ML20081L689

Excerpt from Draft FSAR Section 5.2.8, Inservice Insp Program, & Section 5.2.8.1 Provisions for Access to Rcpb

ML20081L689
Person / Time
Site:	05000000, Shoreham
Issue date:	08/29/1983
From:	LONG ISLAND LIGHTING CO.
To:
Shared Package
ML20081L678	List: ML20081L689 ML20081L700 ML20081L708
References
FOIA-83-386 NUDOCS 8311160392
Download: ML20081L689 (1)

Text

. _ .- . ... - -. _ - -

SNPS-1 FSAR f r

5.2.8 Inservice Inspection Proaram j

The reactor pressure vessel, system piping, pumps, valves, and as defined by the components which require inservice inspection, Code, Section XI and all ASME Boiler and Pressure Vess el addenda thereto, hereinafter called ASME XI, are applicable with the objective of full designed, fabricated, and erected compliance with the requirements of ASME XI and its addenda in six months prior to date of issuance of the construction

+

etfect pennit as stated in Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Pa rt 50.55a, paragraph (g). (10CFR50) Addenda to ASME XI become ef f ective six months af ter date of publication. Thus, for the Shoreham plant, the addenda in effect six months prior to date of of ASME XI issuance of construction permit is the 1971 edition However, the Shoreham design through the Winter 1971 addenda. of the 1971 for inservice inspection is based on requirements l

edition of ASME XI through the Summer 1972 addenda.

5.2.8.1 Provisions for Access to the Peactor Coolant Pressure Boundary

\

The Shoreham plant was already in an advanced stage of of design and ASME XI 4

fabrication when inservice inspection requirements effective. Theref ore, f ull compliance was not practical.

Gtbecame is the intent of the 6esign to comply as fully as practical.

and components which require inspection in accordance r

Systems designed with adequate with the requirements of ASME XI are physical access to allow the required inspection.

Piping systems requiring volumetric ultrasonic inspection are are physically designed so that welds requiring inspection accessible for inspection with ultrasonic equipment.these welds

Access is l provided by leaving adequate space around pipes at

) and by means of renovable insulation and shielding as required.

exa.nination are The surfaces of welds requiring ultrasonic smoothed and contoured to permit effective use of ultrasonic l

i transducers, and pipes adjacent to fittings- are arranged to permit meaningful examination by avoidance of irregular or surface

' visual geometries. Piping systems reauiring surface examination are designed to allow access and visibility adequate for performance of such examinations.

The following areas of the reactor vessel are available for visual and/or nondestructive inservice examination

1. Full penetration pressure containing welds in the j

following areas:

I I

Vessel shell external surface.

I Reactor vessel nor le exterior surf aces.

Closure head inside and outside surfaces.

h92830829 5..'-39 HAFNER83-386 pg  ;

g.n uc b-jeg UNITED STATES n NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

. ,E g

REGION 1 631 PARK AVENUE Ac[

C; ' $. #

D KING OF PRUSSIA, PEN"tYLVANIA 19406

%, ' ,o

y. *s .* ,

Docket No. 50-322 1980 OCT 8 Long Island Lighting Company

. ATTN: Mr. Andrew W. Wofford Vice President 175 East Old Country Road Hicksville, New York 11801 Gentlemen:

Subject:

Inspection 50-322/80-14 This refers to the inspection conducted by Mr. J. C. Higgins of this office on August 11-September 14, 1980 at Shoreham Nuclear Power Station, Shoreham, New York of activities authorized by NRC License No. CPPR-95 and to the discussions of our findings held by Mr. Higgins with Mr. Gerecke and other members of your staff periodically during the inspection.

Areas examined during this inspec; ion are described in the Office of Inspection and Enforcement inspection Report which is enclosed with this letter. Within these areas, the. inspection consisted of selective examinations of procedures O

and representative records, i.nterviews with personnel, and observations by the inspector.

Based on the results of this inspection, it appears that one of your activities was not conducted in full compliance with NRC requirements, as set.forth in the Notice of Violation, enclosed herewith as Appendix A. This item of noncompliance has been categorized into the levels as described in our correspondence to you dated December 31. 1974. This notice is sent to you pursuant to the provisions of Section 2.201 of the NRC's " Rules of Practice," Part 2, Title'10, Code of Federal Regulations. Although Section 2.201 requires you to submit to this office, within 20 days of your receipt of this notice, a written statement of explanation, we note that this item of noncompliance was ' corrected prior to the completion of our inspection, and therefore, no response with respect to this matter is required.

P J

y F D P-

DCT 8 1980 Long Island Lighting Company- 2 r,

In accordance with Section 2.790 of the NRC's " Rules of Practice", Part 2 U Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations, a copy of this letter and the. enclosures will be placed in the NRC's Public Document Room. If this report contains any information that you (or your contractor) believe to be proprietary, it is necessary that you make a written application within 20 days to this office to withhold such information from public disclosure. Any such application must be accompanied by an affidavit executed by the owner of the information, which identifies the document or part sought to be withheld, and which contains a statement of reasons which addresses with specificity the items which will be considered by the Commission as listed in subparagraph (b) (4) of Section 2.790.

The information sought to be withheld shall be incorporated as far as possible into a separate part of the affidavit. If we do not hear from you in this regard within the specified period, the rcoort will be pla ed in tne Public Document Room.

Should you have any questions concerning this inspection, we will be pleased to discuss them with you. l Sincerely, c -

Eldon J. Brunner, Chief Reactor Operations and Nuclear Support Branch

Enclosures:

l l

1. Appendix A, Motice of Violation

2. Office of Inspection and Enforcement Inspection Report Number 50-?22/80-14

)

cc w/encls:

J. P. Novarro, Project Manager Edward M. Barrett, Esq.

Edward J. Walsh, Esq. l T. F. Gerecke, Manager, Engineering QA Department bcc w/encls:

IE Mail S Files (For Anorcoriate Distribution)

Central Files Public Pocu ent Room (enn) local Public Doctrent %on (LonO Nuclear Safety Information Center (?! SIC)

Technical Infornation Center (TIC)

"Eq:I Readina "com state of New York James C. Hiecins, %sident Inspector L. Narrow, RCTJS nranch O a '> i ' s o a . ""' m"

9. Gallo, RPI

U.S. NUCLEAR RECULATORY COMMISSION -

0FFICE OF INSPECTICN AND ENFORCEMENT

'% ~.

O .

Region I ,

'J.?.x 50-322 /80-14 rep 0f.;0  %.f .f; Ocy, 8 50-322 4 Docket No.  % ,,4 'n.,,

Pricrity -- Category B License No. CPPR-95 Licensee: Lor.c Island Lichtinc Comoanv 175 East' Old Country Road Hicksville. New York 11801 .

Facility Name: Shoreham Nuclear Power Station, Unit 1 Inspection at: Shoreham, New York Inspection concu ed: August 11 - September 14, 1980 Inspectors: /' _w /d / i' d cate signec

.' C'. pins, Resident Inspector

~

eate signed O

care signed

[ /0 .FC)

Approved by: __

tade signed fi. B. Kistb, Chief, Reactor Projects Section No. 4, RO&NS Branch .

Inscection Su=arv:

Inspactions on: August 11-September 14,1980 (Inspection Report No. 50-322/80-14)

Areas Inspected: Routine onsite regular, backshift and weekend inspections by the resident inspector (110. inspection hours) of work activities, preoperational testing,

and plant staff activities including

tours of the facility; test witnessing; comparison of as-built plant to FSAR descriptions; review of test.and operating procedures, review of IE Bulletins and Circulars; review of p' ant drawings; review of implementation of preoperational program; and, followup on previous inspection.

findings. -

Results: Of the eight areas inspected, no items of noncomplianc.e were identified in seven areas and one 'in theeighth area (infraction - installation of vent lines and valves without an authorizing E & DCR, paragraph.12.b).

7

- a 79g-Region I For:.12 I (Rev. April 77) 4 L: -

l

~

APPENDIX A NOTICE OF VIOLATION Long Island Lighting Company DocketNo.50$22 l ,

This refers to the inspection conducted by a representative of the Region I (Philadelphia) office at the Shoreham Nuclear Power Station, Shoreham, New York, of activities authorized by NRC Construction Permit No. CPPR-95.

During this inspection conducted on August 11-September 14, 1980, the following apparent item of noncompliance was identified. This item is an infraction.

Criterion III of Appendix B of 10 CFR 50 states, in part, that " Measures shall be established for the identification and control of design interfaces and for coordination among participating design organizations. These measures shall include the establishment of procedures among participating design organizations for the review, approval, release, distribution, and revision of documents involving design interfaces". The Shoreham Nuclear Power Station FSAR Section 17.1.3A requires that organizations having design responsibility establish written procedures for control of their activities. Stone & Webster (S&W) Engineering Assurance Procedure 6.3, paragraph 2.1 states that Engineering & Design Coordination Reports (E&DCR's) shall be used to document changes to S&W drawings. Courter & Company, Inc. Quality Assurance Procedure QAP 15.3, paragraph 3.2.a states that the designer shall determine if a field l change constitutes a deviation from the latest approved engineering design 'i and process ?.o E&DCR if required.

Contrary to the above vent lines and vent valves not specified on the S&W drawing (FM-25A) were installed in three locations of the High Pressure l Coolant Injection System without an authorizing E&DCR to modify the drawing.

[

t i

i t

O cp p 4 i

q

DETAILS

1. Persons Contacted _

J. Carney, Site Engineering Representative (S&W)

D. Durand, 0QA. Engineer (L)

T. Gerecke, QA Manager (L)

R. Gutmann, Maintenance Engineer (L)

J. Kelly, Field QA Manager (L)

W. Hunt, Systems Superintendent (L)

W. Klein, Lead Startup Engineer (L)

M. Milligan, Project Engineer (L)

J. Morin, Senior Licensing Engineer (L)

E. Nicholas, Section Supervisor, FQA (L)

J. Novarro, Project Manager (L)

R. Perra, Chief Inspection Supervisor (S&W)

J. Rivello, Plant P ager (L)

W. Steiger, Chief eratingEngineer(L)

J. Taylor, Startup Manager (L)

D. Terry, Lead Startup Engineer (L)

L - Long Island Lighting Company S&W - Stone and Webster The inspector also interviewed other license and contractor personnel during the course of the inspection including management, clerical, maintenance, operations, engineering, testing, quality assurance, and construction personnel.

2. Previous Inspection Item Update (open) Unresolved Item (322/80-0a-04): Vendor Procedures: The licensee's representative stated that any vendor procedure used to. satisfy FSAR preoperational test requirements would be required to be reviewed by the Joint Test Group (JTG) by commitments directly in the FSAR. This -

was emphasized to all Lead Startup Engineers by a memo from the Startup Manager dated 9/11/80. This item remains open pending review by the JTG of the Carbon and HEPA filter test procedures discussed in the item.

(closed) Unresolved Item (322/80-04-05): Preoperational Test (PT)

Procedure for Control Roam Air Conditioning (CRAC) System: The various flow rates discussed in this item will be tested via procedure CG-000.034-1.

Revision 1 to PT.412.001 was issued to incorporated the other concerns, namely a specific acceptance criteria, test of the automatic start feature of Fan 25 and a demonstration of the capability to manually close certain valves within the time frame assumed in dose calculations given in the FSAR.

O

- - - - - . . . . . . . . - m. - w.

...,,.,5-3

3. Plant Tour O The inspector conducted periodic tours of accessible areas in the plant V during normal, backshift, and weekend hours. During these tours, the following specific items were evaluated:

-- Hot Work. Adequacy of fire prevention / protection measures used.

-- Fire Equipment. Operability and evidence of periodic inspection of fire suppression equipment.

-- Housekeeping. Minimal accumulations of debris and maintenance of required cleanness levels of systems under or foilowing testing.

-- Component Tagging. Implementation and observance of equipment tagging for safety, equipment protection, and jurisdiction.

-- Instrumentation. Adequate protection for installed instrumentation.

-- Logs. Completeness of logs maintained.

-- Securi ty. Adequate site construction security.

-- Prohibited Items. Observations to determine m smoking in restricted areas and no alcoholic beverages on site.

-- Weld Rod Control. Observations to determine weld rod was being controlled in accordance with site procedures.

C- .

Minor problem areas in weld rod control and housekeeping were discussed with licensee rapresentatives throughout the inspection.

No items of noncompliance were identified.

4. Maintainability The inspector reviewed a letter from A. W. Wofford to C. Davis, J. Oye and J. Gum:nersall titled "Shoreham Maintainability" dated 3/16/79, which sets up a Maintainability Task Force. The purpose of this task force is to identify via system and area walk-downs potential maintenance problems.

This is currently a coordinated effort between LILCO, Stone & Webster, and General Electric. To date about 1600 items have been identified. The licensee tracks these items on a computer and dispositions them as the program proceeds. A number of equipment modifications have already been completed.

During plant tours the inspector noted that valves 1821

• HV-055A and B, eighteen inch manually operated valves in the feedwater lines,tre located in a potentially significant radiation area in the primary containment and would require many minutes for an operator to manually operate them. These I valves are used for maintenance isolation purposes. The inspector questioned whether the concept of maintaining radiation doses as low as (m,! reasonably achievable (ALARA) had been considered when making these valves manually operated. This item is designated as inspector follow item no. (322/80-14-01).

i L