IR 05000286/1990002
| ML20012B239 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Indian Point  |
| Issue date: | 03/01/1990 |
| From: | Carrasco J, Strosnider J NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML100271535 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-286-90-02, 50-286-90-2, NUDOCS 9003140038 | |
| Download: ML20012B239 (4) | |
Text
_
..
o m
,
,
-l.-
,
,
.
.
y I)
.
-
.
.
U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
REGION I
Report-No. ' 50-286/90-02
,
Docket Noi 50-286 Il
'
i
[1 License No. DPR-64-Priority --
Category C~
'
Licensee:- Power' Authority of the State of New: York
P.O. Box 215
~~~
.
Buchanan. New York 10511 E
Facility Name:
Indian Point Unit 3 Nuclear Power Plant
.
.
Inspection Conducted:<fehruary 6-9,'193
!
L-Inspectors:
4.tfd 2 -28'~96 l
J. E.'Gadcasto,- Reactor Enginfer, Materials and date
'
Process s S cti
, EB, DRS
,
Approved by:
x
.
J///fv J[SIStrosnider, Chief,Materialsand date
.
- M cesses: Section, EB, DRS-w Inspection Summaryi Inspection on February 6-9.~1990 (Inspection Report-No. 50-286/90-02)
Areas Inspected:
Frocurement, receipt and storage activities related to the
.,
installation of new spent fuel. racks were inspected. This included witnessing
'
.
preparatory activities'for reracking'of the spont fuel pool.
Results:- No violations or deviations-were identified.
,
t r
.N; i
4 h
%
a
.
,
fi l
-.
,
. :
.
t
.
Details 1.0 Persons Contacted
,
- C. Tessner, Project Engineer
- R. Sporbery, Operations Engineer i
- N. Papaiya, Quality Assurance
'
'J. Perrotta, Superintendent of Power
-
- R. Oliva, Quality Control
- P. Peloquin, Construction Manager i
- T Iraola, Senior Construction Engineer
- D Halama, QA Superintendent
- D. Quinn, Resident Superintendent
- M.'Peckham, Assistant to the Resident Manager
,
Nuclear Regulatory Commission
- L. Rossback, Senior Resident Inspector
- G. Hunegs, Resident Inspector
- Indicates those present at the exit meeting held on February 9, 1990.
,
2.0 Maximum Density Reracking of the Spent Fuel Storage Pool
2.1: Modification Scope This modification will replace the existing 12 Exxon high density spent fuel storage racks with 12 new maximum density racks. This replacement will increase the spent fuel storage capacity from 840
"
locations to 1345 locations, and will permit storage of reload fuel in the pool.
'
The inspector reviewed the licensee's Nuclear Safety evaluation number 89-03-253 FHS to determine that.all appropriate analyses were performed, reviewed and approved by the licensee and by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Briefly, the replacement storage rack design is a free standing welded honeycomb array of stainless steel boxes which has no g'.id frame structure.
The storage racks are arranged and categorized in two regions based on fuel assembly enrichment and burn-up. All storage-cells are bounded on four sides by boral poison sheets, except on the periphery of the pool rack array.
Each of the replacement maximum density racks will be supported and leveled on four screw pedestals which transfer the load directly to the pool floor. These free standing racks are free to move horizontally.
However, licensee analyses demonstrate that with only a 0.2 friction
,
l
- -
- - -
-
- -
-
-_
e
.,
' '
l
...
,
factor, there is no impact between the racks and the walls of the fuel pool for the postulated Operating Basis Earthquake (OBE) or Safe Shutdown Earthquake (SSE). Additionally, there is no rack-to-rack
'
impact since the maximum density racks are designed to be installed
,
with essentially no gap between them.
2.2 Procurement Documents i
k The inspector randomly selected a package for review (rack No. 4
%
shipping Notice No. 0945) of critical parameters such as dimensions,
.
V weights, and arrangements. The inspector also verified that the Safety Analysis Report had been translated appropriately into the
-
vendor purchase documents. Documents reviewed included Eastern Stainless Steel Company material certification and test report which provides the material chemical compositions; Jessop Steel Company material test cortification which is based c,r, ASME B&PV Code 1986 edition and provides yield and tensile strengths, and the certificate of conformance certifying that the U.S. Tool and Die, Inc's QA program complies with 10 CFR.50 App. B and ANSI N45.2. The latter document also certifies that the racks were fabricated in accordance i
with code requirements (ASME III sub NF).
t Within the scope of this review, the inspector found no deficiencies.
,
2.3 Receipt ]nstructions and Procedures The inspector verified that a written procedure exists which outlines the proper quality control activities upon rack receipt. The pro-cedure is NUC 3122 No. 1.
The inspector observed the implementation of this procedure and no deficiencies were identified.
2.4 Preparation fy Existing Rack Removal The inspector reviewed written procedures from NV Services Nos.
,
3122-2, 7 and 9 for obstruction removal, rack removal, and contaminated water diving, respectively. No deficier.;ies were observed in these procedures.
The inspector attended a pre-diving meeting, and observed that the instruction and the planning were very effective.
!
Before the exit meeting the inspector was inforud, that the actual diving took place successfully. The diver completed a good portion of the obstruction removal with a nominal exposure of 7 mRems in 1.5 hours5.787037e-5 days <br />0.00139 hours <br />8.267196e-6 weeks <br />1.9025e-6 months <br />.
,s
-
t e
e*
'
t
.
!
-
l Based on the observation of work in progress, the inspector concluded that the procedures are g. sod working documents.
However, the inspector noticed that the signature blocks Ossigned for the preparer and the reviewer on NUC Service's procedures were signed by the same person.
Thus, the contractor had not provided independent levels of review.
However, the inspector determined that the licensee had performed an independent review of the procedures. Thus, the procedures had ac-ceptable levels of review as required by Section 6.8 of the licensee's Technical Specifications which commits to Regulatory Guide 1.33 dated November 1972 which is based on ANS-3.2.
The inspector pointed out to the licensce, the importance of careful quality control of documents generated by contractors for safety related activities.
3.0 Conclusion Based on the scope of the inspection, the inspector concluded that the licensee is effectively controlling installation of the maximum density fuel racks in the spent fuel pool.
4.0 Management Meetings Licensee management was informed of the scope and purpose of the inspection at the beginning and during the inspection. The findings of the inspection were discussed with the licensee representatives during the course of the inspection and presented to licensee manage-ment on February 9, 1990 at the exit meeting (see paragraph 1.0 for attendees). At no time during the inspection was written material provided to the licensee by the inspector.
The licensee did not indicate that proprietary information was involved within the scope of this inspection.
,.
x