IR 05000309/1986002
| ML20203F364 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Maine Yankee |
| Issue date: | 04/10/1986 |
| From: | Varela A, Wiggins J NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20203F326 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-309-86-02, 50-309-86-2, IEB-80-11, NUDOCS 8604250135 | |
| Download: ML20203F364 (11) | |
Text
{{#Wiki_filter:c .. .. U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
REGION I
Report No. 50-309/86-02 . Docket No. 50-309 ! ' r* License No. DPR-36 Priority - Category C , Licensee: Maine Yankee Atomic Power Company 83 Edison Drive f Augusta, Maine 04336 , Facility Name': Maine Yankee Nuclear Power Station Inspection At: Wiscasset, Maine Inspection Conducted: March 10-14, 1986 Inspectors: I Lc N NPell0,1785 A. A. Varela, Lead Reactor Engineer date-NRC Contract Personnel: M. E. Nitzel, EG&G Idaho, Inc.
' T. L. Bridges, EG&G Idaho, Inc.
'd b Approved by: _ iA+t v .. Wig'6th, hief, Materials and 'date ' Processes %ec[[ tion,EB,DRS .
Inspection Summary: Inspection on March 10, 1986 (Report No. 50-309/86-02) Areas Inspected: Special announced inspection by a region-based inspector and two NRC contractor personnel at the Wiscasset plant site. The inspection encompassed review of licensee responses and subsequent analysis-and modifi-cations of masonry walls in response to IE Bulletin 80-11, Masonry Wall Design.
This inspection included a walkdown of existing walls affected by safety re-lated. equipment, a review of design analyses and a review of work packages on wall modifications.
-Results: One violation and one deviation were identified.
8604250135 860418 ' gDR ADOCK 05000309 PDR . . .. . ... . . . .
f; ' .. .. .
> , DETAILS l - . . I 1.
Persons Contacted l Maine Yankee Atomic Power Company (MY)
- E. T. Boulette, Assistant Plant Manager
- S. D. Evans, Licensing Engineer
.
- J.
Hebert, Manager Plant Engineering
- L.
Lawson, Quality Assurance Section Head
- C. R. Shaw, Lead Mechanical Engineer
- G. D. Whittier, Manager Nuclear Engineering and Licensing C.
Frizzle, Vice President, Manager of Operations Yankee Atomic Electric Company (YNSD)
- P. L. Anderson, Project Manager
- W. E. Henries, Lead Mechanical Engineer D.
Magnarelli, Mechanical Engineer R.
Shone, Engineering Manager, MY Project Cianbro Corporation
- S.
Norton, Field Engineer U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
- C.
Holden, Senior Resident Inspector 2.
Inspection Purpose And Scope The purpose of this inspection was to review with cognizant and responsible licensee representatives at the plant the completeness of their responses to NRC/IE Bulleting 80-11, Masonry Wall Design. The scope of the inspection included a review of-engineering design and quality as-surance documentation relating to inspection, testing, analysis and modi-fications satisfying requirements and licensee commitments with respect to the Bulletin. A walkdown inspection of the plant verified repairs and/or modifications relating to the Bulletin 80-11 efforts.
3.
Review Criteria The latest revision of the Bulletin was used to define actions expected by the utility.
In addition, Temporary Instruction (TI) 2515/37 was used to further define inspection requirements for Bulletin 80-11. Applicable sections of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR 50) were used.
4.
Review Of Licensee Responses The inspection team reviewed Bulletin responses available from NRC files prior to the inspection. These are listed in Table 1.
Any items of non- . -. - - - - - - - -- - - - - - .
F ~- .. ... n compliance or those requiring further discussion were noted as items to be l . addressed while at the plant site. Questions relating to licensee re-sponses were forwarded to the licensee in advance of this inspection as preliminary agenda for discussion.
The inspection team reviewed additional material provided by the licensee during the inspection.
For Bulletin 80-11, this material consisted of additional procedures governing engineering activity, engineering design change requests (EDCR's) regarding required modifications, calculations pertinent to the wall analyses and modifications, and internal correspondence regarding reanalysis and modification activities.
The pertinent internal documents described above for IEB 80-11 are listed in Table 2 and 3.
4.1 Findings Based on the review of the documents shown in Tables 1 and 2, the inspectors determined that the engineering aspects of the licensee's response to the Bulletins were adequate. However, several e oblems were noted regarding the comprehensiveness and control of site survey activities which were performed by the YNSD organization for the licensee. These problems are described below.
4.1.1 Walls Omitted From the Licensee's Reviews The NRC inspection regarding this licensee's Bulletin actions was announced on January 28, 1986. As a result of being informed of this inspection, the licensee requested YNSD to perform a confirmatory survey , of the facility to assure all pertinent masonry walls had been identified and evaluated. This confirmatory survey was conducted in February 1986.
The survey found that 10 masonry walls had not been identified and evaluated; 5 of these walls had been in existence at the time of the licensee's original survey activities and 5 walls had been added subsequent to these original surveys.
The inspector inquired about the extent of procedural coverage established to conduct the original surveys and the February 1986 confirmatory survey. The inspector was informed that no specific procedures had been developed or used. The inspections were performed by YAEC personnel using the Bulletin itself as the governing document for the. work. The inspector observed that, had reviewed and approved procedures specifying the scope, method and acceptance criteria been in use for these surveys, the 5 walls in the original survey might not have been missed. The inspector further concluded that, because the original and confirmatory surveys were quality-affecting activities, in that they sought to confirm the continued availability of safety-related equipment, procedures were required by 10 CFR 50 Appendix B Criterion V, the Maine Yankee Quality Assurance Program and YNSD procedure WE-106. Therefore, the lack of procedures constituted an apparent violation.
(50-309/86-02-01)
E ,, ..
. ' Further, the inspector noted that IE Bulletin 80-11, which was issue'd May - -8, 1980, requested that the licensee conduct and report the results of masonry wall surveys. The licensee was also requested to perform a re-analysis of the walls identified as potentially impacting safety-related equipment and to report the results to NRC.
Licensee. letters dated June-30, 1980, Novembe'r 4, 1980, January 25, 1985 and April 22, 1985, indicated that the licensee had implemented a program to verify that masonry walls affected by the Bulletin had been identified and evaluated. Consequently, .the inspectors concluded that the omission of the 5 walls from the pre-vious surveys and reanalysis constituted a deviation for the licensee's commitments regarding the Bulletin.
(50-309/86-02-02) ,
- Finally, regarding-the 5 walls added since the original surveys, the inspectors were concerned that the actions specified in the Bulletin had apparently not been incorporated into the engineering specifications and administrative procedures used by the licensee and YNSD for masonry wall work at the site. This aspect is considered unresolved pending licensee review of this concern.
(50-309/86-02-03).
5.
Licensee Response To Above' Findings: The licensee's representatives acknowledged the findings described above.
The licensee responded that, in the case of YAEC's Yankee Nuclear Services ~ ~ Division, engineering personnel would receive remedial training.to empha-size awareness of the requirements contained in work instruction WE-106.
The licensee also committed to the following actions: , ~ 1.
To develop a procedure applicable to the subject walkdown activities and validate all walkdown results to that procedure by May 15, 1986.
2.
To evaluate various options to modify the Quality Assurance Program and/or plant engineering procedures to emphasize the need for all aspects of work regarding safety-related equipment to be preperly addressed by controlled procedures.
6.
Verification Walkdown Inspection , ' A physical inspection of certain masonry walls subject to Bulletin action was conducted.
The walls included in this sample were chosen by the ' inspection team. The purpose of this walkdown was to verify samples of l-inspections and/or modifications required by the licensee's response to the Bulletin. The walls shown in Table 4 were examined.
During the course of the inspection the inspectors inquired whether the licensee had a mechanism in existence to ensure that the physical condi-tion of the. walls remained as analyzed. To address this concern, the , licensee's representatives committed to evaluate a program of periodic surveillance to assure that the as-analyzed conditions (lack of mortar cracking, boundary conditions, etc.) of the subject walls remain valid.
, . .. .- m m . -
( -_-. _ ... s. 7.
Review Of Licensee Administrative Controls and Quality Assurance In determining the adequacy of administrative controls in assuring quality work, the. inspector requested records of licensee audits relating to its response to the bulletin. Although no quality assurance documentation or audits of engineering activitiet at the plant were produced which described the problems identified in Paragraph 4 of this report, there was evidence of QA/QC involvement in Bulletin-related activities.
Masonry wall modification packages contained in EDCR's number 80-60, 82-05 and 85-15 were found to have been adequately signed-off by quality control personnel, and the engineering evaluation was cbserved to have been per-formed and verified by the Quality Assurance Organizations for conformance to these applicable requirements: - Engineering Instruction WE-100 for Engineering Design Change Request 80-60 Revision 3, and required sign-off forms Implementing Instruction 82-05-01, PED Forms #17-23-1-2 and EI - .WE-100 forms Implementing Instruction 85-15 and required form.
- The required forms for these EDCR's were observed to be adequately signed by engineering plant operational QA and were accepted by project QA. Ad-ditional quality assurance activities relating to EDCR 85-15 were docu-mented in QA Surveillance Report 85 S-093, dated September 5, 1985, and QA Evaluation Report 86 E-018 performed February 28, 1986.
, 8.
Conclusion Based on the observations described in this report, the inspectors considered Bulletin 80-11 closed. Work remaining to be completed by the licensee regarding the walls omitted from IEB 80-11 activities will be followed in connection with the violation, deviation and unresolved item shown in paragraph 4.
- 9.
Definition Of Unresolved Items Unresolved items are matters about which more information is required in order to ascertain whether they are acceptable, violations, or deviations.
. An unresolved item identified durinq this inspection is discussed in paragraph 4.
10. Exit Meeting t The NRC inspector conducted an exit meeting, participated in by EG&G contract personnel, with licensee representativas and YAEC personnel (denoted in paragraph 1).
The NRC inspector summarized the inspection . - - - - - - - - . - . - -
_.
. .. .. findings and the licensee acknowledged these comments. At no time during the inspection was written material, other than that described in paragraph 4, provided to licensee personne,_ a, '~
,
TABLE 1 - LICENSEE RESPONSES TO BULLETIN NO. 80-11 REVIEWED
DOCUMENT DATE Licensee letter WMY 80-103 June 30, 1980 " " WMY 80-149 November 4, 1980 - " " MN 83-190 September 20. 1982 " " MN 82-207 October 21, 1982 " " MN 83-100 May 26, 1983 " " MN 84-52 April 4, 1984 " " MN 84-219 December 19, 1984 " " MN 85-15 January 25, 1985 " " MN 85-41 February 25, 1985 " " MN 85-78 April 22, 1985 " " MN 85-168 September 24, 1985 L __
E <.a n. -
TABLE 2 ENGINEERING DOCUMENTATION REVIEWED - DOCUMENT ~ DESCRIPTION Document Block wall data sheets and'-associated wall summary sheets completed by Yankee Nuclear Services Division personnel for the following masonry walls: C 2-1 C 20 2-3 (two wall panels) - C22 .C23 C 0.5.1 C 20~1 C 46 1-2 C 61 1-3 ' FB 44 1 PAB 21 1-6 PAB 21 7 PAB 36 3 SB 21 4-7 SB 21 17-19 SB 35 1-4 SB 35 7 SB 391 SB 39 2 SB 45 1-3 SB 45 6 SB 61 2 SB 77 2.
TB 212 VE 21 1-4 Y 20 1 MYP 86-201 fankee Nuclear Services Division (YNSD) memo including the safety evaluation of walls PAB 21 1, 5, and 6.. -MYP 86-203 YNSD memo including the safety evaluation of walls SB 45 6 and SB 21 4.
.EDCR 80-60 Engineerirg Design Change Request (EDCR) to incorporate n:asonry wall modifications resulting from IEB 80-11.
EDCR 80-05 EOCR to incorporate masonry wall modifications resulting from reanalysis of certain walls.
- . - - . - - .
r.
.. .=
TABLE 2 - ENGINEERING DOCUMENTATION REVIEWED (Cont'd.)
DOCUMENT EDCR 85-15 EDCR to incorporate masonry wall modifications to battery room walls resulting from reanalysis without arching action.
,
_ -_ _ _ - _. - -_ _ _ _ _. - _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ..e:e : ..I o < \\ '~ '10 ', TABLE 3 CALCULATION PACKAGES REVIEWED - CALC. NO.
WALL FIELD INSPECTION 1MYC-381 Y 20 1 Yes MYC-223 C21 NO
MYC-189, R9, 79-95 SB 21 4 .Yes MYC-189, R9, 7-19 PAB 21 2 Yes-u MYC-189, R9, 20-34 PAB 21 4 Yes
MYC-189, R0, 72-80 SB 21 17-18 Yes MYC-189, R0, 9-31 SB 35 1-4 Yes
iO MYC-189, R3,'5-36 SB 35 1-4 Yes MYC-189, R0, 11 SB 35 7 Yes L MYC-189, R0, 38-63 SB 45 1-3 Yes MYC-189, R9, 58-65 PAB 21 7 Yes ' -MYC-189, R9, 35-48 SB 39 1-2.
Yes MYC-189, R9, 54-57 PAB 36 3 Yes ! a.
These entries are arranged by calculation number, revision, ~ and applicable pages. For example, MYC-189, R9, 79-95 implies that pages 79-95 of revision 9 of calculation MYC-189 applied to wall SB 21 4.
a .
L' i.
1.
k.
.. -..... ... . .... .. . ... _
.. - -- ... . ~.. . .,
, TABLE 4 - MASONRY WALLS FIELD VERIFIED - WALL ELEVATION (ft) LOCATION FB 44 1
Spent Fuel Pool PAB 21 1-6
Primary Auxiliary Bldg.(PAB) ! PAB 21 7
PAB PAB 36 3
PAB SB 21 4-7
Service Building (SB) SB 21 17-19
SB - SB 36 1-4
SB SB 35 7
SB SB 39 1
SB j SB.39 2
SB SB 45 1-3
SB SB 45 6
SB SB 61 2
SB SB 77 2
SB TB 21 2
Turbine Building VE 21 1-4
Vent Equipment Area Y 20 1
' Yard Area (refueling water storage tank)
l ! l i l
't r -' _ _ _ _ __ }}