS

• MODE COMBiflATION: COMPl.ETE QUADRATIC COMBlfl AT ION (C0C) . CONSIDERS SIGN OF MODAL RESPONSES

-RESULTS IN PIPE STRESS ABOUT 10-40% LESS lHAN OVERLY C0ftSERVAllVE REG GUIDE 1.92 METHODS e!NDEPENDEliT SUPPORT MOTION (ISM):

COMBINE LEVELS BY SRSS WHEN MOTIONS ARE UNCORRELATED (P < 1 0.12): 0THERWISE BY ASUM

• SEISMIC ANCHOR MOTION (SAM)

COMBINE PIPE SUPPORT LOADS FROM SAMS AND IfiERTIA BY SRSS

• RV-SUPERPIPE

- SINGLE CODE INCLUDING ALL MODE. LEVEL, SAM COMBINAT!0ftS USING CROSS-SPEClRA CORRELAI10N TECHNIQUES DNS4 - 3327M

l MODG COMBINATION BY CQC l EXAMPLE PROBLEM

\

. PIPING PROBLEM AC 03(SONGS 1)

N ..

b SA N h4g (

/V .

'n

?f8 l r

P '

. RESULTS ,

COCs Cempiate Quadratic Combination  !

l -10PCs NRC R.G.1.92 Method (ASUM of closely spaced modes) ,

J T.H. e Time History '

{

I  !

, i n = ,, u . n~. .., o . . , ,, , , . i.

h at ra

.101..

...i l'.:ti 1.::n B

- n ,- ,

.: .iS'., 1:!! 1

.. ..i... '.i>

1:!! i. n

ISM o LEVEL COMBINATION BY RVoSUPERPIPE um .

. BUILDING MODEL , , , , ,

unsa.

.u

.p;,t

• "=.=, .

~ ~ "

\ . . ,

~~

1 l

.',~~~ y

. PIPING MODEL

4_

1 1

'."/.

.-1:".; " .'.:m. .T. .,r.

l N' 1 a q

ee

, %w: 1 f

Nr/,

.. /

l

) I hodal Type of Force (lo) Time NRC Reo. Guide Rec . Guide Ry.sup ov.suo Support or homent History 1.92 r.M. ~ T.n.  !

i Point (10ft) {

23 Ancnor Fx 287.80 316.45 1.10 329.61 1.15 l

I Fy 168.44 172.86 1.03 177.22 1.05 F: 92.56 120.28 1.30 92.37 1.00 i

Mn 221.79 323.02 1.46 231.78 1.05 My 82.50 149.26 1.81 104.69 1.27 j

j Mr 671.48 710.68 1.06 673.03 1.00 1

60 Anchor Fx 148.34 222.79 1.50 222.70 1.50 [

Fy 100.20 78.29 0.78 75.16 0.75 4 F 138.47 167.29 1.35 457.74 1.14 2

Ma 96.00 159.11 1.66 113.99 1.15 l

My 269.29 369.60 1.37 370.84 1.35 [

l i M 103.38 124.35 1.20 126.00 1.22 i 35 Single Fy 57.67 64.66 1.12 54.70 0.95 l Fa 76.04 122.28 1.61 83.00 1.09 [

l 110 Single Fy 53.59 123.46 2.30 97.68 1.83 Fa 76.66 127.79 1.66 100.71 1.31 115 Single Fx 978.91 1331.42 1.36 951.84 0.97 l

i t

Mean retto 1.39 1.17 Standard Deviation ratto 0.36 0.25 i Average reewetion 16. 8n I

t TA5LE 5 TOTAL SUPP0af LOA 05 (EIAMPLE 8) i i ,

I i

l l'

ISM - LEVEL COMBINATION BY RV-SUPERPIPE TRIANGLE = ASUM (NRC) Method CIRCLE = RV.Superpipe's Combin,ation Method (Random ,

Vibration)

SQUARE = Time History o o oo qgg

. . - i Yi, i

, i r i (1 1 1 i s i o

l

== o o aganaa m A W f

,g

.n. .a.. - _,m_ _ _ . .u. -

m ,

Ji it I i Il Ii 5 '

4, 4, di di 3 **"* o o ,

e _

& wa l

k

,,,_+,--,,,,, - \ \ i kk

$M it

' ' ' A '

t>

e nae

' ' L i t e

a , ,

d i d '

i' ii i 4, o

< q

• • -t g o , 4 .

d

• ~*~ ~* '

gp l'

' .l . . _

j

j: N )il i

h 1

I

OTHER COMPONENTS ACCEPTANCE CRITERIA MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT

- ACTIVE: LEVEL C LIMITS

- PASSIVE: LEVEL D LIMITS

- SCREENING BY TE'ST/ EXPERIENCE VALVES

- ACTIVE: LEVEL C LIMITS

- PASSIVE: LEVEL D LIMITS

- SCREENING BY TEST / EXPERIENCE i

PENETRATIONS

- SAME AS STEEL SUPPORTS

- CONTAINMENT: ASME NE l

l l

l

(Meeting Sumary dated January 19,1988). These interim criteria would be used with the old analysis trethods. Based on these considerations, the steff did not endorse TVA's newly proposed sample analysis techniques.

The staff presented its position on the nine factors involved with the Browns Ferry pipe and pipe support seismic design methodology. The staff's po.ition was based on criteria in Browns Ferry's FSAR, the staff's original SER; or, ,

where explicit Browns Ferry licensing guidance was not available, accepted NRC staff practice or guidance from previous lice.1 sing reviews. The staff's position on the nine factors is sumarized below:

FACTORS

• BF ORIGINAL OSP STAFF RESPONSES DESIGN BASIS

• l

1. Vertical Seismic 0.079 OBE Not Acceptable Response Input 0.139 SSE Not Acceptable 1

2. Seismic Damping 0.5% Acceptable OBE/SSE ,

3. Peak Broadening No Not Acceptable

4. Seismic Anchor Some Should be included in <

Motion (Betweenbuildingsand analysis; not acceptat'le source pipe movement) to exclude

5. ARS Elev. of input C. G. Not Acceptable 6, ZPA Effects No Not Acceptable i

7. Combinstion of Hades SRSS Acceptable Combination of Dir. Acceptable

8. Closely Spaced Modes No Not Acceptable

9. Rigid Range 20 Hz or Acceptable 30 Modes l

(*As proposed by TVA - See Enclosure 2)

TVA 1-dicated that it would require time to review the staff's cornments. The ,

proposed OSP piping audit scheduled for July 18.22 was placed on hold pending TVA's responses to OSP comments.

Original signed by Gerald E. Gears, Project Manager TVA Projects Division Office of Special Projects ,

I t

Enclosures:

1. Attendann .ist DISTRIBUTION i

l 2. TVA Harc w t Docket Files NRC PDR

~ ') Local PDR i

cc w/ enclosures: Ser next page m

OSP:TVA/LA gA/PM T d/ TVAfAD/) Those on Attached List l MSims D)th, 05 G Pas BOL aw SBladk ,

l 7/JJ/88 7 /8I 7/vV88 7/<M/88

t ,

DISTRIBUTION FOR MEETING SU WARY DATED: July 21, 1988 4

' Facility: Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant, Unit 2* .

Docket File

- NRC POR Local POR  ;

Projects Reading J. Partlow -

J. Axelrad S. Richardson

5. Black i-B. D. Liaw l-

,j G. Gears

0. Moran .

J. Kelly M. Sinus F. McCoy -

J. Rutberg J. R. Fair -

T. M. Cheng ACRS(10) i GPA/PA

GPA/CA (M. Callahan) (5)

F. Miraglia  ;

i E. Jordan f

P. Gwynn J. Scarborough j i T. Elsasser  ;

, C. Ader TVA-Rockville l BFN Rdg. File l

I i

i i

).

l i

r b