IR 05000261/1979025
| ML14175B139 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Robinson  |
| Issue date: | 12/11/1979 |
| From: | Herdt A, Modenos L, Wilcox J NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML14175B135 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-261-79-25, IEB-79-14, NUDOCS 8003210077 | |
| Download: ML14175B139 (4) | |
Text
A R
oUNITED STATES
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION REGION Il 101 MARIETTA ST., N.W., SUITE 3100 ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30303 Report No. 50-261/79-25 Licensee:
Carolina Power and Light Company 411 Fayetteville Street Raleigh, North Carolina 27602 Facility Name: H. B. Robinson Docket No. 50-261 License No. DPR-23 Inspection at H. B. Robinson near Hartsville, South Carolina Inspectors 1171
________
L. Modenos Date Signed A J. D. Wilcox Dat Signed Approved by:
___
__ __
_
_____'/2?
A. R. Herdt, Section Chief, RCES Branch Date Signed SUMMARY Inspection on November 13-14, 1979 Areas Inspected This special, announced inspection involved 26 inspector-hours onsite in the areas of seismic analysis for as-built safety-related piping systems (IE Bulletin 79-14)
Results Of the one area inspected, two items of noncompliance were found (Deficiency Inadequate QA records to IEB 79-14 -
paragraph 5; Infraction - Failure to identify all pipe supports and restraints as specified in IEB 79-14 -
paragraph 5).
0III10
II DETAILS Persons Contacted Licensee Employees
- R. B. Starkey, Jr., General Manager
- J. M. Curley, Engineering Supervisor
- M. F. Page, Senior Engineer Other licensee employees contacted included construction craftsmen and technician Other Organizations K. D. Kraynick, Engineering Supervisor, Ebasco Services
- Attended exit interview Exit Interview The inspection scope and findings were summarized on November 14, 1979 with those persons indicated in Paragraph 1 abov.
Licensee Action on Previous Inspection Findings Not inspecte.
Unresolved Items Unresolved items are matters about which more information is required to determine whether they are acceptable or may involve noncompliance or deviations. New unresolved items identified during this inspection are discussed in paragraph.
Seismic Analysis for As-Built Safety-Related Piping Systems In response to IE Bulletin 79-14 Carolina Power and Light Company (CP&L)
submitted their 30 day response on August 2, 1979 and their 60 day response on September 5, 197 In the letter date'd September 25, 1979 CP&L stated that 100 percent of all systems outside the Containment Vessel have been inspected which is approximately 60 percent of all seismic systems and that the AE will complete the final analyses of all systems as required by October 8, 197 CP&L requested an extension to perform the remaining inspections inside containment until the ).980-refueling outage in the Spring (May, 1980).
The NRC in a letter dated September 28, 1979 granted them this extensio During the inspection and discussion with Ebasco's personnel, it was identi fied that the original design ofthe plant was for Operating Base Earthquake
-2 (OBE) and Design Base Eartquake (DBE) was not considered. Prior to their operating license the Commission instructed CP&L to design for a static DBE by applying a factor to the OBE and compare to the DBE allowable In the inspection of ISO SI-10 it was revealed that the structural integrity of the support was in question after new analysis was run with the.latest up to date computer program which includes the static DBE. The question arises whether the factor used in the original design was sufficient, as well as whether this is a generic problem or just a specific problem. This item will be identified as an Unresolved Item 261/79-25-01, "OBE/DBE Design Comparison."
Special Inspection Procedure "Verification of Seismic Analysis for As-Built Safety Related Piping Systems" Rev. 0 was reviewed for compliance with the requirements of the bulletin. The inspector noted that this procedure did not contain measurement tolerances for the pipe geometry or support detail verification. It was pointed out to the licensee that these tolerances should be implemented in the procedure before inspections for inside containment are begun. The below listed work packages were reviewed for compliance with the requirements of the bulleti ISO-SI-10 ISO-SI-9 ISO-SI-4 ISO-AC-2 ISO-AC-4 Isometric drawings were marked up to indicate supports and restraints including type and location by Ebasco engineers as described in the latest stress analyzed ISO. The field inspection teams verified the locations of the supports and descrepancies were noted when found. A sign off sheet was provided for the pipe support verification. Pipe geometry as required by the bulletin was not verified or signed off. Valve orientation was not inspected because valve orientation and eccemtric mass points were not used in the original stress analysi The failure to properly identify the vfrification and inspector is not in accordance with the requirements specified in Criterion XVII of Appendix B to 10 CFR 5 The above condition is identified as deficiency, 261/79-25-02 "Inadequate QA records to IEB 79-14".
The inspector noted that no QA audits had been performed in relation to this work effort. The General Manager vat informed that a project of the scope and importance of IEB 79-14 warrants a deeper involvement by QA departmen The inspector witnessed the re-inspection of portions of ISO -
SI -9, ISO SI-10 and ISO - SI - 4 and found descrepp.cies.with the marked up ISO' Base supports with U-bolt, which act as two way restraints were not identified. Where rod hangers were called for in the Isometric U-Bolt connections were found in the field without any notations of the difference in the support details. The failure to properly mark up the isometrics and
'0-3 identify all supports and restraints as found in the field is not in accor dance with Criterion V of Appendix B to 10 CFR 50. The above condition is identified as an infraction, 261/79-25-03 "Failure to Identify all Pipe Supports and Restraints as specified in IEB 79-14".
The management of CP&L was informed that verification of the supports was necessary after the identification of the above infraction. The management acknowledged this and will start immediately the reverification upon comple tion of the revised inspection procedur,This IE Bulletin 79-14 remains open until all inspections and evaluations are completed and subsequently reviewed by the NR *II