IR 05000029/1976011
| ML19339B410 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Yankee Rowe |
| Issue date: | 05/14/1976 |
| From: | Davis A, Haverkamp D NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19339B404 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-029-76-11, 50-29-76-11, NUDOCS 8011060857 | |
| Download: ML19339B410 (21) | |
Text
{{#Wiki_filter:! ; . O ' ' - . E:I Form 12.
- NOTICE
.
- inn 75) (Rev)
AE N UTf 17 N70 - MGION 11%S NOT 03TAAED P;CmsTuy - G&MIANCEIN ACCOdQMC4 wien as u. :M - . . , U. S. liUCLEAR RECUIATORY CC:CIISSIO:t . ' 0FFICE OF I: S?ECTIO:t A:iD E:iFORCCIE:IT . REGIO:I I 50-29/76-11 50-29
E Inspection Report !!a: DPR-3 Yankee Atomic Electric Company Licensc !!o: Licensce: ' ~ 20 Turnpike Road -- p ,,, , Westborough, Massachusetts 01581 C Safeguards -- Group: Location: Rowe, Massachusetts , R (W) 600 We '. Type of Licensec: , Type of Inspection: -" ""' "*"" """ Dates of Inspection: Aprf1 12-16, 1976 .
M6rch 29.-31, 1976 Dates of Previous Inspection: Reporting Inspector: [ 'f///J/74 " M4 h " D.
R.
Haverka,mp, Reactoi Inspector DATE Accompanying Inspectors: M ////t A.
B.
Davis, Sec tion Chie f' DATE . (part time) ' DATE . . . . DATE . None Other Accompanying Personnel: DATE j, t-Q viewed By: ../ 2.
(1,%1 ,[[/'/'/,' t ~ A.'B.
Davis, Section Chief, Reactor Projects DATE.
Section No.
1, Reactor Operations and Nuclear Support Btanch - , . , . .
___
i . - . . . . . SUMMARY OF FINDINGS Enforcement Action Items of Nonccmpliance
. Infractions A.
Contrary to Technical Specification D.1 requirements to conduct plant operations in accordance with written procedures, the power range neutron flux level channel amplifiers were adjusted without adherance to the requirements of procedure OP-4201.
(Detail 4.c.(2)) B.
Contrary to Technical Specification D.1 requirement for modifying written operating procedures, changes were improperly made to procedure OP-2163.
(Detail 7.c. (1)) Licensee Action on Previously Identified Enforcement Items Item of Noncompliance - Region I Inspection Report 50-29, 76-06, Detail 6.b , The licensee's corrective actions with respect to the abcve item of noncompliance was reviewed and found to be acceptable and complete.
(Detail 8) Design Changes . Not inspected.
Unusual Occurrences None identified.
. . & e > e em , . .
__ . . f . . . . -2- . Other Significant Findines A.
Current Findings 1.
Acceptable Areas Shift logs and Operating Records.
(Detail 3) a.
b.
Plant Tour.
(Detail 4, except 4.c.(2)) c.
Reportable Occurrences.
(Detail 5, except 5.b and 5.c) d.
Nonroutine Event Review.
(Detail 6) Safety Limits, Limiting Safety System Settings and e.
Limiting Conditions for Operation.
(Detail 7, except 7.c.(1)) 2.
New Unresolved Items Reportable Occurrence 76-01.
(Detail 5.b) a.
b.
Reportable Occurrence 76-02.
(Detail 5.c) , 3.
Licensee Identified Items of Noncompliance and Deviations None identified.
B.
Status of Previous Unresolved Items 1.
The following items were reviewed and are considered re-solved: a.
Procedure Changes.
(Detail 10.a) b.
Switching Log.
(Detail 11) c.
Fire Protection Training.
(Detail 12) d.
Identification of Safety Related Instrsmentation and Controls.
(Detail 13) e.
Reported Radiochemistry Data.
(Detail 14). . .. _ _ _, .. -
_.
? . ' ' t . . . -3- . 2.
The following items were reviewed and remain unresolved: a.
Reportable Occurrences 75-07, 76-01 and 76-02.
(Detail 9.a) b.
Reportable occurrence 75-12.
(Detail 9.b) c.
Rep.ortable Occurrence 75-17.
(Detail 9.c) d.
Procedure Changes.
(Detail 10.b) Management Interviews A.
Entrance Interview A pre-inspection interview was conducted on site at the beginning of the inspection on April 12 with the following licensee personnel in attendance: Mr. H. A. Autio Plant Superintendent Mr. J. L. Staub, Technical Assistant to Plant Superintendent The licensee identified no operational problems that related to plant safety or radiological health since the last inspection.
I The inspector identified the scope and objectives of the inspec-tion and scheduled an exit meeting for April 16.
B.
Exit Interview , i An exit interview was conducted on site at the conclusion of the inspection on April 16 with the following licensee personnel in attendance: Mr. H. A. Autio, Plant Superintendent Mr. W. D. Billings, Chemistry and Health Physics Supervisor Mr. R. L. Boutwell, Technical Assistant Mr. T. D. Danek, Operations Supervisor Mr. M. W. Ebert, Reactor Supervisor Mr. P. E. Laird, Maintenance Supervisor Mr. I. R. Seybold, Plant Health Physicist .. ... __. W
. _ _ i
. - - s- - . , . i Mr. J. H. Shippee, Instrumentation and Control Supervisor ' Mr. J. L. Staub, Technical Assistant to Plant Superintendent ' Mr. N. N. St. Laurent, Assistant Plant Superintendent Mr. D. B. Vassar, Assistant Operations Supervisor ' The scope and objectives of the inspection were discussed and the inspection findings were presented as they appear in this report.
. e e . l a +
8 * -e
.
w-w - n v - e
i . . DETAILS 1.
Persons Contacted H. A. Autio, Plant S'perintendent u R. L. Berry, Technical Assistant W. D. Billinge. Chemistry and Health Physics Supervisor R. L. Boutwell, Technical Assistant C. J. Crosier, Tester T. P. Danek, Operations Supervisor M. W. Ebert, Reactor Supervisor J. S. Gedutis, Technical Assistant J. M. Grillo, Control Room Operator R. A. Herzog, Shift Supervisor B. L. Kirk, Shift Supervisor P. E. Laird, Maintenance Supervisor L. Pritt, Auxiliary Operator I. R. Seybold, Plant Health Physicist J. H. Shippee, Instrument and Control Supervisor J. L. Staub, Technical Assistant to Plant Superintendent N. N. St. Laurent, Assistant Plant Superintendent J. C. Trejo, Engineering Assistant j 2.
Inspection Purpose The 'nspector stated that.the purpose of the inspection was to: a.
Review Plant Operations.
b.
Review Selected Nonroutine Event Reports and Reporting Responsibilities.
c.
Review Safety Limit, Limiting Safety System Settings and Limiting Conditions for Operation.
d.
Review Items of Noncompliance and Unresolved Items Identi-fied in Previous Inspections.
The licensee acknowledged this information.
i . . . ... -. . -
. l
. . . . - -6- . 3.
Shift Logs and Operating Records Shift logs and operating records were reviewed to verify j a.
that: (1) Control Room log sheet entries are filled out and initialed.
, ) (2) Auxiliary log sheets are filled out and initiated.
) (3) Shift Supervisor and Control Room log entries involving abnormal conditions provide sufficient detail to communi-j cate equipment status, lockout status, correction and
restoration.
(4) Log Book reviews are being conducted by the staff.
(5) Operating orders do not conflict with Technical Specifi-catiots requirements.
(6) Jumper (Byysss') log does not contain bypassing descrep-ancies with Technical Specification requirements.
. (7) " Problem Identification Reports" confirm there are no violations of Technical Specifications reporting or LCO requirements.
. b.
The review included discussions with licensee personnel and i I review of Technical Specifications and the following plant j procedures, shift logs and operating records; t (1) AP-0001 Plant Procedures, Rev. 4, dated June 13, 1975.
(2) AP-0004 Plant Information Reports, Rev. 2, dated August ' ] 8, 1975.
(3) AP-0018 Bypass of Safety Function and Jumper Control, Rev. 2, dated September 15, 1975.
!. t . .. --,
_ - _ _ _.
t . . -7- ' . . (4) AP-0021 Operating Memos, Rev. 1, dated December 20, 1974.
. (5) AP-0219 Maintenance of Operations Department Logs, Rev. 1, dated June 15, 1974.
(6) AP-2006 Special Orders, Rev. O, dated October 31, 1974.
(7) Shift Supervisor (Operations) Log, January 1, 1976 - l March 31, 1976.
(8) Rowe Station Log 1, January 1, 1976 - March 31, 1976.
(9) Rowe Station Log 2, January 1, 1976 - March 31, 1976.
'(10) Primary Plant Log Sheet, January 1, 1976 - March 31, 1976.
(l'! Secondary Plant Log Sheet, January 1, 1976 - March 31, 1976.
(12) Operating Memos ZE-2, dated March 1, 1976; ZK-4 dated March 29, 1976; and ZR-25, dated March 16, 1976.
. (13) Night Order Book, January 1, 1976 - March 31, 1976.
(14) Bypass of Safety Function and Jumper Cdntrol Log, January 1, 1976 - March 31. 1976.
(15) Bypass of Safety Function and Jumper Control Requests 76-1 through 76-50.
(16) Plant Information Reports 76-1 through 76-3.
(17) Minutes of Plant Operations Review Committee (PORC) Meetings 76-1 through 76-19.
The inspector noted an improvement in the overall quality c.
of operating logs and records since the last inspection of this area. No discrepancies were identif'ed.
a . . ... _ _,
. i , , . .. . .-
i-8- . . 4.
Plant Tour including' The inspector toured accessible areas of the plant, a.
the Control Room, Vapor Container, Primary Auxiliary Building, Safety Injection / Diesel 3uilding and Turbine Building on April 13 and 15.
The tours were conducted to verify that: Monitoring instrumentation for pressurizer level, accumu-(1) lator volume and nitrogen pressure, and boric acid mixing and storage tank level were recording system /com-ponent parameters as required.
(2) Radiation controls were properly established in the vapor container and primary auxiliary building.
(3) Plant housekeeping conditions were acceptable.
(4) No unusual f] id leaks or piping vibrations existed.
(5) Pressurizer safety valves and piping hydraulic snubber oil levels were satisfactory.
(6) Selected safety injection system valves were properly positioned.
- (7) Selected equipment tags were properly authorized and ' logged.
(8) The control room operators were aware of the reasons for lighted annunciators and had taken action specified ir applicable alarm procedures.
(9) Plant tours conducted by the Plant Superintendent and Shift Supervisor are consistent with administrative procedures.
(10) Control Room manning was in conformance with the Technical Specifications and 10 CFR 50.54(k). The tours included discussions with licensee personnel, ob-b.
servation of the above conditions and components, measure-ment of actual radiation levels at selected areas of the vapor container, and review of Technical Specifications and the following plant procedures and records: _ ... ._. D . g --
- -.. . . I i .
-9- ' , . , (1) AP-0017 Switching and Tagging Rules for Plant Equip- ' ment, Rev. 1, dated October 25, 1975.
(2) )P-4203 Weekly Valve Check, Rev. 5, dated December 5,
t 1975.
, (3) OP-8100 Establishing and Posting Controlled Areas, j Rev. 2, dated May 2, 1975.
(4) Switching Log, January 1,1976 - March 31,1976.
l (5) Tagging Status Log, January 1, 1976 - March 31, 1976.
(6) Switching Orders 9113U,1910U and 9581U.
. l (7) Radiation Work Permit No. 438.
c.
The inspector determined that the items reviewed and ooserved during the tours were acceptable, except as described below.
(1) Some caution signs and posted radiation levels inside the vapor container Giffered from the existing measured radiation levels.
The inconsistency was caused by posting the caution signs and annotating the radiation levels - during a maintenance shutdown in January 1976.
When power operation was resumed these signs were left in place with no subsequent updating to reflect the change in the actual radiation levels. During normal plant operation the vapor container is considered and controlled by the licensee as a high radiation area.
These controls were reviewed by the inspector and found acceptable.
However, the radiation signs inside the vapor container are misleading.
The licensee stated that the signs would i be removed, -covered or otherwise corrected during the i ' next routine entry on April 20.
The inspector had no further questions in this area at this time.
(2) While conducting a tour of the Control Room, the in-spector cbserved the Control Room Operator adjusting -
+ . ._, ' .
- _ i . -10- . . the gain potentiometers for the power range neutron flux level channel amplifiers. The adjustments were made in a nonconservative direction such that subse-quent operations could have resulted in exceeding the allowable fraction of full power, as defined in Technical Specification D. 2.c. (1). OP-4201, Rev. 5, " Power Range Channel Calibration," specifies the manner in which power range neutron flux level channel amplifiers will be adjusted.
The gain potentiometer adjustments were not made in conformance with the requirements of OP-4201. The improper performance of OP-4201 is an Item of Noncompliance, Infraction level.
Prior to the completion of the inspection, the licensee performed the following corrective actions to prevent recurrence of the item of noncompliance.
(a) The Control Room operators were immediately verbally instructed to make adjustments to power range channels in accordance with 02-4201.
(b) A memorandum dated April 15,1976, " Setting of Power I and Intermediate Range Channels," was issued by . the Plant Superintendent to all Shift Supervisors
and Control Room Operators.
This memorandum provided revised instructions for setting the calibration level of the subject channels.
(c) Revision 12 to AP-7104, " Core XII Operational Limits," was issued and approved on April 15, 1976. This revision incorporated the instructions of the above memorandum.
The inspector noted an error t' at appeared in the revised procedure, and the licensee stated this item would be corrected by April 30, 1976.
(d) A revision to OP-4201 was initiated to be consistent with the current instructions for determining power and intermediate range channel calibration levels.
The licensee stated that the revised procedure would be issued by April 30, 1976.
The actions taken or intended to be taken to correct this Item of Noncompliance and to prevent its recurrence i are acceptable.
The licensee's completion of corrective a'ction, including revisions to AP-7104 and OP-4201, will be reviewed during a subsequent inspection.
- - - .-. e
. t . _11 - . (3) The tour of the vapor container was conducted in company with the Shift Supervisor, who was performing CP-4232, "Bi-weekly Inspection of Vapor Container." The Shift Supervisor identified a packing leak from no. 1 loop valve stem leakoff 1.ine and. issued MR #76-331 to effect the necessary correct f ve maintenance.
The shift super-visor's inspection was bserved to be systemmatic and thorough. The inspector had no questions in this area.
5.. Reportable Occurrences Reportable occurrences discussed below were reviewed to verify a.
that: (1) Details were clearly reported to the NRC and Facility Management.
(2) Corrective action described in the report was taken to prevent recurrence.
(3) The occurrence was reviewed and evaluated as required by the Technical Specifications.
(4) Safety Limits, Limiting Safety System Settings and , Limiting Conditions for Operation were not exceeded.
These areas were satisfactory for the occurrences reviewed unless otherwise noted.
b.
Reportable Occurrence 76-01 Reference: Licensee letter to NRC Region I dated March 4, 1976.
This occurrence concerned leakage from cracked welds in a piping flange and tee in the no. 3 chargiag pump relief valve discharge line.
There was no detectable increase in air activity in the area of the leakage. The cause of the weld cracks was attributed to vibration induced fatigue failure caused by continuous opera-tion of the positive displacement charging pump. Charging was transferred to the no. 1 charging pump, and the flange and tee were replaced and leak tested satisfactorily. The licensee's action concerning this occurrence were documented in the following records.
' _ ... __, ,
fi
-12- . ' . . . (1) Maintenance Request #76-125.
(2) Job Order #76-28.
(3) OP-5100, Rev. 3, " Valve, Fitting or Pip ~ Section Replacement and/or Repair," completed February 4, 1976.
(4) PORC Minutes, Mcating 76-11.
(5) Breathing zone air sample results for Cubicle #3 Charging Pump dated February 4, 1976.
(6) YAEC Surface Contamination and Radiation Survey, dated February 3, 1976.
The licensee has experienced similar leaks in charging pump piping and has initiated PDCR 75-21 to prevent recurrence of weld fatigue failures.
The licensee's action concerning this design change are discussed in Detail 9.a of this report.
The records associated with Job Order #76 '? did not indicate . the performance of suality assurance inspect.on of the work or review of the completed job order.
The licensee's quality assurance representative was not present during the inspection, and the licensee was unable to demonstrate the completion of ' these quality assurance requirements.
This is an unresolved item pending review of the quality assurance aspects of Job Order #76-28.
c.
Reportable Occurrence 76-02 Reference: Licensee letter to NRC Region I dated March 10, 1976.
This occurrence concerned leakage from a cracked weld in a piping reducer on the discharge header of no. 3 charging pump.
There was no detectable increase in air activity in the area of the leakage. The cause and corrective action was the same as discussed in Detail 5.b with the exception that the weld was radiographed following repair. The licensee's actions concerning this occurrence were documented in the follow'.- records: . p e
=+e , j i ) ogsp== , i . -13- - . (1) Maintenance Request #76-140.
- . (2) Job Order #76-31.
(3) OP-5100, Rev. 3, completed February 10, 1976.
(4) PORC Minutes, Meetings 76-11, 76-12 and 76-19.
(5) Breathing Zone Air Sample Results for P.A.B. #3 Charging Pump, dated February 10, 1976.
(6) YAEC Curface Contamination and Radiation Survey, dated February 10, 1976.
The licensee's actions to prevent recurrence of weld fatigue failures are discussed in Detail 9.a of this report.
The records associated with Job Order #76-31 did not indicate the performance of quality assurance inspection of the work or review of the completed job order.
The licensee's quality assurance' representative was not present during the inspection, and the licensee was unable to demonstrate the completion of these quality assurance , requirements.
This - an Unresolved Item pending review of the quality assursuce aspects of Job Order #76-31.
ii 6.
Nonroutine Event Review The licensee's understanding of the following assigned re-a.
sponsibilities associated with nonroutine events was reviewed.
(1) Prompt review and evaluation of off-normal operating events to assure identification of safety related events.
(2) Prompt review of planned and unplanned maintenance and testing activities to assure identification of noncom-pliance with the limiting conditions for operation requirements of the Technical Specifications.
. W
8 e e l l
,- - r-14- - . (3) Reporting safety-related operating events internally and to the NRC.
(4) Assuring completion of corrective actions relating to safety-related operating events.
b.
The review included discussions with licensee personnel and review of the quality of nonroutine event reports.
The inspector identified no discrepancies in this area.
c.
7.
Safety Limits, I.initing Safety System setti,gs and Limiting Conditions for Operation Startup, power or shutdown operations of the following a.
systems were reviewed to verify reactor operations were in conformance with Techaical Specification Safety Limits, Limiting Safety System Settings, and Limiting Conditions for Operation: (1) Reactor Coolant System.
(2) Power Conversion and Auxiliary Systems.
(3) Containment Systems.
- . (4) Emergency Core Cooling Systems.
(5) Other Engineered Safety Features.
(6) Electrical Systems.
b.
The review included discussions with licenses personnel, review of Technical Specifications, direct observation of the following process instrumentation and conditions, and review of the following procedures and records: (1) Loop Flow Indicatione and Annunciator Alarms.
(2) OP-6101, Rev. 2 "Nuc1 car Instrumentation and Reactor Protection System Precritical Checkoff," completed Januerf 31, 1976.
~ ' -. S . .
t , i e-15- , . (3) OP-4606, Rev. 2, completed January 20, 1976, February 17, 1976 and March 18, 1976.
(4) OP-647, Rev. 1, completed July 21, 1975, August 20, 1975 and September 18, 1975.
(5) Ion Exchanger Isolation Valve Lineup.
(6) Ready and Standby Charging Pump Valve Lineup.
(7) OP-2000.24, Rev. O, " Preparation and Testing of Hot Leg Insertion System," completed December 3, 1975.
(8) Shutdown Cooling Systems Valve Lineup.
(9) Alignment of Charging System for Safety Injection.
(10) OP-4212, Rev. 3, " Monthly V.C. Recirculation System Valve Exercise," completed March 29, 1975.
(11) OP-4610, Rev. 1, completed November 11, 1975.
(12)' Offsite Electrical Supply availability.
. (13) Charging System motor operated valves breaker.
(14) OP-2100, Rev. 5, " Plant Startup from Cold Shutdown," completed January 31, 1976.
' (15) Switching order 9404U, dated January 31, 1976.
(16) Accumulator Level and Pressure Indications.
(17) Rowe Station Logs 1 and 2, January 1, 1976 - March 31, 1976.
(18) OP-2108, Rev. 2, " Routine Power Operation," dated January 22, 1976.
(19) OP-2154, Rev. O, " Operation of Purification System" dated May 2, 1975.
. (20) OP-2163, Rev. O, "Startup of Purification System," completed December 2, 1975.
i o - .. --. G _ __ i
_ _ _. _ __ -__ i - -16-
- . . c.
The inspector determined that the items reviewed and observed were acceptable, except as described below.
(1) The licensee's most recent startup of the purification system was completed on December 2, 1975, in accordance with OP-2163.
The inspector noted that the PORC approved , procedure had been changed by the operator performing the procedure to reflect the existing plant conditions.
The changes did not change the intent of the procedure or result in an improper valve lineup.
However, the changes were not made with the concurrence of two in-dividuals holding senior reactor licenses, and the revised procedure wcs not subsequently reviewed by PORC and approved by the Plant Superintendent, as required by AP-0001, " Plant Procedures," and Technical Specifica-tion D.1.
The failure to maintain proper administrative control of the re-vised procedure is an Item of Noncompliance, Infraction Level.
8.
Control of High Radiation Area Access References: (1) Region I Inspection Report 50-29/76-06, Detail 6.b (2) Licensee letter (WYR 76-45) to Region I dated , April 12, 1976.
netion to review and correct The inspector reviewed the licerva c the Item of Noncompliance identi:ac-in Reference (1).
The in-spector verified that the licensee la reviewed the Item of Noncompliance and has taken action to prevent recurrence as des-cribed in Reference (2), which consisted of establishing adminis-trative controls for securing all high radiation areas.
This item is resolved.
9.
Licensee Followup Actions on Previously Identified Reportable Occurrences a.
Reportable Occurrences 75-07, 76-01 and 76-02 References: (1) Licensee letters to NRC Region I dated August 8 and 15, 1975.
. ... ._, . .
. E' I . . -17- . . . (2) Region I Inspection Reports 50-29/75-10, Detail 6.b., and 50-29/76-02, Detail 17.
(3) Licensee letter to NRC Region I dated March 4, 1976.
(4) Licensee letter to NRC Region I dated March 10, 1976.
The occurrence described in References (1) and (2) concerned a vibratica induced crack in a nozzle to flange weld on the charging header.
The occurrences described in References (3) and (4) and in Details 5.b and 5.c of this report concern similar veld cracks in charging system piping.
The licensee initiated Plant Design Change Request (PDCR) 75-21, " Additions of a Pulsation Dampener on the No. 3 Charging Pump Discharge Header," on September 23, 1975. The caterials required to perform the design change have been received with the excep-tion of the pulsation dampener, which is expected to arrive in May, 1976.
Based on the timely delivery of the dampener, the licensee expects prefabrication efforts will be completed in July, 1976. The installation of the modified piping section , will be completed during the next subsequent caintenance shut-down.
This remains an Unresolved Item pending the licensee's , completion of the design change.
b.
Reportable Occurrence 75-12 References: (1) Licensee letter to NRC Region I dated December 12, 1975.
. (2) Region I Inspection Report 50-29/76-02, Detail 7.e.
(3) Licensee letter to NRC Region I dated Nbrch 19, 1976.
The occurrence described in References (1) and (2) concerned the high pressurizer level scram bistable setpoint being greater than the Technical Specification limit.
The licensee submitted a revised Licensee Event Report, Reference (3), . . __, b M _ +.
I . -18- . which corrected the cause description of the original LER.
The licensee stated that a revision to procedure OP-4626 had been drafted and was scheduled for review by the Plant Opera-
tions Review Committee. This remains an Unresolved Item pending completion of the licensee's actions to revise OP-4626.
c.
Reportable occurrence 75-17 Reference: (1) Licensee letter to NRC Region I dated January 2, 1976.
(2) Region I Inspection Report 50-29/76-02, Detail 7.1.
The occurrence described in References (1) and (2) concerned the setpoint of the Loop No. 1 isolated loop AT interlock being set greater than the Technical Specification limit.
The licensee stated that the procedure used to adjust this setpoint, OP-6200, would be revised by July 1976 to prevent recurrence of the setpoint drift. The procedure will not be required until the next refueling shutdown which is sche-duled for early 1977. This remains an Unresolved Item pending revision of OP-6200.
. 10. Procedure Changes . References: (1) Region I Inspection Reports 50-29/75-17, Detail 3.a. (1)(c), and 50-29/76-02, Details 12.b and 12.c.
, The licensee has approved revisions to Annuncittor Alarm a.
Procedures, which were affected by the recent ECCS modifica-tions. These procedures include OP-3614, OP-3615, OP-3619, OP-3629, OP-3645, OP-3646, OP-3647, OP-3649 and OP-3650.
The inspector had no further questions concerning this item.
b.
Procedures associated with the maintenance of motor operated valves have been revised or originated to include instructions for reinstalling MOV cables lifted to comply with the Technical Specifications. These procedures which include OP-5101, OP-5764, OP-5763 and OP-5766, have been approved by the Plant Operations Review Committee, and are awaiting approval by the Manager of Operations. This remains an Unresolved Item pending final approval of the procedures.
. ... ._,
. O
i , - ? ' -19- . 11.
Switching Log References: (1) Region I Inspection Reports 50-29/75-10, Detail 3.c. (1) and 50-29/76-02, Detail 4.c.(1) The licensee has revised AP-0017, which provides an additional log sheet, APF-0017.4, " Tagging Status Log."
This log sheet is used to maintain a record of outstanding equipment tags in the plant. The inspector had no further questions concerning this item.
12.
Fire Protection Training References: (1) Region I Inspection Report 50-29/76-01 Detail 9.
The licensee's implementation of AP-0503, " Fire Protection Training" was reviewed. The licensee conducted annual fire protection general plant training on February 18 and 19, 1976.
This training included lectures which covered the location and operation of fire fighting apparatus,' communications equipment and breathing equipment.
The
annual plant fire drill was conducted on March 26, 1976. Deficient areas noted during the drill were scheduled for increased emphasis during future training sessions.
The inspector had no further ques-tions concerning this item.
13.
Identification of safety Related Instrumentation and controls i References: (1) Region I Inspection Report 50-29/74-16, Detail 13.b.(1) and 50-29/76-02, Detail 28.
The licensee issued a Safety Classification of Systems Manual, Rev. O, on February 1G, 1976. This manual identifies safety-re-lated instrucents and controls on the plant, and in addition ' identifies safety-related mechanical and electrical components.
The inspector had no further questions encerning this item.
The Safety Classification of Systems Manual will be further re-
viewed during the next quality assurance inspection.
I 14.
Reported Radiochemistry Data References: (1) Region I Inspection Report 50-29/76-02, Detail 5.c. (1). '(2) Licensee letter to NRC, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, dated March 2, 1976.
. ... ._, .
i
. -20- - . The licensee reviewed the radiochemistry data reported in Section V of the January - June 1975 Semi-Annual Operating Report and submitted Reference (2) to correct that report.
The inspector noted that the maximum Iodine-131 concentration in the reactor coolant for the month of April 1975 still had not been correctly reported. The activity was listed as 8.9 E-04 vice 9.7 E-04, which was measured on April 29, 1975. The licensee acknowledged this discrepancy. This was the only remaining error in reporting radiochemistry data which was noted by the inspector. Additional licensee review and correction of reported information is not required. The inspector had no further questions concerning this item.
.
- *
-w , . _. _...,
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ t Frow 00TE C8 DOCUMENT 00T1 RECElvED NO i 6/7/76 6/2*(76 60729 ~. TilEXE ATCNIC EMCrRIC CCT NT e LT9 WEUG cPORT_ QTMER ! x f to Om iG CL OTMtR
I 3( ) ACTION NECESSARY [ CONCvRRENCE O o^****"' NO ACTION NECESSARY [ COuwfNT O ><
CLA556F PCST Op 8CE pile CODE REG NO , DE SC R tP YlON Must Se Unsentate16 REFERT * YO DATE RECE8vED av OATE t 50-29/76-11 l trrTzm In REstouss to mEraar Comcas. masa L A. MARTFIE 2 ' Inc Tv0 IsrnAcrIoss mEvenTEm af Toen-
InsencToa.
' ENCLOSURES C0 RIES FCE REACTOR FACILITIES ERANCE < PML, LOCAL PUE, NSIC, AMD UTIE SENF g TO REGIONAL CORDIMATWL FM DISTRI-BEFFION.
I t h MuAmas r
COPY SENT TO R E' ION I
L U $ NUCLE AR REGULATOR V COMMS$aON FCRM NRC 3;65 .
4
) i i . I - .
. ... --.
t
'T D* hh D . ml al . }}