IR 05000213/1979015
| ML19260B459 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Haddam Neck File:Connecticut Yankee Atomic Power Co icon.png |
| Issue date: | 09/12/1979 |
| From: | Keimig R, Lazarus W NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19260B453 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-213-79-15, NUDOCS 7912100199 | |
| Download: ML19260B459 (6) | |
Text
.
.
.
.
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT Region I Report No. 50-213/79-15 Docket No. 50-213 License No. DPR-61 Priority Category C
--
Licensee:
Connecticut Yankee Atomic Power Company P. O. Box 270 Hartford, Connecticut 06101 Facility Name:
Haddam Neck Point Inspection at:
Haddam, Connecticut Inspection conducted: August 14-16, 1979 Inspectors:
.
[
W'M,r'r[ b 2 /79 W. Lazarus, Reactor Inspector date signed date signed
-
/
date signed Approved by:
k 1, d' g j 92/7-7 R' R. Ketmii, Chief, feactor Projects Section da'te sign'ed No.1, RO&NS Branch Inspection Summary:
Inspection on August 14-16,1979 (Recort No. 50-213/79-15)
Areas Inspected:
Routine, unannounced inspection by a regional based inspector, of followup or Licensee Event Reports (LER's); licensee action on previous inspection findings; and, licensee action concerning IE Bulletin 79-02.
The inspection involved 27 inspector-hours on site by one regional based inspector.
Results: One item of noncompliance was identified in one area (Infraction -
Failure to perform required surveillance tests, Details 2).
'
.
15M 298 Region I Form 12 (Rev. April 77)
,
791'2100I
.
.
.
DETAILS 1.
Persons Contacted
- T. Campbell, I&C Supervisor
- J., DeLaurence, Associate Engineer
- R,Lucas,ProjectSpecialist(NUSCO)
T. Mawson, Project Engineer (NUSCO)
M. Morris, Technical Assistant D. Robinson, Project Engineer (NUSCO)
J. Szymamski, QC Engineering Technician (NUSCO)
- R. Traggio, Assistant Plant Superintendent The inspector also interviewed several licensed operators, technicians, a,nd other members of technical and administrative staffs.
- denotes those present at the exit interview.
2.
Followup On Previous Inspection Findings (Closed) Unresolved Item (213/79-11-05): The inspector reviewed the Control Room Log which indicated that the plant was operated in the three loop configuration from July 14-23, 1979, with the NI overpower trip setpoint reduced to < 84%. A review of surveillance test records for SUR 5.2-9,
" Nuclear Instrumentation Power Range Bi-Monthly Test," for the period January-August,1979, indicated that since the channels were aligned and tested in February,1979, that only the < 107% power trip setpoint had been tested bi-monthly in accorda ne with SUR 5.2-9.
Operation of the plant in the three loop mode from July 14-23, 1979, with reduced overpower setpoints selected, without testing the trip setpoint in the previous one half month, as required by(TS Table 4.2-1(1), represents an infraction level item of noncompliance 213/79-15-01).
3.
Followup on IE Bulletin 79-02 In preparation for on site followup, the inspector reviewed the licensee's response to the bulletin, dated July 6, 1979.
The on site followup was performed to verify that the licensee's program for analyzing and testing pipe support base plates and concrete expansion anchor bolts was as described in their response and that appropriate test procedures had been prepared and were being used for testing. The following specific items were inspected.
1519 299
.
..
.
'
.
.
Review of Testing and Repair Procedures a.
The inspector reviewed the licensee's test / repair procedures listed below, to verify that following items had been incorporated:
(.1 ) Anchors were identified as to type.
(2) Plate dimensions and hole locations defined and recorded.
(.3) Base plate to surface gap considered.
(4)
For grouted base plate, examination of leveling nut and whether present leveling nut must be backed off prior to testing.
(_5 ) Testing values were either from site specific or from manufacturer
-
data.
(6)
For shell type anchors:
Sleeve length.
--
Sleeve embedment.
--
Conical plug in place /shell properly expanded.
--
Minimum thread engagement meets engineering design require-
--
ments.
(.7)
For wedge and Wej-It types:
Minimum embedment and anchor length verified.
--
Stud thread engagement acceptable.
--
Threaded end not shortened.
--
Scraper preload established.
--
Anchor nut not bottomed out.
--
b.
Procedures reviewed:
SPL 10.7-21, Support Inspection - Category I Fluid Systems
--
1519 300
.
-
.
SPL 10.7-23, Ultrasonic Examination of Anchor Bolts
--
SPL 10.7-24, Inspection of Category I Pipe Support Base Plates
--
and Shell Type Anchor Bolts SPL 10.7-25, Inspection of Category I Pipe Support Base Plates
--
and Wedge Type Anchor Bolts SPL 10.7-28, Repair, Removal, or Installation of Concrete Fasteners -
--
Category I Fluid Systems c.
The inspector identified that the following items were not included in the procedures:
(1)
Plate hole size is not being measured or recorded.
(2) Verification that anchor nut is not bottomed out.
(3) Verification of minimum thread engagement.
The license has agreed to make procedure changes to incorporate these items. The licensee also indicated that although it was not written into the procedures, thread engagement and anchor not bottoming had been verified on those anchors already inspected.
Plate hole size had not been measured or recorded. The licensee agreed to either reinspect those plates for proper hole size or to provide adequate justification as to why it was not necessary. This item is unresolved (213/79-15-02).
The inspector also noted that the sample size of anchors to be tested, to insure 95 percent confidence that less than 5 percent will fail, had not yet been determined by the licensee.
This item is unresolved (213/79-15-03).
Review of Completed Test Data The inspector reviewed completed test data for the anchors tested between July 3 - August 6,1979, to verify (NCR) were written and evaluated promptly that required information was being recorded, Nonconformance Reports and corrective action taken promptly where required.
Except as noted in Details 5, no inadequacies were identified.
.
1519 301
.
.
.
Observation of Testing The inspector observed the inspection and tension testing of two shell type anchors in accordance with procedure SPL 10.7-24. The inspection team was well prepared and experienced.
No inadequacies were identified.
Inspection of Base Plates The inspector perfonned an inspection of base plates and anchors in safety related systems located in accessible areas of the Primary Auxiliary Building.
The inspector identified one base plate with two loose nuts on the anchor's threaded rods.
The base plate was located in the RHR pit and was supporting a snubber attached to the RHR line to the Main Coolant System. The inspector verified that the nuts had been torqued to the required 65 ft-lbs prior to completion of the inspection. The licensee's subsequent review determined that this was not seismic restraint, but had been installed to limit vibra-tion of the RHR line during testing of the LPSI system.
The inspector had no further questions in this area.
4.
In-Office Review of Licensee Event Reports (LER's)
The inspector reviewed LER's received in RI office to verify that details of the event were clearly reported including the accuracy of the description of cause and adequacy of corrective action.
The inspector also detemined whether further information was required from the licensee, whether generic implications were indicated, and whether the event warranted on site followup.
The following LER's were reviewed.
- -- 79-07, Missing Seismic Support in Service Water System
- -- 79-08, Missing Seismic Support in RHR System Except as noted below for those LER's denoted by (*) for on site followup, the inspector had no further questicns in this area.
5.
On Site Licensee Event Followup For those LER's selected for on site followup, the inspector verified that reporting requirements of Technical Specifications and Regulatory Guide 1.16 had been met, that appropriate corrective action had been taken, that the event was reviewed tt the licensee as required, and that continued operation of the facility was conducted within Technical Specification limits.
The review included discussions with licensee personnel, review of PORC meeting minutes, Plant Information Reports (in-house reports), and applicable logs. The following LER's were reviewed on site.
1519 302
~
.
79-07, Missing Seismic Support in the Service Water System
--
79-08, Missing Seismic Support in the RHR System
-.
The inspector reviewed the Support Inspection Sheets completed by Bechtel, subsequent speed memos, Nonconformance Reports (NCR), and NCR disposition for the above restraints which were discovered not to be installed per design drawings. The inspector expressed a concern that for the restraint reported missing in LER 79-07, that too long an interval existed from the time that discovery was made by Bechtel on June 30, 1979, until it was reported to plant personnel and evaluated as necessary for adequate seismic load support capability (July 7,1979). The support was subsequently installed on July 10, 1979.
The licensee acknowledged the concern. The inspector noted an improvement in the licensee's handling of a similar discovery of a missing restraint in the RHR system.
This missing restraint was discovered, analyzed, and corrected within 72 hours8.333333e-4 days <br />0.02 hours <br />1.190476e-4 weeks <br />2.7396e-5 months <br />.
No other inadequa-cies were identified.
6.
Unresolved Items Unresolved items are items for which more information is required to deter-mine if they are acceptable, items of noncompliance, or deviations.
Unresolved items identified during this report are discussed in Paragraph 3.
7.
Exit Interview The inspector met with licensee representatives (see Details 1 for attendees)
at the conclusion of the inspection to discuss the scope and findings of the inspection as detailed in this report.
1519 93