ML20010A010

Final Deficiency Rept Re Piping Supports Installed by Reactor Controls,Inc,Initially Reported 800912.Caused by Deviation from Installation Drawings.Corrective Actions Will Be Completed by Fuel Load.Not Reportable Per Part 21

ML20010A010
Person / Time
Site:	Grand Gulf
Issue date:	08/03/1981
From:	Mcgaughy J MISSISSIPPI POWER & LIGHT CO.
To:	James O'Reilly NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II)
References
10CFR-050.55E, 10CFR-50.55E, AECM-81-243, NUDOCS 8108100378
Download: ML20010A010 (5)

Text

'

e v .'

MISSISSIPPI POWER"$ LIG'HT COMPANY Helping Build Mississippi P. O. B O X 164 0, J A C K S O N, MIS SIS IfPI39205

,,,-5 nu* ,

TELT401P August 3, 1981 Office of Inspection & Enforcement p W U. S. Nuclear Regulatnry Commission S Region II 4 I 101 Marietta Street, N.W. k W Suite 3100 Atlanta, Georgia 30303 D' l'UG 0 t imN rg ,

Attention: Mr. J. P. O'Reilly, Director

Dear Mr. O'Reilly:

s

SUBJECT:

Grand Gulf Nuclear Stat on Units 1 and 2 Docket Nos. 50-416/417 File 0260/15525/15526 PRD-80/56 Final Report, RCI Pipe Support Installation '

AECM-81/243

References:

1) AECM-81/39, 1/23/81

2) AECM-80/251, 10/13/80 On September 12, 1980, Mississippi Power & Light Company notified Mr. M.

Hunt, of your of fice, of a Potentially Reportable Deficiency (PRD) at the Grand Gulf Nuclear Station (GCNS) construction site. The deficiency concerns piping supports installed by Reactor Controls, Inc. for the Control Rod Drive Hydraulic System. The installation of the piping supports was not in conform-ance with the original design.

An extensive engineering effort would be required to analyze the original supports as designed and/or installed to determine if they were adequate for l their original loads and if they met the criteria and bases stated in the l

Final Safety Analysis Report. Therefore, we have determined that this deficiency is reportable under the provisions of 10CFR50.55(e). Since the af fected components have not been turned over to MP&L for acceptance, this condition is not reportable under the provisions of 10CFR21.0ur Final Report is attached.

l Yours truly, J. P. McGesghy, Jr.

KDS:dr ATTACHMENT /

l cc: See page 2 (Ff, 7 8108100378 810803 PDR ADOCK 05000416 Member Middle South Utilities System S PDR

Mr. J. P. O'Reilly AEC?t-81/243 NRC Page 2' cc: Mr. N. L. Stampley Mr. R. B. McGehee Mr. T. B. Conner Mr. Victor Stello, Director Office of Inspection & Enforcement U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555

'Mr. G. B. Taylor South Miss. Electric Power Association P. O. Box 1589 Hattiesburg, MS 39401 I

i I'

l' l

bbe: Mr. D. C. Lutken Mr. J. Letherman Dr. D. C. Gibbs Manager of BWR-6 Licensing Mr. J. N. Ward GetieTal Electric Company Mr. J. P. McGaughy, Jr. 175 Curtner Avenue Mr. W. A. Braun San Jose, Ca. 95125 Mr. R. Trickovic Mr. J. W. Yelverton Mr. L. F. Dale Mr. D. M. Houston Mr. C. K. McCoy U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Mr. T. H. Cloninger Division of Licensing Mr. R. A. Ambrosino Washington, D. C. 20555 Mr. R. C. Fron Mr. G. B. Rogers Mr. M. R. Williams Mr. L. E. Ruhland Mr. D. L. Hunt Mr. A. G. Wagner Mr. P. A. Taylor PRD or Inspection Report File File e

E f

- , - _ _a - _ . - - - _ _ _ , _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ - - - - _ - - - - - _ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

... ,' Att chment to AECM-81/243 Prg2 1 cf 1 FINAL REPORT FOR PRD-80/56

1. Description of the Deficiency Pipe supports for the Control Rod Drive Hydraulic System (C11) were instal-led by Reactor Controls Inc. (RCI) with deviations from the approved design drawings. Several types of nonconformances were noted. Further investiga-tion found that RCI's Quality Assurance Manual did not address the control of temporary materials or include provisions for design changes in the field. The deficiency af fects the Control Rod Drive Hydraulic System and is applicable to both Unit 1 and Unit 2. It does not apply to the NSSS supplier.

The cause of the deficient condition was a deviation by Reactor Controls Incorporated f rom the installation drawings. RCI did not have a method of documenting, co1 trolling, and approving the deviations from design drawings.

II. Analysis of Safety Implications The possibility exists that the loss of Control Rod Drive insert and with-drawal supports during plant operations could conceivably prevent the CRD system f rom performing its intended function. A total of twenty eight (26) hangers were documented that have discrepancies between the as-built con-figuration and the design drawing. These conditions have been tracked by RCI.

~

Since an extensive engineering etfort would be required to analyze the original supports as designed and/or installed to determine if tney were adequate for their original loads and met the criteria and bases stated in the Final Safety Analysis Report, it has been determined that this deficiency is reportable under the provisions of 10CFR50.55(e). The af fected components have not been accepted by MP&L, so this condition is not reportable under the provisions of 10CFR21.

III. Corrective Action Taken The reason for the deviations of the installed hangers from the approved design drawings was a lack of proceduralized reg'tirements. This condition affects all Control Rod Drive Hydraulic System piping supports.

To correct the iderlified deficiencies, Reactor Controls Inc. has issued an internal Stop Work Order outlining steps to be taken prior to resumption of work. All installed hangers in the Control Rod Drive Hydraulic System were inspected by Engineering and Quality Control personnel of RCI. Any devia-tions of the installed hangers from the latest drawing revisions were docu-me nted. Engineering Change Notices (ZCN) or design drawing changes are being used to reflect the as-built condition. The ECN's a-d design draw-ings are to undergo a stress analysis review for design verification to "new loads" and will be submittka Jv our Architect / Engineer for review.

These changes will be incorporated into the drawing, if found acceptable to

• Attcchment to AECM-81/243 Piga 2 cf 2 "new loads". Since the "new loads" requirements are more stringent than the original loads, an analysis for the original loads will not be conducted.

When the "new loads" evaluation is complete, all existing hangers will have been analyzed and classified as either:

A) The support as designed and installed is verified as adequate and meets the "new loads" requirements through design analysis. The suppo rt is acceptable as is, or B) The support as designed and installed does not meet the "new loads" requirements through design analysis.

For those supports that do not meet the "new loads" requirements, one of the following steps will be taken:

1) The drawing will be revised as required and the support will be modified per drawing requirements and verified.

2) The support will be removed, scrapped, and a new support designed s ad installed.

To preclude recurrence, Reactor Controls Incorporated has issued an adden-due to their Quality Assurance Manual which allows the use of a controlled and approved Engineering Change Notice to make changes to drawings. RCI has also issued a new controlled manual, entitled Quality Assurance Instructions, which requires inprocess inspection to be performed and docu-mented on an ongoing basis to assure that design requirements are being met during fabrication and installation.

All corrective actions will be completed by fuel load.