IR 05000220/1983014

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
IE Insp Rept 50-220/83-14 on 830607-24 & 0705.Noncompliance Noted:Failure to Lock Open Breaker for Core Spray Isolation Valve 40-12
ML20024F439
Person / Time
Site: Nine Mile Point Constellation icon.png
Issue date: 08/12/1983
From: Sharon Hudson, Lazarus W
NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I)
To:
Shared Package
ML20024F437 List:
References
50-220-83-14, NUDOCS 8309090384
Download: ML20024F439 (8)


Text

P

.

U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY CCMMISSION

REGION I

Report No.

83-14 Docket No.

50-220 DPR-63 License No.

Priority

--

Category Licensee:

Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation 300 Erie Boulevard West Syracuse, New York 13202 Facility Name: Nine Mile Point Nuclear Station, Unit 1 Inspection At: Scriba, New York Inspection Conducted: June 7-24 and July 5,1983 Inspectors: M //J-

? ? !?4 S. D. Hudson, Senior Resident Inspector

' da t'e date date Approved by:

  1. < h,b f,

[3

,

Chid'f4 Restor Projectsfection 2C

/ date Division of Project and' Resident Programs Inspection Summary:

Inspection on June 7-24 and July 5,1983 (Report No. 50-220/83-14)

Areas Inspected:

Routine, onsite regular inspections by the resident inspector (54 hours6.25e-4 days <br />0.015 hours <br />8.928571e-5 weeks <br />2.0547e-5 months <br />). Areas inspected included: licensee action on previous inspection findings, operational safety verification, observation of physical security, plant tours, surveillance testing,and safety system operability verification.

Results: One violation was identified in one area.

(Failure to lock open the breaker for core spray isolation valve 40-12, paragraph 8).

Region I Form 12 (Rev. February 1982)

8309090384 830023 PDR ADOCK 05000220 G

PDR

.

.

DETAILS 1.

Persons Contacted J. Aldrich, Supervisor, Operations W. Connolly, Supervisor, Q. A. - Operations K. Dahlberg, Site Maintenance Superintendent W. Drews, Technical Superintendent F. Hawksley, ISI Coordinator E. Leach, Superintendent of Chemistry and Radiation Management 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 personrel.

2.

Summary of Plant Activities The plant increased power from 40% to 100% following its return to service on June 5,1983 from the recirculation piping replacement outage.

3.

Licensee Action on Previous Inspection Findings (Closed)

INSPECTOR FOLLOWUP ITEM (81-28-01): The inspector examined each of the main steam line radiation monitor indicators and verified that they were correctly recorded by the process computcr's hourly log.

(Closed)

INSPECTOR FOLLOWUP ITEM (82-02-02): The inspector reviewed NMPC drawing no. C-18368-C and detennined that the core spray strainers should not be bolted to their support pedestal to allow for vertical movement.

4.

Operational Safety Verification a.

Control Room Observatiora Routinely throughout the inspection period, the inspector independently verified plant parameters and equipment availability of engineered 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-r.

recorder traces;

--

,,

I

.

.

.

Reactor protection system instruments to determine that the

--

required cnannels are operable; Stack gas monitor recorder traces; and

--

Core thermal limits.

--

The status of selected control room annunciators was discussed with control room operators to determine that the reason for them was understood and corrective action, if required, was being taken.

b.

Review of Logs and Operating Records The inspector reviewed the following logs and instruction for the period June 7-24, 1983:

Control Room Log Book

--

Station Shift Supervisor's Log Book

--

Station Shift Supervisor's Instructions

--

Licensee Event Report Log

--

Reactor Operating Log

--

The inspector also reviewed the Station Shift Supervisor's Log Book from June 25 to July 5,1983.

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

--

,

I regulatory requirements; Determine that records are being reviewed as required;

--

Assess the effectiveness of the comunications provided by the

--

logs and instructions; and Determine that the rept.tting requirements of technical

--

specifications are met.

No violations were identified.

k -

- - - -

-

_ _ _ _ _ _

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

__

_-

. -

_

_ - - _ _ _ _

.

.

5.

Observation of Physical Security The inspector made observations to verify that selected aspects of the plants physical security system were in accordance with regulatory requirements, physical security plan and approved procedures. The following observations relating to physical security were made:

The security force on both regular and off-shifts were properly

--

manned and appeared capable of performing their assigned functions.

Protected area barriers were intact - gates and doors closed and

--

locked if not attended.

Isolation zones were free of visual obstructions and objects that

--

could aid an intruder in penetrating the protected area.

Persons and packages were checked prior to entry into the protected

--

area.

Vehicles were properly authorized, scarched and escorted or controlled

--

within the protected area.

Persons within the protected area displayed photo identification

--

badges, persons in vital areas were properly authorized, and persons requiring an escort were properly escorted.

Compensatory measures were implemented during periods of equipment

--

failure.

No violations were identified.

6.

Plant Tours During the inspection period, the inspector made multiple tours of plant I

creas to make an independent assessment of equipment conditions, radiological conditions, safety and adherence to regulatory requirements.

The following areas were amang those inspected:

Turbine Building

--

Auxiliary Control Room

--

Vital Switchgear Rooms

--

Yard Areas

--

Radwaste Area

--

Diesel Generator Rooms

--

_ - _ _ _ _ -

.

.

Screen House

--

Reactor Building

--

The following items were observed or verified:

a.

Radiation Protection:

Perznnel monitoring was properly conducted.

--

Randomly selected radiation protection instruments were

--

calibrated and operable.

Radiation Work Pemit requirements were being followed.

--

--

Area surveys were properly conducted and the Radiation Work Permits were appropriate for the as-found conditions.

b.

Fire Protection:

Randomly selected fire extinguishers were accessible end

--

inspected 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.

c.

Equipment Controls:

Jumpers and equipment mark-ups did not conflict with Technical

--

Specification requirements.

Conditions requiring the use of jumpers received prompt licensee

--

attention.

Administrative controls for the use of jumpers and equipment

--

mark-ups were properly implemented.

The inspector independently verified that equipment mark-ups

--

  1. BMU 4958 and 4974 for the fire detection system had been properly conducted.

d.

Vital Instrumentation:

Selected instruments appeared functional and demonstrated

--

parameters within Technical Specification Limiting Conditions for Operation.

L

.

.

e.

Radioactive Waste System Controls:

Gaseous releases were monitored and recorded.

--

During the recent outage, the licensee installed a new Radioactive Gaseous Effluent Monitoring System (RAGEMS). This system is designed to monitor the stack gas releases during both normal operations and post accident conditions. The licensee stated that he intends to keep the existing stack gas monitor system operational during the initial trial phase of the new RAGEMS. The inspector reviewed the Stack Gas Isotopic Analysis performed June 15, 1983 and verified that the stack gas monitors were properly calibrated, f.

Housekeeping:

Plant housekeeping and cleanliness were in accordance with

--

approved licensee programs.

No violations were identified.

7.

Surveillance Testing The inspector witnessed the performance of a selected surveillance test to verify that:

Surveillance procedures conform to technical specification requirements

--

and have been properly approved.

Test instrumentation is calibrated.

--

Limiting conditions for operations for removing equipment from

--

service are met.

Testing is performed by qualified personnel.

--

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 test was included in this review:

ISP-RPS-TP, " Reactor Protection System-Auto Trip System Instrument

--

Channel Test," Revision 11, performed on June 24, 1983. The inspector witnessed the calibration of all four channels of the reactor pressure instrument #36-07. Pressure instrument #36-07C could not be calibrated x

_

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

.

.

..

___-

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

-

.

in the as-found condition but the malfunction appeared to affect only the ability to check the calibration of the instrument and not its operability. The inspector witnessed portions of the troubleshooting of the instrument and the replacement of the calibration circuit board. Subsequently, the instrument was successfully calibrated.

No violations were identified.

8.

Safety System Operability Verification On a sampling basis, the inspector directly examined selected safety system trains to verify that the systems were properly aligned in the standby mode. This examination included:

Verification that each accessible valve in the flow path is in

--

the correct position by either visual observation of the valve or remote position 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

--

lubrication, 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 Ventilation System

--

Liquid Poison System

--

The inspector also conducted a complete walkdown of the accessible portions of the Core Spray System #11.

In addition to the above items, the inspector verified that the containment isolation function of this system was in the proper standby line-up. This includes:

Manual valves are shut, capped, and locked as appropriate.

--

Motor operated or air operated valves are not mechanically blocked

--

and power is available as appropriate.

There are no visual leakage paths between the containment and the

--

isolation valves.

t

.

.

__

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

.

.

l

i During the walkdown of the Core Spray System #11 on June 10, 1983, the

'

inspector noted that #11 core spr6y outside isolation valve #40-12 was open but its circuit breaker was not locked in tS" open position.

Technical Specification Limiti?.g Condition for Operation 3.1.4 9 requires that during reactor operation the core spray isolation valves #40-02 and 40-12 be open ard their associated circuit breakers locked in the open I

position. The failure to lock open the circuit breaker for valve #40-12 is a violation of technical specifications.

(50-220/83-14-01) The inspector informed the shift supervisor, who immediately sent an operator to replace the missing lock.

No other violations were identifiea.

9.

Exit Interview At pericdic intervals during the course of the inspection, meetings were held with senior station management to discuss the inspection scope and findings. At no time during this inspection was written material provided to the licensee by the inspector.

L.

.

-

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _