IR 05000322/1979018
| ML19290D929 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Shoreham File:Long Island Lighting Company icon.png |
| Issue date: | 12/26/1979 |
| From: | Marrow L, Mcgaughy R NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19290D928 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-322-79-18, NUDOCS 8002290504 | |
| Download: ML19290D929 (5) | |
Text
.
.
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION g
0FFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT Region I Report No. 50-322/79-18 Docket No. 50-322 License No. CRRP-95 Priority
--
Category B
Licensee:
Long Island Lighting Company 175 East Old Country Road Hicksville, New York 11801 Facility Name:
Shoreham Nuclear Power Station, Unit No. 1 Inspection at:
Shoreham, New York Inspection conducted: Octobar 30 - November 1, 1979 Inspectors:
2 C
'4A MA/
/4./ V[79 L. Narrow,' Reactor Ins'pector
/datd signed date signed date signed Approved by:(cf-GW I
b i
R. W. McGaugny, Cnlef, Projects Section, date signed RC&ES Branch Insocction Summary:
Inspection on October 30 - November 1, 1979 (Report No. 50-322/79-18)
Areas Inspected:
Routine, unannounced inspection by a regional based inspector of work activities, the status of the work and licensee action on previous in-spection findings, Bulletins and Circulars.
The inspection involved 16 inspector-hours on site by one regional based inspector.
Resul ts :
No items of noncompliance were identified.
Region I Form 12 (Rev. April 77)
g 2280 b
.
.
DETAILS 1.
Persons Contacted Long Island Lighting Company T. W. Catchpole, Section Supervisor, Field QA
- B. R. McCaffery, Project Engineer
- E. J. Nicholas Section Supervisor, Field QA Stone and Webster Engineering
- E. Brabazon, Project Engineer C. A. Fonseca, Head, Site Engineering Office G. E. Gula, Project QA Engineer
- J. U. Hassett, Senior FQC Inspector K. A. Howe, General Superintendent of Construction (UNICO)
- W. C. Taylor, Assistant Superintendent, FQC General Electric Company
- R. M. Pulsifer, Resident Site Manager Courter and Comoany
- denotes persons in attendance at the exit interview.
The inspector also interviewed other licensee contractor personnel during the ir,spection.
2.
Plant Tour Shortly after arrival onsite the inspector visited various parts of the plant to observe work activities in-progress, completed work and plant status.
Work items and activities were examined for obvious defects or noncompliance with regulatory requirements and licensee commitments.
Specific activities and work areas observed by the inspector included installation of pipe supports, modifications to down comer restraints and safety rel'tef valve discharge devices in the suppression chamber, cleanup of the refueling cavity liner surface and the status of the control room.
No items of noncompliance were identifie.
3.
Licensee Action on NRC Bulletins and Circulars The inspector reviewed records concerning the iicensee's action on NRC issued Bulletins and Circulars and discussed these actions and records with licensee personnel responsible for processing Bulletins and Circulars.
The following Bulletins were closed based on information from S&W and the NSSS that the equipment in qar.stion had not been used and would not be used in this plant or that the Bulletin was not applicable:
Bulletin No Subject 79-09 Failure of GE Type AK-2 circuit Breaker in Safety Releted Systems 79-11 Faulty Overcurrent Trip Device in Circuit Breakers for Engineered Safety Systems 79-17 Pipe Cracks in Stagnant Borated Water Systems at PWR PlantsBulletin 79-04, " Incorrect Weights for Swing Check Valves Manufactured by Velan Engineering Company" was closed based on information from S&W confirming that the weight used in the seismic analysis corresponded to the correct weights of the valves as obtained from Velan.
The Circulars listed below were closed either because they were not applicable to this site or because corrective action had been taken in accordance with the circular.
.
Circular No Description 77-16 Emergency Diesel Generator Electrical Trip Lock-out Features 78-09 Arcing of General Electric Company NEMA size 2 Contactors 78-18 UL Fire Test 79-10 Pipe Fittings Manufactured from Unacceptable Material.
This item was also reported under 10 CFR 21 by Liberty Equipment and Supply Company
Circular No Description 79-11 Design / Construction Interface Problem 79-12 Potential Diesel Generator Turbo Generator Problem 79-13 Replacement of Diesel Fire Pump Starting Contractors 79-18 Proper Installation of Target Rock Safety-Relief Valves 4.
Licensee Action on Previous Inspection Findings (Closed) Noncompliance (322/79-02-01):
Post Weld Heat Treatment contrary to ASME III. The inspector examined:
(a)
E&DCR No. F-183968 which required clarification of the thickness to be used in calculating the heating / cooling rate for PWHT and the attached letter dated April 23, 1979 from ASME to S&W which defined the thickness of the weld at its thickest location as the controlling dimensions.
(b) E&DCR No. F-20851 which dispositioned the four welds identified on Courter Nonconformance Report (NR) No. 574D as having exceeded the allowable heat-up rates; and the inspection reports showing perfonnance of acceptable radiographic and magnetic particle tests, and visual inspection of the pipe on both sides of the welds for distortion.
The inspector had no further questions concerning this matter.
(Closed) Unresolved Item (322/79-10-01):
Inadvertent disassembly of pipe hanger turnbuckles.
The inspector examined IOC concerning a telephone discussion of this question with Bergen-Paterson (B-P) and CCN 1012-D2-0597 from 9-P to S&W confirming that the threaded rod is plug welded to the connecting members at both ends and therefore cannot loosen af ter instal-lation.
This welding is done in the shop.
(Closed) Unresolved Item (322/79-10-2):
Horizontal arm of hanger with different identification number.
The inspector examined Interoffice Correspondence (IOC) dated September 6,1979, recording a telephone dis-cussion between S&W and B-P concerning this question.
The number identified on the arm was in error but it had been determined by a dimensional check that the correct Part had been installe,
.
5.
Other Questions Raised During Previous Inspections During inspection 79-10 the inspector had questioned lack of a requirement for inspection of valve bodies during the line-walk defect / surface inspection.
The contractor had stated that it was their intent that valve and pump castings be inspected for field imposed defects although the applicable procedure did not have this requirment.
The inspector examined Courter &
Company QA procedure Section 10.1, " Inspection" and observed that Rev. 2 of this procedure dated October 31, 1979 had established a requirement for instection for field-induced defects.
The inspector had no further que-tions concerning this matter.
6.
Exit Interview The inspector met with licensee and contractor representatives (denoted in Paragraph 1) at the conclusion of the inspector on November 1, 1979.
In addition, the NRC resident inspector, J. C. Higgins, attended the meeting.
The inspector summarized the scope and findings of the inspector as described in this report.