IR 05000245/1980008
| ML19337A968 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Millstone  |
| Issue date: | 07/14/1980 |
| From: | Blumberg N, Greenman E, Shaub E NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19337A959 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-245-80-08, 50-245-80-8, NUDOCS 8010010100 | |
| Download: ML19337A968 (11) | |
Text
(
.
.
U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT
REGION I
Report No.
50-245/80-08 Docket No.
50-245 License No.
OPR-21 Priority Category C
--
Licensee:
Northeast Nuclear Energy Company P.O. Box 270 Hartford, Con.acticut 06101 Facility Name:
Millstone Nuclear Power Station, Unit 1 Inspection At:
Waterford, Connecticut Inspection Conducted:
June 2-6. 1980 Inspectors:
Y b
N. J. Blumberg, R actof Inspector date
nu, E. T. Shaub, Reactor Inspector d' ate /
f UNu-7/>r/80 E. G. Greenman, Nuclear Support Section
'date No. 2, RO&NS Branch Approved by:
[N 7[/f/'O
'
E. Greenman, Chief, Nuclear Support Section date No. 2, RO&NS Branch irspectionSummary:
Inspection on June 2-6, 1980 (Report No. 50-245/80-08)
Areas Inspected:
Routine, unannounced inspection by regionally based inspectors of administrative controls for surveillanca procedures; surveillance testing;
'
witnessing of surveillance tests; technician qualifications; insersice plant testing; and, facility tours.
The inspection involved 62 inspector-hours onsite j
by two NRC regionally based inspectors and NRC management.
l Results:
Of the six areas inspected, no items of noncompliance were found in four areas; two apparent items of noncompliance were found in two areas (Defi-ciency - failure to perform an inservice inspection in accordance with procedural instructions, Paragraph 7.c; and Deficiency - failure to maintain records of l
safety related surveillance, Paragraph 4.C).
f
!
Region I Form 167 (August 1979)
8010010/00
'
>
e-
-
.
DETAILS 1.
Persons Contacted
- E. Mroczka, Station Superintendent
- R. Herbert, Unit 1, Plant Superintendent
- K. Thomas, Senior Engineer
- W. Romberg, Operations Supervisor
- P. Przekop, Unit 1, Engineering Supervisor
- F. Teeple, Unit 1, I&E Supervisor T. Piasc1k, Reactnr Engineer P. Callaghan, Maintenance Supervisor J. Crosby, Operations Supervisor J. Kangley, Chemistry Supervisor USNRC
,
- T. Shedlosky, Senior Resident Inspector
'
- E. Greenman, Chief, Nuclear Support Section No. 2, RO&NS Branch
The inspectors also interviewed several other licensee employees during the inspection, including reactor operators, technicians, technical support,
,
and office personnel.
l
- Denotes those present at exit interview.
2.
Licensee Action on Previous Inspection Findings e,
(Closed) Deficiency (245/78-12-04):
Reactor coolant samples were not taken at four hour increments during startup and at steaming rates below 100,000 pounds per hour as required by Technical Specifications.
The inspector observed that procedures, OP-201, Reactor Startup and SP-839, Coolant Chemistry-Startup and Rates Below 100,000 Pounds per Hour, had been revised to include the reguired four hour sam)le frequency.
In addition the inspec-tor reviewed chemistry results from tie last Reactor Startup, December 20, 1979, to verify that sampling was performed every four hours.
(Closed)UnresolvedItem(77-31-05):
The Linear Variable Differential Transformer (LVDT) used for turbine stop valve position indication should be included in a calibration program to check indicated position against valve stroke.
The inspector reviewed drawings of the turbine stop valve and observed that the limit switch for 10% valve closure scram signal is in a fixed position and is not dependent on calibration of the LVDT.
The turbine stop valve closure scram is functionally tested on a monthly oasis per SP408F and is independent of the LVDT.
Based on the above, the inspec-tor concurred with a licensee evaluation that calibration of the LVDT need not be included in the balance of plant calibration program.
(Closed)UnresolvedItem(245/78-17-07):
Submit Technical Specification (T.S.) change to include in T.S. new mechanical snubbers which have been l
_
_
a
.-+a_a g
_i
-
_
e c
.a
.
.
.
,
a
4 added to the plant as required by T.S. 3.6.I.6.
The licensee has stated
that a T.S. change would not be submitted to add the mechanical snubbers.
'
The licensee states that T.S. 3.6.1.6 applies only to hydraulic snubbers and that discussions with twelve other commercial nuclear power plant licensees with mechanical snubbers indicates that their T.S. also do not
include mechanical snubbers.
In addition, the licensee notes that sampl-ing inspections of mechanical snubbers are required by the Inservice Inspec-tion Program.
The licensee reaffirmed its commitment to submit required T.S. changes for the addition or deletion of hydraulic snubbers.
The inspector concurred that T.S. 3.6.I.6 refers specifically to hydraulic
snubbers and, as written, does not apply to the addition of mechanical snubbers.
(0 pen)UnresolvedItem(245/78-34-03):
T.S. Table 3.7.1 lists wrong posi-tions for valves IC-3, IC-4, and CV-5; does not list valves FSV-9-75A-D; and surveillance T.S. 4.7.0.1.C were not accomplished for valves FSD9-75A-D.
The licensee stated that a T.S. change concerning valves IC-3, IC-4, and CV-5 would be submitted by July 30, 1980; and that valves FSV-9-75A-D would be modified during the upcoming refueling outage and a T.S. change would be submitted by January 1, 1981.
(Closed)UnresolvedItem 245/79-24-03):
The Daily Surveillance Log step 4 addressed the three types of fuel bundles used in the cycle 7 core; 7 x 7, 8 x 8, and 8 x 8R.
Step 7 of the log does not include the 7 x 7 type fuel bundle.
The inspector observed that the current Daily Surveillance Log, Revision 32, May 7, 1980, had been revised to include the 7 x 7 type bundles in the procedure.
(Closed) Deficiency (245/79-27-01):
Fire detectors in the Diesel Generator
Room, the Hydrogen Seal Oil Unit, and the Diesel Day Tank Room were being f functionally tested annually rather than semi-annually as required by T.S.;
and torus water level instrumentation calibration exceeded its calibration interval of six months plus 25 percent.
The inspector observed that pro-cedure SP680Q has been revised to include semi-annual functional tests of
,
fire detectors in the Diesel Generator Room, the Hydrogen Seal Oil Unit, and the Diesel Day Tank Room and that these instruments were tested on
'
January 3, 1980; and May 5, 1980.
In addition, the inspector observed that SP411L, Torus Water Level Instrumentation calibration was last oerformed within the six month interval required by T.S.
(0 pen)UnresolvedItem(245/79-27-02):
Submit change to T.S. to allow func-tional tests of fire detectors using direct application of heat rather than i
byinjectingasimulatedelectricalsignalintothemeasurementchannel.
'
This change has been written but has not yet been submitted.
The licensee stated the change was held up as the fire detection system is currently i
being upgraded and that a T.S. change would be submitted by January 1, 1981 i
which would include both the newly installed fire detectors and the change l
in method of functionally testing fire detectors.
I
,!
i
_.,
_
... _.._ _ _____ _._ _ __._ ___._ _, _.
-,,, _ _. _. _. -. _ _ _,.
.
.
,
3.
Administrative Controls for Surveillance Procedures and In-service Inspection Program The inspector performed an audit of the licensee's administrative controls by conducting a sampling review of the below listed administrative proce-dures with respect to the requirements of the Technical Specifications, Section 6, " Administrative Controls," ANSI N18.7 " Administrative Controls for Nuclear Power Plants" and Regulatory Guide 1.33 " Quality Assurance Program Requirements."
ACP-QA-3.02, Station Procedures and Forms, Revision 12, May 1, 1980
--
ACP-QA-3.03, Document Control, Revision 10, February 14, 1980
--
ACP-QA-9.02, Plant Surveillance Program, Revision 6, January 1, 1980
--
ACP-QA-9.02A, Unit 1 Surveillance Master Test Control List, Revision 4,
--
January 30, 1980 ACP-QA-9.03, In-service Plant Testing, Revision 2, January 30, 1980
--
ACP-QA-9.04, Control and Calibration of Measuring and Test Equipment,
--
Revision 6, May 9, 1980 ACP-QA-9.06, In-service Inspection Program, Revision 1, August 3, 1978
--
ACP-8.09A, Change and/or Revision Review, Revision 2, October 4, 1979
--
No items of noncompliance were identified.
4.
Surveillance Testing a.
The inspector reviewed surveillance' tests on a sampling basis to verify the following.
Tests required by Technical Specifications are available and
--
covered by properly approved procedures; Test frequency is in conformance with Technical Specificatior,
--
requirements; Test format and technical content are adequate and provide satis-
--
factory testing of related systems or components; Test results of selected tests are in conformance with Technical
--
Specifications and procedure requirements have been reviewed by
,
someone other than the tester or individual directing the test.
,
I
.
-.
>
.
.
,
,
' he following surveillance tests were reviewed to verify the items T
c.
identified above:
SP 410B, Rod Block Monitor Functional Test, Revision 1,
--
December 12, 1979 Data were reviewed for four tests performed (I&C Form 410B-1, Revision 1, October 3, 1979):
January 28, 1980; February 25, 1980; March 31, 1980; and April 28, 1980 SP 4080, Discharge Volume High Water Level Scram, Revision 2,
--
April 8, 1979 Data were reviewed for four tests performed (I&C Form 4080-1, Revision 2, October 3, 1979):
February 19, 1980; March 18, 1980; April 21, 1980; and May 19, 1980 SP 622.7, LPCI System Operability, Revision 4, November 21, 1979
--
Data were reviewed for five tests ]erformed (OPS Form 622.7-1, Revision 2):
January 15, 1980; Fe)ruary 20, 1980; March 7, 1980; April 8, 1980; and May 13, 1980.
SP 626.2, Manual Operation of Relief Valves When Reactor is at
--
low Pressure, Revision 4, February 10, 1979 Data was reviewed for the test performed June 27,1979,(OPS Form 626.2, Revision 2, January 31,1979)
SP 628.1, Integrated Simulated Automatic Acutation of FWCI, Core
--
Spray, LPCI, Diesel and Gas Turbine Generator, Revision 3, August 1, 1979 Data was reviewed for the test performed June 23, 1979 (OPS Form 628.1-1, Revision 2, July 25, 1979)
631.2, Control Rod Exercise-Stuck Control Rod, Revision 4,
--
May 6, 1980 Data were reviewed for six tests performed (OPS Form 631.2-1, Revision 2, August 26,1977):
April 21, 1980; May 1, 8, 15, 22, l
and 29, 1980 SP 632.4, Su]pression Chamber Drywell Vacuum Breaker Exercise,
--
Revision 3, FebcJary 23, 1978 Data were reviewed for the four tests performed (0PS Form 632.4-1, Revision 2, November 14,1979):
January 4, 1980; February 7, 1980; March 4, 1980; and April 1, 1980
-
'
'
.
.
SP 638.1, JET Pump Check, Revision 3, May 7, 1980
--
Data were reviewed for fifteen daily tests performed (OPS Form 10.10 Shift Surveillance Schedule P.9, Revision 32, May 7, 1980)
May 14-May 28, 1980 SP 661.4, Standby Liquid Control Pump Operational Readiness Test,
--
Revision 1, November 21, 1979 Data were reviewed for four tests performed (OPS Form 661.4-1, Revision 2, October 31,1979):
January 18, 1980; February 19, 1980; March 17, 1980; and April 14, 1980 SP 668.2, Gas Turbine Emergency Fast Start Test, Revision 8,
--
April 4, 1980 Data were reviewed for five tests performed (OPS Form 668.2-1, Revision 3, April 19, 1980): January 4 and 5, 1980; March 7, 1980; April 1, 1980; and May 12, 1980 SP 680B, Fire Pumps Auto Start Test, Revision 5, November 7, 1979
--
Data were reviewed for six tests performed (OPS Form 6808-1, Revision 2, November 30,1978):
February 8, 1980; March 7 and 31, 1980; April 4 and 12, 1980;- and May 2, 1980 SP 680C, Semi-Annual Fire Protection System Post Indicator Valve
--
and Hydrant Valve Test, Revision 2, April 16, 1980 Data were reviewed for two tests performed (OPS Form 680C-1, Revision 2):
October 4, 1979 and April 1, 1980 SP 680M, Annual Fire Protection System Fire Pump Flow Rate Test,
--
Revision 1, November 18, 1978 Data was not maintained by the licensee for this test, see paragraph C1.
SP-778.2, Bench Check of Relief / Safety Valves, Revision 2,
--
June 13, 1979 Data were reviewed for tests performed (OPS Form 778.2-1,l 1979 Revision 1, June 13, 1979 and vendor data sheets) in Apri by vendor on new relief valves.
SP 780.3, load Test on Station Batteries, Revision 4, April 4,
--
1980
.
.
,
Data was reviewed for tests performed (OPS Form 780.3-1, Revision 0, August 12, 1978) on May 9 and 11, 1979 c.
As a result of the above review, the following item was identified:
(1)
Documentation of SP 680M,ined for test performed on August 28, An Rate Test, was not mainta
)
1979, as required by Technical Specification 6.10.1.d.
Failure to maintain records of safety related surveillances constitutes a
'
deficiency level item of noncompliance (50-245/80-08-01).
5.
Inspector's Witnessing of Surveillance Tests a.
The inspector witnessed the performance of surveillance testing oi selected components to verify the following:
Surveillance test procedure was available and in use-
.
--
Special test equipment requi.'ed by procedure was calibrate)
--
and in use;
'
Test prerequisites were met;
--
The procedure was adequately detailed to assure performance of
--
a satisfactory surveillance;
,
,
Surveillance test was performed in accordance with procedural
--
requirements; System restoration was correct.
--
b.
The inspector witnessed the performance of the following surveillance tests:
SP 4048, Average Power Range Monitor Functional Test, Revision 0,
--
March 4, 1977, performed June 3, 1980 SP 608H, Fire Protection System Transformer Deluge System, Revi-
--
sion 1, April 20, 1978, performed June 5, 1980 SP 680J, Manual Sprinkler System Valve Operability Test and
--
l Inspection of Systems, Revision 1, April 16, 1980, performed
'
June 5, 1980 SP 680Q, Functional Test of Hydrog2n Seal Oil, Diesel Generator
--
Room, Heater Bay, and Diesel Day Tank Fire Detection, Revision 1, March 26, 1980, performed June 5, 1980
__
_.
.
.
i c.
Observations During Surveiliance Testing (1) During the Transformer Deluge System Test, SP 680H, site opera-tors, encountered an arcing overheating problem with the switch on the solenoid actuated deluge valves.
The operators informed the electrical maintenance foreman, and resolved the problem.
(2) While performing functional test of Diesel Day Tank Fire Detec-tion System, SP 680Q, the operators encountered problems reseat-ing water supply valve 1-Fire-80 and inoperability of the local valve actuation alarm.
The operators cycled the valve manually several times, which removed the reseating probiem, and initiated a maintenance request (MR) to repair the local alarm.
No items of noncompliance were identified.
6.
Technician Qualifications
,
the inspector discussed the qualification records of personnel having responsibility for surveillance testing of safety-related components and equipment to verify that the individual's experience level and training were in accordance with the guidelines of ANSI N18.1-1971, Selection and Training of Nuclear Power Plant Personnel.
No items of noncompliance were identified.
7.
Inservice Inspection Program a.
The inspector reviewed the in-service inspection plan and procedures on a sampling basis to verify the following:
Tests are in conformance with the in-service inspection program
--
requirements.
Test frequency is in conformance with Technical Specifications
--
and the In-Service Inspection Program.
Tt;t format and technical content are adequate and provide satis-
--
factory testing of related systems or components.
Test results have been reviewed as required by facility adminis-
--
trative requirements and appropriate action was taken for results failing acceptance criteria.
Tests were performed by qualified personnel.
--
b.
The following in-service inspection plans, procedures and test results were reviewed to verify the above:
l l
- _.
.. _ -._ -
-
- - - -
- -.
-
-
...-.
.-
-__.
.
- --
.
.
In-service Inspection Ten Year Program for Northeast Nuclear
--
Energy Co. Millstone Unit 1, General Revision, October 10, 1978; Pump and Valve In-service Testing sections.
SP 1060 ISI Program Pump Vibration and Hydraulic Test, Revision 2,
'
--
January 9, 1980 (1) Data sheet, SP 1060-1, LPCI Pump Vibration, Revision 1, November 1, 1978.
Data reviewed for tests performed:
February 12, 1980; March 7, 1980; April 8, 1980; and May 13, 1980.
(2) Data sheet, SP 1060-4, Condensate Booste: Pump Vibration and Hydraulic Test, Revision 0, November 1, 1978.
Data reviewed for tests performed:
January 3029,1986.1980; February 26, 1980 April 1, 1980; and April (3) Data sheet SP 1060-9, Emergency Service Water Vibration andHdraulicTest, Revision 0, November 1,1978.
Data
,ed for tests performed:
February 12, 1980; March 12,
-
.,d; April 10, 1980; and May 14, 1980.
(4) Data sheet, SP 1060-11, Reactor Building Closed Cooling Water Vibration and Hydraulic Test, Revision 0, November 1, 1978.
Data reviewed for tests performed:
February 7, 1980; March 12, 1980; April 7, 1980; and May 12, 1980.
'
5)
Data Sheet, SP 1060-14,ision 0, November 1, 1978. Control Rod D i
and Hydraulic Test, Rev Data reviewed for tests performed:
April 15 and 22, 1980 and May 20, 1980 for CRD Pump A; January 17, 1980, February 19, 1980 and March 19, 1980 for CRD Pump B.
SP 1061, ISI Valve Timing Program, Revision 1, November 8, 1978
--
(1) Data sheet, 623.14-1, Containment Isolation Valve Leak Rate Test, Revision 1, Apil 15, 1978.
Data reviewed for test done May 2, 1979; performed on vaive 1-FW-9A, Outside Con-tainment Check.
(2) COL 335-1, Low Pressure Coolant Injection Valve Check-Off List, Revision 0, May 20, 1977.
Reviewed check-off litt completed June 22, 1979 for valve 1-LP-1A system suction shut-off.
(3) COL 322-1, Emergency Service Water Valve Check-off List, Revision 0, April 28, 1977.
Reviewed check-off list com-pleted June 11, 1979 for valve 1-LPC-2C, Pump Discharge Stop.
,
-
. _ _ _
--~
.
, _..
-...-
-
'
.
(4) COL 307-1, Isolation Condenser System Valve Check-off List, Revision 4, May 14, 1980.
Reviewed check-off completed June 23, 1979 for valve 1-IC-12, Makeup Stop.
SP 1062, ISI Bearing Temperature Program, Revision 2,
--
November 8, 1978.
No data was reviewed.
c.
Findings (1) The inspector reviewed a sampling of valves listed in the In-service Inspection Program, Table IW-1 to determine compli-ance with in-service test requirements.
The inspector observed that in-service test requirements were not being met for the following valves:
Table IW-1 requires that valve 1-IC-12, " Makeup to Isola-
--
tion Condenser Stop", be verified in tte " locked open" posi-tion.
The inspector observed that Valve Check-off List 307-1 verified 1-IC-12 in the open position only and, in addition, the inspector observed that 1-IC-12 was open but not locked.
Prior to completion of the inspection, the licensee stated that a lock had been installed on 1-IC-12 and that Valve Check-off List 307-1 had been revised to require 1-IC-12 to be locked open.
Table IW-1 requires that Valve 1-RC-6,"" Reactor Building
--
Closed Cooling Water Inlet Check Valve, be exercised full stroke for operability.
A " Relief Request" associated with Table IW-1 states that 1-RC-6 should be exempt from quar-terly testing and specifies a full stroke exercise during reactor refuelings.
Since issuance of the ISI program revi-sion in October 1978, a reactor refueling outage occurred during 1979, however, valve 1-RC-6 was not tested nor did there appear to be any plans or procedures to assure this valve would be tested during the next refueling outage.
The licensee stated a procedure would be prepared to ensure the future testing 0f 1-RC-6.
,
Table IW-1 requires that Valve 301-138, " Control Rod Drive
--
(CRD) Return Isolation", be verified open every three months.
The inspector determined that this valve is not being veri-fied open every three months.
The licensee stated that a surveillance would be established to assure that the valve is verified open on a quarterly basis.
Failure to perform in-service inspection tests is contrary to T.S. 4.13 and the In-service Inspection Ten Year Program and constitutes a deficiency level item of noncompliance (50-245/80-08-02).
<
i
_
__ __
._
._
__
_
_
__-
_
__
_.
_
.__
_
"
!
.
.
!
1
!
(2) Data sheet SP 1060-17 has recently been issued to provide for
!
in-service testing of the fuel pool cooling pumps; however, pro-j cedure SP 1060 has not been revised to refer to SP 1060-17.
In
'
addition the procedure lists form SP 1060-16, "In-service Inspec-l tion Pump and Motor Record", as an active form but girovides no
instruction as to its use.
The licensee stated procedure SP 1060 would be revised by July 31, 1981 to include form SP1060-17 and to provide instructions for use of form SP1060-16.
This item
,
is unresolved review (50-245/pendinglicenseeactionandsubseq4entNRC:RI
80-08-03).
8.
Facility Tour l
On several occasions during the inspection, tours of the facility were conducted including the Reactor Building, Auxiliary Building, Turbine i
Building and Diesel and Gas Turbine Generator Rooms.
During the tours, the inspector discussed plant operations and observed housekeeping, radia-i tion control measures, monitored instrumentation and controls for Technical l
Specification compliance.
In addition, the inspectors observed Control Room operations on each day of the inspection for Control Room manning and
!
facility operation in accordance with Administrative and Technical Specifi-cation requirements.
i l
During the tour of the Reactor Building the inspectors noticed two CRD scram inlet valves leaking for rods 34-39 and 22-31.
The inspectors noti-
,
!
fied the licensee of the leaks and the licensee completed maintenance requests (MR) for the valves (MR 1033-80, ROD 34-39 and MR 1032, R0D 22-31)
to initiate corrective action if the leaks still persist when the CRD sys-tem is placed back in operation.
No items of noncompliance were identified.
9.
Unresolved Items Unresolved items are matters about which more information is required in order to ascertain whether they are acceptable items or items of noncom-pliance.
The unresolved item identified during the inspection is discussed in Paragraph 7.c.(2).
10.
Presentation of Preliminary Findings
Licensee manacement was periodically informed of inspector findings as i
follows:
on Z une 3 and 4,1980 reprt details 4.c.(1), 7c(1) and 7c(2).
A summary of inspection findings was provided to the senior licensee
representative on site at the conclusion of the ins
,
The licensee acknowledged the inspection findings. pection June 6, 1980.
Subsequent telephone
!
discussions concerning inspection findings were held between Mr. R. Herbert
and Mr. N. Blumberg on June 9 and 10, 1980.
.
_
..,
.
_
.__
-
.
-
.
..