IR 05000213/1979016
| ML19256F676 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Haddam Neck File:Connecticut Yankee Atomic Power Co icon.png |
| Issue date: | 10/25/1979 |
| From: | Keimig R, Lazarus W NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19256F670 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-213-79-16, NUDOCS 7912190797 | |
| Download: ML19256F676 (5) | |
Text
.
U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT
REGION I
Report No.
79-16 Docket No.
50-213 License No.
OPR-61 Priority
_
Category C
--
Licensee:
Connecticut Yankee Atomic Power Company P. O. Box 270 Hartford, Connecticut 06101 Facility Name:
Haddam Neck Plant Inspection At:
Haddam Neck, Connecticut Inspection Conducted:
October 2-5, 1979 Inspectors:
W,6(4cM
/h/Js'/79 W. Lazm us,.Repctor Inspector
'date date date
,
,
Approved by-
^ -M f
/d-2f-7 9
. R. Keimi hief, Rppttor Projects Section date
'
No. 1, R0 S BranchV Inspection Summary:
_ Inspection on October 2-5, 1979 (Report No. 50-213/79-16)
Areas Inspected:
Routine, unannounced inspection by a regional based inspector of licensee's actions concerning several IE Bulletins and a plant tour observing plant conditions and licensee activities.
The inspection involved 27 inspector-hours on si'- by one NRC inspector.
Results:
No items of noncompliance were identified.
1627 316 Region I form 12 (Rev. Ap' il 1977)
7912190
DETAILS 1.
Persons Contacted
- R. Blewett, Quality Assurance Supervisor J. Delawrence, Engineer J. DeRoy, Associate Engineer
- J. Ferguson, Station Services Superintendent
- R. Graves, Station Superintendent M. Kapinski, Project Engineer (NUSCO)
R. Lucas, Project Specialist (NUSC3)
- T. Mawson, Project Engineer (NUSCO)
M. Morris, Technical Assistant D. Robinson, Project Engineer (NUSCO)
J. Szymanski, QC Inspector (NUSCO)
R. Thomas, Associate Engineer
- R. Traggio, Unit Superintendent The inspector also interviewed several members of the licensee's operations, technical and administrative staffs.
- denotes those present at the exit interview 2.
Status of Previous Inspection Findings (Closed) Unresol-ed Item (213/79-15-02):
The inspector reviewed the licensee's IEB 7!-02 test / inspection procedures to verify that required inspection elemects had been added.
(0 pen) Unresolved Item (213/79-15-03):
In discussion w:th the Project Specialist and Project Engineer, it was determined that the size of the test sample for IEB 79-02 had not been finalized, but would be soon.
The justification for the sample size will be included in the licensee's response which is to be submitted upon completion of resting.
3.
IE Bulletin 79-02, Support Base Plates and Concrete Expansion Anchor Bolts The inspector reviewed the status of the test program being conducted, and witnessed testing of expansion anchors inside the containment.
The licensee indicated that all of the supports included in the test program, which would be inaccessible at power, would be tested prior to resumption of plant operation.
The program would then shift to the remaining accessible supports.
Further inspection and followup will be performed following receipt of the licensee's final report in the RI Office.
1627 317
4.
IE Bulletin 79-13, Steam Generator Feedwater Nozzle Cracking The inspector discussed the radiographic examinations of feedwater nozzle welds which were being done to comply with the bulletin requirements.
The inspector reviewed a sampling of completed radiographs and visually inspected the nozzle weld on the No. 3 steam generator during a tour of the containment.
The licensee completed his radiographic examinations and evaluations of findings before the conclusion of the inspection.
All defects noted were evaluated and found to be acceptable under ASME Section III by the licensee. Details of these findings will be documented in the licensee's report to the RI Office.
Followup in this area will continue during the licensee's next extended outage as the remainder of the required piping welds are examined.
5.
IE Bulletin 79-14, Seismic Analyses for As-Built Safety-Related Piping The inspector reviewed the following areas to verify that the licensee was performing the inspections of safety-related piping as required by the bulletin and indicated in a licensee letter dated August 1, 1979.
a.
Review of Inspection Procedure The inspector reviewed Special Procedure, SPL 10.7-32, "As-Built Verification for Safety-Related Systems," to verify that required inspection elements were included, i.e.:
--
Piping geometry Pipe support location
--
Pipe support details
--
--
Pipe attachments Concrete embedments
--
Valve / valve operator locations and weights
--
No inadequacies were identified.
b.
Observation of Activities The inspector accompanied members of the team performing a verifi-cation inspection of a section of Residual Heat Removal System piping. The inspector questioned the lack of detail drawings for pipe supports and the presence of insulation on some sections of piping and valves.
The inspection crew indicated that the support detail drawings had not been located so that support details for this section of line would be performed in a subsequent inspection and that insulation would be removed prior to a second inspection so that valve and valve operator types could be verified.
The inspector had no further questions in this area.
1627 318
c.
Review of Inspection Documentation The inspector reviewed a sampling of isometric drawings which had been field verified and marked to indicate discrepancies.
For each case that a missing support was noted as a discrepancy, the inspector verified that a Non Conformance Report (NCR) had been completed and promptly evaluated to determine the effect on system operability as required by the bulletin. No inadequacies were identified.
Documen-tation of discrepancies reviewed included:
Isometric drawings:
MKS-105 A, L, N
--
Plan drawings: FP-58, D, H, K, Q, R, P, Z and FP-56 H, K, L, W
--
Stone and Webster Engineering Company Memos: SWEC-43, 49 and 63
--
NCRs:
CY-137-41, and 43; CY-79-165-2; CY-79-137-35
--
During this inspection the licensee identified that 18 supports were missing on Seismic Category I Containment Air Recirculation Fan Cooler Return Lines and detarmined that system ability to withstand the design seismic stresse: was compromised.
A prompt notification was made to the RI Office (LER 79-11/1P) as required.
The licensee indicated that the replacement supports would be installed prior to startup.
No 'tems of noncompliance were identified.
d.
Independent Field Verification The inspector performed an independent verification of auxiliary feedwater discharge piping (outside containment) and emergency diesel generator fuel oil piping (in the diesel rooms), using the isometric drawings of these systems which had already been verified by the licensee.
The inspector identified a unistrut support which attached the "A" diesel generator fuel oil line to several other pipes and conduits and had not been shown on the drawing.
The licensee is evaluating this discrepancy to determine if the support should be considered in deturmining seismic effects o1 the fuel oil piping.
This item is unresolved (213/79-16-01).
No other discrepancies were identified.
6.
Plant Tour The inspector performed a plant tour to observe maintenance activities in progress, status of housekeeping and cleanliness, condition of pipe sup-ports, functioning of required instrumentation, and adequacy of health physics controls.
The areas toured included the Control Room, Turbine Building, Emergency Diesel Rooms, Switchgear Room, HP Control Point, Con-tainment, and Primary Auxiliary Building.
Except as noted below, no in-adequacies were identified.
1627 319
.
-
During an inspection of pipe supports on main feedwater piping, the inspector identified two discrepancies.
On Main Feed Pump "A", the vertical support closest to the pump on the discharge line had one of four nuts not in contact with the base plate.
On Main Feed Pump "B" discharge piping, support WFPD-H-44 had a nut which could not be engaged more than one or two threads.
Both items are being evaluated by the licensee and will be re-inspected during a subsequent inspection (213/79-16-02).
7.
Unresolved Items Items about which more information is required to determine acceptability are considered unresolved.
Paragraphs 5 and 6 contain unresolved items.
8.
Exit Interview At the conclusion of the inspection the inspector met with licensee rep-resentatives (see detail 1 for attendees) to discuss the scope and findings of the inspection as detailed in this report.
1627 320