IR 05000244/1982007
| ML20053D289 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Ginna  |
| Issue date: | 05/12/1982 |
| From: | Kister H, Zimmerman R NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20053D283 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-244-82-07, 50-244-82-7, NUDOCS 8206040268 | |
| Download: ML20053D289 (6) | |
Text
,
.
.
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Region I Report No. 50-244/82-07 Docket No. 50-244 License No. DPR-18 Priority Category C
--
Licensee:
Rochester Gas and Electric Corporation 89 East Avenue Rochester, New York 14649 R. E. Ginna Nuclear Power Plant Facility Name:
,
Inspection at:
Ontario, New York
-
Inspection conducted: April 10 through 30, 1982
/2 J--
Inspectors:
dat'e signed oy P. Zimmerman, Senior Resident Inspector
-
date signed
-
j
.
date si'ned c
}
2.s Approved by:
c da'te signed
. B. Kister, Chief, Reactor Projects
Section 1C. Division of Projects &
Resident Inspection
,
-
Inspection Jiummary:
,
Inspection on April 10-30,1982 (Report No. 50-244/82-07)
i Areas Inspected: Routine, onsite, regular, backshift, and weekend inspection by the residentinspector(46.5 hours5.787037e-5 days <br />0.00139 hours <br />8.267196e-6 weeks <br />1.9025e-6 months <br />). Areas inspected included plant operating records; surveillance testing; maintenance; material accountability for steam generator modifications; e licensee action on previous inspection find!ngs; and accessible portions of the facility t
i during plant tours.
at
-
Results: No violations were identified during this inspection.
.
l l
i B206040268 820513 l
PDR ADOCK 05000244 G
'
l Region I Form 12 l
(Rev. April 77)
s
,
DETAILS 1.
Persons Contacted The below listed technical and supervisory level personnel were among those contacted:
E. Beatty, Operations Supervisor J. Bodine, QC Engineer L. Boutwell, Paintenance Supervisor C. Edgar, I & C Supervisor D. Filkins, Supervisor Health Physics and Chemistry D. Gent, Results and Test Supervisor G. Larizza, Technical Engineer T. Meyer, Nuclear Engineer R. Morrill. Training Coordinator J. C. Noon, Assistant Plant Superintendent C. Peck, Operations Engineer B. Quinn, Health Physicist B. A. Snow, Plant Superintendent S. Spector, Maintenance Engine r J. Straight, Fire Protection and Safety Coordinator R. Wood, Supervisor of Nuclear Set.urity The inspector also interviewed and talked with other licensee personnel during the course of the inspection.
2.
Licensee Action on Previous Inspection Findings (Closed) Unresolved Item (79-19-04'.
During the annual spring, 1980 outage the Pressurizer Power Operated Relief Valves (PORVs) were re The new valves, manufactured by Copes-Vulcan, include cast steel yokes (placed.
ASTM-A216). The valves were installed in accordance with procedure SM-80-lGG0.6, RCS Overpressurization Protection-Nitrogen Accumulator System Modification. The yoke material was deter-mined through review of Copes-Vulcan Drawing D-193012, Revision O.
(Closed) Inspector Follow Item (80-11-01). The licensee established a program for locking selected breakers in their proper position to prevent similiar misposition-ing occurrences. The breaker supplying the 'B' Auxiliary Feedwater Pump discharge valve (MOV 4008) is r.ow required to be locked open per procedure S-30.4, Revision 15.
(Closed) Violation (81-08-03). A training session was held for members of the Plant Operations Review Committee on January 6, 1982.
In addition to reviewing the circumstances surrounding the violation, the session included discussion on the need to consider the failure position of valves when determining which valves are to be used to isolate equipment or pipin.
The licensee's response letter to this violation, dated July 2, 1981 stated that the required training would be performed by September 30, 1981. Tne inspector stated that in the future, if a commitment oate cannot be met, appro-
'
priate notification explaining the circumstances, should be made to the NRC.
3.
Review of Plant Operations a.
General Throughoat the reporting period, the inspector reviewed plant operations associated with the annual refueling, modification, and maintenance outage.
Major accivities in progress included repair of leaking feedwater ring drain plugs in both steam generators; water lancing both steam generators; final secondary side video inspection of 'A' steam generator; 'A' and 'B' Reactor Coolant Pump alignment and balance; and preparations for the Integrated Leak Rate Test.
b.
Shift Logs and Operating Records Operating logs and records were reviewed against Technical Specification and administrative procedure requirements.
Included in the review were:
Control Room Log
-
daily during control room surveillance Daily Surveillance Log
-
daily during control room surveillance Shift Supervisor's Log daily during control room
-
surveillance Plant Recorder Traces daily during control room
-
surveillance Plant Process Computer Printout daily during control room
-
surveillance Station Event Reports 4/10/82 through 4/30/82
-
Maintenance Work Orders and Trouble 4/10/82 through 4/30/82
-
The logs and records were reviewed to verify that entries were being properly
'
made; entries involving abnormal conditions provided sufficient detail to communicate equipment status, deficiencies, corrective action restoration and i
testing; records were being reviewed by management; operating orders did not conflict with the Technical Specification or reporting requirements; logs and records were maintained in accordance with Technical Specification and administrative procedure requirements.
l c.
Plant Tour 1.
During the course of the inspection, tours of the following areas were conducted:
--
Control Room
..
..
.
. - - -
.
.
.
..
.-
. _ -
..
,
.
i
Auxiliary Building
--
,
Intermediate Building (including control point)
--
Containment
--
,
Service Building
--
lurbine Building
--
.
Diesel Generator Rooms
--
Battery Rooms
--
Screenhouse
--
Yard Area and Perimeter
--
2.
The following observations resulted from the tours:
a.
Monitoring instrumentation. Process instruments were observed for correlation between channels and for confomance with Technical Specification requirements.
b.
Annunciator Alarms. Various alarm conditions which had been re-ceived and acknowledged were observed. These were discussed with shift personnel to verify that the reasons for the alarms were
'
understood and corrective action, if required, was being taken.
c.
Shift manning. Control room and shift manning were observed for
'
conformance with 10 CFR 50.54 (K), Technical Specifications, and l
administrative procedures.
d.
Radiation protection controls. Areas observed included control point operation, posting of radiation and high radiation areas, compliance with Radiation Work Permits and Special Work Permits, personnel moni-toring devices being properly worn, and personnel frisking practices.
e.
Equi 3 ment lineups. Valve and electrical breakers were verified to be in tie position or condition required by Technical Specifications and plant lineup procedures for the applicable plant mode. This verifica-tion included control board indications daily and field observations made during routine plant tours.
'
f.
Equi) ment tagging. Selected equipment, for which tagging requests had )een initiated, was observed to verify that tags were in place and the equipment in the condition specified.
!
g.
Fire protection.
Fire detection and fire fighting equipment and controls were observed for confomance with Technical Specifications
>
and administrative procedures.
.
...
.
..
-
. -
-
-__
. - -.
..
- - - -
.
.-
~
~
.
h.
Security. Areas observed for conformance with regulatory require-ments, and site security plan and administrative procedures, in-cluded vehicle and personnel access, protected and vital area integ-rity, escort and badging.
i.
Plant housekeeping controls.
Plunt conditions were observed for conformance with administrative procedures. Storage of material and components was observed with respect to prevention of fire and safety hazards. Housekeeping was evaluated with respect to controlling the spread of surface and airborne contamination.
No violations were identified.
4.
Inspector Witnessing of Surveillance Test a.
The inspector witnessed the perfonnance of surveillance testing of selected components to verify that the surveillance test procedure was properly ap-praved and in use; test instrumentation required by the procedure was cali-brated and in use; Technical Specifications were satisfied prior to removal of the system frcm service; test was performed by qualified personnel; the procedure was adequately detailed to assure performance of a satisfactory surveillance; and test results satisfied the procedural acceptance criteria, or were properly dispositioned.
b.
The inspector witnessed the performance of:
Refueling Shutdown Surveillance Procedure (RSSP)-6.0, Containment
--
Integrated Leakage Rate, Revision 9, April 24,1982. The initial pressurization was observed on April 29, 1982.
5.
Inspector Witnessing of Plant Maintenance and Mcdifications a.
During the inspection period, the inspector observed various maintenance and problem investigation activities to verify compliance with regulatory requirements, including those stated in the Technical Specifications; com-pliance with administrative and maintenance procedures; compliance with applicable codes and standards; required QA/QC involvement; proper use of safety tags; proper equipment alignment and use of jumpers; personnel quali-fications; rediological controls for worker protection; retest requirements; and ascertain reportability as required by Technical Specifications.
In a similiar manner the implementation of design changes and modifications were reviewed. Compliance with requirements to update procedures and drawings were verified and post modification acceptance testing was evaluated.
b.
The inspector witnessed the following maintenance activities:
--
Adjustment of the containment purge exhaust valve (5278) shoes following completion of local leak rate testing; performed April 27, 1982.
.
.
.
.
6.
Material Accountability for Steam Generator Modifications Reference: NRC Region I Inspection Report 82-06 As discussed in the referenced report, the licensee modified the " running" Material / Tool Accountability Logs for each steam generator by instituting a daily review of the log sheets in order to update, close out and carry-over outstanding open items. The " running" logs were removed from use, by
,
the Quality Control (QC) Department, on or about, April 1,1982, to enable compilation of a list of materials / tools which had been logged in, but not out of each steam generator prior to the initiation of the carry-over log-ging system.
The log reviews indicated that a substantial amount of mater-ials/ tools remained unaccounted for inside the steam generators.
The licensee used a combination of controls to assure adequate material /
tool accountability, as detailed in the referenced report. Based on these controls and direct inspector observation of the work area in the 'A' Steam Generator, it is believed that the Material / Tool Accountability Logs were not adequately maintained, and did not provide an accurate representation of actual housekeeping practices inside and around the steam generators.
The inspector will perform a review of the log keeping controls, to include the licensee's actions concerning the log discrepancies. This item is un-resolved (82-07-01).
On April 19, the inspector reviewed photographs of the QC accountability inspection of the pieces cut out of the 'B' Steam Generator during the moisture separator modification. All pieces were layed out on the contain-ment floor, compared to drawings of the mositure separator region, and check-ed dimensionally. No discrepancies were noted with the exception of approx-imately twenty-four smalI bolts which were unaccounted for.
It is believed the bolts were removed from the steam generator in a pail and discarded.
In-spector witnessing of the QC accountability inspection associated with 'A'
Steam Generator is documented in the referenced report.
,
The inspector will review video tapes of the final, secondary side TV inspection following completion of all work in the steam generators.
7.
Unresolved Items Unresolved items are matters about which more information~1s required to deter-mine whether they are acceptable. An unresolved item is discussed in paragraph 6 of this report.
8.
Exit Interview At periodic intervals during the course of the inspection, meetings were held with senior facility management to discuss the inspection scope and findings.
__