IR 05000102/2002028
| ML17054B526 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Nine Mile Point, 05000102  |
| Issue date: | 03/27/1985 |
| From: | Sharon Hudson, Linville J NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML17054B524 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-220-85-02, 50-220-85-2, NUDOCS 8504020293 | |
| Download: ML17054B526 (20) | |
Text
U.
S.
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
REGION I
Report No.
50-220/85-02 Docket No.
50-220 License No.
DPR-63 Priority Category C
Licensee:
Nia ara Mohawk Power Cor oration 300 Erie Boulevard West S racuse New York 13202 Facility Name:
Inspection At:
Nine Mile Point Nuclear Station Unit
Scriba New York
Fb ~28
Inspector:
S.
on, Seni esident Inspector Da e
Approved By:
J Linv e,
Chi<<
, Reactor Projects S ction No.
2C, D
Date Ins ection on Januar 2 to Februar
1985 Re ort No Results:No violations were identified in the areas examined.
Ins ection Summar
~/
R i
i i
b h
id i
t2lh Areas inspected included:
licensee action on previous inspection findings, operational safety verification, physical security, plant tours, safety system verification, surveillance testing, maintenance activities, Licensee Event Reports, review of licensee identified events and general employee training.
e 8504020293 850328 I
- DOCK 05000220
4
DETAILS 1.
Persons Contacted J. Aldrich, Supervisor, Operations W. Connelly, Supervisor, g.A. Operations T. Perkins, General Superintendent, Nuclear Generation T.
Roman, Station Superintendent The inspector also interviewed other licensee personnel during the course of the inspection including shift supervisors, administrative, operations, health physics, security, instrument and control, and contractor person-nel.
2.
Summar of Plant Activities The plant operated at full power throughout the inspection period.
3.
Licensee Action on Previous Ins ection Findin s
(Closed)
Inspector Followup Item (84-02-01):
In preparation for the Spring 1984 refueling outage, the licensee found a black, foreign material between the fuel rods of four old fuel bundles which were stored in the spent fuel pool.
The licensee decided not to use these fuel bundles as part of the core reload for Cycle 8.
The inspector examined the Special Nuclear Material Control Sheets for each of the four fuel bundles (serial
¹NMD-2, NMD-56, NMD-59, LJ-1802)
and verified that each sheet had been marked to help prevent their future use without further evaluation.
4.
0 erational Safet Verification a
~
Control Room Observation Routinely throughout the inspection period, the inspector independ-ently verified plant parameters and equipment availability of engi-neered safeguard features.
The following items were observed:
Proper control room manning and access control; Adherence to approved procedures for ongoing activities; Proper valve and breaker alignment of safety systems and emergency power sources; Reactor control panel instrumentation and recorder traces; Reactor protection system instruments to determine that the required channels are operable;
E
Stack gas monitor recorder traces; Core thermal limits; Shift turnover b.
Review of Lo s and 0 eratin Records The inspector reviewed the following logs and instructions:
Control Room Log Book Station Shift Supervisor's Log Book Station Shift Supervisor's Instructions Reactor Operating Log Book The logs and instructions were reviewed to:
Obtain information on plant problems and operation; Detect changes and trends in performance; Detect possible conflicts with Technical Specifications or regulatory requirements; Assess the eFfectiveness of the communications provided by the logs and instructions; and Determine that the reporting requirements of Technical Specifications are met.
No violations were identified.
5.
Observation of Ph sical Securit The inspector made observations to verify that selected aspects of the plant's physical security system were in accordance with regulatory re-quirements, physical security plan and approved procedures.
The following observations relating to physical security were made:
The security force was properly manned and appeared capable of per-forming their assigned functions.
Protected area barriers were intact gates and doors closed and locked if not attende *
't ~
Isolation zones were free of visual obstructions and objects that could aid an intruder in penetrating the protected ares'ersons and packages were checked prior to entry into the protected area.
Vehicles were properly authorized, searched and escorted or control-led within the protected area.
Persons within the protected area displayed photo badges, persons in vital areas were properly authorized, and persons requiring an escort were properly escorted.
Compensatory mesures were implemented during periods of equipment failure.
No violations were identified.
6.
Plant Tours:
e During the inspection period, the inspector made frequent tours of plant areas to make an independent assessment of equipment conditions, radiolog-ical conditions, safety and adherence to regulatory requirements.
The following areas were among those inspected:
Turbine Building Auxiliary Control Room Vital Switchgear Rooms Cable Spreading Room Diesel Generator Rooms Reactor Building The following items were observed or verified:
'a ~
Radiation Protection:
Personnel monitoring was properly conducted.
Randomly selected radiation protection instruments were cali-brated and operable.
Radiation Work Permit requirements were being followed.
Area surveys were properly conducted and the Radiation Work Permits were appropriate for the as-found condition b.
Fire Protection:
Randomly selected fire extinguishers were accessible and inspec-ted on schedule.
Fire doors were unobstructed and in their proper position.
Ignition sources and combustible materials were controlled in accordance with the licensee's approved procedures.
Appropriate fire watches or fire patrols were stationed when equipment was out of service.
c.
E ui ment Controls:
Jumper and equipment mark-ups did not conflict with Technical Specification requirments.
Conditions requiring the use of jumpers received.prompt licensee attention.
Administrative controls for the use of jumpers and equipment mark-ups were properly implemented.
d.
Vital Instrumentation:
Selected instruments appeared functional and demonstrated para-meters within Technical Specification Limiting Conditions for Operation.
e.
Radioactive Maste S stem Controls:
Gaseous releases were monitored and recorded.
No unexpected gaseous releases occurred.
f.
~kk Plant housekeeping and cleanliness were in accordance with approved licensee programs.
7.
Safet S stem 0 erabilit Verification On a
sampling basis, the inspector directly examined selected safety sys-tem trains to verify that the systems were properly aligned in the standby mode.
This examination included:
'L
0
Verification that each accessible valve in the flow path is in the correct position by either visual observation of the valve or remote posi tion indication.
Verification that power supply breakers are aligned for components that must actuate upon receipt of an initiation signal.
Visual inspection of the major components for leakage, proper lubri-cation, cooling water supply, and other general conditions that might prevent fulfillment of their functional requirements.
Verification by observation that instrumentation essential to system actuation or performance was operational.
During this inspection period, the following systems were examined:
Emergency Diesel Generators Core Spray Systems Liquid Poison System No violations were identified.
e 8.
Surveillance Testin The inspector witnessed the performance of selected surveillance to verify that:
Surveillance procedures conform to technical specification require-ments and have been properly approved.
Test instrumentation is calibrated.
Limiting conditions for operations for removing equipment from ser-vice are met.
Surveillance schedule is met.
Test results met technical specification requirements.
Appropriate corrective action is initiated, if necessary.
Equipment is properly restored to service following the test.
The following tests were included in this review:
V
ICP-93,
"Containment Spray Raw Water System Flow and Pressure" per-formed on containment spray raw water pump ¹112 on February 8, 1985.
ICP-81,
"Core Spray System" performed core spray flow instrument
¹11 on'ebruary 8,
1985.
IMP-NEU-2, "Intermediate Range Monitor Instrument Channel Calibration performed on IRM channel 18 on February 27, 1985.
No violations were identified.
9.
Maintenance Activities The inspector examined portions of various safety related maintenance activities.
Through direct observation and review of records, he deter-mined that:
These activities did not violate the limiting conditions for opera-tion.
Required administrative approvals and tagouts were obtained prior to initiating the work.
Approved procedures were used or the activity was within the "skills of the trade".
Appropriate radiological controls were implemented.
guality control inspections were conducted as appropriate.
Post maintenance testing was performed.
During this inspection period, the following activities were examined:
Replacement of Reactor Building Ventilation Monitor ¹ll on February 7,
1985.
On January 24, 1985, the inspector noticed that a
temporary repair had been performed on Reactor Building Ventilation Monitor ¹11.
This work was performed as per Work Request
¹30822.
However, the Quality Control De-partment had not been informed prior to making the temporary repair.
When informed of this, Nonconformance Report ¹85-02 was issued by Quality Con-trol Department to the Instrument and Control Department.
The'esident inspector reviewed the corrective actions taken in response to this Non-conformance Report and noted that they appear to be adequate.
The tem-porary repair has since been replaced by a permanent repair.
The inspector had no further question A I
10.
Review of Licensee Event Re orts LER's The LER's submitted to NRC Region I were reviewed to determine whether the details were clearly reported, including accuracy of the description of the cause and adequacy of the corrective action.
The inspector also de-termined whether the assessment of potential safety consequences had been properly evaluated, whether generic implications were indicated, whether the event warranted on site follow-up and whether the reporting require-ments of 10 CFR 50.73 had been met.
During this inspection period, the following LER's were reviewed:
LER No.
Event Date Subject 84-17 November 12, 1984 Reactor scram while shutdown The root cause of the scram was an incorrect procedure.
The inspector verified that a technicallycorrect procedure N1-ST-V8,
"Main Steam Isola-tion Valve Full Closure Test",
has been issued for testing the MSIV posit-ion scram.
84-18 November 13, 1984 Reactor scram e
The reactor scrammed from 4% power due to erroneous operation of the mech-anical pressure regulator.
This event was previously reviewed in Inspec-tion Report 84-25.
During two subsequent start-ups on December 18, 1984 and March 5, 1985, this p'roblem with the mechanical pressure regulator did not reoccur.
85-01 January 23, 1985 Automatic initiation of Reactor Building Emergency Ventilation System This LER reports three automatic initiations of the Emergency Ventilation System in a 2 week period due to spiking of a Reactor Building Ventilation Radiation Monitor.
After the third occurrence, the detector was replaced and calibrated.
No unacceptable conditions were noted.
11.
Review of Licensee Identified Events
'a
~
On February 1,
1985, the licensee notified NRC, Region I that a re-cent review of the Emergency Condenser steam line drain lines con-cluded that it was not properly seismically supported.
In the event of their failure, the one inch drain line could be isolated by shut-ting the Emergency Condenser Isolation Valves.
The room where the
~
~
'll i
drain lines are located is not normally manned but is equipped with a temperature alarm to warn the control room operator of a
steam line break.
Existing procedures instructed the operator to take this ac-tion.
In the event the break was not immediately isolated, the licensee's calculations show that reactor coolant loss thru the break would be
gpm.
This is within the makeup capacity of either of the two con-trol rod drive pumps.
The ability of the Emergency Condenser System to remove decay would not be significantly affected since only 5.4%
of the normal steam flow to the Emergency Condensers would be lost thru the break.
NRC, Region I concluded that since the operability of the Emergency Condenser System was not significantly affected and the licensee had administrative controls in effect to isolate the break, continued operation, while repairs to the drain line were performed, was ac-ceptable.
The repair s consisted of installing a total of 6 seismic restraints on the two drain lines.
All repairs were completed by February 5,
1985
'.
On February 14, 1985, the licensee reported to the NRC that it had failed to comply with Technical Specification 3.6.10. 1 b and c since a continuous fire watch had not been established when the Halon Fire Protection System was inoperable.
As the result of surveillance testing on February 6,
1985, three fire dampers in the Auxiliary Con-trol Room were found to be inoperable.
With these fire dampers in-operable, the Halon System would not maintain the concentration of halon gas required to suppress a fire in the area.
The first indi-vidual to review the completed surveillance test did not realize the significance of the inoperable dampers and therefore did not estab-lish: the required fire watch.
When a second supervisor reviewed the test on February 14, he established the fire watch.
The dampers were repaired and sucessfully retested on February 25, 1985.
During the period when the fire dampers were not operable, the smoke detection system for this area remained operable.
The manually init-iated C02 system for this area was also operable throughout this period.
The inspector had no further questions regarding these events.
12.
General Em lo ee Re ualification Trainin The inspector attended the licensee's general employee requalification training program to verify that the training addresses the areas of admin-istrative procedures, security, quality assurance, site emergency plan, industrial safety, fire protection and radiation protection, as specified
in Administrative Procedure APN-10D, "General Employee Training and Radia-tion Protection Training".
The licensee routinely provides instruction in prenatal radiation exposure to all employees.
The licensee provides
"hands on" training as well as classroom instruction for those individuals required to wear self contained breathing apparatus.
All personnel must complete the training and pass a written examination annually to maintain their qualifications (general employee, radiation protection and/or res-piratory protection).
No violations were identified.
13.
Exit Interview At periodic intervals throughout the reporting period, the inspector met with senior management to discuss the inspection scope and findings.
Based on the NRC Region I review of this report it was determined that this report does not contain information subject to
CFR 2.790 restric-tion V
.
g a