ML20066E878
| ML20066E878 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Catawba  |
| Issue date: | 11/08/1982 |
| 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, SD-413-82-19, NUDOCS 8211170285 | |
| Download: ML20066E878 (2) | |
Text
s DUKE POWER GOMPANY r.o.nox aaino CllANI.OTTE, N.O. 98942 li AI, it. TUCKER teLernown ena rarmensret (704) Oh4Mt November 8, 1982
- * * = ' - -
Mr. James P. O'Reilly, Regional Administrator U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Region II 101 Marietta Street, Suite 3100 Atlanta, Georgia 30303 Re: Catawba Nuclear Station Unit 1
..3 Docket No. 50-413 4
2
Dear Mr. O'Reilly:
Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.55c, please find attached a final report to Signifhcant Deficiency Report SD 413/82-19.
g h9 0
2 0 Very truly yours, u
- d. ',
.n.
Hal B. Tucker RWO/php Attachment cc: Director Office of Inspection & Enforcement U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D. C. 20555 Mr. P. K. Van Doorn NRC Resident Inspector Catawba Nuclear Station Mr. Robert Guild, Esq.
Attorney-at-Law P.O. Box 12097 Charleston, South Carolina 29412 Palmetto Alliance 2135 Devine Street Columbia, South Carolina 29205
-QS of VI fKo 1108 00413 PDR
r-se
,~
DUKE POWER. COMPANY CATAWBA NUCLEAR STATION SIGNIFICANT DEFICIENCY (FINAL REPORT)
REPORT NUMBER: SD 413/82-19 REPORT DATE:. November 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.A. Ignatonis, Region 11 NRC, on September 9, 1982 by Messrs. G. D. Rowland and W. O. Henry, of Duke Power Company, Charlotte, NC 28242.
COMPONENT AND SUPPLIER:
Kerotest valve item 9J-551, S/N UB13-8, Duke tag IND117 DESCRIPTION OF DEFICIENCY: During a surface inspection of this valve, linear indications were identified on the valve body. These indications violate Construction document NDE 30J.
Light grinding was used in an attempt to remove the indications. 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 ASME Code pressure boundary integrity will be violated.
CORRECTIVE ACTION: Valve'S/N U813-8 was sent back to the manufacturer for evaluation and repair. The valve was examined by the manufacturer's, Engineering and QA Department. The Indications were determined t'o be <(low) foundary marks.
The actual wall thickness of the valve (in this area) was measured to be greater
~
than the minimum. required wall thickness for the valve.
These foundary marks are considered non-relevant by the manufacturer. Therefore, no repair work is required by the manufacturer. The valve will be returned to Duke.
.