IR 05000244/1982022
| ML20028B463 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Ginna  |
| Issue date: | 11/12/1982 |
| From: | Kister H, Zimmerman R NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20028B456 | List: |
| References | |
| TASK-2.F.1, TASK-TM 50-244-82-22, NUDOCS 8211300403 | |
| Download: ML20028B463 (9) | |
Text
__ _
.
.
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 50244-820923 50244-821001 Region I 50-244/82-22 Report No.
50-244 Docket No.
Category C
License No. DPR-18 Priority
--
Licensee:
Rochester Gas and Electric Corporation
<
49 East Avenue Rochester, New York 14649 R. E. Ginna Nuclear Power Plant facility Name:
,
Ontario, New York Inspection at:
-
Inspection conducted: October 1-31, 1982 Inspectors;
&wwrwnn 1If8f9iL R.P.Zimf.e[ man,SeniorResidentInspector date signed
-
date signed
=
j
.
da e signed
<
N/
['
Approved by:
v
<
li. B. Kister, Chief, Reactor Projects
' date( signed
"
Section lc, Division of Projects &
Resident Programs Inspection Summary:
,
Inspection on October 1-31, 1982 (Report No. 50-244/82-22)
Areas Inspected: Routine, onsite, regular and backshitt, inspection by the resident inspectcr (142.5 hours5.787037e-5 days <br />0.00139 hours <br />8.267196e-6 weeks <br />1.9025e-6 months <br />). Areas inspected included: plant operations; surveillance testing; maintenance; Licensee Event Reports; secondary chemistry monitoring program; c
followup of licensee actions on previous inspection findings; followup of implementation
-
of Three Mile Island Lessons Learned; periodic and special reports and accessible por-tions of the facility during plant tours.
Results: No violations were identified during this inspection.
.
} 211300403 821116
~
gDRADOCK 05000244 POR Region 1 Form 12 (Rev. April 77)
^
'
.
.
.
'
DETAILS _
l.
Persons Contacted x
The below listed technical and supervisory level personnel were among those contacted:
'
s E. Beatty, Operations Supervisor J. Bodine, QC Engineer L. Boutwell, Maintenance Supervisor C. Edgar, I & C Supervisor D. Filkins, Supervisor Health Physics and Chemistry D. Gent, Results and Test Supervisor G. Larizza, Operations Engineer T. Meyer, Technical Engineer R. Morrill, Training Coordinator
\\.
B. Quinn, Health Physicist
-
'
T. Schuler, Maintenance Engineer B. A. Snow, Plant Superintendent S. M. Spector, Assistant Plant Superintendent
~i.
,
J. Straight, Fire Protection and Safety Coordinator
,
P. Wood, Supervisor of Nuclear Security
'
i The inspector also interviewed and talked with other licensee personnel during the course of the inspection.
'
'
2.
Licensee Action on Previous Inspection Findings (Closed)InspectorFollowItem(244/82-03-01): Radiation survey instruu nt calibration. Health Physics Procedure (HP)=7.6, Survey Instrument Calibration
!
and Maintenance Records, Revision 7, May 8,1982 has been revised to include acceptance criteria for survey instrument calibrations which conforms to ANSI N323-1978, Radiation ProtectioniInstrumentation Test and Calibration.
(Closed)InspectorFollowItem(244/82-03-03): Radiation survey instrument history files. A sampling review of radiation survey instrument history files determined that use of the new Survey Meter Maintenance / Calibration Data Sheets has resulted in an improvement in maintaining accurate histories of instrument maintenance / calibration. The inspector still noted one case; however, where
>
,
,
only minimal description was documented of an instrument problem and repair,,
s
making it difficult, due to the vagueness of the entry, to detennine the nature
.
,
of the problem and the maintenance performed. The inspector restat'ed the need to improve the description of instrument problems and corrective actioris by
,
expanding the descriptive information entered in the history files.
'
(Closed) Violation (244/82-03-02): Control and calibrate measuring and test equipment. A sampling review of two vibration meters and,one digital ther-
,
mometer used by the Results and Test Group indicated that the instruments were properly calibrated over the range of intended use, and documentatf or.
including traceability of the calibration standard were available.
t k
l
-
-
.
_
- _ _
.
.
(Closed)UnresolvedItem(244/82-03-05):
Inoperable Pressurizer PORV, l
Detailed descriptions of the failure mode of the PORY are documented
in NUREG 0909-NRC Report on the January 25, 1982 Steam Generator Tube Rupture at R. E. Ginna Nuclear Power Plant, and J. Maier (RG&E) letter to D. Crutchfield (NRC), dated April 13, 1982. The circumstances of the relief valve failure were also documented in the NRC Systematic Assessment of Licensee Performance (SALP), dated September 15,1982 and was again reviewed with upper licensee management during the site SALP meeting on September 21,1982.
3.
Review of Plant Operations
!
a.
Throughout the reporting period, the inspector rev1ewed plant op-erations. Activities in progress included continuation of a seneduled outage to perfom steam generator tube eddy current testing, video in-spection of the steam generator secondary sides and evaluation of periodic impacts received on the steam generator metal impact monitors.
Routine power operation resumed on October 21,1982.
Results of 100% eddy current examination of the ' A' Steam Generator hot leg indicated one (1) tube with a crevice intergranular attack (IGA) indication above the 40% plugging criteria. Similiar examin-ation of the 'B' Steam Generator hot leg indicated 28 tubes with IGA indications above the plugging criteria, 2 tubes with stress corrosion cracking indications of 27% through wall and 2 tubes with absolute signals significant enough to warrent corrective action. All 33 tubes were mechanically plugged.
Video inspection of the 'B' Steam Generator secondary side periphery identified that a tube (R39,C69), previously plugged in 1976, had a fishmouth burst about 1 1/4" in length and 3/8" wide, located 31/2" above the tubesheet. A wear mark at the location where the burst
.
subsequently occurred was observed by video inspection during the l
Spring, 1982 outage. The wear mark was determined to have been caused by a loose foreign metal plate which was removed in the forced Spring outage after initiating a tube rupture in January,1982 (NUREG 0909).
The mechanical plugs were drilled out and the tube was removed follow-
!
ing inside diameter radial cuts about 1" above the tube sheet and 4"-
6" below the first support plate. Westinghouse NPT-80 plugs were in-stalled and seal welded in place. As a precautionary measure, exist-ing mechantcal plugs were drilled out and NPT-80 plugs were installed r
and seal welded into two adjacent, previously plugged tubes (R39C70; i
i R39C68 which were also identitied to have wear marks during the Spring, 1982 outage.
Review of steam generator metal impact monitor data by the licensee and Westingnouse has determined that the vast majority of impacts received since system installation in May, 1982 have occurred during periods of
.
-.-
-
. -
._
_ _ _
_
, _
.
. _ _
'
.
.
l
thermal transition, such as plant neatup and cooldowns, and are not indicative of a loose part. During steady state operation with little or no thermal transient, few impacts have been received, and those that occurred were attributed to a specific plant evolution such as auxiliary feed pump testing.
b.
shift Logs and Operating Records Operating logs and records were reviewed against Technical Specification and administrative procedure requirements.
Included in the review were:
daily during control room Control Room Log
-
surveillance daily during control room Daily Surveillance Log
-
surveillance daily during control room RCS Leakage Surveillance Log
-
surveillance daily during control room Shift Supervisor's Log
-
surveillance daily during control room Plant Recorder Traces
-
surveillance daily during control room Plant Process Computer Printouts
-
surveillance October 29, 1982 Jumper / Bypass Log
-
all issued between 10/1-31/82 Station Event Reports
-
Maintenance Work Orders and
-
all issued between 10/1-31/82 Trouble Cards j
The logs and records were reviewed te verify that entries were being prop-l erly made; entries involving abnormal concitions provided sufficient detail to communicate equipment status, deficiencies, corrective action restora-tion and 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 Tech-nical Specification and administrative procedure requirements.
c.
Plant Tour 1.
During the course of the inspection, tours of the following areas were conducted:
Control Room
--
Auxiliary Building
--
Intermediate Building (including control point)
--
Containment
--
Service Bui? ding
--
Turbine 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 cnannels and for conformance with Tech-nical Specification requirements.
b.
Annunciator alarms. Various alam 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 administrative procedures.
d.
Radiation protection controls. Areas observed included control point operation, posting of radiation and high radiation areas, compliance with Radiation Work Permits (RWPs) and Special Work Permits (SWPs), personnel monitoring devices being properly worn, and personnel frisking practices.
e.
Equipment lineups. Valve and electrical breakers were verified to be in the position or condition required by Technical Speci-fications and plant lineup procedures for the applicable plant mode. This verification included control board indications daily and partial lineups of the Safety Injection and Containment Spray Systems on October 25; and the 'A'
and 'B' Diesel Generators and Fire Suppression System on October 26.
f.
Equipment tagging. Selected equipment, for which tagging requests had been 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 conformance with Technical Specifica-tions 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 in-tegrity.
-.-
-
.
1.
Plant housekeeping.
Plant conditions were observed for confor-mance 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 tne spread of surface and airborne contamination.
No violations were noted.
4.
Inspector Witnessing of Surveillance Test a.
The inspector witnessed the performance of surveillance testing of selected components to verify that the surveillance test procedure was properly approved and in use; test instrumentation required by the procedure was calibrated and in use; Technical Specifications were satisfied prior to removal of the system trom service; test was performed by qualified per-sonnel; 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 portions of the following tests:
.
Calibration Procedure (CP)-53, Containment Hydrogen Monitor Calibration,
--
Revision 1, August 4, 1982, performed on October 8, 1982.
Periodic Test (PT)-7, Hydro Test of Reactor Coolant System, Revision
--
26, October 15, 1982, performed October 20, 1982.
PT-2.10.3, Low Head Safety Injection Check Valve, Revision 2, November
--
11, 1981, performed October 20, 1982.
CP-2.8.1, Rod Position Indication System 'D' Bank at Power Alignment,
--
Revision 2, March 18, 1980, performed October 22, 1982.
No violations were identified.
5.
Inspector Witnessing of Plant Maintenance and Modifications During the inspection period, the inspector observed maintenance and a.
problem investigation activities to verify compliance with regulatory requirements, including tnose 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; radiological 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.
--
-
.
...
-
.
.
- _ _
_ _
_ _ _ _ _.
_ _ - _.
_ _, _
_,_ -
.
The inspector witnessed portions of the following maintenance activities:
Use ot an inside diameter cutter to remove a damaged section of a
--
previously plugged 'B' Steam Generator tube (R39,C69) between the tubesheet and first support plate on the hot leg side, perfomed October 6, 1982.
Penetrant testing on a section of Boric Acid Storage Tank recirculation
--
piping, performed October 11, 1982.
Replacement of stem, plug and cage assembly on Pressurizer PORY (431C)
--
after identifying leakage to the Pressurizer Relief Tank during Reactor Coolant System pressure test prior to plant restart, perfomed October 14,1982.
.
Repair of failed individual rod position indicator drawer for Bank
--
D, Control Rod K-7, performed Octooer 21, 1982.
No violations were identified.
6.
Secondary Chemistry Monitoring Program
,
The inspector reviewed the overall secondary chemistry program for conformance with the requirements of the Provisional Operating License, Amendment 33. The inspector determined that the monitoring program satisfactorily implemented the License requirements and received adequate supervisory review. The inspector noted; however, that although 'in-line' instrumentation is calibrated routinely to conform with results of laboratory analyses, alarm setpoints (local and con-trol room) for critical parameters are not tested periodically to assure the
.
alams are received at the desireu setpoints. The licensee representative
'!
stated that a functional testing program for instrumentation monitoring secono-i ary chemistry critical parameters would be developed and implemented by Feb-l ruary 1, 1983. The inspector will fol?ow the licensee's, actions (82-22-01).
7.
Followup Inspection-Three Mile Island (TMI) Lessons Learned Implementation i
II.F.1, Attachment 6 Containment Hydrogen Monitor
Reference:
NRC Inspection Report 82-18 During preoperational testing in July 1982, the cognizant project engineer documented in an internal memorandum that the local hydrogen concentration meters located in the Intermediate Building and Relay Room were not compatable
with the Control Room indication in that the former are of an analog nature and the latter is linear. The inspector noted that although a new Control Room i
scale was ordered, it was not until October that a temporary conversion sheet was placed in the Control Room for use, if necessary, during the interim. The j
inspector stated that the inability to gain an accurate reading (error approxi-
'
mated + 10% of scale) in the Control Room deviated from the NUREG 0737
_
+
l
'
.
.
..
.
._ __
-.
-
.
_ _ _ _ _ _ _
. -
_
_
.-
....
specifications. The inspector discussed the need to seek more thorough
'
corrective action with licensee management and restated the NRC position in the Systematic Assessment of Licensee Perfomance (SM P), dated Septem-ber 15,1982, that plant modifications require increased management attention.
8.
Licensee Event Report (LER's)
i i
1he inspector reviewed the following LER's to verify that the details of the
events were clearly reported, and to verify the accuracy of the description of cause and adequacy of corrective action. The inspector detemined whether
!
further information was required, and whether generic implications were involved.
.
-The inspector also verified that the reporting requirements of Technical Spec-ifications and station administrative and operating procedures Md been met; that appropriate corrective action had been taken; that the event was reviewed by the Plant Operations Review Committee; and that the continued operation of the facil-ity was conducted within the Technical Specification limit.
82-21:
Excessive Leakage Past 'B' Containment Spray Pump Discharge Check l
Valve-September 23, 1982. During perfomance of surveillance te: ting, valve
'
862B failed to promptly close. V8628 is a containment isolation valve which has had several recent repetitive leakage failures. The subject containment penetration was isolated and the 'B' Containment Spray System declared inop-erable in accordance with Technical Specifications. The check valve was in-spected by a vendor representative during the recent outage, the seating sur-face was machined and the valve functionally tested satisfactorily.
,
82-22:
Steam Generator Tube Degradation-October 1,1982. Review of this event is included in paragraph 2.
Provisional Operating License DPR-18 has also
- -
been amended to require that during the mid-March, 1983 refueling outage, the licensee shall conduct complete eddy current and visual inspection of the steam generators.
No violations were identified.
9.
Review of Periodic and Special Reports Upon receipt, periodic and special reports submitted by the licensee pursuant to Technical Specification 6.9.1 and 6.9.3 were reviewed by the inspector. This
>
!
review included the tollowing considerations: the report contains the infomation required to be reported by NRC requirements; test results and/or supporting in-tormation were consistent with design predictions and performance specifications; planned corrective action was adequate for resolution of identified problems; i
determination whether any information in the report required classification as an abnomal occurrence; and the validity of the reported infomation. Within the scope of the above, the following periodic report was reviewed by the in-
'
!
spector.
Monthly Uperating Report for September,1982.
--
i,
-.
-..- -
. -
- - -.. -
-. - -.
- -.
- -.
....
--
Semi-Annual Effluent Release Report-January through June,1982.
Annual Environmental Operating Report-1981.
--
No violations were identified.
10.
Exit Interview At periodic intervals during the-course of the inspection, meetings were held witn senior facility management to discuss the inspection scope and findings.
. -..-
. - - _ _
_..