IR 05000219/1986030
| ML20215N756 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Oyster Creek |
| Issue date: | 10/30/1986 |
| From: | Chaudhary S, Jerrica Johnson NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20215N753 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-219-86-30, NUDOCS 8611070237 | |
| Download: ML20215N756 (8) | |
Text
.
.
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
REGION I
Report No. 50-219/86-30 Docket No. 50-219 License No. DPR-16 Priority Category C
--
Licensee: GPU Nuclear Corporation P.O. Box 388 Forked River, NJ 08731 Facility Name: Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station Inspection At:
Forked River, New Jersey
~
Inspection Conducted:
September 30 - October 10, 1986 Inspectors:
N N
/o/29/94 S. K. Chaudhary, t.ead Reactor Engineer
' date.
Approved by: hi E'
'#/N 8
J. R. Johnson, Chief, Operational Programs date Section, 08, DRS Inspection Summary:
Inspection on September 30 - October 10, 1986 Inspection Report Number 50-219/86-30)
Areas Inspected:
A routine unannounced inspection by one region-based inspector of the Technical Specification surveillance : testing and calibration program; calibration of safety-related instruments; the measuring and test equipment control program; and the maintenance program.
Results: No violations or deviations were identified.
8611070237 861031 PDR ADOCK 05000219 G
.
.
DETAILS 1.
Persons Contacted GPU Nuclear Corporation
- P. Pitman, Licensing
- V. Foglia, PM Manager, Plant Material
- J. D. Kowalski, Licensing
- J. J. Barton, Deputy Director ~
- V. R. Willitt, Jr. Planning /MCF
- S. Fuller, Operations QA Manager
- J. P. Malooney, Manager, Plant Material
- P. B. Fiedler, Director and V.P.
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
- J. R. Johnson, Chief, Operational Programs Section
- J. Wec.hselberger, Resident Inspector In addition to 'the above,- the inspector met and held discussions with other plant personnel including managers, engineers, QA/QC, and craft personnel during the course of this inspection.
2.
Maintenance Program The inspector reviewed the licensee's maintenance program to ascertain whether the program was in conformance with Technical Specification (TS),
Regulatory requirements, licensee commitments, and industry. guides and standards.
Special emphasis was.placed on review of the preventive maintenance program and practices currently approved and implemented.
2.1 Program Review
The inspector reviewed licensee's administrative procedures to verify the adequacy of management controls established to assure an effective and comprehensive preventive maintenance (PM) system in the plant.
The responsibility for the PM program has been assigned to the Plant Materiel department and is tracked by a computer program controlled by the project planning section of the department. _The master tracking system includes all pertinent information, i.e.
the last date of PM; next scheduled PM; whether the established frequency has been met; and the latest date by which PM must be performed.
It also indicates the responsible plant section and/or craft labor to carry-out of the task.
The inspector noted that a weekly PM schedule and status report was issued and distributed to management and other personnel responsible for corrective and/or preventive maintenance. Access to the computer
. - -. - - -. - _
.
.
-. -
.
-.
. - -..
-
-
-.
.
.
.
.
~
'
'
.
. program was controlled by the planning department to minimize
inadvertent or; unauthorized manipulation of this information and/or
'
PM~ data. base.
The procedure covering this activity appeared
-
adequate.
,
a 2.~ 2 Findings
,
Based on the above re'vi ew,'
examination, and discussions with cognizant personnel, the inspector determined that:
1.
Written procedures had been developed.and established _ for pla.nning, scheduling and requesting routine PM and/or other
,
_ maintenance requirements;
,'
2.
Criteria and responsibilities. for review and approval of L
maintenance requests had been established; 3.
Responsibilities ~had been assigned for identification ~and implementation of inspection holdpoints;
,
~
4 '.
A master schedule-for the PM program had been devel_oped and kept current; and
.
5.
- Responsibility for establishing PM frequency, and documentation and. review of completion of PM _ activities had been assigned and implemented.
.
The inspector had no further questions -in this area at this time.
No violations were identified.
- 2.3 Implementation To ascertain whether maintenance activities on important-to-safety
.
systems and components were conducted in accordance with approved procedures, regulatory requirements, codes and standards, and TS.
,
'
The inspector selected three safety-related systems to ensure the.
appropriateness of surveillance and maintenance activities conducted by the licensee.
The selected systems were Core Spray, Isolation Condenser, and Reactor High pressure Scram. The sample consisted of-a total of seven test / maintenance work activities.
2.4 Findings
'
Based on 'the 'above review of documentation, and discussions with cognizant personnel, the inspector determined that:
-1.
Required administrative approvals were obtained prior to initiating work;
.,
l
,,.--,..,v-+-,-.
g
.-r,,,,...,,-.,..-.
,.,.n.n,,,.,.,.,,,,n..-....._
_,.,,.. _
,-,n.
---nn_,,
,,.. - _,,,,
-
-
_.
-
. -
. -
-__. - -
-
-
-
..
.
.
'
.
2.
Limiting Conditions ' for Operation ('LCO) were met while the components / systems were removed from service; 3.
Functional testing. and calibrations were completed prior to returning the system to service; and 4.
The corrective and preventive maintenance records were assembled and stored as historical records.
No violations were identified.
'
3.
Surveillance Testing and Calibration Contro1' Program The inspector reviewed documentation to ascertain whether the licensee had developed and effectively implemented programs for surveillance testing,
'
calibration, and inspections required by section 4 of the plant Technical
-
Specifications (TS). The program for calibration of. other safety-related instrumentation, not covered by TS, was also examined for adequacy and
!
effectiveness.
The inspector interviewed and held discussions with-licensee. personnel and cognizant plant management to as'sess their knowledge and understanding of the program requirements, and to review responsibilities. assigned to various departments ~ and sections of the licensee's organization.
3.1 - Program Review The inspector reviewed the program description and examined records to determine if calibration requirements had been established for
,
components associated with safety-related systems and/or functions,
l that were specified in the TS; and if a master schedule had been developed that included calibration frequency, responsibility for implementation, and the calibration status of each component.
The inspector' determined that a calibration program had been
established for such safety-related components.
A~ master schedul.e had been developed to show the responsibility, frequency,.and -the status ~ of calibration for each safety-related component covered by the Technical Specification, as well as to ensure that adequate
. records were maintained.
3.2 Findings Based on the above review, examination, and discussions with cognizant personnel, the inspector determined that:
- 1.
A master schedule for TS calibration and functional testing of instrumentation and. systems had been established; the schedule included frequency of each. test / calibration and/or inspection,
,
the responsibility for implementation, and the surveillance test / calibration status of the item or system.
e, --
n..
n.,n
. -,,
-,-,,-,,.-,,.,.,.n,--,n
..
e --
-v,..,...
....., - -
~ -,
--
-..n.----.
,.m
.,, - - -,,...
.
2.
The. responsibility for maintaining and updating the schedule was established and assigned by procedure.
3.
The current master schedule reflected the TS requirements for such tests and/or calibration, and 4.
The respcnsibilities, for-review and evaluation of data, reporting and controlling deficiencies, and ensuring the required surveillance test / calibration was satisfied, had been -
established by procedures.
The inspector had no further questions in this area. No violations were identified.
3.3 Surveillance Procedure and Records The inspector reviewed procedures and' records to verify that surveillance of safety-related systems and components was being co,nducted in accordance with approved procedures as required by TS; and also if these procedures were adequate to accomplish the safety intent of the.TS requirement, thus assuring operational safety of the
.. plant.
The inspector randomly selected ten tests from completed surveillance tests to verify the adequacy of conformance to the above require-ments.
Documents reviewed are listed in section 8 of this report.
3.4 Findings Based on the above review and examinations, the inspector determined tnat the procedures were' adequate to direct and control surveillance
testing. Procedures. included required prerequisites and preparations
for test; acceptance criteria; instructions and steps to assure that.
l the system or components ~ were restored to an operating condition l
after the test; and responsibilities for review and approval for the test data.
Procedures appeared to meet the intent of the TS surveillance testirg requirements.
The inspector also determined that the records maintained for. these tests were adequate.
They showed that the completed tests were reviewed for acceptability of results; met the testing frequency; and were in conformance with the TS requirements for the surveillance tests.
l-No violations were identified.
4.
Quality Assurance Program for Measuring and Test Equipment The inspector reviewed the licensee's QA program to ascertain if the program adequately provided administrative controls over measuring and test equipment (M&TE); and if the controls provided were in conformance
,
i with regulatory requirements, commitments, and industry standards.
l
_
-.
- e-
.
~
-The program. review consisted of verification of licensee's commitments in the Final Safety Analysis Report (FSAR) for conformance with regulatory requirements, and review of procedures for adequacy.
The procedures contained criteria and responsibilities for calibration frequency, methods for placing in or removing equipment from service, and the calibration status of the equipment.
The procedures also included methods of. documenting calibration history of equipment, including:
Traceability to calibration source, As-found and as-calibrated data,
Identification of standards used,
Identification of calibration procedure used, and its traceability to a national standard,
Date of calibration, and
Name of person performing calibration.
The procedure also specified that M&TE equipment must have accuracy four times greater than the equipment which.was being calibrated.
A system,.
very similar to the master schedule ' sed for TS calibration, was in use u
for controlling.the calibration frequency and recall of equipment.
Requirements for the history of use, and controls to prevent inadvertent use of equipment beyond calibration frequency were also established. The procedure also required an investigation and evaluation of data recorded by the M&TE' prior to scheduled calibration if the M&TE Equipment was found to be out of calibration. The inspector also questioned the responsible
~I&C supervisor to assess his knowledge and understanding of the program, and found him to be knowledgeable.
No violations were identified.
5.
Cracks and Spalling in Structural Concrete The inspector reviewed seven " Material Nonconformance Reports" initiated by the licensee regarding cracks and spalling of concrete in safety-related structures in the plant. The cracked and spalled areas were also~
visually examined by the inspector to assess the extent and severity of this problem.
Also, the inspector discussed his concerns with cognizant licensee personnel regarding adequate technical resolution of this matter.
The inspector was informed that the preliminary resolution was to monitor.
the cracks for growth, and to repair the. spalled areas.
The inspector, however, stated that during his visual examination of the cracked beam, there was no apparent evidence of any baseline measurement marks and/or instrumentation to continuously measure the growth. However, the Plant Director assured the inspector that technical evaluations would be performed and the safety of the structure would be assured before the plant start-up from the current refueling outage.
This item remains unresolved ~pending review of licensee technical evaluation and any corrective action, if necessary.
(86-30-01)
,
.
__
.-,.-.
..
6.
Unresolved Items Unresolved Items are matters regarding which more information is needed to determine' if they are acceptable items or items of violation or deviation.
An unresolved item is discussed in paragraph 5..of this report.
7.
Exit Interview At the conclusion of this inspection,.the inspector met with licensee management (identified in paragraph I with an
- ),
at which time the inspector summarized the purpose,. scope, and the findings of the inspection.
At no time during this inspection, did the inspector provide written material to the licensee.
8.
Documents Reviewed 8.1 Procedures Administrative Procedure, AP-101;
" Organization and
-
Responsibility", Rev. 15.
Administrative Procedure, AP-103; " Station Document Control",
-
Rev. 19.
-
Administrative Procedure, AP-104; " Control of Nonconformances",
Rev. 9.
-
Administrative Procedure, AP-105; " Conduct of Maintenance", Rev.
26.
Administrative Procedure, AP-108.4; " Control of Plant Modifica-
-
tion and Major Maintenance Work in Critical Plant Areas while the Plant is in Operations", Rev. 1.
-
Administrative Procedure, AP-112; "0yster Creek Calibration of Maintenance, Test and Inspection Tools, Gauges, and Instruments", Rev. 17.
Administrative Procedure, AP-112.1; " Technical Specification
-
Supporting Installed Instrumentation", Rev. 22.
Administrative Procedure, AP-113;
" Conduct of Installed
-
Instrument Surveillance, Calibration and Maintenance", Rev.10.
-
Administrative Procedure, AP-116; " Surveillance Test Program",
Rev. 1 _-
.
..
'
Administrative Procedure, AP-103; " Station Document Control",
-
Rev. 19.
Administrative Procedure, AP-118;
" Preventive Maintenance
-
Administrative Procedure", Rev. 10.
8.2 Other Documents Electrical and I&C Material Weekly Status Repor'ts (covering
-
equipment problems, PM, and Miscellaneous support) from 1/3/86 to 9/25/86
-
Mechanical Weekly Status Reports from 1/03/86 to 9/18/86.
-
Performance Indictator Data for 1, 2, 3, and 4 quarters for 1985 1&2 quarters for 1986.
Preventive Maintenance and Surveillance Master Schedule.
-
,
Preventive Maintenance and Surveillance Weekly Status Reports.
Calibration History Files for
-
'a.
Tong Tester; AE-149
b.
0-60 psi-Gage; PI-454 c.
0-60 Psi Gage; PI-456 d.
Fluke Model 8050A; VI-131; VI-35; and VI-16.
Maintenance and Surveillance Test Reports for:
-
a.
Core Spray System Test # 610.3.005 610.3.105 610.3.205 b.
Isolation Condenser System Test # 609.3.002 609.3.003 c.
Reactor High Pressure Scram System.
,
Test # 619.3.016 619.3.017
.