ML19262A818
| ML19262A818 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 10/18/1979 |
| From: | Hunnicutt D, Oller R NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19262A813 | List: |
| References | |
| REF-QA-99900080 99900080-79-2, NUDOCS 7912110088 | |
| Download: ML19262A818 (8) | |
Text
.
U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT REGION IV Report No.
99900080/79-02 Program No. 51300 Company:
Copes Vulcan, Inc.
Post Office Box 577 Lake City, Pennsylvania 16423 Inspection Conducted:
Septen.aer 17-18, 1979 M8/Y?
Inspector:
L R. E. Oller, Contractor Inspector Date ComponentsSection II Vendor Inspection Branch Approved by:
b NIO7' ?
D. M. Hannicutt, Chief Date ComponentsSection II Vendor Inspection Branch Su:mna ry Special Inspection on September 17-18, 1979 (99900080/79-02)
Areas Inspected:
Implementation of 10 CFR Part 21 and other NRC.equirements including assessment of the cause, corrective action and generic considerations relative to the deficiency found in Copes Vulcan manufactured pressurizer power operated relief valves (PORV), Nos. PCV-430 and 431C, supplied for the Ginna Nuclear Station, as identified in 10 CFR Part 21 report by Copes Vulcan, Inc.
Also included was a discussion of a failure in 1974 of a cast iroa frame (yoke) on a similar type PORV supplied to N0E unit in Switzerland and the possible generic implications with regard to the Indian Point 2 and Ginna nuclear power stations. The inspection involved sir. (6) inspector hours on site.
Results:
In the areas inspected no deviations or unresolved items were identified.
Other Findings: CVI's Part 21 report was in accordance with the requirements of 10 CFR Part 21.
1530 106 7912110 h
2 In regard to generic considerations related to the failure in 1974 of a cast iron frame (yoke) on a CVI supplied PORV used in a Swiss nuclear unit, the RG&E Ginna Unit still has similar valves with cast iron frames (yokes).
h
/
3 DETAILS SECTION I A.
Persons Contacted
- J. Baker, Vice President of F.;ineering
- D. Mays, Quality Control L, nager
- R. Lewson, Director of Engineering D. Tammaro, Contract Engineer
- Attended the Exit Interview.
B.
Preinspection Conference A preinspection conference was held on September 17, 1979, with Mr. R. Lawson.
The NRC inspector indicated the scope of the inspection would include a followup inspection relative to the 10 CFR Part 21 report dated May 18, 1979, by Copes Vulcan, Inc., to the NRC, with regard to inadequate relieving ca-pacity of two (2) pressurizer power operated relief valves supplied for the Rochester Gas and Electric Company's Ginna station.
In addition, the NRC inspector indicated that a discussion would be included concerning the generic implications in domestic nuclear stations of an alleged cast iron frame (yoke) failure in 1974 of a similar type power operated relief valve supplied by Copas Vulcan to Westinghouse for use in the NOK nuclear gener-ating station in Switzerland.
C.
Reported 10 CFR Part 21 Deficiency 1.
Deficiency Reported The equipment in question is two (2) pressurizer power operated (air diaphragm) relief valves Nos. PCV-430 and PCV-431C furnished by Copes Vulcan, Inc. (CVI), to Westinghouse Electric Corporation (Westinghouse) for use in the Rochester Gas and Electric Company's J.3&E) Ginna nuclear generating plant. As a result of a written inquiry from RG&E on February 2, 1979, CVI eigineering determined on April 28, 1979, by layout, that the required relieving capacity would not meet the specified C relieving capacity of 50.RG&E was notified of this condition by EVI letter dated May 7, 1979. CVI was advised by their customer on May 11, 1979 that the NRC inspector at the site had questioned whether CVI had any similar valves at other plants.
This matter was also reported to the NRC by RG&E letter dated May 25, 1979, with attached LER 79/011/01T-0.
1530 108 1530 107
4 2.
Objectives The objectives of this follow-up inspection were to ascertain that the reporting organization had implemented the requirements of 10 CFR Part 21 and had:
Met the requirements for reporting the deficiency.
a.
b.
Performed an evaluation of the condition, including making an assessment of generic implications.
Assigned responsibility and implemented a plan of corrective and/
c.
or preventive action.
3.
Method of Accomplishment The preceding objectives were accomplished by:
Review of CVI's 10 CFR Part 21 Report dated May 18, 1979, and a.
RG&E's I.ER Report letter dated May 25, 1979, with attached LER No.
79/011/01T-0.
b.
Discussions with cognizant CVI personn6.
Review of CVI's Part 21 Report implementing procedure No. 50-1.1.4, c.
Revision 0, dated January 17, 1978.
d.
Review of " Valve Assembly Drawing for 2"-1500 PSI, ASA Standard with 3" Inlet and Outlet Valve Assembly," Drawing No. B-132349, Revision 5, for the subject valves.
e.
Review of RG&E's letter dated February 2, 1979 to CVI asking what C could be expected with an assumed one inch stroke for the ysubject valves.
f.
Review of CVI's 5 to 1 scale layout contour sketch for plug part No. M-132476 and Cage Part No. M-131286 for the subject valves.
g.
Review of CVI's corrected plug contour drawing M-132476, ?evision 5, dated May 11, 1979, by checker.
h.
Review of CVI's letter dated May 7, 1979, to RG&E confirming a discussion on May 3, 1979, of RG&E's request and providing written details with regard to CVI's engineering determination of a maxi-mum C of 42, the cause of the problem and CVI's initiation of y
action to supply two (2) sets of new correct trim which would I
meet the specification.
i 1530 109
5 1.
Review of Westinghouse Purchase Order 54-G-661648, dated December 16, 1966, to CVI for two (2) power operated relief valves to Westinghouse specification Vo. G-676270, dated March 8, 1966.
j.
Review of Specification Sheet 1 of 1 Revision 1, issued May 22, 1967 for RG&E Project, Westinghouse E-Specification No. 676270 to verify the C 50 requirements for the two (2) subject valves PCV-430 and %31C.
4.
Findings a.
Deviations from Commitments None.
b.
Unresolved Items None.
c.
Other Findings (Comments)
(1) Discussion and review of documents established that the Copes Vulcan, Inc. (CVI), 10 CFR Part 21 Report dated May 18, 1979, met the reporting requirements of 10 CFR Part 21.
(2) CVI performed an engineering evaluation of the condition and provided corrective action by redesigning the valve plug machining template to meet the specified C of 50.
The original error was determined to have been#a machining error of the plug contour caused by an incorrect template. Two (2) sets of new trim consisting of cage, plug and stem were then manufactured and shipped to RG&E on June 22, 1979.
(3) CVI reviewed generic considerations by:
(a) Determining that the original valves were designed and manufactured to Westinghouse specification G-676270 for only the Ginna, Indian Point 2 and NOK Switzerland nuclear generating units. THE NOK relief capacity requirement was only for a C of 30 and the original y
two (2) Indian Point 2 valves w?re replaced with a different design.
(b) All subsequent CVI orders for PORVs, a total of five (5) were designed and manufactured with a tapered / flat bottom quick opening plug.
1530 110
6 D.
Exit Meeting 1.
The inspector met with Messrs. Baker, Lawson, and Mays at the con-clusic.; uf the inspection on September 18, 1979.
2.
The status of Copes Vulcan's 10 CFR Part 21 Report dated May 18, 1979, and the 1974 Swiss PORV frame (yoke) failure problem were discussed.
3.
Management comments related to the above items.
1530 111
7 DETAILS SECTION II A.
Person Contacted
- R.
Lawson, Director of Engineering
- Attended the Exit Meeting.
B.
Valve Frame (yoke) Failure 1.
Deficiency Reported On September 13, 1979, the inspector was informed by the NRC Vendor Ir.apection Branch Chief that a Copes Vulcan, Inc. (CVI), power operated relief valve frame (yoke) had failed in the NOK Swiss nuclear generating unit in 1974 and the details and generic considerations of this inci-dent should be investigated during the visit to Copes Vulcan on September 17-18, 1979.
2.
Obl--tive The objective of this investigation was to determine if CVI was in-formed of the problem and had reviewed generic implications with regard to any similar valves on domestic nuclear generating units.
3.
Metlod of Accomplishment The preceding objective was accomplished by discussions with Mr.
R. Lawson.
4.
Findings a.
No deviations or unresolved items were identified.
b.
Other Findings (1) CVI was notified verbally by Wesinghouse on September 15, 1979, of the event but were given no details.
(2) CVI was notified verbally by Westinghouse on September 17, 1979, that Westinghouse's position was that the event was not a reportable item under 10 CFR Part 21.
1530 112
8 (3) The subject vatve on the Swiss unit was one of the same valves related to the C problem but both valves were re-y placed about two years ago.
(4) CVI indicated the RG&E Ginna plant still has cast iron valve frames, but the entire valve assemblies replacements for Indian Point 2 were ordered in July, 1977.
(5) CVI knows that none of their other customers have PORVs with cast iron frames supplied by CVI.
\\Sho \\\\h
..