ML20202B395

Discusses Case RII-84-A-0081 Re Potential Allegation Concerning Past Design Practices.Insp on 840403-13 Revealed Listed Items

ML20202B395
Person / Time
Site:	Comanche Peak
Issue date:	05/09/1984
From:	Liu W NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II)
To:	Uryc B NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II)
Shared Package
ML18052B537	List: IR 05000445/1979026 IR 05000445/1980015 ML20199M024 ML20199M047 ML20199M072 ML20199M087 ML20199M099 ML20202A685 ML20202A693 ML20202A708 ML20202A712 ML20202A726 ML20202A765 ML20202A776 ML20202A785 ML20202A801 ML20202A812 ML20202A832 ML20202A837 ML20202A854 ML20202A860 ML20202A873 ML20202A877 ML20202A896 ML20202A902 ML20202A927 ML20202A934 ML20202A946 ML20202A953 ML20202A967 ML20202A973 ML20202A980 ML20202A988 ML20202A997 ML20202B002 ML20202B023 ML20202B029 ML20202B042 ML20202B046 ML20202B051 ML20202B062 ML20202B070 ML20202B076 ML20202B087 ML20202B095 ML20202B105 ML20202B111 ML20202B116 ML20202B129 ML20202B133 ... further results
References
FOIA-85-59 NUDOCS 8607100292
Download: ML20202B395 (11)

Text

, , 4 mas UNITE 7 ETATES ,,

)

, q,, NUCLEA3 RESULATORY COMMISSION g 8 g REG WNil , _J F

$ g 101 MARIETTA STREET, N.W. *

• ATLANTA. GEORGIA 30303 'N

%,...../ MAY 9 1984 i i

EMORANDUM FOR: B. Uryc, Investigations / Allegations Coordination Staff THRU: J. J. Blake, Chief, Materials and Processes Section Division of Reactor Safety FROM: Winston Liu, Reactor Inspector, Materials and Processes Section Division of Reactor Safety

SUBJECT:

POTENTIAL ALLEGATION CONCERNING PAST DESIGN PRACTICES AT COMANCHE PEAK Case No: RII-84-A-0081 l

The subject potential allegation involved a contract design engineer, the alleger, who is working in the areas of safety-related pipe supports and piping systems, for the Catawba facility, at the Duke Power Ccmpany design office, in Charlotte, North' Carolina. The alleger stated that he had used the alternate analysis method before he started at Duke Power four years ago. He elaborated on his past experience at Comanche Peak by saying that the job had been very backward in that the procedures were not nearly as good as the Duke Power Alternate Analysis procedure. He further stated that there were no analysis procedures at all (e.g., thermal calculations were based on an ITT Grinnel Handbook, seismic restraint spacing was not covered by procedure, etc.).

In response to the aforementioned concerns, I conducted an inspection on April 3-13,1984, at Comanche Peak plant site in the areas of safety-related supports and piping systems, held several discussions with the responsible engineering personnel, and reviewed various engineering design and analysis procedures.

During the discussion, the responsible licensee representatives revealed the following:

1. 1975 -

ITT Grinnel was responsible for all pipe support design and Gibbs and Hill was responsible for all piping stress analysis.

2. 1977 - Pipe support design was transferred from ITT Grinnel to NPSI and Class 1 piping system was transferred from Gibbs and Hill to Westinghouse.

3. 1979 - Gibbs _ and Hill was responsible for piping system stress airalysis inclu*g mP b= piping. but they naa age _

nothing in terme nf using Alternate Analysis for small bore pip _i ng. -

4. 1980 -

Most small bore piping stress analyses were performed after 1979. Current pipe support engineering (PSE) group was formed in January 1980. This group is responsible for design and analysis of small bore DiDino systems by usino either CAlternatellysis method (hand calculaTFnsbor' Computer 8607100292 060630 11 cation (rigorous analysis).

PDR FOIA GARDE 85-59 -

PDR l