ML20099L381
| ML20099L381 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Hatch  |
| Issue date: | 08/22/1984 |
| From: | Gucwa L GEORGIA POWER CO. |
| To: | James O'Reilly NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| References | |
| 1006N, NED-84-450, NUDOCS 8412010106 | |
| Download: ML20099L381 (2) | |
Text
,
j Georgia Power Company
,nn 4-
. 333 Pedmont Avenue r is s Attanta, Georgia 30308 3((8C Q CC %
Telephore 404 526-6526 MMrq Address:
Post off:ce Box 4545 Attanta Gergia 30302 3c} AUG 28 All : 12 Georgia Power L T. Gucwa N "#"'" "# W**
Manager Nuclear Engmeenng are cnier nuclear Eng: nee' NED-84-450 1006N August 22, 1984 U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Ccmnission PH'EDHEE:
Office of Inspection and Enforcenent RII: HCD Region II - Suite 2900 50-321/50-366 101 Marietta Street, m Inspection Report Atlanta, Georgia 30323 84-05 ATITNTION: Mr. Janes P. O'Reilly GENTIIMEN:
Georgia Power Ccapany sutmits the following supplanental response to Violation Iten 84-05-01, Inadequate Inspection of Masonry Wall Modifications. Mr. J. T. Ienahan of your office requested that a review be performed to ensure there was not a prograrmatic problen of Quality Control (OC) Inspectors approving welds which were not acccuplished in accordance with the design drawings.
A review of welded mechanical and electrical supports has been performed. Ten mechanical supports associated with Design Change Request (DCR)83-066 and forty-one electrical supports fran DCR 79-250 were reviewed. No major discrepancies causing a safety concern were identified.
As stated in the initial response to this violation, QC Inspectors were trained on Noverber 1,1983 on the importance of reviewing details on design doctnents prior to performing inspections. QC inspection of DCR 83-066 work was performed prior to the Novenber 1,1983 training while inspection of th DCR 79-250 work was performed after the training took place.
The following minor discrepancies were identified in seven of the ten mechanical supports reviewed:
1.
'Iwo support drawings had improper weld joint details.
2.
'Ihree support drawings had cnitted weld symbols on joints.
3.
One support drawing had an improper weld symbol on a joint.
4.
'Iwo field welds had anall areas of undersized welds.
Of the forty-one electrical supports reviewed, only one discrepancy was found. The support drawing had an improper weld symbol.
84120go106840822DRAOCK05000g I O $Of
GeorgiaPower d U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Comnission
. Office of Inspection and Enforcenent Region II - Suite 2900 August 22, 1984 Page h o
'the results of this review show that the training given to QC Inspectors on Novenber 1, 1983 was benefical in correcting this problen.
The Quality Control Department will continue to stress the importance of OC inspectors reviewing design drawings prior to performing inspections.
Please contact this office if there are any further questions.
Very truly yours, WT ' &
L. T. Gucwa JHAnb xc:
J. T. Beckhan, Jr.
H. C. Nix, Jr.
Senior Resident Inspector I E Q)1 I
I i
rwns