IR 05000244/1986009
| ML17251A695 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Ginna  |
| Issue date: | 06/17/1986 |
| From: | Beall J, Gallo R NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML17251A694 | List: |
| References | |
| RTR-NUREG-0737, RTR-NUREG-737, TASK-1.C.1, TASK-1.D.2, TASK-2.F.2, TASK-2.K.3.05, TASK-3.A.1.1, TASK-3.A.1.2, TASK-TM 50-244-86-09, 50-244-86-9, IEIN-81-21, IEIN-83-46, IEIN-85-045, IEIN-85-45, IEIN-86-032, IEIN-86-32, NUDOCS 8606240286 | |
| Download: ML17251A695 (22) | |
Text
U.
S.
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
REGION I
Report No.
50-244/86-09 Docket No.
50-244 Licensee No.
DPR-18 Priority Category C
Licensee:
Rochester Gas and Electric Corporation 49 East Avenue Rochester, New York 14649 Facility Name:
R.
E. Ginna Nuclear Power Plant Inspection At: Ontario, New York Inspection Conducted:
May 1, 1986 through May 31, 1986 Reviewed by Inspectors:
W. A. Cook, Senior Resident Inspector, Ginna T.
K. Kim, Resident Inspector (Trainee),
Ginna J.
E. Beall, Project Engineer, Sect.
2A, DRP R.
K. Struckmeyer, Radiation Specialist, DRSS
~C/3 pg E. Beall, Project Engineer, Date Reactor Proj t Sect.
No. 2A, DRP Approved by:
R.
M. Gallo, Chief, Reactor Date Project Section No.
2A, DRP Ins ection Summar
Ins ection on May
1986 throu h
Ma
1986 Re ort No. 50-244/86-09 h
resident inspectors (175 hours0.00203 days <br />0.0486 hours <br />2.893519e-4 weeks <br />6.65875e-5 months <br />)
and two region based inspectors (39 hours4.513889e-4 days <br />0.0108 hours <br />6.448413e-5 weeks <br />1.48395e-5 months <br />).
Areas inspected included: plant operations; licensee action on previous findings; surveillance testing; maintenance; IE Information Notice Follow-up; review of TMI Action Plan implementation; offsite review committee; review of periodic and special reports; and inspection of accessible portions of the facility during plant tours.
Results:
In the nine areas inspected, no violations were identified.
A update of selected TMI Action Plan items is documented in paragraph 7.
Inspector review of the licensee's Nuclear 'Safety Audit and Review Board, QA/QC Subcommittee meeting on May 22, 1986 is discussed in paragraph 8.
8606240286'860618 PDR ADOCK 0500024 PDR
DETAILS 1.
Persons Contacted During this inspection period, the inspectors held discussions with and interviewed operators, technicians, engineering and supervisory level personnel.
2.
Licensee Action on Previous Ins ection Findin s
a.
(Closed)
Unresolved Item (79-08-01)
During an ear lier review of licensee actions in response to IE Bulletin 79-06A, the inspector determined that not all of the emergency and operating procedures had been revised to reflect current NRC guidance.
In addition, licensed operator requalification training was not yet completed.
Since this preliminary review in May 1979, numerous revisions to the station operating and emergency procedures have occurred.
In addition, a major revision to the Licensed Operator Requalification Training Program has occur red and has been reviewed by the NRC staff.
Symptom-based Emergency Operating Procedures (EOPs)
were recently implemented by the licensee as discussed further in paragraph 7.a. 1.
As reviewed by the inspectors, EOP development and implementation and licensed operator training on the same, are in accordance with licensee commitments per NUREG-0737.
This item is closed.
(Closed)
Inspector Follow-up Item (82-16-01)
Develop procedural controls for modifications which are accepted for operation prior to their completion.
This item involved the modification of the service water supply to the emergency diesel generators to provide an alternate source of cooling water.
The modification was accepted by Operations pending availability of certain replacement valves needed to complete the modification.
No procedures were written or revised for use of the partially modified system.
The inspector verified that this modification had been completed and that a revised systems procedure was in place.
In addition, the inspector determined that Administrative Procedure (A)-301.3, "Station Modification Installation and Acceptance",
has been revised to require interim procedures for partially completed modifications in service.
This item is closed.
(Closed) Inspector Follow-up Item (82-16-03)
Develop a method to identify status of design/modification packages during the post-completion review cycle.
This item.involved the difficulty in locating a completed modification package and in controlling the duration of the review cycle.
The inspector examined the methods employed to track the status of completed modification packages through the super-visory review cycle.
A computerized tracking system allows users to determine each modification's general status and to identify the
Cll
responsible reviewer.
The inspector reviewed a sample of three com-pleted modifications involving safety-related equipment.
In each case, the inspector was able to determine modification status and the cognizant reviewer.
Each reviewer maintained a clear and detailed status of the review conducted for the selected modification and the location of the modification package.
This item is closed.
(Closed) Yiolation (84-07-02)
This violation involved the apparent use of a plant procedure before it was "approved" and became "effective".
Periodic Test (PT)-13. 1. 15 was performed on December 11, 1981 prior to its effective date of December 14, 1981.
Since the date of the station superintendent's approval was not clearly documented, it was understood to have been approved on the "effective" date.
PORC review and approval had already been given'n the licensee's response to this violation, (Kober to Murley letter, dated June 8, 1984),
the licensee committed to review and clarify procedural review and approval methods to prevent recurrence.
The inspector reviewed the licensee's revised Administrative Procedure A-600.series pertaining to procedures control guidance.
Since the violation was issued, the inspector has not observed any related procedural control problems.
This violation is closed.
(Closed)
Inspector Follow-up Item (84-16-03)
During a previous report period, the inspector identified the use of temporary cooling fans on the motors of operating service water pumps.
Licensee representatives stated that the temporary fans were used to supplement available motor cooling and to minimize motor insulation deterioration.
No engineering evaluation had previously been performed to determine the necessity for temporary motor cooling.
However, a recent licensee evaluation indicates that the normal operating temperatures of the service water pumps are well below the vendor specified dielectric breakdown temper-ature for Class F motor winding insulation ( 156 degrees F).
The ambient temperatures experienced in the screenhouse are not high enough, even in summer months, to require the use of temporary motor cooling fans.
However, the licensee will continue to operate the fans to assist in minimizing insulation breakdown.
This item is closed.
(Closed)
Inspector Follow-up Item (84-19-01)
During a previous review of licensee's Measuring and Test Equipment controls, the licensee was in the process of revising their program to improve measuring and test equipment classification, control and related documentation requirements.
The inspector reviewed the revised station Admini stra-tive Procedure, A-1201, "Calibration and Control of Measuring and Test Equipment, Plant Instruments and Equipment",
and its implementa-tion.
In addition, the inspector reviewed the most recent licensee guality Assurance Audit (86-22:DB) in this area.
No deficiencies were noted.
This item is close (Open) Inspector Follow-up Item (85-06-01)
During an earlier inspec-tion period, the licensee committed to review the need for developing a general troubleshooting procedure or guidance.
The need was based on an apparent lack of appropriate controls while conducting trouble-shooting activities such as the failure analysis on the reactor coolant system temperature channel on April 5,.)985.
The inspector determined that the licensee is still pursuing resolution of this i ssue.
This item remains open.
3.
Review of Plant 0 erations Throughout the reporting period, the inspectors reviewed routine power operations.
The reactor operated at 100% power for the entire inspection period.
The inspectors reviewed the following activities:
On May 13, 1986, the inspector attended the monthly shift supervisors meeting held with the Operations Manager.
The Operations Manager periodically holds these meetings to communicate directly with his staff.
The meeting was informally structured with open discussion on topics including:
outage planning and coordination; recent NRC inspection findings; use of maintenance work requests; shift supervisor and licensed operators responsibilities and authority; operator requalifications; recent operational occurrences and problems; and administrative matters.
The inspector was an observer and did not participate in the discussions.
On May 19, 1986, the inspector attended a routine Modification Follow Group meeting for the installation of the Catalytic Oxygen Removal System.
The Modification Follow Group is organized by the liaison engineer, and is comprised of individuals from the various departments on station which provide support to a particular modification.
The inspector attended the meeting as an observer to monitor the licensee's station modification control practices.
The Modification Follow Group appears to be an effective method of tracking the status of modifica-tions, identifying problems, communicating and coordinating the various organizations involved and for maintaining overall control of modifi-cations.
During the inspection, accessible plant areas were toured.
Items reviewed include radiation protection and contamination controls, plant housekeeping, fire protection, equipment tagging, personnel safety, and security.
Inspector tours of the control, room this inspection period included reviews of shift manning, operating logs and records, equipment and monitoring instrumentation status.
The inspectors routinely checked
the status of control board alarms during daily plant tours and ques-tioned control room operators on abnormal alarms.
During this inspec-tion period, the inspectors reviewed selected portions of the completed Operations Procedure (0)-6.7,
"Weekly Alarm Status Check",
and verified the licensee was properly tracking and reviewing control board annun-ciator status.
Safety system valves and electrical breakers were verified to be in the position or condition required for the applicable plant mode as specified by Technical Specifications and plant lineup procedures.
This verification included routine control board indication review and conduct of a partial systems lineup check of the Safety Injection Pumps, Containment Spray Pumps, and Auxiliary Feedwater System on May 23 and May 30, 1986.
No violations were identified.
4.
Surveillance Testin i
The inspector witnessed the performance of surveillance testing of selected components to verify that the test procedure was properly approved and adequately detailed to assure performance of a satisfac-tory surveillance test; test instrumentation required by the procedure was calibrated and in use; the test was performed by qualified per-sonnel; and the test results satisfied Technical Specifications and procedural acceptance criteria, or were properly resolved.
During this inspection period, the inspectors witnessed the performance of a portion of the following tests:
System Operating Procedure (S)-15. 1, "Flux Mapping Normal Procedure",
Revision 28, dated 3/22/86, performed on May 6, 1986.
Periodic Test (PT-2. 1), "Safety Injection System Pumps",
Revision 40, dated 2/Zl/86, performed on May 15, 1986.
PT-2.2,
"Residual Heat Removal System",
Revision 37, dated 11/16/85, performed on May 21, 1986.
PT-2.7, "Service Water System",
Revision 30, dated 02/11/86, performed on May 30, 1986.
PT-9. 1, "U/V 480V Safeguard Buses",
Revision 8, dated 12/12/84, per-formed on May 20, 1986.
PT-16, "Auxiliary Feedwater System",
Revision 43, dated 11/01/85, performed on May 20, 1986.
No violations were identifie.
Plant Maintenance During the inspection period, the inspector observed maintenance and problem investigation activities to verify:
compliance with regulatory requirements, including those stated in the Technical Specifications; compliance with administrative and maintenance procedures; requi red QA/QC involvement; proper use of safety tags; proper equipment alignment and use of jumpers; personnel qualifica-tions; radiological controls for workers protection; and reportabi lity as required by Technical Specifications.
b.
The inspector witnessed a portion of the following maintenance activities:
Calibration of Reactor Vessel Level Instrumentation System on May 21, 1986.
Calibration Procedure (CP)-18, "Calibration and/or Maintenance of Reactor Vessel Level Measurement System (Loop B)".
Preventive maintenance on plant ventilation radioactive monitoring instrumentation sample 'pumps (R13/R14)
on May 28, 1986.
Maintenance Procedure (M)-11.28, "Rotary Air Sampler Inspection".
Installation and calibration of reactor coolant pressure instrumen-tation channel in the overpressurization protection panel on May 29, 1986.
Calibration Procedure (CP-420), "Calibration and/or Maintenance of Reactor Coolant Pressure Channel 420".
No violations were identified.
6.
IE Information Notice Follow-u The inspector reviewed licensee actions on the following IE Information Notices.
Licensee's are not required to respond to these Notices, however, the information should be reviewed for applicability and appropriate action taken.
The inspector review included discussions with licensee representa-tives, observations, and documentation review if warranted.
IE Notice 81-21 and 83-46 - These Notices involved biofouling of cool-ing water heat exchangers.
The inspector verified that the instrumen-tation was available on all safety-related equipment cooled by open cycle service water system for monitoring changes in flow or differential pressure, except for Safety Injection and Containment Spray pump bear-ing coolers.
Inspector review of procedures and observation of periodic tests on Emergency Containment Spray pumps indicated that these sur-veillance tests were adequate in determining potential degradation of heat exchanger performanc I'
b.
IE Notice 85-45 This Notice identified a potentially hazardous seismic interaction between the movable incore flux mapping system and the seal table.
The inspector determined that licensee mechanical and structural engineers inspected the Ginna Flux Mapping System on June 5,
1985.
The licensee initially determined from this inspection that the system incorporates design features for seismic restraint.
U-bolts are installed at the wheel locations to prevent rolling or lifting and the system is supported from wide flange beams.
During the 1986 Annual Refueling and Maintenance Outage, the licensee obtained the as-built information of the flux mapping system to determine if any modification would be necessary.
The licensee is still analyzing this as-built information.
The inspector will review the licensee final evaluation in a subsequent report period.
(86-09-01)
IE Notice 86-32 This Notice involved a request by the NRC for data collected by licensees on environmental radioactivity measurement increases attributed to the Chernobyl nuclear plant accident.
The inspector verified that the licensee received the information notice and discussed the proposed reporting format and contents with the licensee representative.
The licensee routinely collects and analyzes samples of the environmental media at and around Ginna station as required by Technical Specifications.
From the environmental samples collected from May 2 through May 7, 1986, the licensee determined that there was a small increase in contamination levels in the vicinity of the station which is most likely due to the Chernobyl accident.
The licensee provided thi s information by letters to the NRC dated May 13 and May 30, 1986.
7.
U date of Three Mile Island TMI Action Plan Im lementation The inspector reviewed licensee's actions associated with the following TMI Action Plan Item (NUREG-0737), to verify that the licensee's commitments were met.
1.
Short-Term Accident and Procedures Review I.C. 1 This action plan item required the licensee to perform analyses of transients and accidents, pr'epare emergency procedure guide-lines, upgrade emergency procedures and conduct operator retraining.
By Kober to Zwolinski letter, dated February 28, 1985, the licen-see submitted the Procedures Generation Package (PGP) to NRR for review.
The PGP outlines the licensee's entire Emergency Pro-cedures analyses, upgrade and training program..
In accordance with the PGP, the licensee completed operator training and final
'alidation of the revised Emergency Operating Procedures (EOPs)
in November 1985.
The EOPs were implemented in December 198 During routine control room tours, the inspectors reviewed selected EOPs and discussed the contents of the EOPs with the operators on shift to determine their general knowledge and familiarity with the procedures.
The inspectors verified that, effective April 1, 1986, the licensee promulgated the EOPs into the operator requalification training program which currently includes control room simulator training.
The inspectors observed the conduct of control room simulator training of EOPs during the week of April 15, 1986.
No discrepancies were noted.
This Action Plan item remains open pending NRR issuance of the Safety Evaluation Report.
b.
The inspector reviewed the following items to determine the progress being made by the licensee to complete the remaining TNI Action Plan commitments.
Plant Safet Parameter Dis la Console I.D.2 This Action Plan item requires the licensee to install a computer-based Safety Parameter Display System (SPDS) which will provide operating personnel with the minimum set of parameters from which the plant safety status can be assessed.
During the 1986 annual refueling and maintenance outage, the licensee replaced the plant process computer and installed the new Safety Assessment Sy'tem (SAS).
All field data points are connected to SAS and calibration of the system is in progress to verify the accuracy of computer displayed parameter against control board indications.
The NRC Order of June 12, 1984 requires SAS to be fully operational and operators trained on the system by June 30, 1987.
Instrumentation for Detection of Inade uate Core Coolin II.F.2 This Action Plan requires the licensee to provide additional instrumentation or controls to supplement existing instrumentation in order to provide an unambiguous and easy-to-interpret indication of inadequate core cooling during accident conditions.
The installation of reactor vessel level monitoring system hardware was completed during the 1986 refueling outage.
The licensee is currently conducting functional testing and calibration of the system.
The reactor vessel level monitoring system is projected to be operational by June 1987.
3.
Automatic Tri of Reactor Coolant Pum s Durin
.Loss of Coolant Accident II.K.3.5 This Action Plan item requires the licensee to analyze and establish criteria for the continued operation or securing of reactor coolant pumps during various loss of coolant accidents.
Generic Letter No. 85-12, dated June 18, 1985, addressed the NRC
staff's position regarding the Westinghouse Owners Group submit-tals on this action plan item and provides guidance concerning licensee implementation of the reactor coolant pump trip criteria.
The licensee's response to Generic Letter No. 85-12 is documented in Kober to Zwolinski letter, dated August 19, 1985.
The inspec-tor will review the implementation of this item pending issuance of the Safety Evaluation Report by NRR.
U rade Emer enc Su ort Facilities III.A.1.2 This Action Plan item was clarified in Supplement 1 to NUREG-0737, dated December 17, 1982.
This item required numerous upgrades of the Emergency Support Facilities, Technical Support Center (TSC), Operational Support Center (OSC)
and Emergency Operations Facility (EOF) to enhance communications, plant control, radio-logical protection, technical and operational support, emergency responses and accident recovery.
The proposed operation of the Safety Assessment System, with system accessibility in both the TSC and EOF, will complete the currently scheduled upgrading specified by this action item.
Im
> ovin Licensee Emer enc Pre aredness-Lon Term III.A.2 This Action Plan item requires the licensee to upgrade their emergency plans to provide reasonable assurance that adequate protective measures can be and wi,ll be taken in the event of a radiological emergency.
This item in conjunction with item III.A.1. 1,
"Upgrade Emergency Preparedness" and item III.A.1.2,
"Upgrade Emergency Support Facilities", endorses the specific criteria of NUREG-0654 (FEMA-REP-1), "Criteria for Preparation and Evaluation of Radiological Emergency Response Plans and Preparation in Support of Nuclear Power Plants",
and NUREG-0696,
"Functional Criteria for Emergency Response Facilities".
Complete implementation of the licensee's Emergency Preparedness Program is also awaiting operation of the Station's Safety Assessment System (SAS).
The SAS will provide a computerized information link between all the Emergency Support Facilities and the control room.
8.
Offsite Review Committee On May 22, 1986, the inspectors attended the licensee's Nuclear Safety Audit and Review Board (NSARB), QA/QC Subcommittee meeting held at the corporate office.
The QA/QC subcommittee's function is to review and approve corporate Quality Assurance policy and to provide oversight of
S
Ginna station and corporate activities to assure that the Quality Assurance objectives are being implemented.
The QA/QC subcommittee is used to aug-ment and not to duplicate the NSARB.
Agenda topics for the meeting included:
status of the management communications program; NRC Inspection Report No.
86-02 corrective action update; extension of the "Top 10" management atten-tion criteria to Corrective Action Reports (CAR's) and Non-Conformance Reports (NCR's);
1986 Management Audit criteria; Engineering drawing up-grade status report; impact of the recently instituted
"RG5E Q-GRAM"; and various other quality-related status reports.
All committee members were present at the meeting and all actively participated in the discussions.
The QA/QC subcommittee appears to be a viable corporate oversight organiza-tion dedicated to improving management involvement and enhancing employee attitudes toward producing quality work.
No deficiencies were noted.
9.
Review of Periodic and S ecial Re orts 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 following considerations:
the reports contained the information required to be reported by NRC requirements; test results and/or supporting information were consistent with design predictions and performance specifications; and the validity of the reported information.
Within this scope, the following reports were reviewed by the inspectors:
Monthly Operating Report for April 1986.
Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report for 1985.
This report summarizes the results of the sampling and analysis of environmental media to determine the radiological impact of station operations.
These environmental media include air, water, vegetation, and aquatic plants and animals.
In addition, direct radiation is monitored by placement of thermoluminescent dosimeters at various locations around the station.
As a result of this review, the inspec-tors determined that the licensee has generally complied with its Technical Specification requirements for sampling frequencies, types of measurement, analytical sensitivities, and reporting schedules.
The report included summaries of the laboratory quality assurance program and of the land use survey.
No deficiencies were note I J
~
'
10.
Exit Interview At periodic intervals and at the conclusion of the inspection period, meetings were held with senior facility management to discuss the inspec-tion scope and findings.
Based on the NRC Region I review of this report and discussion held with licensee representatives, it was determined that this report does not contain information subject, to
CFR 2.790 restriction ~ y
. ~
P
W