ML20004B664
| ML20004B664 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Waterford  |
| Issue date: | 05/25/1981 |
| From: | Aswell D LOUISIANA POWER & LIGHT CO. |
| To: | Seyfrit K NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV) |
| References | |
| 10CFR-050.55E, 10CFR-50.55E, W3K81-0182, W3K81-182, NUDOCS 8105290257 | |
| Download: ML20004B664 (4) | |
Text
,
l OUISIANA P O W E R & L1 G H T! A o scx SCC 8
- NEW cALEANS. LCUISiANA 70174 1 a ceuscNee srnsar
- (5041 366-2345 ments
- 3. L ASWELL v'ca *a'" *" a' ue:*
May 25, 1981 W3K81-0182 Q-3-A35.07.29 Mr. K. V. Seyfrit, Director, Region IV U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Inspection & Enforcement 611 Ryan Plaza Drive, Suite 1000 Arlington, Texas 76012
SUBJECT:
Waterford SES Unit No. 3 Docket No. 50-382 Interim Report of Significant Construction Deficiency No. 29
" Inadequate Clearance Between Process Piping Systems and Box-type Pipe Supports / Restraints"
REFERENCE:
Telecon - L. L. Bass (LP&L) to R. C. Stewart (NRC) on 4/23/81 Dear Mr.
Seyfrit:
In accordance with the requirements of 10CFR50.55(e), we are hereby providing two copies of the Interim Report of Significant Construction Deficiency No. -
29, " Inadequate Clearance 3etween Process Piping Systems and Boxtype Pipe Supports / Restraints."
If you have any questions, please advise.
Yours very truly,
. P'1 I 'o, t
/2 s -
j D. L. Aswell, Vice President y
ll,AY ~ 3 7
Power Production i-u.s.to*'"'T SA C #
DLA/TFC/rd Q
4 cc:
- 1) Director
/
U Office of Inspection & Enforcement U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D. C. 20555 l
(with 15 copies of report) 1
- 2) Director Office of Management Information and Program Control l
j U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D. C. 20555 pan (with I copy of report) 9' l f
8195290257
f LOUISIANA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY WATERFORD SES UNIT NO. 3 Interim Report of Significant cons ruction Deficiency No. 29 Inadequate Clearance 3etween Process Piping Systems And Box-Type Pipe Supports / Restraints
\\[ 2 [
/,
Reviewed by
/ Date#
R. J. Mflhishr, Site Manager 8
8
/
/
h Reviewed by J. L. Wilis, Projec uperintendent Date
[/8
[4 #ddA/ MI/"8/
Reviewed by J. Xart, ProjectLicen/ngEngineer Date EI b/
Reviewed by R. A/Har tnett, Q. A. Site Supervisor
' Dats May 21, 1981 l
i I
- ^
1 INTERIM REPORT OF SIGNIFICANT CONSTRUCTION DEFICIENCY NO. 29 INADEQUATE CLEARANCE BETWEEN PROCESS PIPING SYSTEMS f
AND BOX-TYPE PIPE SUPPORTS / RESTRAINTS
~
INTRODUCTION This report is submitted pursuant to 10CFR50.55(e). It describes deficiencies relative to clearance between process piping systems and box-type pipe supports /
i rastraints.
i DESCRIPTION On April 23, 1981, it was established that a problem existed with the box-type f
The restraints for process piping being installed by Tompkins-Beckwith, Inc.
problem described was an apparent misinterpretation which occurred in implement-The cri-ing the allowable gap criteria between the pipe and restraint structure.
teria originally established by Ebasco Design Engineering was' a maximum of 1/16" total gap in each restraint direction.
The criteria entered in Tompkins-Beckwith, Inc.'s, contract was 1/16" maximum and 0" minimum.
The as-built installation re-suited in insuf ficient clearance to allow pipe thermal movement as required.
Fuel Pool, Containment Spray, This problem exists in the following piping systems:
Component Cooling Water, Safety Injection, 3oron Management, Waste Management, Turbine Cooling Water, Nitrogen Gas, Chemical Volume Control, Blowdown, Emergency Generator, Extraction Steam, Condensate, Reactor Cooling, Main Steam, Heater Drain, Air Evacuation and Auxiliary Steam. -The total number of restraints af-facted is esti=ated at 1,900.
Of this number, it is estimated that approximately 450 supporte will require some for= of modification (shim, trim lugs or add gap) in order to make them acceptable.
SAFETY DIPLICATIONS_
~
If these deficiencies were lef t uncorrected, possible degradation of safety systems Such' degradation could occur through the exceeding of ASME Code al-7 could occur. sses creating the possibility that systems would be overstressed in lowable st:
come way not analyted in the FSAR. Additionally, these deficiencies present the Such failures are not potential for common mode failures within/between systems.
analyted in the FSAR.
Based on the above, Ebasco Licensing considers this deficiency reportable under 10CFR50.55 (e).
l CORRECTIVE ACTION J
the deficiencies is delineated I
The corrective action plan being undertaken to correct as follows:
I I
i l
o '
A.
Evaluation 1)
Ebasco Site Support Engineering (ESSE) Fanger Group will measure all as-built gaps.
- 2) Analysis of as-built gaps versus calculated thermal movements and maximum expected radial expansion of pipe will be conducted by Ebasco to determina acceptability of the as-built installation.
- 3) Bergen-Patterson will be requested to comment on technique and logic of Ebasco analysis.
B.
Corrective Action Imolementation 1)
Restraints which require modifications will be remeasured by Tompkins-Beckwith, Inc., after modifications are completed.
- 2) Nonconformance Report W3-2644 will be the vehicle used by Tompkins-Beckwith, Inc., to implement corrective action (modifications) and docu-ment as-built gaps of restraints which are modified.
For those restraints not installed to date, the gap criteria has been redefined and distributed through issue of field sketches Series M694.
These requirements have been incorporated into the respective Tompkins-Beckwith program procedures.
Corrective Action will be completed on or before June 30, 1982, at which time the Final Report will be submitted.
f
~,.
_ - _ - ~,,
,.. ~..
,