ML20024F318
| ML20024F318 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Diablo Canyon  |
| Issue date: | 09/01/1983 |
| From: | Crane P PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC CO. |
| To: | JOINT INTERVENORS - DIABLO CANYON |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8309090270 | |
| Download: ML20024F318 (48) | |
Text
{{#Wiki_filter:* gg g
}g( AELATED conny,gpng.np 00CKETED USNRC 1
'83 SEP -7 21 :04 2
CFFICE CF SECRL1p t 3 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 00CKETitiG & SERV!c-BRANCH 4 NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 5 6 BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING APPEAL BOARD 7 l l 8 9 In the Matter of ) 10 ) Docket Nos. 50-275 I PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY ) 50-323 11 ) (Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power ) (Reopened Hearing -- 12 Plant, Units No. 1 and 2) ) Design Quality
) Assurance) 13 14 l 15 I i
! 16 APPLICANT PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY'S ! ANSWERS TO ( JOINT INTERVENORS' SECOND SET OF INTERROGATORIES l 17 l l 18 19 l i 20 INTERROGATORY NO. 1:
-List all non-Class I structures, systems, and I 21 1 22 components at Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant ("Diablo j 23 Canyon") that are "important to safety," as that term is I 24 Prescribed and defined in the November 20, 1981 memo from ,
i 25 Harold Denton entitled " Standard Definitions for
)
l 26 Commonly-Used Safety Classification Items." , 1 ! G309090270 830901 PDR ADOCK 05000275 l i g PDR
1 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 1: 2 Applicant objects on the grounds that the 3 interrogatory seeks discovery of matters which are beyond 4 the scope of the Board's order of August 26, 1983. 5 6 INTERROGATORY NO. 2: 7 List each and every major contractor and sub-8 contractor for Diablo Canyon, Units 1 and 2, that has been
~
9 involved in the design of structures and/or systems and/or 10 components important to safety. For PGandE and each such 11 contractor or subcontractor state: 12 (a) the time period when the subcontractor did 13 design of such structures, systems, and/or components; 14 and I 15 (b) the time period when the subcontractor did 16 not develop and/or implement a QA/QC program that 17 complied fully with 10 C.F.R. Part 50, Appendix B, and 18 Appendix A, GDC-1. 19 20 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 2: . 21 Applicant objects on the grounds that the-22 interrogatory seeks discovery of matters which are beyond 23 the scope of the Board's Order of August 26, 1983. 24 /// 25 /// 26 /// l _ m 1 INTERROGATORY NO. 3: 2 For PGandE and each of its past or present major 3 Diablo Canyon contractors and subcontractors, state whether 4 you contend that, at all times during their work at Diablo 5 Canyon, each had established and implemented a design QA/QC 6 program that complied fully with 10 C.F.R. Part 50, 7 Appendix B, and Appendix A, GDC-1. If you do not so 8 contend, for each company, contractor, or subcontractor, 9 state: 10 (a) each and every fact which supports your 11 answer, including a description of the noncompliance; 12 (b) each 10 C.F.R. Part 50, Appendix A or B 13 criterion not complied with; 14 (c) the time period in which such noncompliance 15 occurred; and 16 (d) as to each instance of noncompliance, all 17 measures, if any, taken by you or others to compensate l l 18 for the noncompliance. 19 20 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 3: i 21 As to PGandE, its contractors or subcontractors, 22 for the period prior to November 19, 1981, the interrogatory 23 is irrelevant and asks for matters which are beyond the 24 scope of the Board's Order of August 26, 1983. With regard 25 to the ITP as specified in Contention Number 8 of the same 26 Order, there is full compliance.
1 INTERROGATORY NO. 4: 2 List each ITR, with revision number, upon which 3 you intend to rely in the reopened design quality assurance 4 proceeding. As to each ITR, identify specifically the 5 sections upon which you intend to rely. 6 7 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 4: 8 Applicant intends to put into evidence each and 9 every ITR in its latest revision and to rely upon each in 10 its entirety. 11 12 INTERROGATORY NO. 5: 13 State whether you intend to rely upon the IDVP 14 Final Report in the reopened design quality assurance 15 Proceeding. If so, identify specifically the sections upon 16 which you intend to rely. 17 18 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 5: 19 Applicant intends to put into evidence the IDVP 20 Final Report and rely upon it in its entirety. 21 22 INTERROGATORY NO. 6: 23 State whether you intend to rely upon the NRC 24 Staff Diablo Canyon SER Supplement 18, in the reopened 25 design quality assurance proceeding. If so, identify 26 specifically the sections upon which you intend to rely.
. w P L 1 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 6:
2 Applicant intends to put the NRC Staff Diablo 3 Canyon SER Supplement 18, into evidence and to rely upon it 4 in its entirety. 5 6 INTERROGATORY NO. 7: 7 State whether you have reviewed the Quality 8 Assurance Review and Audit Reports issued by R.F. Reedy, 9 Inc. in March 1982 regarding design activities of PGandE and 10 various of its contractors or subcontractors. If so, state 11 specifically: 12 (a) each fact stated therein with which you 13 disagree; 14 (b) the specific pages of each report where the 15 facts set forth in your answer to subparagraph (a) are 16 located; 17 (c) each ' conclusion or opinion stated therein l 18 with which you disagree; i 19 (d) the specific pages of each such report where 20 the conclusions or opinions set forth in your answer to 21 subparagraph (c) are located; and 22 (e) the specific basis for your disagreement with 23 cach such fact, conclusion, or opinion. 24 /// l 25 /// 26 /// t ! l- -
1 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 7: 2 Applicant objects on the grounds that the 3 interrogatory seeks discovery of matters which are beyond 4 the scope of the Board's Order of August 26, 1983. 5 6 INTERROGATORY NO. 8: 7 List each and every respect in which the DCP 8 Corrective Action Program is not now complete with respect k. 9 to any corrective action which is necessitated by, arises 10 out of, or relates to a defect, nonconformance, or l 11 deficiency in (a) the design of Diablo Canyon or (b) the 12 design QA program of PGandE or any the [ sic] design QA 13 programs of its past or present contractors or 14 subcontractors. In addition, identify specifically (a) each 15 and every structure, system, or component important to 16 safety as to which such corrective action is not complete, 17 (b) the- specific corrective action, including any 18 modifications, not completed, and (c) the defect, 19 nonconformance, or deficiency necessitating or leading to 20 such corrective action. 21 22 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 8: 23 Applicant objects to the second sentence of 24 Interrogatory No. 8 as being beyond the scope of the Board's 25 Order dated August -26, 1983. In response to the first 26 sentence of the interrogatory, Applicant submits the current 1 DCP status report. The status previously was reported by 2 the IDVP in section 7.3 of the IDVP Final Report. Further 3 details are given in the referenced sections of the DCP's 4 Phase I and Phase II Final Reports. 5 6 INTERROGATORY NO. 9: 7 List each and every document within your posses-8 sion, custody, and/or control that describes, documents, 9 outlines, or discusses any deficiency, nonconformance, 10 error, or deviation by PGandE, or any of its Diablo Canyon 11 contractors or subcontractors, in or from compliance with 12 any of the Appendix B criteria, GDC-1 of Appendix A, or 13 applicable QA procedures. With respect to each such 14 document, state: 15 (1) its date and title; l 16 (2) its author (s) and recipient (s); l 17 (3) the nature of the deficiency, nonconformance, 18 error, or deviation described; and 19 (4) what action, if any, was taken to remedy the 20 deficiency, nonconformance, error, or deviation. 21 /// 22 /// 23 /// 24 l 25 26
1 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 9: d 2 Applicant will produce for inspection relevant 3 documents within the scope of the Order of the Board dated 4 August 26, 1983, at its place of business in San Francisco, 5 California, on September 15, 1983. 6 7 Respectfully submitted, 8 ROBERT OHLBACH PHILIP A. CRANE, JR. 9 RICHARD F. LOCKE Pacific Gas and Electric Company 10 P. O. Box 7442 San Francisco, CA 94120 11 (415) 781-4211 12 ARTHUR C. GEHR Snell & Wilmer 13 3100 Valley Center Phoenix, AZ 85073 14 (602) 257-7288 15 BRUCE NORTON Norton, Burke, Berry & French, P.C.
-16 P. O. Box 10569 Phoenix, AZ 85064 17 (602) 955-2446 18 Attorneys for Pacific Gas and Electric Company
-21 B i
- ' 'Phil' A. Crang,Jr.
. 23 DATED: September 1, 1983. 24 25 26 _ _ .. - - _ - _ - _ _ __ ... . . . _ . _ - . ~ . _ _ . __ ,__ _ _ _ _ __. _ . _ _ . - _ . . _ _ . . . _ _
g [a g ){ g 1, 030057 DiabloCanyonProject PACIFIC GAS AND ELEhTRIC COMPANY BECHTEL POWER CORPDRATION
~
August 30, 1983 DCVP-TES-1333 Dr. W. E. Cooper TES Document Control Project 5511 Teledyne Engineering Services Waltham, MA 02254
SUBJECT:
Diablo Canyon Project Phase I and Phase II Status, August 29, 1983
Dear Dr. Cooper:
Attached please find a copy of the subject document which updates the information sent to you August 29, 1933 (DCYP-TES-1332). This provides a detailed current status of the DCP work and is intended to assist you in your preparation of a supplement to the IDVP Final Repart. l
- Please advise if you have any questions or corraents concerning this information.
Thank you. Very truly yours, GH !!00RE Project Engineer, Unit 1 7
/: RR Fray EFKason:skf
'No written reply requested.
' Attachuent: Diablo Canyon Project Phase I . and Phase II Status, August 29. 1983. cc: RL Cloud (RLCA) f ATTACHMENT TO RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 8 P.O. BOX 3965 e SAN FRANCISCO, CAltf0RNIA 94119
.4011a:SXF _
' 030057 DIABLO CANYON PROJECT PHASE I AHD PHASE II STATUS August 29, 1983 Update ,-
SUMMARY
g_
.~. In the following we are providing a listing of the status of our Phase I and Phase II work. We have presented below the scope of the DCP CAP as defined in the Phase I Final Report and Phase II Final Report. This is an update of the August 29, 1983 transmittal (DCVP-TES-1332).
This summary is divided into 4 sections, providing a status of the work. Section 1. Civil / Structural work Section 2. Piping and Pipe Supports Design Review Section 3. Equipment Seismic Design Review Section 4. Phase II Status For each section some of the information is presented in tables. The status of all information is in terms of the percent of tne work thatComplete is complete. back-up Where no percentage is shown, no DCP activity has occurred. information is available in the Phase I Final Rejport and Phase II Final Report. l l I b
~
i i l i August 29, 1983 f m%Ln M6
1 - - l t
\
SECTION 1. CIVIL / STRUCTURAL WORK gGQg The status of the Civil / Structural work is presented in Table 1.1 which includes important infomation contained in the footnotes to this table. For details on this work, please see applicable sections of the Phase-I Final ,
~
Report. i l I b l l l August 29, 1983 0040D/0116P
Tabla 1.1 DIABLO CANYON .0 JECT , . PHASE I CORRECTIVE ACTION PROGRAM STATUS - CIVIL STRUCTURAL Ares
- 8 Desten Review 9estenRevistenerReanalysikN ModificationsI ' l
Method- Calc. er Criterla Clarified As-5ection Description and Methodology Const. Sullt DCWs Criteria elegy Analyses DCRs Reviewed Reviewed Reviewed Estab11shed Issued Compi . Coop 1. Compf. DCR Methodology Calc. Calc. Calc. ( Established Pres. Check. Aper. 2.1.1 Centainment l' and Internals 2.1.1.3.2.1 Nortrental 100 model of . containment for DC and 99E 2.1.1.3.2.2 portrental 100 model of - containment ' internal structure for Nesgr1 2.1.1.3.2.3 Norizontal 100 model for containment for Mosgri e e' .g .,., 3 Aegest 29. 1983 00400/0086P
~
T bis 1.1 , . DIADLO CAA .A PROJECT . PHASE I CORRECTIVE ACTION PROGRAM STATUS - CIVIL STRUCTURAL Area
*t. Desten Review 9esten Revision er Reanalysis stadtficat1&nd Comments Method. Calc. or Criteria Clarlfled As-Section Description and Methodology DCNs Const. Dutit SCWs Criteria ology Analyses Established issued Compl. Compi. Ceay1.
Reviewed Reviewed Reviewed DCM Methodology Calc. Calc. Calc. , Established Pres. Check. Appr. 2.1.1.3.2.4 vertical 100 I model for containment enterter for Hosgri 2.1.1.3.2.5 vertical 100 model of containment Internal , strectures
- ans annulus for Mosgri 2.1.1.4 Design review of structures 2.1.1.4.1 Containment 2.1.1.4.1.1 Selsmic 100 100 100 analysis review 100 100 100 2.1.1.4.1.2 Review of design 2.1.1.4.2 Internal structure 2.1.1.4.2.1 Review of 100 100 100 seismic
- analysts 2.1.1.4.2,2 Review.6F 100 90 75 ,, . ' . '
design 4 August 29. 1983 00400/0086P
sp l Wn Ce 0 0 O 0 1 , f' DC , t1
- d l p n l m 5 0 O' 0 '
e e eo 9 9 1 t stC tA a , . c i t1 f sy 0 0 i d nn oo 9 9 0 0 5 o CC 1 M d su e Ns 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 MIs 1 1 1 1 cr. l e 0 o 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 as 0 t 0 0 6 0 1 1 1 I CA 1 1 1 S U T N 1 . A s .k T v cc 0 0 5 0 0 0 S- l l e 0 0 9 0 0 0 a ah 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 R n CC 1 1 1 1 - A e R e T G R . . C O ce 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 C RL r l e 0 0 0 9 0 0 0 0 J PA e ar CF 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 O R 1 1 1 R NU n e 1 OT IC t 1 TU s L CR id yd 1 2 T N AT S v e et ge oh b A E Rf y l s t C VL l g oi i II n e al ro dl O TV ob L CI il od h a 0 0 0 B fC sCde tt 0 0 0 A R e oh es 1 1 1 I 9 ahs ME _ O M C lti rel eMb I t a idt M E rnsC S CaED A H P - rsd eee
.sw cli ye l av ane CAR w
e i d v - e ., oye w ed R h gi nt 6v e e1 e _ tMeR _ s e 9 ad ie rw ee _ ti _ iv _ _ re
. CR n f o
' g f i o e )
s s
? e ne n e s n 2 y l
n D e ee c . n a ( s
) l a l e t) n tta n i s e r y 4 9 a e v n a f t3 a f vt l c t rg
( a e a c l s o a( r ar ores a n l is t p s t y cs c cC est ce3 ei en t e i e sr ye w e ie fl r i f r ws a ey s i nt f oi ra ur 1i 1d r e d o 1 r s[ s l0l td yo lh r l l enl id v ett 1l t h g e0 e c e l nu i ia a i a vnaa d r pps si i t s d/d at s n a v dn l dl uu r e o oto ne 3 D e A n nwAs e on o R MA P oo MP eorn Rdca of e Mos iue Prr Ab C t I M mom Am 8 9 . 1 _ s 1 2 P 2 ,6 _ e 1 3 98 _ r 2 2 2 A 3 3 3 20 _ 6 2 3 3 3 3 0 n 4 4 4 5 5 t/ o 2 2 2 2 2 2 s0 i 1 1 1 1 1 - - 1 u0 t - - 1 1 1 g4 _ 1 1 1 1 c 1 1 1 1 1 u0 e 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 A0 S . 2 2 2 2 2 I ): ;
T:b12 1.1 -- . DIA8LO CANYt, /ROJECT . . PMASE I CORRECTIVE ACTION PROGRAM STATUS . CIVIL STRUCTURAL
'8= testen Review DestenRevistenerReanalysik'I Modificat1M ' ***
Area As-Descriptten Method- Calc. er Criteria Clarlfled 5ection Criteria elegy Analyses and Methodelegy DCNs Const. Oellt DCRs Established Issued Compt. Compt. Comp 1. Reviewed Reviewed Reviewed DCM Methodelegy Calc. Calc. Calc. ,: Established Pres. Check. Appr. 2.1.2.3.4 Description 100 100 100 100 l' of analvtical output 100 100 100 100 2.1.2.3.5 Local vert. slab fles. 100 100 100 2.1.2.3.5.1 Model mothed and analysis setput . 2.1.2.4 Structure design review Introductlen 100 100 2.1.2.4.1 100 100 100 100 50 2.1.2.4.2 51 abs (5) 100 100 95 g5 30 2.1.2.4.3 Me11s 100 100 100 100 2.1.2.4.4 Lead dis-sipation to foundation 100 100 100 106 2.1.2.4.5 Concrete colums 95 95 50 2.1.2.5 Analysts and quellficatten of structure Fuel hand 11pg 100 2.1.3 building Methodelelgy 100 ,, , , . 2.1.3.3 100 100 100 100 '. 2.1.3.3.2 Model description 100 100 100 100 2.1.3.3.3 Model material properties Aegest 29. 1983 00400/0086P
labla 1.1-SIA8L0 CANYt >ROJECT . PMA5E I CoastCTIvt ACTION PROGRAM STATUS . CIVIL STRUCTURAL I
*I. Geilen Review testenRevistenerReanalystNI Itodificatismi e *.
Area As- ' Descriptten feethod- Calc. or Crtteria C1arlfled 5ect1*n Criteria elegy Analyses and teethodology DCNS Const. Dellt DCNs Issued Comp 1. Coupl. Camp 1. Reviewed Reviewsd Reviewed Estab11thed DCM Methodology Calc. Calc. Calc. Established Pres. Check. Apor. 100 100 100 90 2.1.3.3.4 Description of analyses 2.1.3.4 Design review 100 100 90 2.1.3.4.1 Criterts e.ai. j 100 100 2.1.3.4.1.1 Visual 1-spect. and , slupilfled , analysts 100 100 WO , 2.1.3.4.1.2 Detailed selsmic analysis 4 100 100 0 100 100 100 0 2.1.3.4.2 Hodiftip-tions(*3 95 95 50
- 2.1.3.5 Analyses and sodifications <
of modifled Ste?cture 100 100 95 95 70 2.1.3.6 Fuel hand 11ag butiding crane 100 40 30 20 20 0 0 0
-- Platforms 100 1 2.1.4 Turbine building (I) 100 2.1. 4 . 2 Criteria , *l *7 Meihodo1hy 100 2.1.4.3 100 l 2.1.4.3.1 Structures t
Itodels 100 j 2.1.4.3.2 7-Aug;st 29. 1983 00400/0086P
Table 1.1 . DIA6LO CARY04 .0 JECT
* ~
PHASE I CORRICTIVE ACTIOR PROGRAR STATUS . CIVIL STRUCTURAL Ares
' ' Besten Review DeslenRevistenorResnalysth RodificatientI ' !**
Method- Calc. or Criteria Clarlfled As. 5ection Bescription and Methodology DCRs Const. Bellt DCRs Criterla ology Analyses Estab11shed Issued Compt. Compi. Compi. Reviewed Reviewed Reviewed DCR Rethodology Calc. Calc. Calc. Established Prep. Check. Appr. Nortrontal 100 2.1.4.3.2.1 100 2.1.4.3.2.2 Vertical 100 2.1.4.3.2.3 Podestal model Analyses 100 2.1.4.3.3 description 100 2.1.4.3.3.1 Review of analyses 2.1.4.4 Design review 100 100 55 2.1.4.4.1 Eval. to triteria 100 100 100 100 95 25 0 2.1.4.4.2 Redif1 cations 100 109 85 2.1.4.5 Analysis and quellficatten of structure 2.1.5 Intake structure Scope 100 2.1.5.1 2.1.5.2 Criteria Loading 100 2.1.5.2.1 combinations Rethodolog'y 100 ,, . . , . , 2.1.5.3 100 2.1.5.3.1 Description selsmic math. 100 2.1.5.3.2 model
.s_
Augrst 29. 1983
- 00400/0086R
A
~ /
1l
=" T
%"( ) O[>
<E I
[C. L;.
'"s 1
sp
. Wm 0 l
- Co '
- 8 DC e
t1 t l p n e l m eo 0 0 1 t sBC tA a . . c i t1 f sp 0 i no oo 0 d e CC 1 R d e su Ws Cs 0 0 1 Di tr 0 0 0 0 0 0 ie 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 as 1 1 1 1 1 1 I CA 1 s I t k f i A s .k 0 0 0 T v cc 0 0 0 0 0 0 S l l e 0 0 0 0 a ah 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 p 1 R CC A a R e . . T G R C O cs 0 0 0 0 0 E RL r l e 0 0 0 J PA e ar 1 1 1 1 0 R CP 4 NU n 1 0T o lC i - 1 iU s ' 3Y CR AT if v e yd ge 2 oh 1 N S el l s b A C Rf y t C VL t g oi I II TV ne al re dl ob O tl ed ha L CI 0 0 0 S EC sC d e tt 0 0 A R e D ah5 oh es RE 0 1 1 1 I R D O it1 C re1 erb a 0 I t 0 idt R 1 E rns C S CaED A H P rsd eee
.sw cl i ye l av ane CAR w
e i d v - e ' . , ed w R eye h gi entelove tRoR s e D ad ie rw ee ti i v re CR e f o8 t(
)
w-e it s ns ot n e e s o e vf r e e is l t c r o c i t e ed c srer t et o e1 oe r1f r a u r e wt s e sa nr et r u ys s i i a r
'e t ty pl ia t s
p r st cf nont wd t ce t y e el rn l u i r f l i ele Fte 0 goc ee el iu ot pc aun el t se ca s s sep 1 eje 1 iu i c se f a i td c ee arb r sdt r vo vs ep t ra an r ee Do ef e 3 s e vd ao ldo eor nt ue enat er ee Rp Rr Rs nt r I sc Sa C Se R 8 9 p Wm Ssp Assw Dacs 1 P
,6 a 2 7 98 e 2 3 3 5 6 20 r 3 4 1 8 0 A 7 8 O. 8 0 0 t/
6 7 7 7 3 s0 n o 3 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 e0 5 5 5 5 1 g4 i 1 1 1 t 1 1 1 1 1 1 e0 c 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 A0 2 2 2 5 e 2 2 2 2 2 2 j i' ' ,)ji !l,.j; 4I
1ak12 1.1' DIA8LO CART. PROJECT , PMASC I CORRECTIVE ACTION PROGRAR STATUS
- civil STRUCTURAL Area '8* Desien Soview DeslanRevisionerReanalysik' Rodificattens ' E'
, Section Description Nethod- Calc. er Criteria Clartfled As. Criterla elegy Analyses and Methodelegy DCNS Const. Built DCRs Reviewed Reviewed Reviewed Estabitsbed Issued Comp 1. Comp 1. Comp 1. OCM Rethodelegy Calc. Calc. Calc. Established Pres. Check. Aser. 4 2.1.6 Outdoor storage tanks 2.1.6.2 Criteria 100 2.1.6.3 Rethodelegy i 2.1.6.3.1 Description 100 4 2.1.6.3.2 Settelt meth. '. 100 model i 2.1.6.3.3 Setssic model 100 < properties 2.1.6.3.4 Analytical 100 methods i , 2.1.6.4 Design review and goalifica. tien of tanks 2.1.6.4.1 Review of 100 100 100 ! analysts 1 100 100 2.1.6.4.2 Review of 100 results 4 ! 2.4 Electrical l conduit and
- raceway j supports 2.4.2 C 1teria.8 .g .,.,
I 2.4.2.1 Response 100 acceleratten of suoport systems
-10 -
August 29. 1983 00400/0086P l
Tib13 1.1 , DIA8LO CANY06 .ROJECT . PHASC I CORRECTIVC ACiton PROGRAR STATUS , CIVIL STRUCTURAL Ares '8* 9esten Review 9estenRevistenerReanalys1NI RedificattensI ' ! Method- Calc. er Criteria Clarlfted As-5ectlen Descriptlen Criteria elegy Analyses and Methodelegy KNs Const. Bellt BCWs Reviewed Reviewed Reviewed Cstablished Issued Comp 1. Compt. Compt. DCR Rethodelegy Calc. Calc. Celt. Estab11shed Pres. Check. Acor. Leeding 100 2.4.2.2 ces61 nation . Acceptance 100 2.4.2.3 criterla 2.4.3 Selsele resistance analysts 2.4.3.1 Rethodelegy , Description 100 2.4.3.1.1 of sepperts Transverse 100 2.4.3.1.2 seismic analysis Long1tedinal 100 2.4.3.1.3 setselc analysts 2.4.4 Verificatten of seppert lecettensO) 2.4.5 Design review 100 100 90 2.4.5.1 Evalvetten to criteria 99 95 0 9 2.4.5.2 Description of modificy- ., . , . , tions .. 2.5 HVAC ducts and supports 2.5.2 Criteria 2.5.2.1 Response 100 acceleration of ductwork systems AugYst 29, 1983 00400/0096P
ftbla 1.1 . DIABLO CART 0h .dOJECT . 4 PHASC I CORRECTIVC ACTION PROGRAM STATUS ' CIVIL STRUCTURAL
'8 Detten Review BestenRevisionerSeanalesikII Itodificattend ' "*
Area As-5ectlen Description Methed- Calc. or Criteria Clarlfled Criterla elegy Analyses and Methodology BCRs Const. Bellt SCNs Established Issued Cesel. Comp 1. Comp 1,
. Reviewed Reviewed Reviewed DCM Methodelegy Calc. Calc. Calc.
3 a Established Preo. Check. Aser. Leading 100 2.5.2.2 j codinattensOS) Acceptance 100 2.5.2.3 criteria 2.5.3 Rethodelegy Descriptten 100 2.5.3.1 of ducts and , sapperts , Generic 100
- 2.5.3.2
- gealification Specific 100
! 2.5.3.3 geallfication 2.5.4 Design review
' 100 100 15 2.5.4.1 Evaluat1p to criterlatIII 100 95 30 0 2.5.4.2 Descriptten i of modifica. tions(III 1 i s .g ., Aegest 29, 1983 0040D/0086P
Note s: 1. s includes work required to mak2 caltslations consistet with as 41t as a rss:lt af cther changes or to c rrect strcrs. ,
- 2. C:Icc1stions cv31 eating the cf fset cf pipe h nger loads on restratxts are la progr ss.
- 3. Final p1ptog and other leads are being reevaluated.
- 4. Designalleuohidsandproceduresfornon-seismicloadsarebeingevaluated. I ' E' i
- 5. Nortrontal diaphragm calculations are being reviewed. The vertical slab calculations are approved.
- 6. Unit 1 is 100E complete in construction, and Unit 2 construction is about SOE complete. As-built of Unit 1 1s g51L complete.
- 7. Scopo is established. Open 1 tees consist of (1) review of requirements associated with high energy line break, and (2) evaluation of structural steel beams is in progress. j.
- 8. As-bulits for vent not modifications have been received and are being reviewed. As-builts for fillets have not been received.
- g. Location sommery for each support is complete for Unit 1. Additions due to new installations are being received on an ongoing basis.
- 10. Review of requirements associated with high energy line break phenomenon is in progress.
- 11. Additional support design associated with MVAC system changes is in progress.
f
/
..' .g .,*,
1
C
- Q AugIst 2g. 1993 O
, 00400/0086F- 1 Q CTl j -3 i m
- SECTION 2. PIPING AND PIPE SUPPORTS DESIGN REVIEW 2.1 Large Bore Piping r ,
General - The Final Report Scope, Criteria and Methodology sictions are
~
complete and no changes are anticipated. Analyses and qualification of
'~
installations assigned to Westinghouse Corporation have been completed. All current criteria and design input data have been transmitted to
- Westinghouse. Th'.y have reviewed changes to certain input data and anticipate no further modifications to be required. This estimate includes iterations due to construction interfa'ce and as-built review.
Table 2.1 tabulates the status of this information. All large bore piping has been reviewed and qualified. However, certain calculations exist with inputs identified as preliminary or results which require review a'nd acceptance. The notes to the table describe items which require closure of documentation and an assessment of each item's significance. These items should not be totaled as an indication of analyses with open items as many analyses contain raore than a single item. t I A small number of iterations of pipe analyses may also result from problems encountered during support cesign review and redesign associated l with recently issued analyses and construction difficulties encountered during support or pipe modification.
.- e
)
F L ' 2 Thirty-eight minor pipe modifications have been issued to date and s.. _ construction has completed thirty-five. .
~
\ ,
~
6 August 29, 1983 - u (00400/0116P -
- - _. .. ~-J- . _ - _ . - . - . - . , . . _ - - _ - _ . . - . . . , _ _ . . _ - - - _ - .
T(bis 2.1 , SIA8tO CAN n .0 JECT ,_ l PNASC 1 CORRECTIVE ACTION PROGRAM STATUS , LARGC DORC PIPING ,, e ..' Area *8- Besten Review 9esten Revisten er Resealvsts modificatteIIs s ustes Method- Calc. er Criteria Clartiled and As-Sectlen Description Const. De11t Criteria elegy Analyses Methode10er Cstablished DCRs BCWs Revire Review Review Method- Issued Cesel. Cosw1. Cag1. SCM 9CN ology Calc. Calc. Calc. f. Pres. Poor. Estab. Pres. Check. Aser.
}
i 2.2.1 Large Bore Piping e F1pe Stresses 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 92 85 0 2. 5. 6 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 N/A pdA N/A N/A 7 e Valve 100 100 i Osalificattop e Norrie and 100 100' 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 N/A N/A N/A N/A 1. 4 Fleed Need ., i Leads . e Local Stress 100 100 100 100 100 100 1M 100 ISO N/A 5/A N/A P./A 3
- 1. Retrie Leeds - F1f ty-sla analysts contain nortle leads dich require documentation of acceptsete to corrent Iceds. Some addittenal emelysts Notis:
may rcselt from this ites. No piping modifications are espected. Any design changes would be issued as part of large Lore scppert modificettens.
- 2. Spectra - All analyses contain the proper corrent spectra with the excepiten of two. Spectra for these problems have hen revised and the analysis are being eeren.
l j 3. Local Stress tvalmetten Apprestaately fifteen local stress evaluattens are anticipated to close this ites. Most evaluations are iterations to entsting cakstatten cairsed by lead changes and a few will be caused by new topport design. Few if any design changes will ressit from this activity. These design changes would be issued as a part of large bore pipe stress modifications.
- 4. Fleed Need Leeds - Apprealantely 26 analyses cents 1h containment penetration fined heads which remain to be gvallited for revised analysts l
1 leads. No modificattens are espected. } i 5. Two analyses are tapacted by piping reroutes which are caused by SIP or constrectlen Interferences. Few pipe sopport modifications are j espected.
- 6. Afinalweptdownisbeingperformedtoinspectpipeclearancesandserifygeneralpipingconfiguratten. Few modifications are 1 anticipated.
t l l 7. One analysts contains a valve for wh kh a support reaction reestns to be geallfted. No piping modificatten is espected. a i I' August 21. Ig83 t
; C0400/0086P 1
. i i 2.2 Small Bore Piping All small bore piping associated with both the Generic and S mple I Programs has been reviewed and qualified with a few exceptiohs (Table 2.2) . In addition, certain calculations exist with inputs identified as preliminary or results which requird review and acceptance by others. The notes to the table describe a listing of items which require closure of docementation or completion of a calculation activity. The significance of each item is addressed. Some computer analyses may require revision due to possible future changes in input data such as spectra or header movements. A small number of iterations of pipe analyses may also result from problems encountered during support design review and redesign associated with recently issued analyses and construction difficulties encountered during support or pipe modification. Ten pipe modifications have been issued and construction is complete. August 29, 1983 00400/0116P _ - __ _ _ ___ -
(,
~
030057 5 5 - . Y E = EmE E= E E E E E E=g=E
= = = =
2em =
.;g, .
E E Emf 4= E E E E E=g =E
= = = =
.3 =2 s.r,
= =
E E *E= = E E E E E E E
) tt=
I
- = = = = = = I '-
s wu K.I E
= =E = E= E -- ES= E x-E
=
R
= !=E E=
5'uE E E 29 8 88 E E E8 8 g : It
, = 32 E E SE S E
- S.. E E ES 8
; uw -
g E : .
;* 8 E E8 S SS 8 8388
= g , *, .. - - -- - - - - - -- -
N 4 ,! 2t 5
;3 }.3' gt 4
eO w T g; t.m E E E8 S SS E 8 8 8
- - - - -- .R. -
3 g=gg_g 3% E o W 5 t"
~
a : 2 - c 28 8 8 88 8 i
= S gjsj g) 8-8 88 8 - - - - -- -
- g ,_
u
- 21 5.! E E ES S E 8 8 E ES E N o f - - -- -
t
.n
..l EE E E 88 8 E E ES E - - - - -- -
33,;g 3 I 2 2} 5"g ; g II E I EE I IE E E EE E 2 . II g; E E SE E EE
- - -E - --E - E8 F b1 .
E . j a u% E 3 .,T 32 , :,11 w
.T T . .
j 3g ~ CE 32 2 XTET.%.Em 25 .
#,*:t- s s :2 -[-[ :
- r -
2 8 IAI.e.I52.1-w 23 8. A -s: r l
=: # t Aw2:fo:lms Es .o ,
g
- I3 3 . .. . 2 . . . . .. .
s S
- dj 8 :
~
a se
$O
Tab 12 2.2 - DIASLO CANYOL .0 JECT , PHASE I C0t#ECTIVC ACTION PROGRAR STATUS , SMALL 90RC PIPING , Area Besten Review 90 sten Revision er Reanalysis Nedificatten l* Notes Description Method. Calc. er *riteria Clattfled and As- As. Section Const. Sollt' Bellt Criteria ology Analyses MihedoleerEstab11shed DCNs Review Review Review method- Issued Comp 1. Comp 1. Accepted DCM GCM ology Calc. Calc. Calc. % % % Pres. Agr . Estab. Pres. Check. Amor. 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 N/A N/A N/A N/A e Thermal 100 Analyses N/A 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 N/A N/A N/A e Valve Bypass 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 N/A N/A N/A N/A e Vents and 100 j Brains Not:s: 1. Norrie leads - Seventeen norrie ieeds require close out of documentation to show acceptance of those loads contalmed in the analyses. l a August 21, 1963 0040D/0086P
2.3 Large Bore Supports I All large bore piping supports have been reviewed and qualifted. , However, iterations of piping analyses due to input data reNsion are
~~
. causing support requalification and redesign (Table 2.3). Presently 500 supports out of a total of 4300 require requalification due to piping analysis revision. The bulk of these supports are associated with decreased loads and movements and require only documentation changes. In addition the activities and items described in the notes must be completed to ensure no further calculation or design revision. For each item an assessment of significance is established.
658 supports are in the construction process. 2386 are installed and are accepted through QC inspection and as-built preparation. j
-b August 29, 1963 0040D/0116P
it.bla 2.3 - DIASLO CANh PROJECT , PHASE I CORRECTIVE ACil04 PROGRAM STATUS LAR6E BOR[ SUPPORTS .
.i. te s'.
Area testen Review Desten Revisten er Reanalysis Itedificattens 8 Notes Section Description method. Calc. or Criterla Clartfled and As. As-i 1 Criteria elogy Analyses Methodeleer Estab11shed DCWs Const. Bellt Bellt Review Review Review Method- Issued Comp 1. Compt. Accepted i DCM DCM ology Calc. Calc. Calc. % % % Pree. Aper. Estab. Prep. Check. Appr. i 2.2.3 Large Sete , Sepperts o stress 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 99 86 72 34 1.2.3.4.5.6.7 ' 8 l e Fregeency 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 19 86 72 34 1.2.3.4.5.6.7 O 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 gg 36 72 34 1.2.3.4.5.6.7 e Base Plates 100 8 I e Itodifications . 99 96 72 34 1.2.3.4.5.6.1 g I See to Piping Reanalysis Wetes: 1. As-Se11ts - Reconc111atten of as-bellts to date has resulted in a redesign rate of 35. Apprestaately 2000 as-bellt reconciliations are eetstanding which is projected to cause 60 iterattens to design. Approstmately 1000 of the 2000 as-built reconciliations to go are regelred ier fsei lead.
- 2. Constructlen Difficulties - Presently, apprealmstely IDE of the modified pipe supports regelre a design iteration to allow construction templetion. Based on 650 supeorts requiring constructlen completion. 65 support design changes are anticipated.
, 3. Civil verificatten - Presently, appreatmetely 1/25 of the support designs issued with increased leads regelre redesign er addittenal structural steel design to obtain civil approval of the loading on the structure. Approstmetely 20 additional moJlficattens are anticipated to result from this activity.
- 4. Small Bore Seppert Leeds - Apprestostely 30 supports require confirection of the attached small bore seppert lead. No modifications are anticipated.
j
- 5. Egelpment Restraint - Confirmetten of the acceptance of support attachments to the two RNR pumps is outstandine. No modificatten is anticipated.
- 6. Spectra schenge Impact en 5.I.P. - Changes to spectra have caused many Design Class 11 supports, which were modified for System Interaction with 6e'stga Class I installations, to be reviewed. This work 15 essentially complete but 12 more Interaction probleet legebre i resolution.
- 7. STRUDL - One versten of the STRU9L program used fe'r support qualification has been found to contain a few errors. The errors have been corrected and program reverification completed. Reviews performed to date Indicate that support gue11f1 cation conclusions are unaffected.
More reviews and recalculation are required to close this issue but no design changes are anticipa*ed.
- 8. Engineering Judgement - 308 supports require review for piping analysts quallfled by engineering judgement. 145 of tI*ese have been quellfled. No modifications are antic 1ated.
Augtst 2g. 1983 00400/0086P
! 2.4 Small Bore Pipe Supports ( All small bore supports associated with both the Generic and Sa'mple programs have been reviewed and qualified (Table 2.4). HoweVer, f- iterations of piping analyses due to input revisions and changes to spectra and temperatures and operating modes are causing support review and redesign. Presently, approximately 49 supports out of 2500 require requalification due to these changes. Very few modifications are expected to result from this effort. In addition, support qualification / design iterations will occur as described in the notes to the table. The significance of each item is addressed. One hundred fifty supports are in the construction process. 1500 are installed. l l l l l l l
. ,e
- 1 August 29, 1983 00400/0116P
s , n o e i t g e e t c 3 4 5 4 r u a r 22 2 2 2 2 t s s 11 1 1 1 1 no n d o e i c t l b w tp% e A A A AA A A 1 o
.l suc l c 2 5
22A2 55/5
/
N
/2 N5
/ //
N NN
/2 N5
/
N t 1 l l
.* AtA N c a
.I A e o
, . c t t1 e A A A AA A A r n aI n
l l g% 9 99A9 / N
/9 N7
/ //
N NN
/9 N7
/
N t o
. e suo 7 77/7 N l i
t tASC i a t u r a . . b e c - t i t1 s f sp A A A AA A A S i mm% 0 00A0 / /0 / // /0 / a d oo 9 99/9 N N9 N NN N9 N n g . o CC N 0 M 0 id s 5 se ned et gge y da A A A AA A A l p inu / // /0 / e ai sas 0 00A0 / /0 c ehs 0 00/0 N N0 N NN N0 N t DCI 1 11 N1 1 1 e ei m rt i i n s ua q
. . e tr p r ee l p 0 0000 0 00 0 00 00 0 rr ep 0 0000 0 00 0 00 00 0 p a CA 1 1111 1 11 1 11 11 1 A s t s re
. og 5 pn S s .k 2 pa U i cc 0 00 0 00 00 0 uh T s l e 0 0000 0 00 0 00 00 0 f sc A y ah 0 0000 11 1 o CC 1111 1 11 1 11 T
S l a 1 en n e pg ii . t R e . . a ps s A S e cs l e 0 0000 0 00 0 00 00 0 r e t R T t 0 00 0 00 00 0 dd s T G R ar 0 0000 11 11 1 n e y C O O r CP 1 1111 1 11 1 g it l E R P e i f r a J P P s io n O U n d - e dp a 4 S eded . d op 4 0 l C t t nh as oyb hga 0 e r mu s e r - P t ot 0 0000 0 00 0 00 00 2 i i t e o 2 e 0A 1 C I P v di e R l a eb el s MoE 0 1 0000 1111 0 1 00 11 0 1 00 11 00 11 0 1 a nn h4 t
. eg B 2 4 L E f t i g f n V R n 1 s i oo r l O e rE a r ds i a i D t 0 00 0 00 00 0 ee %t t 1 C sl r Np 0 0000 0 00 0 00 00 0 td 2c 8 I L eCe Cp 0 0000 1 l / u d
- f. R L t o DA 1 1111 1 11 1 11 11 uo 1 r e I R A al st t s O O M l o e 2s i C S rd rs n v .
eo . n yo e d I th s 0000 0 00 0 00 00 0 so l c r e i t Me 0 0000 0 00 0 00 00 0 ai e r E re Cr 0 11 1 ht t n r i S CN OP 1 1111 1 11 1 11 a ai o u A er m f q H t e t g e P at an w r di ei e rs rd i s oe o0 pn v a cli
.swye 0 0000 0 00 0 00 00 0 t1 se pa at s
e r w n l av 0 0000 0 00 0 00 00 0
.t e o 11 1 ts ane 1 1111 1 11 1 11 l u yu r i CAR ia l o i t w uc t u a e b ns q g i
v - o et sr e i r t st e d w ,- a eo s R oye 0 00 0 00 00 0 d rp s e h gi 0 0000 0 00 0 00 00 0 f e Pp t v n t ev 0 0000 11 11 1 ot u r n e el e 1 1111 1 11 1 c - s o p I tMeR ne p s oj s0 d e i o e5 u e 9 a tr l1 s d t ap t n rw ee 0 0000 0 00 0 00 00 0 l l s l n e uo p a p 0 0000 0 00 0 00 00 0 x ii 1 11 1 11 11 1 ii c i p l v 1 1111 c id e re nh re CR a s oc t s 7 s s r d ci 1 a 1 e
' e d s e eh 9B u
' l w t n d e Rw y s
. w r e cd s
- e d e
ev i w e ee pt n a e e d L g n. o l e i i v n Sa o st td nt e n in t n u re i oR v ty r nng n an *si to a e o e e ds t e 1 cdt i t aenRl a e td ci m s i r R riMo g R aensatpmI A a srm 1 n ut t e t os arAs en 1 erseel hspdT msnop 1 a re n h p tt c deT np/esgi e tuicsugr1 i /rtihi ut tl o t r i Ss sp r i r l e r apNsgrp l - cvnssi evt Menacu sceoonevquAh ernq t nm p r c i p e tea euai s AARCMIwOEBSTVOAE su oo p o s np n SSSCLtP a e Ao Cc A F 3 D e S5 ee G e e eeee S e ee e ee ee e 8 9 1 s . . . . P e 1 2 3 4 6 r 98 A 20 0 n : t/ o 2 s s0 u0 i e g4 t t c 2 o u0 e N A0 S 2
' 'li I j', ' ;I , ! i:li!lI' > ] -
SECTION 3. EQUIPPENT SEISMIC DESIGN REVIEW The status of the equipment seismic design work is presented in the following. This includes Mechanical Equipment, Electrical Equipaint and Ifftrissents, and Heating, Ventilating, and Air Conditioning (NVACl Equipment. i 3.1 Mechanical Equipment The scope, criteria, and methodology phases of the program are 100% complete. For 100% of the mechanical equipment, calculations which detemine if the equipment is seismically qualified for a given set of controlled seismic input have been completed (See Table 3-1). 3.2 Instrumentation and Controls The IAC work consists of selected analysis, design; and construction activities. The status for all I and C equipment is presented in 1 i Table 3-1. f Analysis work is complete when the equipment qualification levels have been compared to the appropriate required response spectra and have been found acceptable. Some final documentation may be outstanding. tiesign" work is complete when the DCN has been issued by engineering for
,f modifications to bring equipment up to the qualified configuration.
l l 1 August 29,1g83 00400/0116P
- 030057 Construction work is complete when all equipment modifications have been completed by General Construction. Some final documentation *iay be i- outstanding. T l
l For Instrument tubing supports the analyses are complete for the latest 1 spectra, although, not all calculations are signed off. 3.3 Electrical Equipment The Electrical work consists of selected analysis, design, and construction activities. The status of Electrical equipment is presented in Table 3-1, Section 2.3.2. For the analysis work, completion means: the equipment qualification levels have been compared to the appropriate required response spectra and have been found acceptable. Some final documentation may be outstanding. Design work is complete when the DCN has been issued by engineering for modifications to bring equipment up to the qualified configuration.
.: 1 August 29, 1983 00400/0116P
Construction work is complete when all equipment modifications have been completed by General Construction. Somce final documentatid,n may be i- outstanding. T 3.4 HVAC Equipment The review of seismic qualification of Class I HVAC equipment has been completed as of August 16, 1983. This is based upon the application of seismic spectra issued for project use. Table 3.1 tabulates the percent completeness of major steps of the related work. The seismic qualification of HVAC equipment is an ongoing process in which the analyses will be updated as new input are generated in accordance with PEI-13 and DCM CH-52. l l l
-{
i l
! August 29, 1983 00400/0116P a
t.. ~ s e t e 5 5 6 O , e e t e " t t o 's o o N ' N N l I I Sp 0 0 0 Sm 0 Co 1 a SC tI s p 0 0 n .l l m 0 0 o suo 1 i ASC t a . . c i tt f sp 5 5 0 i d nm oo 7 7 0 1 o CC R d e 0 su) 0 0 0 Ws2 0 0 1 Cs( 1 1 OI cr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 l o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ae 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 CA 1 1 S U s . T i .k A s cc 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 T y l e 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ah 0 0 0 0 0 1 S l 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 a CC R n A1 8 a RG e . . 0 T G1 R ce 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O5 l e 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C. R r ar 1 1 1 1 PK e d CP 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
- h. NC nde 1 P OI e nh .
IM t asd . 6 3 N T5 s i orb 2 O Cl i dl h ga 0 - 2 Y At v eb t et 0 1 N 5 el a el s b A E R ft MeE 1 a C VT t s T IN n rE O TE e a L CM tl n . S EP sCe Rr A RI e e Ce 0 0 I RU 9 al Ss D OO io A 1 CC rd eo
'l th it e Re
_ E re 0 _ 5 CM Cr 0 A SP ) 1 M 1 P 1 rsd eee 3
.sw cli ye 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 l av e 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 ane l b 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 CAR w a e T '.*
i d v - e : ed w R oye t 0 0 h gi n 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 n t ev e 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 t e el e peR h m 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 s c e a B ad t t t e rw ee a ti e 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 iv S e 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 re ( 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 n CR
- s
. )
s er . tst t 3
- ) t ge se nrn eoengs e
i* nn ( n
)
I I y g e .lt tne en t n e sesatd nt l r et mt menr r ereo novir e l( F e n t I m erehil ns nint aolf t o t at cn ( a l e hoam p ul sP us hurcmesansnePisaoaa l nit rt ecra 7i1 trct at t e mu s re&l rl tcsp tt mti h et m9oenii p ie nm t n at eit s enev nd gt noPl t adn te mt i r d ndnn ao ap e o r s e N d saAcsnmiedrallo I(P L i pL s P naaiswtr S n uv r Po aa am nCeMo Cr oraih edo Co v h elrscdPrm r h tnoenpI c hl t t 3 s cu i o 8 e eg r e ni e e e e e e e e o 9 D R( C R Ite 1 P a ,6 e 98 r 20 A 0 t/ n 2 3 sD i o 1 1 1 2 u0 g4 t 3 3 3 u0 c 3 A0 e 2 2 2 2 S '
lable.3.1 - DIAOLO CANTON ltCT PMASE I CORRECTIVE ACTION PROGRAR STATUS . EQUIPMENT StlSMIC DESIGal r-i Area . Desten Review testen Revisten er Reanalysts Rodifications i notes Sectlen Descriptlen
- 8 Method- Calc. er Criterla Clartiled and As- '
s Criteria elegy Analyses Nethodeleer Established DCRs Const. Dv11t DCRs Reviewed Reviewed Reviewed Method. Issued Comp 1. Cog 1. Comp 1. DCM OCR ology Calc. Calc. Celt. (X) Pres. Appr. Estab. Pres. Check. Appr. o Centre) 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 0 0 0 reen press. radiation moniter(4) e Control 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 0 0 0 reen press. Chlertny mentterd)
. e Centre) 100 100 100 100 100 100 roes air supply rad. ,
monitor . 6 Pressertrer 100 100 100 100 100 100 Sav Pos. . Indicator e Sub-cooled 100 100 100 100 100 100 mergin monitor o Process 100 100 100 100 100 100 solenoid valves i 2.3.2 Electrical 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 80 60 60 . Equipment (1) 4 < 2.3.3 NVAC Egalp- 100 100 100(I) 100 100 100 97 97 97- 100 40 0 0 ment
, Notes: 1. Scope of this work is defined and complete.
1
- l 2. Caglete defined as the issue of a centre 11ed document which defines appropriate criteria which includes lead cod 1 nations, seismic input, damping values and allowable stresses.
; 3. Ceglete'Is defined as the issue of a formal document which describes an appropriate methodology to be employed. 't *,
4 Devices will be relocated due to high RR$ at Elev. 190'. Devices have been tested to test machine limits.
- 5. Design modification is the result of new annulus spectra.
- 6. Design modificatten is the result of equipment upgrade not design verificatten.
- 7. Duct-monitor HVAC equipment analyred 15 g5% complete.
-27 Ag:st 23,1983 00400/0086P
TABli 2.3.1.1-1 ~ MECHANICAL !!PMENT SEISMIC 8/29/t ~ QUAL.IFICAIION RESULTS ,
' Requ1 red Physical '*
..,* Qualif1 cation .Plotif1-
. Location: "a" Level Qualifi- Qualifying Damping catTons Building / cation Spectra Value Required? Notes Elevation H,,3
- H Used Yes/No References Eeutoment E-W V Method HE. DDE. OE Fe:;dwater System ',
0.30 0.35 0.24 A DE R No A AFW Pump and Motor Aux /100 0.60 0.70 0.48 DDE R 0.85 0.96 0.56 HE R ^ 0.28 0.46 0.31 A DE R No A AFM Pump (lurbine-driven) Aux /100 0.56 0.92 0.62 DDE R 0.96 0.79 0.58 HE R i No A AFW Puso Turbine Aux /100 0.28 0.46 0.31 A DE R 4 0.56 0.92 0.62 DDE R 0.96 0.79 0.58 HE R CVC System No A Boric Acid Tank Aux /115 0.69 0.83 0.13 A DE 2% 1.38 1.65 0.26 DDE 2% 2.69 2.00 0.96 HE 4% i Notes: . KEY: A - Qualified to latest spectra & nozzle load l 8 - Currently high nozzle load. Anticipate will be resolved by further analysis. C - Design change in progress. D - Currently high nozzle loads. Anticipated that support modifications will be required. E - New,pozzle loads being evaluated. , ,, Qualification Method I A - Analysis c l T - Test ca C Damping Valve O CJ1 -
' 'l R - Rigid 00510/0116P .
TABLE 2.3.1.1-1 (Cent'd) 8/29/83 . Req 21 rec Physical .
! Q:alificatten Modif1- ,,
location: "o" Level Qua11ft- Qualifying Damping cations ** 8u11 ding / cation' Spectra Value , Re Notes N
- Ie's/No quired?
Ee91pment
* Elevation H,,3 E-W V Method HE. DDE. DE Used References l Safety Injection System SI Pump Lube 011 F11(er Aux /85 1.0 1.0 0.65 A DE R No A I '
1.0 1.0 0.65 DDE R 1.0 1.0 0.65 HE R ,, Component Cooling System Aux /73 0.2 0.2 0.13 A DE R Yes C CCW Pump 0.4 0.4 0.27 DDE R
' O.63 0.63 0.5 HE R Aux /73 0.2 0.2 0.13 A DE R Yes C CCW Pump Notor 0.4 0.4 0.27 DDE R 0.63 0.63 0.5 HE R Cont /140 0.8 0.8 0.54 A DE R No E i Containment Fan Cooler Box R 1.25 1.25 0.84 DDE 1.7 1.7 1.97 HE R Gaseous Radwaste System 0.2 0.2 0.13 A DE R No A Waste Gas Compressor Aux /60 0.2 0.13 No A Waste Gas Moisture Aux /60 0.2 A DE R
! Separator 0.2 0.13 No A i Waste Gn Decay Tank Aux /60 0.2 A DE R l 00510/0116P -29
TA8LE 2.3.1.1-1 (C:nt'd) 8/29/83 .. 3 R; quired Physical -
- 0
- a11ficaticn Modift- "
Location: "a" Level Qualift- Qualifying Damping cations
- . Building / cation Spectra Value . Required? Notes *
* 'tes/No References Ee11pment Elevation "N-S "E-W V Method HE. DDE. OE Used 01 sel Generator System, 01esel Generator ,
Turb/85 0.41 0.41 0.27 A DE 2% Yes 0
.. 0.81 0.81 0.54 DDE 2%
1.10 1.10 0.92 HE 4% 01esel Transfer Pump and MSS /77 0.2 0.2 0.13 A DE R No A Motor 0.4 0.4 0.27 DDE R 0.54 0.54 0.50 HE R 01esel Generator tube 011 Turb/85 1.25 1.25 0.83 A DE 1% No E filter 2.50 2.50 1.67 DDE 1% 1.90 1.90 1.50 HE 4% Olesel Transfer Filter MSS /77 0.2 0.2 0.13 A DE R No 8 - 0.4 0.4 0.27 DDE R 0.54 0.54 0.50 HE R , 01esel Transfer Strainer MSS /77 0.2 0.2 0.13 A DE R No E 0.4 0.4 0.27 DDE R 0.54 0.54 0.50 HE R Prisning Tank Turb/85 0.20 0.20 0.13 A DE R No A 0.40 0.40 0.27 DDE R j O.54 0.54 0.50 HE R j Starting Air Receiver Turb/85 0.20 0.20 0.13 A DE 2% No A l 0.40 0.40 0.27 DDE 2%
; 0.85 0.85 0.50 HE 4%
Ventilation System 1 Aux /100 0.34 0.30 0.13 A DE R No E l Containment H2 Purge Supply filters 0.68 0.60 0.27 DDE R
' O.86 0.91 0.60 HE R .,.,., ,
Containment H2 Purge Aux /115 0.37. 0.5 0.13 A DE R No E Exhaust Filters 0.737 1.0 0.27 DDE R 0.96 1.4 0.60 HE 4 Aux /115 1.92 1.6 0.74 T DE R No A Containment H2 Supply and Exhaust 8 lowers and Motors 3.81 3.2 1.47 DDE R 2.94 3.01 1.50 HE R
! 00510/0116P TABLE 2.3 1.'l-1 (Cent'd) 8/29/83 R:q'J1 red Physital -
' Ou211f1ccticn Modif1- ,. Location: "a" Level Qualif1- Qua11fying- Damping cations
- Bu11 ding / cation- Spectra Value . Reguired? Notes
! ,,* H Used ' Yeshio References Elevation N-S E-W V Method HE. DOE. OE i Eastoment 0.48 0.20 0.134 A DE 2% Yes C i CCW Heat Exchanger Turb/85 r O.96 0.40 0.27 00E 2% '
- 0.98 0.61 0.50 HE 4%
No A CCW Surge Tank Aux /163 0.90 0.58 0.17 A DE R 1.79 1.16 0.33 - 00E R ' 2.26 2.27 1.2 HE R . 0.13 R No A CCW Pump Lube 011 Cooler Aux /73 0.2 0.2 A DE 0.4 0.4 0.27 00E R l 0.63 0.63 0.50 HE R
, Makeup Water System No A i
Makeup Water Transfer Aux /100 0.31 0.30 0.13 A DE R i j Pump and Motor 0.61 0.60 0.27 DDE R 0.85 0.75 0.60 HE R l Saltwater System i R No A i ASW Pump and Motor Intake /-2 0.39 0.35 0.26 A DE 0.78 0.70 0.52 DDE R 1.030 1.013 0.55 HE 4% Fire Protection System No A j Fire Pump Aux /115 0.39 0.35 0.26 A DE R 0.78 0.70 0.52 DOE R 1.03 1.013 0.55 HE R 0.39 0.35 0.26 A DE R
- We' i". A Fire Pump Motor Aux /115 O.78 0.70 0.52 DDE R 1.030 1.013 0.55 HE R l
'DE No A j Portable Fire Pump (diesel) MSS /85 0.2 0.2 0.13 T R 0.4 0.4 0.27 DDE R 0.75 0.75 0.50 HE R 1
1 j 00510/0116P
; SECTION 4. PHASE II STATUS l i
The status of the Mechanical, Electrical, and Instrumentation and Controls l work is presented in this section. For details on this work pleah see
~
aEAlcable sections of the Phase II Final Report. 4.1 Mechanical 4.1.1 Results of IDVP Review. The DCP has supplied virtually all of the information including RFI responses and completion sheets that are required to close all Mechanical Phase II E0Is and additional verification. Thus, this work is about 95% complete. 4.1.2 Selection of System Design conditions (E01 Nos. 8009, 6010, and 8062) DCP work in this area is 100% complete. Appropriate pressures for the AFW system have been confimed, all necessary modifications to components have been identified, and all required components have been replaced in the field. DCP work to support additional verification is approximately 95% complete. The DCP has (1) determined the set of pipes and components that should be reviewed, (2) determined acceptability 1
- of each component, and (3) made physical modifications as needed,
~~.
Reference:
DCP Phase II Final Report, June 1983. Section 3.3.4. l August 29, 1983 00400/0116P
4.1.3 High Energy Line Break Outside Containment (E018001) DCP work in this area is 100% complete. This has included recalculation of pressures and temperatures using a verified computer code applicable to the particular conditions for the areas identified in the E0I. I ! l DCP work to support additional verification is approximately 90% l complete. This includes the recalculation of pressures, the identification of required modifications, and initiation of Design Change Requests. Temperature effects will be considered as part of the environmental qualification program. , l
Reference:
DCP Phase II Final Report, Section 3.3.5. i l 4.1.4 Jet Impingement Analysis Inside Containment .I DCP work in this area is approximately 90% complete. This i includes the identification of all high energy pipe, 1 identification of postulated breaks, identification of targets and detemination if they are needed for the particular break, calculation of pressure on the targets, detemination if the needed targets can withstand the associated pressures, and issuance of modifications as needed. l l . ...
Reference:
DCP Phase II Final Report, Section 3.3.6. l l August 29, 1983 00400/0116P
'42 Elsetrical DCP Electrical Activities relating to Phase II Verification are complete. Responses have been provided to all RFI's and E0!'s. All physical modifications associated with E0Is, additional verification, and i_ open items are complete.
4.2.1 E01 Status. A total of twenty-six electrical E0!s were identified and four of these required modifications. None of 1 these E0Is had any real safety significance. l 4.2.2 Open Item Status. A total of two Open Items were identified. Both of these required physical r.odifications although neither had any real safety significance. 4.2.3 Additional Verification Two areas of additional verification were identified. One of these resulted in physical modifications. No real safety significance was associated with this additional verification.
Reference:
DCP Phase II Final Report, Sections 3.3.3, 3.3.7, and 3.3.8. 1 < 4.3 Instrumentation and Controls l
. 4.3.1 E01 Status. For E0I 8032 all design and construction work is complete. All other E0!s pertaining to Instrumenta. tion and l .
l Control are complete with no construction required. August 29, 1983 00400/0116P
..! * 4.3.2 Open Item Status. Two open items have b:en identified. Both require physical modifications. The designs for both are g () g
( complate. Construction completion is forecast for October 28, 1983.
~
i_ 4.3.3 Design Activities Resulting From Corrective Action. No I- additional designs have resulted from DCP corrective action work.
Reference:
DCP Phase II Final Report, Section 3.3.11, 4.4 HVAC 4.4.1 E01 Status. DCP activities pertaining to EDI 8035, Smoke Detectors in CRYPS Intake Ducts are complete. The smoke i detectors have been installed. 4.4.2 Open Item Status. Open Item 36, HVAC Heat Loads in 480 VAC and 120 VDC Areas, has been addressed. Design is complete. New fans have been procured with increased air flow capacity so that the maximum temperatures irt these rooms will not exceed the ratings of the electrical equipment served. Construction is 95% complete ' with September 15, 1983 as the scheduled date for construction completion.
Reference:
DCP Phase II Final Report, Section 3.3.10. i. I August 29, 1983 00400/0116P
hk a SECOND SET OF INTERROGATORIES PROPOUNDED TO PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY BY JOINT INTERVENORS I have assisted in preparing the answers to Interrogatories 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, and 9 . Said answers are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. y AbWl Y/ - i Dan G. Lubbock Subscribed and sworn to l before me this 31st day l of August, 1983. Immm mC. T.mme.mm.unumanemumum NEAL MADISON i l e S NOTLtY SAN FRANCISCO PU3UC CITY AND COUNTY OF lg -CA
.[- h My Commission Empires Dec. 27,1985 3 e..muunnem..u....uun.u.. .. ..nuuuma
! C. T. Neal Madison, Notary Public in and for the City and County of San Francisco, State of . California l i ! My Commission expires December 27, 1985 l l
ad SECOND SET OF INTERROGATORIES PROPOUNDED TO PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY BY JOINT INTERVENORS I have assisted in preparing the answer to Interrogatory No. 8. Said answer is true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. cn - Gar H. Moore Subscribed and sworn to before me this 1st day of September, 1983. smnummmummmmumannmannenme l ,. C. T. NEAL MADISON i
. NOTGY PT.UC - CAUFORNIA i
=b4 s CITY AND COUNTY OF j
. h SAN FRANCISCO 3
[.7T. d'cakdf& Neal Madison, Notary Public 5 My Commimon Empires Dec 27,1985 muunnuumumunmumununnan.a.a... g C. in and for the. City and County of San Francisco, State of California My Commission expires December 27, 1985
. 10 fL G i s IA L UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION In the Matter of )
)
PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY ) Docket No. 50-275
) Docket No. 50-323 Dicblo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant, )
Units 1 and 2 )
)
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE The foregoing document (s) of Pacific Gas and Electric Company has (have) been served today on the following by deposit in the United States mail, properly stamped and addressed: Judge John F. Wolf ' Mrs. Sandra A. Silver Chairman 1760 Alisal Street Atomic Safety and Licensing Board San Luis Obispo CA 93401 US Nuclear Regulatory Commission W2ahington DC 20555 Mr. Gordon Silver 1760 Alisal Street Judge Glenn C. Bright San Luis Obispo CA 93401 Atomic Safety and Licensing Board , US Nuclear Regulatory Commission John Phillips, Esq. Washington DC 20555 Joel Reynolds, Esq. Center for Law in the Public Interest Judge Jerry R. Kline 10951 W. Pico Blvd. - Suite 300 Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Los Angeles CA 90064 US Nuclear Regulatory Commission
~
Washington DC 20555 David F. Fleischaker, Esq. P. O. Box 1178 Mrs. Elizabeth Apfelberg Oklahoma City OK 73101 c/o Betsy Umhoffer 1493 Southwood Arthur C. Gehr, Esq. San Luis Obispo CA 93401 Snell & Wilmer 3100 Valley Bank Center J& nice E. Kerr, Esq. Phoenix AZ 85073 Public Utilities Commission Bruce Norton, Esq. State of California 5246 State Building Norton, Burke, Berry & French, P.C. 350 McAllister Street P. O. Box 10569 San Francisco CA 94102 Phoenix AZ 85064 Mrs. Raye Fleming Chairman 1920 Mattie Road Atomic Safety and Licensing Shell Beach CA 93449 Board Panel US Nuclear Regulatory Commission Mr. Frederick Eissler Washington DC 20555 - Scenic Shoreline Preservation , Conference, Inc. 4623 More Mesa Drive Scnta Barbara CA 93105
- Copies by Express Mail
+
4 Chairman Judge Thomas S. Moore Atomic Safety and Licensing Chairman Appeal Panel Atomic Safety and Licensing US Nuclear Regulatory Commission Appeal Board Washington DC 20555 US Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington DC 20555 S:cretary US Nuclear Regulatory Commission Judge W. Reed Johnson Washington DC 20555 Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Board Attn: Docketing and Service US Nuclear Regulatory Commission Section Washington DC 20555 Lcwrence J. Chandler, Esq. Judge John H. Buck H:nry J. McGurren Atomic Safety and Licensing US Nuclear Regulatory Commission Appeal Board Office of Executive Legal Director US Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington DC 20555 Washington DC 20555 Mr. Richard B. Hubbard Michael J. Strumwasser, Esq. MHB Technical Associates Susan L. Durbin, Esq. 1723 Hamilton Avenue Suite K Peter H. Kaufman, Esq. San Jose CA 95125 3580 Wilshire Blvd. Suite 800 Los Angeles CA 90010 Mr. Carl Neiberger Talegram Tribune Maurice Axelrad, Esq. P. O. Box 112 Lowenstein, Newman, Reis, and Sen Luis Obispo CA 93402 Axelrad, P.C. 1025 Connecticut Ave NW Washington DC 20036 Date: September 1, 1983 i A u ,/ (
- Copies by Express Mail /
}}