IR 05000029/1976001
| ML19347C461 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Yankee Rowe |
| Issue date: | 02/09/1976 |
| From: | Haynes R, Paolino R NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19347C460 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-029-76-01, 50-29-76-1, NUDOCS 8011190500 | |
| Download: ML19347C461 (13) | |
Text
.!
.
,
.
.
n'
,
- '
U: I Foret 12 (Jan 7';) (Cuv)
,
.
U. S. NUCLTAR RECULATO:W CO:CIISSIO:1
'
.
OFFICE OF I::SPECTIO:7 A 3 E:.TORCP.':P.!!T REGIC:t I IE Inspection Report No:
50-29/75-01 Docket No:
50-29 Licenscc:
Yankee Atot2ic Electric Co.
License No:
DPR-3 20 Turnpfke Road Priority:
-
C Westborough, Massachusetts 01581 Category:
Safeguards
-
Group:
Location:
Rowe, Massachusetts 01367
'
-
PWR - 175 MWe Type of Licensce:
Routine, Announced
,ge of Inspection:
January 5-8, 1976 Dates of Inspection:
.
December 7-11, 1975 Dates of Preva.cuc In6pectien:
/ />#M g>d/d 9[7 b Reporting Incpcetor:
' DATE R. J. P olino, Reactor Inspector Accompanying Inspectorc:
DATE i
_.
l D A;a r.
-
i
.
-
D/iT::
_
None l
Other Acco:apanying, Per:.,on:ici:
DATi;
.
-
- 3 l7l, rg.__..
$ -
u
.
D A l,-
---.. - -
..j. /.
.f, s Yevics:es? r>y:
,.
,
R. C. Haynes, Settion Chie.f
..
,
l r
.
.
__.
.... -
r i
=
e
!-
.
.
.
.,
l
.
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
.
Enforcement Action
,
None Licensee Action on Previously Identified Enforcement Items
!
Not Applicable Design-Changes
'
None Identified
- Unusual Occurrences i
None Reported
,
Other Significant Findings A.
Current Findings 1.
Acceptable Items
!
}
a.
Work Control Procedurea An audit of the work control procedures verified that-the licensee has established controls for operating personnel
-
"
approval and control of construction, maintenance and modification activities within the plant boundary.
(Details, Faragraph 3)
I b.
Quality Assurance Surveillance An audit of the quality assurance procedures and records
"
verified that work authori=ations are required to be audited periodically.and that the audits are being per-formed.
(Details, Paragraph 4)
,
a
+
- e
..,
a
!
.
-
i
,,.
---
_,
-.
,
,.- -,,,...,,,
--_.--,-,ne
-
,-
,
,#
,,,,
'
T:,'
.
.
.
~
-
-2-
.
.
.
c.
Emergency Procedures
,
An audit of the plant operating procedures verified that there are procedures for plant shutdown /cooldown in the event of loss of normal cooling systems.
(Details, Paragraph 6)
d.
Facility Inspection An inspection of the facility fire fighting equipment, both fixed and portable, showed that equipment was avail-able and the equipment had inspection tags affixed in-
.
dicating compliance with the inspection and maintenance procedures.
(Details, Paragraph 7)
e.
. Fire Inspection Report An audit of the latest inspection report documented that fire inspections are conducted semi-annually by NELPIA.
(Details, Paragraph 8)
Licensee f.
Iy> - egnt Line Weld Failures (Reference:
eports 50-29/75-1, 75-3 and 75-4)
-
An audit of the modifications and design changes indicates the licensee has resolved the problem involving weld failures
'
.
on instrument lines.
(Details, Paragraph 10)
Hydraulic Shock Suppressors (Reference:
Licensee Event g.
Report 50-29/75-15)
The manufacturer has replaced the hydraulic shock suppressors with new units which meet the curren't design specifications.
(Details, Paragraph 11)
.
.
e a
.
...
-_,
i e
s-
---w.
w v-,
,
m
~,e-r
-,
- - -
--...-.
.
-..
-
,. _
. __
- _ - -
i i
.
.
,
a
.
3_
.
.
-.
.
-
2.
Unresolved Items
.
a.
Design Change Controls An audit of Administrative Control Procedures indicated there are no requirements for a review of replacement cable penetration seal material for nonflammab411ty.
(Details, Paragraph 5)
b.
Fire Procedures and Training An audit of plant records and scheduled activities
indicate there have been nr fire drills held to date.
(Details, Paragraph 9)
B.
Status of Previousiv Identified Unresolved Items
-
Not Inspected
'
.
J Management Review
!
At the conclusion of the inspection, the inspector held an exit interview with the f ollowing persons to discuss the inspection findings:
A.
Persons Present Yankee Atomic Electric Plant (Rowe)
H. A. Autio Plant Superintendent
'
N. N. St. Laurent, Assistant Plant Superintendent P. E. Laird, Maintenance Supervisor J. L. Staub, Technical Assistant to Plant Superintendent
,
B.
Items Discussed 1.
Purpose of the Inspection The inspector stated that the purpose of the inspection was to ascertain whether special controls for fire preventicn/
protection had been provided in accordance with IE Bulletins 75-04 and 75-04A, and to review certain Licensee Event Reports.
.
.
G
'
-,,
I I
.
.~
.,m.-w--,-,
y-y-.
,
--
,,y-..
.,,
.,-_y
,
-
.,
-
,,,
,,,,,,
-y,y
,.--.
.-
. _ _.
.. _.
.
i
.
.
.
.
'
-4-
.
.
2.
Current Findings - Acceptable items i
Control of ignition sources, use of fire watches and a.
control of work activities by operations personnel.
(Details, Paragraph 3)
b.
Quality assurance and cudits of work authorizations.
(Details, Paragraph 4)
c.
Emergency Shutdown Procedures.
(Details, Paragraph 6)
d.
Facility Inspection.
(Details, Paragraph 7)
e.
Fire Inspection.
(Details, Paragraph 8)
f.
Instru=ent Line Veld Failures.
(Details, Paragraph 10)
g.
11ydraulic Shock Suppressors.
(Details, Paragraph 11)
3.
Current Findings - Unresolved Items
-
No requirement to review replaceable ' cable penetration a.
seals for the use of non-fla=mabic materials.
(Details,
Paragraph 5)
b.
No fire drills conducted to date.
(Details, Paragraph 9)
'
The licensee acknowledged the inspector's findings.
.
.
-
...
,_.
O
.
.
.
.
..
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.-
-..
-. __.--..
-
.- -
'
.
"
,
<
,
.
.
.
.
i DETATLS
.
,
.
1.
Persons Contacted Yankee Atomic Electric Plant L. Reed, QC and Audit Coordinator L. Bozek Site OQCA P. Laird, Maintenance Supervisor R. L. Boutwell, Technical Assistant
,
J. K. Thayer, Technical Assistant - Maintenance R. Durfcy, Technical Assistant - Maintenance J. Shippec, Instrument Supervisor
,
E. Begrebing Assistant Maintenance Foreman D. Army, Engineering Assistant - Ma!ntenance J. Staub, Technical Assistant - Plant Superintendent 2.
General s.
Plant Status The plant was at 80 percent power.
.
b.
Purpose of the Inspection The purpose of this routine announced inspection was to ascertain
!
'
whether special controls for fire prevention / protection during operation, modification and naintenance activities have been provided in accordance with IE Bulletins 75-04 and 75-04A and to review corrective actions taken on items reported in Licensee Event Reports 75-1, 75-3, 75-4 and 75-15.
- 3.
Work Control Procedures The inspector verified that there is a procedural requirement for Operations approval of all construction, modification and a.
.
maintenance activities performed within the plant boundary.
.
.
.
...
__
'
i l
.
--
.-
- - ~ - -,.
.et-y.
,y
-
y,,y
-
-
- -,
w
-, -
-
.
--
.
.
.
e-6-
.
.
The procedures audited included: AP-0003 entitled " Plant Operation Review Committee, Responsibilitics and Authoritics",
issued 2/11/74 which defines the responsibilities and author-
'
icy of the PORC committee; AP-0200 Rev. 2 entitled " Plant Design Changes" issued 5/16/75 which describes the procedure for initiation, preparation, review, approval, alteration and completion of Plant Design Changes; AP-0201 Rev. 4 entitled
" Plant Modifications" issued 5/30/75 which describes review and approval of Plant Modifications; AP-0202 Rev. 3 entitled
" Emergency Design Changes" issued 8/15/75 which describes the procedure for distribution, review, alterations and imple-
,
meneation of Engineering Design Changes.
b.
The inspector verified there is a procedural requirement for activitics involving welding, open flame and ignition sources which requires a fire watch and that communications be estab-11shed with the control rocm when these activities are per-formed in the proximity of flammabic materials, cable trays or vital process equipment.
-
The procedures audited included: AP-3005 Rev. 1 entitled
" Standard Welding and Inspection Procedures", issued 6/13/75; OP-5100 Rev. 3 entitled " Valve Fitting or Pipe Section Replace-ment and/or Repair of Valves, Fittings or Piping," issued 6/4/74; YAEC Safety Standard Manual, Section 4 entitled " Fire
Prevention," issued 9/67.
The above docucents provide administrative guidelines with re-spect to fire watch requirements, communication with the control room in the event of a fire and the assignment of an individual to monitor the safe conduct of work.
4.
Quality Assureance (QA) Surveillance The inspector verified that QA procedures have been established a.
that require periodic auditing of =aintenance requests to assure that operations personnel authorize work activities for construction, modifications and maintenance.
-
'-
--.
.
..
_ _.
.. _ _.._
.,
_..
. - - - _
_
.-
_ _
_
_
_
'
.
.
.
-1-
-
.
Procedures audited include: AP-0208 Rev. 4 entitled "In Plant
Audits" issued 10/9/75 which specifies individual responsibilities for compliance with the in-plant audit program and procedure QCA-XVIII-2 entiticd "In-plant Audit Prograny" issued 6/24/75.
b.
The inspector verified that the "In-plant Audits" as described in Procedure AP-0208 Rev. 4 were performed as evidenced in Audit Report No.75-174, dated 11/7/75 and Audit Report No.75-187, dated 1/6/76.
c.
The inspector verified that the scaling of cable conduit into the cable tray house was based on verification that the seal
,
material was nonflammable as evidenced by a Stone and Webster Engineering Corp. report entitled "Cabic, Sleeve and Barrier Test No. 11" dated 10/26/73.
The inspector found that the work control procedures were in accord-ance with the licensce's response to IE Bulletins 75-04 and 75-04A.
5.
Design Change Controls a.
The inspector audited the following documents furnished by the licensce: Guideline No. 1, dated May 1974 which describes the policy for material purchase, design changes, repair and modifications; Guideline No. 5, dated September 1975 which describes policy for control of work practices and fire pre-
vention within operating plants.
.
The inspector noted that the docu=ents did not specifically address cable penetration seals.
The licensee stated that to his knowledge there are no procedures that specifically address this area. The licensee stated that this matter would be reviewed.
The apparent lack of procedural controls which specify, or require review of, the type of replacement cable-penetration seal, to preclude the use of flammable materials in the seal, is considered to be an unresolved item pending completion of the licensee's review. This matter will be examined in a
'
subsequent NRC inspection.
I e
-- *
.
...
,.
.
, _.
_
.-.
,
,
--
--
,
.
.
~8-
-
.
b.
The inspector audited the list of Plant Design Changes and Modification Requests submitted by the licensee for the pre-vious year.
Of 23 Plant Design Changes for 1975, only two involved elec-trical changes. Nine design changes had been completed, including one electrical change.
.
Of 43 Plant Modifications for 1975 only two involved elec-trical changes.
Twenty-seven modifications were listed as complete, including one electrical modification.
Plant Design Changes (PDC) and Plant Modifications (PMR)
audited included:
PDC-75-10 dated 6/13/75 involved the addition of a relay and wiring in the Safety Injection panel in the main control roca.
PDC-75-9 dated 8/28/75 involved the installation of a second feeder line to the main co.olant cut-off valves.
PMR-75-26 dated 6/10/75 involved the installation in the control room of a beeper alarn using existing spare wiring.
.
None of the above changes involved cable penetratica seals or-use of non-flammable materials.
6.
Emergency Procedures U
The inspector verified that the licensee does have a procedure a.
for fighting fires in specific. vital ar2as and that fire drills are required on an established frequency.
.
...
__,
,
.
em
'
,
.
<
.
-9-
.
Procedures audited included: AP-0503 entitled " Fire Pro-tection Training" issued on 9/5/75 'which outlines the fire protection training, drills and rehearsals for all plant personnel; YAEC Safety Standard Manual, Section 4 entitled
" Fire Preventions", dated September 1967 which provides instructionc on the use of fire fighting equipment and pro-cedures.
.
The licensee stated he has not had the opportunity to impic-ment the Administrative Procedures 0503 due to the shutdowns immediately following the issuance of the procedure (see Detail paragraph 9, this report).
b.
The inspector verified that there are procedures which de-
scribe the operation of the nor=al and alternate decay heat removal systems.
Procedures audited include: OP-3014 entitled " Emergency Plant Shutdown and Cooldown Under Abnormal and Off-Normal Circum-stances", issued 7/31/75 which establishes corrective action to be taken to combat failures of systems required for emerg-ency shutdowns; OP-3106 Rev. 2 entitled " Loss of Main Cool-ant," issued 12/5/75 which describes action to be taken by operating personnel in the event of loss of main coolant
accident; OP-3113 entitled " Loss of Shutdown Cooling," issued 3/28/74 which describes the operator response to mitigate the consequences of a shutdown cooling event and; OP-3203 Rev. 1 entitled "Feedwater Line Break Action," issued 3/4/74 which describes action to be taken in the event of a break in the feedwater system.
7.
Facility Insoection
,
The inspector inspected the following areas for fire hazards and the maintenance of fire fighting equipment:
Control Room. Turbine Area, Cable Vault Area, Battery Room, Switch-gear Room, Lubricating 011 Room and Diesel-Cenerator area.
No significant probicms were identified by the inspector.
.
e D
O
' 9 me
,
e t
'M
. - -
.
-.
t
.
,,
,
'
.
.
The fire fighting equipment, both fixed and portable, appeared to be in good condition and was tagged to indicate there had been recent maintenance inspections performed.
The chemical and carbon-dioxide fire extinguishers were checked monthly by the licensee.
Fire hoses and fire fighting equipment were checked annually for operability and safety.
Procedures audited for verification included: DP-5626 Rev. 2, issued 11/25/75 which describes the procedure for the monthly check of fire extinguishers and equipment; DP-5625 Rev. 1, issued 5/;0/75 which describes the procedure for the annual check for operability.
The most recent report for the monthly checkoff was dated 12/17/75.
The most recent annual checkoff sheet was dated 8/29/75.
The inspector noted a =cco (D-19) dated 8/19/75, entitled " Pressure Testing of Fire Hoses." The memo reported tuo 50 ft fire hoses with pin hole leaks and 5 hoses that blew out at the coupling when placed under pressure. All of. the f aulty items had been replaced.
The inspector had no further questions on this item at this time.
8.
Fire Inspection Report The inspector examined the most recent plant fire inspection report No. N-20, dated 6/27/75.
The inspector noted that the report was prepared by the Nuclear Energy Liability / Property Insurance Associatt (NELPIA), which conducts semi-annuci inspections of the facility.
The inspector noted the report made no new recommendations nor listed any outstanding items from previous inspections.
.
p
.
- o
- ,
S
- M
,,
.--
,
.,
,
.
, -, - -.
.-
-
_
.-
i
.
.
'
.
-11-
-
.
.
.
9.
Fire Procedures and Training The inspector noted that the licensee has had no fire drills.
,
The licensee stated that the procedure AP-0503 entitled " Fire Protection Training" was issued on 9/5/75 a short time prior to plant shutdown in October, delaying its impicmentation.
The inspector did note that key personnel are volunteer firemen for the local fire department and that training sessions have been con, ducted in the use of some fire fighting and safety equipment.
Training Memos audited included: memo dated 9/24/75 entitled,
" General Plant Training Respiratory Protection" with training sessions held in October 16/23, 1974 June 20, 1975 July 8/9, 1975 July 10/11, 1975, July 22/23/24/25, 1975; memo dated October 17, 1974 entitled " Fire Training on Combustion Fires" and; memo dated October 30, 1975 reporting results of meeting with the local volunteer fire department regarding mutual assistance in the event of a fire.
.
The implementation of Procedure AP-0503 with respect to fire drills is considered to be an unresolved item pending a review of the
' licensee's fire drill status during a subsequent inspection.
10.
Instrument Line Weld Failures (Reference:
Licensee Event Reports 75-1, 75-3, 75-4)
The inspector audited documentation pertaining to the instrument line veld failures. The licensee has decided to replace all butt type wcld connections on instrument lines h inch and under with i
Swagelok connections.
This change is in process and is approx-imately 50 percent completed.
The license has attributed the weld failures to the butt type weld connections and line vibrations.
Documentation audited included: Job Order (J.O.) 75-32 issued 2/10/75 for leak in charging line flow transmitter at the trans-mitter joint near low side tap.
.
...
--.
.-,
_
_
.
. _ _
.._.
t
,
..
,..
.
.
.
-12-
.
J.O. 75-53 issued 3/11/75 for leak in shutdown cooling system d/p cell sensing line.
J.O. 75-67 issued 3/20/75 for leak in shutdown cooling flow indi-
'
cator sensing lino.
Plant Design Change No. 75-6, J.O. 75-96 issued 7/25/75 for in-sta11ation and testing instrument line modification and replacement of welds with Swagelok connections, 11.
Hydraulic Shock Suppressors (Reference: Licensee Event Report 75-15)
The inspector audited documentation pertaining to the testing and replacement of the hydraulic shock suppressors installed on the pressurizer safety valves and safety valve discharge lines.
,
Documents audited included: memo F-29, dated 7/29/74, entitled,
" Hydraulic Snubbers" confirming facility snubbers do not contain alcmite fittings; Grinnel QA Procedure No. 07B011, entitled "Ad-justment of Hydraulic Shock and Sway Suppressor Snubber Valves for lh inch thru 6 inch Bore Sizes," dated 10/15/75; Surveillance Test Repor: dated 11/19 thru 11/22, 1975 and 11/24 thru 11/27, 1975 describing tests of hydraulic snubbers for tension / compression
lock-up and tension / compression bleed rate at the vendor's facility and OP-5103 issued 11/10/75 entitled "Dissassembly and Inspection of Grinnel Hydraulic Snubbers."
The Surveillance Test Report indicates that the hydraulic snubbers sent to the vendor for test and calibration did not meet the Grinnel test specification outlined in the Grinnel Procedure No.
07B011.
It appeared that the Grinnel Procedure had been written for the current design of hydraulic snubbers. The new design involved changes in the location of the oil reservoir which a-ffected the response time.
The older snubbers used by the facility were of a different design which was more sensitive to oil dis-placement in the reservoir than are the newer snubbers.
The vendor has replaced the older design units with units of the new design, tested and calibrated per Grinnel Procedure No. 07B011.
These units werq found to be in compliance with the equipment specifications.
.
...
--.
--e
-
-
s-
---
-
-,
,
-
,,
n
,