ML12090A754

Entergy Pre-Filed Hearing Exhibit ENT000438, General Visual Inspection Report for IP3 6-inch Dire Protection Line (N/S) Corner of the Whut Pit (Aug. 2011)

ML12090A754
Person / Time
Site:	Indian Point
Issue date:	08/12/2011
From:	Entergy Nuclear Operations
To:	Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel
SECY RAS
Shared Package
ML12090A727	List: ML12090A728 ML12090A729 ML12090A730 ML12090A731 ML12090A732 ML12090A733 ML12090A734 ML12090A735 ML12090A736 ML12090A738 ML12090A739 ML12090A740 ML12090A742 ML12090A744 ML12090A745 ML12090A746 ML12090A747 ML12090A748 ML12090A750 ML12090A751 ML12090A752 ML12090A754 ML12090A755 ML12090A756 ML12090A757 ML12090A758 ML12090A760 ML12090A762 ML12090A763 ML12090A764 ML12090A766 ML12090A767 ML12090A768 ML12090A771
References
RAS 22156, 50-247-LR, 50-286-LR, ASLBP 07-858-03-LR-BD01
Download: ML12090A754 (8)

Text

ENT000438 Submitted: March 30, 2012 0

)

ENGINEERING STANDARD EN-EP-S-002-MUL TI I REV. 0 ENTERGY Buried Piping and Tanks General Visual PAGE 12 OF 12 Inspection ATTACHMENT 7.1 INSPECTION CHECKLIST Sheet 2 of 2 IP3 6*inch Fire Protection Line (N/S) at NIW INSPECTION Piping I Tank corner of the WHUT Pit DATE:

8/11/11 ELEVATION:

EI.48'.o" LOCATION DWG:

9321-F-41823 INSPECTOR:

J. Peterson NOTE YES

1.

ANY BLISTERING (COATING)?

D NO [gI YES

2.

ANY PEELING (COATING)?

D NO [gI YES

3.

ANY FLAKING (COATING)?

D NO [gI YES

4.

ANY DELAMINATION (COATING)?

D NO [gI YES

5.

ANY EMBRITTLEMENT (COATING)?

D NO [gI YES

6.

ANY EMBEDDED ROCKS (COATING ANDIOR METAL)?

D NO [gI coating inspection only YES

7.

ANY CRACKING (COATING ANDIOR METAL)?

D NO [gI YES

8.

ANY RUST (METAL)?

D NO [gI YES

9.

ANY CORROSION (METAL)?

D NO [gI YES N/A - carbon steel piping was

10.

ANY FLAKING OR SCALING (METAL)?

D NO [gI externally coated.

YES

11.

ANY MECHANICAL DAMAGE (METAL)?

D NO [gI N/A - as above YES

12.

ANY NICKS, GOUGES OR ARC STRIKES (METAL)?

D NO [gI N/A - as above YES

13.

ANY TUBERCLES (METAL -IF INTERNAL INSPECTION)?

D NO D NIA GENERAL APPEARANCE (Inspector):

This inspection was an opportunistic inspection conducted during excavation of the excavation of the area between the IP3 RWST and Waste Holdup Tank Pit (see attached sketch) for the Dry Cask Travel Path mod. All exposed 6-inch piping was externally coated and wrapped carbon steel. The coating and wrap was in very good condition, with, no eyidence of flaking, embrittlement, separation from metal, bublJling, blistering, delamination, etc.

In total the entire length of exposed 6-in. fire protection piping was approx. 20 feet. This included the 6-inch fire protection header, from which the 6-in.

branch to the PAB teed off. Ofthe exposed length of piping, approx. 8 feet was inspected in detail, as the header, at lower elevation was covered over, prior to the visual inspection. The inspected length of piping, however, was deemed to be typical of the entire length ofthe excavated piping..

Photographs of the excavated piping is attached to this report.

)

ENGINEERING STANDARD EN*EP*S*002*MUL TI I REV. 0 ENTERGY Buried Piping and Tanks General Visual PAGE 12 OF 12 Inspection ATTACHMENT 7.1 INSPECTION CHECKLIST Sheet 2 of 2 DEGRADATION FOUND?

FURTHER EVALUATION REQUIRED?

COMMENTS (Inspector):

YEsD NO~

YEsD NO~

CR-I.

The attached photos of the excavated 6*inch fire protection piping were taken during the changing field conditions. First pictures taken include a 6-inch FP supply header, from which the 6-in. branch to the P AB tees off of. Additional photos, however, were taken after the header piping at the lower elevation was covered up.

2.

Buried portions of the 8-inch fire protection line in the area was also uncovered and inspected during this excavation activity. A separate inspection report was written to document those inspections.

INSPECTOR(S) PRINT/SIGNIDATE:

J. Peterson EVALUATION:

ACCEPTABLE ~

ACCEPTABLE WITH DEFICIENCIES D UNACCEPTABLE D RECOMMENDED ACTION (Program Owner): The results of this inspection will be captured in the Underground Piping and Tank Program database, and used to establish Reasonable Assurance of Integrity, and/or update future piping inspection priorities and schedules.

FUTURE MONITORING: D The results of this inspection did not identify any problematic areas in the piping that would warrant future monitoring.

PREVENTIVE MAINTENANCE: D None recommended.

)

CORRECTIVE ACTIONS: D

ENGINEERING STANDARD EN*EP*S*002*MUL TI I REV. 0 ENTERGY Buried Piping and Tanks General Visual PAGE 12 OF 12 Inspection ATTACHMENT 7.1 INSPECTION CHECKLIST Sheet 2 of 2 PHOTOGRAPHIC OR VIDEO RECORDS ATTACHED?

YES t8l NO D PROGRAM OWNER PRINT/SIGNIDATE:

R.e. Lee o

)

l1.

I