ML20058D016
| ML20058D016 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Catawba  |
| Issue date: | 07/16/1982 |
| From: | Parker W DUKE POWER CO. |
| To: | James O'Reilly NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| References | |
| 10CFR-050.55E, 10CFR-50.55E, NUDOCS 8207270003 | |
| Download: ML20058D016 (2) | |
Text
-.
.. = -. _.
- ~ _.
0 9,S m
i DUKE POWEH COMPANY
- rj Powru Utstmixo 1>
}
4 422 SouTu Cucacu Srazer, CauntnTTE, N. C. asad ' 6 l
A 9 W I L LI A*4 O. PA R M E R, J R.
v.c n p.c.'""'
7"""
7C' July 16, 1982 Strane Paoovctiog 37 3-40 e 3 Mr. James P. O'Reilly, Regional Administrator i
U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Region II 101 Marietta Street, Suite 3100 Atlanta, Georgia 30303 Re: Catawba Nuclear Station i
Unit 1 Docket No. 50-413
Dear Mr. O'Reilly:
Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.55e, please find attached Significant Deficiency Report SD 413/82-13.
Very truly yours, l
j
]/
i
_ (p,
William O. Parker, Jr.
RWO/php Attachment cc: Director Mr. Robert Guild, Esq.
i Office of Inspection and Enforcement Attorney-at-Law U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 314 Pall Mall Washington, D. C. 20555 Columbia, South Carolina 29201 Mr. P. K. Van Doorn Palmetto Alliance NRC Resident Inspector 2135 Devine Street Catawba Nuclear Station Columbia, South Carolina 29205 I
FFICIAL copy 8207270003 820716 PDR ADOCK 05000413
- ;r-E d 7 J
S PM
_ _ _ _ _ - ~.
N l
DUKE POWER COMPANY CATAWBA NUCLEAR STATION SIGNIFICANT DEFICIENCY 1
i Report Number: SD 413/82-13 Report Date: July 16, 1982 l
Facility: Catawba Nuclear Station, Unit 1 Identification of Deficiency:
Examination of the Duke field weld radiography revealed rejectable indications in the adjacent base metal of the containment spray heat exchange nozzle. The containment spray heat exchanger lA was manufactured by Yuba Heat Transfer Corporation and has serial number 74-N-008-2A and national board number 3324.
Initial Report: Initial Report was made to Mr. Jack Bryant, Region II NRC, on June 17, 1982 by Messrs. J. E. Cavender, V. H. Shellhorse and L. M. Coggins, Duke Power Company, Description of Deficiency:
The radiographic film showed subsurface indications i
around the nozzle approximately 2 to 3 inches from the weld preparation. A visual examination revealed that some surface indications were present. The nozzle was made from SA312-304 pipe material with a nominal 0.5 inch wall thickness.
Our review of the documentation package and discussions with Yuba confirmed that this material had been manufactured by Curtiss-Wright with heat number 27N008-2A.
The pipe material had been hydrostatically tested and ultrasonically inspected by Curtiss-Wright prior to shipment to Yuba. This is the first time this problem has been identified. A visual examination of the other Yuba heat exchanger nozzles and examination of radiographic film for the other field welds did not i
find any additional problem areas.
A field investigation was performed to determine the depth of the indications.
Most indications were removed by light grinding near the surface. These indications were within 12.5 percent of nominal wall thickness as required by Section 10 of ASTM Specification A-530.
This requirement is called out in Section 12 of material Specification SA-312. The 12.5 percent of nominal wall thickness requirement was violated in some areas.
In one area as much as 0.200 inch was removed.
Analysis of Safety Implications: The depth of the subsurface indications violated material specification requirements (finish) for SA-312 pipe. However, no indications have violated the minimum allowable wall thickness for the nozzle i
based on ASME Code (pressure) or seismic loading requirements. Therefore, the pressure boundary and structural integrity of this heat exchanger was not violated.
Corrective Action: All indications, both surface and subsurface, have been removed and PT examined. An RT examination was also performed to assure that all indica-tions were completely removed.
The ground areas will be weld repaired to the original wall thickness of the pipe and blended into the surrounding metal. A final RT examination will be performed followed by a hydrostatic test of the heat exchanger as part of the containment spray piping system hydrostatic test. This work is scheduled to be completed during July-August, 1982. Although the affected nozzle contained several subsurface indications, Duke has not identified any such indications in the remaining (Yuba) heat exchanger nozzles and believes this problem to be an isolated occurrence.
=
_,_.