ML19260B591
| ML19260B591 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 10/17/1979 |
| From: | Ellershaw L, Hunnicutt D NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19260B588 | List: |
| References | |
| REF-QA-99900385 99900385-79-1, NUDOCS 7912100415 | |
| Download: ML19260B591 (3) | |
Text
'
U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT REGION IV Report No.
99900385/79-01 Program No.
51400 Company:
Crane Company Chapman Division 203 Hampshire Street Indian Orchard, MA 01151 Inspection Conducted: August 17, 1979 Inspectors:
2 /<
//-/ 7-7f L. E. Ellershaw, fontractor Inspector Date ComponentsSection II Vendor Inspection Branch Approved by:
Ic4
/# -/7-7 f D. M. Hunnicutt,' Chief Date ComponentsSection II Vendor Inspection Branch Summary Special Inspection on August 17, 1979 (99900385/79-01)
Areas Inspected: Follow-up on a licensee reportable occurrence report relative to a failed swing check valve. The inspection involved four (4) inspector hours by one (1) hTC inspector.
Results:
In the one area inspected, no deviations or unresolved items were identified.
7912100 M 3
~
2 DETAILS SECTION A.
Persons Contacted D. A. Martino - Supervisor, Quality Engineering B.
Introduction Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) documented a reportable occurrence (Report BFRO-50-260/786) dated May 5, 1978, to J. P. O'Reilly, NRC Region II, re-garding a swing check valve in the high pressure coolant injection system that was found in an open position during maintenance inspection after failing a local leak rate test.
Investigation determined the cause of failure to be a mechanical interference between the end caps and the hinge pin. Action was taken by machining the end caps to provide an interference clearcnce. Following this action, the valve operability was checked and found within acceptable limits. The valve manufacturer was identified as Crane Chapman.
C.
Follow-up Inspection on Report BFR0-50-260/786 1.
Objectives The objectives of this follow-up inspection were to ascertain whether or not there were generic implications, and to review data relative to the identified valve.
2.
Method of Accomplishment The preceding objectives were accomplished by:
a.
Review of reportable occurrence report.
b.
Review of purchase order requiremeucs from the customer to Crane Company.
c.
Review the applicable drawing (PA-144429, revision 0, dated August, 1967).
d.
Review of the Quality Control records pertaining to the partic-ular valve.
e.
Discussions with cognizant personnel including NRC Region II.
1521 i78
3 3.
Findings Crane Company is not an ASME Certificate of Authorization holder.
The reportable occurrence report identified the valve as number 2-73-603.
During initial contact (telephone) with Crane Company, it was indicated the number was not a Crane Company number. The inspector contacted NRC Region II for additional input. Region II provided the following information:
Item (valve) Mark Number - BF1-23-65; P.O. Number 205-H-1108; Order Number CV 09023-8 (Crane's); List 151, 20" Swing Check Valve.
P.O. 205-H-1168, revision 3 dated August 17, 1968, imposed the fol-lowing requirements: Valve to be made to Code ASA B31.1; hydrostatic and liquid penetrant test per Section VIII; magnetic particle test to Section III; and a maximum seat leakage rate of 2cc/hr/ inch when tested at 150 lbs. The design condition is 150 lbs. at 300 F.
The Crane Company Quality Control Finished Valve Inspection Report dated November 10, 1969, reflects the accomplishment of the above, and also includes radiography of the body and cap, and a disc oper-ational test.
Customer inspection was performed, which included the hydrostatic testing of the seat and shell, and the report was signed off by the Customer representative on January 23, 1970.
A determination as to the generic imp?.ications could not be made because Mr. Martino indicated Crane Company has not received infor-mation relative to the reported problem.
It was further indicated this is a standard valve which is in substantial use, particularly in the petro-chemical industry. The production rate of this type valve in the late 1960s and early 1970s approximated nearly one hundred per year. The current rate is approximately ten per year.
The valves have been, and are being manufactured to Code ASA B31.1.
Ultimate destination, for the most part, is unknown, as this is a standard valve which is often sold to supply houses for subsequent resale and distribution. Therefore, it could not be ascertained as to the quantity of this type valve that might be inatalled in other units.
D.
Exit Interview The scope and discussions relative to this follow-up inspection were summarized at the conclusion of the inspection on August 17, 1979, with Mr. D. A. Martino, who acknowledged the comments.
4 1521 I79