ML19208D597
| ML19208D597 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Haddam Neck File:Connecticut Yankee Atomic Power Co icon.png |
| Issue date: | 06/28/1979 |
| From: | NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19208D594 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-213-79-10, NUDOCS 7909280686 | |
| Download: ML19208D597 (2) | |
Text
.,\\
^f APPENDIX A NOTICE OF VIOLATION Connecticut Yankee Atomic Power Company Docket No. 50-213 Based on the results of an NRC inspection conducted on March 27-30,1979, it appears that several of your activities were not conducted in full compliance with conditions of your NRC Facility License No. DPR-61 as indicated below.
Items A and B are categorized as Infractions.
Item C is a Deficiency.
A.
10 CFR 50.55a paragraph (g)(4) states in part: "Throughout the service life of a... nuclear power... facility, components... classified as ASME Code 1, 2 and 3 shall meet the requirements... set forth in Section XI of editions of the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code and Addenda..."
The accepted Inservice Inspection / Test Program commits to the 1974 Edition through Summer 1975 Addenda of the ASME Code.
The accepted edition / addenda of the ASME Code Section XI, Subsection IWP-3111 states in part:
...Whenever a reference value or set of values may have been affected by repair or routine servicing of the pump a new reference value or set of values shall be determined or the previous value reconfirmed by an inservice test run prior to or within 96 hours0.00111 days <br />0.0267 hours <br />1.587302e-4 weeks <br />3.6528e-5 months <br /> after return of the pump to normal service..."
Contrary to the above on or about July 27,1978, maintenance, which effected pump reference values on the B High Pressure Safety Injection (HPSI) Pump, was completed with no subsequent inservice test run prior to or within 96 hours0.00111 days <br />0.0267 hours <br />1.587302e-4 weeks <br />3.6528e-5 months <br /> of pump restoration to normal service; and on or about October 10, 1978, maintenance, which affected pump reference values on the B Service Water (SW) Pump, was completed with no sub-sequent inservice test run prior to or within 96 hours0.00111 days <br />0.0267 hours <br />1.587302e-4 weeks <br />3.6528e-5 months <br /> of pump restora-tion to normal service.
The B HPSI Pump was repaired for the replace-ment of a booster pump shaft sleeve and wear ring, and the B SW Pump received a major overhaul.
B.
Technical Specification (TS) 3.22 states in part: "The Fire Suppression Water System (which includes two high pressure fire pumps) shall be operable during all modes of operation..." and TS 4.15. A.1 states in part:
"The Fire Suppression Water System shall be demonstrated operable...At least once per 31 day + 25% on a staggered test basis by starting each pump and operating it Tor 15 minutes with flow..."
Surveillance Procedure SP 5.1-15, Fire Protection System Tests, Revision 4, October 6,1978, implements these TS requirements for the Flectric Driven and Diesel Driven Fire Pumps.
1034 A
7900280G g&t
Appendix A 2
Contrary to the above from January 3 to March 1,1979, the Diesel Driven Fire Pump was not demonstrated operable in accordance with SP 5.1-15.
Further maintenance was conducted on this pump from February 15-27, 1979, and associated documentation did not reflect post mainte-nance testing of this pump in.accordance with SP 5.1-15.
C.
Technical Speci#ication 6.8.1 states in part: " Written procedures and administrative policies shall be... implemented...that meet or exceed the requirements and reconmendations of Section 5.1 and 5.3 of ANSI N18.7-1972..." ANSI N18.7-1972 paragraph 5.1.7 states in part:
... control procedures shall be instituted to assure timely conduct of surveillance testing and appropriate documentation, reporting and evaluation of test results..."
Quality Assurance Procedure QA-1.2 - 11.2, Review of Test Data, Revision 1, June 11,1978, paragraph 6.1 states: " Deficiencies identified during the performance of tests such as failure to meet acceptance criteria shall be reported to the Station Superintendent with a Plant Information Report (PIR). The report will document the correctiva action taken."
Contrary to the above on January 3, and March 1, 1979, the acceptance criteria for a surveillance test was not met, in part, with no subse-quent documentation on a PIR.
Specifically, lube oil pressure for the diesel driven fire pump was recorded high and outside the required range of 45-55 psig per SP 5.1-15, Fire Protection System Testing, Revision 4, October 6, 1978.
As a result of this, documentation of corrective action taken was not accomplished.
1034