ML19322A651
| ML19322A651 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Oconee  |
| Issue date: | 04/21/1972 |
| From: | Jennifer Davis NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | Thies A DUKE POWER CO. |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19322A643 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 7911210714 | |
| Download: ML19322A651 (4) | |
See also: IR 05000269/1972002
Text
I
-
.
,
.
'
,,t-
t
UNITED STATES
fe
I
ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION
$
,i
,,
.
DIVl5loN oF COMPLIANCE
jg
AEGION 11 - S t.:l T E d*8
230 P E ACHT se E E ST R E ET. NORT HWEST
,
, g gg e,e m t - 14048920 4903
ATL ANT A GEORG8 A 30303
In Reply Refer To:
April 21, 1972
P
CO:II:CEM
'
50-269/72-2
50-270/72-1
50-287/72-1
.
Duke Power Company
Attn:
Mr. A. C. Thies, Senior Vice President
Production and Transmission
Power Building
1622 South Church Street
Charlotte, North Carolina 28201
~
Gentlemen:
This refers to the inspection conducted by Mr. Murphy of this office and
other Division of Compliance staff members on February 22-25, 1972, and
on February 29, 1972, of activities authorized by AEC Construction Permit
Nos. CPPR-33, 3h and 35 and to the discussions of our findings held by
Mr. Murphy with you and other members of your staff at the conclusion of
the inspection.
.
Areas examined during this inspection included a review of hot functional
test procedures, evaluation of the results of preoperational tests, in-
stallation of Unit 2 reactor building tendons, installation of Unit 2
reactor coolant piping, installation of Unit 3 reactor building liner
plate, valve vall thickness measurements, valve stem failures, trace-
ability of Unit 1 pipe and fittings, review of the General Office Reviev
Committee Bylavs, and the implementation of the Ocenee Quality Assurance
Program.
Within these areas, the inspectica consisted of interviews with
personnel, selective examinations of procedures and representative records,
and observations by the inspector.
.
During this inspection, it was found that certain of your activities
appeared to be in nonccmpliance with AEC requirements.
Specifically, as
a result of our inspection of the implementation of your quality assurance
program for the stressing of Unit 2 reactor containment building tendons,
six items of apparent noncompliance with A2C requirements were identified.
These items and reference to pertinent require =ents are listed in the
enclosure to this letter. Please provide us within 30 days, in writing,
with your comments concerning these items, any steps that have been or vill
.
pusia*71y
_
.
-
. .
. _ _ .
. - _ - _ _ _ _ _ _
.
.
.
.
.
Duke Power Company
-2-
April 21, 1972
.
-
,
be taken to correct the deficiencies in the implementation of your quality
assurance program so as to prevent recurrence of these types of deficien-
cies, and the date all corrective action or preventive measures were or
vill be completed.
Concerning our review of your test procedures during this inspection, our
inspectors identified to members of your staff instances where the proce-
dures could be strengthened so as to assure that the required test objec-
tives could be accomplished.
It is our understandica that these changes
vill be incorpcrated into the approved procedures.
Regarding the " Guide for Conducting the Oconee Preoperational Test Program,"
it is our understanding that this document vill be revised to include in
Section III, " Development of Test Procedure," and Attachment B, " Test
Procedure For=at," reference to the FSAR requirements as a part of the
acceptssce criteria.
Section IV, " Verification of Test," will also in-
clude the requirement that the group head will, as a part of the review
of the test results, verify that appropriate FSAR requirements have been
met.
Our comments relating to the Bylavs of the General Office Review Comittee
for the Oconee Nuclear Station vere incorporated in the revision dated
February 29, 1972. These coments included specifying in Section III,
"Comittee Responsibility," the requirement that the Comittee audit
station operations as specified by.Section 6 of the Proposed Technical
Specifications, and that the Committee consider the other requirements
of the Technical Specifications, the FSAR and AEC regulations in their
deliberations.
In addition, as also specified in this section, the
Committee vill p~epare procedures as required by Criterion XVIII of
10 CFR 50 to be used in conducting the Comittee's business.
Concerning the valve stem deficiencies and implementation of the Ocenee
Quality Assurance Program, we vill continue to review your progress on
these items during future inspections.
-
-
1
Should you have any questions concerning this letter, we vill be glad to
discuss them with you.
truly yours,
l
,
.
[ Director
John G. Davis
Enclosure:
Description of Items
.
of Noncompliance
.
..
-
. -
--
_
- - .
.
_ ___
.
.
.s e
.
1
-
-
p
.
ENCLOSUP1
'
DOCKET NOS. 50-269
'
50-270
<-
50-287
,
Certain activities under your license appear to be in nonccmpliance with
10 CFR 50, Appendix B, " Quality Assurance Criteria for Nuclev Power
Plants," FSAR requirements and the requirements of applicable codes as
listed below:
i
]
1.
Cr,iterion VI of Appendix B to 10 CFR 50, " Document Control," requires,
in part, that documents, including changes, are reviewed for adequacy
,
and approved for release by authorized personnel.
Contrary to these requirements, from discussions with members of your
i
staff, it appears that a revision had been made increasing the accept-
!
able tenden elongation specified by the [ tendon] Stressing procedure,
N4, and this revision had not been approved.
'
2.
Criterion XII of Appendix B to 10 CFR 50 requires, in part, that
measures shall be established to assure that gages, instruments, and
other measuring devices used in activities affecting quality are
properly controlled, calibrated and adjusted at specified periods to
'
maintain accuracy within necessary limits. ACI Code 318-63, Section
i
2621, requires, in part,that prestressing forces shall be determined
by a recently-calibrated gage. The FSAR, Section 5B.2.8.2, requires,
i
in part, that the gages used in stressing the tendons indicate the
pressure in the jack within plus or minus two percent.
!
!
Contrary to these requirements, -a review of the records indicated
that the stressing gages were calibrated in July 1971 and January
i
1972. Seven of the twelve gages had been calibrated on only one of
j
these occasions and the calibration of four gages was not maintained
within specified limits as indicated by "as found" error in excess of
the acceptance limits during the January 1972 calibration.
I
3.
Criterion II of Appendix B to 10 CFR 50, requires, in part, that a
,
test program shall be established to assure that all testing required
to demonstrate that structures, systems, and components will perform
satisfactorily in service is identified and performed in accordance
with written procedures, that prerequisites for the given test have
been met, that adequate test instrumentation is available and used,
and that test results shall be documented.
(Tendon] Stressing proce-
dure,N4 , requires that the pressure gages be checked twice daily.
Contrary to these requirements, records were not maintained for the
pressure gage tests and from discussions with members of your staff,
it appears that these pressure gage tests were not made during the
%
-
-
period from July 1971 to January 1972 when tendon stressing was being
accomplished.
.
o
r
4
g*
y.
- - - - -
gry---
-*-e---
y
"
T
.
..
J*
.
,%
..
2-
-
.
-
i
k.
Criterion XVI of Appendix B to 10 CFR 50, " Corrective Action,"
requires, in part, that conditions adverse to quality including non-
conformances are determined and promptly identified and corrected and
that corrective action be taken to preclude repetition.
Section
5B.2.8.2 of the FSAR and Section 2621 of ACI 318-63 require, in part,
that the cause of any df er'repancy between calculated tendon elonga-
tions and measured elongaties exceeding five percent be corrected.
Contrary to these requirements, although approximately 16 percent of
the measured elongations differed from calculated elongations by more
than five tercent, there was no evidence that the cause had been deter-
mined and Vat corrective action had been taken.
5
Section 2606(a) 1 of ACI 318-63 requires, in part, that tendons not be
stressed in excess of 0.80 fs' (ultimate strength of the steel) and
that after anchoring, the tendons not be stressed in excess of 0 70 fs' .'
Section 51.h.2 of the FSAR states, in part, that the temporary jacking
force for a single tendon may not exceed 850 kips (0.8 fs').
I
Contrary to these requirements, it appears from a review of the records
and discussions with members of your staff that tendons could have been
stressed to 0.85 fs' and could have had final seating stresses in
excess of 0 70 fs' because of improperly-calibrated gages.
Since docu-
mentation is not availab] e as to the tendons stressed with gages out of
calibration, the identities of the affected tendons could not be
determined.
6.
Criterion II of Appendix B to 10' CFR 50, " Quality Assurance Program,"
requires, in part, that the applicant shall regularly review the status
and adequacy of that part of the quality assurance program which they
are executing.
Contrary to the above, the inspectors found in discussions with = embers
of your site supervisory staff that they were not aware of the defi-
ciencies in the tendon stressing program.
-
.
O
w
1.
9
-
i
~
s