independent design verification program,' fifteenth semimonthly … · 2017. 2. 28. · i...

A W~EDYNEEMQINEERINQ SERVICES

TES SEMIMONTHLY REPORT

IDVP-TES-SM-15

Period: May 27, 1982 through June 9, 1982

1.0 PHASE I

1.1 Pro ram Mana ement Plan

The TES Project Organization has been revised as indicated by theattached figure. Of particular significance is the addition of aProject Administration group. With direction from TES ProjectManager and assistance from the TES Controller, this new group willadminister all business aspects of TES as IDVP Program Manager.Operationally there will be three prime functions within the group.

Publications - The administrator of this activity wi 11 be responsi-W 111g yg P p d df Egf 1gP dProject Plans, reports .of all types, assisting in development ofvisual aids, charts and other material to be transmitted from TES.Major input from these activities will come from TES technicalteams, subcontractor documents, and others as required. Secre-tarial function for the group will be included in this scope ofresponsibility.

Sgdf1g-TP df 1 111 df TES d P IETPparticipants schedules with that of PGIIE to assure timely response.He will coordinate with the Publications activity and'evelop amaster transmittal plan-as regards TES contractual requirements forthis project. Act as expeditor/coordinator for nonstandard ship-ments such as courier, express mail, etc. Mill be responsible f'restablishing and maintaining VAX database for real-time status ofall EOI Files under evaluation.

I

Contracts - Project contract administrator is also operatingmanager of this administration group. Initial prime considerationis establishment of consistent contractual policy towards all sub-.contractors as regards scope of work, estimate of their charges,labor rates, terms and other standard conditions. Mechanism willbe established for timely review and approval of subcontractor in-voices to TES.

1.2 Pro ram Procedures DCNPP-IDVPP-PP-XXX

1.2.1 Issued

None during this report period.

820hi80i58 820&iiPDR ADOCK 05000275R " ','PDR

IDVP-TES-SM-15Page Two

A ILEDYNEENQINEERINQ SERVICES

1.2.2 Identified

There is no change in status.

1.3 ~Re orts

Copies of the executed report forms are appended in sequence of FileNumber.

1.3.1 0 en'tem Re orts

a. TES has issued no new Open Item Reports during this reportperiod,

b. TES has not reopened any Files during this report period.

c. TES status with respect to the previous gA Finding Reports isreported in 1.5.3.

d. TES review of RLCA Open Items issued prior to March 25, 1982continues. These are:

950, 982, 984, 988, 989, 990, 991, 992, 993, 1003, 1004, 1016,1027, 1028, 1029, 1049, 1058, 1059, 1060, 1062, 1063, 1070,1071, 1072, 1073, 1074.

e. A total of seventeen Open Item Reports (1075 through 1091) havebeen opened subsequent to March 25, 1982. 'Of these, the follow-ing are. still Open Items:1077, 1078, 1079, 1080, 1081, 1082, 1084, 1085, 1086, 1088,1089, 1090, and 1091.

LR.R ~ERa. Error Reports were issued during this report period for Files:

937(C), 953(C), 957(C), 978(C), 1008(C), 1013(B) and 1069(A).

b. Potential Error Reports under review by TES are Files:

939, 940, 958, 959, 963, and 1083.

1.3.3 Pro ram Resolution Re orts

a. 0 en Item Res onsibilit Transferred to PG&E

(1) No new Files are transferred to PG&E.

ID VP -TES -SH-15Page Three

A VQ.EDYNEENGtNEERINQ SERVICES

(2) Potential Program Resolution Reports transferring an OpenItem to PG&E under review by TES are Files 938 and 961.

b. Deviations

(1) New Files as Dev'iations are 965 and 1075.

(2) A Potential Program Resolution Report as a Deviation underreview by TES is File Number 1032.

c. Closed Item

(1) Program Resolution Reports indicating concurrence withRLCA as a Closed Item are enclosed for Files:

1024, 1048 and 1051.

(2) Potential Program Resolutions as Closed Items under reviewby TES are Fi les:

,962, 1002, 1054 and 1087.

1.3.4 IDVP Com letion Re orts

~RI dIDVP Completion Reports have been issued, for Files:

1024, 1048 and 1051.

b. Pro ram Resolution Re ort as a Deviation

TES is prepared to issue IDVP Completion Reports on the follow-ing Files when informed by PG&E that physical modificationswi l l not be app lied in response to each fi le for:965, 1011, 1018, 1020, 1030, 1053 and 1075.

c. Class C or Class D Error Re orts

The IDVP procedure permits issuance of an IDVP CompletionReport when PG&E informs TES in writing that physical modifica-tions will not be appled to each File. TES is prepared to issuesuch reports when so informed by PG&E for:

937, 953, 954, 957, 964, 978, 1008, 1017 and 1050

1.3.5 Interim Technical Re orts

The first IDVP Interim Technical Report, on Additional Verificationand Additional Sampling, has been approved by TES and issued byRLCA.

~'L

I

6

c

I OVP -TES-SM-15Page Four

A 4 EDYNEENGINEERING SERVICES

1.1.6 ~PR I 6

Preparation of this report has not yet been star ted

1.4 Comments on Previousl Issued Semimonthl Re orts

1.4.1 ~BTES

No comments at this time.

1.4;2 ~BPGIIG

No corrments at this time.

1.4.3 ~BRLCA

No contents at this time

1.4.4 ~BRFR

No comments at this time

1.5 Status of IDVP Pro ram Mana ement Efforts

1.5.1 TES Related

See 1.1 of this Semimonthly Report.

1.5.2 RLCA Related

TES continues to review and evaluate the RLCA potential programreports and issue the appropriate Program Resolution or Error Re-ports. Several of these reports are attached to this semimonthly.TES has initiated a review of the RLCA piping sample analysis re-ports and continues to review the draft RLCA report of the auxiliarybuilding analyses. .TES and RLCA met at TES's offices to discusscoranents and changes to the RLCA Interim Technical Report for Addi-tional Verification and Additional Sampling. RLCA is ready toissue this Interim Technical Report with TES aproval.

An evaluation of missing mass effects with respect to support loadsfor two special cases has been initiated by TES. The special casesare (1) valves on or next to supports and (2) axial .supports on longruns of pipe. TES is in the process of selecting five piping modelsfor a design review as part of the additional verification process.

A draft report on the TES Audit of Westinghouse was completed, butat this reporting, TES is considering making the appropriateeditorial and formal changes to issue it as an Interim TechnicalReport.

IDVP-TES-SM-15Page Five

A 4LEDYNEENQlNEERINQ SERVlCES

TES engineers accompanied RLCA engineers on a field inspection onJune 1 and 2, 1982.

1.5.3 RFR Related

Preparation of an Interim Technical Report on the guality AssurancePl09ram and Implementation Review performed in accordance withSections 3.0 and 4.0 of the Phase I Engineering Program Plan (DCNPP-IDVP-PP-001) continues.

2.0 PHASE II2.1 . Prb ram Mana ement Plan

Revised drafts of the Phase II Program Mangement Plan were sub-'ittedfor PGEE and IDVP review, on.May.21, .1982. All comments

have'een

received and will be reviewed at an IDVP meeting and aPGEE-IDVP meeting on June 10, 1982. Submittal for NRC review isexpected during the next report period.

2.2 Pro ram Procedures

The Phase II Engineering Program Plan (DCNPP-IDVP-PP-002) is in-cluded in the Phase II Program Management Plan as Appendix D.

2.3 ~Re orts

No EOI Reports have been issued for Phase II.2.4 Corrments sn Previousl Issued Semimonthl Re orts

None at this time.

2.5 Status of IDVP Pro ram Mana ement Efforts

2.5.1 TES Related

See 2.1 and 2.2 of this Semimonthly Report. Preliminary work hasbeen started in response to the expected contents of these plans.

2.5.2 RLCA Related

Reviewed PGINE and IDVP comnents on the RLCA portion of the revisedPhase II Engineering Program Plan. No technical effort to,report.

2.5.3 RFR RelatedI

During this reporting period, R. F. Reedy and Associates activityinvolved review and corwnent on the Phase II Program Management and

~ I ~

IOVP-TES-SM-15Page Six

A 7.EDYNEENGINEERING SERVICES

Engineering Program Plans, and, through meetings with PGKE, clari-fication of those service-related contractors who performedsafety-related design work during the Phase II portion of'heIndependent Design Verification of OCNPP-1.

2.5.4 SWEC Related

During this reporting period the SWEC related activities were thefo 1 1 owing:~ Respond to TES comnents about Phase II Program Management Plan

and Engineering Program Plan.

o SWEC's personnel met on June 8, 9 and 10, 1982 with their PGKEcounterparts at PGhE's offices to discuss details of theprogram.

TES QA MGRG.S. S PROXGZRS

PROJ ECTMANAGERNf.F. COOPER

'ONTROL LE RVV.S. MODXeH

QA E%1NCZnJ.H. MALO%SON.

MGR. PROJECTADMINISTRATIONJ. Q. CRAGjM

TECHNICALADMNISTRATORJ. M. CANTALUPO

XHEDULIMGW.J. CAac.Y

PUBl.ICATIONS

P.T. ELLiSCONTRACTS .J.Q.CRAG]N

l

lI

ASSISTANT. PROJ. MGR: saic

L.C. NOR1EGA

ASSISTANTPROJ. MGR.'RFR

M.A; REYETT

ASSISTANTPROJ. MGR.

RLCAR, VvR~Y

ASS'T. mOJ. MC Z.IDVP - PI,-~EINTERFACES

R.C. Ml)LKfNSGN

ERROR REPORT

Class:,B, or

File No.File Revision No.

PG&E Task No.

1 Dates: Reported to Program Review ConmitteeProgram Review'ommittee Action NAReported to PG&E and Originator 820607

2. Shd1«TEST i 1 Rp3. Structure(s), system(s), or component(s) involved:

RLCA Piping Analysis 102

4. Description of Error:,PGandE Design Review Isometric 446544 Rev. 11 does not show the secondflange on the vertical run of line 44 from the stabilizer/separator.Design Analysis 8-25, computer date 8/19/80, does not show this flange.RLCA field inspection showed the location of this second flange 13 inchesabove the first flange.

5. Significance of Error:

This error does not cause an overstress.

6. Recomnendation:IDVP Completion Report can be issued if PGandE informs TES that there willbe no physical modifications.

Edward Denison/R L C A on 5/19/82arne/Organization . Date

Approved Prog m anager

7. Potential Error Report signed byType N

Signatures Not ApplicableFor Program Review Comm>ttee

ERROR REPORT

Class: C~cFile No..

File Revision No.PGKE Task No. 7(@i~2

NA'FZ)

2.3.

1. bates: Reported to .'Program Review Comnittee NAProgram. Review Committee ActionReported to PG5E and Originator

Scheduled for TES Semimonthly Report No. 15

RLCA Piping Analysis 109,

4; Description of Error:

Support 58S/69R is shown on PGandE Design Review Isometric 447119Revision 12 to be active in the z and y directions. RLCA field inspectionshowed this support to be active in the x, y and z directions. DesignAnalysis 2-14 (computer date 1/16/82) node 5 shows a z and y directionsupport.


Thi.s error does not cause an overstress.

6. Recormendation:

TES concurs with RLCA Revision 1.PGandE in their 11th semimonthly indicated that a modification is planned.,IDVP therefore requests PGandE to identify the nature of the modification.

7. Potential Error Report signed by Edward Denison/R.L.C.A. on 4/30/82Type Name/Organization - Date

8. Signatures Not ApplicableFor Program Review Committee Approved P gram Manager.

ERROR REPORT

Cl ass:,B, or

File No.File Revision No.

PG&E Task No 70029

1. Dates: Reported to Program Review Coranittee "AProgram Review Committee Action

'eported to PGRE and Originator ~ 8206072. Scheduled for TES Semimonthly Report No.a. s ...;,.(,); e

RLCA Piping Analysis ¹109

4. Description of Error:

Lines 577 and 578 are shown on PGandE Design Review Isometric 447119Revisi.on 12 to be insulated. RLCA field inspection showed these lines

'o

be uninsulated.

P105-4-957-005 PGandE is currently insulating these lines.

Design analysis 2-14 (1/16/82 computer date) shows the weight of thelines as 1.212 pounds per inch. The correct value is 1.26 pounds per inch.

5. Significance of Error:This error does not cause an overstress.

6. Recoranendation:

TES concurs with RLCA Rev. 1.installed by PGandE.

RLCA will reverify insulation after it is

7. Potential Error Report signed byNot Applicable8. Signatures:

For Program Review Comm ttee

Edward Deni son/R.L. C ..A. on 5/10/82Type Name/Organization Date

Approve Program anager

PROGRAM RESOLUTION REPORTFile No.

File Revision No.1. Resolution of an: OI Open Item: Cl Class Error2. Independent Oesign Yerification Program Resolut>on >s as:

a. 0 Closed Itemb. Kk Deviatioric. 0 Open Item with future action by PGKE: Task

3. Date Reported to PGIIE4 dddldf Tddd;~p 155. Resolution based on the following documentation:

965

P105-4-432: PGandE Load Balances 85A part 4 I and II (8/6/76 and9/3/76) show vertical spring hanger 55S/128V to be located 8'5" from

.the elbow. RLCA field inspection showed this dimension to be 8'10"- within the 79-14 tolerances.

6. Program Resolution is:Devi ati on

7. Potential Program ResolutionReport signed by - Edward Deni son/R.L. C.A. 5/19/82

pe arne rganization8. Signature: (Approved/Program Manager)

ERROR REPORT

Class: C

1'. Dates: Reported to Program Review CorreitteeProgram Review Committee ActionReported to PGIWE and Originator

2. Scheduled for TES Semimonthly Report No.3. Structure(s), system(s), or component(s) invo

Regenerative Heat Exchanger

File No. 978File Revision No. 2

PGIIE Task No. 70050

Not A licable

ved:

4. Description of Error:For the vertical direction, two-thirds of the filtered horizontalspectrum was used in the analysis. The Hosgri report states thattwo-thirds of the unfiltered horizontal response spectra is to beused as the response spectra for the vertical direction. The analysishas been revised to reflect the correct vertical acceleration.

5. S'ignificance of Error:All stresses are below allowable.

6. Reconmendation:

Error Class C

7. Potential Error Report signed by Edward Denison/RLCA on 820510Type Name/Org an z at i on Date

8. Signatures: Not ApplicableFor Program Review Comm ttee Approve Prog m Manager

e

ERROR REPORT

Class: C

File No 1008Fiie'evision No. ~

PGSE'ask No.

l. Dates: Reported to Program Review Comnittee ot A lic ble'Program Review Committee Action

Reported to PGICE and Originator2. S h I 1'd f TES E i 1 R p N . ~;3. Structure(s), system(s), or component(s) involved'.

Main Annunciator Cabinet Drawing DC663101-75-1

4. Description of Error:

The Hosgri spectra referenced in the PGEE analysis, 'Drawing DC663101-75-1,are preliminary spectra (4/4/77). This item represents an incorrectengineering input because the 4/4/77 spectra differ from the Hosgrispectra.

5. Significance of Error:'

IDVP independent analysis 'indicates that allowables are not exceeded as aresult, of the differences in spectra and therefore EOI 1008 is an errorClass'. File 949 (Error Class A or B) on Hain Annunciator Cabinet

.addresses erroneous assumption of rigidity for N-S direction in the PGKEanalysis.

6. Recoranendation:

PGICE to incorporate correct Hosgri spectra in their reevaluation ofcabinet in response to,the concerns of File 949.

7. Potential Error Report signed by Edward Denison/RLCA on 820318Type Name/Organization Date

8. Signatures: Not ApplicableFor Program Review Comm ttee Approved P ogram anager

ERROR REPORT

Class: B~s,


PGhE Task No.

l. Dates: Reported to Program Review Comnittee 820527Program Review Committee Action N/AReported to PGSE and Originator

2. Sh Wf TKSS i h1 Rp N.~,3. Structure(s), system(s), or component(s) involved:

Group YI Electrical Equipment (gualified by Testing)

4;. Description of Error:

The target test spectra and the SSE test response spectra taken from thetest table (Wyle Report 58255) used to qualify the Group VI ElectricalEquipment did not envelop the required Hosgri spectra (Figures 4-.219 and4-228).


A sine. sweep resonance test (Wyle Report 58255)) showed the equipment tohave all resonant frequencies above 29 Hertz. '[he FSAR Hosgri Amendmentspecifies that this test was performed to IEEE 344-1975. This standarddoes not explicity provide for qualification of items whose test spectr'adoes not completely envelop the required response spectra.

6. Recornnendation:

As stated in the 1013 File Rev. 1: The SSE test response taken from thetest table (Wyle Report 58255) completely envelopes the required Hosgrispectra above 15 Hertz. Since the SSE test response spectra completelyenvelopes the required Hosgri spectra at all equipment resonant fre-quencies (experimentally determined), TES judges this test adequate toqualify the equipment.

7. Potential Error Report signed by E. Denison/RLCA on 820527Type Name/Organization Date

8. Signatures: N/AFor Program Review Comm ttee pprove r g am anager

PROGRAM RESOLUTION REPORTFile No. 1024

No.File Revision1. Resolution of an: IO Open Item: Cl Class Error2. Independent Oesign Yerification Program Resolution is as

a. 6< Closed Itemb. 0 Deviationc. 0 Open Item with future action by PGEE: Task

3. Date Reported to PGEE 820607Rhd 1d 'TEST i~AN. 15

5. Resolution based on the following documentation:

EOI 1024 Revision 0: PGandE Design Review Isometric 449317 Revision 3shows line 1917-4" rigidly restrained by a support labeled 85S - 40R.The qualification analysis shows this restraint to be labeled 85S- 40V. Several lines are supported by this restraint: 5 rigidlyand one by' spring hanger.

6. Program Resolution is:This item will be covered by a review of the 79-14 Program.

7. Potential Program ResolutionReport signed by Edward Denison/R.L.C.A. on 5/20/82

~e Name rganization Date8. Signature: (Approved/Program

Manager�

)

File No. 1024File Revision No.

IDVP COMPLETION REPORT

'he

DCNPP Independent Design Verification Program (IDVP) effort related tothe above Fi le Number is complete.

1. The action which completes the IDVP effort is:

g fil'e Revision No. 2 is a Program Resolution Report whichrecategorized this item as a Closed Item.

Q The IDVP has been informed by PGLE that no physical modificationswi 11 be applied by PGEE in response to File Revision No.wh'ich recategorized this item as either a Deviation or as a ClassC or Class 0 Error. The PGICE document so informing the, IDVP is

2. Signature:

Approved/Program Manager


l.2.

3.4.5.

File Revision No.Resolution of an: Se Open Item: Cl Class Error.Independent Design Verification Program Resolution is as:a. 8 Closed Itemb. 0 Deviation,c. 0 Open Item with future action by PGIIE: TaskDate Reported to PGIIE 820610phd ldf 1155 i~yp E. 15Resolution based on the following documentation:

Line S6-52-3 —PGI|E Design Review Isometric 446548 Revision 8 shows theunrestrained EW pipe span through support 99/101R to be 11 feet 9 and 7/8inches. RLCA field inspection showed this span to be 12 feet '2 inches.Both of these spans are larger than allowed by PGEE Drawing 049239 Revision3.

Line S6-52-3 has been rigorously analyzed not designed by spacing, rules.Design Analysis 9-23 covers Line S6-52-3. Therefore this item is a closeditem.

'.

Program Reso lution is:

IDVP Completion Report issued as Rev. 3.

7. Potential Program ResolutionReport signed by E. Denison/RLCA

ype Name rganizatson8. Signature:

on 820510Date

(Approved/Program Manager)


IOVP COMPLETION REPORT

The OCNPP Independent Oesign Verification Program (IOVP) effort related tothe above File Number is complete.

- 1. The action which completes the IOVP effort is:

[g File Revision No. 2 is a Program Resolution Report whichrecategorized this item as a Closed Item.

Q The IOVP has been informed .by PG5E Chat no physical modificationswill be applied by PGEE .in response to File Revision No.which recategorized this item as either a Oeviation or as a ClassC or'lass 0 Error. The PG8E document so informing the IOVP is

2. Signature:Approved/Program Manager

a

PROGRAM RESOLUTION REPORTEile No 1051

File Revision No.1. Resolution of an: Cd Open Item: Cl Class Error2. Independent Oesign Yerification Program Resolut>on )s as:

a. K3.Closed Itemb. 0 Deviationc. 0 Open Item with future, potion by PG&E: Task

3. Date Reported to PG&E4. Edd1dd EEE i~Ed. 45. Resolution based on the following documentation:

EOI 1051, Revision 0: The insulation specification given in PGandE'rawing 102040, Revision 9, 6/22/81 for lines 264-8 and 2519-8 is

NIR (No Insulation Requ'ired). PGandE Design Review Isometric 446540,Revision 9, shows the insulation specification for these lines tobe III P(Personnel Protection Only).P105-4-1051-003 The 79-14 Design Review Isometric, controls in thesecases.

6. Program Reso luti'on is:4

Closed Item

7.

8.

Potential Program Resolutioneport signed by Edward Denison/R.L.C.A. 5/20/82

ype Name rganization DateSignature: (Approved/Program Manager)

File No. '051.File Revision'No.

IDVP COMPLETION REPORT

The DCNPP Independent Design Verification Program (IDVP) effort related tothe above Fi le Number is complete.

1. The action which completes the IDVP effort is:

g File Revision No. 2 is a Program Resolution Report whichrecategorized this item as a Closed Item.

Q The IDVP has been informed by PG5E that no physical modificationswill be applied by PGIIE in response to Filp Revision No.which recategorized this 'item as either a Deviation or as a ClassC or Class 0 Error. The PGEE document so informing the IDVP is

2. Signature:Approved/Program Manager

ERROR REPORT

Cl ass: A

l. Dates: Reported to Program Review ComnitteeProgram Review Committee ActionReported to PGICE and Originator

2. Scheduled for TES Semimonthly Report No. 153. S« ( ), y* '( ), '~"

RLCA Piping Analysis 109

Fi)e No.File Revision No. 4

PGEE Task No. 70164

NA

4. Description of Error:Valves LCV-113 and LCV-115 are shown to be unsupported on PGandE DesignReview Isometric 447119 Revision 12. RLCA field inspection (11/30/81) confirmedthat these 35 inch long valves with 2 inch connections were unsupported.PGandE Analysis 2-14, Computer Date 1/16/82, indicates that supports havebeen added to valves LCV-113 and LCV-115.

5. Significance of Error:This item causes an overstress in the RLCA Piping Analysis'09.

PGandE is in the process of adding supports to'these valves. Thismodification will be field verified by RLCA.

6. Recorrmendation:

Error Class A

Edward Deni son/R.L.C.A~n 5/17/82arne/Organizatioo Date

Approved/Pr gram Manager

7. Potential Error Report signed byType N

8, Signatures: Not APPlicableFor Program Review Committee


File Revision No.1. Resolution of an: SZ Open Item: Cl Class Error2. Independent Design Verification Program Resolution is as:

a. 0 Closed Itemb. ZX Deviat'ion

. c. G Open Item with future action by PG&E: Task3. Date Reported to PG&E 8206074 5hd,ld '555;~hyh 5 155. Resolution based on the following documentation:

RLCA 104, Piping line 104, supports 5007-R and 18-5R

Supports 5007-R and 18-5R are 1 abel ed on PGandE Design ReviewIsometric 449316, Rev. 3 as being active in the y and z directions.RLCA field verification showed the support to be active in both thex and y directions. Design Analysis 4-3 (computer date 2/18/80)agrees with RLCA field inspection. Isometric is incorrect.

6. Program Resolution is:

Deviation

7. Potential Program Resolution~ Report signed by Edward Denison/R.L.C.A.

ype Name rganization8. Signature:

on 4/30/82Date

(Approved/Program Manager)

independent design verification program,' fifteenth semimonthly … · 2017. 2. 28. · i...

Documents