IR 05000285/1979019
| ML19257D288 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Fort Calhoun  |
| Issue date: | 12/14/1979 |
| From: | Brickley R, Hale C NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19257D285 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-285-79-19, IEB-79-14, NUDOCS 8002040029 | |
| Download: ML19257D288 (5) | |
Text
'
.
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT
REGION IV
Report No. 50-285/79-19 License No. DPR-40 Company:
Omaha Public Power District 1623 Harney Street Omaha, Nebraska 68102 Inspection Conducted: November 26, 1979 Inspector:
T. /M M
/4/IM9 R.H.Brickley,PrpipalInspector Date Program Evaluation Section Vendor Inspection Branch Other Accompanying NRC Personnel:
NMM fx//?/79 R. G. LaGrange, Mecl(/nical Engineer Date'
'
EB/ DOR /NRR Approved by:
/O '/ll'79 C. J. 6, Chief Date Program Evaluation Section Vendor Inspection Branch Summary
.
Inspecti)n conducted November 26, 1979 (50-285/79-19)
Areas Inspected:
Special inspection of OPPD activities on IE Bulletin 79-14.
The inspcetion involved ten (10) hours on-site by one NRC inspector and one other NRC accompanying personnel.
Results: There were no items of noncompliance or deviations or unresolved items identified.
1864 111 8002040 O2c)
.
DETAILS SECTION A.
Persons Contacted Omaha Public Power District (OPPD)
- M. E. Eiden, Manager, Generating Station Engineering (GSE)
J. J. Fluehr, Mechanical Engineer L. T. Ktsek R. Lewis T. J. McIver A. W. Richard, Plant Engineer
- D. D. Wittke, Section Manager, GSE Gilbert / Commonwealth Companies (GCC)
- R. A. Lang, Task Coordinator
- A. D. Nayakwadi, Supervising Engineer
- D. J. Watson, Site Manager
- Denotes those in attendance at the exit meeting.
B.
Seismic Analysis for As-Built Safety-Related Piping Systems 1.
Objectives This was a special inspection conducted at OPPD to determine the following:
That OPPD is inspecting systems to the latest drawings and a.
comparing the results with the seismic analysis used.
b.
That the latest piping design isometrics, used for the IE Bulletin 79-14 walkdown inspection, were used (either as direct input or by a stress analyst's review) as input to the seismic analysis.
The guidelines that were used to identify the nonconformances c.
of the marked-up drawings to the seismic analysis input used.
2.
Method of Accomplishment The preceding objectives were accomplished by an examination of the following:
a.
Letter from Gibbs & Hill Inc. to OPPD dated October 31, 1979 certifying that the Fort Calhoun Unit 1 piping stress analysis were performed using models which reflected the lat(st piping design isometrics.
1864 112
.
b.
Report-Discrepancy Description / Support No's CHVS-103, CHVS-104, CHVS-104A, CHVS-106, CHVS-109, CHVH-111 and the associated isometric i.e. Bergen-Patterson No. 355 and Dravo No. 396.
c.
Bc. -Patterson isometric No. 118-1 Revision 1 and Dravo isometric No. 206 Revision 7.
Note:
Bergen-Patterson uses the Dravo Isometric to indicate the location and type of support and place their title block and drawing number on it.
.
d.
OPPD guidelines for IE Bulletin 79-14 inspection.
3.
Findings a.
General (1) Gibbs & Hill Incorporated sent OPPD about twenty (20) boxes containing packages that they have identified as the ori-ginal seismic analysis.
Some, but not all, of these pack-ages consisted of Bergen-Patterson/ Dravo isometrics, sup-port drawings, and computer output sheets.
Based on the letter identified in B.2.a above OPPD concluded that the latest revision of the drawings were the ones used for the seismic analysis input therefore they used them during the walk-down inspection.
The inspectors examination of the documents identified in B.2 above resulted in the conclusion that the available data packages did not provide sufficient evidence to verify that the isometrics used in the walkdown inspection were utilized as input to the analysis.
It should be noted that the computer sheets did not list the source of the input.
(2) OPPD personnel, utilizing the latest revision of available drawings, performed the walk down inspect sn using acceptance limits established by OPPD. The initial engineering judgement on discrepancies between the as-built condition and the isometric was performed by the Plant Review Com-mittee (PRC). OPPD representatives stated that, to the best of their knowledge, no member of the PRC had expertise in seismic analysis.
(3) The following guidelines were utilized by OPPD in deter-mining recordable discrepancies for IE Bulletin 79-14.
Restraint location: Restraint locations which deviated from the design documents by 1 foot were recorded on the marked-up isometrics; restraint locations which deviated 1864 113
.
from the design documents by 2 feet were recorded on a discrepancy report form.
Valve type and manufacturer:
Deviations from the design documents in either type or manufacturer were recorded on a discrepancy report form.
Restraint configuration:
Restraint cimensions which deviated from the design documents by 15% were recorded on a discrepancy report form; restraint material (e.g.,
3" x 3" x 1/4" angle) deviations were recorded on a discrepancy report form; restraint orientations which visual inspection found to be different from the design documents were reported on discrepancy report form.
Anchor location: Measurable deviations from the design documents were reported on a discrepancy report form.
Piping geometry: Deviations in geometry were recorded on a discrepancy report form; dimensions which deviated from the design documents by 15% were recorded on a discrepancy report form.
(4) The status of the IE Bulletin 79-14 activities as of this inspection is as follows:
Number of isometrics listed to be inspected is 225.
_
Number of isometrics inspected is 141.
Number of isometrics with associated original analysis is 71.
Number of isometrics which match the revision of the original analysis is 16.
b.
Deviations and Unresolved Items None identified.
c.
F_ollow-Up Items (1) OPPD committed to submitting resumes of PRC members to NRC for evaluating their expertise in seismic analysis.
(2) OPPD committed to having GCC review all PRC actions on IE Bulletin 79-14.
1864 114
.
(3) OPPD committed to comparing all available analytical isometrics (used as input) to the walkdown isometric to determine the extent of agreement.
(4) OPPD committed to submitting to NRC the details of all discrepancies and their disposition.
C.
Exit Interview An exit interview was held with management representatives on November 26, 1979.
In addition to those individuals indicated by an asterisk in para-graph A, those in attendance were:
R. L. Jaworski, Section Manager, Technical Services W. C. Jones, Division Manager, Production Operations K. J. Morris, Manager, Administrative Services
'
'
The inspector summarized the scope and findings of the inspection.
Management comments were generally for clasification only, or acknowledgement of the statements by the inspector.
1864 115