IR 05000245/1979018
| ML19256F080 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Millstone  |
| Issue date: | 09/27/1979 |
| From: | Mccabe E, Shedlosky J NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19256F078 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-245-79-18, 50-336-79-19, NUDOCS 7911210316 | |
| Download: ML19256F080 (7) | |
Text
.
.
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT 50-2.45/79-18 Report No.
50-336/79-19 50-245 Docket No.
50-336 DPR-21 License No. DPR-65 Priority Category C
--
Licensee:
Northeast Nuclear Energy Company P. O. Box 270 Hartford, Connecticut 06101 Facility Name:
Millstone Nyclear Power Station, Units 1 & 2 Inspection at:
Waterford, Connecticut 06385 Inspection conducted:
July 1 thru August 3,1979 2M9 Fog Inspectors:
.T.
iosky, Resident inspector date signed
date signed date signed Approved by:
N M'" 's eil n h 3 E. C. McCabe, Jr., Chief, Reactor Projects date signed Section No. 2, RO&NS Branch Inspection Summary:
Inspection on July 1 thru August 3,1979 (Combined Report Nos. 50-245/79-18 and 50-336/79-19 Areas Inspected:
Routine, onsite regular, backshift and weekend inspection by the resident inspector (37 hours4.282407e-4 days <br />0.0103 hours <br />6.117725e-5 weeks <br />1.40785e-5 months <br />, Unit 1; 34.5 hours5.787037e-5 days <br />0.00139 hours <br />8.267196e-6 weeks <br />1.9025e-6 months <br />, Unit 2).
Areas inspected included the control rooms and the accessible portions of the Unit I reactor, turbine, radio-active waste, gas turbine generator, and intake buildings, the Unit 2 enclosure, auxiliary, turbine and intake buildings, and the condensate polishing facility; radiation protection; physical security; fire protection; plant operating records; surveillance testing; calibration maintenance; core power distribution limits; and reporting to the NRC.
Results: No items of noncompliance were identified.
1380 105 q911'd\\0}([
Region I Form 12 (Rev. April 77)
.
.
DETAILS 1.
Persons Con'. acted The below listed technical and supervisory level personnel were among those contacted:
J. M. Black, Superintendent, Unit 3 P. Callaghan, Unit 1 Maintenance Supervisor F. Dacimo, Station QC Supervisor E. C. Farrell, Superintendent, Unit 2 J. Bangasser, Station Security Supervisor H. Haynes, Unit 2 Instrumentation and Control Supervisor R. Herbert, Superintendent, Unit 1 J. Kelly, Unit 2 Operations Supervisor E. J. Mroczka, Superintendent, Plant Services J. F. Opeka, Station Superintendent R. Place, Unit 2 Maintenance Supervisor P. Przekop, Unit 1 Engineering Supervisor W. Romberg, Unit 1 Operations Supervisor S. Scace, Unit 2 Engineering Supervisor F. Teeple, Unit 1 Instrumentation and Control Supervisor 2.
Review of Plant Operation - Plant Inspections The inspector reviewed plant operations through direct inspection and observation during routine power operation of Units 1 and 2.
Inspections were made of the accessible portions of the Unit 1 control room, reactor, turbine radioactive waste, gas turbine generator and intake buildings; the Unit 2 control room, enclosure, auxiliary, turbine and intake buildings.
During this inspection, activities in progress were routine plant power operations and surveillance testing.
A one day shutdown of Unit 1 occurred on July 2 due to a low reactor water level scram following a loss of plant instrument air.
The inspector observed operations in the control room including shift turn-overs and back shift and weekend activities.
a.
Instrumentation rcotrol room process instruments were observed for correlaticn between channels and for conformance with Technical Specification requirements.
No unacceptable conditions were identified.
1380 106
.
b.
Annunciator Alanns The inspector observed various alarm conditions which had been received and acknowledged.
These conditions were discussed with shift personnel who were knowledgeable of the alarms and actions required.
During plant inspections, the inspector observed the condition of equipment associated with various alarms.
No unacceptable conditions were identified.
c.
Shift Manning The operating shifts were observed to be staffed to meet the operating requirements of Technical Specifications, Section 6, both to the number and type of licenses.
Control room and shift manning were observed to be in conformance with Technical Specifications and site administrative procedures.
d.
Radiation Protection Controls Radiation protection control areas were inspected.
Radiation Work Permits in use were reviewed, and compliance with those documents, as to protective clothing and required monitoring instruments, was inspected.
There were no unacceptable conditions identified.
e.
Plant Housekeeping Controls Storage of material and components was observed with respect to prevention of fire and safety hazards.
Plant housekeeping was evaluated with respect to controlling the spread of surface and airborne contamination.
There were no unacceptable conditions identified, f.
Fire Protection / Prevention The inspector examined the condition of selected pieces of fire fighting equipment.
Combustible materials were being controlled and were not found near vital areas.
Selected cable penetrations were examined and, thus, fire barriers were found intact.
Cable trays were clear of debr.
g.
Control of Equipment During plant inspections, selected equipment under safety tag control were examined.
Equipment conditions were consistent with information in plant control logs.
1380 107
h.
Instrument Channels Instrument channel checks were reviewed on routine logs.
An independent comparison was made of selected instruments.
No unacceptable conditions were identified.
1.
Equipment Lineups The inspector examined the breaker position on all switchgear and motor control centers in accessible portions of the plant.
Equipment con-ditions were found in conformance with Technical Specifications and operating requirements.
3.
Review of Plant Operations - Logs and Records During the inspection period, the resident inspector reviewed operating logs and records covering the inspection time period against Technical Specifi-cations and administrative procedure requirements.
Included in the review were:
Shift Supervisor's Log 7/1 to 8/3/79
-
Plant Incident Reports
-
7/1 to 8/3/79 Jumper and Lifted Leads Log all active entries
-
Maintenance Requests and Job Orders-all active entries Safety Tag Log
-
all active entries Plant Recorder Traces
-
daily during control room surveillance Plant Process Computer Printed
-
daily during control room Output surveillance Key Control Log
-
7/1 to 8/3/79 Nigat Orders daily during control room
-
surveillance Plant Incident Reports
-
daily during control room surveillance The logs and records were reviewed to verify that entries were properly made; entries involving abnormal conditions provide sufficient detail to cocinunicate equipment status, deficiencies, corrective action restoration and testing; records are being reviewed by management; operating orders do not conflict with the Technical Specifications; logs and incident reports detail no violations of Technical Specification or reporting requirements; logs and records are maintained in accordance with Technical Specification and Administrative Control Procedure requirements.
Several entries in these logs were the subject of additional review and discussion with licensee personnel.
No unacceptable conditions were identified.
1380 108
.
,
.
4.
Licensee Event Reports (LER's)
The inspector reviewed the following LER's to verify that the details of the event were clearly reported, including the accuracy of the description of cause and adequacy of corrective action.
The inspector determined whether further information was required, and whether generic implications were involved.
The inspector also verified that the reporting requirements of Technical Specifications and Station Admin-istrative and operating procedures had been met, that appropriate corrective action had been taken, that the event was reviewed by the Plant Operations Review Comittee, and that the continued operation of the facility was conducted within the Technical Specification limits.
Unit 1 79-12, Instrument Calibration drift - Reactor Building Exhaust Duct Refuel Floor High Radiation Monitor.
79-13, Observed inadequacy in implementing procedural controls - Source Range Monitor response check not performed for 54 hours6.25e-4 days <br />0.015 hours <br />8.928571e-5 weeks <br />2.0547e-5 months <br /> vs required check every 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br />.
79-14, Observed inadequacy in implementing procedural controls - Source Range Monitor functional test not performed prior to core alterations.
79-15, Inoperable refuel interlock due to worn bridge track limit switch.
79-16, Setpoint drift reactor low pressure ECCS pump start and injection valve permissive.
79-17, Setpoint drift steam line tunnel high temperature switch.
Unit 2 79-11, Failure to measure and record results of containment local leak rate testing prior to repair of containment isolation valves.
79-12, Inoperable linear power range channels A and D due to open connections in detector cables.
79-13, Inoperable control room chlorine detection system due to clogged detector solution lines.
1380 109
.
.
5.
Licensee Action Taken on Bulletin 79-06C (Unit 2)
IEB 79-06C, dated July 26, 1979, required, in part, that in the event of a reactor trip and the initiation of the high pressure injection system caused by low reactor coolant system pressure all operating reactor coolant pumps are immediately secured.
In order to accomplish this action the bulletin requires two licensed operators remain in the control room at all times.
In response to this document on July 30, 1979, revisions to procedures 2506 - Loss of Coolant Incident; 2509 - Steam Lina Rupture; and 2515 -
Stera Generator Tube Rupture, were issued.
Change 1 to revisions 5, 4 anu 5, respectively, were issued to implement the requirements of the Bulletin.
This change deletes previous requirements to run reactor coolant pumps and now requires tripping all operating reactor coolant pumps upon a reactor trip and initiation of a high pressure safety injection caused by low reactor coolant system pressure.
The licensee has implemented changes in control room manning to require a second licensed operator in the control room while the reactor is in Modes 1, 2 or 3.
That operatcr has direct responsibility for immediate and follow-up actions involving Main and Auxiliary Feedwater Systems and Reactor Coolant Pumps during feedwater flow or steam generator level transients or during pressurizer low pressure safety injection actuation.
Changes to station administrative control procedures are being drafted to formally implement these changes.
This is an open action and will be reviewed during a future inspection (336/79-19-01).
6.
Review of Periodic and Special Reports Upon receipt, periodic and special reports submitted by the licensee pursuant to Technical Specification 6.9.1 and 6.9.2 and Environmental Technical Specification 5.6.1.b were reviewed by the inspector.
This review included the following considerations: the report includes the information required to be reported by NRC requirements; test results and/or supporting information are consistent with design predictions and performance specifications; planned corrective action is adequate for resolution of identified problems; determination whether any information in the report should be classified as an abnormal occurrence; and, the validity of reported information.
Within the scope of the above, the following periodic reports were reviewed by the inspector:
--
Monthly Operating Reports - March through June 1979 Annual Operating Report 1978 dated March 1,1979
--
!380
!10
.
.
--
Semiannual Radioactive Effluent Release Reports July 1 through December 31, 1978 dated March 1,1979 Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program - 1978, dated
--
March 31, 1979 The inspector had no questions relative to the above reviewed.
7.
Previously Inspected Open Items (Closed) Corrective actions following indication of primary to secondary steam generator leak (336/79-01-01).
The licensee inspected the steam generators as required by Technical Specification 4.4.5.
During the startup following that inservice inspection and corrective tube plugging monitoring for primary to secondary leakage indicates that the leak has been corrected.
(Closed) ECCS Flow Verification Surveillance Procedure Acceptance Criteria (336/79-09-01).
Revision 2, dated July 16, 1979, reviewed during plant safety committee meeting 79-78 has been issued.
The test procedure acceptance criteria, section 2, is in conformance with Technical Specifi-cation 4. 5.2. f.
The test procedure, sections 7.1, 7.2 and 7.3, contains a more restrictive acceptance criteria to incorporate instrurrat error of control board instruments or reading taken from the process computer.
8.
Exit Interview At periodic intervals during the course of this inspection, meetings were held with senior facility management to dinuss inspection scope and findings.
1380 111