ML18079B025
| ML18079B025 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Salem  |
| Issue date: | 04/16/1979 |
| From: | Ebneter S, Finkel A NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML18079B024 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-272-79-13, 50-311-79-27, NUDOCS 7910020859 | |
| Download: ML18079B025 (4) | |
See also: IR 05000272/1979013
Text
-----* -- ------*-* ------*-------*~_ .. .....__ _____________ -----------*-* --------*-* ..
~-*-** . **- -
---*--- - - ---* - - -- -
-**-- -
-
50-272/79-13
Report. No.50-311/79-27
50-272
Docket No. 50-311
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT
Region I
License No. CPPR-53
Priority ------
Category ~c _____ _
Licensee: Pu bl i*c Service Electric and Gas Company
80 Park Pl ace
Newark, New Jersey 01101
Facility Name: Salem Nuclear Generatinq Station. Units 1 and 2
Inspection at: 80 Park Place, Newark, New Jersey
Inspection conducted: April 16, 1979
Inspectors:
({. f. ~
A. E. Firikel;Reactor Inspector
Approved by:
Inspection Summary:
date signed
date signed
~Zfgned
Inspection on April 16, 1979 (Combined Report Nos. 50-272/79-13 and 50-311/79-27)
Areas Inspected:
Routi*ne, announced inspection by a. regional based inspector.
The inspection consisted of a review of the engineering weights used for the
Velan Valves in the piping analysis program (reference IE Bulletin No. 79-04)and
the design analysis associated with the replacement of the Differential Voltage
Relays 12PVD11 type.
The inspection involved 6 hours6.944444e-5 days <br />0.00167 hours <br />9.920635e-6 weeks <br />2.283e-6 months <br /> at the corporate office
by one NRC regional based inspector.
Results:
Of the two areas inspected, no items of noncompliance were identified.
Region I Form 12
(Rev. April 77)
- 79J0020~S'f.
'*
I ......
DETAILS
1.
Persons Contacted
Public Service Gas and Electric Company.
- R~ Evans, Assistant Manager of Quality Assurance
- R~ Kirk, Senior Engineer
- F. Omohundro, Assistant Manager of Quality Assurance
- E. Schwalje, Manager of Quality Assurance
F. Sullivan, Senior Staff Engineer
- M. Rosenzweig, Quality Assurance Coordinator
- Y. Yaworsky, Assistant Chief Engineer
- denotes those present. during exit meeting~
1
2.
Velan Swing Check Valves CReference IE Bulletin 79,.04)
The inspector reviewed the licensee's computer valve listing which
identified the size, location, type, manufacturer, and code require-
ments for the Salem Nuclear Generating Station, Unit 1 and 2.
The
.valve listing identified the Velan Swing Check Valves as FA-3.3 (3
11 )
FA-34 (4
11 ) and FA-35 (6
11 ).
An examination of the valve listing in-
dicated that the listing of FA-33, FA-34, and FA-35 included all the
3 irtch, 4 inch,. and 6 inch Velan Valves in Units 1 and 2.
-
The. inspector reviewed. the Velan Swing Check Valve *drawing Nos.
78409 (3
11 ), 78501 (4
11
) and 78704 (6
11 ) and verified that the drawings
listed weights .were correct with the latest Velan Engineering infor-
mation.
The listed drawings had the corrections made to the
11 Notes
11
section of the drawings as indicated below:
Velan Valve Drawing No.
78409 (
113
11
)
78501 (
114
11
)
78704 (6
11
)
Original Weight
60 lb.
100 1 b.
225* 1 b.
Corrected Wgt. Date
200 lbs.
325 lbs.
450 lbs.
12/15/77
12/15/77
The corrected weight on the 78704 (6
11
) valve was not dated, but the
Valve Listing of November 26, 1973 has the weight of the 78704 valve
- as 450 lbs.
The licensee used the Franklin Institute Pipidyn II program for cal-
culating the Seismic Category 1 piping stresses.
The inspector *re-
viewed the engineering data sheets and verified that the present
calculations have the corrected weights, as listed above, factored into
the Pi pi dyn I I pr,ogram.
.......
- ~.
3.
3
The inspector reviewed the licensee's Design Division standards
for "Maximum Lateral lbs. Pipe Strappi11g Charts" and verified
that the Velan Valve weights for the
113
11 ,
114
11 , and
116
11 valves
are within the requirements of the "Standard for Stress No.
30354D4073-1
11 chart requirements.
The data listed below is from
the licensee
11Standard for Stress
11 charts and is what the inspector
used in reviewing.the Pipidyn II program data results against.
-~
CC-3
CC-4
CC-6
Max. Lateral Lb - Lbs
250 Lbs.
400, Lbs.
.700 Lbs.
No items of noncompliance were. identified.
Bus* Differential Voltage Relays*
Code
ASTMA-36 (CS}
The licensee was informed by General Electric on April 11, 1979 that
the* Switchgear Business Department (SBD} of the General Electric
Company has recalculated a relay panel required response spectra (RRS}
for the 4. 16KV 350MVA Metal Clad Switchgear that is used for Vital
Bus. appl feat ion at the Sa 1 em Nuclear Generating Station Units 1 and 2.
The Horizontal and Vertical Design Basis Earthquake (DBE} floor
- RRS. for the 100 foot elevation of the Auxiliary Building was used
in a relay seismic test according to the requirements of the IEEE
Standard 501 entit.led
11Se-ismic Testing of Relays.
11
stated that except for the PVD llCllA and 9 ohm HEA lock out relay coil,
the Vital Bus Switchgear Relays have been sefsmicaJly tested
to levels which envelope the computed relay panel RRS and meet the
requirements of P.O. 303-79520.
General Electric stated that *the PVD21D series of *re*l~s w;hich replaces the
PVDll series of relays have,been tested to seismic levels which envelope
the computed relay panel RRS and were functionally operable before,
during, and after exposure to seismic levels defined in IEEE 501.
The licensee notified Region I of the relay problem on April 11, 1979.
The inspector reviewed the test data associated with the Differential
Voltage Relay, General Electric.Report RN Letter No. 99.
The inspector
verified that the licensee has ordered the replacement relay 12 PVD 21
and 23 ohm HEA coils for the Salem 1 and 2 Units.
This item is considered to be unresolved.
The .installation and testing
of the 12 PVD 21 relay and 23 ohm HEA coil will be verified during a
subsequent inspection.
(272/79-13; 31\\/79-27)
"' . ..
4
4.
Unresolved Items
5.
Unresolved items are matters about which more information is
required in order to ascertain whether they are acceptable items,
items of noncompliance, or deviations.
One unresolved item dis-
closed during this inspection ii discussed in Paragraph 3.
Exit Interview
The inspector met with the licensee representatives (denoted in
Paragraph 1) at the conclusion of the inspection on April 16, 1979.
The inspector summarized the purpose and the scope of the inspection
and the findings .