ML20065R254
| ML20065R254 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Catawba  |
| Issue date: | 10/08/1982 |
| From: | Tucker H DUKE POWER CO. |
| To: | James O'Reilly NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| References | |
| 10CFR-050.55E, 10CFR-50.55E, NUDOCS 8210290119 | |
| Download: ML20065R254 (2) | |
Text
O b
DUKE POWER COMPANY P.O. ISOx 33180 CitAHLOTTE. N.C. 28242 II AL II. TUCKER TELEPHONE (704) 373-4531 veos racesonnt nectman enourown October 8, 1982 ex-Mr. James P. O'Reilly, Regional Administrator U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
.c
- 3 Region II a
101 Marietta Street, Suite 3100 pf Atlanta, Georgia 30303 5
d,.a ff., f.)
Re: Catawba Nuclear Station 3.
C Unit 1 27 Docket No. 50-413
Dear Mr. O'Reilly:
Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.55e, please find attached Significant Deficiency Report SD 413/82-19.
Very truly yours, d
-(E Hal B. Tucker RWO/php Attachment cc: Director Mr. Robert Guild, Esq.
Office of Inspection & 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 r210290119 821008 PDR ADOCK 05000413 S
PDR OFg1C%
]
r b
Duke Power Company Catawba Nuclear Station Significant Deficiency Report Number: SD 413/82-19 Report Date: October 8, 1982 Facility: Catawba Nuclear Station, Unit 1 Identification of Deficiency:
Linear indications on a Kerotest item 9J-551 valve were identified on the (end) body. The deficiency was identified on August 19, 1982.
Initial Report:
Initial report was made to Mr. A. Ignatonis, Region II NRC, on September 9, 1982 by Messrs. G. D. Rowland and W. O. Henry, of Duke Power Company, Charlotte, North Carolina 28242.
Component and Supplier:
Kerotest valve item 9J-551, S/N UB13-8, Duke tag 1NDil7.
Description of Deficiency:
During a surface inspection of this valve, linear indications were identified on the above referenced valve body. These indications violate Construction document NDE 30J. Light grinding was used in an attempt to remove the indica-tions. A grinding depth of 1/16" was not sufficient to completely remove the indications.
Analysis of Safety Implications:
If the indications exceed the minimum required wall thickness for the valve, the pressure boundary integrity will be violated.
Corrective Action:
The affected valve has been sent back to the manufacturer for evaluation. The indications will be removed by grinding and the remaining wall thickness will be determined. If the actual wall thickness is greater than the minimum wall thickness required, the valve will be returned to Duke. If not, the valve will be weld repaired and then returned. A final analysis and corrective actions will be complete by November 8, 1982. A final report will be provided at this time.
_