IR 05000269/1980002
| ML19294B676 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Oconee  |
| Issue date: | 01/24/1980 |
| From: | Ang W, Herdt A, Modenos L NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19294B675 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-269-80-02, 50-269-80-2, 50-270-80-01, 50-270-80-1, 50-287-80-01, NUDOCS 8003050281 | |
| Download: ML19294B676 (3) | |
Text
o UNITED STATES 8
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
~
n
$ g, yE REGION il
,
0, g
101 MARIETTA sT., N.W., SUITE 3100 b
o ATLANTA, GEORGI A 30303 Report Nos. 50-269/80-2, 50-270/80-1 and 50-287/80-1 Licensee: Duke Power Company 422 South Church Street Charlotte, North Carolina 28241 Facility Name: Oconee Nuclear Station Docket Nos. 50-269, 50-270 and 50-287 License Nos. DPR-38, DPR-47 and DPR-55 Inspection at kl w
e gn Office, Charlotte, North Carolina y th., -[
d O
Inspectors:
e
.
9-[L O M-ilx/n W.
n'g
'Date S'igned
.
,.e 1. Modenos D' ate S'igned
Approved by:
. /
b
/ A/ 70 p.A'. R. Herdt, Section Chief, RC&ES Branch D' ate Signed
.
SUMMAARY Inspection on January 9-11, 1980 Areas Inspected This routine announced inspection involved 36 inspector hours onsite in the areas of pipe support baseplate designs using concrete expansion anchor bolts; seismic analysis for as-built safety-related piping.
Results Of the areas inspected, no items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
0305 0
,
DETAILS 1.
Persons Contacted Licensee Employees
- J. R. Wells, Corporate QA Manager
- S. B. Hager, Chief Engineer, Civil Engineering
- W. H. Bradley, QA Manager, Engineering
- R.
B. Priory, CE Principal Engineer
- T.
F. Wyke, Principal Engineer
- D. L. Rehn, Senior Engineer
- D.
H. Stout, Assistant Design Engineer
.
- K.
R. Wilson, Junior Engineer, Licensing Other licensee employees contacted included six office personnel.
- Attended exit interview 2.
Exit Interview
.
The inspection scope and findings were summarized on January 11, 1980 with those persons indicated in Paragraph I above.
3.
Licensee Action on Previous Inspection Findings Not inspected.
4.
Unresolved Items Unresolved items were not identified during this inspection.
5.
Pipe Suppcrt Baseplate Designs Using Concrete Expansion Anchors An inspection of Duke Power Company (DPC) design engineering offices was performed to verify licensee compliance with IEB 79-02 requirements and licensee commitaents. Calculations for the following supports were inspected:
3-51A-2-0-2438 - H264
- H262
- 277
- 288
- SK19 3-53B-5-0-2435B-H5 Unit 3 concrete expansion anchors that had been inspected and determined to have shoulder to plug dimensions greater than the allowed tolerance had been evaluated by DPC Design Engineers to determine technical acceptability.
However, this initial technical evaluation had been determined by the
.
-2-
.
licensee to be incomplete. The licensee said that the evaluation would be reperformed. A similar analysis is also to be performed for Units 1 and 2.
A preliminary tabulation of Unit 1 IEB 79-02 inspection findings was reviewed. When compared to Unit 3 findings, it appears that approximately the same magnitude of unacceptable oversized bolt holes had been noted in both units. The licensee indicated that a formal position on the Unit 3 oversized bolt holes will be provided on the next change to the IEB 79-02 response.
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
Pending completion of IEB 79-02 requirements, this bulletin shall remain open.
6.
Seismic Analysis for As-Built Safety-Related Piping Systems The inspectors reviewed the Unit 3 surveillance package for system No. 53
" Main Feedwater from R. B. to A Heater".
A description of the method used to follow the requirements of IE Bulletin 79-14 was provided by Duke's engineers. Piping composite drawings were marked up with support locations in accordance with the latest revision of their stress analysis. Valve drawings and support details were part of the total package the field inspectors used to inspect the pipe geometry and support details. Sign off sheets were provided for the surveillance for each parameter inspected.
Nonconformances were selected by the inspectors and review of the pipe stress analysis provided information that valve weights, materials properties and proper codes were being checked and followed.
A diagramatic layout of the High Pressure Injection System, drawing No.
P0-101-A-3 Rev.
12, provided a detailed explanation of how systems and subsystems are broken up and how code clases are being used. A description of the marking of the diagramatic layout indicated how all the safety-
.
related systems would be covered in their inspection program.
IE Bulletin 79-14 small remain open until all inspections and evaluations are completed.
i