ML20236V900

Summary of 871028-30 Audit W/Util & S&W in Cherry Hill,Nj Re Implementation of Piping Design Criteria

ML20236V900
Person / Time
Site:	Comanche Peak
Issue date:	11/25/1987
From:	Terao D NRC OFFICE OF SPECIAL PROJECTS
To:	NRC OFFICE OF SPECIAL PROJECTS
References
NUDOCS 8712070157
Download: ML20236V900 (7)

Text

~ -

o o _

g* I/ UNITED STATES

(

1 q .

o 4 NOCLEAR REGULATOPY COMMISSION +R 8 WASHINGTON, D. C. 20806 .

5 November 25, 1987; fi i

. Docket Nos. 50-445D ,m and 50-446- ", t y^

gQ Texas Uti'Ities Electric Company (TU. Electric) ]L APPLICANT:

FACILITY: Comanche Peak'SteamLElectric. Station (CPSES), Units 1 and 2' '

SUMMARY

0F AUDIT.ON OCTOBER 28-30, 1987 --IMPLEMENTATION'0Ff ,

d j

1

' PIPING DESIGN CRITERIA ".

1 On.0ctober 28-30,1987,'the'NRCstaffand-itsconsultantscoAducted'a9olloAp' audit of the CPSES Corrective Action Program for-of Stone'& Webster Engineering Corporation'(SWEC) piping'Jersey.-

.in Cherry Hill,'New' design at the off

~

ll The purpose-of the audit was to continue 1the review >of the adequacy of.the ,

implementation of design criteria: developed by SWEC forithe resolution:of..'

generic technical issues associated with large bore' piping and pipe supports; L o 1 at CPSES. The followup audit was.a continuation of' audits"previously held on; ~ '

.c j September 2-4, 1987 and September 22-24 '1987 (see NRC' staff; audit summaries; 1 1 '

dated September 28, 1987 and October. 16,1987,respectively)..'In-addition, .h the staff discussed a number of specific questions arising:from a general review of the piping design criteria @rovided in Comanche Peak; Project Procedure (CPPP)-7, " Design Criteria for Pipe Stress and Pipe' Supports,"' Revision!3, N dated February 23, 1987. , j The following is a sumary of the issues selected in the audit, the extent of their implementation reviewed by the staff, and the-status of the staff's review of the issues as discussed at the exit meeting. A list of attendees at Ii.;

the exit meeting is provided;in the enclosure to-this summary.

)

Pipe Support Stability - The staff reviewed 12 additional' pipe support calcula- 4 tions selected from the deposition of one of the. CASE

• witnesses -(CASE exhibit. l 669/6698) related to the issue of stability. The staff reviewed.the~. latest . j pipe support calculations and drawings for the. adequacy of modifications imple -

mented by SWEC'per CFPP-7 guidelines. The staff found that of the 12 supports reviewed, 6 supports have been' deleted. 3 supports (associated with a. single. 6 non-rigid gang frame) have.been modified to a single rigid gang frame,'and j 1 U-bolt support has been modified to a' welded pipe stanchion.. In addition .

I frame support (details unknown in CASE Exhibit 669/6698L) is; currently:a rigid l gang hanger frame. The staff found.that'the modifications to these 12 supports >

adequately resolve the instability concerns associated with them 'as identified '

in the. CASE Exhibit 669/669B. j i

nl b a( 7'3 Q)yo

• Citizens Association for Sound Energy - intervenor in'CPSES operatingilicense l proceedings. E'* 4

.J , j'l l 8712070157 871125 N i' L!

h PDR ADOCK 05000445 '

A PDR g -9 'i o .

h[

g -

y Sumary of Audit on 10/28-30,' 1987 ' - P - November 25, 1947 l

h j '

U-solt Twisting and Cinched U-Bolt - The stiff Ytviewed 8 additional suppobts k

I identifieo.in CASE Exhibit 669/669B which ntiNd a cinched U-bolt on a .

E trapeze designs The latest pipe support kew,%9s were reviewed for the adequacy- '

of the modification to resolve the issues 'or D-bolt twisting and cinchedf U-bolt. Of thelB; pipe supports reviewed, the staff found thst 3 supportsi .j l have been deleted, ? supports are incomplete (in process), I support has been l modified to a strap with lugs per CPPP-7,1 support has been modified to a rigid frame, and I support has been modified to a standard pipe clamp with ~l snubber. The staff found the modifications completed to date to' conform to

• the guidelines M CDPP 7 and adequately. msolve the concerns associated with U-bolt twisting' and% bolt cinching, The staff did not identify any open itecG 1

in the modificat hos to these supports. l 1

Seismic /Non-Seismic Interface Anchor Desigti - As part of the followQ review l of issues identified in the CPSES Safety dduation Report Supple' ent {,SSER)  !

No.10, the staff audited an item regardird the design of saisin%/ndh-seismic i interface anchors (see NRC staff " Summary of Meeting on SeptemWe 2 f1987N 1 Piping Generic Technical Issues," dated October 5.1987, Item 32). Jte5 staff y selected a seismic /non-seismic interface anchor in the Auxiliary feedwater _I l

system to review the methods of analysis used for the piping systems connected to the anchor. The piping on the seismic side of the anchor used a detailed' response spectrum nethod of analysis (stress problem 1-N015). The pfptng on the non-seismic (turbine building) side und a simplified calculation based.on .1 the plastic hinge moment which would occur in"the event of piping system ' collapse.

The methods of analyses are consistent with the licensing commitments in the FSAR and are, thus, acceptable. Tde staff did not identify any open or unresolad ites.

Richmond Inserts 1 The staff continued its revieN of the modifications proposed to accommodate the itermal expansion in a feedwater gang fran:e located inside containunt using Richmond inserts. (See Item A.2 in Audit Summary dated October 16, 1987.) @ e modifications are not yet finalized. However, the staff review'of the proposed modifications finds a reduction in the overall length of the tube stoel frame.

The new sections will be evaluated by SWEC using the CPPP-7 deslgn criteria for establishing the maximum tube steel section lengths. Contingent upon the proposed modifications satisfying the acceptance criteria in CPPF-/fhe staff finds the modifications to be acceptable, The staff concludes that tne overall process used to Atemine the accepteoility of thermal expansion in long-tube steel frames inside containment using Richmt.ind dnserts to be adequately idplen,ented. The staff did nct identify any open or unresolved items. d LocalStressin'Pign3-Thestaffselected3calculationsforevaluatino local st*6is~E~~'sprag.

p The calculations included an opposing double trunnion design, pads on large diameter piping, antfa stanchion welded to a pipe elbow.

The staff revie,wed th applications of the methodology used to evaluate the local stress effects in the piping for overall correctness. The staff did not:

identify any open or unresolved items. 4 ,

/

.]

sw k

_ _ _ _ - ..r .o

y- -

p m I

,; k j i,, ,,

h 19 i s

Summary of Audit on 10/28-30,1987 , ' Ncven6er 25,1987 Excessive Girth Butt Weld Ra fial Shrinkage - As part of the followup review of 55ER 11 iswes, the staff audfIIS an item related to the stress intensifi- t',J catien factor (SIF) used in pipiig design for evaluating excessive radial. weld h' shrinkage in piping girth butt walds'. (See Item 33 in1 Enclosure 3 to Meeting Sumary dated October 5,1987.) The staff finds that j;he SIF of 1.1 developed by SWEC for CPSES Lppears to be joconsistent with SIF values established by the ASME Boiler & Pr2ssure Vessd Code Section III (ASME Code) for evaluating other as-welded pipe conditions. Ahe staff finds that there are only 7 welds of  ;

concern where the SIF has been used. This is considered an open item and will {

be discussed fn:Nr in a safety evaluation.

j Pipe Support Generic Stiffness - The staff audited the uso: of acttal pipe support stiffness which would be used in lieu of the generfcitt!ff sefis as i specified in CPPP-7. ThestaffrevlewedProjectMemorandud(?AI)Md7which controls the process when actual Stiffnesses are to be used. phe ' actual stiffnesses will be used during final reconciliation of the as-Jdit piping conditions. The staff did not identify any open or unresolted items.

Tube Steel Seatien Properties - The staf'i audited the conformance of the SWEC design data uTa'olrd pipe support calculations to the American Institute of Steel Constructica '(ALSC) " Manual of Steel Construction," 8th Edition, as specified in CPPP.7 and reviewed PM-140 which addresses the calculation of effective throat Mr 2 by 2 inch tube steel. The staff ff d not identifyf t.ny 3 open or unresolved items, Additional Followup Items - During a previous staff audit of the piping as-built verification program, the staff identified on a safety injection line a pipe support design with a pipe clamp welded to a trapeze cross member. The {

staff reg' Jested the pipe support calculation to verify the acceptability of the 1 design. The specific pipe support and similar designs have been modified to {

eliminate the clamp and replace it with a stanchion welded to the pipe and i trapeze cross member. The resultinn moment restraint effects and higher SIF on the pipe will be alculated by SWEC'in the final piping reconcilidion analysis.

The staff did not identify any open or unresolved items.  !

A total of 48 hours5.555556e-4 days <br />0.0133 hours <br />7.936508e-5 weeks <br />1.8264e-5 months <br /> was involved during this audit at the SWEC offices. ) ,

A David Turco, Mechanical Engineer i Comanche Hek Project Division Office of Special Projects i

Enclosure:

List of Exit Meeting Attendees 3 cc: See next page., ,

I  !

j I f 2 d-A e.u

~

} :o p -

f l W. G. Counsil Comanche Peak Steam Electric Station d Texas utilitTes Electric Company Units 1 and 2 cc:

Thomas G. Dignan, Jr. Asst. Director for Inspec. Programs

. Ropes & Gray Comanche Peak Project Division 225 Franklin Street U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Boston, Massachusetts 02110 P. O. Box 1029 Granbury, Texas 76048 Robest A. Wooldridge, Esq. Regional Administrator, Region IV Worsham,$Forsythe, Sampels & U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission i Wooldridge 611 Ryan Plaza Drive, Suite 1000 l l

2001 Bryan Tower, Suite 2500 Arlington, Texas 76011 Dallas, Texas 75201 Lanny A. Sinkin Christic Institute

& , Homer C. Schmidt

' Director of Nuclear Services 1324 North Capitol Street Texas Utilities Electric Company Washington D.C. 20002 Skyway Tower e

400 North Olive Street, L.B. 81 Ms. Billie Pirner Garde. Esq.

'" Dallas, Texas 75201 Government Accountability Project -

Midwest Office Mr. Et;bert E. Bailard, Jr. 104 East Wisconsin Avenue

.Girector of Projects Appleton, Wisconsin 54911 libbs and Hill, Inc.

11 Penn Plaza New York, New York 10001 David R. Pigott, Esq.

Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe 600 Montgomery Street j San Francisco, California 94111 Mr. R. S. Howard Westinghouse Electric Corporation P. O. Box 355 Anthony Z. Roisman, Esq.

Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15230 Suite 600 l 1401 New York Avenue, NW '

Renea Hicks, Esq. Washington, D.C. 20005 Assistant Attorney General Environmental Protection Division Robert Jablon P. O. Box 12548 Capitol Station Bonnie S. Blair Austin, Texas 78711 Spiegel & McDiarmid 1350 New York Avenue, NW Mrs. Juanita Ellis, President Washington, D.C. 20005-4798 Citizens Association for Sound Energy 1426 South Polk George A. Parker, Chairman Dallas, Texas 75224 Public Utility Committee

• Senior Citizens Alliance Of Ms. Nancy H. Williams Tarrant County, Inc.

CYGNA Energy Services 6048 Wonder Drive 2121 N. California Blvd., Suite 390 Fort Worth, Texas 76133 Wal s t Creek, CA 94596 L

r 1 i

t JJ . . ,

W. G. Counsil Comanche Peak Electric Station -

Texas Utilities Electric Company Units 1 and 2

)

cc' '

Joseph F. Fulbright -Jack R. Newman, Esq.

-Fulbright & Jaworski- Newman~& Holtzinger, P.C.-

1301 McKinney Street Suite 1000 4 Houston, Texas.77010- 1615 L Street, N.W. ]

Washington, D.C. 20036 .]

Roger D. Walker i j

L Manager, Nuclear Licensing 1 Texas Utilities Electric Company Skyway Tower  !

400 North Olive Street, L.B. 81 :l Dallas, Texas 75201 Mr. Jack Redding '1 c/o Bethesda Licensing- 'i Texas Utilities-Electric Company -J 3 Metro Center Suite 610 {

Bethesda, Maryland 20814 William A. Burchette. Esq.

Counsel for Tex-La Electric Cooperative of Texas Heron, Burchette, Ruckert & Rothwell q Suite 700 1 I

l 1025 Thomas Jefferson Street, NW i

Washington, D.C. 20007 James P. McGaughy, Jr. d GDS Associates Inc.

a Suite 720 '

1850 Parkway Place Marietta, Georgia 30067 l Administrative Judge Peter Bloch 4 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission <

i Washington, D.C. 20555 Elizabeth B. Johnson Administrative Judge Oak Ridge National Laboratory P. O. Box X, Building 3500 Oak Ridge, Tennessee 37830 Dr. Kenneth A. McCollom-1107 West Knapp Stillwater, Oklahoma 74075 Dr. Walter H. Jordan Administrative Judge  ;

881 West Guter Drive Oak Ridge, Tennessee 37830  ;

-4 i

'b Enclosure-Exit Meeting (10/30/87)

Piping Audit - Implementation of Generic Technical Issues SWEC (Cherry Hill, NJ)

List of Attendees TU Electric D. M. Rencher SWEC A. C. Leonard S. A. Ali R. P. Klause F. L. Ogden S. C. Chow W. Wang USNRC/ Consultants D. Terao G. Moy (Teledyne Engineering Services)

R. Hookway (Teledyne Engineering Services) 1 i

i i

l

_ _ - _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _l

,. ._ _ ~

i c Q Q Q ): I h h

, ~..

4 Sumary of Audit on"10/28-30/87 . 4 .- . Novenber!2571987l Distribution: '

! Docket. File- '

NRC PDR Local PDR. '

t CPPD Reading +

OSP Reading J. Keppler/J. Axelrad 1

-C. Grimes P. McKee  ;

J..Lyons R..WarnickL 1 l

M. Malloy

-A. Vietti-Cook D..Terao CPPD-LA.

0GC.Bethesda T F. Miraglia E.-Jordan J. Partlow ACRS(10) <

i l

l l

l l

OFG .:05P:0 PPD 5 P:C PD :05P:CP :A/D:05P:0 PPD -:.  :

AVietti-Cook ':

NAME' :DTerao:cb oy- :JLy .: .:

,?

I DATE ::11/10/87 :11/l')/87 ' :11/t187' ':11/M/87  ::  :.

r ,

L _ -_-. - , :IL ss '>