ML19322A727
| ML19322A727 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Oconee  |
| Issue date: | 04/12/1972 |
| From: | Thies A DUKE POWER CO. |
| To: | Jennifer Davis NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19322A725 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 7911210761 | |
| Download: ML19322A727 (1) | |
Text
s G
DUKE POWER COMPANY Powra Bu Lorno m
4aa SouTu Cnuncu SrazzT, CuARLOTTz, N. C. assoi April 12, 1972 4 c. twins P. o.nox ante censon vics passiormt i
Paoouction ano taansas,ss.o Mr. John G. Davis, Director United States Atomic Energy Cornission Division of Compliance Region I) - Suite 818 230 Peach:rce Street, N. W.
Atlanta, ;eorgia 30303 Re:
C0:II:CEM 50-269/72-1
Dear Mr. Davis:
In reference to the enclosure of your letter of March 16, 1972, we offer the following coc:ments:
1.
Item 1 of that enclosure was responded to by my letter of April 7,1972.
2.
In regard to TP 1 B 200 3A " Hydrostatic Test of the Vent Plugs for In Core Instrument Piping Closure Assembly," fif ty-two (52) valves were satis-factorily tested. Upon removal of these valves from the test jig, seventeen
(
(17) had threads damaged. Seventeen (17) untested valves from the same lot as the fif ty-two (52) tested enes then replaced those with damaged threads.
Subsequently, ninety-eight (98) additional valves from this same lot were tested and all satisfactorily passed the hydro test. Therefore, of the one hundred sixty-seven (167) valves purchased, one hundred fifty (150) satis-factorily passed the hydrostatic test, and seventeen (17) were untested.
Ponsequently, we feel that the structural integrity of this lot of valves has been satisfactorily proven. Removal of the seventeen (17) untested valves from the Unit 1 in core instrucent piping closure assembly might subject them to possible thread damage.
In ref2rence to TP 1 A 201 5 " Core Flood System Flow Test," we believe that the level instrumentation was operating satisfactorily throughout that test.
The test results, although within the acceptance criteria, did not follow the predicted time-flow curve; therefore, the level instru=entation cay have appeared to be reading inaccurately. However, the level instrument calibratien was rechecked after this test and found to be within the allowable calibration tolerances. We find no data to indicate that the level had decreased below the lower impulse line.
We trust the above information addresses the concerns of your _lett_cr.
. ;j s.
s Very truly yours, "4
.h kA
)
g, gCOg
/
A. C. Thies cc:
Mr. W. S. Lee Mr. E. D. Powell Mr. W. H. Owen Mr. R. L. ~ick
'*11 sto 76f t