ML19270H135
| ML19270H135 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 04/03/1979 |
| From: | Ellershaw L, Hunnicutt D NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19270H134 | List: |
| References | |
| REF-QA-99900209 99900209-79-1, NUDOCS 7906230049 | |
| Download: ML19270H135 (4) | |
Text
..
U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT REGION IV Report No.
99900209/79-01 Program No.
51300 Company:
Bergen-Paterson Pipesupport Corporation 48 Winnisquam Avenue Laconia, New Hampshire 03246 Inspection Conducted: March 14-15, 1979 Inspector-hIf cwW Yf.3 77 m ws L. E. Ellershaw, Principal Inspector, Vendor
' Dste
/j Inspection Branch Approved by:
3'f M
S/77 D. M. Hunnicutt, Chief, ComponentsSection II,
' Date Vendor Inspection Branch Sunmary Special Inspection on March 14-15, 1979 (99900209/79-01)
Areas Inspected:
Follow-up on a 10 CFR Part 21 Report discussing possible deficiencies of Bergen-Paterson Pipesupport Corporation (B-P) fabricated rigid rod struts, Part No. 2000, submitted to B. H. Grier, Region I, dated February 16, 1979 (B-P Reference No. 79-099-000(R)). The inspection in-volved twelve (12) inspector hours on site by one NRC inspector.
Results:
In the one area inspected, no deviations or unresolved items were identified.
2247 235 79062306f'g
.. Details A.
Persons Contacted _
W. F. Becksted, Manager, Quality Assurance R. L. Hecker, Manager, Product Engineering B.
Introduction Bergen-Paterson Pipesupport Corporation (B-P), Laconia, New Hamsphire, submitted a 10 CFR Part 21 Report to USNRC, on February 16, 1979, regarding certain rigid rod struts, Part No. 2000, not meeting certain operating conditions as published in the Load Capacity Data Sheets (LCDS).
C.
Follow-up on 10 CFR Part 21 Report 1.
Objectives The objectives of this follow-up inspection were to ascertain that the reporting organization had implemented the requirements in accordance with 10 CFR Part 21 and had:
a.
Met the requirements for reporting the deficiency.
b.
Performed an evaluation of the condition, including making an assessment of generic implications.
c.
Assigned responsibility for effecting corrective action and preventing recurrence.
2.
Method of Accomplishment The preceding objectives were accomplished by:
a.
Verifying that the requirements for reporting " reportable deficiencies" have been posted, and that procedures have been initiated to provide for the reporting process.
b.
Review 10 CFR Part 21 Report and associated documents including:
LCDS for Rigid Rod Struts, Part No. 2000, Revisions 0, 1, and 2 and internal correspondence dealing with the load calculations as determined by the Energy Method and Finite Difference Method.
c.
Discussions with cognizant personnel.
2247 236
. 3.
Findings A complete determination has not been made as to the acceptability of the rigid rod struts, P/N 2000.
Certain struts, even though not meeting the published LCDS data, may be acceptable after determining the Customer's Design Base Earthquake (DBE) criteria.
The following nuclear power plants under construction, with the B-P job number, have received the indicated quantity of struts, all of which failed to meet the LCDS data:
Sumers (2864) - six (6)
Shoreham(1012)-one(1)
Grand Gulf I (7410) - seven (7)
Grand Gulf II (7411) - one (1)
Wolfereek (7500) - twenty-one (21)
Waterford (3464 & 3465) - three (3)
St. Lucie II (7446 & 7447) - two (2)
WPPSS II (4374) - quantity unknown Zimer (4270) - quantity unknown Two (2) struts provided for Waterford are known to be unaccept-able.
The status of the balance (sixty (60), plus WPPSS II and Zimmer),
is unknown.
The customers provided load criteria in the design specifications which B-P assumed to be the worst (faulted - DBE) condition.
If the customers' load criteria are for the faulted (DBE) condition, which is less than the published LCDS faulted (DBE) condition, the majority of the struts will be acceptable for application, even though they fail to meet the LCDS data.
The materials used for the rods in the struts are:
LCDS, Revision 0 - SA-306 Gr.60 or SA-36 LCDS, Revisicn 1 - SA-305 Gr.60 or SA-36 LCDS, Revision 2 - A-108 Gr.1018 22d
.. Corrective action taken appears adequate in that:
a.
Customers are being notified and information regarding faulted (DBE) load conditions has been requested.
b.
A complete design review of all component supports manu-factured by B-p has been performed, using the Energy Method and the Finite Difference Method.
c.
A " Hold" has been placed on all size 10 and 20 struts, P/N 2000, which were still in B-Ps inventory.
The action taken to preclude recurrence was a complete design review using the more accurate type of analysis.
D.
Exit Interview The scope and findings of this 10 CFR Part 21 follow-up inspection were summarized with the management representatives identified in paragraph A.
Management made no comments related to the discussed inspection findings.
2247 238 9