ML20129A402

Rev 2 to GI-I Procedure for Inspecting Grid

ML20129A402
Person / Time
Site:	Diablo Canyon
Issue date:	09/29/1978
From:	Tennyson V FOLEY, INC.
To:
Shared Package
ML20129A367	List: DCL-84-059, Forwards Results of Review of Electrical Contractor Insp Records Re Use of Concrete Expansion Anchors in Electrical Raceway Supports.Ack of Receipt of Matl Requested.Supporting Documentation Encl ML20129A362 ML20129A381 ML20129A388 ML20129A402
References
FOIA-84-744 GI-I, NUDOCS 8506040574
Download: ML20129A402 (21)

Text

'

G ]'

n IV t

-_,)

r;-

a p

l l

5 GI - I l

l g

j Rev. 2 Date:

9/29/78 e

i fj g

It5M$*:lf/I)NME hl k

PROCEDURE FOR INSPECTING IN THE GRID e

O THE

[.

HOWARD P. FOLEY 52 [ 7 8 COMPANY-Approved by

/M/

_W h

/

P. O BOX 327 AVILA BEACH. CALIF.

93424 805 $95 2322 Omus:

ALLENTOWN PENNSYLVANIA SALTmsomt hAAAvLAND 5 e #*d" W ll j $ f]

CMC ACO. sLLe<0:1 g g{ pa g s **. '

[

i DALLA I

.w.,mvaa,iN, s itzAS f

g \\.,, ki it 4.

g', {'. i t.,..c$.k

. ) ;8,I tg.-YU

<t v =A M0v570N TIAAS W

t f.

LOS AasGetti CAuPomNa teAmt NCZ CAutonNu hatwms itNNisset IstwoALEANS Louis 4ANA eILA00LPMt4. Pt NNSYtvAseA PMotNis. AAt20NA misevaca etNNSv vw4 DIABLO CANYON now0No vince.a

• • $f,$'Etg0$

NUCLEAR POWER PLANT b

TUCSON AAQ0NA WASa**of DN O C 0506040574 041110 PDR FOIA h " 'mi DEVINEB4-744 PDR sonscNTON Alatata

Afysdotx.9 %

u-O Every support inspected in the Grid shall be documented on an HPF/SIWS~ form.

The form shall be' filled out as follows:

INSPECTED FROM List the document which initiated the inspection.

I.E. "CI" C.O. #, etc. In the case of the Grid survey enter "N/A".

RACEWAY I.D.

& REMARKS List one conduit and/or tray which is.

mounted on the support noting whether it is:

(A).

Vital (B).

Non-Vital (C).

Non-Vital that cross over vitals -or-(D).

Non-Vital that requires Class I Supports per the design Dwg.

If a conduit does not have an I.D. SPELL H O

our-I z "unta netfi a 3/4"==e conduit-SUPPORT IDENTIFICATION #

This number will be the appropriate Grid number followed by the sequential number of that part-THE icular support in the Grid.

I.E. "GE/GW-140-2-28" HSWARD P. FOLEY where "GE/GW-140-2" is the Grid number, and this COMPANY support was the 28th support to be inspected in the Grid.

DETAIL

& REV.

Fill in the appropriate Detail number and current revision.

If the support is from a drawing other than 050030, then that drawing must be'l'isted.

~

I.E. 501879, Detail B.

UNIT i Fill in I or II.

L FOR Ie.J:l v..n.N'4'M a A Vtw!

0"fhLY N,

GI-I, Rev. 2, 9/29/78 p,,,

1 o f.1.

w k[p;dplX D q/,3

.-('

DRAWING NUMBER, REV., AREA, ELEV.

Fill in the number of the drawing referenced on the Grid drawing and the rest of-the appropriate information.

,e SUPPORT LOCATION o

s Please disregard this space on'the SINS ~as;no location diagram of the support in question will be made.

ATTRIBUTE ACPT REJ TAG #

For each of the attributes listed, either the inspect-ors initials should be entered in the "ACPT" column

([l.

indicating that the current criteria for that item has been met or else the letters A,B,C,D & ETC shall um a 9

be filled in the "Rej Tag d" column indicating a I

F discrepancy.

If there is a discrepancy in more than one attribute, each "Rej Tag d" should be a different THE letter.

Each attribute must be filled in with either H3 WARD P. FOLEY an initial, a letter or "NA".

If any attribute is COMPANY rejected, then " Workmanship" must also be rejected with-a letter.

TAG # DISCREPANCY DESCRIPTION TAG COORD.

For each attribute which has been rejected with a letter, list-that letter in the " Tag d" column and fill in a description of the rejected item in the appropriate box.

Refer to the attached list of stand-ard wording to be used to explain discrepancies.

Leave the " Tag Coord" column blank unless the re-I 4

CI T.

Raw 9

asonssa

Ar M ou P +/,3 u

i discrepancy, in which case enter "No tag" (See

('

E'

~ attached explanation of "No tag" discrepancies).

CORRECTIVE' ACTION TAKEN '

'[

(A)' If an item which was originally rejected is corrected, the responsible production person will enter the steps taken to correct the dis-crepancy and the responsible foreman shall initial.and date the. corrective action entry.

or (B)

If an originally rejected item is an " Accept

'screpancy, this will be determined as is" di by a responsible engineering dept. person who will then fill'in " Accept'as is" and enter the~ number 'of the appropriate document which justifies this acceptance.

Q.C. ACCEPT. & DATE This column will be signed and dated by the re-spensible QC inspector after:

pu rs

'J Corrective action has been taken and, upon reinspection, the originally discrepant item THE is found to be Acceptable.

H3 WARD P. FOLEY may be signed by a responsible engineer or COMPANY or Q.C. person after:

" Accept as is per.... " with the supporting document listed has been entered by the respon-sible Engineering Dept. person.

Q.C. Inspector Date A signature and date of original inspection will be filled in by the QC Inspector. who originally inspected the support.

FOR INFT2 TION DEY GI-I, Rev. 2, 9/29/78 p,g, _y_ o f _3

e m.

u

~.

NW?.W Y fy, i

r The QC inspector will affix a key tag to the support inspected identifying that support with the'. same number j

listed on the HPF/SIWS for " Support Identification #".

Any support which has a discrepancy that is not a "No Tag" it' m will have an HPF/SIWS/ Hold Tag attached to l

e it by the QC inspector at the time of original inspection.

This tag will list the appropr? ace " Support Identification

1. ", the ne:ber of one conduit on the support, the date and the signature of the inspector who performed the original inspection.

Any errors on the HPF/SIWS will be corrected with a single line through the errant item, the correction, if any, and the initials of the correcting party and the date.

" Welds" can not be initialed for unless there is a weld accepi:ance sticker affixed to the support.

When welds cre initialed as being acceptable, the name or initials and the date on the sticker need to be noted ne m to " welds" in the attribute section of the HPF/SIWS.

Following is a list of discrepancies which are "No tag" HOWARD P. FO COMPANY white background.

1.

Anchor bolts installed closer to (a)~ other anchor bolts (b) abandoned bolt holes (c) edge of concrete then is permitted by clie current approved crite'ria.

This is in Unit I only.

t FCiD lilN[L o.v.:.2I! O.P M.8 7I@..!

03.0 V lli 9 e

• V < si U l % L I GI-I, Rev. 2, 9/29/78

. pero __g_ aq g

- - c-b%9(X h h3 n

~

2.

Anchor bolts installed at angle exceeding 5, but 0

not exceeding 15.

3.

Anchor bolts installed flush to top of hex nut, but without a full thread showing past the top plane of the nut.

4 Anchor bolts which have not been properly em-bedded deep enough.

~

5.

Supports which vary from the existing detail only in that they are built stronger than the detail calls'for EXAMPLES:

(a)

An extra S-6 brace has been added.

(b)

A 3-hole angle bracket has been installed instead of the required 2-hole type.

{

(c)

The detail specifies P-l'000'without saying " Minimum" and P-5501 has been jia q:

installed.

6.

Supports that are welded but do not have a weld sticker.

THE H5 WARD P. FOLEY All other current' criteria which has not been met COMPANY must be red. tagged.

J The only time these discrepancies are not "No-tag" items when they are on supports with a white back-ground is when the support inspection has been ini-tiated'by a CI dated later than the " Accept as is" date.

IE 4/19/77 for anchor bolt embedments.

3/27/78 for certain anchor bolt spacing and 4/25/78 for anchor bolts installed flush to nut but w/o l

a full thread showing.

FOR INF0"i".T!fM ONmY 1 9129178 n---

h&91A 5

e

{' -

Following is a list of the standard wording to be used in-the-discrepancy description area of the,HPF/SIWS.

This particular wording is necessary for the responsible engineerin} peisonnel to be able to properly' disposition the needed Corrective Action.'

AnchorBolt'ProbSems:

+: n.

.4 -

" Anchor Bolt (or A/ Bolt) installed at angle exceeding 5 but not over

' " ~ '

15.".

r...

"A/ Bolt installed at angle exceed-0

. ing 15.".

,, e "A/ Bolt is only embedded

, should

. be.2 (or however deep. it is, supposed 7

t o b e). ','

"A/ Bolt installed flush to nut, but' without a full thread showing."

O "A/ Bolt installed without a full peu umsme thread and also is n5e flush to nut'.'"

3i 1

'"A/ Bolt installed W/I 12 dia. of

~~~ ~

anchor on another support."

.THE H3 WARD P. FOLEY "A/ Bolt has been cut off."

COMPANY "A/ Bolt installed W/I 4.5 dia. of abandoned bolt hole (needs grout).

"A/ Bolt installed without 3" of solid concrete to edge of concrete."

"A/ Bolt installed without %" of solid concrete to edge of emb. unistrut."

"A/ Bolt installed W/I 12 dia of bolt into emb. unistrut."

"A/ Bolt installed W/O %" of solid con-L crate to edge of abandoned bolt hold.

FOR INFilR!MTm iWlY

=

1

.a r

m..

n,.

.W." q~'.-

ig19-g.

I' Detail Prob.lem,s...:.,

g,.

If a stipport is not to detail because something is missing, is in the wrong place, or is the wrong size spell g ouel t's-6. brace is-missing on inside of Strut" or i,.-

~" Strut only extends down 6" should be 14" min." or "Crossmember is 42" long.

Detail shows 2'4" moc'.'" or "S-6 Brace installed on wrong side of strut" or "P-1026 installed where detail shows P-1331" or

" Ceiling strut is P-1000 detail shows

{.

P-5501 min." etc.

If the support is not built to any. recognizable detail, spell g out.

" Support stenciled S-49, is not built to this or any 050030 Detail" or THE HOWARD P. FOLEY PPon not bum to any mm l

COMPANY Detail."

l If support is not to detail simply because it is over

[

built, spell it out.

j

" Support is over-built where 3-hole bracket is used instead of P-1331" or

" Support is over-built where extra S-6 l

brace has been added."

etc.

s.

FCaI:i.

I

.. c. n

~

~

e m

1

.- u

.s

--.a...

.u hgbl9tXD9)($

WELDS If the support is not to detiil because of welding deficiencies, spell M out.

" Detail call for 4-l%" welds.

Support only has two."

or "Not to detail where welds are on wrong side of strut."

When a support has been welded and there is no

" weld acceptance" sticker on it, the welds must be rejected.

The explanation needs to be as follows:

"No weld sticker, welds cannot be inspected due to Z.R.C.and/or paint."

C 7 "T THE H3 WARD P. FOLEY COMPANY

~

FOR INFCAi!0N ONLY

~

GI-I, Appendix A, Rev. 2, 9/29/78 Rrr n _ n _f; a _ s

.a 4.

k%Ad 910[g Foliowing is a list of the current criteria for:

Anchor bolts:

(1)

Anchor bolts must be installed at an angle not exceeding 5'.

(2)

Anchor bolts must be installed with at least one full thread showing past the top plane of the hex nut.

(3)

Minimum embedment for 1/4" anchors is 2" Minimum embedment for 3/8" anchors is 2%"

Minimum embedment: for 1/2" anchors is 2%"

Minimum embedment'- for 5/8" anchors is 2 7/8" Minimum embedmant: for 3/4" anchors is 3%"

(4)

Anchor bolts are not to be installed closer to each other than 12 dia, of the larger bolt in question.

(See Dwg. HPF-100 for explanation I

of where and how this measurement is to be made.)

(5)

Abandoned bolt holes which are within 4.5 bolt dia. of an installed bolt needs to be grouted.

(Unfilled bolt holes are not to be filled with an anchor bolt).

4 THE (6)

Anchor bolts are not to be installed closer H* WARD P. FOLEY than 4" to the edge of an abandoned bolt hole COWANY which is to be grouted, i

(7)

Anchor bolts are not to be installed closer than 6 dia.. to the edge of concrete.

In no case are anchor bolts to be installed closer i

than 3" to the edge of concreta.

(Edge of j

concrete is defined as a place where the concrete changes planes in a convex direc-l tion.

I.E. a camfered edge and not where the concrete meets an embedded weld plate L'

F0bb5bNDiRY m. A..end1 s.

i,i,8

.a..

i

.o

- ~- u c

I" kfppMpli 9 $5

\\

i-m (8)

Anchor bolts which are still part of a support are not to be cut off.

(9)

Anchor bolts are not to be installed closer than 12' bole dia. to a bolt into embedded unistrut.

(An exception to this is where the support detail specifically calls for anchors to be installed closer to bolts into embedded unistrut which are part of the same support).

(See Dwg. HPF-100 for explanation of where and how this measurement is to be made.)

(10)

Anchor bolts are not to be installed closer than

%" to the edge of an embedded weld plate or steel sleeve where the wall thickness of the sleeve is a minimum of %".

{

(11)

Anchor bolts are not to be installed closer than %" to the edge of an embedded unistrut member where there also is no bolt into the 77 embedded unistrut within 12 bolt dia. of the anchor bolt in question.

(See Dwg. HPF-100 for explanation of where and how this measure-HOWARD P. FOLEY ment is to be made.)

COMPANY (12)

Anchor bolts used to support any conduit or combination of conduits greater in total weight than the equivalent of a single 2" conduit must be %" in dia. or greater ( an exception to this is where the support is either an S-19A or an S-19B, in which case the table provided on the detail shall apply).

't Q 8,'? f P,& t i,E j.

.;y y

' k u k k ali, k k & "

h a

... f.h 7 Annantiiy R Rav 7

Q/70/7A n.

.s.,

.s.

.L e..

s nn..

h6dpli9 I

3 l

~

Note:

Distances:

(a)

Between Anchor bolts (b)

Between an anchor bolt and a bolt into an embedded unistrut memb'er -

(c)

Between an anchor bolt and an aband-oned bolt hole which needs to be filled.

j are to be measured from center to center of the items in question.

Distances:

(a)

To edge of embedded weld plate or steel sleeve (b)

To edge of " unloaded" embedded unistrut (c)

To edge of concrete (d)

To edge of abandoned bolt hole which has been or is to be grouted C-are to be a measuremene of the solid concrete between the items in question.

U Other miscellaneous criteria:

1.

Dimensions on supports may vary from the dimension THE shown on the detail by:

HOWARD P. FOLEY

+ 7% for dimensions less than 4 feet

~

copANY 6" for dimensions equal to or greater than 4 feet 2.

For vertical dimensions which are not called out as " minimum" any dimension which is less than the detail calls for shall be acceptable.

3.

All new supports installed after June 1, 1978 must have detail stenciled on yellow background.

0["q"vty"=N*Wein,ir,rd;ii:.:

"' e ' ' :

e g

~

lj

'j

d

,$dPli 9 0[3

-o A.

4. 'All nuts and bolts except anchors installed on supports shall be installed at least " Flush" to the nut.

5.

Note #13 of 050030 only applies to supports which are shown as being acceptable with single unistrue.

If the original support detail calls for ths sur-face mounted strut to be double unistrut then this double unistrut can not be notched.

o C

I THE i

NOWARD P. FOLEY COMPANY l

l n

c.

a.,,

,..g h

l,'v N nt w i,. e s t U,'d.,

^

• Y",

l

_ [,_.

k I

b.

s, -p

• 4 Lt b

e

%.-e,a.-

s. W 8

t A.1.0 aortetafeO%$

~

A.1.1 Concrete espanssen anchors saould not te used sadescremenately. For er.cortant eore, bolts should pref-

')

eraaly se cast en-place. selsed, or grouted en creueo notes or en cast-en-olace sleeves. snere tsose types of enstallateca are for good reason engractical, espansson anchors may be used.

A.I.T Proveseens sf thes standard shall apply to the shell or stud type espansson anchors.desegnated en Part 8.

A.1.3 Ancmors must be at least 1/2" dea =eter eben used for structural connections or for anchorage of pepes, conduets or ducts greater than 2* osameter.

A.I.4 Anchors shall not te anstalled en prestressed concrete elements nor used to connect concrete elements ehech must have a specs f eed value of f are ressstance.

.m A.1.5

(=cended length of anct.or sna11 to eactuseve of thackness of grout pad or other overlay.

A.2.0 aE cosetr LCars g,_,

~

A.2.1 A11ceable loads sheen en Table A. as modefsed by the grovessons of this standard. Shall apply to ancnors O D installed en treenary cancrete.

M' A.2.2 for concrete strength netween 2 kai and 6 ksi. lenear enterpolatoon en Table A may be used. For concrete strength greater than 4 tsi, use 6.4si-all,osable values. for sound concrets of unkneen strength. use 2 Q

kse values.

~C$5 A.2.3 A11oeatle lead values geven in thes standard shall not te encreased tecause of short.1suration of loading (e.g.. for send or seessac loads),

m.

For anchors subjected to c5ntenuous or frecuent (more than *0C temes per year) reversal of loading.

.""'*I':P A.2.4

~

. allowable loads small, be 1/3 of the alloeanie values geven en this standard.

Og h-A.2.5 A11ceable Ioads given en thes standard are entended for use a.t " work ang load" levels.. For *ultemate" cr " limit

• load desegn purposes. tesce these vaaues may me used.

A.2.6 Anchors installed en lightseeght aggregate concrett shall have allowable loads equal to those provided for anchors en ordenary concrete noth fj = 2 ksi.

~I A.2.7 Aliowable Icans of anchors of 1/2* or larger deaceter may be -encreased by 50% if. proof. loading is done

-accordir; to the instrwetscas geven en Part 6.

. N, A.2.8. It center to tenter spacang of anchors es less than 12 diaceters and/or of destance frore edges of concrete M%7 to center of anchor as less than 6-deaneters, the allosaele loads -snall' he reduced in accorcance wa t*i the q

-folloesng formulae:

1. ~

-FD

• 2.25 Pg 8L _.(._

SD 1.5 Sg _.(_

t46 E63

[+3 D allowable pullout load reduce'd fc edge distance -and/or spacang.

-shere: P Pg = allowable pullout load feca Tatie A 50 m alloestle shear load red ced for edge de stance

.54 s allosacle spear loao frnra Taole A N a no. 'of diameters of an:nor spaceng

-(41N112): i f p12. use 86 12 E m eo. of daaoeters of edge destance 01C16): if E)6. use Ea5

. Anchor spacing sha!! he not less thar 6 temes nomenal diameter of anchor. Edge distaece shall be not

.less than 3 times nomenal ceameter nor less than 3 enches. If edge of concrete es chaefered. edge mdestance shal) near d

f f

u s,

ONLV n

a i

Nu.31

-. n,, i h;u I-l i

i

.m n.w:..t

- i

.c en Y_

\\

/

N;'&..I,*/

aa a

>..i s r r t. c..., s

..ne n r *3 j u s

,s.e -

F.%.

we e., v... n,

..,.. c.m

e. o

",E'EF

-(assse (taas4 STAascasto

' ai.rta att(s tI:*

vc We

n. "

CONCRE16 EXPANSiGs, ANCHORG FOR

$*'5'"'"

4; STATIC AND SEISMIC LOADING

' ' ' " ' - 8

" 4 2'"

r ~==m gi -

t.... e,,,r r y e e., e e..~ c

' a-m,

, ' w,,- -

PAC!nC G AG /WO ELEC.Tf UC COMPANY 054162 3

4. e ?.J 3 l fi3NC LAN Fr*ANCISCO. CALITCsrtN'A

---

~

L :**

1--J e.

%,f

eh

\\

e ~

A.2.9 For anchors ehich esti te subjected simultaneously to pullout and shear forces the allowable load i

values u*ses must satisfy the foliosing formula (Fagure 13:

j g

p 5/3 S

5/3 g

C 9g S

shore e,. s, e allosael. Ioads toutlaut, shear) reduced for spacing or edge sistance of appropriate P.SC allosaele loads to to used in cases ehere pullout and C

1 shear loads may occur simultaneously N

For convenience in calculation, esponents in the At amove formula may, conservatavely. be reduced to 1.0.

e TAGLE A ALLOWAILE LOAD (KIPS) ON CIPANSION ANCMCR$

NCUINAL COCRf7E STRENOTH. tc' 2 ksi l

3 usi I

4 ksi l

5 ks6 l

6 kse

' OI IR l

l 5

l p

5 l e

5 e

5 e

e 5

1/4

.25

.30 L

.n5

.30

.30

.30

.325l

.30 I

.35

.30 i se8

.a0

.5 l

.50

.60 ll

.60

.67 11

.70

.73

.s0

.s0 l 1/2

.70l

.74 lh

.97

.89 l! 1.C5 1.04ll1.23 1.!9 l

1.40 1.34l 5/8 ll 1.20l 1.COl1.50 1.25 !l 1.60 1.53lI2.10 f1.75 2.40 2.00l 3/4 0 1.83 1.50ll2.35 1.93 ll 2.90 2.10N3.45 2.40 4.03 2.70 l 7/8 l

2.50 2.C0 ll 3.35 2.35 4.20 2.70 5.C5 3 C5 5.99 3.40 l 1

l D.33 l 2.50 l 4.30 2.90 5.50 3.33 6.60

?.70 7.70 4.10 I 1 1/4 l;

5.33 3.40 l 6.65 3.95 l 9.C3 4.50 9.35 5.10 10.70 5.70 (

, NOTE:

P. PULLCUT: 5. SHEAR For empar.sion anchors installed in lightseight aggregate ccncrete, ass'.'me f's e 2 431.

See par. A.2.6.

1.0 g

\\1

• O s

T

\\

\\

s.

• O

\\

('g)\\

P \\

5 5/3 g)5/3 C

C 2

A s-

/

\\

s 1

/

N N

sro. -

4 N

N

' in. $s.1 N

\\

.3 -PD

-50

\\

i i

.2-

\\ x \\

I N

.1 *.2.

3 4

.5

.6

.T

.8

.91.0 Pc/Pg FIGWC 1 REDUCTICN FACTORS FOR CCU31NED PULLOUT AND SH[AR e,

r PG&E m CONCRETE EXPANSION ANCHORG FOR n g-U J 'a g e 7 iiO.

STATIC AND SEISMIC :.0ADING t ft? 2 et 4

Sains butC S Of t188

_ j__

J

• ,e

[

8.

Instattatee,

e' 8.1.0 Antication Pr' esseens of(thse standard shall sooly to the folloeirg concrete espansson anchers. Other espansion 8.1.1 e

enchers small net to used esthout specific authoretation of the [nganeer.

Ste(LL A4CM080

• PHILLIPS SELF.CRILLING. PHILLIPS NONORILLING. OlaWGNO. HILTI M01, RasL Sa8[R.TCofM,

$ IUD 40CIs0RS: e KWist.80LT. PARS 8CLT. PeelLLIPS 81DGE. PMILLIPS SLCCVE. e[J.lf ANuR.TITC.

. PetlLLIPi STUS ANCHOR may be used en seres up to 3/4" diameter, ee SCJ.If (original style, eith saade shape eedges) may be used. provided estedment is 125% of that shown in Tatie 8. sith 50f. of the aliceanle load values shoen en Taele A.

?

8.1.2 Anchors must he at least 1/2* diameter when used for structural connectlens or for anchorage of pipes.

conduits or ducts greater than 2" esameter.

8.1.3 Anchors shall not te installed in prestressed ccncrete elements nor used to connect concrete elements ehich must have a spectfac value of fare relestance.

8.2.0 fasfaLLat e's 8.2.1 installation of anchors shall be according to manufacturer's instructions as to tools, torque and tightening procedure.

s 3.2.2 If a hole cannot be drelled to the correct depth (e.g., if reinforcing steel is encountered ehile drilling), a nee hele shall ne orilled. There shall be at least 1/2" of sound concrete netween abandoned hole and nee hole. If an unused hole es esthin 4.5 nemenal diaseters of an espansson anchor, center to center. the unused hole shall be f elled eeth grout or esth an espanded anchor.

3.2.3 If axis of a drilled hole deviates frois normal to concrete surface by more than 5 the hole shall not 8

be used unless spec'afacally authorered hf the Cegineer.

8.2.4 &linimum required estedrent. for shell type anchors. is equal to the length of shell. For most shell anchors the shell may be recessed not'dare than 1/4 of the nomenal diameter. Installed shells recessed to greaterdepths shall not be used unless specifically authorized by the Engineer.

niiniouse required emoeoment for stud type anchors is given en Taele S.

Embedeent length is esclusive of thickness of any grout pad or other overlay.

8.2.5 Anchors shall be installed according to stanuf acturer's instructions.

If, af ter starting from finger.

--tightened passtion. ancnor slips core than IC". of minipura required enhedmont while being tightened.

- one of the folloesng remedsal actions shall be taken:

a.

Remove bolt or nut. reset anchor, repeat tightening:

b.

Remove anchor. seestitute larger diameter or longer anchort c.

Drill new hole and irstall additional anchor which satssf ees the requireernts of this standard.

8.2.6 Anchor spacing. center to center, shall be not less than Giers nominal diameter of anchor nor shall edge destance he less than 3 times nomenal deameter nor-less than 3 inches unless specifically authorized by the Engineer, 8.2.7 If edge of concrete is chaefered. edge distance shall be seasured from nearest edge of chaefer.

8.3.0 Pacer tesOf=5 When required ty the Engineer, proof loading shall te done according to the following enstructions:

8.3.1 shenever an installation crew starts anstalling anchors at a job site, each of the anchors installed by that cree shall at forst te proof Icased in tensson to 2507. of the a!!ceanle rullout load designated by tne [ngeneer. Af ter fsve successive anchor ansta11ations have been completed es thout f ailure, a randpa selecteen of IC". of the anchors of each saae installed by the cree tnereaf ter on the same project shall ne tested en the above manner.

. (.,D

.s.

eue.as musste N at CONCRE1E EXPANSION ANCHORS FOR 05416d

^

STATIC AND SEISVIC LO A DIN G sett 3 er 4

satm g esicewus i

e

• b..

.y1

'E i

e f

'g

)

o-8.3.2 ef proof leading as done by Ja:eeng against a surf ace area of concrete surroundeng the ancher, the Jacking pressure shall te destratuted over an annular area of inner diaeeter at least ; times the senseum requered seesseent geven en fanie S.

g.3.3 Cr6tersa for fasture of an ancher dursag proof leading ares (1) concrete crests. (2) anchor treats. er (3) anchor s1sp during the test is greater than St of the esasave required entedmont.

/

TAOLE 8 MINIMUM EWetDMENT REQUIRED FCR STUD-TYPC EXPANSION ANCHCRS INSTALLED IN CONCRETC Nominal Winimue Diameter Estedment (Inches)

(Inches) e US 1=US 3/8 1-3/4 U2 2=U4 5/8 2-7/8 3/4 3-3/8 US 4

1 4-U2

)

~

1 U4 5-!/S 4

c.

i I

1 4,

'W P G (e C CO.

CONCRETE EXPANSION ANCHORS FOR 05 416 P.

=

STAT lC ANO $ClSMIC

t. O A 01 N G smest 4

or 4

eassu

,-o

ANCHOR BOLT INSTALLATION INSPECTION REPORT RCWY I.D.

i UNIT #

AREA ELEV.

GRID #

DWG & REV #

SUPPORT LOCATION DIAGRAM l

EOLT #

4 I

2 3

4 5

6 7

8 INSP. PT.

ANCHOR BOLT TYPE ANCHOR BOLT SIZE DIA. & DEPTH OF ANCHOR BOLT HOLE LENGTH OF EXPOSED BOLT

-AFTER SETTING A

LENGTH OF EXPOSED BOLT AFTER TIGHTENING AdGT.E OF BOLT IO CONCRETE 900 I 50 DETAIL # AND REVISION DATE INSPECTED INSPECTOR TAG #

DESCRIPTION OF DISCREPANCY CORRECTIVE ACTION TAKEN

[$ D EPTl i

l' REMARKS:

HPF/ABIIR 10/23/80

+

' i*

,,. ' p.g.:. ;.,, '

6Pos2 a (Rev.1/s3) szrrnm marr FIxetxc avoir (M.TR)

1. }

Quality Assurance 5

(Ovez for Enetructione)

I I

1

- - _7 A_** *.; o

1.,

3 1 1.

SATI m.DG DL: 8 3

.c M 9..,_1,6.M...,.

2.

SUFFL133:.'~ EnginaerLag 3.

ESQUn3tGF1',13Ft1ENCit er it e r i.a V "In s t ru e e t ea s. Pr se edu r a s

.N

... e a m.a :....

.c....:q: c.,

4>

7'IMDD Ct E scruir aseet s_ f o r _ the t ans iceles an d e a se e la t ad t e a t L:3 e f evner a t e anchor belt e u s ed is Elec tr ic al, EVAC, s ed Ins t rum ent a t ica must e r t s hav e no t be en M oc tf ied by E3210

• er ia t.

mi k\\

5.

BUCCESTC 1150Lt7 TION I s su e a av e c 1.* i_e2 e len. '.'

~

.5h AV

~.

., 3 ).

21_

't VYk (k i

-d DATE: [ 23,8 6.

12AD AtTDITott

_C.

'i =*,W J.

7.

F10P05ED CCA.AICTI OH (IT SUPPLI.13)!

See_Proposad Corrective Action on nex: page y.

~

8.

DATI CC12ICT175 ACTION WILI. 52 CCHFLF.!ED:

n/A d '\\No 0

.lOfl Sl 3 9 r. clu t t rn

\\

CA17.

ty/_f4fJ' SIGRATURI

~ TITLE e

~

~

w..

.:.../

10. MCIPTEDr_

5.$'

~

32 JECT!D: __

11. ConGNT81

-- - &.w

.. ;.e,.yg,

.: g -..<.

12AD ACDI,To.t t 's,.,

Ytab1CATICHDAft act;gtyP '4T' 12.

.,. 3 E

{},

• g[g

. gg g

.. g w 3.,.-

~ * *

16. 01RT1t117TIOWs SPECITTING tleCINtzR

'. g...h..f,, -

QUALIr! CONT 10L

.,,% g,.

id 5' M &

• i$5';iY e

-.. -.- -50t*

~;*

i Wpfes 0344

~I?

Et a

\\ l'*

X i..

em.. -

s<

s.g

'd E

~

~

ShiR 83317A 01

. :n 2:~5 li,a,

.n.... +..

0 P80#05to CORRECTIVE Actiett

~ $:bh$bY-

. u. 4 g'f fg g g A spectffcation is not ~ required.

torc ued to a specific value.. Standard celectrical and inst T.;

of the bolt is not affected by the mconc ition 'which is adequ

.1 -

{

ructures need not be or bolt head, subject to the conditten;nitude of the torque appiled to t on.

these queports.the shear on the boltJ This condition is n t that the terous is not used to reduce

,j.s (See Section IT of " Guide to Design criteria f o

Riveted dolots". J.W. Fisher and J.H. A. Struik, Jonn Wile ci,si or Bolted and ens).

kJ '.

.*(, k

.l::

-fa.

.9 I. l,,..

. I-7, x

.::w 9%

e L.

d..,.',

qi

-,txt :;..

.~.,

!.!r 1:

' ! 3...s47,. - 3"<g4 1

, -.Q,. 4'

."N.I e"

h, ;

4 i

]

P. ullman Power Products i

eso as4

.*T r

DCCWENT NO.

I assus pqEP ARED Sy, R. Northroo APPROVED gy H. Karner earte 91578

~

+

i i

TO BE USED PAGE FORM ONL.Y ON JOS 8 7177 NO.

p.g3 i

i i

i

'",imli',7 "

mean,em,

r -

ti -

• == imam r

^-

."'" "" ' "" 'un-n p~.. _ s--' i :.2a 5/11/82

~ ~ -

' ~ ~ "

1.

'.88051B e SWW 335423 6 Marts.

l Q

3.

assEm mass m a m 13912 'rt:5 sangtas ;.:st

)

y 4

3.

m :WEa&&B e *m W 3.3.

1 C [,11", a asse g 8.

mases/Flas artum a *e&asumme "rpt: ett stieneit tes l

g 4

C.

? Pus Suas ! amen &&as ( 83:B lm. MJ fWts etittirtelltse l

3.

assesso Susamms lN l45 immm

{

ig

(

L Summma amaan any emmma j

Q l

l

..== = i==,mam a mass = im mas i

w 1.

F'IT-55

a. Plus assem 'r---

(U Emma ass l

Q (23 P.O. as l

Q dIIM 8.

august slummeses lM sweat M l ll g

ha tu seasse a ruas paa num e m

l l

i sa n,.m i

w l

9 y C.

peu. asismissess ens. remune w

-N 4.

M PW M 2333 W P4igt. 3EL 1.

ll l

4 88

7. m W F5B m (75 N FM M F.F.i lXg f

f M,[#]

C*

4. mW -'

M M m:j N

I E55 ml ll

[

f

/

gm 'm emuumumma 3/s 9/W 6e

(

l a-/ P r ]

, ettest 6e e

ali":..

l me an ei s

u.7

.!/ ins e

==

c_ y., "g g

gg p.

amm

-a 8

I i!

8CA*.2.7 l

1{

3

18. Fmb SB N me

a. ames suremen Cass j

(i 9.

age 8Wams Ammumav4maanama j

(

(

(

e. = s. -

.s.

mn u

1 i

IE'

'E Mg l $*I,* 38EE l

er--

-...m.

y j

s. Pass claemums na ammmmme unsa asumer l

(

(

L Eser Em Samus tem &ar

(

(

B.

amer ne laum6 na Flama

(

l L 44& Satm#tuus ansaname ama S ee

(

F.

ta&& 4 Can&ame Planum ammes eso ammmmesy Q

3. = - -

u 4

l L tar 45amsume vteams telasme l

Q a.

s

a. _ _ -

9.

M Fis.# 4 Slas L 754 Saas B.

?!Pri 9 m

)

13. 6 am W 4.4.

(Commasse ---- '--- asusare 1.C. SIm i

38E l

e I

I I

L....

. ~. - -.

^).

Pullman Power Products I

am p

00CUMENT NO.

'*~

t5Sut PREPARED SY:

R. h "t w e APPROVED BY W. 1rA M ac OAft, Q.lC.7R s" : F # 2 m. 014 u, #m'<,rg.,717,

's?' r r 5 c,sg,

_- r i

se i._

t

3. Safes sm. Du emme aus Imus l

l

f. _a vaem uneen l

l 6.

seg er Fair M j

i

r. aarsumms 6

I

s. ummsa azur i

t

== _

i e

sa. dame sans.--

4 l

l f"

m _s W"

4..

'g

/,

w.cor :---

e e

J ex r,3 -

,e.'t.,

..,.y

• 6 l

c ~

0 cz.:

av...

J.-u WaA1:3 -*

. ~.n S

7 M!

m:7 m,j Cl'tn.:.a

.d32 'O.

CNT Se d,T

)

mCC.

pmr i

<s o

\\

N'

?

PAC I P'IC OA.S AND -ELE C TR,I'C C O1WEPANY n stuc vun. su rune.sc., cc..rons, m s. mn ni.o::

. m m.3

...g a.o scu m an

.... J '.?.. :...

/

January 27, 1984 PGandE Letter No: DCL-84-031 fir. John 8. Itartin, Regional Administrator U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Connission, Region V 1450 Maria Lane, Suite 210 Walnut Creek, CA 94596-5368 Re: Docket No. 50-275, OL-DPR-76 Diablo Canyon Unit 1 Response to Allegations 25, 58 and 96 - 55ER 21

Dear Mr. Martin:

Enclosed is the PGandE response to allegations 25, 58, and 96 described in SSER 21 pertaining to expansion anchors. PGandE's response to the concern regarding the H. P. Foley procedure governing the installation of anchor bolts will be submitted next week.

In addition, PGandt is currently developing responses to the other allegations and concerns which require resolution prior to criticality.

Kindly acknowledge receipt of this material on the enclosed copy of this letter and return it in the enclosed addressed envelope.

5incere1y, r

~

Enclosure cc:

D. G. Eisenhut H. E. Schierling Service List 4

m,)

l

___-._.._.___-,.,___.......m.~.._.,____..,_.__.,_.._.--.,

i

\\

t 4

In the following years, a series of anchor installation inspections were walkdowns were performed on the piping, radtway, y installed.

performed te verify that the anchors were.properl Extensive and HVAC supports. The relatively few deviations that were found (2 to 3. percent of all installations)' demonstrate that the installation precedures were understood and were properly executed.

In. order to determine the acceptability of anchors deviating from the established, installation requirements, analytical evaluations and testing programs were performed.

'. is a chronology describing the continuous reviewing and l

monitoring of the use of expansion anchors at Diablo Canyon. The chronology shows that when problems were encountered in one contractor's installation the existence of similar problems in the other contractors' work was inve,stigated. Resolutions of specific concerns are addressed in Attachments 2 through 6.

The dynamic testing program.for the.DCPP expansion anchors is described in Attachment 7,,

In 1979 the NRC recossended minimum design margins for piping support anchors in I&E Bulletin 79-02. The Diablo Canyon piping support anchors were then requalified in conformance with:this. bulletin..

t 9

e.tA In 1982 and 1983 the Diablo Canyon verification program reviewedIthe usage of expansion anchors. Factors of safety achieved.in the installations, l

using drawing 054162 (e.g., raceway. HVAC, and instrissentation supports) were quantified. These safety factors were sumeinrized in a report attached to the verification program E0I 1016 (Attachment 8. Ref.1).

Previously approved deviation reports were also reviewed. The.

, verification program did not address each individual anchor with a deviation. Rather, the verification program established the acceptability i

of expansion anchors as follows:

(1) For anchors installed in accordance with drawing 054162, a factor of safety of at least 3 between demand and capacity was confirmed'(see Attachment 2).

(2) For anchors not conforming with drawing 054162, the previous resolutions were reviewed. Based on these previous resolutions, it was established that the deviations would not cause an unsafe condition.

(3) Expansion anchors with known insta_11_Ation__dettatians were sampled. The anchor capacities were analytically reduced and, in every case, the evaluation found a factor of safety greater than 3.

i (4) The support systems using expansion anchors are highly such that the existence of a few anchors with factors redundant,less than 3 would not reduce design margins of safety unacceptably or in any way coepromise the integrity of the supported systems.

i l ^

~- -_-

6 o

'LIn conclusion, expansion 7nchor usage at Diablo Canyon has always been carefully impfamented and reviewed. As shown in the attachments, a high degree of confidence in the adequacy of the anchor installation has been

' established.

In the veriffeation progras the factoratof safety were -

' quantified. For properly installed anchors, factors' of safety of at least 3 were verified in every case reviewed and most anchors were shown to have factors of safety markedly above 3.

While the potential exists that 2 to 3 percent of the expansion anchors may have lower factors of safety due to installation deviations, the overall margin and redundancy in the design of expansion anchors at DCPP is reasonable, conservative, and acceptable.

I 4

e a

e' J

l e 0070d

. - Expansion Anchor Chronology Inspection (I)

Governing '

Procedure

' 'Date' or Test (T) _

Description Manufacturers' Mar 1972 T

PGang performed static tests to validate data in manufacturers' Instructions catalogs. Approximately 54 tests of Wej-it, Kwik-Bolt, Parabolt, Phillips anchors were performed.

Manufacturers' May 1972 T

PGandE performed 18 aynamic (sine) tests at UC Berkeley to define l

Instructions the performance of expansion I

anchors when subjected to dynamic loads.

14 static tests were performed as well.

PGandE Standard Drawing 054162 Drawig Nov 1974 was issued.

(Foley rocedures 054162 were issued in 1975.

4 Drawing Feb 1975 I

Foley was instructed to sample expansion anchor spacing. Some 054162 spacing violations were found which led to a complete walkdown l

in July 1975. Some edge distance i

violations were found which led to testing in September 1975.

Drawing' July 1975 I

A 3-month-long 1005 walkdown of all raceway installations was 054162 made. Construction tagged and logged all -spacing vio' ations.-

1-Engineering estah'ished a review criteria and inspected all violations. Modifications were made when necessary.

PGandt Calculation Binder 52, Drawing Oct 1975 sheets 150 through 156. contains r

054162 calculations addressing spacing violations arising from the July 1975 walkdown.

t

)

t 4

0070d

- '. * ~

~ ' ' " '

Governing Inspection'll)E '.-l.'

Procedure _

Date or Test (T) _

Description Drawing Oct 1975 T

PGantE tested performance of anchors close to chemfered edges 054162 of concrate.

12 tests in. shear and pullout were done for 1/2"'.'

dia. and 5/8" dia. Hilti anchors.

Drawing Feb 1976 I

Discrepancy report DR E-1235 054162 documented edge distance.

violations discovered in the July 1975 walkdown and~ resolved.by the October 1975 tests.

4 i

Drawing Dec 1976 I

Piping expansion. anchors. wore.

054162 inspected per Inspection Procedure for Installed Flush.

Shell Concrete Anchors..The following items were inspectedi, obvious flaws, cut.off anchors, over embedmont..engular alignment, and depth that.

expansion. plugs were driven.,

Drawing Dec.1976 T

Procedure for Establishing 054162 Acceptance Criteria fer Concrete Anchor Installations was l

implemented. Testing was performed for various setting depths for expansion plugs (approximately 80 tests), cut off anchors (approximately 30 tests),

angular misalignment (7 tests),

and over-embedment (10 tests).

Drawing Feb 1977 I

Discrepancy report 282 documented the generic review of i

054162 expansion anchors used in piping supports.

l l

l 5

0070d

i Governing In @ t h rTI)'

Procedure Date or Test (T) _

Description Drewing-Mar 1977-I. T Disc N anc/' report RSS b 2

2.

extended the anchor reviewinto 054162 HVAC area. A generic review was made on a li.)g basis'(77 anchors).

ors were inspected

'~ fort obvious flaws, cut off ends.

' m,i..

.,overembedeent ' angular alignment.

,.s, and depth that' expansion plugs were deiven.

3' anchors had' plugs not " fully driven."' 11 anchors were' tested and all exceeded

'i

, allowable load values. No other deviations were foundi' i Use of 2-3/4" long Hilti Drawing Mar 1977 I

Kwik-tolts identified as a i

054162 potential problem.~ Usage had stopped in January 1975.

l Discrepancy report 288 was Drawing.

Apr 1977 I, T issued documenting raceway 054162 support anchor ee6edmont inspections. For 3/8" dia, anchors, 448 were checked by measuring bolt projections and 64 were UT inspected. For 1/2" dia.

anchors, 508 were measured.

Testing program WA-1 was performed in which 110 anchors were tested at au6edmonts less than required by drawing 054162.

Drawing May 1977

1. T Discrepancy report 3373 was f

issued. Spacing between good and 054162 abandoned toles/ anchors did not always meet drawing 054162 requirements. 65 tests were performed to evaluate problem.

1/2' dia., 5/8* dia., and 3/4" dia. Hilti wedges and 5/8" dia.,

3/4" dia., and 7/8" dia. Phillips wedges were tested.

\\

i i

l OO70d

Governing... _

.' [,. " ' In'spection (I)

~

Procedure

.Dete

.or Test (T)

Description Drawing Sep' 1975 '"";." If ' " ' ~

NCR DC1-80-RE-002 documented a throu generic (grid) raceway support (980) gh 054162 1

review. Foley procedure GI-I was followed and checked 1005 of raceway installations, including inspecting anchors for: spacing, edge distance, angular alisment, nut engagement, embedmont tepth, and cut off bolts.

Drawing Oct 1980 I. T A procedure was issued for 054162 developing ultimate pullout capacity criteria for imperfectly i

installed shell-t concrete anchors.

In 1976 1 ping anchor problemswereresoved(DR282)l but ter meet IE8 79-02 additiona tests were performed. Expansion t.,

plug depths were varied and the anchors were pulled to define their ultimate strength.

Approximately 150 tests were done for 1/2" dia., 5/8" dia., and 3/4" dia. HDI anchors and 1/2" dia., 5/8" dia., 3/4" dia. and 7/8" dia. Phillips self-drilling anchors.-

Drawing Nov 1980 I, T A report was issued concerning 054162 inspections, tests, analyses, and rework of seismic Category I pipe supports and concrete expansion anchors in conformance with IEB 79-02. The acceptability of piping anchors was confirmed.

Testing was performed to better define shear-tension interaction (refer to Teledyne report TR 4121-1, July 1980).

Drawing Oct 1981 T

PGandE performed a series of 054162 in-situ tests on raceway supports to confirm their behavior. The static tests showed linear behavior.

7 0070d

= - - - - -- - -. -.

s Governing Inspection (I)

Precedure g

or Test (T)

Descrfption Drawing Jun 1982

..I The grid program inspection data 054162 was reviewed in the verification program. All anchor bolt" deviations were reviewed (3746 problems were identified in the grid walkdown). The verification program reviewed the acceptability of these anchors'.

E01 1016 report was prepared to Drawing Jun 1982 054162 address factors of safety inherent in the drawing 054162 allowable loads.

Drawing Dec 1982 I

55 anchors with threads cut off 054162 had been identified in the June 1982 grid walkdown review. These anchors were re-inspected and dispositioned in compliance with verification prograu criteria.

Drawing Jan 1983 I

44 anchors with insufficient 054162 embedmont identified in the grid walkdown were UT examined. Based on the UT results, the design calculations were revised and the embedmont problem was resolved.

Drawing Sep 1983 I.

NCR-DC1-83-RM-N004 required 054162 testing ti@tness of 2400 HVAC.

bolts. On' y 8 were found loose and were all able to be reset without replacement..

Drawing Dec 1983 I. T Per NRC's request. 40 raceway 054162-anchors were torque-tested to

.., determine adequacy of I

installation. All were found to be tightly installed. These 40 I

were then-UT inspected and 1 had I

i less embedmont than required by drawing 054162 (2-3/4" long Hilti anchor).

l i

I i

-s-i i

M % cpcne

..t g,.hment'2 V Fictert of Safety

.=.s,

,c Table A of. drawing 054162 gives' allowable loads for expansion anchord. ' These values have been used in design.of expansion anchors at Diablo Canyon. In response to verification program EDI 1016 (Ref. 1), the factors of safety achieved by using the Table A allowable loads wore quantified. This demonstrated that factors"of safety ran ing from nearly 4 to 9.1 were achieved between maximum allowable working level loads (DE seimeic loads) and the anchor capacities published in the menufacturers brochures.; In accordance with drawing 054162. the allowables in Table A were doubled for severe environmental lavel loads (Hosgri and DDE seismic loads).- thus reducing by half the safety factors stated above.-

'~

A review of the electrical ~ raceway ' support calculations was recent1y.

performed. This review shows that for 1005 of the' raceway supports with properly installed anchors. a factor of safety of at least 3 has bee,n maintained between demand and capacity for Hostri and DDE' level loads. A sample of 4fi.faceway support calculations fount the following distribution in the f actors of safety:

Factor of Safety' 5 of Supports -

23 100 14

~ 98 25 89 1 10 82 A similar sampling was made of 50 HVAC duct support calculations with the following results:

Factor of Safety 5 of Supports 23 100 24 80 25 62 11D 26 i

The factors of safety listed in the tables above are conservative for the following reasons:

(a) Many calculations envelope loads to expedite the analysis.

t I

i l

0070d

- h, s are based on concrete strengths achieved (b) Dyansion anchor capacitie. lin' der break tests. Concrete typically in the 28-day and 60-day cy strengthens 35 to 505 between the test cylinQr strength and the 2-year strength..,"his. would result in a 20 to 255 increase in capacity for mostAnchors.

'1 (c) Most anchors are subjected to both shear and pullout loads. The 5/3 interaction equation specified on drawing 054162 was used to combine shear and pullout loads. This equation results in a conservative s

. design when compared to test r,esults.,,

Instrumen'tatiAnsupportswNreatso' designed.usi drawing 054162. 'The instrumentation. supports have higher design mar ns.than the raceway and HVAC supports because the instrumentation supports are almost always very lightly loaded.

u, l

Traditional factors of safety for expansion anchors range from 3. recensended by Appendix B of the ACI 349. code, to 4'or 5. recommended by letC IAE Bulletin 79-02. Factors of safety for expansion anchors have been set at these hi levels primarily to account for variability in workmanship (installation)gh and to account for reduced capacity. in case a concrete crack subsequently passes through the anchor's location (tension zones'of reinforced concrete elements).. Reference 2 addresses expansion anchor performance in cracked

~

concrete. This report concludes that a factor of safety of. 3 (to account for variations in installation) is adequate even,for anchors in cracked concrete.

As shown in the preceding tables. the overall margins in the Diablo Canyon expansion anchor designs are large. Factors of safety of at least 3 (and usually much more) have been maintained in the support designs. Only in cases where anchors were not properly installed is there a potential for the factor of safety to be less than 3.

Installation deviations, addressed in the following attachments, have been reviewed and it has been found that the factors of safety have not been reduced to unacceptable levels.

e

~ 0070d

= Attachment 3 - Embedmont l

IFordereto, achieve ther pullout: strengths which were used to cogute the factors. of safety listed in Attachment 2, minimum embedmonts of the expansion i

anchors into the concrete structures must be achieved. The manufacturers' brochures,and drawing 05416.2 specify the required minimum embedmonts.

~

In 1977. a discrepancy report (DR 288) documented a potential embedment deficiency in electrical raceway support anchors. Between 1972 and 1975 approximately 14,000 1/2"-diameter, 2-3/4"-long, wedge-type expansion anc W s were bought by the electrical contractor (raceway supports are estimated u contain a total of approximately 125,000 expansion anchors). To install v a i

1/2"-diameter anchors at the required 2-1/4" embedment, only 1/2" of-the' anchor. stud would project out from the concrete surface; thus, any of these that were used would likely have been installed at less than required

~

embedmont.

Under the assumption that some of these "short" anchors were used in safety-related raceway supports, a testing program was undertaken in 1977.

1 Test anchors were installed at-1-1/2" of embedment and were successfully proof-loaded to Hosgri design level loads. A field sampling program was then undertaken in which over 5001/2"-diameter expansion anchor embedmonts were measured. This sampling program found all anchors have at least the 1-1/2" cabedmont used in tie testing program. The combination of field sampling and proof testing provided assurance that the use of 2-3/4"-long anchors was acceptable (factor of safety of at least 1).

Between 1978 and 1980, a systematic (grid) program inspected the conformance of all raceway supports to the design drawing requirements. In this inspection, anchor eubediaent was determined by subtracting the projecting length of the anchor from the overall anchor length.

It was assissed that expansion anchors were at least 3-3/4"-long. -While this grid program would not have identified 2-3/4"-long anchors that were set at less than re embedmont, it verified that the vast majority of the raceway anchors' quired had the expected embedment.

In the 1982 verification program, the data compiled in the 1978 grid inspections were reviewed.

Only 44 out of approximately 125,000 anchors were found to have less than required embedment. The embedmont of each of these anchors was checked by UT examination and the allowable loads on these anchors were appropriately reduced in the verification program calculations. Every one of the 44 cases was found to be acceptable (factor of safety greater than

3) when the reduced allowables were compared to the actual demand.

In December 1983. 40 raceway support anchors were selected for torque-testing.

Results showed that all 40 anchors were properly set. The embedmont on the 40 anchors was then measured. One of the 40 was found to have less than the minimum embedmont required by drawing 054162 and was a 2-3/4"-long anchor.

Assuming that the 40 anchors were randomly selected, this sample would indicate, to about a 755 confidence level (as determined by a statistical consultant), that 2-1/2 percent of the raceway support anchors were the 2-3/4'-long anchors. -

0070d

1 I

An evaluation of the signif:tsaese4.shostt. %t for.:that reemeurduppen~

anchors was made recently. Forty-five raceway support calculations were-selected for review. Under the assumption that all anchors had been set at I

1-1/4" estedmont*, the capacities of all anchors were. ana.lytically reduced.

The factors of safety for the anchors were then calculate.d-and.eaMbited the following distribution:

Factor of Safety

^ Percentage of Supports

,g,,,.c 11 100 j,'..,...,<

24 M

25 76 3 ' E.

'ii

} 10

'51 j.

j The results above overwhelmingly demonstrate the safety marains in the raceway support designs. Since only about 2-1/2 percent.of all: ancEors are likely;to have reduced embedment, and since only 18 percent.of all enchors;would havela factor of safety less than 3 even if embedded at 1-1/4"; the combined Her probability that any particular anchor would actually have a factor of safety less than 3 is very low.

Even with short easedmontsr the factors,of. safety for the raceway support anchors would be between 1 and 3 and would not create an unsafe condition.

~

.. ~

• The grid program inspections verified 2-1/4" embedmont for anchors assumed to be 3-3/4"-long. So if some anchors were actually 2-3/4"-long, their actual embedments would be at least 1-1/4".

f 0070d

Attachimiint 4 -[5 pacing

~

Drawinf054162 and manufacturerd tir6ch5Ees spe"cify afnimum' spacing

' ^ ' "

requirements for installation of adjacent' anchors. Spacing between anchors is japortant for the anchors whose capacities are controlled by pullout.of concrete cones around the anchor. When anchors are placed close together, their pullout cones overlap and reduce their pullout capacities.

In 1975,'anch6r 'intpic'tionstrevealed n'userous sp~ aci$ deviations. Resolution i

of theideviations.was ach,leved'by inspecting all" supports using expansion anchors. Anchors with spacing deviations were entered in a construction log and red-tagged for. engineering disposition.

In July 1975, a 3-month-long walkdown was performed ~by PGandE.engineerings Each spacing. deviation was resolved in one of the following. ways:

(a)'One of; t'h'e' two adjacent anchors 'was very lightly loaded; i.e.,

anchors securing grounding More than to percent of,all violation,ga.bles, lighting conduits, etc.

s were.of this type.

(b) Both of the adjacent anchors _would not experience simultaneous loading. For example, 'one anchor might'be installed in a brace designed to resist north-south seismic loads, while the other anchor was installed in an east-west seismic brace.

(c) Both of the adjacent anchors were loaded in shear only. Shear capacities are governed by the shear capacities of the individual anchor's steel shank, not by anchor spacing.

(d) The design loads were less than the reduced allowable loads.

Engineering reviewed the design calculations of some deviations and analytically reduced the anchor strengths in accordance with drawing ;

054162.

(e) Physical changes to the supports were made. Modifications were made to eliminate the spacing deviations in cases that were not resolved by the means described above.

In 1982 and 1983, extensive walkdowns and design calculation reviews of the supports were made for the verification program. Where spacing deviations occurred between anchors installed within one support, anchor capacities were reduced in accordance with drawing 054162. For spacing deviations occurring between anchors installed in different supports, the deviations were resolved as follows:

(a) A saepling of design calculations qualifying supports containing i

anchors with support-to-support spacing deviations was made. In all cases the actual demand, when campared to reduced capacity, resulted in factors of safety greater than 3.

. l 0070d

i (b) The spacing deviation acceptance criteria used in the 1975 walkdown (items (a) through (e) above) were reviewed. With the exception of the deviations sent to engineering for review, the 1975 criteria remain valid. Thus. the 975 walkdown satisfactorily resolved the majority of the spacing deviations.

(c) Analytical techn1 ues (Ref. 3) for reducing anchor pullout strength.

based on overlapp ng cones, show anchor capacity to be relatively insensitive to reductions in spacing. For example. at half the required spacing. 80 percent of the capacity remains.

(d) A series of spacing tests (Ref. 4) was performed by Doberne and-Eigenson in 1962. Phillips Red-Head Self-Drilling expansion anchors were set at varying spacings and pulled to capacity. Evaluation of the test data showed 100 percent capacity available at 10 diameters (10d) spacing (drawing 054162 requires 12d) and 80 percent capacity available at 5d spacing. These data agree with the analytical method referenced above and corroborate the relative insensitivlty of anchor capacity to reduced spacing.

The 1975 spacing review resolved spacing deviations on a case-by-case basis.

the verification program resolved spacing deviations on a sampling In 1982,Every case sampled was found to have an adequate factor of safety basis.

(greater than 3). While some spacing deviations may exist in which there are factors of safety less than 3. these would be very few and would not result in unsafe conditions.

k L

i

. l t

m--

~ -,.. ~.. - - -,,

. - Angular Alignment Drawine 054162 and the contractor's procedures require expansion anchors to be installed not more than 50 out-of-plomb. This angular tolerance was based on the engineering judgment that a So misalignment would have no effect on the anchor's strength. At one time some of the manufacturers' brochures included a 50 misalignment tolerance, also based upon engineering judgement.

P6andE Engineering subsequently approved anchors installed up to 15o out-of-piimb, although the installation procedures retained the 50 tolerance. Thus, the only time that the 150 tolerance was used was when an anchor had inadvertently been installed at an angle greater than 50 The Engineering acceptance of 150 angularity was based on two sets of tests. The first were proof load tests performed in conjunction with

-discrepancy report 288 (Ref. 5). Wedge-type test anchors were installed 200 out-of-plumb and proof loaded in pullout to the Hosgri design load levels (twice Table A values). The second testing program was performed for piping anchors in conjunction with DR 282 (Ref. 6). These shell-type test anchors were installed 150 out-of-plumb and were proof loaded to more than 150 percent of the Hosgri design level loads (three times Table A values).

All anchors in both test programs held the proof loads.

Bechtel is currently performing ultimate strength (failure) tests on expansion anchors installed 100 out-of-plumb. Preliminar diameter Hilti Kwik-Bolts (wedge-type anchors) y results from tests on 3/4" indicate that there is no reduction in ultimate strength due to 100 misalignment, thus establishing that the factors of safety are retained in cases when the anchors are misa11gned.

Although none of the tests referenced above wore performed explicitly on Phillips 5tud anchors, the anchorage mechanism on the stud-type anchors is I

identical to that used on the shell-type anchors. As mentioned above, the l

shell-type anchors installed 150 out-of-plumb were successfully proof tested to loads 50 percent above the Hosgri level allowables.

i In summary, expansion anchors installed between 50 and 150 out-of-plumb are very rare occurrences. All of the test data cited above indicate that the anchors perform satisfactorily when installed within the 15o tolerance.

Therefore, approval of the use of anchors at angles up to 150 is reasonable and acceptable.

i i

, 0070d

. _- Miscellaneous Irregularities The inspection and walkdown reports referenced in Attachment 1 note a few irregularities in anchor installation that are not addressed in Attachments 3 through 5.

Examples of these irregularities include tapping stud anchors sideways to improve alignment and torquing anchors to achieve full nut engagement. These are extremely rare occurrences and no test data are available to quantify the effects, if any, that these irregularities have on anchor capacities.

As noted on page 2 of this submittal, it is expected that 2 to 3 percent of all anchors experienced some deviations (or irregularities) in installation.

These deviations could reduce an anchor's factor of safety below 3 ff that specific anchor were required to carry the maximum load allowed by drawing 054162. However, it is believed that the irregularities of the type mentioned above would have only minimal adverse tapact on the anchor capacities and a factor of safety of at least 3 exists between demand and capacity.

Due to the infrequency of occurrence and the large factor of safety built into the design, installation irregularities would have no significant effect on the overall safety of the attached components. oo70d

9 1

I.51sulation of Expansion Anchors in Dynamic Te_ sting Program In 1983, dynamic testing of the Diablo Canyon raceway supports was performed at ANCO Engineers Inc., at the testing facility.

In this dynamic testina program, it was not feasible to use expansion anchors due to limitations in mounting concrete slabs on the shake-table. Therefore A307 machine bolts were used in lieu of expansion anchors. The A307 bolts were torquad to produce a preload of about 1050 pounds. The torque necessary to produce this preload was small, typically 10 to 12 ft-lbs. This preload value was used

)

because it provided a reasonable representation of the expansion anchors in 1

field conditions. Further justifications for the use of a 1050-pound preload are:

(a) It is a common practice to torque expansion anchors to produce a reload about equal to the working design load (1025 pounds for I

p/2"-diameter bolts in 4000 psi concrete). For exagle, Hilti 1

recommends 3 or 4 turns after finger-tight condition, which produces the desired preload.

(b) The use of a wrench for installing expansion bolts is necessary and experience has shown that 12 ft-lbs torque is very easily attained when the nut is turned, even with a 6-inch wrench. This was further verified in the three field-saspling progress, described below.

During an onsite audit. NRC inspectors examined 140 raceway supports. All but 12 anchors were found to be at least snug-tight.

Estimating 4 anchors per support, only 2 percent did not have a preload.

In another NRC inspection 40 anchors were randoely selected and all 40 were found to be snu A third program executed in response to an NCR (Ref. 7) g-tight.sampledthetightnessofE400 HVAC duct support bolts. All except 8 bolts were found to be tightly installed.

In the dynamic testing, at intermediate level shaking (average Hosgri design load level), almost all of the A307 bolts retained their preload.

In the supports where there was some loosening of the A307 bolts, no adverse changes occured in the support's response.

Numerous field inspections have shown that with the exception of an occasional loose bolt, the concrete expansion anchors in place at Diablo Canyon are installed snug-ticht. This condition was reflected in the ANC0 testing by using preloaded A307 bolts. As observed in the testing, bolt preload did not preclude bolt loosening ar.d the supports performed satisfactorily. Therefore modeling of the expansion anchors in the dynamic testing with preloaded A307,

bolts was reasonable and appropriate.

4 i 0070d

1 s

~ - References (1) " Resolution of RLCA E0I 1016 " Diablo Canyon Project Electrical Raceway Support Calculation E01 1016, Rev. O. June 1982.

(2) " Expansion Anchor Performance in Cracked Concrete," R. W. Cannon.

Tennessee Valley Authority, 1981.

(3) " Structural Engineering Aspects of Headed Concrete Anchors and Deformed Bar Anchors in the Concrete Construction Industry " KSM Welding Systems Division, Omark Industries,1971.

(4) " Pullout Capacities of Phillips Red Head Concrete Anchors as Affected by Spacing," Doberne and Eigenson, File 626, September 1962.

(5) " Test Procedure W l, Concrete Wedge Anchors.' Rev. 1. PGandE, March 1977.

(6)

• Procedure for Establishing Acceptance Criteria for Concrete Anchor Installations " Rev. 2. PGandE, December 1976.

(7) Nonconformance Report DC1-83-RM-N004, September 1983.

l l

f I 0070d

-. - ~. - - -

r

'pi

.o>

COPV

" T' '

~

PACIFIC OAS AND E LE C T RIC C O MPANY gg n state stRect, sam rRancisco. cauFORNIA 94106 TELEPHONE 1.u n February 7, 1984

[

Q[

PGaridE Letter No:

DCL-84-048 Mr. John B. Martin, Regional Administrator U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Connission, Region V 1450 Maria Lane, Suite 210 Walnut Creek, CA 94596-5368 Re: Docket No. 50-275, OL-DPR-76 Diablo Canyon Unit 1 SSER 21 - Allegations 25, 58, and 96 Concrete Expansion Anchors

Dear Mr. Martin:

As a result of the NRC exit interview on January 19, 1984 at Diablo Canyon, and the NRC review of PGandE letter DCL-84-031 dated January 27, 1984, only two issues remain to be resolved regarding the allegations listed in SSER 21 on concrete expansion anchors. These issues are (1) review of H. P. Foley Company Procedure QCP-9 that governs installation of expansion anchors and (2)

PGandE expansion anchor sampling program.

With respect to the first issue, the review of QCP-9 is complete and the results are presented in Enclosure 1.

For the second issue, the NRC Staff and PGa'dE had agreed that a successfully executed field sampling program would add significantly to the confidence that the expansion anchors used in the electrical raceway supports are adequately installed. Enclosure 2 contains a copy of the instructions that were prepared for this sampling program. The sampling program has been initiated and is expected to be complete on February 8, 1984. Evaluation'of the data will then be performed. A report to the NRC, containing the results of the sampling and of the data evaluation, is scheduled to be submitted by February 13, 1984.

Kindly acknowledge receipt of this material on the enclosed copy of this letter and return it in the enclosed addressed envelope.

Sincerely, J. O. Schuyler by J. D. Shiffer Enclosures ni la n a n n m n ec:

T. W. Bisho Q)c)f/[d'/

b AP

l l

PGandE Letter No: DCL-84-048 1

ENCLOSURE 1 F0 LEY QA PROCEDURES All of the electrical raceway construction at Diablo Canyon has been. performed by one contractor, the H. P. Foley Company. Foley's construction procedures address many components of raceway installation. One of these components is expansion anchors. The portions of Foley's procedures that govern installation of expansion anchors have never been revised in a way that significantly altered the installation process. The attached table tracks the pertinent installation requirements through the revisions of Foley's:

procedures, from their first issuance in 1973 to those in use today. It should be noted that most of the procedure revisions pertain-to aspects of raceway construction that do not affect expansion anchor installation.

However, the revisions affecting expansion anchors show' increasing attention to QC verification of the expansion anchor installations, which parallels the nuclear industry's increased awareness in the benef.its of anchor-in=pections.

In a recent NRC site inspection, the QC expansion anchor inspe:t' ion' records were reviewed. These records indicated cases in which the anchors were (1) straightened to improve alignment and (2) torqued to improve nut engagement.

As stated in PGandE's letter DCL-84-031, dated January 27, 1984,- the frequency of these occurrences is so low that there would be no significant effect on the overall safety of the raceway support system. To further quantify the rate of occurrence, the QC inspection records are being reviewed to identify all recorded cases of bolt straightening after installation and torquing tc improve nut engagement. The results of this review will be analyzed to verify that the frequency of occurrence supports the position that no further action 4

is required. The results will be reported to the NRC by February 13, 1984.

i Should we determine additional action is necessary, it will be included in the report.

In sumary, Foley Company did not make any significant changes in the expansion anchor installation requirements. This procedura consistency helps maintain consistency in installation. QC inspection was increased over the years, yet no significant changes in the installation procedures were found necessary. Thus,1the procedures governing raceway expansion anchor installation at Diablo Canyon have proven to be consistent and adequate.

. 0131d l

1

i l

ATTACWENT A TO ENCLOSURE 1

}

Date Procedure Number and Title Description 1

i 12/28/73 IDR-1, Quality Control Procedure This procedure required inspection of conduit and for inspection and Documentation cable trays after installation,' but 'did not of Raceways specifically address, support:: or expanston anchors.

7/16/74 QCP-9, Rev. 1. Quality Control This procedure contained the same ufrements as I

Procedure for Inspection and I:M-1, except'that an' inspection b ock'for supports

~

Documentation of Raceways was added to the inspection form.

1 (was procedure IDR-1) i 2/24/75 QCP-9, Rev. 2. Quality Control Installation acceptance requirements for expansion c

Procedure for Raceways Junction anchors were added to the procedure. The following and Teminal Boxes

~

l acceptance' require 6ents for expansion enchors were 4

specified:

i i

- Acceptable anchor types: McCulloch Kwik Bolts, Phillips Red llead Wedges Hilti1(wik Bolts I

j

- Center-to-center specing:

12 diameters j

- Edge distance: ~ 6 ~ diameters '"

- Minimum embedmonts: Anchor Size Min. Es6edmont

" - Ug -afa.

z=

i 3/8"-dia.

2-1/2" 1/2*-dia.-

2-1/2" 5/8"-dia.

2-7/8" l

l 3/4"-dia.

3-1/2" In addition, an inspection block for expansion anchors uns added'to' inspection forms.-

b 5/6/75 QCP-9, Rev. 3. Quality Control Changes did not affect expansion anchors.

Procedure for Raceways Junction and Terminal Boxes 5/30/75 QCP-9, Rev. 3. Procedure Changes did not affect expansion anchors.

Change Motice 1 (PCN 1) 0131d

--e a

s i

i ATTACHENT A TO ENCLOSURE 1 Date Procedure Number and Title Description 4

7/21/75 QCP-9 Rev. 3. PCN 2 Changes did not affect expansion anchors.

7/15/75 QCP-9, Rev. 3. PCN 3 Changes did not affect expansion anchors.

7/10/75 QCP-9, Rev. 3. PCN 4 Changes did not affect expansion anchors.

j 7/17/75 QCP-9..Rev. 3. PCN 5 Changes did not affect expansion anchors.

y 9/29/75 QCP-9, Rev. 4, Quality Control The following additions were made to the expansion i

Procedure for Installation of anchor installation requirements:

Raceways, Junction and Terminal j

Boxes

- Edge distance measurements were clarified requiring consideration of concrete corners and embedded items.

-I

- Spacing between good and abandoned anchors / holes was specified as 1" clear.

t j

1/23/76 QCP-9, Rev. 4. PCN 7 Changes did not affect expansion anchors.

(PCNs to QCP-9 Rev. 4 start with no. 7) 5/6/76 QCP-9, Rev. 4. PCN 8 Changes did not affect expansion anchors.

i 6/29/76 QCP-9, Rev. 4. PCM 9 Phillips Stud. anchors were added to the Ifst of i

I acceptable anchor types.

8/9/76 QCP-9, Rev. 4 PCN 10 Edge distance measurements were clarified requiring chaefers to be considered as concrete edges, i

I 11/9/76 QCP-9 Rev. 4. PCN 11 Changes did not affect expansion anchors.

12/15/76 QCP-9, Rev. 4. PCN 12 Changes did not affect expansion anchors.

12/30/76 QCP-9, Rev. 4. PCN 13 Changes did not affect expansion anchors.

4

i 0131d i

l l

ATTACHENT A TO ENCLOSURE 1 f

Date Procedure Number and Title Description i

3/4/77 QCP-9, Rev. 4. PCM 14 The following additions were made to the expansion anchor installation acceptance requirements:

- The use of Phillips Stud anchors was limited to i

sizes up to 3/4" diameter.

I

- The 12d spacing requirement was clarified to mean 12 times the diameter of the larger of the two adjacent anchors.

- Empty holes within 4.5 diameters of a good anchor were required to be filled with grout.-

i j

In addition, quality control inspections were required to be performed on a periodic basis.

i i

.I 11/23/77 QCP-9, Rev. 4. PCM 15 Changes did not affect expansion anchors.

Changes did not affect expansion anchors.

2/15/78 QCP-9, Rev. 4. PCM 16 4/7/78 QCP-9, Rev. 4 PCM 17 In this PCN, the following changes were inadvertently made regarding spacing and edge distance requirements.

(These changes were made due to a misinterpretation of the engineering l

requirements on drawing 054162 and were promptly i

corrected - see PCM 19. This is of no concern i

because almost no raceway was constructed during l

the period that reduced spacing was allowed):

l

- Acceptable spacing revised from 12d to 6d.

- Acceptable edge distance revised from 6d'to 3d.

Also in this PCN, the acceptable clear distance between good and abandoned holes was. reduced from 1" to 1/2".

l I

i i

! I 0131d

ATTACWENT A TO ENCLOSURE 1 i

Date Procedure Number and Title Description 1

i 6/8/78 QCP-9 Rev. 4. PCM 18 In this PCN, an anchor inspection form was added i

i which provided verification blocks for the j

following items:

- Anchor type

- Anchor size

- Anchor hole diameter and depth -

- Length of bolt exposed after setting

)

- Length of bolt exposed after torquing i

- Anchor not more than 50 misalignment (with

}

l respect to perpendicular) j 8/11/78 QCP-9, Rev. 4. PCN-19 Spacing requirements were changed back to the i

correct values in this PCN:

s I

l

- Acceptable spacing returned to_12d.

1 l

- Acceptable edge distance returned to 6d.

I Also in this PCN, anchor specing was clarified to include anchors installed in Unistrut members.

10/2/78 QCP-9, Rev. 4 PCM 20 Changes did not affect expansion anchors.

i 10/18/78 QCP-9, Rev. 4, PCM 21 Changes did not affect. expansion anchors.

1/4/79 QCP-9, Rev. 4. PCN 22 Changes did not; affect. expansion anchors.

.i j

5/30/80 QCP-9, Rev. 4. PCN 23 Changekdidnot' affect'expansionanchors.

?.

]

11/25/80 QCP-9, Rev. 4. PCN 24 Changes did not', affect expansion anchors.

i

~

=

l i

i l j 0131d

ATTACHIENT A TO ENCLOSURE 1 i

Date Procedure Number and Title Description i

l j

6/24/81 QCPE-9, Rev. O, Quality In this revision the following'.eddittens and 1 '

Control Procedure for e

clarifications were made:

Installation of Electrical 3

Raceways, Junction and

- Acceptable anchor. types were revised to l

i Terminal Sexes "Phillips Red Head Stud anchor or (was QCP-9) approved equel."

(was QCP-9)

- 105 QC inspection of anchors was i

e required.

?

~

{

For new installations, the following requirements l

were added:

• 85 l

- At least 1 bolt.. thread must be exposed above its nut.

' ~

l

- A 12" mininum dfstance from pipe supports must be maintained.

l 8/10/81 QCPE-9, Rev.'O, M N 1 Changes did not affect expansion anchers.

11/9/81 QCPE-9, Rev. O, M N 2 Changes did net affect expansion anchors.

5/6/82 QCPE-9, Rev. O PCN 3 Changes did not affect expansion anchors.

5/6/82 QCPE-9, Rev. O PCN 4 Changes did not affect expansion anchors.

5/6/82 QCPE-9, Rev. 0, M N 5 Changes did not affect expansion' anchors.

6/15/82 QCPE-9, Rev. D. PCN 6 Changes did not affect expansion anchers.

l 6/17/82 QCPE-9, Rev. 0, M N 7 Changes did not affect expansion anchers.

7/16/82 QCPE-9, Rev. O. PCN 8 Changes did not affect expansion anchors.

1 f

l

! i 0131d I

i ATTAC60ENT A TO ENCLOSURE 1 Date Procedure Number and Title Description 7/15/82 QCPE-9 ReW '0, PCN'9' Changes did not affect expansion anchors.

(

j 8/18/82 QCPE-9 Rev. O. PCN 10 Changes did not affect expansion anchors.

i 4/15/83 QCPE-9, Rev. O PCN 11 Changes did not affect expansion anchors.

j 4/15/83 QCPE-9, Rev. O. PCM 12 Changes did not affect expansion anchors.

i 5/23/83 QCPE-9 Rev. C, PCN 13 Changes did not affect expansion anchors.

~ QCPE-9, Rev. 0. PCN-14 This PCN was not issued.

t 6/28/83 QCPE-9 Revp 0, PCN 15 Changes did not affect expansion anchors.

I i

8/8/83 QCPE-9 Rev. O, PCN 16 Changes did not affect expansion anchors.

)

8/5/83 QCPE-9 Rev. O. PCN 17 Changes did not affect expansion anchors.

9/23/83 QCPE-9 Rev. O. PCN 18 Changes did not affect expansion anchors.

4 9/23/83 QCPE-9, Rev. O,' PCN 19 Changes did not affect expansion anchors.

9/12/83 QCPE-9 Rev. O. PCN 20 Char:ges did not affect expansion anchors.

j 9/19/83 QCPE-9, Rev. 0. PCN 21 Changes did not affect expansion anchors.

i I

i 11/7/83 QCPE-9, Rev. 1. Quality Control Expansion anchor requirements were deferred to

{

Procedure for Raceways. Junction QCP-9, Rev. 5 (QCPE-9 no longer addresses expansion and Terminal. Boxes anchors).

~

i i

l 0131d i

ATTACKNT A TO ENCLOSURE 1 Date Procedure Number and Title Description 11/7/83 QCP-9. Rev. 5. Quality Control 1

Procedure for. Installation and QCP-9. Rev. 4. addressed all aspects of raceway installation. QCP-9. Rev. 5. only addressed j

Inspection of Stud and Shell 1

Concrete Expansion Anchors expansion anchors (for use in raceways or any other j

1{

(QCP-9. Rev. 5 was work done by Foley).

issued 4/13/82 for general use)

QCP-9. Rev. 5 requires detailed inspections and i

documentation for new work.

1 4

i

?

I i

1 1

cf

~

r i

L 1

..^

..) ' i. e' ' 7 E '.

?...t j C.:' (, ;. 0

.. ::. _ 3 ';

f

-,' 2,

~

e i

}

1 k

1 i

l 0131d.

t 1

i PGandE Letter No. DCL-84-048 ENCLOSURE 2 7

INSTRUCTIONS FOR SAWLING CONCRETE EXPANSION ANCHORS IMMELED IN ELECTRICAL RACEWAY'5WPORT5

~-

l

~

1.0 General 1'

INeseinstructionsshail'beNo11owedtoobtaindatafromarindom sag ling of the con' crete. expansion anchors used in the Diablo Canyon Unit 1 electrical raceway supports. Questions or modifications regarding these instructions.shall be, discussed with Project Engineering or their en-site representative. i 2.0 Sample Size

.InedatadefinedinSection"3.0shallberecordedfor100 raceway

' supports. Attachment A provides a list of 200 randomly selected raceway supports from which the samples shall be taken.. Starting with the first.-.

support on the list and proceeding sequentially down the list, eachJ.

support shall be located. If the support cannot be found, does not contain any concrete expansion anchors, or if the support is inaccessible, it shall be so noted on a sampling form (Attachment B) and 1

sagling shall be continued with the next support on the list. When data on 100 supports have been recorded, the samp1ing shall be terminated. If more support numbers are. required, Project Engineering shall be contacted.

3.0 Recording Data t

l The form provided in Attachment B shall be used for recording data, outlined below, that shall. be compiled for each support.

i A) The sample number and the support number (from Attachment A) shall be recorded.

8) The date that the support was installed shall be recorded.

If the support was subsequently modified, the date of the original i

installation shall be used.

If the actual date is not readily available, it should.be specified if installation occurred before or after January 1975.

i C5 The quantity of expansion anchors used In.the supports shall be recorded. When more than one anchor has been used, a simple sketch of the' support shall be made. Each anchor's location within the support shall be noted on the sketch and shall be given a sequential number.

l l

i 0131d

. ~.

For each expansion anchor in the support, the following data shall be recorded. The individual anchor data shall. correspond to the anchor nudpering sequence established on the support'tketch prepared in Section 3.C. above.

D) The anchor diameter.(1/2" diameter, 5/8". diameter, etc.) shall be recorded.

i t,m 4

~ E) The anchor type (wedge type Phillips Stud type or shell type) shall be recorded.

4 F) The anchor embedeent (for stud or wedge type anchors only) shall be determined by using the following method:

T F.1)

The overall anchor length, determined by UT measurement.

shall be recorded.

F.2)

The exposed length of anchor that projects out beyond the

]

concrete surface shall be recorded.

F.3)

The embedmont, determined by subtracting the projecting length (F.2) from the overall. length (F.1), siell be recorded.

G)

The angular alignment of the anchor (the anchor of the axis of the

~

anchor with respect to perpendicular) shall be recorded..

,H)

The distance -(spacing) to the closest adjacent expansion anchor, whether in the sampled support or in any other adjacent support, shall be recorded.

If the distance is greater than 10 bolt diameters, siaply state:

10d.

l I)

The (edge) distance to the nearest concrete edge (chaefer),

embedded plate or other embedded ites shall be recorded.

If the distance is greater.than 5 bolt diameters, sig1y state:

5d J)

The engagement of nuts (for stud or wedge type anchor's only) shall be recorded, noting the number of exposed threads on the anchors.

K)

It shall be determined if the anchor has been tightly installed.

~

Tight is defined as.being unable to turn the nut (or. bolt in a shell anchor) by hand.

.. i 4.0 ~ Sampling of Adjacent Supports Ifoneormoreanchorsinasampledsupport. bas.anovera11'1Ang'thof l

2-3/4" or less (as determined by UT examination per section 3.F.1) and adjacent support along the conduit run, selected from either. side of the sasq le support, shall be added to the sample set. This adjacent support shall be inspected in accordance with Section 3.0, above, and shall be

, 0131d

_ _. _. ~. _ _. _ _

clearly identified, on its data form, as an addition to the original saample.

-...w.

If the adjacent support also contains a 2-3/4" long anchor, a second adjacent support shall be added to the sample set as described above.

5.0 As-Built Sketches

'As-built sketches of the sampled supports shall be prepared M en installation deviations, as defined below, are foun.1. The as-built sketches shall be prepared in accordance with " Minimum As-Built..

Requirements" which was attached to December 13, 1983 meeting; minutes (Chron No. 040424)

.e..

As-built sketches shall be prepared when any of the following deviations are found:

(a) the embedment, determined per Section 3.F.3, is less ihan that specified on drawing 054162 (e.g., less than 2-1/4" for,.1/2" diameter anchors)

(b) theangularity,determinedperSection3.Gisgreat(thanSo.

(c) the spacing, determined per Section 3.H. is less than.10d.

In addition to the sampled support, any other support (s)-involved in the spacing deviation shall also be as-built.

(d) the edge distance, determined per Section 3.I, is less thazn 5d.

~'

6.0 Quality Assurance All data compiled for this sampling shall be recorded on the ' forms provided in Attachment B and shall be signed by the originator and a checker.

The UT machine shall be calibrated prior to use.

i 7.0 Data Transmittal '

i l

All data sheets and as-builts compiled in this sampling program shall be expeditiously transmitted to Project Engineering, Attention:.J. K. McCall.

l l

. 0131d l

L

f

)

t \\;. wta t e. a w.

aw t

.q,u.

.ei, ni.iq. w y

..y a 4 i tr ye a y.:..

ATTACHE NT A TO ENCLOSURE 2 w.....

.pg_

l Sample Support support Conduit i

.. g, ;,...

g,.,.

Tm

.So.

. 1.

C5R-127-4-13 5-296 K7887 2.

K-73-2-12 5-19A E8591' i

-3.

. t,C-140-9-23 5-149 K2704 4.

A-140-3-39 5-48 K2652 5.

t K-140-3-31r>

5-596 K9796 l

6.

8-104-5-35 5-415 KA730 7.

K-115-3-34 5-20 KT571 8.

E /8W.940-44857 x ohn192 K7363 - -

u 9.

GE/GW-140-4-370 5-288 K6592 10.

H-115-5-27 5-288 K8393 11..

E/GW-115-2-104 5-115 K4097 12.

GE/GW-115-3-202 5-7 K6310 13.

TG8-140-2-3 5-197 KA109 1

14.

E/GW-140-6-61 5-20 K6132 i

15.

GE/GW-140-4-740 5-415 K5769 16.

K-115-4-157 5-19A K9108

17..

G-140-7-243 5-48 K1993 18.

GE/GW-140-7-137 5-19A KT573 19.

G-140-8-541 5-19A KX208 3

20.

GE/GW-140-4-1020

.5-87 KT152 T

K-85-5-32 5-194 K6679 22.

K-115-4-104 5-289 KH323 C-104-10-12 5-149 K2724 23.

24.

A-119-5-13 5-415 K2635 l

25.

C-104-2-15 5-415 K4012 26.

J-115-5-8 5-20 K8066 27.

E/GW-115-2-48 5-18 K6099 1

28.

D-104-2-31 5-243 K2415 29.

K-140-1-155 5-19A KT879 30.

H-128-3-237 5-198 K7788 31.

E/GW-100-1-108 5-198 K6114 A.

H-73-5-4

.5-87 KK617ny i

33.

K-100-1-191 5-252 K9242 34.

L-140-4-33 5-20 K8212

.,3, G-140-4-45

.5-102 K9507nv 36..r CSR-127-3-461 5-88 K9759 37.-

E-140-5-13 5-20 K7002 5-454 BTA201 38.

A-107-6-32 5-19A K5776 39.

FE/FW-140-1-17 i

40.. -

E/GW-115-2-77 5-18 K6397 11, A-107-12-34 5-172 K2449 i

42 E/GW-140-6-206 5:172 K6769 43.

H-128-1-95 5;T54 ERAna i

44.

K-154-1-350 5-243 KV160 1

l 0131d 4

ATTAC N NT A TO ENCLOSURE 2 Sample Support Support Conduit No.

no.

Type No.

J 45.

GE/W-15-3-124 5-18 K6392 46.

GE/W-15-2-282 5-415 K8770 47.

CSR-127-6-431 5-198 K7911 48.

J-115-5-3 5-20 K8066 49.

CSR-127-5-297 5-194 KT366 50.

F-140-1-58 5-41 KX895 51.

G-117-2-(68) 5-197 VKX394 52.

CSR-127-3-391 5-19A KT358 53.

GE/W-140-4-817 5-19A KT148 54.

GE/W-115-4-58 5-415 KT598 55.

GE/W-115-4-48 5-85 KT286 56.

GE/GW-140-4-797 5-243 K5779 l

57.

C5R-127-5-76 5-102 KT069 58.

C5R-127-4-310 5-19A K7137 59.

K-100-1-54 5-183 K9336 60.

D-140-5-54 5-171 K5275 61.

D-140-5-33 5-415 K5252 62.

K-185-1-24 5-194K K6843 K-154-1-324

$-87 KV106 64.

GE/W-115-4-361 5-202 K8496 65.

H-128-11-43 5-20 K8873 66.

K-115-4-133 5-19A K9107 67.

A-107-4-39 5-372 K2339 68.

A-140-4-1 5-415 K2869 69.

G-117-1-638 5-202 KX616 70.

GE/W-115-3-127 5-288 KT319 71.

C5R-127-4-11 5-87 K2449 72.

K-115-2-23 5-19A K3853nv

i 73.

L-140-7-106 5-202 KT967ny 74.

A-107-11-19 5-58 K2641 75.

GE/W-115-2-141 5-387 K7307 76.

K-115-3-148 5-314 KH323 77.

K-140-9-135 5-23 KH569 78.

K-115-1-15 5-20 KT589 79.

G-117-1-106 5-19A KX525 80.

L-140-2-12 5-20 K8256 81.

K-140-1-156 5-289 KT510 82.

A-107-4-27 5-20 K2480 83.

GE/W-140-6-117 5-288 K6429 l

i 84.

CSR-127-5-175 5-88 K811 06.

J-115-1-56 5-243 K8235 i

86.

L-140-4-71 5-20 E8281 87.

CSR-127-5-196 5-121 KT003 88.

H-85-1-42 5-288 KT959 a

2-0131d

_y--

-.m, y

-%. - --,-,e-wr-.,e,,e_,

m e

,,-.,s._w,.,_._-_,_w%

. _,,,.,,y..m.

._w,__m.~,#_

i l

i ATTAC M NT A TO ENCLOSURE 2 Sample Support Support Conduit Es.

No.

Tne No.

-'~

W.

CSR-127-3-387 5-140 E8615-90.

GE/eW-140-4-372 5-288 K6592 91.

K-140-9-119 5-23 KH545 92.

D-104-5-12 5-195 K4879 93.

A-107-3-3 5-7 K2408 94.

GE/GW-1404-134 5-20 KT573 I

95.

A-107-4-37 5-392 K2339 N.

A-119-8-1 5-20 K2453 97.

H-128-11-8 5-242 K4725ny i

98.

GE/GW-100-2-12 5-87 K6764 99.

G-1404-885 5-102 KX991

_10fk J-140-4-141

.5-8Z,,

KK713 10' L-165-2-53 5-20 K8471. K8469nv 102.

H-115-2-53 5-804 K4014. FNED, FNAD, FNEC, FNAC 103.

H-115-3-134 5-183

K7107ny, i

K7108ny,

K7109ny, 4

K7110nv l

4%

GE/GW-140-4-886 5-AZ.

K8764 T,5.

CSR-127-6-96 5-19-B K6510nv 106.

CSR-127-5-241 5-438 TRAnv. KR015ny

)

10 7.

F-140-5-20 5-20 KX498 i

.10L.

K-154-1-3006 1-91 K4515 109.

D-104-5-84 5-20 KX4846 110.

H-115-1-48 5-85 KT781 111.

D-104-5-95 5-20 K5049 112.

GE/GW-140-6-113 5-19-A K6429 0

113.

J-115-1-63 5-20 K8237' 3

114.

J-115-2-21 5-149 K8098 115.

A-85-5-12 5-115 K2631 p

116.

F-145-6-(10) 5-19-A FX460

?

117.

K-1004-76 5-19-B K9786 118.

G-140-7-257 5-20 K1503, K1504, KX875ny i

CSR-127-4-453 5-87_

K145H l

120.-

K-140-348 5-288 K6094 i

121.

CSR-127-7-125 5-91 K7246 122.

G-117-2-31 5-415 K1541ny, KX462 123.

FE/FW-117-2-15 5-415 K5907 T24.

K-140-4-187 5-264 K9913, K9799, K9982 i

! 0131d

t I'

l' ATTAC N NT A 70 ENCLOSURE 2 i

Suple Support Support Conduit i

No.

No.

Tne No.

125.

GE/W-140-1-69 5-104 TAS#v.

KS643ny, K6120, K6121. KT062 126.

H-115-5-83 5-19A K7130nv 127.

K-140-9-166 5-172 1015 50 l

128.

FE/FW-140-1-55 5-415 K5839 l

129.

CSR-127-5-399 5-19-A KK303 130.

CSR-127-5-137 5-288 KT765 131.

CSR-127-4-144 5-49 KT777 132.

8-104-10-24 5-415 K3214ny 133.

CSR-127-5-221 5-286 K7221 134.

G-140-4-(11) 5-214 KX211 135.

G-140-1-92 5-19-A KX670RV, KX498 136.

CSR-127-5-400 5-97 KK300 137.

K-140-3-31 5-5M K97M i

138.

FE/FW-140-1-4 5-19-A K5774 139.

H-128-2-145 5-202 K5M9 140.

J-115-10-71 5-370 KK807ny 141.

K-115-4-161 5-19-A K3853 i

142.

CSR-127-6-50 5 19-B K6503 143.

H-128-3-8 5-114

KK528ny, K7006nv. K7016 K7010 14L.

G-140-7-510A 5-1f2 KX050nv i

145.

F-117-6-17

~ 5-6: 8 EJCA I

146.

FE/FW-117-1-281 5-231 KT610 i

147.

K-100-2-21 5-20 KH340. KH546 144.

K-140-9-46 5-87 101532 149.

F-165-3-711 5-415 K1428

,_199 GE/GW-115-3-210

_5-172 K5091 151.

K-154-1-126 5-194 KV068 152.

F-140-2-162 5-214 K1729 153.

GE/GW-140-6-114 5-19-A K6429 154.

J-115-9-13 5-387 K8931 155.

H-128-5-51 5-202 K7640ny, K7493,

K65Mny, K6633ny 156.-

A-140-6-22 5-19-A K2855ny

_,.18Z.

GE/GW-100-1-605

.kAZ K8909ny 168.

GE-GW-140-5-163 5-243 K6530 159.

F-165-4-764 5-20 KX864. KX865 160.

CSR-127-6-25 5-19-B KT830nv l

. 0131d

ATTAC N NT A TO ENCLOSURE 2 Samplo support Conduit So.

Two So.

i

.. 151.

E-186-1-22 5-19-A R$843 l

162.

E/GW-140-4-370 5288 R$592 M3.

K-85-4-95 5-19-A K6024 Ice.

SE/GW-140-4-884 5-19-8 K6227ny, K7250 185.

N-115-4-45 5-576 5 748 i

166.

C W 127-7-415 5-19-A K7148 167.

GE/6W-140-4-159 5-20 KT628, K6494, i

K6235nv i

164.

H-115-4-3 5-20 KT630 i

i 169.

GE/GW-115-1-168 5-20 K6643 J

170.

C-104-3-2 5-216 K3904 l

l 171.

8-104-16-10 5-149 K2415 172.

C-104-10-12 5-149 K2724 173.

K-115-4-4 5-410 KK524 24.

G17.5-4-44 5-172 K1093 75.

GE/GW-140-1-304 5-183 TARFny, K6001, K4312 176.

GE/4W-100-1-276 5-243 K7191 177.

C5R-127-5-58 5-243 KT538ny 3

l 178.

H-128-3-180 5-209 KK305 179.

GE/GW-140-4-429 5-20

K5562ny,

[

4 K5625ny, K7266 KT124

.]lg.

K-85-4-21

_5__-lZ.

K6679 1

is1.

F-140-2-(33) 5-214 K1729 182.

GE/GW-100-1-194 5-19-A KK767

,lSL GE/GW-140-4-1171

.5_ E K7266 184.

G-140-6-(11) 5-12 KI572 185.

K-140-1-142 5-20 KT940 106.

CSR-127-3-230 5-288 K8657ny 187.

2K-100-2-68 5-7 K9440 188.

CSR-127-3-545 5-19-A K7159 189.

K-154-1-344 5-87 KV170 190.

CSR-127-7-347 5-83 K7952 191.

CSR-127-3-451 5-19-8 K7866 192.

GE/GW-140-4-1132 5-202 K2894

'193.

GE/GW-100-1 546 5-202 K3474ny 194.

GE-GW-100 I-565 5-19-A K4143ny 195.

J-115-143 5-20 K8237 196.

FE/FW-117-1-340 5-415 K5834

.]tZ.

K-85-4-161 H

E8897 198.

GE/EW-140-4-822 5-19-A E8770 199.

A-119-5-25 5-208 K2773 l

_ 200._

GE/f,W-140-7-193

_5-102 KT169, K5763 i

t I ;

0131d

ATTAC M NT B T0 ENCLOSURE 2 Expansion Anchor Sampling Data Fore o

Supp0RT DMA A) Sample No.

Support No.

If data has not been compiled, specify why not:

~S)'BetesupportInstalled:

C) Quantity of Anchors in Support:

Sketch Numbering the Individual Anchors Attached?

Yes No ANCHOR DATA Anchor #1 Anchor #2 Anchor #3 Anchor #4 D)

Anchor Diameter E)

Anchor Type F.1) Overall Length F.2) Exposed Length F.3) Embedded Length G)

Angularity H)

Spacing I)

Edge Distance J)

Nut Engagement (specify no. of exposed threads)

K)

Tightness (specify tight orloose)

$16MATWES Originator (s)

Checker (s)

Date(s)

Date(s)

-