IR 05000354/1985015

Insp Rept 50-354/85-15 on 850318-22.No Violation Noted. Major Areas inspected:safety-related HVAC & safety-related Pipe Support & Restraint Sys

ML20129G545
Person / Time
Site:	Hope Creek
Issue date:	05/30/1985
From:	Alba A, Bettenhausen L, Gaudino M, Kortas A, Manol K, Kamal Manoly NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I)
To:
Shared Package
ML20129G520	List: IR 05000354/1985015 ML20129G516
References
50-354-85-15, NUDOCS 8506070306
Download: ML20129G545 (15)

Text

{{#Wiki_filter:I .

.

U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

REGION I

Report N /85-15 Docket N License N CPPR-120 Priority -- Category A Licensee: Public Service Electric Gas Company P. O. Box 236 Hancock's Bridge, New Jersey Facility Name: Hope Creek GeneratingStation Inspection At: Hancock's Bridge, New Jersey Inspection Conducte : March 18 - 22, 1985 Inspectors: . /I K./#pa'ndfy, L ad 96 actor Engineer ' 3![[ dite tk 03 t[$ d' ate A./K6rpl,'ectorEngineer k < o t $ $98NS v M/ Gafdinol Reactor' Engineer dite Q . a n C+ w, vac

    '/ Wath A. Alba,Reactorffgineer Approved by-  -

k L.Elettenhausen,Cifief, Y!8# dite I Operations Branch, DRS Inspection Summary: Inspectior. Report No. 50-354/85-15 on March 18 - 22, 1985 Areas Inspected: Routine, unannounced inspection by four regional based inspectors of licensee activities related to installation of:

*

Safety Related Heating, Ventilating, and Air Conditioning Systems

* Safety Related Pipe Support and Restraint Systems The inspection also included a review of the Pre-Service Inspection Program (PSI) and an evaluation of the licensee's action on previously identified open item related to Seismic II/I review. The inspection involved 104 inspector-hours on site and 9 inspector-hours of in-office inspectio Results: No violations were identifie k$

g

.
.

DETAILS Persons Contacted Public Service Electric and Gas Co (PSE&G) A. Barnabei, Principal QA Engineer

*R. Griffith, Principal QA Engineer
*R. Donges, Lead QA Engineer R. Robinson, QA Engineer M. Metcalf, Principal Startup QA Engineer D. Evans, QA Principal Startup QA Engineur P. Drucker, QA Principal Startup QA Engineer
*A. Sternberg, Acting for Manager QA E&C
*W. O'Donnell, Chief Mechanical Engineer Bechtel Power Corporation (BPC)
*G. Goldsmith, Resident Engineering, Mechanical
*A. Matyas, Resident Engineering, Civil
*W. Goebel, QA Engineer
* Mourer, Manager of Construction
* Griffin, Project Field Engineer
*T. Ferenchak, Assistant Resident Project Engineer U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
*S. Chaudhary, Senior Resident Inspector
* Denotes personnel present at exit meetin . Licensee Action on Previous Inspection Findings (0 pen) Unresolved item (354/84-10-01) Seismic II/I Program The discrepancies identified in Inspection Report 84-10 were related to inconsistencies contained in the documents controlling the walkdown and QC inspection of activities associated with the Seismic II/I Progra This item was originally identified as an inspector follow-up item; however, after further evaluation by Region I the item has been changed to an un-resolved item. Based on discussions with cognizant licensee and Bechtel representatives, the following are resolutions to specific items listed in the same order that they were identified in report 84-1 . Section 3.2 addressing scheduling walkdowns in specification G-052 for the seismic II/I evaluation program has been revised to specify additional walkdown prior to turnove In addition, it provides for review of new Bechtel installations and implementation of the II/I walkdown program following turnover prior to licensee acceptance of design responsibilit This revision is acceptabl ~

q ,

.

.z . Attachment #1 to G-052 has been revised t'o require a QC inspection
  -

of' project engineering activities regarding the identification of

<  Seismic II/I interactions and their resolution. This revision is acceptabl > : This concern was related'to the exception of certain installations   '

from the II/I inspection on the basis that they are not installed in areas containing safety related items. HVAC installations under M-635 specifications was cited as an exampl ~Section 2.3.3 of'G-052 specification (, revision 2) addresses this concern with regard to non-category I commodities which are installed throughout the Q-buildings. It requires that.these commodities be- < supported by. hangers designed to category I criteria-in accordance with_ design criteria D7.2. :It also requires QC inspection of these 1 installations to insure compliance with the design. The requirements-in'the specifications were found to be adequate with regard to'the '

  ' design of supports for non-category I commodities. However, it did

not provide an assurance that spacing of supports for non-category I HVAC ductwork is such that it precludes collapse of the ducts between-

   -

support points during an SSE event due to excessive spans. This item-remains open pending licensee evaluation and NRC revie . The inconsistency between specification G-052 forithe Seismic I.I/I' evaluation program and the design criteria for seismic qualifi-cation-D7.9 as related to the generic exemption of instrument lines-and trays from II/I concerns is still unresolved. The licensee in-dicated that the inconsistency will be resolved by deleting the apparent implication in D7.9 regarding II/I concern for instrument _ lines and tray This item _ remains ope S' . QC involvement in inspection of stairways and runners in areas containing safety-related equipments was not apparent. Section 2.3.6 of specification G-052 has generically exempted them from seismic II/I interactions unless specifically identified by walk-down teams. The calculations which provides the basis for this conclusion.were not complete during this inspection. _This item remains-open_pending completion of the calculations and NRC revie . Consideration of instrument _ lines, supports and trays in Seismic II/I concerns was addressed. Revision 2'of Section 3.3.4 to speci_fication G-052 provides clarification regarding the use of two hole machined-block clamps en tubing supports. The-revised section indicates that-the P&ID is the only source for Q determination of. instrument tubin Though all Category I. tubing is stainless steel supported by two hole machined-block, some non-category I tubing is stainless steel sup-ported. Similarly, the. lack of stainless steel tubing in two hole

   ~

machined-block bolted clamps indicates that the line is non-category

        .
.

L- - ,. , - . - . , - , - . - , . . , . - - . - . . . - . . - . - . . - - . - . . . . . - - - ,

     .

+-

.
.

' 3 The specification also indicates that some instrument tubing is tagged as "Q" on the receiving or transmitting end, though in fact they are not "Q" since they have been downgraded subsequent to taggin The revision of the specification was acceptabl . Clarification was required regarding a note in paragraph 3.5.2b of G-052 (Rev. A) concerning the acceptability of components and supports on basis of QSH designation on isos and hangers. The licensee will include this clarification in the next revision of specification G-05 This item remains ope . Implementation of administrative controls for these cases involving Seismic II/I interaction with no practical hardware solution will be accomplished by communicating to the licensee the necessity and nature of these controls. Bechtel will track these items through open record sheets until they are closed by a " summarizing letter." This was addressed in section 3.5.8 of specification G-052. This action was determined to be acceptabl . The establishment and implementation of Bechtel's QA audit of Seismic

' II/I program activities is addressed in the Quality Assurance Master Audit Plan. The first audit is scheduled for March 29, 1985. This action was found acceptabl . Bechtel has conducted a sampling program to determine the adequacy , 'of existing non safety conduit clamps and some raceway supports installations for Seismic II/I concerns. Generic calculations are ' being performed to address the qualifications of these interactions.

L l The next revision of design criteria D7.2 will incorporate the re-L ' sults of this review. Bechtel has also indicated that future elec-trical installation will receive QC sampling inspection. This item will remain open pending incorporation of the above commitments in

applicable procedures and NRC review of the revised document . QC sampling inspection for generic acceptance of certain II/I items will be addressed in the next revision of design criteria D 7.2.

! This item remains ope ' 12 . Generic exemption of certain non-safety commodities from Seismic II/I concerns is addressed in Section 2.3.6 of specification G-052. The calculations which substantiate these exemptions were not complete during the inspection. -The licensee indicated that the calculation will be completed in April,198 This item will remain ope . __ . _ . - . _ -

.
.

13. An inconsistency was identified between paragraph 2.3.3.d of specifi-cation G-052 and paragraph 4.4.1.f of procedure D7.3 (criteria.for plant separation) as related the exemption of ladders and handrails from Seismic II/I concerns and QC inspection thereafter. Bechtel indicated that the configurations which will require modification are those which can neither be grouped and covered by the generic calcu-lations nor qualified by specific analysis for Seismic II/I concern Bechtel indicated that revision No. 3 of specification G-052 will cover this area and resolve this inconsistenc This item remains ope . The inconsistency between the design criteria for field routed pro-cedure D7.9 and specification G-052 regarding areas inside the plant not containing safety related equipment was partially addressed in revision 2 of section 2.1.3 to specification G-052. Revision of procedure D7.9 incorporating the changes in G-052 were incomplete during this inspection. Other concerns related to non safety related HVAC supports are addressed in Section 2.3.3b and 3.3.7 of revision 2 to G-052; however, this item cannot be fully resolved without the qualification of non safety HVAC ductwork as discussed in item 3 above. This item remains open pending revision of the procedure and completion of the qualification of non-Q HVAC installation . Qualification of non-seismic raceway installations regarding the adequacy of support spacing to preclude failure during seismic event will be documented by the licensee for NRC review. This concern is similar to that addressed in item 3 above for non-safety HVAC instal-lation.

" This item remains ope . A discrepancy was identified in the requirement for spacing of Q-tray supports in procedure D7.9 and specification J-825. The licensee indicated that this inconsistency will be resolved in the new revision of procedure D This item remains ope . The first concern is related to the identification of instrumentation drawings with sections flagged as Q3 or Q SH which imply QC inspection where as instrumentation QC did not have PQCI to inspect for II/I instrumentation installations. The licensee indicated that this concern will be explicitly addressed in the new revision of pro-cedure D The second concern which is related to tubing support installations specified in paragraph 3.3.4 of G-052 and their QC inspection, has already been covered in item #6 above. This item will remain open pending the issuance of the new revision of procedure D7.9 and NRC revie . - . _ . -

c

,
.

1 This concern is related to the scheduled lead time of sixteen weeks for Seismic II/I walkdowns before turnover. This concern has been addressed in revision #1 to Section 3.2 of specification G-052 which requires another- final walkdown to be conducted, to identify possible new interaction items, at approximately two weeks before the area turnover. This was found to be acceptabl . Facility Tour The inspectors conducted several facility tours which included the reactor building for observation of the installation activities in the reactor pressure vessel and the torus. The tour also included the control build-ing areas No. 25 & 26 at elevations 54'-0", 124'-0" and 155'-0" to observe safety related HVAC installations. The inspectors also observed house-keeping and cleanliness controls, protection of components, piping and systems, and work in progres No violations or unacceptable conditions were identifie . Safety Related Heating, Ventilation, And Air Conditioning (HVAC) Systems 4.1 Objective The objective of this inspection was to determine whether installed and Quality Control (QC) accepted safety-related HVAC installation conformed to engineering design, regulatory requirements and licensee commitment .2 General HVAC systems are designed by Bechtel Power Corp. (BPC). The sub-contractor for HVAC system ductwork and duct hangers procurement, fabrication and installation is W-H Constructors. QC inspection of installed hardware is the responsibility of BPC field QC. Approxi-mately 15% of HVAC installations remain to be installed and/or inspected by QC. This includes 770 hangers and 1877 sections of ductwork. Completion of the installations is predicted to be by August, 198 As a result of the large number of non-conformance reports written by QC (approximately 600 NCR's between July, 1982 and January, 1983) against completed HVAC installations, BPC field engineering is per-forming an initial walkdown inspection prior to that being performed by Q BPC prepares HVAC area drawings (P-Dwgs) which identify the location and size of ductwork in .the building in addition to hanger's type and location. The subcontractor prepares the erection and lay-out drawings which are then reviewul by BPC engineers to verify the accuracy and compatibility of the subcontractor drawings to the P-Dwgs. BPC field engineers document their walkdown inspection on inspection cards which are used for controlling, tracking and docu-

l'

.

l l l

menting ductwork and duct hanger inspections. QC-inspection of HVAC installation is then performed utilizing the inspection cards, sub-contractor layout drawings and the P-dwg The licensee (PSE&G) conducts surveillance of contractor and sub-contractor activities on site. The licensee performs inspection and surveillance of site contractors in addition to audits of engineer-ing and construction activities. The licensee also performs evaluation of the effectiveness of the QA program through the utilization of the trend analysis, program. All of the above activities are prescribed in the licensee Quality Assurance Manual Instruction .3. Document Review Applicable sections of the following documents were reviewed in part to verify that applicable regulatory requirements, design basis and FSAR commitments for safety related HVAC system supports, are cor-- rectly translated into specifications, procedures and instruction The following documents were reviewed in part:

*

Specification No. 10855-M-735(Q) for HVAC Ductwork and Equipment installation

*

Specification No. 10855-C-136(Q) for Installation of Expansion-Type Anchors

*

Drawing No. C-0388-0 for Seismic Category I HVAC duct support standards

* Specific work plan / procedure (SWP/P-M-104) for HVAC ductwork Hangers Installation, Inspection and Documentation
*

Specific work plan / procedure (SWP/P-C-4) for installation of Expansion Type Concrete Anchor, Grouted-In Anchors, Undercut Anchors, and Through Bolt * Bechtel's Nuclear QA Manual

*

Bechtel's Construction QC Manual

* Quality control instructions:
 --

Project QC Instruction No. 10855/SM-1.03 for Heating, , ' Ventilation and Air Conditioning Contractor Surveillance Inspectio Project QC Instruction No. 10855/SM-1.03-1 for Inspection of HVAC Hanger Installatio Project QC Instructions No. 10855/SM-1.03-2 for Inspection of HVAC Ductwork Installation

.

4 e -w

- t .

.

 *

Specification No. 10855-G-14 Rev. 6 for General Project Require-ments for Allowable Scope for Field Change Notice No violations were identified in this revie .4 Walkdown Inspection of HVAC Ductwork and Hanger Installations A walkdown inspection was made of HVAC installations in the control building area #26 at elevation 54'-0" and area #25 at elevation 175'-0".

The ductwork and hanger installations inspected, and document / drawing used for the walkdown are tabulated below: HGR. N HGR. Doc./Dw Ductwork Line N Ductwork Dw HGR No. 77 NCR-WH-376 1-GK-419-SNM P-9261/SM-261 HGR N FCN-HC346 1-GK-419-5NM P-9261/SM-261 HGR No. 10 FCN-HC345 1-GK-419-5NM P-9261/SM-261 HGR No. 11 FCN-HC348 & 1-GK-419-5NM P-9261/SM-261 Dwg. C-0388-0 HGR No. 78 FCN-349 & 1-GK-419-5NM P-9261/SM-261 Dwg. C-0388-0 HGR No. 79 SDDR-2144 & 1-GK-419-5NM P-9261/SM-261 Dwg. C-0388-0 H-1 Insp. Card N GK-410-5NM P-9256/SM-256 CC-084 & Dw Dwg. C-0388-0 H-2 Insp. Card N GK-410-SNM P-9256/SM-256 CC-161, Dw C-0388-0 & FCR FCR-W1827 H-3 Insp. Card N GK-410-SNM P-9256/SM-256 CC-090 & Dw C-0388-0 H-4 Insp. Card N GK-410-SNM P-9256/SM-256 CC-094 & Dw C-0388-0 H-6 Insp. Card N GK-410-SNM P-9256/SM-256 CC-096 & Dw C-0388-0 & SDD12-1705 H-7 'Insp. Card N GK-410-SNM P-9256/SM-256 CC-192 & Dw C-0388-0 H-9 Insp. Card N GK-410-SNM P-9256/SM-256 CC-109, Dw C-0388-0 & FCN-C-14222 H-10 Insp. Card N GK-410-SNM P-9256/SM-256 CC-083 & Dw rn: , l

.

The verification of ductwork and hanger installations included the follow-ing attributes:

* Checking actual configuration against hanger drawing, including dimensions;
* Checking directions in which hangers restrain ductwork and maximum clearances between ductwall and hangers;
*

Checking connections to the proper structure;

* Checking sizes of weld on hangers and ductwork welded stiffeners and joints
* Checking baseplate dimensions and location of structural attachment-on the baseplate;
*

Checking baseplate bolts for tightness, edge distance, and minimum bolt embedment for a representative sample of anchor bolts;

* Checking ductwork for uniformity of cross section and freedom of holes, dents and wrinkles;
*

Checking for identification markings on ducts as per specification M-735(Q) requirements;

* Checking for proper Unistrut (or equivalent) member sizes and bolt identification or hangers; and a

Checking for tolerance and gaps between hanger baseplates and concrete wall No violations were identifie .5 Review of QA/QC Documents The inspector reviewed the following documents relating to the licensee's QA activities:

* QAI 5-1, Quality Assurance Manual
* QAI 10-1, contractors site inspection and surveillance
* QAI 10-3, surveillance program
* QAI 2-16, Trend Analysis Program
* QAI 18-2, Audit Plans and Checklists
 .___   _ F .
.

The inspector also reviewed the following Surveillance Reports issued by licensee's QA of on-site contractor regarding HVAC activities:

*

Report #CC84-423 (December 17-28, 1984): Testing activities, fire damper inspection and storage

*

Report #CC84-410 (December 3-7,1984): Huck bolting and expansion anchor bolt qualification

* Report #CC84-420 (December 10-14,1984): Inprocess activities and storage
*

Report #CC85-001 (December 31, 1984 -' January 11,1985): Leak testing

*

Report #CC85-004 (January 8, 1985): Storage and In place pro-tection of HVAC (installed)

* Report #CC-85-009 (January 18,1985): Weld rod issue room
* Report #CC-85-18 (February 15 - 26, 1985): - Surveillance of weld rod rooms No violations were identifie .6 Findings Ductwork for HVAC line No.1-GK-410-SNM was found to be buckled in the bottom surface adjacent to hanger No. H-9. The maximum buckling was measured as 5/8" at mid-distance of the identified surface. Tolerance for width and height of rectangular ducts is addressed in section 7.3.2 of specification M-735(Q) and is limited to't inch. Bechtel QC indicated that their inspection of installed ductwork did not include the limitations for waviness, bulging, wrinkles and dents as required by the above specification. This was attributed to the resolution in FCN
 #M703 which was issued to address this subject. The engineering disposition in the FCN states a required revision in paragraph 7.3.2 of the specification to indicate that sheet metal should be free from holes, dents and wrinkles at the time of instal-lation. However, at time of acceptance, the condition of the duct shall be such that minor dents or wrinkles would not affect the structural integrity nor the functional requirement a_s determined by Bechtel Engineering. Though the FCN number ap-pears on the cover sheet of revision #10 of the specification, its content was not incorporated in the body of the document as would be required since the FCN was not voided or supersede Additionally, a remark on the FCN indicated that specification change was not required, and that the condition of the duct (minor dents and wrinkles) at the time of installation and acceptance will be left to the judgment of field engineerin . , ~ _ _ _ . . _ _ _ __

C .

*

l l

QC personnel interpreted the remark as relieving them from in-specting this attribute though the procedure did not speci-fically define miner dents and wrinkles in ductwork or indicate that its determination was left to the judgment of field engine-ering. The licensee was informed of the concern regarding the apparent conflicting statements within the FCN, and between the FCN and the specification, in addition to the fact that QC did not inspect ductwork for wrinkles, bulging and dents, on basis of the FCN resolutio This item is unresolved pending licensee response and NRC review (354/85-15-01).

2. The following two concerns were identified during the review of the HVAC Duct Support Standard (Drawing No. C-0388-01): General requirements item #3.12(H) provides an installation tolerance of 1/8" between the duct wall and the support steel when Huck-Bolt fasteners are used in the connectio Since the bolts are installed very close, the duct corner (approximately 115 inches), a deformation of the duct wall will occur when pulled by the fastener a distance of 1/8".

The inspector identified his concern to the licensee re-garding the qualification of the duct wall for the anti-cipated local yielding during installation as a result of this tolerance, and the subsequent effect on the duct when subjected to seismic loads during operatio The standard did not set tolerance limitations on perpen-dicularity between HVAC support frames and ductwork center-line. The out-of perpendicularity, if exceeded, will result in a redistribution of applied seismic loads from ductwork to supporting frames. As a result, this could lead to an overstress of supporting frame The abuve concerns are unresolved pending licensee response and NRC review (354/85-15-02). Construction scaffolding was found in contact and leaning against HVAC ductwork line #1-GK-419-5NM and hanger No. H-11 in the control building at elevation 54'0" (area 25).

Control of scaffolding installation in areas containing QC ac-cepted ductwork installations and before turnover to the 11-censee was not addressed in surveillance procedures. The lack ' of control of construction scaffolding could result in transmit-ting excessive loads and subsequent damage to HVAC ductwork and hangers which are already accepted by Q This item is unresolved pending licensee response and NRC review (354/85-15-03).

. . .

. . .   . . - . - .

W L

..:
.
-

4 .~ :QC inspection of gaps between HVAC hanger baseplates and con-crete wall surfaces-is limited by the. Duct Support Standard (Dwg..No. C-0388-0) to the-area in proximity of the anchor

.. . bolts. Ignoring possible gaps at. center of plate in excess of the limits set in the criteria would be acceptable if the struc-tural attachments to baseplates were subject exclusively to
'

axial!(tension and compression) loads. Bechtel Engineering Lindicated that.this was the case since all structural members-are. treated as' pinned connections at the boundary, thus not transmitting any moments to-the baseplate l This assumption does not agree with.the actual installations - where structural members are typically welded all around to the baseplate. Fixed or rigid connection between the member and the baseplate would induce end moments which will be transmitted to the baseplate. These moments would be particularly significant for frames resisting lateral seismic loads without an axial brace. ' Applied' moments on baseplates with or without gaps .would result in. increased bolt tension loads which could exceed al-

  .lowable-design loads and reduce required factor-of safety. I t ..
     '
  .could also result in. increased baseplate stresses beyond allow-able limit This item is unresolved pending_ licensee response and NRC review (354/85-15-04).

Preservice Inspection (PSI) Program Review

^

Purpose and Scope

 :The inspector reviewed the licensee's Preservice Inspection Program for conformance. to regulatory requirements regarding the qualification-and certification of various . levels of nondestructive testing personne The program guidelines applicable to each nondestructive examination method were examined considering. education, training, experience, exami-nation and certification requirement .1 Reference Documents The following references were:used to review the program guidelines:
 * ASME B & PV Code, 1977 Edition through Summer 1978 Addenda, Section IWA-2300 Qualifications of Nondestructive examination-
 - personnel

 * iSouthWest Research Institute Nuclear Quality Assurance Program Manual, NQAP 11-1, Revision 2, Special Process Control
 *-

American Society for Nondestructive Testing recommended practice No. SNT-TC-1A,-1975 Edition

r1 ,

.

5.2 Inspection Areas The essential program elements examined included:

 * 1 Acceptable levels of education and appropriate trainee experience and classroom training criteria
 * General and specific examination topics and number of related questions
 * Examination grading factors
 * .Re-examination, certification, re-certification and certification termination policy No violations were identifie .0 Safety Related Piping and Pipe Supports 6.1 Purpose and Scope A sample of safety-related piping and pipe supports were selected to determine through independent inspection whether the installation of these components are in compliance with licensee commitments. The inspector performed a walkdown of the Residual Heat Removal (RHR)

System B-loop from Heat Exchanger No. BE-205 to the rector pressure vessel penetration. System Isometric drawings were used to trace the system and to identify equipment, supports, piping spools and field welds as installed. Hangers approved by Quality Control-were in-spected using appropriate pipe support detail drawings. The supports were reviewed in part for appropriate design dimensions, weld require-ments and support orientatio .2 References The following references were used in the walkdown:

 * 1-P-BC-01, Rev. 18, System Isometric, RHR Pumps B&D discharg * 1-P-BC-02, Rev. 13, System Isometric, RHR System /Inside Drywell.

, * 1-P-BC-004-H09, Rev. 5, Pipe Support, Reactor Building, RHR Pumps B&D Discharge

 * 1-P-BC-004-H68, Rev. 1, Pipe Support, Reactor Building, RHR Pumps B&D Discharge
 * 1-P-BC-004-H69, Rev. 1, Pipe Support, Reactor Building, RHR Pumps B&D Discharge

.

P .

.

*

1-P-BC-004-H70, Rev. 1, Pipe Support, Reactor Building, RHR Pumps

 'B&D Discharge
*

1-P-BC-004-H71, Rev. 2, Pipe Support, Reactor Building, RHR Pumps B&D Discharge

*

1-P-BC-004-H72, Rev. 3, Pipe Support, Reactor Building, RHR Pumps B&D Discharge

*

1-P-BC-004-H74, Rev.1, Pipe Support, Reactor Building, RHR Pumps B&D Discharge

*

1-P-BC-004-H75, Rev. 3, Pipe Support, Reactor Building, RHR Pumps B&D Discharge

*

1-P-BC-004-H76, Rev. 2, Pipe Support, Reactor Building, RHR Pumps B&D Discharge

*

1-P-BC-015-H04, Rev. 4, Pipe Support, Reactor Building, RHR System / Inside Drywell

*

1-P-BC-015-H06, Rev. 3, Pipe Support, Reactor Building, RHR System / Inside Drywell

* Hope Creek Generating Station, FSAR Volume 7, Section 5.4.7, RHR System a M51-1, Rev. 11, P&ID, RHR, Sheet 1&2
* Technical Specification 10855-P-410(Q), Rev. 15, " Installation, Inspection and Documentation of Pipe Supports in Nuclear Service" ,

6.3 Observations Rigid and dynamic type pipe supports with various degrees of acces-sibility were visually examined in part for the following:

* signs of corrosion or deterioration a presence of foreign materials or structures that mr.y obstruct component operation
* deformation of plates, rods and connecting joints
* indications in weld surfaces a dimensions and clearances were within design criteria and spect-fication tolerances No violations were identifie r
.
..

- Unresolved Items Unresolved items are matters about which more information is required in order to ascertain whether they are acceptable items, violations or deviations. Unresolved items are discussed in Section 2 and 4.6 of this repor . Exit Interview
 :During the course of this inspection, meetings were held with licensee representatives to discuss the inspection scope and findings. No written material was given to the license The inspectors met with licensee representatives (denoted in Paragraph 1)

at the conclusion of the inspection of March 22, 1985. The inspector summarized the scope and findings of the inspection.

t-

         .

l r i t'

, - . , , - , . , - , . , - - . , . - - - . . , _ . . , , ,, .-n g --m. ,n. .-, -e - - - - - , , , , , , , , ,-,,n., ,

}}