ML20238D140

From kanterella
Revision as of 21:15, 11 May 2021 by StriderTol (talk | contribs) (StriderTol Bot change)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Final Response to FOIA Request for Documents Re 790313 Order Shutting Down Facility Due to Concerns Re Over Stresses in safety-related Piping Sys & Supports.Forwards App E Documents.Documents Also Available in PDR
ML20238D140
Person / Time
Site: Beaver Valley
Issue date: 09/09/1987
From: Grimsley D
NRC OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATION & RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (ARM)
To: Schwencer A
TECHNICAL ANALYSIS CORP.
References
FOIA-87-470 NUDOCS 8709100581
Download: ML20238D140 (2)


Text

{{#Wiki_filter:fse, Fo1 R T70 us,0Nsir m l [.

                     ' P' .                RESPONSE TO FREEDOM OF                                                                 N '"^'                        I ! ''               2
    'g eee..

j INFORMATION ACT (FOlA) REQUEST A CJ (

                                                                                                                                                                  $[p - 9 jgg7
                                                                                                                                                                                          ~
        '                                                                                                                         DOCKET hvMBERisi vr oppsceam REQUESTER PART l.-RECORDS RELEASED OR NOT LOCATED ISee checked boxes)                                                                     ~

No agency records subpset to the request have been located. , No additonal agency records subpset to the recivest have been located. N s Agency records subpct to the request thyt are identifed in Appendu are sIready available for public inspection and coppng in the NRC Pdic Document koc l 1717 H Street, N.W. Washington, DC . g Agency records sub.ect to the reavest that are identifad in Appendix b_ are being made available for public inspection and copying in the NRC Public Docurm

                                                                                                                                                                                                 ]

Room.1717 H $treet, N.W., Washir<gton, DC, ia a folder under this FOIA number and reauester name. j The nonpropnetary version of the proposal (s) that you agreed to accept in a telephone conversation with a member of my staM is now bemg made avalable for public inspection and coving at the NRC Public Document Room,1717 H Street. N W., Washington, DC, in a folder under the FOIA number and requestar name. Enclosed is informahon on how you may obtain access to and the charges for copying records placed in the NRC Pubhc Document Room,1717 H Street, N.W., Washington, DC. Agency records subpet to the request are enclosed. Any applicable charge for copies of the records provided and payrnent procedures are noted in the comments section. Records subpct to the request have been referred to another Federal agency 6es) for review and direct response to you. I in view of NRC's response to the request, no further action is being taken on appeal letter dated i PART H A-4NFOftMATION WITHHELD FROM PUBLfC DISCLOSURE Conain informaton in the requested records <a being wkhheld from pubhc d<sclosure pursuant to the FOIA exemptione described in and for tne reasons stated in Part it, sec- l tions B. C, and D. Any released portions of the documents for which only part of the record is being withbeid are being made available for public inspection and copying in  ! i the NRC Pubhc Document Room.1717 H Street N W., Washington, DC, in a folder under this FOlA number and requester name. Comrnents l l 1

                  -                                              a SIG -        . DIRECTOR,InvTION O P-     5 AND RE                                                                                                                                          l 4e                        ,

d, - i J l 8709100501 870909 NRcFoRM

  • PDR FOIA SCHIJENCB7-470 PDR is mi
 .-         -                                  --    _        _          ._                                 _ _ _ _            __      ______.__._______.____._______________________a

s 4 - 4. . , Re:- F0! A- 8'7 - 4 7 0 - 0' APPENDIX E D. RECORDS MAINTAINED IN THE PDR UNDER THE ABOVE RE0 VEST NUMBER NUMBER DATE DESCRIPTION

l. l-t% 79  %.~ o -{p b m R. R . H u Q ko E.ef. f % ,

W 4: 6 - v g Pem % % a , E"

                                                      'OOf              N Sp a 3 os a a X t a ; N h e a. /a w M       -

( HITS ho . # I V74 / N,;2 ) (M (vry. ) ,: u)/NM *. L R f6 A/E k O a /A n w3f"- E (Sgup) i i j 1

e

                ,q                  #                                                              ,/ NM
            ^*

l

       ,            ,                                                                                   L g     %                                    UNITED STAYES NUCLEAR REGULATORY Commission                      y~ ~ h                                !

i*d' D,, I) j # t REGION I gf j 5p f

                                                              $31 PARK AVENUE I c-                          "f~a/

t .aua er raussia. ecausvt.vwA i .o. 4

                      .o}
                      .....                                         18 JAN 1979 i

MEMORANDUM FOR: E. L. Jordan, Assistant Director for Technical Programs. DROI, IE  ; THRU: h U J. Brunner, Chief, Reactor Operations and Nuclear L Support Branch, RI FROM: R. R. Keimig,' Chief, Reacto" Projects Section #1, RO&NS Branch, RI ~T i

SUBJECT:

BEAVER VALLEY POWER STATION UNIT 1 (DOCKET NO. 50-334) SAFETY INJECTION PIPING STRESS' ANALYSIS - REQUEST FOR

        -                                       ADDITIONAL TECHNICAL REVIEW (AITS NO. F14741H2)
        '[                The licensee submitted LER 78-53 to Region 1 on October 27, 1978 to                                               {

{c.J J'l report errors identified by the licensee's A/E in the piping stress- i TAH analysis performed for safety injection piping inside the containment.. l' The LER was supplemented by additional reports on November 9 and Decem-hn ber 6,1978. The reported errors were discovered during an A/E review l n of the stress calculations after receipt of new information from the l wi NSSS vendor which corrected the weights of check valves installed in the l injection lines. l During our. review of these activities, we noted that the A/E had applied. L two essentially equivalent computer programs, PIPESTRESS and NUPIPE, to , > ... the reanalyses of three of the one hundred and three lines reviewed, i The results of these analyses indicated an overstress condition in two M lines requiring modification of the piping supports. Additionally, the "Uh results cotained from NUPIPE and PIPESTRESS for the same lines differed

   -                       significantly with each other and with the original design hand calcu-lations. Attempting to reconcile these differences, we discussed the analysis results with the A/E and informally with NRR: DOR Engineering gh".-"

Branch (Steve Hosford). Our discussion with NRR indicated that the magnitude of the differences in results could not be reconciled by only

          '                 the differences in calculational methods used by the computer programs as was indicated by the A/E. While the two lines affected have been
 -                         modified to accomodate the differences, we are concerned that, if the differences in supposedly equivalent analysis methods cannot be tech-nically reconciled, nonconservative results may have been previously applied to pipe supports designed for safety related piping.

CONTACT: .D. Beck man (488-1268)

3) foIg-#7M76 E// *
  • e

J Memorandum for E. L. Jordan 2 18 JAN 1979 We request that the information contained in the attachment to this memorandum be forwarded to the NRR: DOR Engineering Branch for their review. We recommend that they assess the information provided and establish whether further review or action appears necessary. Our concerns include:

1. Reconcilia' tion of the differing analysis results to assure that the design methods used are neither incorrect nor unconservative; and,
2. The need for further licensee review of piping potentially affected
 -                                             by any incorrect or nonconservative calculations.

Our discussions with the A/E, Stone and Webster, were conducted with Mr. 1-James Cumisky (Boston Office, 617-973-5685). Mr. Cumisky has indicated

    '"       '                           a willingness to provide additional. information or answer questions re-

, ni i garding this matter. i,

                                                                          /     R. R. Keimig, Chief g

l , Reactor Projects Section No.1 RO&NS Branch l

Attachment:

Chronology of A/E Reviews / Reanalyses ? I [',j 1 J 1 ; g 1 - %ll l 1

                                                                                                                             .I l
                                                                                                                             )

l

                                                                                                                         . l 4

u__.__. m

e gi rd n 3d nd p o 5( e t i

         -     / sSn                 t 8st eSa                        s           F 7 ncnE c                       e          0 oeiRi                    u           0
          .itl Tf                     q .         8 oti             Si                w       1 N ah eE n l ceP g no il            0 RurrIi                           .e E cahPs                        sb           s Ll          t                  e            s  0      0    0     0      0     5 as         ea            nd           e  0      0    0     8      0     7 eh              i e            r  6      9    8 1

td et c 'e h t de l s s t S 6 1 2 4 9 4 8 9 2 7 6 3 4 yy 1 4 i ns eu nanfl a ec e 4 Uh eonl op rs l c hi b - nlih s td a oal c gi er w i n and o ti eei h e l a gh sd th l tit oun t A S r t ,a rr o , ou S r s) th ff I ef rE rt S wooP rIaopb wd Y o on L P nrP l a A oeU rh e N yi N ot bd A et e i e E l asd ew dh R l cenl ec

     /   aihaod                     d a S Vl t            h e          it             s W       p     S wz              vt            s E   r pf S              y       oa            e I   eaoE nl                     r             r V   vs        Ria               pe          t E   aisT               n             r      S R   emeSda                      ea B        sE e                 r           d E       e yP we                 at            e 3      1     3     3      9     0
     /   nhlI er                          n       t  9      2     3     0      4     0 A itaPi e                       se            a 1      6     4     5      4     0 n( vw   e em se l   6      1     3     2      7     7 F dfa eo         srs              yg            u        3     3     3            3 O                                             c t       re          e       l n          l Y   rtiden                   . aa            a G   ol eoris                    nr          C O   puhcelt                     ar                -
 ~   L   est            w       l         a 0   re         r       eu       r N       rneses                  eg O   s     It ere               t n R   re         unh r pit ui pp H   oh C   rt .ml                 S    mi r     ) o          eS       op e y9 c 0 s E                c    g                       M                  M l    . 0eR                                        R                  R nt1 o1hT                         n                       E                  E on .w tS               E wi                           H                  H i

tr e 1. t al ,P t w o T T a a2d n eI l pBeol P eh h s

                                                                  +                  +    i up        iib              t                       T     T     T            T      s canlopit tadn                    s                 E     E     E            E      p l                            fe                      B     B     B            B a ei pd p a                 oh                     O     0     D            D      n crtade                           c                                               i ec         ace          st                     +     +     +            +

swe) s SrnaI cP t e lk p p p p p s es ea P us p e l l l l S l l u rt ,t dU s  : S S S S S S S l tnRsenN e , 0 E a seAbl u ry 2 + + + + R + + v mSeioe l - E T geFWhfh sl I P d d d d S d d l nl W t sa S I a a a c E a a l i pS & e en - P o o c o P o o A ppP rn ro U l l i l I l i iuVe .ee ti 6" N D D D D P D D psBnwwe st  : oo w i e E esetldt ed n T hthS ene hd i O Tit (bab TA L N

R ei7 3 8 5 7 Rei7 2 6 4 8 t - TN a - S rI 2, 4, 7, 7, TNa-S rI 7, 7, 2, 2, aI m EhtS 0 9 6 0 iS a Pt s - EhtS 1 5 0 7 r r 1 1 4 2 Pt s - 1 1 4 1 a g Ii e"

              'P wR6 Ii e" PwR6                                          v "6 o r

eep l n

                            ^

bis aLS r E n n err u u dot R R ifs s E S ndP S oeI S 5 9 9 4 S 2 1 1 2 ctP Et 8 9 3 8 Et 8 8 4 8 .a Rl Ti 3 ,. 8, 4, 8, Rl Ti 7, 8, 3, 9, et e Su 0 9 6 2 h oh Su 1 7 2 7 t nt EB 1 2 3 3 EB 1 6 0 7 n P * *

  • P I s 1 2 1 wah PA I s * *
  • o t PA hsi sew s ns8

- 2 2 oe ir6 n 7 n 7 tt - u t - u t - as5 RwnI 5 8 9 3 RwnI 0 6 4 6 l eiS 4 6 4 6 eiS 8 1 3 0 ue6 EN a- 9, 2, 9, 4, ENa - 7 6, 8, 3, - P Iht6 Pt s Ui en r" 9 8 1 0 4 1 2 P Iht6 Ft s Ui en r" 1 1 5 1 0 4 7 1 lh btf t a ,o rr NwRo NwRo 'e ao - 2 E vl t ouc bca aif E t P t 3 8 4 9 P t 8 2 8 9 era I l 8 3 9 8 I l 9 5 7 0 h a P n Uusu i 5, 2, 9, 6 Pn Uusu i 7, 6 7, 6, t pf NRAB 9 6 6 8 NRAB o 0 3 1 1 1 9 0 4 6 3 1 nn 2 2 2 iI s 1 1 1 e

                                                                                                  *     )         c

- ( se

                                                                                                               . n e                                                                                         t r l

l e kl e F suf . b 0 0 0 0 b F 0 0 0 0 a s0 0 0 0 8 a s0 isf e ws0 0 0 0 8 reiv oe8 6, 9, 8, 8, ws0 oe8 6, 9

                                                                                     ,  3,      8,       erdi l r1     6      4     9                                                              t 9                 l r1      6      4       9       9       sEwa lt       1      2     4    2                 lt

_ AS0 1 2 4 2 aP ov AS0 Ihr - yP s e bU Nnn - M M d edic oo R R E t nt E aais H H c ds T T i Sne

                                         +                                                             dSol
                                                                                        +                nEc

. T T T iR T T T T E B E B E B E B E B E B seelS "th O O D O O D uPi e 3 + + + lI ub 7 2 7

                                                                                 +      +       +       aPb
            -                   p     p     p    p      -                     p     p       p p v             o I                     l    l     l     l     I                                                      est S                  S      S     S    S       S                   S l

S l 1 l sias

            -                                                                           S       S       st"           g
         "                  +      +     +    +
                                                        -                                               e             n 6

6

                                                                          +      +      +       +       rnei d     d      d    d                          d                           t ehr e                                                                       d       d       d     set a n

a o a a a e a a a a w e i l 1 0 i o l o i n o o c o et rp l i i i heop L O 0 D O L D D n D-Tbf a ll

                           ..                                       3                                                                   j
                 ~                                                                                                                       1 Although modifications were made to line'SI-72 which reduced the stress                                        ;

to allowable values in both it and SI-72, the difference in the respec- l tive as built results raised the question of the accuracy and/or conser- l vatism of the PIPESTRESS program as applied to all the 103 lines analyzed. ' The f>llowing information, extracted from the S&W report to the licensee 7 on this matter discusses the three lines involved and the evaluation of each line's stress analysis results. The figures mentioned are attached. ' y, "The nodel run in NUPIPE 'and in PIPESTRESS are geometrically similar, r I however, the mass distribution and support stiffness are different. ' further, the method of force summation (intramodal) is different rj between PIPESTRESS and NUPIPE. NUPIPE utilizes more conservative , techniques for intramodal combinations of gener/Jiized loadings.

                                                                                                                                 'l These newer techniques arose following establishment of BV1 Design                                      4 Criteria . . . .

The PIPESTRESS methods used were accepted dynamic analysis tech-niques for Beaver Valley 1 generation plants and are the basis for. all computerized Category 1 pipe stress analysis done for' Beaver , Valley Unit 1. Figure IA gives the hanger location and peak local stress vs. sllowable from the NUPIPE model for line 6"-SI-20. Figure IB is a i hetch of the hangers-pipe (SI-A-60/6"-SI-?,0. interface showing the l overstressed area. The table attached to this sketch identifies , i the d,1fferences in the hanger attachment lo@s resulting from the two different computer models. Based on the above, the Safety l l Injection line 6"-SI-20 is acceptable as desiped."

                                                                                                                                      ]

Discussions with S&W indicated that this acceptance was basedwpon ob.- taining satisfactory stress values using the techniques committed to for - the original design. The differences in NUPIPE and PIPESTRESS results , were attributed to NUPIPE using root mean square values for individual

                         .and total loads where the PIPESTRESS program algebraically comb.ines                                          ;

individual loads. ',. i The S/S report continues: > j { l . PFigures II A&B' give,the most highh stressed hanger, location and i l ' stresses resulting from the NUPIPE and PIPESTRESS runs on 6"-SI-73. ) , Eased on this data, ii"-SI-73 is acceptable as designed. 1 I * ( , b

                                                                                                       /

(

                                                                                                            >                O'
                                                                              ~

l . t l ' . t i

I

                                      ,a      =

Q

                                                                                                                                                         \

1 Figures IIIA and B give'the most highly stressed hanger, location j and stresses resulting from the NUPIPE and PIPESTRESS runs for line 1 6"-SI-72. Based on this data, modification to hanger YC-1.C-H306A

                                                                                                                                                         ^

(Figure IV) and the addition of hanger LSS-H is' required to be 2

                                            ' added to line 6"-SI-72".

The reasons given by S&W for the differences between the NUPIPE and j PIPESTRESS results were the same as those for 6"-SI-20. In these cases,

                                                                                                 ~

j the addition of the supports on 6"-SI-72 also affected the response of- 1 6"-SI-73 (as noted in the far right hand column of the previous tabulation) l resulting in both the NUPIPE and PIPESTRESS values being within code { allowable values.  !

'                                     In conclusion, the S&W report states-
                                          .     "We believe that the remainder of the containment annulus piping is I

acceptable based on the fact that the pipe stress analysis section

       !                                        has comple'ted a review of seismic piping shown on the BP-3 series
       .                            .           drawings (annuluspiping). The review was limited to piping 21/2" OD to 6" OD because of the possibility that these sizes may havo -

c been ar.alyzed by the ' chart' method. .The attached tabulation (Table I) contains all the seismic lines falling between 21/2" and , , , 6". This tabulationicontains 103 seismic lines of which 55 were , @ > reviewed and found acceptable.  ! A large portion of this piping was analyzed during the "as built l

         ,                                       review" .(in S974) using computer program PIPESTRESS. PIPESTRESS results areravailabler for all or portions of 45 of the (remaining)
 ,'(
 ...
  • teldlated lines and are acceptable".

W '. On the basis of discussions with NRR: DOR Engineering Branch personnel. E gjh ws consider additional technice3 review is necessary-to neconcile the diffennces in the' PIPESTRESS 'and NUPIPE results.- These discussions in- , dicated that the differenc{s appeared to be incongruous in light of ~ i theiF, knowledge of the two,. prograrra. 1 j 1 j t . l e

                             .                      ,              y                 ,
                                                                                                                                                ~
                                                                                < g 5'                                      ,                                                                                                  i
                                                                            /
    "               ~'
                        -        .s> ..t         ,

s - 4 l

i l Tec mica Analysis Corporation l 6723 Whittier Avenue. Suite 202. McLean, VA 22101 (703)883-3700

                                                                                                                                 ]
                                                                                                                                  )

l July 21,19El DIEDOM OF INFORMATl0#

                                                                                          ' bclREQUEsr Director, Office of Administration                                                                              0            1 U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Wa shington, DC 20555 d]                -

Subj ect : Freedom of Inf ormation Act Request f or Records

Dear Gentleman:

We are seeking a . copy of certain internal NRC memoranda, notes and log book entries related to the events associated with  ! the March 13, 1979 NRC Order which shut down the Beaver Valley i Uni t i reactor due to concerns over stresses in saf e ty r elate d piping systems and their supports. We have been unable to find these documents in the Public Document Room at 1717 H Street.  ; I In accordance with the provisions of the FOIA, we request a j 1 copy of the documents identified herein. j 1 Unless otherwise noted below, the period of time of interest to us is October 26, 1978 through August 8, 1979 only. 'Ibe following documents or groups of documents are requested:

1. I&E Region 1 memos, notes or Daily Reports to Hg on an l Oct ober 26 telecon in which Duquesne Light Company  !

orally reported an werstress condition in the Beav er l Valley 1, Docket 50-33 4 Assigned LER 7 8-53/OIP. The phone call was made to Mr. D. R. Haverkamp and Mr. A. N. I Fasno at 1630 hours on October 26, 1978. I

2. Any I&E Region I working notes, Daily Reports to Hg, l memos of phone calls or utility handouts (from the Inspector and Region 1 persons), related to discussions with Duque sne Light or Stone and Webster or NRC Bethesda on this subje ct during or f oll owing the i October 31-November 3, 197 8 I&E inspection. We have Re por t No. 50-334/78-30 indicating that W.J. Raymond performed the inspe ction and identifying the representatives of Duquesne Light Company and Stone and Webster that were contacted during the inspection.

Period of interest here is October 31 to Nwember 14, 1978. 9' g p ? 9 W W ~7 , 1

g 7 ' 4-t iL  %-  ; 4 1 ,,y r; , , '

               ,,  .o.  ,

s .

                                                                        ,-                            s D"
                  ~'
                          '3, .   'Same. req u!sst         4:[ 2 abbve except related, to         3 Luque sne ' s t                        '   Interim LER dated Novesber 9,. 1978 and the 4 inspection II, .

coy sted by lI&E Inspaction Report 50-334/78-33. Pt;ti od of ir.terest here i n, Novemba c .9 to Decenber 6, 1978 ~ and J ncl udes the' I&E 2napectin's calls to Luq ue sne on 11/30, 12/1 and 12/5/78,.

                           $.      Same. . as 2 above' except reltted to Duybesne's LER                            78-ti3 / IT-0.        Period     ot" intuent in December            6   through Cecember 8,197 8.
5. Region I memoranda, notes > and lirjono calls to or from i

the NRR project manager and arry oth&r person in. NRC Bethesda regarding strer;s calculations on Beaver Valley saf ety r ela ced sy stems. Period of interest is December 8 th r ough De cember 17 antj incl udes phene calls of December 17. and 14 and R6gion 1 Daily Report to Hg on De cabe r . li , 1. 97 8. 6.' Jam'e rec ua st as 2 abov e except related to the inspe ction covered fy I&E Inspection Report 50-334/78-

34. Period of interrn itt December 18, 197 G th rough December 31, 1978 and includes December 22 6iscussions with NRR/ DOR personnel (e.g., Wiggingt n, 'Hosf ord, others). .

7.- Pr ov ide a copy of the concurrence page for th e NRC March 12,1979 Show Cause Order on Beaver vc11ey Unit 1 and the concurrence page for the liafety Evalua tion Report. which accompanies that oren. .

8. b*amt req ue st as i dbove exceot for the NRC August 6, 1970 Order . on Beav er Valley Unit 1. .
9. Frov iih. all mem !randa, notes or other documents on this s ub,N ei o rigi na ted, con curred in or signed by the Director of Systems Saf ety, NRR and the Chief of D0R Enginaerial Branch t o anyone in NRCt
a. Ad:sising f or or against the March' 13, 1979 Order on Bem er Valley Unit 1,
b. Recommending f or or against approval of an ceder teminating that March 13,1979 oider.
10. Provido a copy of the pages of the WRR Beaver Valley 1 Proj ect Manager's Log Book that have entries related to the concerns over stresces in the saf ety related piping systems (October 26, 1978 through August 8,197 9) .

1 2 'l j [J'] a*? ', f I Y / f g,)

           >.(_ "'F eiwe' agree    to pay the cost of _ fulfilling this request up - to If' a higher cost is projected, please call' me at 883-L$200.00
              . 3706.                                                                       <

Your prompt response t'o this request will be appreciated. Sincer ely, Al Schwencer l 4 3}}