IR 05000413/1985054

Insp Repts 50-413/85-54 & 50-414/85-65 on 851209-13.No Violation or Deviation Noted.Major Areas Inspected:Pipe Support Baseplate Designs Per IE Bulletin 79-02 & Seismic Analysis for as-built safety-related Piping Sys

ML20141H477
Person / Time
Site:	Catawba
Issue date:	01/06/1986
From:	Blake J, Vias S NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II)
To:
Shared Package
ML20141H473	List: IR 05000413/1985054 ML20141H470
References
50-413-85-54, 50-414-85-65, IEB-79-02, IEB-79-14, IEB-79-2, NUDOCS 8601140120
Download: ML20141H477 (4)

Text

-

(_

UNITED STATES km Ettg%

- -

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION y' '

REGION il I g j 101 MARIETTA STREET, * g ATLANTA, GEORGI A 30323

'4 ,o 9 .. ....

Report Nos.: 50-413/85-54 and 50-414/85-65-Licensee: Duke Power Company 422 South Church Street Charlotte, NC 28242 '

! s Docket Nos.: 60-413 and 50-414 License Nos.: NPF-35 and CPPR-117 Facility Name: . Catawba 1 and 2 '

Inspection Co te cember 9-13, 1985 Inspec or: / 86

' V' Da b Signed Appro ed by: _

/ 6 BG J. lake, Section Chief ,- Date Signed E i ering Branch s, D vi ion of Reactor. Safety

SUMMARY Scope: This routine, unannounced inspection entailed 43 inspector-hours on site and at the licensee's Design Engineering Office in Charlotte, North Car'olina, in-the areas of pipe support baseplate designs using concrete expansion anchors (IEB 79-02) and seismic analysis for as-built safety-related piping systems (IEB 79-14).

Results: No violations or deviations were identifie ?

,

,

I

,

!

', 1;

,

,

"

8601140120 860108 PDR ADOCK 05000413 *

G PDR

.

i

, .

_ -

I^

'

., '\ k

-

-

3 .

REPORT DETAILS Persons Contacted Licensee Employees

• E.'M. Couch, Project Manager, Construction

• T. B. Bright, Engineering Manager, Construction

• Ray, Principal Engineer

• H.'B. Barron, superintendent of Operations

• H. L. Atkins, Quality Assurance (QA) - Projects

• A. Boyles, Hanger Technical Support

• F. P.~ Schiffley II, Licensing Engineer

• E. G. Williams, QA Project Technician Other licensee employees contacted included construction craftsmen, technicians _, . Quality Control (QC) inspectors, design engineers, and office

' personne 'NRC Resident Inspector

• P. K.EVanDoorn, Senior Resident Inspector

• Attended exit interview Exit Interview- l l

The inspection scope and findings were summarized on December 13, 1985, with L those persons ' indicated in paragraph 1 above. The inspector described the areas inspected and discussed in detail the inspection finding ~

No dissenting comments.were received from the license (0 pen) Inspector. Followup Item 414/85-65-01,- Hanger / Support Inspection-

_

Discrepancies, paragraph The licensee: identified as proprietary some of the materials provided to and reviewed by the inspector during this inspection; however, details from these' materials are r.ot-included in this repor . Licensee Action on Previous Enforcement 84atters This subject was not addressed in the inspectio ~ Unresolved Items-Unresolved. items were not identified during this inspection.

t .

-

.

/

,

.  !

5. Safety-Related Pipe Supports and Restraint Systems (50090) Unit 2 Observation of Work and Work Activities The inspector selected the following sample of 18 hangers / supports in the area of dynamic pipe supports and component supports structures that had been QC final inspecte Documentation for the installation, inspection, and design were reviewed; the hangers reinspected with the assistance of QA/QC inspectors; and the results discussed with the QA/QC inspectors to determine the effectiveness of the hanger progra Hanger Number System Type 2-A-KC-3637 R/2 Component Cooling #3 Snubber 2-A-KC-3906 R/4 Component Cooling Multiple Frame 2-A-KC-3907 R/3 Component Cooling Multiple Frame 2-A-KC-3920 R/0 Component Cooling Double #8 Struts 2-A-NV-3387 R/2 Chemical and Volume Control #1/2 Snubber 2-A-NV-3388 R/2 Chemical and Volume Control #B Strut 2-A-NV-3402 R/1 Chemical and Volume Control #4 Spring 2-A-NV-3403 R/2 Chemical and Volume Control #1 Snubber 2-R-ND-0001 R/2 Residual Heat Removal #13 Spring 2-R-NV-1564 R/02 Chemical and Volume Control #A Strut 2-R-SM-1743 R/0 Main Steam Rod Hanger 2-R-SM-1744 R/0 Main Steam #A Strut 2-R-SM-1745 R/1 Main Steam Sliding Support 2-R-SM-1747 R/0 Main Steam #A Strut 2-R-SM-1748 R/0 Main Steam Rod Hanger 2-R-SM-1749 R/0 Main Steam Double #A Struts 2-R-SM-1755 R/0 Main Steam Rod Hanger 2-R-SM-1760 R/0 Main Steam #3 Spring The above hangers were reinspected against their detail drawings for configuration, identification, fastener / anchor installation, clearances, member siza, welds, and damage / protection. In general, the hangers were installed in accordance with design documents with the exception of four hangers identified by the inspecto The inspector observed that first, lock nuts on the clamps for pipe supports 2-A-NV-3387 and 2-A-NV-3388 were loose. Second, for hanger 2-R-NV-1564 the angle between the strut axis and the pipe clamp axis was observed to be approximately 12 . The licensee stated that this was due to construction in the area at that time and that when the support was formally inspected, the angle was within allowable tolerance of 14 . Finally, for hanger 2-R-ND-0001, the elevation of the horizontal tube steel was measured to be off elevation as indicated by the hanger design drawing by +6 7/8", the licensee stated that the tolerance for this situation is 3"; however, the intent of the support has not been changed and can function as required. The inspector feels

k

6 i

that during his inspection these conditions were isolated cases. The licensee is in the process of issuing Nonconforming Item Reports (NCIRs) to document the noted conditions during the inspection for further action. Pending licensee corrective action for the NCIRs, this was identified as Inspector Followup Item 50-414/85-65-01, Hanger /

Support Inspection Discrepancie Design calculations for the 18 supports were reviewed and evaluated during the inspection for thoroughness, clarity, consistency, and accurac They appeared to be adequate in terms of using design input, references, units (dimension, force, and movement), equations, tables, and computer analytical models. In general, design calculations were of good qualit The inspector observed inspection of four mechanical snubbers prior to installation and torqueing of bolts to the support plate The snubbers were checked for smoothness of shaft travel by simulating normal operation by pulling and pushing the snubber shaft; the inspector also simulated unit activation by sudden movemen It was also noted that there was no evidence of deterioration or noticeable corrosion and that the support plates, extension rods and connecting joints are not bent, deformed, or loos Hanger Number System Size 2-A-NV-3629 R/l Chemical and Volume Control # 1/2 2-R-NV-0103 R/0 Chemical and Volume Control # 1/2 2-R-NV-0311 R/l Chemical and Volume Control # 1/2 2-R-NV-1695 R/D1 Chemical and Volume Control # 1/2 Within'the areas examined, no violations or deviations were identifie . Independent Inspection Effort Construction Effort The inspector conducted a general inspection at Unit 2 to observe construc-tion progress and construction activities such as material handling and control, housekeeping and storag In addition, a general inspection of the Unit 1 Control Room was performed to observe plant status, control room activities, and control room decoru Within the areas examined, no violations or deviations were identified.