05000348/LER-1978-062, Forwards LER 78-062/01T-0

Forwards LER 78-062/01T-0

ML20147B355
Person / Time
Site:	Farley
Issue date:	10/02/1978
From:	Clayton F ALABAMA POWER CO.
To:	NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II)
Shared Package
ML20147B361	List: 05000348/LER-1978-062, Forwards LER 78-062/01T-0 05000348/LER-1978-062-01, /01T-0 on 780922:during Inspec of Class I & II Pipe Restraints/Snubbers,Noted That Main Feedwater Line Lateral Seismic Restraint FW-R49 Was Not in Place.Reason or Date of Removal Not Determined;Unit Reinstalled ML20147B355 ML20147B363
References
NUDOCS 7810100085
Download: ML20147B355 (1)

LER-1978-062, Forwards LER 78-062/01T-0

Event date:
Report date:
3481978062R00 - NRC Website

text

._

A cca Pc,e Co ' pr.y

67) Ply 18:":', /141 r ^

P s' ff a f'

/

3 B nwfu " Amur's 3b?91 Te'estyy e ?O5 323 C,341 F. L. CL AYTON, JR.

s"' * * "'

AlabamaPower the southem electnc system c3 October 2, 1978 a

vn O

( ? ! ',r '

w wsn

.Q d c:

$a

.g.

U T C_'

MR m

c: e4 m

S"N 3-Eb r:o

es 5

e

• 5 S.

E v

U1 x

o U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Inspection and Enforcement Region II 101 Marietta Street, N.W.

Suite 3100 Atlanta, Georgia 30303

Dear Sir:

Joseph M. Farley Nuclear Plant, Unit 1, Licensee Event Report No.

LER 78-062/OlT-0 is forwarded herewith, with three (3) copies each, in accordance with FNP Technical Specification 6.9 to provide fourteen (14) day written notification of the occurrence.

If you have any questions, please adviae.

Yours truly, Q (j/ n....- y '

/-

,/.-

--e F. L. Ciayton, Jr.

FLCJr/THE:bhj Enclosures cc:

Director, IE (40 copies)

Director, MIPC (3 copies)/

9 [r Iplf $485 posa sk ll3

NRC FORM 366 U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Q) 7

• - g..

LICENSEE EVENT REPORT CONTROL BLOCK: l l

l l

l l lh (PLEASE PRINT OR TYPE ALL REQUIRED INFORMATION) 1 6

lo l1l l A l L l J lM_lF l 1 l@[0 l0 l-l0 l0 l0 l0 l0 l-l0 l0 l@l 4 l 1l ll 1l 1l@l l

l@

l 0 9 LICENSEE CODE 14 15 LICENSL NUMBEH 25 2ti LICENSE TYPE Jo b7 CAI b8 CON'T l0l1I s$"C l L l@l 0 l 5 l 0 l 0 l 0 l 3 l 4 l 8 l@l 0 l 9 l 2 l2 l7 18 l@l1l0l0l2l7l8l@

7 8

60 61 DOCKET NUMBER 68 69 EVENT DATE 74 75 REPORT D ATE 80 EVENT DESCRIPTION AND PROE ABLE CONSEQUENCES h l o l 2 l l During an inspection of Class I & II pipe restraints / snubbers on 9/19/78(unit in Mode l lo l3; l 5), it was noted that main feedwater line lateral seismic restraint FW-R49 was not in l

[ o l, l l place. A review of on-site documentation was initiated to determine if the support had l [ol3; l been removed or relocated. Bechtel performed a preliminary seismic analysis which indi-l toic1 lcated that the system may perform satisfactorily without the restraint. When the docu-l 10 l 71 l mentation review indicated that the restraint was misning work was initiated to rein-l i o ;s l l stall the restraint. Installation was completed on 9/26/78 while still in mode 5.

l 7

8 9110alth/ saf e tV of public Were not affected.

80 SYdEM

CAUSE

C A USE COMP.

VALVE CCDE CODE SUSCODE COMPONENT CODE SUBCODE SUBCODE lo191 l 11 l H l@ l Xlh l Zlh l S l U l P } 0 l R l T lh [_Z_lh l Zl @

7 8

9 10 11 12 13 18 19 20 SEQUE N TI AL GCCURRENCE REPORT REVISION LER RO EVENT YE Aft REPORT NO.

CODE TYPE N O.

O Rtl'su g l21 7l 8l l-l l 016l 2l l/l 10l1l l Tl l-l l0l 22 23 24 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 AKE A

N ON PL NT T

HOURS SB IT F0F bub.

U PLIE MAN FACTURER

(_.Aj@l Zl@

l Zl@

l Zl@

l0l0l0l0l

[_y j @

lNl@

lAl@

lXl9l9l9l@

3J 34 35 36 J/

40 di 42 43 44 47 CAUSE DESCRIPTION AND CORRECTIVE ACTIONS h l i j o l lThe reason for/date of removal of lateral seismic restraint FW-R49 could not be deter-l

_. ;3 l,j l mined.

FW-R49 was reinstalled. A review of selected hangers / restraints on 9/27/78 l

,,,,,l indicated no other hangers / restraints were missing.

l 11 131 l l

11 141 l l

7 8 9 80 A S

% POWER OTHER STATUS ISC f

DISCOVERY DESCRIPTION I1lbl W h l0l0l0l@l NA l

l C l@l Inspection for NRC staff evaluation l

A TlVITY CO TENT RELEASED OF RE LF ASE AMOUNT OF ACTivlTY LOCATION OF HELEASE l1 l6 l l Z l @ l Zl@l NA l

l NA l

7 tl 9 to 1j 44 45 80 P6HSONNEL FXPOsuHES NUMBE H TYPE DE SCHIP TION i, l i l v l 1010 l 0 l@l Z l@l NA l

PERSONNE L INJU IES DtSCn, prion @ NA

~Um n

' l1laj l0l0l0l@l l

7 11 9 11 17 80 LOSS of OH ()AMAGE TO F ACILi1Y 1YPE DESCHIPilON l t l 9 l l Z l@l NA l

l l h

PL>u t e TY NRC USE ONLY ILSU E D DESCHtPTION 121 Hl l N lhl NA I

lllIIIllIIIII~I 7

, 9 iO w o9 80 s W. G. Hairston, III (205) 899-5156

_E

.....r

<, - -,, ~,,,,,.,,

,_,c

~

4 i

ALABAMA POWER COMPANY JOSEPH M. FARLEY NUCLEAR PLANT i

DOCKET NO. 50-348 ATTACHMENT TO LER 78-062/01T-0 Facility: Joseph M. Farley Unit 1

[

Report Date: 10/2/78 Event Date:

9/22/78 Identification of Event Main feedwater line lateral seismic restraint FW-R49 was not in place.

Conditions Prior to Event

The unit was in Mode 5 for a scheduled' maintenance outage.

Description of Event

On September 19, 1978, during an inspection of Class I and II pipe restraints and snubbers by Teledyne/Bechtel/SCSI personnel as part of an NRC staff evaluation, it was noted that main feedwater line lateral seismic restraint FW-R49 was not in place. A review of-on-site documentation was initiated to determine if the-restraint had been deleted or relocated.

This review indicated that the restraint was in place prior to December 16, 1976.

It was not determined when the restraint was removed.

Concurrent with the documentation search, a preliminary seismic evaluation was performed by Bechtel. _This evaluation indicated that the system may perform satisfactorily without the restraint.

Bechtel stated that a more rigorous evaluation would have to be performed to verify this.

On September 21, 1978, Bechtel/SCSI notified the plant staff that the restraint was missing and that no authorization could be located for its removal. Further conversation with SCSI on September 22, 1978, indicated that a detailed evaluation concerning the need for this restraint would take one to three weeks. Based on this estimate, l

the Plant Manager notified the NRC of a possible condition as l

described in Technical Specification 6.9.1.8.1.

Work was initiated to reinstall the missing restraint.

On September 25, 1978, the Plant Operations Review Committee met to discuss the missing restraint.

Present at the meeting were repre-i.

sentatives of Bechtel,' Daniel Construction Co. and Alabama Power Company Construction, Construction Quality Assurance, and.Startup.

All information relative to the incident was reviewed. The PORC recommended that all accessible Class I and II hangers / restraints on safety related portions of main steam, main feedwater and auxiliary feedwater piping located in the main steam and feedwater valve room and selected hangers / restraints in other areas of the auxiliary y

,.-o.,__

78-062/01T-0 building and containment be inspected to verify the installation of pipe hangers / restraints.

In addition to the main steam and feedwater valve room, selected portions of the following piping systems were inspected in the auxiliary and containment buildings: main steam, feedwater, pressurizer spray, letdown, residual heat removal, high liead safety injection / charging, safety injection / accumulator.

Approximately 190 pipe hangers / restraints were inspected. That j

inspection, conducted in accordance with FNP-1-ETP-74, Pipe llanger/ Restraint Investigation Procedure on September 27, 1978 while still in Mode 5, failed to show any additional missirg hangers / restraints.

Concurrent with the above noted inspect. ion a further review of construction documentation was conducted.

No evidence was found to indicate that removal of the restraint was authorized, nor was information found to indicate when or why the restraint was removed.

Reinsta11ation of restraint FW-R49 was completed on September 26, 1978.

Designation of Apparent Cause The apparent cause could not be determined.

Analysis of Event

The unit was in Mode 5, cold shutdown, at the time of discovery. A preliminary seismic evaluation performed by Bechtel indicated that the system may have performed satisfactorily without the restraint.

The restraint was reinstalled prior to leaving Mode 5.

An inspection of selected hangers / restraints showed no others missing.

Based on this inspection, this condition is considered to be singular in nature.

The health and safety of the general public were not affected by this occurrence.

Effect on Plant This occurrence had no significant effect on plant operations.

Corrective Action

As noted above, the missing restraint was reinstalled.

Failure Data None ac

,.n-g