ML20064N695
| ML20064N695 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Cook  |
| Issue date: | 01/28/1983 |
| From: | Hunter R INDIANA MICHIGAN POWER CO. (FORMERLY INDIANA & MICHIG |
| To: | James Keppler NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20064N598 | List: |
| References | |
| AEP:NRC:0691B, AEP:NRC:691B, IEB-79-14, NUDOCS 8302160312 | |
| Download: ML20064N695 (2) | |
Text
c lNDIANA & MICHIGAN ELECTRIC COMPANY P. O. BO X 18 80WLING GR EEN ST ATION N EW YORK, H. Y.10004 January 28, 1983 AEP:NRC:0691B Donald C. Cook Nuclear Plant Unit Nos. I and 2 4
Docket Nos. 50-315 and 50-316 License Nos. DPR-58 and DPR-74 IE INSPECTION REPORTS NO. 50-315/82-07 AND NO. 50-316/82-07 l
Mr. James G. Keppler, Regional Administrator U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission j
Office of Inspection and Enforcement Region III 799 Roosevelt Road Glen Ellyn, Illinois 60137
Dear Mr. Keppler:
The Attachment to this letter is the final report prepared in response to the subject Inspection Report concerning the varification of calculations performed for Seismic Class I Piping Systems by outside vendors.
This document has been prepared following Corporate Procedures witich incorporate a reasonable set of controls to ensure its accuracy.
and completeness prior 'o signature by the undersigned.
Very truly yours, h,tb ??%
R. S. Hunter Vice President cc: John E. Dolan - Columbus M. P. Alexich R. W. Jurgensen W. G. Smith, Jr. - Bridgman R. C. Callen G. Charnoff NRC Resident Inspector at Cook Plant - Bridgman 8302160312 830411 FEB "M
i PDR ADOCK 05000315 Q
Attachment to AEP:NRC:0691B This attachment constitutes the final report on the verification program performed to insure that all calculations done by outside vendors for Seismic Class I piping systems in compliance with the requirements of I. E.Bulletin 79-14 effort, were performed in a menner comparable to AEPSC's requirements and Q.A. program.
This report covers those items noted as opea as of the time of our interim report (Reference 2).
Verification Program Results and Conclusions Verification of the ten randomly selected problems listed in a.
Reference (2) is now complete including supervisory review and approvals. All problems were found to meet AEPSC acceptance requirements as incorporated in D. C. Cook Plant Procedure No.
79-14-10, Rev. O, " Verification of Con 9ultants' Pipe Stress Analyses for Acceptance by AEPSC".
b.
Procedure No. 79-14-11, " Procedure and Specifications for Performing Re-analysis of Piping Systems per I.E.Bulletin 79-14",
formalizes and documents the instructions, specifications, criteria, and requirements that had been provided by AEPSC to its Consultants for the re-analysis of piping systems for the I.E.
Bulletin 79-14 program.
Copies of Procedure No. 79-14-11 were sent to ATI, EDS, Harstead Engineering, and Teledyne on Decembar 1, 1982 for their review and attestation that their re-analysis was done in accordance with this procedure. Each of these l
consultants has submitted written confirmation that their I.E.
l Bulletin 79-14 re-analysis was done in accordance with the above procedure.
Note: Procedure No. 79-14-11 was originally proposed as Procedure No. 79-14-5A and titled " Procedure and Specifications for Consultants for Piping Systems Selected for Computer Re-analysis" (see Reference 2).
This procedure was re-numbered and the title was changed as indicated above in the interest of clarity.
ATI, one of our consultants, informed us on January 13, 1983, that trare was an error in the computer program ADLPIPE which was used for IEB-79-14 pipe stress reanalysis. The error only involved the calculation of the piping hanger loads for the static analysis.
Seismic and forca cine history analyses are unaffected.
Since then ATI has re-reviewed all of the IEB-79-14 problems analyzed by them for AEPSC to determine the effects of the code error. Their
}
review has determined that only one problem, No. 1-031 (Residual s