IR 05000029/1974009
| ML19339A933 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Yankee Rowe |
| Issue date: | 08/23/1974 |
| From: | Mccabe E, Ruhlman W NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19339A932 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-029-74-09, 50-29-74-9, NUDOCS 8011050715 | |
| Download: ML19339A933 (7) | |
Text
.. i
..
..
....
.
.
.
'
O.
-
-
.
,.
/
-
.
.
.
.
U. S. ATO:iTC ENERGY C01:llSS10::
.
DIREC10MTE OF REGULAT0n* OPEMTIO::S
,
REGIO:t I
.
RO Inst.cction Report !!o. :
50-29/74-Oo Docl:ct >o.:
q0.29 Licensec: gnkeeAtomicElectricCompany Licence !!o. : DPR-3 20 Turnpike Road Priority:
.
i Westboro, Massachusetta 01581 C
Category:
.
,
'
s
.
I Location:
Rowe Massachusetts g
.
Type of Licens:c:
PWR, 600 iMt (W)
Type of Insppetion: Routine. Announced Dates of Inspection: August 141k 15,1974
Dates of Previous Inspection:
d"17 16 - 18, 1974
-
Reporting Inspector:
N /d ud 3[D/T-
W. A. Ruhlman, Read or Ihspector U^l'
isecompanyin:; Inspectors:
M
& f-W
[_
ffM3
<
E.C.McCabe,Jr.,Senio(ReactorInspector
-
,
~
-.
.,
_.
Dut.
.
Otlwr.'ccor.panj a n;; Personnel:
Nohe
_..
-
Da.
'
-
8 01105 0 7/ 5~
,
-
.
- dm 2.
.
.
v/3/-
Rev h.: a n v:
_
_
_
i
.
.
.
.
.
SUNNARY OF FINDINGS Enforcement Action The pressurizer pressure channel low pressure scram setpoint was found to be less than the minimum allowed by Appendix A, Section D.2.d.1 of the Technical Specifications.
(Details, Paragraph 8)
Licensee Action on Previous 1v Identified Enforcement Items i
Not inspected
)
Unusual occurrences
Pressurizer Pressure channel, setpoint drif t.
(Details, Paragraph 8)
Other Significant Findings I-A.
Current Findings e
j The plant was cade critical following the installation of a new
!
incore instrumentation package (Report 50-29/74-06, Details, Para-graph 12) and the cocpletion of refueling operation on August 13, 1974 and zero pcuer physics testing was in progress.
B.
Status of Previous 1v Unreso(ved and Ooen Items j
1.
Resolved Items In the below listed cases, the licensee had taken the action (s)
I required to resolve the item and RO:I has no further questions j
in these areas.
a.
Plant Security Training.
(Details, Paragraph 2)
b.
Quality Assurance Training.
(Details, Paragraph 3)
c.
OSHA and Plant Safety Standard Training.
(Details, Paragraph 4)
'
d.
Maintenance Department Training.
(Details, Paragraph 5)
e.
Safety Related Plant Changes.
0 Details, Paragraph 7.a)
^
f.
Material Handling, Shipping, Packaging, Cleaning, Storage and Preserva tion.
(Details, Paragraph 7.b)
2.
Unresolved and Onen Items The following items remain unresolved or open either because the appropriate actions have not been completed or because the item could not yet be inspected.
-
--.
,
__
t
,
~
l
.
l-2-a.
Instrument and Control Personnel Training. Unresolved.
0 Details, Paragraph 6)
b.
Operator Requalification Program. Open.
(Details, Para-
graph 10)
Management Interview l
An exit interview was conducted on August 15, 1974 at the conclusion of l
the inspection with the following licensee attendees.
Mr. H. Autio, Plant Superintendent
,
Mr. N. St. Laurent, Technical Assistant to the Plant Superintendent Mr. R. Berry, Training Coordinator The following summarizes the items discussed.
A.
Plant Security Training.
(Details, Paragraph 2)
l B.
Quality Assurance Training.
(Detaild, Paragraph 3)
l C.
OSEA and Plant Safety Standard Training.
(Details, Paragraph 4)
l D.
Maintenance Department Training.
(Details, Paragraph 5)
l l
E.
Instrument and Control Personnel Training.
(Details, Paragraph 6)
l P.
Previously Unresolved Items - Quality Assurance.
0 Details, Para-
+
'
l graph 7)
l G.. Protective Instrumentation Setpoint Drif t (A0 74-3).
(De tails, l
_
Paragraph 8)
i l
H.
Conduct of Operations.
(Details, Paragraph 9)
I.
Operator Requalification Program.
(Details, Paragraph 10)
!
$
-
.
.
i
!
,
!
i
.
...
._.
!
.
.
.
.
.
DETAILS 1.
Persons Cont g ed O_nsite Mr. H. N. Autio3 Plant Superintendent Mr. R. L. Berry, Training Coordinator
.
Mr. R. E. Durfey, Engir.eering Assistant Mr. R. S. Emery, Public Relations Director Mr. J. A. Flanigan, Plant Health Physicist Mr. W. G. Jones, Jr., Assistant Plant Superintendent Mr. P. E. Laird, Maintenance Supervisor Mr. E. A. Miles, Technical Assistant Mr. J. G. Parillo, Associate Engineer Mr. J. H. Shippee, Instrument and Control Supervisor Mr. J. L. Staub, Technical Assistant Mr. N. N. St. Laurent, Technical Assistant to the Plant Superintendent Mr. R. H. Streeter, Storekeeper 2.
Plant Security Training
j Tnis item was identified as unresolved in 50-29/74-03, Details, Para-graph 2.a.
At that time, the licensee stated that training. program
changes would be incorporated which would ensure that personnel from all departments would be made aware of the information disseminated
,
at any lectures that they failed to attend and that a method of evaluating the effectiveness of the training would also be developed and incorporated.
Both of these requirements have been incorporated and approved in Revisica 1 to, the GENERAL PIANT TRAINING PROGRAM
,
i l
procedure No. AP-0501.
I
!
This item is reso;.ed and RO:I has no further questions in this area.
3.
Quality Assurance Training As documented in Details, Paragraph 2.c of 50-29/74-03, this ar.ea of
!
training was also covered by the licensee's procedure No. AP-0501.
The licensee's commitments in this area w1re essentially the same j
as for item 2 above and they were also met with the changes incor-l porated in Revision 1 to the GENERAL PLANT TRAINING PROGRAM procedure.
i
This item is resolved and RO:I has no further questions in this area.
4.
OSHA and Plant Safety Standard Training This section of the Industrial Safety Training program was document-ing attendance during the inspection covered in report 50-29/74-03,
-.
.
_.
._
_
_ _
t
.
.
.
4_
.
Details, Paragraph 2.e(2).
However, the training given was not
.-
required to be evaluated to determine that the lecture attendees
.
were understanding the instruction. This facet of training is also,"
covered by the GENERAL PLANT TRAINT.NG PROGRAM procedure, and the licensee's commitment to correct the noted concern was also met in Revision 1 of AP-0501.
This item is resolved and RO:I has no further questions in this area.
5.
Maintenance Deparrment Training The only deficiency identified with the training given in this department was that the program was not defined to ensure continuity if the department supervisor should be transf erred, promoted or in some other manner fail to personally require that the training be accomplished. This lack of a documented program was noted in Details.
Paragraph 3.b(1) of report 50-29/74-0]. This deficiency has been corrected with the approval of the TRAINING OF MAINTENANCE DEPARTMENT r
PERSONNEL INCLUDING INITIAL AND ANNUAL REVIEW TRAINING REQUIREMENTS procedure No. AP-5006.
i
,
This item is resolved and RO:I has no further questions in this area.
'
6.
Instrument and control Personnel Training
.
As documented in Details, Paragraph 3.a of report 50-29/74-03, the training in this department was being conducted in accordance with an approved training procedure. The licensee stated that the con-trolling procedure would be revised to include the new requirements delineated in ANSI N45.2.6 - 1973. During this inspection, the
inspector was given copies of newly instituted certification require-
,
ments sDnilar to those required by the ANSI standard, and he was
'
j shown new documentation procedures which met the intent of the i
standard. The inspector was informed th:t the INITIAL AND REVIEW I
QUALIFICATION TRAINING OF I&C PERSONNEL procedure had not yet been revised to reflect the new practices. The procedure revision, according to the licensee, has been delayed due to the heavy I&C workload during the recently completed refueling outage. The 11-censee discussed the revision planned with the inspector and stated that a copy of the revised procedure would be forwarded, when approved, for RO:I review.
This item remains unresolved pending receipt of the revised procedure incorporating the licensee's commitments.
.
...
.-.
,
_
,,
i O
.
.
-5-7.
Previous 1v Unresolved Items - Quality Assurance
_-
In a letter dated January 9,1974 from Yankee Atomic Electric Company to RO:I, steps were defined to resolve the deficiencies noted in inspection report 50-29/73-05.
Dr. ring the inspection documented by report 50-29/74-03, the inspector checked the implementation of the steps defined in the letter which resulted in resolving eight (8) of the ten (10) items. The two (2) remaining items were reinspected with the following results.
a.
Safety Related Plant Changes As noted in Details, Paragraph 7.b(1) of report 50-29/74-03, this item was unresolved because the action defined in your response letter and the actions taken at the site were considered inappro-priate. Action taken essentially resulted in two (2) different procedures covering safety related plant =odification with no guidance to define which procedure should be used.
This inspec-tion determined that the procedures have been revised and gui-dance defined to make one procedure for safety related changes
and tne other procedure for non-safety related changes.
This item is resolved and RO:I has no further question in this
-
area.
b.
Material Handline, Shinnine, Packagine, Cleanine, Storace and Preservation As noted in Details, Paragraph 7.b(2) of report 50-29/74-03, this item was unresolved because the actions defined in your
The response letter had not yet been implemented at the site.
i action described consisted of issuance of a procedure revision i
!
to incorporate changes to eliminate the noted deficiencies.
During this inspection the inspector verified that a new pro-cedure, MATERIAL HANDLING, PACKAGING, SHIPPISG, CLEANING, STORAGE AND PRESERVATION had been written, typed, and desig-nated AP-0224. This procedure was approved by the PORC on *
August 16, 1974.
This item is resolved and RO:I has no further questions in this area.
,
8.
Protective Instr. mentation Setnoint Drift (A0 74-3)
Reference: Licensee letter to RO:I dated July 5, 1974 During routine refueling interval surveillance testing of the pres-
__,
surizer pressure channel, the low pressure scram setpoint was found
,
- .. ~ ~
.
.
-6-
\\
to be at 1780 psig. The licensee reported this as a violation of the Technical Specifications, Appendix A, Sectiun D.2.d.1 and Table 1 which lists a minimum setpoint of 1800 psig. The problem was ideatified by the licent,ee as instrumentation setpoint drif t.
A0 74-3*was reviewed by the PORC in meeting 74-35 on Jiily 3,1974.
The PORC recommended that instruments with setpoints covered by Technical Specification limits be set more conservatively to allow
-
for some setpoint drif t without exceeding the Technical Specification value. The Committee also recommended that all Instrument Technicians be trained to set setpoints to a more conservative value rather than
'
right on the Technical Specification limit.
A training lecture was held, according to licensee documentation, on July 25, 1974 at which time all I&C Technicians received the training recommended by the PORC.
In addition, the licensee was currenily reviewing and revising the align =ent/ calibration procedures for the affected instrumentation I
to indicate that the setpoints should be set more conservatively I
and specifying the setpoint band to.be allowed.
RO:I has no further questions in this area, and no additional response
'
'is required.
9.
Conduct of Ooerations The inspectors also observed operations in the cont?
/oom associated l
with the licensee physics testing being conducted fo owing the recent
.
refueling outage.
-
i l
A valk through tour, with proposed storage areas and techniques being i
explained, was taken through the recently completed warehouse facilities.
E The inspectors identified no deficiencies in either of the areas where i
routine operations were observed.
10. Operator Recualification Prozram
'
Certain aspects of this training were not required until af ter the i
l first annual requalification examination had been administered as
'
noted in Details, Paragraph 5.a of report 50-29/74-03. At that time
,
the licensee estimated that this examination would be administered during the latter part of July 1974. Due to the workload and. delays in the refueling' operations, this item was not completed and new dates have been selected during the month of September 1974. This
'
item will remain open and be-reinspected af ter the examination.
.-.