IR 05000003/1974009
| ML20050C550 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Indian Point  |
| Issue date: | 09/22/1974 |
| From: | Davis A, Fasano A, Oberg C NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20050C548 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-003-74-09, 50-247-74-11, 50-3-74-9, NUDOCS 8204090049 | |
| Download: ML20050C550 (37) | |
Text
.
.
..
-.
,,,
' '... -
.
...
,
-
.
.
,
- -
.
.
,
U.S. ATO:!IC E :ERCY CC:2:ISSION
.
D.IRECTORATC OF REC'JLATORY OPERATIO :S
.
REGIO:: I 50-03 RO Inspec tion Report !!o:
50-03/74-09, 50-247/74-11 Docket No:
50-247 DPR-5
-
,
Licensec:
Consolidated Edison Cornany of New York Inc.
License No:
'f-
4 Irving Place Priority:
New York, "eu York 10r03 C&B Category:
_.,_
,
Indian Point 1, Buchanan, New York Location:
Indian Point 2, ibchanan, ' cu York
,
'
PUR 615 !n:th - Unit 1
-
Typ$e of Licensec:
PWR 873 :31e - Unit 2
.
S ecial Announced P
Type of Inspection:
II 8-31*' AUSU" 1~
11
'
Dates of Inspectien: _""
'
June l'0-14 (DN 50-0.:), May 23 - June 7 (D:: 50-247)-
Dates of Previcus Inspcetion:
r (t) #'
'
~
.
,
.
' M ' /-t
'
Reporting Inspec tor.:
-
Date
,
A. N.# Fasano, Reactor Inspector
.'
'Q
'I J-l
,
Acconpanying Inspectors:
/
- ' ~ ' ' -
C. R. Oberg, Reactor Inspector Date
[ ? ? [ f /j Y',
t. *
r.
t
'
T. Rebelouski, Reactor inspector Date hb c' Y~
9b 3/-
'
-
i
~
'
- U A. B. Davis, Senior Reactor Inspector
,
.
Date
-
.
Other Accomp nying Personnel:
Date
- Excluding Saturdays & Sundays and July 29, 30.
^
-
y p y.
-
,
Reviated ty:
//
!c,.-
j / 1 - /- j_
,,
I A.
B. Davis, Senior lie.tetor inspector Date
8204090049 740927 PDR ADOCK 05000003 O
.-
.
_
__
..
I
..
.
,
.
.
.
.
SLE1".A!W OF FI" DINGS
,
f
.
'
Enforcement Action
,
i A.
The follouing violations arc considered to be severity catcaory 2.
'
1.
Failure to "-11ou Procedures Technical Specification 6.8.1 states, " Detailed written pro-J cedures covering the areas listed below including applicable l
l ch ekof f lists and instructions, shall be prepared, approved as specified in 6.8.2 and adhered to".
j i
Also, Appendix B Criterien V,10 CFR' 50,- states in part, i
" Activities affecting quality shall be prescribed by docu-mented instructions, procedures, or drawings, of a type appro-
'
priato to the _circunstances 'and shall be in accordance with these instructions, procedures....." "... Instructions, pro-cedures or drauh.:s shall Include appropriate quantitative or qualitative acceptance criteria. f or determining that important
.
activitice have been satiaiucturily acecap1131.ed".
Contrary to the above, the follouing wan noted in the reviewed
'
records during this inspection.
a.
Abnornal Occur ences (Reference Details, Paragraph 12.c, 12.c)
(1)
Failure to follow valve lineup as required in "Back Flushing of Purification Outlet Filter", resulted in
,
'
an unplanned gaseous release determined to be 0.6%-
of TS Limits.
(Unit 1)
<
(2) Failure to have the required Radioactive Uaste Release Permit as required in Station Ado:inistrative Order 107.
Although the radioactive liquid release was within TS limits, the release rate established j
was higher than planned.
(Unit-1)
b.
Surveillance (Reference Details, Paragraph 8, 8.c.. 8.d)
(.)
Failure to complete the procedural requirer.ents in the performance of the " Nuclear Power. Range Channel Axia! Offset C.2libration", PC-M1.
The equipment-
'
needed to to this test (and other tests)-lacked
\\
i
~ - -.. -
, -, -. - - - -,,,,,,,,, -,
..,., - - - -,,, - -,,.,.,,,,
,,,,
,,-n-
-..-.-n---,
<-
,
r
-, -,,,
,
-.
. -
-
.
-.
...-
-
.
.
'
.
.
,
-
-2-
l
.
serial number notation.
Pernission by the f.'atch
'
- Foreman.' designated by initialing the data sheet, and prercquisites required for the conduct of the
,
j~
procedure.ppeared to be lacking.
(Unit 2)
(2) Failure to use specified voltage when perforning
Nuclear. Source Range Tc ts.
Voltages used were i
close to plateau limits which could result in l
faulty results.
(Unit 2)
Plant Operations (Refcrence Details, Paragraphs ll.b(1),
c.
j ll.d)
!
l (1). Failure to acknculedge review by the. Shift Watch Forecan of 13', 53' clevation and Pricary Auxiliary Building Log Shc
'.s for approxinately one third -
of the June readings.
Acknowledgement is done by
,
'
initialing the log sheets..(Unit 2)
i
!
(2) The Deficiency Repo/ts for January and February,
!
l 1974, as required by the-Licensee's OA Progran ucre not issued.
Two of tne issued repocca t.eue e p;,c.: -
?
ently not distributed to the Senior Vice President for Central Operrtions as required by the licensee Quality Assurance Pro:
.o document Cl-240-1.
(Units 1 and 2)
l 2.
Failure to llave Docunented R.' cords The Technical Specification 6.5.1-states in.part that
,
...
l I
records ::all be prepared and maintained for fiveL(5) years...",
..." Records of principal maintenance' activities, records of f.
periodic checks, inspe:
ons, and or calibrations performed
'
,
I to verify that requirements specified under surveillance standards are being met".
!
Contrary to the above the following was noted in the reviewed records during this inspection:
.
.
'
a.
Surveillanco (Reference Dctails, Paragraph 8.c)
I (1) The Central Control Room Log Sheet for June 9, 1974, was not availabic for review.
The data sheet appearc to have been lost.
(Unit 2)
.
,
!
_
v7-
- - -
t g
,,
e-ey-.,
.---#
,,.c-m-wi--- - -n-
-i,,,
.s.
---,sie,---m-,n----
y-w w
,--cf..--
.--
e
--
z
--w-
-.._
-
.
.
- -. _
-. -
-
.
-
-..
.
,
.
.
_3-
.
.
,
Failure to " at Rercre Recuirc.p g.
.
3.
Technical Specification 6.12.2.a rceuires notification within-24 hours by telephone of an-abnorcal occurrence and a written report sent to the AEC promptly.
Contrary to the above, the following as noted in records
i-reviewed during this inspection:
,
a.
Surveillance (Reference Details, Paragraph 8.g)
(1) Test data in the pc'
rnance of Steam Line Pressure i
Analog Chanac1 runct onal Test, PT-:Ill ca July 13, The 1974, shoved settings below TS requirecents.
abnormal occurrence was reparted on July. 25, 1974.
l The licensee did report the abnt real occurrence j
.
within the prescribad tine after-it was identified
,
as an abnormal occurrence on July 25, 1974.
(Unit i
2)
i 4.
railura to cendno* nam.d red Tes ty minimum Technical Specification, Ta' ic 4.1-1 states in part, frequencies for checks, cal.aration and ecsts of instrument channels, :'uclear Pouct Range, calibrate daily by heat balance".
l Contrary to the above the follow g was noted in reviet-Ing I
recor'ds during this insiaction:
>
l a.
Surveillance (reference Details, Paragraph S.c)
(1)
Central Control Room (CCR) Log Sheet for June 18, l
1974, indicated that no calorimetrics determination was performed.
(Unit 2)
'
i t
(2) The June 17, 1974, CCR Log Sheet did not contain recorded calorcetric power level determination.
!
i (Unit 2)
.
B.
Safetv 3.
None
!
Licensee Act ton on Provionniv Identified Enforcenant Items
Not Inspected
,
'
.
,
,
f
.
.
'. *
-4
.
Desica Chan~as None Unusual Occetrences AO 4-1-14 A.
Unplanny aclense of Rndloactivity, The licensee had a gascou" releaFe of 0.6% of the TS caximum allcw-Discussions with licensee indi-able instr.ntaneous relcase rate.
cated a failure of operating personnel to adhere to procedure.
Corrective action has been ta*r.cn by licensce and is in agreement (Details, Parar,raph with that stated by licensee in A0 4-1-14.
12.c)
This item is considered closed.
B.
Fact Insertfon Pulse - Failures. A0 4-1-15 end A0 4-1-17 The licen ze has experienced repetitive problems with the Fast Inc2diate licenseo corrective action has Insertion Pulser " >nitor.
returned tl.
unit to operaticn in an expedivivua
...a c...c r.
The licensea's long-term corrective action, which included a s;;ci-fied caintenance program, is scheduled f or completion in August.
(Details, Paragraph 12.d)
This item is considered open.
Administrative Control' of Liould Uaste. A0 4-1-16 C.
The licensee failed to :omplete the requirements of Station Adr.inis-The trative Order 107 and released a quantity of liquid waste.
rele.se did no.. cxceed site TS limits.
This ite, is con idered closed.
Control Rnd Drive _. A0 4-1-18
.
D.
The licen e found an open circuit in the drive motor of control T!.e cathed of attac' inn identificatica 16 in Group A.
rod No.
tags which bared insulation f rom a wire was determined to be the tune of the AO.
.
O
.
'.
-5-
.
Corrective action, which will con =' t of examination of all rod drive n:'ters ant! spares' in not yet completed.
(Details,
,
Paragraph 12.f)
This iten rc=ains open.
E.
Unplanc ' Caseous Relense A0 4-1-19 Cascous release of < 15 of TS na::inun allowchle limits occurred from the area of Cell No. 3.
(Details, Paragraph 12.g)
This itca remains open.
F.
Stec, Generator B1c do n Valve F.citure. A0 4-1-20 During periodic surveillance testing a pneumatic actuated steam r blowdcun valve f ailed to operate due to deposits of generat dirt lodged in tha needle valve.
(Details, Paragraph 12.h)
This item is cl.ced.
G.
Pressurg Switen Drift,
'O
.-i-21
.
'
Th2 Pressure Suitch, SS1022, menitoring steam header pressure was ft and to be 28 psig fren the desired tting.
The licensee ectab-lithed a setting change to accenodate instrucent drift.
(Details, Paragraph 12.1)
This iten recains open.
11.
Control Rcd Drive Switch
- Ilurn. A0 4 7-22 During periodic surveillance testing, the cercoid switch, which actuates standby pump start at low line pressures, was found inoperable.
(Details, Paragrcph 12.j)
This itea is closed.
-
.
Other Sit _nificant F i n.! ! n c.g A.
Current None B.
Status of Previonniv R.nort."i Unrosolved It es
Not Ins;. eted
.
.
.
-6-
.
- hnam ent Intervie" A rianneint interufew was held at the Indian Point Site, Buchanan,
':ew York, sith "r. St ein und staf f on Septer' ar 11, 1974.
Persons Prm-t - Con rdison Mr. ". Str in, "anar,er. ?!uelear Powr Generation
!r. T. Law, Director, Technical E 7,ineering Mr. J. Mahepeace, Chief Engineer Mr. R. Sir as, Chief Engineer Mr. S. Salay, Station Mt :er for Cperations and :'aintenance Mr. S. Canton, Chi.d Engineer Mr. C. Beer, Directer, Qualtty Mcurance Mr. M. Eyster, Quality Asnurance Engineer i
Mr. U. Ferreira, Statica Q/ Er.f neer Mr. J. l!alpin, r.cactor Engineur Mr. M. Shatkow
.1, Reactor Engincar Mr. W. "onti, Plant Engineer Re".ular c,rv 0, erat ions Mr. A. Davis, Senior Reactor Inspector Mr.
L. Oharg, Senter Audit Specialict Mr. A. Fasano, Reactor Inspector A.
Areas Ins"octed The license representativec were informed that the intcnt of this inspection was to revi,w progress in areas related to the operation of Unita 1 and 2, and that this was a specia; review directed at the inspection of the following:
1.
Maintenance (Reference Details, Paragraph 3)
2.
Engineering Service (Ref erence Details, Paragraph 4)
3.
Equipment Calibration (Reference Detalla, Paragraph 5)
4.
Classificat ian f Systems (Reference Details, Paragraph 6)
5.
Audit Proar.
(Ref erence Details, Para:;raph 7)
.
6.
Surveillance Pre:r a (Ref erence Detatis, Paragraphs 8 & 9)
7.
Organi::ation and Administrat ion (Reference Details, Para-graph 10)
8.
Plant Operation (Ref.rence Details, Paragraph 11)
9.
Abnormal Occurrenceu (Re:eren : Details, Paragra;'t 12)
The inspected areas were discussed with the licensee representa-tives.
(See Detail:. ref erencod above)
.
.
\\
.
,
'
-7-
)
-
,
B.
Violatteno Di.acussed The R0 inspoctor stated that there were five apparent violation.4 resultin; from this inspectica.
Durir7, the revieu of the viola-tions it acnte evident that inform:ttion prev:ausly lacking clininat.
one violatien.
(Reference Details, Paragraphs 3.b. (3)
(f))
The four violations ware categorized ar a 2 severit/ and were
-
designated as:
1.
Failure to follow prot 'ures.
(Refer ice Enforectent Action, Paragraph A.1.)
2.
Failu e to have docur,n ted records.
(Reference Enforce: cut Action, Paragraph A.2.)
3.
Failure to meet Re9 ort Requirements.
(Referene. Enforcement Action, Paragraph A.3.)
(Roforence Parag ;ph 4.
Failure tc cenluct r:T/ "ed ?nsen.
A.he)
It was stated and agreed that the generic issue in most of the violat Nns uere traceable to a f ailure to tollo:',
i.e., adhere to procedures.
.
e
.
.
%
.
.
.
.
DETAILS
.
1.
Perso-' C w 1cted W. J. Cahill, Vice President S Salay, Acting Statica Manager F. Grahan, P' ant Engineer J. Makepe1c-. Chief Enginecr, Unit 2 B. Maroney,. n:;ineer E
A. "espeli, Unit 2 Operations Engineer R. Van 'lyc Manager :'uclear Services
,
T. La '. Di ector, Technical Engineer L. Ka:!ula, Test Enr,ineer W. Carr;ca, Engineer Tert W. Steia, :tana:er, : uclear Pcver
'
M. Sha ke.shi, Reactor Eng.cer, Unit G. Ecer, Director, Quality Ascurance R. Gordc,, Director, Quality Standards and Reliability G. Wasilan'<o, '. nager, Quality Assurcnce W. Ferriera, Statica QA En'J ccr R. S '~ms, Chief En'tineer Unit 1 J.
pin, necetor Engineer, Unit 1 A.
efetc, Director, Radiation Safety
,
J. Kelley, Che intry Director R. Dozeh, ISC nnqineer C. Linoges, Operation Ent;ineer Unit 1 W. Monti, Unit 2 Operations Engineer
.
J. Moency, I6C Electronics Engineer W. Wedlcr, QA Engineer P. Waldo, Central Files Controller T. Ualsh, ILC Electronics Engineer A. Flynn, C: :ef !!uclear Engineering
,
'
S. Ali, QASR Engineer M. Inal, : ucienr Engineer J. Grob, Chief ::cclear and Emissions Control Engineer R. Reddin';, Reactor Operator A. Galati, Project Engineer G. Minussian, Gen < ral Supervisory Engineer - Ir.;;truncatation G. llanhey, Supervising Engineer, Instrument Shop A. Polcz, Director of Tech. Services and Developntnt Depr toent N. Ilartman, Quality Assurance and Reliability I. Vollver, General S' w. visor, ISC Unit 2 L. na r, Gener.il Supervisor, If.C Unit 1 li.* Bennet t, General Superviso., Maintenance
.
.
.
.
_9
.
.
2.
Ce n s ! C.':% n t,
.
The Ntailr. Sectina contains findings with restact to 8 major areas of operation.
In :l1 area.> the inspectors reviewed rceords and noted findinp.
Each '.rea as prescnted in the details centains a separate revieu with separate findings.
3.
'!a i n t en n ne e The The inspector enanined the ongoing naintenance programs.
inspection of this cajar area of effort as accocplished by follou-ing a her of work rem::sts throup,h the sequence of operatiens at the Inun.n Point T.cilit, and at the Corporate Office.
The intent was to incpuet the stat-of the various saf ety related maintenance Reference was progranc and the implenantc. tion of these programa.
made to the Technical Sp.c ficationc of Unit 1 and Unit 2 for
. i verification to conf ernance of requircnents.
a.
Corrective " inernen -
Three procedurcs appear to fora the basir. for the processing and control of correceive o.a'a m....ve.
T'
y are:
(1)
SAO 10'., Rev. 3, Maintennnce Work Request Procedures (2)
SA0 105, Rev. 2, Ucrk Pernits (3)
SA0 127, Rav. 1, Modifications of Indian Point Facilities The purpose of SAO 10' is to establish "a uniform Station Administratiec Policy regarding requests for maintenance at Indian Point Station".
The procedure centers around the use of the Maintenance Unrh !:cquert (:?P.).
Tbe L'R is intende d to be und r the control of the Operationr, Sub-Section.
General priorities of work are established through this system as tell as directiin for implementing an interrelated system for K.lR handling and record 1:ceping.
of SAO 105 is to establish a uniform station The purpor
" policy" r._garding t' ' issuance and control of Ucrh Pernits.
The procedure 1so requires tha establishment of tag outs on to insure safety for workers during va lves, switche s, etc.,
Detai ad instructions are given for logging, n ntenance.
issuance and controi of the various docenents.
The SAO alco contains inforrition for cross referencing of variour. docu-ments by the recording of serial numbers on the docements.
.
%
-
-10-
.
The purpose of SAO.127 1.s to establish the systen that insures ara cade on all that acequa:e reviws and saf ety evaluatien.3 pr osed plan: ~"ilfications.
The Directer of Technical Eng,incerina hw the najor responsibility fc-implementing the controls establishcd.
(1) tlork Rect: str. '"l%
Seven jobs or ucrk requents for Unit I and 14 jobs frca Unit 2 were rt 2wed by tracing the 'GR through the management syst 7.
The jobs el sen were on Class A systems as identified in the Con Ed Quality Assurance Manual, Cl-2 '+ 0-1.
The 21 selected can b; divicad into 10 mechanical =cintenance jobs and 11 instrtnentation and control, ISr jobs.
The review resulted i the follouing findings:
(a)
Nine of the 21 ""R's could not be identified to a work parait.
It uns noted that sone types of ucrh are performd without a wor' per=it.
The S/0 issilent en t b m tter of u':ch trpn of work does not need a ucrk permit; however, it establinhes adninis-trativa responsibility for determininS the need f or a permit.'or each job.
(b)
One "aintenance/1LC record could not be located.
The IEC recor did not alunys include the required original copy but did contain zeroned copies for completra jobs.
(c) Quality Assurance records were available.
Four of the 21 QA records reviewed were found to be in-complete.
This appears to be a deficiency that will require licencee's attention.
f (d) The methods used to control maintenance by the Unit 1 and the Unit 2 Operations Engineer are different.
The SAO's are silent on the matter of control.
SAO 104 as written is not enplicit that the Opera-tions Subsection of each i'ait has overall respon-sibility f or t!.. Unit eaintenance.
Discussions with facility managenent personnel indicate that this is the i n '..cn..
l!ouever, the reviewed records ket't by
.
the Unit Oper.:tionn Sub crions were not complete and not in ar erent with inC nor aintenance N-Secti on eet.oro...
It appears that a. Sin;;1e cont rol center es not ents.
-11-
.
(e)
A requin d for:;, part of the M1R, desi nated ac Fem 1 is to be co.71. t.'d by ::aintcnance and ICC Su'n: c-tiens.
Tl Form 1 f or ILC :tli;s care found to be incenpis t.?, that is, blanks uere not filled out in moSt ccSe3.
(f)
The effcc*ive SAO 105, Rev. 2, April 24, 1974, con-tains a rcv1Jed .7.
fornat.
The new forns ucre net availabla (printica probic=); therefore, the old '.
forms are still being used.
Tac use of the old forn appears te have contribut to confusion about th2 des! nation of Class A conpenents by Operaticus
personnel.
(g) The :f";c flow throug'a the Tes t 7.n'; in ee r.
The Test Engine.:r tcachs cenpletion of the e ::::13 that re-quire an op: rational ecut af ter completion of maintcrance.
Durin3 the tracine of the 21 M'.lRs the inspector noted, r m i.'um1 ami inaufred abaut inputs to related ree ds that :pp,cred to be deficient.
The following Itca vere revic ad and or discussed:
(1) One IOC record, concerning a diesel generater repair, could not be located.
The item uns tested by the Operations Subsection of Unit 2.
'
(2) A selected po ; ion of Unit 2 " Operability Leg" (a co'lection of outstanding "Ulk grouped according to Synten) was cenpared to records of ISC and "aintenance.
The selected portion included:
18 Numbered *.:ns enamined
'
9 Identified as ILC :0.ls, six of which we re accounted for in the IEC Subsection 9 Identified as "aintenance ". k:;, all of ;hich l
were accounted for in the Maiut enance Sub-
'
section.
(3)
A discus-lon u:-h the Acting Station Manager indican 2 that tie ho periodic =aintenanca
.
.
~
l
.
-
.
.
.
.
-12-
.
me e t in ge,.
These e.2e t ing-arc'not en a regu-larly scheduled basin, but are held as occa ica
-
requires.
Minutes of these =cetings are not kept.
Q) Th "nintenance Superintend _nt and the I!.C Engineer maint 'n a "forcal :T!R status file",
indicar ag the fo' '.owing:
"!0!R's deferred (for tatorial or codificatica)
IC?R's started M'.?R's corp] ted in?R's scheduled fo r accc plial. ent during a planned outage".
The inspector requested the information from the status file.
The licencee statcd ther the n :ber of !?."'; are not kept current, and en effort teat Le t:de to ccant then.
It von stated that the intent of the status file re-rpi: ~~ ant was on ly to kct, infot.ation so L!at data c:.n be c;:tra t cd *.: hen necded.
There is na attcngt to keep ti cratus current.
b.
Prev:ntive 'i-iv pr"e pre-ran (1)
PEAD-1., Preventive !bintenance Progran, catablia!.c an overall plant preventive nainten nce pcogrnn which :;ill af ford " data accumulation for future refercnte, create a history of inspecticac perfornad, and dirtribution of
'
machine do ntima and manpower needn".
Each preventive maintenance procedure defines a P:: re-quirement on a specific component.
A file is established for each unit.
Each procedure is identified by an alpha-numeric cede and specifics certain controls, such as Radiolegli 1 Ccntrol Requiren.nts, Safety Precautiens.
and !*tinttaance Acceptance Criteria.
Detailed step-
-
step procedures are included as the center ef the p:*
progrr*
A conthly P:: report is cada sut=arizing thu statu of the progr :a.
This program was originally startel by using an outside The contract hac keen tecninated with appros:i-
<
!
contractor. - the proceduct.. r itten.
Oaly a few prece-mately 9% ot durcs hu been implenented.
Full inpler.cnta tion O':*
.
.
!
-
.
-13-
.
.
schedule in effect and follou 3 is expect.J in about 1 year accordim; to the licensee.
Fnic is at ut sin cat
,
beycud the late previausly consitted by t liccasce fc:
L*n it 1.
(2) P:t activities f rom Unit 2 (2) The inspector selected tt:0 systcss.
Thace are:
(a)
Reacto: Coolant Systen (1) Nuclear Steca Cencrc.or 21 - co=? eted 3/16/74 l
(2) !;uclear Steau Generator 22 - completed 3/10/74
,
(b) Reactivity, d Power Control (1) Reactor Trip Breaker A - completed 4/22-23/~i (2) Reactor Dypass Breaker A - completed 4/22-23/74
,
(c)
Core and Internals - none perfor=cd (d)
Pnwer conversion Svate.m - ner.c perferred (e)
Auxiliary Systets - none perfor:.ad (f). Electrical System - nonc performed (g)
Entrgency Pa.-cr (1)
Ilesel Generator 21 - Quarterly-completed 5/23/74 i
(2)
Diesel Generator 21 - Annual-completed 2/19/74
,
(h)
ECCS or Containment Systens (1)
Safety 'nj cction Punp 22, Bus 2A (2)
Containment Recirc Fan 24
.
i (1)
Other Engineered Safety Systems i
l (1)
Persent.el ;
-k 21 (2) Pernor.ael.nd Equipment Hatch 22
,
(3)
The followinc, are the findinc.s of the inr.pcetor on re-viewing the above P.! activities:
'
.
(a )
% u. r! permi t n ce n!d not be lo-ated for 'uc! -- r
..t in t s..
- .
' t. au i:.ne ra t..rn J1 and J.' prev..t.
.
..
PM.
,
t
.
-14-
.
(b)
Q A r c co rd ve r..> no t f,wnd for the P:I actions ex-amined for ::cclear Staa" Cenerctors 21 and 22.
The licensee has ct..:.
that the I'd actien was cen-ducted concurrent : t a najor nadi:ientit a ef forts being perferned en the Ste2n Cencretors and that 0A f or the P:' f ell under the larger et' fort.
covera;.
He state,! records cre availabic.
This iten rc=nins open.
(c) No QA requirements vare spacified for DG21 annual P:!.
(d) : 0 QA requircrents *.:cre specified for EG21 quarterly except for "like ar.d kind" parts replacenents.
(c)
No QA r.uir:. cents were specified for Drea'<.er P:1 f or "like and hind" parts replacenant.
exct :
(f)
Diesel generat ~ i'M (.'-nnual) vas perf ornad tith a procedure aat had not been arproved.
The licensee infor:2d th: in;ractor of a pceviously written preccdure frc, Sich the procedu'i in use derived.
The original procedure and its had bi
-
condu, uere under the Test Fngin:>r.
The procedure used, therefore, can be traced to an approved pro-cedure.
(g)
Inprovecents could be cade if the sign of f for l
testing as deue after taintenance was completed.
4.
Enr ineerint Serv * _en
.
a.
SAO 109, Pov. 2. Pecuests for Fnnineerin" Services (effective date !! arch 22, 1974)
of this SAO is to define policy regarding " pro-The intent cessing" of requests for Engiacering Services and to define The nethods m,ans of nonitorian pregress of these rec,uests.
desc-ihed adr.inistratively nanac.c Engineerin', Service :4ccos (ES:1) and Engine. ring Serviec Requesc; ('dSR).
As of.Tuly 19,139 ES'!'s and 8' ESR's result ing from the ES:?'s
14 E. I's were selected in a
"
had been lo.r.ed in the rt da.
ran' ~ fashi-n to cuar.:ine.u.e syste. for processing of the ES:
.n.
Ali.
E%".', czm.:ir ed or i a. inati. in l ') 7 '..
.
.
.
.
-15-
.
.
The inspector rovidWJ the method of obtainin;; engineering Of these, at services b:/ tracing 14 ES"'s throu;h the system.
the time of the inspection, 8 had been idcutified as ESR's.
Of these S ES2's 2 and been compicte.!.. I had not been turned over to the eng' scoring staf f to uork on (sulaitted 4/29/74 and still retained by Pouer Operatien) and the others were in various stages of cs:pletion.
The administrative processing time lag for these ESR's aver-aged 3S.8 days.
The stated soul for adcinistratien delay is 10 days.
This goni was not met in the ESR's saapled.
It was noted that "energene"" type work can be started by a teJephone call frca the ::an.r SPGD.
An inf ornal necns of follo ap on the ESR's is centin.ully going on by telephone with the ascigned engineer.
A bi-nor - ly report cn the ESC status is sent to NPGD and other p
- ies.
This appears to be the formally establirhed means or monitoring the progress of the work.
5.
Calibration or Ecr n.rn; r
a.
SAO 117, S.' v. 1. Calihrntine end Cc" trol nf ' 1surin~ Toeis.
Cauces and Test,nuim ont tt m
on tia-
"A"..ucleur.i era This administrative order establishes a respcasibility for and the broad calibration requirements for T.easuring tools, gnuges and test equipment.
Sub-Sections are to establish and cain-tain a systen for cal aration which includes a naater list of
,
equipment and a schedule for their pericdic calibration.
!
b.
PEADS Rev. 1, Calibration and Centrol of Men uring and Tcst_
Equipnent This administrative directive was issued by the Plant Engineer and gives specific details for the ceasuring and test equip-me": calibratica pre;ran.
It includes details of usage for adequacy of r,ference standards, envirennentil controls, intervals of calibt :icn, traceability of reference standard, labeling, precalibration checka, and nonconformance reportin;.
.
.
-16-
.
TEAD '!.
p.ev 0. Prm-nre for t ihrat in' preci rim Pressure c.
Test Gac v-(iaccd ':..:i:... '.' t e r ~ rd:d
'
Ref:
AST:1 Pub. D-25'U-71, P-
' = ended Practice f or Ca.'ibrn-tio:. of Stnndar i en Equiprent.
neada a standard calibratien the procede It was noted ti:
e
due date.
log to include the date of cailbration and ncnt discussion with the The insp : tor deternined the following (by:
licensee; observation; and revic of records at the Indian Point laboratory in ::eu York. i.e.,
Site and at the corpan-ca libr.:ti :
Techn cal Services and Development Department):
e<:
ent has (1)
An adequate pre-ram for calibration of test been e ; a b l i ;. '.
and in gunaral, is bein; carri out.
ad were cinor and have be?n identific1 in De f ic it a c i"
'
Con Eds inter:
audit p r or.rce.
These d eficiencies to ident ify th+ refer <.nce standard incl ded the :.iilure used and the calibration procedure used.
(2)
Procedures ior calibrr.tien v
.i.. eat c.r;. availabl ?
are either written by Coa Ed iers.: nel or use is mas et the canufacrurer's instruct?cn hvo:.s.
Calibration of instal'.2d plant inctru.n atr-ton in i nits 1 and 2 has not bec.n Oine on a periodic basis.
It was noted * *:ct calibration of the equipment has been doney but that it has beca donc caly en (u s i.:r' an..,, ) crom Operations.
a progrca has bcon 3.rcrteu,
.
c
....
request
.
1;/4.
Chec!s
! is scheduled f cr review and approval in August, for various compoacnts are done according cf or accuracy of setpcinta to the.-perledic surveillance test.
6.
Classificaric, of Synte.s l
General a.
insp.'eter held discussions with several Con Ed perscnnci The concerning dec]n'.ification of systenc or portions of nystt r.3.
CI-2'0-1, Qualit;. A.surance !!anual, classif ies cost syst'. s as n_
prtsides a ms;'ns of declassification.
"Clas s A",
at inspector also rcviewed dec':ssific tion on several corponente and one systca.
The inspector's review indicates that systeta are declaa ifled l
A" without sp. c i-l by Enr. ins erine ! ron "Clasg A" to "::cn-Clas
.
a i :, applicibl..
(i.e., A.
3, C,
'
fying whiih cla
.1.. i r, r. t i s I
'
i e
l r
-
I
.-
_,
.
- L7-
.
or D).
Further, it is not apparent that Safety Guide 26 c-3 FI !
,i f i c :t ion.:nd S tar lards) was used as a (Oua l it y basis iv: :.n.-b delG rctio-
.
The licensee stated that they ca not conmitted to Safety Guide 27.
7.
Audit 're -nn a.
03 ~120, n.v. O. Connelidated E 'ico-Connanv Audit Prneram for Ofi..tionai.oclonr Fc Itiries, ditictive date:
October 29, 1973.
This Qi direct've establishes a cceprehensive audit progran concerning operatit 4, maintenan,_c, administrative and QA functional areas.
It provides for a semi-annual rcvieu by the Nuclear Pacilities Saf ety Conmittee and derinnates res;,oncibi-lity for the prnran enablisirent, planning, schedulinn, implezcatation, rc;wrtinr,, recording and follatup with the Vice P res id.'nt. 0A02.
Audits are conducted with speci^ia attentica to the following arens:
QA Records Desi; Docunants Procurement Vendor Approval Receiving Inspection Identification & Marking
,
Handling & Storage Measuring Eculprent Maintcnaree & Mudificatica Operatin;; Procedures and Test Procedures In ervice Inspections Corrective Action Welding NDE Authoriced Inspection Agency Station Security & Visitor Control (Including Energency Plan on Civil Dinorders, Fire)
Training & Persranei Oualification IIcal.th Physics & Radiation Control
.
%
-
.
-18-
.
Radiation Chumical Centrol Core Lsading Abnorr:1 U;c':rr;necs S Corrective Action Fuel Supp::cr Startup Testing (1?-3)
(1)
The inspector 2eternined that the audit progran has been functioning ti.'ce 1973 The audits are being conducted in accorJanee *ith the schedule.
Reports on audits are being cade to appropriate personnel.
Responsibility for correc ;ve action has been est blished for cach finding.
Follovup audits are being conducted to verif y corrective action.
(2)
It uns noted by the inspector that the station does not desir, nata an :nJ.cidu-1 to be responsibic for correction of deficiencias tvund durir; audits.
The inspector's findings indicated that the audit prorr;u is bei"g constant'" carried out by cocpctent persons rho have agt:2nt support.
8.
Surveillance Test nc l' nit 2 a.
Reactor Ccol:mt Activity (Reference TS Table 4.1-2)
The inspec.or reviewed Unit 2 Technical Specification, the Chemists Chemical Log dated 5/12/74 to 7/13/74, Chemistry Specificaticas and Sanpling Schedu~ a, Radiation Sampling
'
Schedule for Effluent :Tonitoring, Piant Rad'ttion Sacple
-
Schedule, Record Rettatien and Management Procedure, Latch Chemistry Data Sheet, Chemistry Su==ary for one Month (Central File 4-336) and Control Roon Log Sheets.
The information reviewed indicates that the licensee was performing the Technical Specification required determina-tions.
In reviewing the Chemists-Chemical Ler. for the period 5/12/ 7'
to 7/13/74 it was noted for the period 5/30/74 to 6/1/74 th.tt requirements of administrative precedure for management in i t i -
aling was lacking.
.
.
.
.
-19-
.
b.
E.acter C it %rc:' !'to rination:
A rcview cf the bcren d2 terminations for the month of **ay, 1974, indicated that na lic: nsco w.s performin;; hia test as requircd by l'ait 2 Teci. Ical 3pecifications (Table 4.1-2).
c.
Po,er Ran-- Surwillance-The inspcetor revitved l' nit 2 Technical Specification, Tabic
-
4.1-1, ::uelcar Pouer Ran;;c Channel A::ial Of f act Calibratica Procedure, ?.ev. 0; Reactor Coolant emperature Analen Channel Functi. cal Test Procedure; and the Reactor Thermal Pouer Calculation, Rev. 1, Procedure.
During the revicu refercnce was made to TS 3.10-2, Paragraph 3.10.2.1 and discussien: vere held tith the licanuue.
The referenced caterial specifies that at power lovels greater than 75% uith 1 c:: core nuclea chanac1 out of service, a cerc quadrant pou;r balcnce uculd be required cace per day by i. 7 of movable detectors or use of cor-exit therm?couplus.
Thc licenza crated that all s.:ccre 'etector; h.,u Leen.y m -
able und that the neal for such a quadrant pc er balance determination had not been required.
Ile statcd that a pro-ced c to cover this eventuality will be concidered.
A re.
c, of the Reactor Thermal Pcwer Calculatien Procedure uas made for the test conducted 6/12/74.
The data appeared to meet the acceptance criteria as prc.:ented in the procedure.
A review of tha : uclear Pouer Range Channel Adal Of f set Cali-b ration, PC-M1, Rev. O, 2/3/74 indicated that the procedure was still under development.
It was furth r noted that in the performance of this procedure there was a lack of completi ;
procedural documentation requirements.
Requirements lacking were as follous:
(1)
Equipment used to run test lacked equipnent serial
'
number notation.
(2)
Equipr ant sheet not initialed.
(3)
Data sheet nc. initialed by 'latch Foreman.
l The test procedure was also lacking verification of requirid prerrquir.ite notation, cuch as the radial tilt status.
Thiu l
is an at arent vio' t ion of Technic :1 Specif icat ion 6.8.1.
-
i
.
l
.
.
-20-
.
.
The Techn
.1 Specific: tient (T3) requires the perforrince v*.
P C-M1 on.. nr. : r ' - M -ia.
Data was tch a by the licennee to assure th " epe rat ica of 'Jnit 2 6.ve 9:
po'.re r '.tas uithin Unit ^ IS requiru cats.
The licennee is currently developing Procedure PC-MI.
This iti..a is conu idered open.
A review of the Cc.tra; Control Rcom (CCP.) loc sheets *.::s made.
It was noted that the Calorinetric pan r determinatien recorded for Ju 27, 1974, si..ad _he power level to ba at IG1.25."..
The Unit 2 'nenc, cat 4 License specifies that t b.:
licensee is autherince to c.pecate the facilIt> ct stency secte reactor core pot.cr le.41s not in cxcess of 2753 'Uth.
The licensee stated that in:cdiate ccticn uns taken to lower the paver level.
The June 18, 1974 leg sheet revit*:e d, indicated that a calcri-netric deterninntica ecs not perforr d dua to a lack of st aa:7 state conditien.
This is an apparent violation of Technical
.
Specificction, Tabl e 4.1-1.
The CCR Loa '
st f er June 9, 1974, was n-arcilcble for revie..
This is an apenrent violation of Technical Speci-fication 6.5.1.
The CCP. Le; Sheet for June 17, 1974, did not have calorimetric power icvel determination recorded.
.
A review of the P.eacter Ceolant Tcaperature Analog Channel Functional Tests /as cada (Delta T over-tcr. rature and dcir T overpower for 2nd quarter 1974) and indicate that Technical l
Specifications were met.
,
d.
Nuclear Source ",nge - Analog Channel Functional Test
_
The inspector reviewed requirements for this test an presente.!
in Unit 2 TS and ';uclear Source Range Analor, Channel Functivn d Test Procedure, PT-\\'l.
!
The perfornance of surveillance requirements appecrs to heve I
been ret.
The June CCR log sheets and the 'tay 15,19 74, CCn log sheets were teviewed for daily checks.
I I
t i
!
.
i
i
%
i
!
.
.
.
-s
,
-21-
.
It *:as noted that valtc ?.e plateaus were bein?, set close to the m tiri stated.
'ih procedure has instruction-cd;e of p!rt t; t indicarc otte n <
<hi, are ~ Uray between the linits are to ha us.d.
The pecacribcd valu; was not used in.come tests cenducted.
Close adherenco to procedural instructions is warranted to assure ccurate test results.
This is an apparent violation to Technical Specifica ica 6.S.1.
.
e.
Steam Generator _- vel The file copl as of "Staa:a Generator Level Analo., Channel
Functional T;st, Rev. 1, February 23, 1972", u.:re reviewed fer the tests conducted during the first half of 1974.
It appears that the intmat of the test was met and the results were within Unit 2 TS rer.uirer. ants.
The test procelures vsre alco revie':ed for co:.pletion of instrue 'ons as required of the test perferner and revicuer.
Cor. men t s follev:
(1)
It was noted that t procedure requires revieu.
The licensee stated thu all Unit 2 surveillence test pre-cedures are in the process of being reviewed.
He further stated tLit all tests will be revicued by August 9, 19';.
Each test '111 alto contain a ncu cover sheet as requi.2d by Station directives.
l (2)
It was noted that the special instruction sheet attached for infcreation tas inconsistently filled out. (see tests for June 20, 1974, M 17, 1974, and April, 1974).
The i
licensee stated that this sheet was for his purposes to
.
better evaluate drift probicms.
He stated that he is l'oking into loping a typed listing for settings as l
related to te._
a.
Such a listing would provide data that could be more easily compared and revieued.
.
l (3)
The test perforr r failed to sign, date and initial the Equipment Neet Form, and to indicate the as left settings on the data sheet.
Thu D'/'.! used was not indicated in all cases (: ;e April 24, 1974 and March, l')74 tests).
f.
Core Inte rn,.! s L
>
The core internals tv-tine. requires a specified percent.v.c of l
acecr.plichu n: over a 10 ye.
periad, (neference Unit 2M i
-
.
t-22-
.
4.2).
The intent of the inspectien at this ti::e cas to as-ce"tain the e,tatus ef the progran developrcut for TS surveil-lance requiremeat.
.
Records were available on praservice inepections of Unit 2 with baseline data.
for in-Proposals have bcen written for a 10 year contract service in; ection service.
The licensee stated that plans are for inservice inspection to be perf orced around Octcher, 1975.
g.
Stenn Line precure Anr1 r runnnel ruectionn! Tprt. PT-:" 1, This test is perfort::d to demonstrate the opernbility of stean line pressure blatacler.
No deficicacies were found in the records revieued.
A review of data noted c.; July 10, 1974, shored a setting be-lou TS requirements.
This.as noce? c3 a Significant Occur-ne
- 1
';, 107'. en d cn A1.norral Occur-rence ". p:
, <n",
-
rence noted oa 1y 25, 197'.
The TS 12.2.a requires notifica:ica uith ~n 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> by telphoac of an cbnorral occurrenec and a written report sent to the AEC prorptly.
This is an apparent violatien of the Technical Specit cations.
The recognition of the.".buerral Occurrence in a tice'v fashicn is the conc rn in this inu..
1ee in th't corrective action en th. bistable appears to h: ce been acco plished iccadiately, h.
Stean Generator Level ana!ca Char.nel Functienal Tes; This test is perforned conthly to demonstrate the operability of the stear generator bistables.
The file records for 1974 were sanple revieued.
No deficiencies vere found in the records revie.ed.
Ref ercace PT-MS, Revision 1, February 2S, 1972.
.
%
.
.
-23-
.
i.
Str'ic._'.
t. r". ?n':ct
...
This tc-
. PT-MT.'. Is perf orc sd renthly to ascc. ain the can-ditien _
the ai; 2 bat- - i <...
File record.; for 1974..ere reviewed nd f ound to ' e.2 2 tisf act; ry.
It w:s noted that th procedura requires notation of serial numbers for t.it equip e-used in :he perferrance of this
.
test.
Serial.:unber and signature requirements were not always apparcut.
J.
Din el Cenurn-cr Trnet! tal Te t This test is perforro.! rnthly to demonstrate the ocarability of the energency die::el <:nerator.
The test records for 1971
were revie::cd.
S'o deticiencies uere f ound in th-records reviewed.
In e-r ' r : Svsi en %ctr icci Lor d Teal, PT-n14, Rev.
.
k.
Saf er'z March 4, IV74.
- ring,
-b r: f-.11 /;
Ni- ? 19 rot
. i;
. rf e r:
'
This.
..
in ths efueli.:3 st:.tas i.t has riarr..a thu-; test.
Cae of t
the pu..oses of the test is to r=r?"e that each diesel genera-tor will auto s tcrt cud assu::.e the required lonu.tithin /0 seconds af ter the start signal.
(Deference TS 4.6.A.3).
The test review was perforced :brrh li,197'+, and the licensee noted acceptance on March 27, 1974
- 'o deficiencies ucre found in the records reviewed.
1.
Saferv Iniection P sten Test. PTR-1?. Rev. 3 l
This test in perf or:. ;d during ref ueling.
Unit 2 has performed this test p rior to TS requirements.
The purpcse of this test is to verif:. that the various "alves and punps associated with the engineered saf e 'uards sys.. n will respond pronptly and I
perfore the r.
tired design function.
The test recnrd rc-vieued indica'es that the test was perfor ad in March, 1974,
.
and that the pruccdure 'ould require change..
s I
The licensee stated that the procedure has been revised, April f
1974.
.
!
l l
l l
e
.
.
.
-24-
.
The ins p..c t or not d t' :t " 11re c] c.; :r 2 timN ap eared to recuire furth - deit:i.
.'ith re ;e :: to crec tunce cri-teria, s pe c i h eall:.
'L>: ~ 11. ene 531a.
'S l ' c...sc e has ag reed t o re c i.c..
" ;i / '.O cy cl criteria.
This is an open iten.
47 t 2 1... y.,.._ 4.
. q... g...-.
O. T. _ c.?.1 p.g. - 4..
..
s m.
....s
.t
.....
..
.
The pur'ese of th'c tect is te arrure.he int.ority of F.ZpA
.
,
filter.'-v coaducti c sual inspactienc in each of ths 5 fan cooler units and bv.:nuerir ; tha: pressure droa cerasu thes.s
.o ca u. _ ten c e s we r e t cunc,., a the a_..
.
..
.
.
rccorcs
filters.
..
.s i
revicwes.
n.
6.4 V.. "
V.-.,-'.
=. ~_ c e. ". ' o '. '. ' - " T r.-~. '. * '. m =-=. _ *. _. =. _ '.
...
,
.
The test results rev et.ed apn : red to meet th2 at entance criteria ei the proc _ dure.
':0 d..~icie:eles s ee fet nc in t'.e recors.s rcvie' cd.
i
9.
S u rve i l le
"', ; t ic : "t'--
a.
C.:n e
.
.s....,. 2,. s.
..
,
TIms i n..
,,. o r c_,., i.. _ _i,,a._... s.
...
.,
...
.,.
t.
.
.
.m
.
..:
m.
i.
.2
_...
- w.
.
.
.
area of. on t ain c.nt svnt t.
ine nroeccare: rev;euca cen-for ed with the Tc haical opec..ca tie-. re quirn nts of dcily,
.
.
.
quarterly cnd annual secucace n.tu acceptance cria r.a.
.
The following surveillance tcuts warc reviewed:
(1)
TD-4 Contai
.,
Systcn I.eal:c;e - Ccatinuous 'ic,nitoring (2)
TQ-1 Containc ent Isolativa Valve Test ?.ev. 5 (3)
TA-12.1 Containr.'a t Isolation Syster Tcst nev. 3 b.
TD-4 Containment E' :t en L dn e - Cantinue"s "r,.iro-i'c The surve-:11ance test, TD ', consists of =nnitoring the pres-sure-temp.rcture-air /nitreg, n inle ca:;c to de terr.:ine the in-tegrit*/ of centairment.
A sar lc of tuenty daily cniculn ica sheets from varied cir:e rate calcula ti or',. rnd fra :s was revie...d.
l.c ce p t ab le le n.n;e
-
-
I n c. u c _ a,
-
-
ins umc.ntat ien e :librat ion anu,
,_ecsage criterta were in se test p a c k.2,;e.
.
%
.
.
.
.
.
.-
-25-
.
The inspectar st.t.ed that certain areas of concern were id.n-
"
.
tiff I as follm:s:
(1)
To rn ?.t Th proce!ure doca nr> con f orr.1 to present standards.
The insertion of r re,rnadu. (1966) listing prerequiaites ad preparations she.id 12 includ; d i.. the bod-/ of the sur-veillance proce ure.
.
licensee scated thct a program of updating facility T'
procedures, that includes the survcillance prot.eduren, Thia : roc dure uill be revic.. ;d is presen.!;.' n.. c'tay.
.
updated requirem_nts of
, to mact within threa
.
adcinistrative t cdures.
(2) For-:!ae - Tort C:1cu'nt'en The incpecter atuted that the fo;.ulae cred in calcule-tion and data sh
- d'd not reficct the mat a.at
expression denet.u in the precedure.
The licensee vill r.iut succelllarte test furnule-to c :ure thet varia: Lens of for ulae haze been in ar-porat ed. ecountin;; f or air /nitrog n in-!e.ic ;c esti.;a..,.
Items (1) and (2) are conc. dered to bc.1en items.
The in'pector noted that the review of data shect:5 for s
perf orrc:acc eni;in.nrs reviev, acceptance crite-ia and frequency indicated no deficiencies.
I c.
T0-1 Contain.cnt Tr.clation Valve Test - Rev. 5 Surveillance Test TQ-1 censists of cycling the isolation valves rematel;. and manually to the oper/ closed positicas on a quarterly basis.
The inspector ra vic::cd and noted inconsistencies in the ne-%r of val /es tested.
Further infot.atien noted that ch an:2.e '. o of the Tech: :al Spt cifIcat ions approve:2 this ehnage of sequencir.g.
l The inspector h'.
no further questicas as to frequency, cri-mration for the c nductance of o
teria, prercqui
.u or p-this test.
It var not ed ti..t the tinin;; of valve:, was not
'
included in th!
wrveilt ace ts a t.
.
S l
..-
26-
.
d.
TA-12.1 - contn!,r nt T aoi ntiaa S"s t: n Test n
. 1 Surveil:
'ce Test TA-12.1 ccn n::: of deter.nining the opera-bility of the various ini cting d:vic22 f or contair.=ent ise-lation closure.
The inspector's review of TA-12.1 indicated the tendancy of the licer ce to it a as found a parameter that was at a
..o r e cons rvative natu e than required.
The inspector qu.ationed
.
th following areas:
(1)
Hirh Gas Activit? ?.1. arn C"Iteria of 24 cpc +0-3 cpc tas left in the as-tested
value of 18 cps '0 ~
Furthat informatica uas found te indiente confirnatio. of this value in a TS amandncut.
(2)
prescuriner L'v s1 Fgtion Criteri i of S" instrument was found as tested to act ivate at 12".
The test tr vicu by licensce f our.d this to be a coac mtivo a c t t '. r ;.
The inspector quest',cd licensee es te prob 1ces in re-porting of s.titch drif ts,
r. turning :,: u er.cs to set points to enable eparatorc
_o knct conditicas of actua-tions and it' operating instructions reflected these changee.
The licensee stated that c:1y non conservative' switch drifts are reported.
The values of the octtinne are known to op: : tors but not docemented uhea on the con-servative side.
The licensce agreed to return all suitch settings to values indicated in the criteria.
He intends to continue reviewing instrument drift for possibic use of more cons.rvative settings to rc ain within acceptance limits.
.
10.
Ore,a j a r'o-and ^.f M!stration a.
Organizarton21 Structure The Unit 2 actinp ore,aa i.~ntion re flects a structur as de-scribed in Ccn Ed'
tr't 2 TS Ch urm 'hr aer 4, ':ovember 7, 1974.
The requect for approval of this ch.n",e remainc pendi.",
.
%
.
.
.-
-27-Li.er n actien.
The licensie has stcted that permennel are actir
'n functi'ne ai refl. t = i in the req:::cteu T..
change but thu the c'~i d 71 or;; uni ~ tion in ef f ect is that described in the Technic:.1
.a icat ' en.s.
This is an open item.
The Unit 2 positi,a ;;uldes and job-descripti a ttere revietmd,
reference Administrative Directive ::o. 2/a-4, April 13, 1973.
The f ollotting job descriptiens s:cre revic'. red:
Chicf Ens;ineer Uni-2 Operator P.m;inc Cuit 2 tlatch Tur- :n Senier neasto - Op r: tor
'eactor )p a r er
. ac1ent Po er Oper:tc., ?!PD-Rover NPD-:h:c lear
- PD-Cenveatie.21 Plant hr,;! w r Mana:wr, ::c. Lear Potter Generation Mano ur,.acicar S " vices Stativ..
.-a.. # c, O g..aticcw in * ::alnt;I t c ~.
'
The licensee statica cf fice schedules t:ere revitved for the periods U/20 to 3/3 for Unit 1 c d Unit 2.
Compariscrs t:cre e2de t: h req ired licensed operator status bas J on unit assi;ntd :. d possessica of the cppro; riate operator-license.
This itet, appears to be within TS requirc-ment...
b.
The On-site Revi Com.ittee The S tat irin !!uelear Saf er'r Cc-i t tee, S?:S C.
thi n i r,t ra tive.
Proce..u c.. !a y.,....:,
l'),, 4, 'ms revieted.
tua pur;'o e of th m.
_.
.
.
procedure is to describe how the S::SC is to fult'ill Itr re-sporsibill:les.
Also, the Statica ?:uclear S;f ety Charter.
Nove.ber, 19. 1973; S':SC " mbers listine,, Jann::ry 23, 197'.:
and 'e:no Sept embr.r 6, 1973; Subj ect " Alternate 'nabers of S:;SC" t ere revictred.
Th. first S::SC reutinu appears to have been held on Aur,ust 21,
.
1973, na';ing thic cor:mittee appro mately one year old.
T!.e re
.
%
-
.
.
.
.-
-28-
.
were 20 neetings held over the period August 21, 1973 to J ae 20, 197'.
The nin i tua f: equ..
. of n tings is bi-tanthi which is understo~
to nean ence every two nonths.
The following su=~
- ines the findings of of the inspector:
The minutes reviered indicate that the SNSC nenbers are =c.t-ing and pcr.~orning in a er mer that appe7r.: satisf -tory in t ulfillin"., t.ne calor re spons i1.u...ities at-t,ae eo:: tit tee as
-
.
.
c
.
.
reficcted in the Unit 2 TS, Reference TS 6.5.
It appears that, in gencral, itcas discrssad uhich result in a need."or f uture consideration are not synt=acica]ly read.:r.msca.
The li enece has stated tha; pe itive acticn to recall itens w ill be t. '.en.
This retains an open ite:2.
Th RO innpertor netcd that the TS cddreeces to recponsibilit ies of the con-
.ee where the cerait tee is requirc a to revie-certain arc s.
'rtw nir utes rev. _
.3 a, pear to lach contcn'_
to assure th. c.1 areas are addressed.
The licece e is consid:.rin a pr rn-cd a2enda ro that 13 review areas are systcnntien]iy ccdressed alen; with critical problem arer.: that require their attcntien.
This is cons iJ; red an open iten.
c.
The Of f-Site Pe f eu Cc aitt c c- - -
- - - -
The Company Nuclear Revicu Board, Reference i 6.5.2, Unit 2 describes the recuircments of the Nuclear Facilities Safct.
&
l l
Cornittem, ;;i'
..
.!
TL inspector reviewed the February 27, 1973 ceno, " Directory of NFSC"; the minutes of the F bruary 21 teetinr,, No. 179; and
,
the minutes for the June tecting, No. 184.
I The material revicwed appears to indicate that the NFSC conduct of business is in accort ance uith TS requirc:ents.
N Porronnel d.
p,-Dostructive Personnel certification records were revieued.
The recarla included those troa eentractor., where ';DT per:canel are hired
~
,
'
to perf. na NDT ef forts as well as Ccn Ed personnel qualif ica-tion recorda.
.
.
.-
_29_
.
11.
Plan: C"cr1r'cn'
a.
Loo Re_v__i +..
_
(1)
Jurm r Loq Licensee records fcr.*,pril, " ;. and June were revicued.
- istrative proced. ce for Lt it 2, 2.iD-S The parti 2nt a-Rev. O, " Lifted. ira ar.a Ju-a r '.? ires Leg ':coh" was reviewed.
The proc dura de' crib 's a tenns of controllin; the use of lif ted uirca and jir.per vires.
Entry :o. 1CS uns noted for R-16 jrepered acrosa UF'.4F to clear a c itecc.ry.. claru.
The r try una Juna 17, 1971.
The licenzee stated 2t cha
.s in cyntcn are required and have ben. rc :.:osted.
The jen?er includes ti.e erano-rator auto ch.rt Jnun function cal.. and the a.stw.1 ui!~.
respond to isolation but vill rcquire manant shutdeun of the evaporator.
The ent.r * ca revicued i lic:'t e that the licen;ec rac cd-
.
.,
.
.
ne r ta:,
pt van u en t o. a. c
,1.
c. c L.e,.c u c,,gr ;.r: :n c.
.
.
11fted :;.res.
Do not operata ngs are is;ued cnu equip-nent un" ta"<
1.
The tcGs nra numbersd sequenti;.ll/ c.nd so loggca{ giving a quic,; c*ec'rt and coa t. h,.
'
f (2)
Sh i f r U_n t ch For: r, I.on.
The R0 inapector revic
.]
the f I.rc t 10 day input for Ap ril, 1971
- o deficiencies ucre found in the aanple reviewed.
(3)
Operatine Orkro The R0 inspector rev'. cued orders for t!
conth of April.
No deficiencies ucre found in the order., revieued.
b.
Data Sheet Peviou ;
(1)
The June 15, 19 7 '+. 13' cud 53' elevat icna and the Prir.ary Auxiliary Bulls..n, Lc3 She.:ts u.re rc ic.;c d.
Apprc;.i-nate'v 60 unita were revie...d where the Shift Uatch Fore...an is r. quired ta initial.
Ini tialim; uan lackin;;
on about 30 R inil"r requi n.nents f or ini t ia tinq bv the data collec:.
te r la c!:
- na less than 17.
Thi:t is an apparent v iolat ion of, Technical Spec if icat Lon f>.8.1.
.
.
.
.
.
-30-
.
Data r. corded for Jur 6, 1974, 15' elevation, containcd penciled
- p:-
aich is nat in accordance with opera:- ns proce.iural le tructienr.
The data in pencil was in cet;-
formance wit. the basic need to de t2m. nt in f o r..a tien.
c.
Significant Occurrence Panorts, SOR The R0 in:pector reviewed the April, l' Fi, SOR reports and scanned the r gort; f ron..:n 27, 1"74 1,rou; July, 1974.
It was noted that there was failure to cosplete details as require <' to corplete the docuaentation of the S02.
The failures.Fraar te indiente a lack of d xuraatcd evidence of managenent revi;n, date of event, and 2.'. arcal Occurrence (.10)
design tica or A0 croca reft ~ence.
The no inspector in re
- ing F3R 74-2-33 noteu th^t an air ej ector loep ac al prchi.
ind a pasuibility of unplanned radio w r._ I t
,c uera e.7erienced.
Thic occurrence appe:.:s
,1, 1n,4.
,
to 1inve occurred on a.pr,.
it
-
U r -..n n W r.sv i ed this ;l ntica (hfers.nce call from e
lica ;ce u.
Ac.;u-: 19, 197.'., to no:1 irrecter) and stat >d that this 502 un;,:t consid" red as a repartable abnorral occurrcn:2 in ti s t tP c7.
r cf tau synt;
.:sre awcre of the air ejecter leap prehlen ant a release was anticipated, so controlled.
Co rrec t ivt measures on the loop seal renain an open item.
The SOR(s) are very inferrative and deserve review and follou-up actions.
The rep.:rts e canned for the later r :rt of June through July, 1974, appear to contain nuch of the type of documentation th:2t was lacking in th.: April sample indicating a valida:.in of nanagements closer involve =ent.
It appears that a sequential nr Serinp. system is being us"0 to nurner the SC 's.
E :amplea enist chere uequi ntial nur%. rs are micsing, wh2re a nurt fr and a sub letter notation are used and unere the sane
- "be r ci".ht have been used twice.
These deficienci.'; appear to praent a centrol problen sheuld an SOR requ ce tracing.
d.
De f ic ien t ', 'i cm. M (R :f ers cc 4. ! !! - Ju: cur.n,ee /Jr :n is t ra t ive r. i r. :c t ive, AD-15.
et.:
.e,
..in;,
':.ty 21, 1974).
T%-
Rev. O, N t ic.
<,
.
.
.
.
-31-
.
purpose of th.. directi'
is to establich direction for control of D:t(4) at Incir
"c Statica and t-define responsibili-tit.s of personnC aut. rized to initiate, at; prove and distri-bute Dis.
A Deficiency Report is a descrip ~ ion of a signific: nt cc. di-tion adverse to qtmlity found durini; statien 0? activitieu, during u eration, or durin operatienal or pc icdic testin".
The inspector revicued records on D?.s for the first half year of 1974.
A rev'eu cf Dr. status reports "as rada.
It a pears that Statu Pep: rts fuc Juur:r'f nnd February,19M, vere not is-sued.
A rant:Jy state, rep rr i.s requ' red,to meet the Indisa Poi. t QA Pre;rr. as specified in CI-2!.0-1.
The licene c et d that J~
-/ and rehru ry of 1974 uerc ver'/ bun * -'r h3 crd t'. a t a4
- ion was r. n c to cpply work effort into creas of biqiar priority thca a statue report.
The licensee pei:.ted cc.; th.: the " arch roer: *:as uritten to
'u ri a t, t..
,3 n *.:: r. - ' r t M d te.
A re"4 " 'f M ee"#-
"-
':u r t to in n c.ta butier rega!.r.
of L.e s ta t a.: r.:p n r :
<
that the Senior n por C:ntral 0;mrations e.s nat inclu?..d in
. y c., a
- _.c., s y..
L.,
.:. 0,,
the a,.stributica itst as require
..
o u
.t
+
Reference reportn of Illy 23. On July 2, 1974.
This is an apparent violation of Technical Specif icatica 6.0.1.
It appears that a syster for initiating D2's,
.istribution af DRs, control of D79 and status docun atatien in still bein'.
perfected by the persens revnensi'le for thes2 efferts.
a j
Weakaess appears to be in the ability to =cet tha requirenents i
l as apecified in progran and procedural docue2atatica.
A l
managem. t evaluatiia appears to be needed to ascartain that specifit req uirc nen *- 3 can be cet and the nc 2 or priority ef l
the requirenents.
A review of procedural recuir. d interf ace l
of sections ar.J st 5sce ans as reflects inposed require =enta
'
of deadline :, ste as, and follauup acticas carrants attcatien.
The records revit.ced indic te that effort is being r.7 plied to impler at this Q3 ri,nir,.nt; pro;.rcss is evidrnt.
-
e.
To r of Plant A m inihl-
\\r. a'
The inspector teured t. facility ile the P.cactor, l' nit 2,
.il u.uier",ni., orrective
.ain-was in a c.1 1 sin..d a ;tatus
',
..
.
.
ten.im
.I ne i n-
. ;io r Le s..
- t.a
-
g sts...
.
.
.
.
-32-
.
.
(1) ::enite-in, equir.:nr rc: erdir, as re tuircd (2)
Cant r.*1 re:' : F 'O's kac. sled:;e of cn,acintor clar~.3 e.
- centrol reon and on site (3)
Pe c.on,.1 r.m,-
'.n ; :cnditions
'
(4)
Plaat hv."
'
m (5)
D:istenee of fici.! ier n (6)
En stence of abnor 71 piping fibrations (7)
Pipe honger/ --d. mic rest raint settin:;s and hydraulic fluid lev _f (8)
A; reenc u t bettreen valve : itch positions and positions of vrtves (9)
Equi; nt conditicn and 1cch out ta; infor tion (10) status er facilit:- trui.nin;; nrc;;rr lectures (11) Toura by Untch Fort ma n.a "ni Eng!ne;r (12) Accesa contrc'. to '.'.adiation
'.re as The ir
?c tor no*. _ d th:t c. inti acive level of trork "as in prog-in the centairr.:n crea an well cs the scce: d.try arcae
..Laidc contah nt.
Indientic>ns tit re t!.at p r ::'a r:. cd ic r.vLou cly enisted.
There trere -
secon rv t;ater It.
>
ator lenha observed durinr. the tour.
Tha are :u en ".dned i:<rc-ger.rall:. cle in n'. a ccasiderstien was ;;iven ta the work ben.;
pertor:M.
It appe c.'d t! at taare is a nc.1 fir a g:nerci clea"up of
.f residu:t1 baric at deposi an:' also ch;.: min-; and i.aintir
'
'
floor a was in c.
lin= ant.
The licensee acham:1cd d thi_
u
-
.
.
.
.
.
concern anc.1 Lateu t.t etforts an this c rection a e in p rcg res s.
Step off p"da were in use and t,ed to floor arecs well marhed.
Signs ucre posted t ith notatica of radiction fielda t.o be enpected.
The !!? technician maintained access control to the PAC ad contain: cat areau.
A log uas c: ntaincd sheu-
and c;;ress.
ing ing,rc
,
Discussions with the SRO indicated that an activo training cad retrainin.; prn", ram is beinr, pursued at IP site.
The STO app,ared to immt his job requircnents and the condition of the plant.
The l' nit Engineer's late'
tour of the facili was August 1, 1974, and the U..cch Fore:.
makes tours each shif t.
.
%
.
.
.
.
e-33-
.
12.
Abna;- a ! Occu rre'
".s 4
-
The in, etor inforned the 11ce r that a revie:: of abnormal occurru.. as on a S rpi.ng b.ns t:1 Le performad at qu;.' r t erly intervals.
a.
I!cennoe novi.
br' air.-
>.te
.
The inspec. 3r re....cd, ca naciling, basis, the /dinernal
.
Occurrcnces !.0 4-1-14 thru..0 4-1-22.
The Si;;nificant Occur-rence -.eports for tiie /.0's '.cre revic; 2d '.:y the licensee in accordane, uith ".trtion Order ::o.
l,
"Rcportin, c.
Anc- :ous Conditican Ch...ntraleus coc.ditiran defincu by Cnit's
.
.
..
.
..
.
Techntea, copec tii :'t tens to,ao an.uaorm:1. Occurrence were reporteu, t o A.,.,.
_..inic iten is closei.
.
.
.
b.
Nucl ear ra cil f r i.- F *~ e t. cc.mi t t :.- C'rSc)
The inspector
.t :
that 1.0 4-1-l!. had teen reviu: I by ':7.7 The r>emaini:- anna :al occurreacca '.-1-15 thru !.0..-1-22 '..
been schedui for revieu.
This iten is cpc.
c.
t'onlanv' ?!c We of ::. :c~.ct! re ::- - >r..?
.0 4-1 '4 Refer.. ac:
Con "d letter to f.i.
i d.ted June 13, 1974 During operet'on cf the Chenical Procesa Eleido.:n Purific tion Systcn an unplan.cu release of radicactive caterial occurn.u.
The failure of a valve operator en inlet to filter CT-F
'.0 positioned
.ce in a pr.
ally opcn cond'.tien, allo. tin ;
l liquid frc-. the curificati a systen to drain to the Liquid
,
k!,aste Sump Tank that vc'.ts gaseous vaste to the vent pipin; i
into the superheater stack.
l The amount of gaseous releases constituted 0.6'; of TS =animum l
i instantaneous reiense rate for gaseous activity.
i The lice nne, 4" ' cued th.it the oper ;in ; persennel had fc.:l ad l
!
to isolate filt-by ch s in-c m uual ealven as called for in l
" Back f lush in;; c.
- 'ur D u.;t ien Outic t filter", P-62, P it.
l The licensee har taken.cerrective actica by rect;>hr s icia; t a perstnael the i: >rtance of f u' I compliance to proceduren a ni valve lineups.
i F
I I
%
f I
(
-
.
.
,
,
.
-34-
.
.
The inspe. te: stated th.t failure to adhere to dccunented j
operatin; precede ~i. u a violatica of ndr.ir trative pre-cede ; a.td a viul.,ina of 16 CPR 50 '+pune N.
3, Criteria 'J.
d.
Fast In r...r ti en Pu l ' r F t_i l u re c /!'. 4 -l-13 _.' n 4-1- 17
_
Re f erenc er. :
Con Ed lettnr to RO:I da ed June 21, 1974 Con Ed letter to RO:i dr.;cd Ju.'y 17, 1974 The licensoe's rc ferenced reporta discussed the loss of. ope ra-tion of th Fast Ins t.r tion lcer 'oai'.sr.
Ti,e Fnst Incerti.m
-
Pulser fian ito r f",ction is ce provide nn-line r.wting of Nucicar inctra entatloa Syste., ccpabiliti.- to ;nitinte fact insertion of tna control rodo.
The in edicr.e corrective cetica consisted of curr"nt ch:.
.
replt.cer-nt f diedea and capacitors and the rcplacencni o'
'
the nonitor,ith a cpnre unit t.22 co pleted ia nn e: pedit taan c:annc e in order to return t:w nanitor to cp_ratica.
The licerene is prcrently prepari: _; a preentive r. lint 2 nan :
progrc, t!:t util re qu i re
. '. '.' u ! d testi-
. d replace:r
- ?
components at iniicate off-r.'t'
readcuts in eccer to pre, nt actual f r-!!. ce o.
_n? pul':e - en icor unit.
TI f a ' w ra f.<
.
scheduled for ce"p:etica in lat:
<t.
Pendin,; RO:I revict of-the P:: p rag rr.n, thi s itcn rc::al.
opea.
e.
Administrati.e Cc trol of Lionid 1: !.n e /.0 4-1-!'s
--
Re fe rcacc :
Con Ed letter to RO:I iited June 28, 1974 The licensee released the c tents of the W.
te Distillate Storage Tank to dischar;;c caaal prior to receis in ; the fir.21 approv.1 called for in the Radioactive t.S:te Release Pernit au docunented in Station Administrative Ord;r 10i.
i The rec tred naarline, and analysis of the ':UST cortcats hnd
'
talen plact. prior to the liquid relen c.
The rt lc
> of t:u.;
liquid did not t..:eed the is site li:c le a.
Carrectise actic, of reenchasis ei adherence to procedures to op.
i n;', p e r, n-nel has been nade.
The inspector sta:.ed th it the 'at: re is an apparent violatten to folloa pro.dores a specifird ta 9t:. tion
- i r. i.s t ra t is
-
Order 107.;nd 10 C R 50, appendix S, Crituric.. i.
.
+
,
l
.
.
.
.
.
-35-
.
'
f.
Ce. trol n.4 n-ivi mr-r
.n ci rc.:i t 10 4-!-10
. :
C a n F.; letter to 0: 1 nated July S, 1974 Refe During a contra 1h * b.dc.ca, th. lier :e.e initlated an r to-matic far.
inrertian d cratrol rod.s.
Control nod ::o. 16 in Group A. did twt rcr e n c.
to sigani.
A nanut i sera 1 tras in-stituted '-ith CI,:.a. 16 oraratin; satisfactorily.
TF lice: ze disc". W ol-d the red drive hou<in,: c: -1 discovarsi and open e:rcuit in t:
rol drive : toter windin ;3.
Ihe oren circuit.:
cauecj by a reti:od cmloyed b' n,nuf acturer of attachinc, t.'c,tificatien tn N tz'al ch penet rated 'firir, in., u i a-tion.
Drive rater :: ; r pnited.
The licensca has not cc-'?le t:-d co rrective actica connicti-cf examinatic:. of all instalicd dri'.c
- ter; and crarca to pre-ciud: furt!:c.r aba'rral.itic., in arce of 3. arted :icina.
Th k iten re. in c. opea.
g.
l'nninnne,! C:w
.:c
.0 f.-1-19
"
'
.
Reference:
Con '.5
ter to P.0:I dat0J July 10, 19 7 '+
aut " 'tically isointe:J by *M pi :-t The vertilr t ien dy:- * ~ " ' " -
exhau.
t -- i t o rs o f
.'a ::e m..r.
a ct : ity.
Locci monitbra in are:
of Cell ::o. 3 in the ',..cler.r Service T,ui1Jina sint itaneouel:
detected an increare in activity.
Lic;na
's irr :diate action ww. to isolat e prin:ry
.npli.p. valva in Cell ':o.
3.
The activity decrenc_d to nerr~.1 bacb roenl levels 1:ithin t.ro hours.
Th licence 2's tr.."tiration of occurrence inclu.'.'
the re,et.'.
. reve al operations to try to c::nlic2te ::
t,
.
-
tt2on or abnorcality.
Th; licensca could nac obtain sinilar 1:1c rc
.c.;
in activity.
It is to be noted that the gaseous releases ere
less than 1% of TS teniaua aljawable l i t. i. t s.
.
The 11een<ce H centinuinc. to r.:nitor the area of Cell :o. 3 l
to deter..:.nr c.w e of release.
Thic item retains cpen.
h.
Failure ta Clo-
't'. o" ' r:l t, " n i o..d m in 'l' 1 v a 9 ' - 1 0 Reference:
Con L trer to no:I dated July 12, 1971 The licennec's porio ic ::urv"illance tes t p ro: r.,
incin& s T3 i T c.; t ".
Durin;; perf orr.ance <J 12.4/T3 L2. J A "Lesp I::.;i..t :
l
.
f l'
%
l l
l I
l r
l l
l
>
!
-
a
.
'
-
,
.,
,
.
.
.
.
,..,
.
.
.
.
- 3 '. -
.
the et.t a pntum tie operate.! upper bic.r.ic in valve en SL, >:
Gener tor *.e.
13 kile9 to e
'se.
The pnen :1 tic operitor a '. e n e i t' 'zalve :cs found to b in-operati-due to dirt lod;;cd ender the nee'lle valve preventiu; isolative of the air cuppl/ to tha actuator.
Upon clea'iin:, c7 the v:1ve tha tent uns completed sati.<.fce-toril..
Addit ienal surveys of ele:nlincos of air supply did not disclose evidene. of entrained caterial.
This iten in closed.
1.
Free t re S"_it.:h I' '[t - ' 0 '+- ! - 21
__
Reference:
Con Ed letter to R0:I d;t.:
July 16, 1974 Stean he,d n pres "ra instrurentasien includ's pre suitch
- o. SS ' OP.
Pur.~..
reuti;e sur ill :nce tc7t!
c. 5 ",,
,.
this e.;1teb r",
found to actuate at 322 rs:
c-:
.. c d t o a de'.;i red sn -
o f 350 po ig 4 3-0.
The n b :c e::~- lit:. is attri-5.i en in ir -
"t deif,
The licene.u has ce~.mitted to a ret.cs: ct ne::: cc';; 'ule d s' : -
doun to ins"ca inc_cn: at i li.ihilit;..
IFi i t c.' rn a i:.3 open.
j.
Con t.'l P.ac' Drive '!.!c.u!1c Prm - Stritch "' ? Lure l'1 ! - 1 2 Reference:
Con Ed letter to P0:I d._ted July 16, I D i
The Standl ; Ceatrol R". Drive Ilydraulic pcp f :iled to ste.rt
'
during a riodic surveillcace test TS-S entit'ed "C:'D Hydrau-uns i'intified lic Systet.- Pressure Safety Devices".
The cat
-
a.
f ailure of :lerco! ' Suitch No. 1PSS to sen lou h.
caulic
,
!
balance header prac. ;re.
l l
Licensce's rep!: ce'l instru :e e'd succeu fully complet._
l survelllance procedurc.
- o hi:
ry of f..ilurcc ef this type I
switch could be f cund by in::.pector.
This item is clonJ.
!
l i
i l-I
.
%
i
[
-
,