IR 05000280/1980018
| ML18139A377 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Surry  |
| Issue date: | 05/20/1980 |
| From: | Compton R, Herdt A NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML18139A376 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-280-80-18, 50-281-80-18, IEB-79-02, IEB-79-14, IEB-79-2, NUDOCS 8006300243 | |
| Download: ML18139A377 (5) | |
Text
!..
UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
REGION II
101 MARIETTA ST., N.W., SUITE 3100 ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30303 MAY 2 o 1980 Report Nos. 50-280/80~18 and 50-281/80-18 Licensee: Virginia Electric & Power Company Richmond, VA 23261 Facility Name:
Surry Docket Nos. 50-280 and 50-281 License Nos. DPR-32 and DPR-37 Inspection at Surry site near Surry, Virginia Inspector-;J?.M. Ce,,,.~
R. M./??/tt Approved by: l?li/wtt/11 A. R. Herdt, Section Chief, RCES Branch SUMMARY Inspection on April 29 - May 2, 1980 Areas Inspected
'Datrsigned J/J<<)/91)
'ifat~ Signed This routine, announced inspection involved 28 inspector-hours on site in the areas of IE Bulletin 79-02, "Pipe Support Base Plate Design Using Concrete Expansion Anchor Bolts"; IE Bulletin 79-14, Seismic Analysis for As-Built Safety-Related Piping Systems"; and licensee actions on previous inspection finding Results Of the three areas inspected, no items of noncompliance or deviations were identifie.
.
.
.....
-:-
..,...
.,,.-:,_.,.,,_
..--1.--
---....... ~._.~
__ ~,.-......,,_. _ _.,. -
.
. *'... _
__.... -
,_, ___.., ____.. __.... *....
- -**- ~-****** -*. _ _.,_~---*~.......... -*.. --~-- ***--****'-..
- *
Persons Contacted Licensee Employees
- J. L. Wilson, Station Manager DETAILS
- T. A. Peebles, Superintendent of Technical Services
- K. M. Robinson, Jr., Supervisor of Engineering Services (Corporate)
- F. L. Rentz, Resident QC Engineer
- R.H. Woodall, Associate Engineer
- R. K. MacManus, Associate Engineer Other Organizations
- H. W. Nelson, Project Manager, Ebasco Services Incorporated (Ebasco)
- J. Rapp, Project Engineer, Ebasco M. H. Ismail, Site Project Engineer, Ebasco C. E. Carino, Site Lead Civil Engineer, Ebasco R. Oneill, Supervising Engineer, Ebasco J. Barberis, As-Modified Group Leader, Ebasco L. W. Brown, Senior Site Representative, Stone and Webster NRC Resident Inspector D. J. Burke
- Attended exit interview Exit Interview The inspection scope and findings were summarized on May 2, 1980 with those persons indicated in Paragraph 1 abov.
Licensee Action on Previous Inspection Findings (Closed) Unresolved Item 281/80-13-01, Disposition of tension retest require-ments - Transmittal N-43. Ebasco procedure EEPC-005, "Inspection and Testing of Existing Concrete Expansion Anchor Bolts", has been revised to more clearly define the role of the Options Review Committee (ORC).
Specifically their responsibility for determination of the required tension test loads and of the final acceptability of an anchor is now delineated. This item is close (Closed) Unresolved Item 281/80-13-02, Significance of differences in anchor
- inspection. data. Ebasco has reviewed 100 visual and tension packages selected at random and found no further discrepancies. For the pac-kage that had the original discrepancy noted by the NRC, the bolt diameter discrepancy did not have any effect on the acceptability of the anchor. Therefore, this item is close.*
-2-(Closed) Unresolved Item 281/80-13-03, Inspection for interferences during
!EB 79-14 piping walkdown The calculated movements of the piping at the interferences previously identified by the NRC inspector were not large enough to effect stresses. This item is close (Open) Unresolved Item 281/80-13-04, IE Bulletin 79-14 as-built discrepancie The large number of Home Office Verification Requests (HOVR's) concerning baseplate thickness and bolt hole spacing can be attributed to the plus or minus 1/4 inch tolerance for baseplates and bolt hole spacing allowed in the support/restraint as-built procedure, EEPC-S-00 As the baseplate analysis was being performed for IE Bulletin 79-02~more accurate dimensions were taken during the anchor inspection program, EEPC-S-004, and changes reported to the analysts via HOVR' Four of the five discrepancies between the installed piping and the as-built drawings listed in NRC inspection report 50-281/80-13 were resolved to the inspector's satisfaction based on supplementary documentation provided by Ebasco. The rod hanger installed, but not shown on MKS-CH-25 was apparently missed by the as-built inspection cre However, this support did not affect the system analysis and has been designated for remova Because of additional concerns noted in paragraph 6 below this item remains ope.
Unresolved Items Unresolved items were not identified during this inspectio.
(Open) IE Bulletin 79-02, "Pipe Support Base Plate Designs Using Concrete Expansion Anchor Bolts", Units 1 and 2 Stone & Webster Engineering Corporation (S&W) has issued procedure STF-16,
"Program for Inspection and Testing of Existing Expansion Anchor Bolts",
for Unit 1. This procedure was reviewed and possible clarifications and the portions remaining to be issued (Appendices) were discussed with the licensee and S&W personnel. The bulletin requirements to check preload on the few installed wedge type anchors prior to other inspections and to assure that wedge anchors were left in a preloaded condition were discusse Units 1 and 2 site procedures will be revised to reflect these action The following anchor bolt inspection and testing data packages were examined for completeness, type of discrepancies noted and conformance to procedural requirements:
Line 3"-CH-113-1503, Support 14
. Line 3"-GW-90-154,' Support 16 Line 6"-WGMU-39-151, Support 6
- Approximately 25 anchors had been inspected and tested as of April 30,
- 198 Only one anchor had failed the tension test. The qualification records for the inspection team members were examined, including Level I and II certifications, statement of instruction, examinations and eye
.exam ******--
- A--** --- ------* --***--*-*-. ____...,. __,,. <
______..
__ J
________.__,_
--* ----~-
-
....... -*---"---
..-...------*---** *--*-*--**--
-
.~.
~
-3-Satisfactory field inspection and tension testing of one anchor in support 6 on MKS-1018B2 was observed. It was noted that a 5000 psi gauge was used when the test pressure was only 150 psi. In good standard practice a gauge is selected so that the test is in the mid range of the gauge and graduations are appropriate for the test. The same situation had been observed during Unit 2 tests by Ebasc The licensee agreed that proper gauges would be utilized for future test Thirteen Unit 2 completed anchor bolt inspection/testing packages were also examine No deviations or items of noncompliance were identifie IE Bulletin 79-02 remains open pending completion of-testing, inspection and analysis and subsequent review by the NR.
(Open) IE Bulletin 79-14, "Seismic Analysis for As-Built Safety-Related Piping Systems", Unit 1 & 2 The inspector walked down the following piping runs to compare the actual piping and support configurations with the as-built drawings developed by the S&W (Unit 1) and Ebasco (Unit 2) inspection teams:
Unit I MKS-118G2-5, Auxiliary Steam Generator Feedwater System Supports 6, 8-17 MKS-1029A2-3, Boron Recovery System Supports 2, 3, 5-9 MKS-1122A6-3, Steam Generator Blowdown System Supports 1-11 Unit 2 MKS-WAPD -5 MKS-SHP-1 MKS-SI-13 MKS-125Al-1 MSK-117D, R1IR to relief tank Supports 1-7 Supports H17 and Hl17 Supports 2-8 Supports 1-12, 15-19 and 25 Supports 3, 5, 6, 7 plus 2 new supports No siginficant discrepancies were observed that were not resolved by Ebaso
__ -engineerin However, several questions remain concerning the IEB 79-14 work effor. *. Snubber sizes were not indicated on several:- as-built drawings. Ebasco
- engineers indicated that where sizes were not indicated the smallest
- size snubber suppled by Grinnel was assumed installed or the field was asked to verify the actual size. This item will be examined during a future inspection atEbasco's home offic !'
-l'.-,.,..,::.,
- 'E.*'-,.,-,__.... -.
-4-Spring hangers and supports were noted in Unit 2 that were not at the proper setting (one totally unloaded).
Due to the large amount of support additional and modification work performed this is expecte The licensee stated that an inspection and adjustment of spring supports will be per£ ormed prior to startup of Unit.
Valve/operator nameplate information was not indicated on most as-built drawings. The licensee stated that the valve weight inputs to seismic analysis were being verified using QA record To demonstrate that the requirements of the bulletin have been met, the licensee agreed to compile and forward to the inspector the information and methodology being used by the analyst Pending resolution of the above questions,Unresolved Item 281/80-13-04, IE Bulletin 79-14 As-Built Discrepancies, will remain ope No deviations or items of noncompliance were identifie IE Bulletin 79-14 remains open pending completion of inspection, analysis and modifications efforts and subsequent reviews by the NRC.