IR 05000250/1986013

Insp Repts 50-250/86-13 & 50-251/86-13 on 860303-07. Violation Noted:Inadequately Supported Lube Water Piping

ML20197A844
Person / Time
Site:	Turkey Point
Issue date:	04/23/1986
From:	Blake J, Vias S NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II)
To:
Shared Package
ML20197A833	List: IR 05000250/1986013 ML20197A831 ML20197A838
References
50-250-86-13, 50-251-86-13, IEB-79-02, IEB-79-14, IEB-79-2, NUDOCS 8605120398
Download: ML20197A844 (6)

Text

I '

,

K

'

%v

,

en af0h UNITED STATES

,

[ 4(

o NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION REGION il 3 y 101 MARIETTA STREET. * * ATLANTA. GEORGI A 30323 4., ...../ Report Nos.: 50-250/86-13 and 50-251/86-13

. Licensee: Florida Power and Light Company 9250 West Flagler Street Miami, FL 33102 Docket Nos.: 50-250 and 50-251 License Nos.: DPR-31 and DPR-41 Facility Name: Turkey Point 3 and 4 Inspection Co c 9: c .

r3-7, 1986 Inspect : ,

~

3 . Date Signed Approved by: 7!P3 J. ' '.' pldke'. Section Chief DAte Signed En neering Branch Di isionj of Reactor Safety SUMMARY Scope: This routine, announced inspection entailed 34 inspector-hours on site and in the engineering offices in Juno Beach, Florida, in the areas of seismic analysis for as-built safety-related piping (IEB 79-14) and pipe support baseplate designs using concrete expansion anchor bolts (IEB 79-02).

Results: One violation was identified " Inadequately Supported Piping,"

paragraph S PDR ADOCK 05000250 0 PDR L_

. _ _ _ . _ . _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ ._ _ . . . - __ _ . .

f

.

<

.

'

'

,

'

!

REPORT DETAILS Persons Contacted Licensee Employees

• J. Arias, Jr., Regulation and Compliance Supervisor R. Gill, Lead Civil Engineer i *R. Hart, Licensing Engineer I. Lanier, Mechanical Engineer S. Verducci, Nuclear Licensing Engineer Other licensee employees contacted included engineers, technicians, and .

office personne !

Other Organizations

• J. Donis, Site Engineering Supervisor, Bechtel Power Corp. (BPC) -

• J. Gnecco, Site Engineering Representative, Teledyne Engineering i Services (TES) ,

i *M. Mulbrey, Mechanical Engineer l

'

NRC Resident Inspector D. Brewer, Resident Inspector - Operations

.

i

• Attended exit interview

,

. Exit Interview i-

'

The inspection scope and findings were summarized on March 7,1986, with < ,

those persons indicated in paragraph I above. The inspector described'the areas inspected und discussed in detail the inspection findings I'l;ted '

s' '

below. No dissenting comments were received from the licensee,

(0 pen) UNR 50-250, 251/86-13-01, " Adequacy of design ca'pacities used for installed Wej-It concrete anchor bolts", paragraph (0 pen) Violation 50-250, 251/86-13-02, " Inadequately supported piping",'

paragraph ~'

'

,

'

,e ,

. n

~

s

-

l i >

,

l

___ __ _ _ _ _ _ _._- --_ _ _ - - - . _ ___ . _ _ _ . _ - + - - - - -- - __ _ - -. _ -- - _

-

l

.

4

! The licensee did identify as proprietary material various documents for review by the inspector during this inspection, but no proprietary

.

information is contained in this report.

i

Licensee Action on Previous Enforcement Matters (25528, 25529) (Closed) UNR 50-250, 251/85-12-02, " Pipe Support Design Calculations."

'

The inspector reviewed procedure EDP1-4.37-10. " Design Calculations",

issued October 15, 1985, and a letter dated September 9,1985, stating they had completed their review of calculati0ns that used engineering judgement. The revisions of the above procedure now give guidelines for the use and documentation of engineering judgement. This item is considered closed.

' (Closed) UNR 50-250, 251/85-12-03, " Pipe Penetration Restrictions".

The inspector reviewed Teledyne Engineering Services (TES) analysis of the six penetrations in questio TES issued a letter to FPL on January 17, 1986, with a technical report TR-5875L-1 R/0 " Evaluation of Temporary Piping Penetration Restrictions", dated July 17, 1985. TES concluded that no significant problems would have occurred due to the ,

penetration restrictions and that they would not have resulted in a 1

FSAR noncompliance under any operating or design loading condition l

. This item is considered closed.

, (Closed) UNR 50-250, 251/82-23-01, " Pipe Support Analysis, Unresolved Questions' .

l (1) The inspector reviewed the Plant Change / Modify log that shows that

'

all items for review and field modifications in reference to IEB's 79-02 and 79-14 have been closed, indicating that the

- remaining Unit 3 supports had been upgraded during the outage in

'

', , the summer of 1985. This part was also addressed in inspection report 50-250, 251/85-1 (2) The inspector reviewed a letter from TES dated March 6, 1986, to ,

-

FPL stating that TES issued a project guide, " Anchor Bolt '

i

' .

Allowables - FSAR Piping System Support Analysis - Turkey Point

'

'

Units 3 and 4", in which the one-inch Hilti-Kwik Bolt allowables

. derived from Hilti SED Test Report 80-15 were incorporate Furthermore, the letter stated that TES performed an audit of all . its Turkey Point 79-14 pipe support analysis, performed to date in an effort to correct any support analyses and design modifications

• - - related to one-inch Hilti-Kwik Bolts with five-inch embedment depths or greater.

. 1

, .L v

i i

l

.

a--m- z r

-

--~,9 y e, n m a w.- +, -+,ma, a-n,--em w wy- - - --,,e-~ -,-,gw-a,-w---- - - - - - - - --- -y----n w- -

vme w -e,-,wwgw- y g w

.

.

(3) The concern about the use of Wej-It concrete expansion anchors is being removed from this UNR and is opened as a separate concern, UNR 50-250, 251/86-13-01, " Adequacy of Design Capacities Used for Installed Wej-It Concrete Anchor Bolts". For additional discussion see paragraph UNR 50-250, 251/82-23-01 is considered close (0 pen) UNR 50-250, 251/85-12-01, " Pipe Support Modification and Inspection". The concern of additional attachments on support number A-6026, not shown on the pipe support drawings, and not identified by QC, was reviewed by this inspector. Per a letter by TES to FPL dated February 12, 1986 TES performed an audit of all its pipe support modification drawings issued under IEB 79-14, and determined that only one other support drawing did not correctly show an additional attachmen Revisions for all drawings involved with the above supports have been revised to show all attachments and references to other drawings as shown in TES's, Technical Reports TR-5322-14 R/2 and TR 5322-20 R/2 and all were found to be acceptabl TES concluded that no FSAR noncompliances would have resulted under any operating or design loading conditio This portion of the UNR is considered close Pending the generic review and evaluation by the licensee of Support A-8942 and others for inadequate slide clearances, and further NRC inspection, this concern of the UNR will remain ope . Unresolved Itens Unresolved items are matters about thich more information is required to determine whether they are acceptable or may involve violations or

deviations. One new unresolved item identified during this inspection is discussed in paragraph 5.

Safety-Related Pipe Supports and Restraint Systems (50090)

! During this inspection, the inspector reviewed a description and detailed work scope indicating the licensee's direction and scope of work that will be done to address concerns about pipe support modification and inspectio These concerns were initially discussed in Inspection Report 250, 251/85-12 in UNR 250, 251/85-12-01. One of these concerns involved the use of Wej-It concrete expansion anchors. The licensee stated that a small number of Wej-It concrete expansion anchors had been used on sit The Teledyne representative informed the inspector that Wej-It catalog capacities were used in the design calculations. The licensee l and Teledyne were informed by the inspector of recent on-site testing i

I l

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

,.

.

. .. ..

.

.

.

performed by Crystal River where site specific capacities were found to be 40% to 60% less than the catalog values. The inspector requested the licensee to evaluate the potential applicability of the Crystal River test values to Turkey Point. Pending confirmation of the adequacy of capacities used in design calculations for Wej-It concrete expansion anchor Pending review and evaluation by the licensee and further NRC inspection, this matter was identified as Unresolved Item 50-250, 251/86-13-01, " Adequacy of Design Capacities Used for Installed Wej-It Concrete Anchor Bolts", The inspector reviewed the three sections of one-inch diameter piping for the Auxiliary Feedwater Pump (AFW) Lube Oil Coolers, from the discharge side of the Lube Oil Coolers of the AFW Pumps A, B, and C to the Recirculation Line Header, as shown on Drawing No. 5610-M-2/78-10 Design Document No. M-18, " Office and Field Engineering Users Manual for Routing and Supporting Two Inch and Under Piping", revision dated October 5, 1984, Section 2.1, gives the criteria and applicable codes for this piping; and Section 2.1.2 (a) weight stresses, gives the maximum spacings in Tables 2.1 to Table 2.4 for hangers on straight pipes and Figure 2.10 of Appendix A, for piping with concentrated load Contrary to the above, the one inch Lube 011 Cooler piping as described above were found not to be supported as required by the above documen The inspector also reviewed the three-inch diameter Lube Water piping from the Intake Water piping to the Main Condenser Circulating Water Pump In that there is a code class change in this section of piping, Specification 5172-M-51, " Field Fabrication and Installation of Piping and Field Erection Equipment", requires assurance that the structural integrity of the safety-related section be maintained. That is, during a seismic event, damage to the nonsafety-related section of piping should not have any adverse effect on the safety-related sectio The inspection showed that there was no adequate support provided for the nonsafety portion of the Lube Water piping that would prevent damage to the safety-related portion of the pipin The discrepancies noted above are contrary to the procedures and specifications as noted and as required by (1) 10 CFR 50.55a.(a)(1), "... systems and components shall be designed, fabricated, erected... to quality standards commensurate with the importance of the safety function to be performed."

... . . . . .

. .

.

.

-

.

,

(2) Florida Power and Light Topical Quality Assurance Report (FPLTQAR 1-76A), Section TQR 3.0 requires that "... design control program shall ensure that the design is defined, controlled and verified..."

Contrary to the above, procedural requirements for the supporting of safety-related class pipe and the assurance that the structural integrity of the systems be maintained, have not been met, and is identified as Violation 50-250, 251/86-13-02, " Inadequately Supported Piping".

l-

!

!

l I

-. . _ .