ML20010H504

From kanterella
Revision as of 09:59, 17 February 2020 by StriderTol (talk | contribs) (StriderTol Bot change)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Suppls Response to NRC 810520 Ltr Re Violation Noted in IE Insp Repts 50-413/81-03 & 50-414/81-03.Corrective Actions: Engineering Evaluation Conducted.Flow Orifice Plates Will Continue to Be Installed Per Const QA Procedure
ML20010H504
Person / Time
Site: Catawba  Duke Energy icon.png
Issue date: 08/19/1981
From: Parker W
DUKE POWER CO.
To: James O'Reilly
NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II)
Shared Package
ML20010H491 List:
References
NUDOCS 8109240548
Download: ML20010H504 (2)


Text

_ - _

0 ' DUKE POWER COMPANY POWER Dull. DING 4cc SocTir Cuuacir STHEET, CIIAHI.OTTE, N. C. 28242 i ' kP -

u.3' WILLIAM O. PAR MIER, J R.

Vier PatsiorNv Tctgenoug:Anga704 STEAM PnoovcTioM 373-4083 August 19, 1981 Mr. James P. O'Reilly, Director U..S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Region II 101 Marietta Street, Suite 3100 Atlanta, Georgia 30303 Re: RII: PKV 50-413/81-08 50-414/81-08

Dear Mr. O'Reilly:

In regard to Violation 413-414/81-08-03, failure to control storage and protection of flow sections to prev,ent deterioration, an engineering evalu-ation has been conducted to evaluate the effects of rust degradation on erected carbon steel flow sections. The following describes the results of this evaluation.

Flow orifice plates have been and will continue to be installed in accord-ance with Construction Quality Assurance ?rocedures M-10 and M-24. Construc-tion Procedure 132 describes the fabrication of flow sections containing flow metering orifice plates, flow nozzles, or venturis. Procedure M-10 covers the inspection requirements along with material criteria for all flow sections.

Procedure M-24 describes the cleanness acceptance criteria in which a quality control inspector visually inspects the internal surface of items being joined. By Section 6.2 of Procedure M-24 carbon steel surfaces must meet the following requirement:

Thin uniform rust films are acceptable. The following types are not acceptable:

1. Hard rust (rust which forms in a crusty film and tends to break off in flakes or pieces.)
2. Heavy rust (a continuous film of appreciable thickness which forms due to lengthy exposure to aerated water or condensed moisture!)

Since all flow sections at Catawba Nuclear Station have been installed in accordance with Construction Procedure M-24, any rust degradation on the carbon steel flow sections would be of the thit. uniform rust film type.

0109240548 810909 PDR ADOCK 05000413

, O PDR k -_ _-

  1. 8 lE Mr. James P. O'Reilly, Director August 19, 1981 Page 2 The accuracy efforts of a thin layer of rust were discussed with various flow meter vendors. All agree that the upstream cnd downstream sections essentially maintained their smoothness and are not affected by a thin layer of rust. -The error resulting from rust would not exceed ona-half of a percent of total flow and is acceptable for adequate system performance.

Therefore, the effects of rust degradation on installed sections are minimal and will not alter the accepttbility of the measurements.

I declare under penalty of perjury, that the statements set forth herein are true and correct to the best of my knowledge.

Ve truly yours, 1s> _- '

0 '

William O. Parker, Jr.

RWO/php cc: NRC Resident Inspector Catawba Nuclear Station

r- -

s' =,e ,

p

. h /.8M?

I'IRf, C; pe g , ',f ,

DUKE- POWER COMPANY .

POWElt 13UILDING

-122 SOUTH CHUNCH STREET, d CIMHLOTtI N. C. saa4a -JUL 20 A S

a. 0 wtLLIAM O. PAR MER. J R.

Vice PnEE DrNT IELCPMOkt:Anta 704 Strane PaoovchoM 373-4083 July 13,1981 Mr. James P. O'Reilly, Director U..S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Region II 101 Marietta Street, suite 3100 t Atlanta, Georgia 30303 Re: RII:PKV 50-413/81-08 50-414/81-08

Dear Mr. O'Reilly:

In regard to Violation 413-414/81-08-03 identified in the above referenced Inspection Report, an evaluation of the possible deterioration of flow sec-tions that have been installed in the permanent locations is being conducted.

This evaluation will be concluded and a final response will be provided by 1 September 18, 1981.

Very t uly yours, A

/

uh /A / 44s William O. Parker, Jr.

RWO/php I cc: NRC Resident Inspector Catawba Nuclear Station i

,