IR 05000395/1980022
| ML19338F764 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Summer  |
| Issue date: | 09/11/1980 |
| From: | Quick D, Whitener H NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19338F762 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-395-80-22, NUDOCS 8010270193 | |
| Download: ML19338F764 (5) | |
Text
g,O gf
'o,,
UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION e
e,
- a REGION il
n e,
',[
101 MARIETTA ST., N.W.. SUITE 3100
d*'
ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30303
- ....
.
Report No. 50-395/80-22 Licensee: South Carolina Electric & Gas Company Columbia, SC 29218 Facility Name: Summer Docket No. 50-395 I.icense No. CPPR-94 Inspection at Summer site near Winnsboro, SC Inspector:
.[
Tag 7 Il h d H. L. Whitener
'
Dite Signed 9 //
O Approved by:
'
,
D. R. Quick', Section Chief, RONS Branch Ddte Signed SUMMARY Inspection on August 6-8, 1980 Areas Inspected This routine, unannounced inspection involved 23 inspector-hours on site in the areas of program and procedure review for the thermal expansion and vibration testing of safety-related piping systems to be performed in conjunction with hot functional testing; and, inspection of a sample of installed piping supports and restraints at ambient temperature.
Results Of the two areas inspected, no items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
8010270/M
-
.
......
-
o
,
O DETAILS
.
1.
Persons Contacted Licensee Employees H. Babbs, Manager, Nuclear Operations 0. Bradham, Plant Manager
- H. Radin, Senior Engineer
- J. Connelly, Assistant Plant Manager Gilbert Assosicates
,
!
- H. Bamburger, Piping Engineer Westinghouse D. Weiland, NSSS Site Manager C. Montemayor, Resident Field Service Engineer Other Organizations Daniels Construction M. Hollenbeck, Hechanical Engineer NRC Resident Inspector
- J. Skolds, Senior Resident Inspector
- M. Heffley, Resident Inpsector
- Attended Exit Interview 2.
Exit Interview The inspection scope and findings were summarized on August 8,1980, with those persons indicated in paragraph I above. The licensee made certain commitments at this meeting which are identified in the details of this report.
3.
Licensee Action on Previous Inspection Findings Not inspected.
4.
Unresolved Itema Unresolved items were not identified during this inspection.
.
-
,
..
--
.
-2-5.
Thermal Expansion and Vibration Testing of Safety-Related Piping Systems
.a.
General
'
The inspector reviewed the test procedures for monitoring pipe support and restraint systems during thermal expansion and vibration testing of the reactor coolant system pressure boundary and safety-related piping systems. These tests are to be conducted during the initial plant heat up.
The licensee's program appears to meet the requirements of Regulatory Guide 1.68, the applicable portions of Section 3.9 and 14.1 of the FSAR, and Question and Response 110.8, 110.15, and 110.31 of Volume XVII of the FSAR. Pertinent aspects of this review are discussed below.
b.
Procedure Review Proper approvals and techne al adequacy were reviewed for test proce-dure TE-1, Revision 0, " Thermal Expansion Testing During Hot Functional Testing".
During review of this procedure the inspector verified that the following items were included in the licensee's program:
(1) Examination of piping support and restraint systems at various temperature plateaus from ambient to operating temperature.
(2) Examination of pipe support and restraint systems during hot functional transient testing (i.e., pump and valve operation).
(3) Pretest inspection and recording of support and restraint settings.
(4) Recording of support and restraint settings at various temperature plateaus.
(5) Established thermal expansion criteria for system performance (6) Evaluation of system performance during heat up by qualified personnel.
(7) Approval of the Piping Design Engineer, prior to adjusting any supports or restraints.
c.
Licensee Commitments The inspector concluded that the licensee has developed a test program which is consistent with regulatory requirements; however, certain problems were identified during procedure review and discussed with licensee and appropriate contractor personnel. At the exit interview the licensee made commitments to resolve these problems. These commit-ments are as follows:
.-
-
.. -. - -
-
-
.
.
-3-
.
(1) All areas which are shimmed after the hot condition will be reinspected at the next heatup.
This item is identified for followup inspection as item number (395/80-22-01).
(2) All supports and restraints which are adjusted during or subsequent to the heat up will be reinspected during the next heat up. This item is identified for followup inspection as item number (395/
80-22-02).
(3) Thermal growth of the reactor coolant system (RCS) as determined by gap measurements and movement of systems attached to the primary system will be compared with the predicted thermal growth for the RCS. Any abnormal deviations in actual thermal movement, of either magnitude or direction, will be identified and evaluated by appropriate design engineering groups. Based on design engi-neering judgement, reanalysis will be performed, as necessary, to confirm that no undue stress has occurred. This item is identified for followup inspection as item number 395/80-22-03.
d.
Vibration Testing In volume XVII of the FSAR, Question and Response 110.31, the licensee is committed to perform visual inspection of piping systems.
The acceptance criteria is the judgement of a qualified observer.
If, in the opinion of the observer, vibration levels are questionable, measure-ments will be made.
The inspector discussed indicators used, in judging the vibration levels, with a qualified observer. Some of the indicators used are as follows:
(1) Experience with vibration in systems (2) Vibration is contained within restraint limits with minimal or no impact (3) Vibration, initiated by changing operating modes, dampens out in a reasonable time (4) Proper operation of supports and restraints The inspector has no further questions on this matter at this time.
6.
Pipe Support and Restraint Inspection The inspector, accompanied by a licensee representative, toured portions of the plant. A sample of support and restraint installations were inspected in the following systems:
a.
Safety Injection
.;
=.
.
-
.
-
_ -..
. - -
.. -
-..
. -. -
.-
.
.
'
..
f
-4-
.
!
I b.
.
,
c.
Emergency Feedwater i
.
d.
!
i One inoperable mechanical snubber was identified on the Emergency Feedwater
]
System. An operable replacement snubber was installed.
3 t
i i
I
!
,
i i
i
!
<
k
<
i t
I i
- -
,
i a
i i.
I
4 j
,
i
.. _ _ _... _. _.,.. _.. _ _..,....
_. _... _ _., _..
.. -...
.
.
_. ~.
. _,
.,,