IR 05000369/1980004
| ML19338D944 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | McGuire  |
| Issue date: | 05/08/1980 |
| From: | Ang W, Herdt A NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19338D920 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-369-80-04, 50-369-80-4, NUDOCS 8009240241 | |
| Download: ML19338D944 (4) | |
Text
,
-
h e,# "*%,o,,
UNITED STATES
/
NUCLEAR RE;ULATORY COMMISSION o
g a
REGION 11
[
101 MARIETTA ST., N.W., SUITE 3100 o
,
d" ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30303
MAY 121980 Report No. 50-369/80-04 Licensee: Duke Power Company 422 South Church Street Charlotte, NC 28242 Facility Name: McGuire Nuclear Station Docket No. 50-369 License No. CPPR-83 Inspection at McGuire Nuclear Station near Charlotte, North Carolina T/
O Inspect
W. P. An'g Date' Signed Approved by:
4/ //
b A. R. Herdt, Section Chief, RCES Branch Date Signed SUMMARY Inspection on April 16-18, 1980 Areas Inspected
-
This routine, unannounced inspection involved 18 inspector-hours on site in the areas of pipe support baseplate designs using concrete expansion anchor bolts (IEB 79-02); and seismic analysis for as-built safety-related piping systems (IEB 79-14).
Results Of the areas inspected, one item of noncompliance was identified 1n '
^
two are.
(Infraction - Failure to follow penetration and support installation requirement paragraphs 5 and 6).
.-
.
B009240 N
_
__
-
-
.
-
.
.
DETAILS 1.
Persons Contacted Licensee Employees
- J. C. Rogers, Project Manager
- G. W. Grier, Project Engineer
,
- E. B. Miller, Senior QA Engineer
- M..Starnes, Senior QC Engineer
- J. Goodman, QC Engineer
- G. B. Robinson, QA Engineer Other licensee employees contacted included 4 construction craftsmen and 2 technicians.
- Attended exit interview 2.
Exit Interview The inspection scope and findings were summarized on April 16, 1980 with those persons indicated in Paragraph I above. Subsequent to the inspection on May 2, 1980, the licensee was informed of the item of noncompliance in paragraphs 5 and 6 as well as the inspector followup item in paragraph 5.
3.
Licensee Action on Previous Inspection Findings Not inspected.
4.
Unresolved Items Unresolved items were not identified during this inspection.
5.
Pipe Support Base Plate Designs Using Concrete Expansion Anchor Bolts (IEB 79-02)
On July 9, 1979 and August 20, 1979, the licensee provided a response to IE Bulletin 79-02. An inspection was performed to verify licensee compliance with IEB 79-02 requirements and licensee ' commitments. The following proce-dures provides the licensee's requirements'for inspection of concrete expansion anchors:
-
Construction Procedure (CP) No. 308 R19 - Installation of Red-Head Concrete Anchor.
QA Procedure M-15 R10- Installed Pipe Support Inspection QA Procedure M25 R3 - Concrete Anchor Installation Inspection i
Im'.
_ _,;,
ma
_ gun ; A -
-- ~
- - - -
- -
,
-
-
L
.
-
,
...
..
-2-Duke Power Company Specification MCS-1196.02-00-003'- Specification for Field Inspecti~on of Installed Se1Lf Drill Concrete Expansion Anchors in Selected Nuclear Safety-Related/ Seismic Piping Systems.. Torque-Tension
. experimental data provided to the licensee by ITT Phillips were used by the L
licensee as the basis for the correlation of their required installation and inspection torque values.
The'following supports were randomly selected.nd inspect'ed for compliance with-IE Bulletin 79-02 requirements and licensee commitments:
1-MCA-ND-H24
-
1-MCA-ND-H23
'l-MCA-ND-H76 1-MCA-ND-H26S The inspection records for support 1-MCA-ND-H26S were not available during-the inspection. Three.of five self-drill expansion anchor bolts of support 1-MCA-ND-H76 were determined to be torqued to less than the CP-308 required installation torque value of 40-45 ft-lbs. This appears-to be in noncompli-ance of 10 CFR 50,' Appendix B, Criterion V and. shall be identified as an example of Infraction 369/80-04-01, " Failure to Follow Penetration Support Installation and Inspection Requirements".
The licensee response to IE Bulletin 79-02 indicated that safety factors of 2 and 3 where used for the faulted-and upset load conditions for McGuire concrete expansion anchor bolts. _The licensee was informed that this did not. comply with IEB 79-02 requirements. The licensee agreed to study this conflict and arrange.for a resolution of this conflict by meeting with the NRC staff. The inspector identif % S is item as an inspector followup item 369/80-04-02, " Safety Fact w :-4 the Fan 1ted and Upset Load Conditions".
Pending resolution of the iteso note'. above and completion of IEB 79-02 requirements, the bulletin sha3.1 h ~ eft open.
i 6.
Seismic Analysis for As-Built Safety-related Piping Systems (IEB 79-14)
On November 1, 1979, the licensee provided'a response to IE Bulletin 79-14.
An inspection was performed to verify licensee compliance with IEB 79-14
.
~
.;
requirements and licensee commitwats. The following procedures were reviewed:
,
QA Procedure M-15 RIO - Installed Pipe Support Inspection
~
i QA Procedure M-8 - Piping System Installation Inspection-Duke Engineering Department Procedure MCSRD 9.0 - McGuire 1 and 2 As-Built
Piping Analysis Impact Review Procedure
'
i
-
.
.
,
.V a
- :__..
_
-
m,
,
,
y
..
c.
,,
-3-
,
Portions of the piping and supports shown on the following drawings were randomly selected and inspected:
System NC 07 - Drawing MC-1414-03.20-05 Rev. 5 - Reactor Coolant System RTD Loops - Reactor Building Support MCR-INC-710 Support MCR-INC-711
'
Support MCR-INC-712 Sy' stem NDA - Drawing MC-1414.04-43-00 Rev.
.
System - Auxiliary building Support 1-MCA-ND-H24 Support 1-MCA-ND-H23 Support 1-MCA-ND-H76 The inspector noted the following discrepancies:
The math model drawing for.MCA-1414-03 20-05 shows 28" spacing between a.
supports INC-711 and INC-712. The inspector noted that the actual installation is 20".
The licensee agreed to study the above noted hanger' spacing problen and to clearly document the inspections that were performed by visual estimation and the accuracy of this estimation.
b.
In addition to the item noted in paragraph 5, hanger ND H76 also was noted to have a pipe to hanger spacing of approximately 1/4" where the drawing requires 1/S" maximum.
c.
Penetration M381 shown on drawing MC 1678-4 Rev. 18 is required by note 5 of that drawing to have a minimum pipe to sleeve clearance of 1/8".
Actual clearance near the bottom was approximately 1/16" and 0 at the bottom.
The above items appear to be additional examples of the noncompliance identified by. 369/80-04-01 in paragraph 5 above.
The current as-Built records for the above noted piping and supports are marked up copies of the drawings. 'The -licensee stated however that these drawings will be formally issued As-Built drawings with all the inspection notations incorporated at a later date.
YendingresolutionofalltheaboveitemsandcompletionofIEB79-14,the
'
bulletin shall be left open.
.
i