IR 05000245/1986018
| ML20215N089 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Millstone  |
| Issue date: | 10/23/1986 |
| From: | Finkel A, Jerrica Johnson NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20215N082 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-245-86-18, NUDOCS 8611040262 | |
| Download: ML20215N089 (8) | |
Text
.
-
.
OP W
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION REGION ~I Report No.
50-245/86-18 Docket No.
50-245 License No.
DPR-21 Licensee: Northeast Nuclear Energy Company P.O. Box 270-Hartford, Connecticut 06141-0270 Facility Name: Millstone Nuclear Power Station, Unit 1 Inspection At: Waterford, Connecticut Inspection Conducted:
September 22-26, 1986
.
-
/#[/#///
Inspectors:
A. Fi 1, Lead}factorEngineer
/ d4te-Approved by:
rh 11 No' L m f ol 2.3 l st J. Johnson, Chirf, Operational Programs date Section, Operations Branch, DRS Inspection Summary: Routine, unannounced inspection on September 22-26, 1986 (Inspection Report 50-245/86-18).
Areas-Inspected: Maintenance program and procedures, electrical, mechanical and instrumentation maintenance tasks and quality assurance / quality control interfaces.
Results: No violations'were identified.
l 8611040262 861028 PDR ADOCK 05000245
'
l
PDR l
t
.
.
DETAILS 1.0 Persons Contacted Northeast Nuclear Energy Company
- P. Przekop, Instrumentation and Control Supervisor
- J. Stetz, Millstone Unit 1 Superintendent
. W. Varney, Maintenance Supervisor.
- '
United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission i
- G. Grant, Resident Inspector The inspector also held discussions with managers, supervisors and other licensee employees during the course of inspection, including operations, technical and administrative personnel.
- Denotes those present at the' exit meeting on September 26, 1986.
2,0 Maintenance, Instrumentation and Control Organization 2.1 Administrative Controls The inspector reviewed and evaluated the licensee's program controlling safety-related Maintenance and I&C activities to assess if the administrative controls established were consistent with the plant Technical Specification (TS), Regulatory Guide 1.33, ANSI N18.7 and 10 CFR 50, Appendix B.
Documents reviewed are listed in Appendix 1 to this report.
The Maintenance and Instrumentation supervisors are responsible for the overall conduct of maintenance activities at this site. The supervisors report directly to the Unit 1 Superintendent who reports to the Station Superintendent.
.
.The Production Maintenance Management System (PMMS) is used for tracking, l
trending and control of maintenance activities by both the Maintenance and the I&C supervisors. The planning groups under both supervisors plan and l
(
coordinate the activities that are to be performed by the mechanical, i
electrical and I&C personnel and update the PMMS program when the tasks I
~are completed. Both preventive and corrective work orders are generated by the PMMS program as well as providing completed work order status data.
The -review and approval of the work order generated by the PMMS program by the Maintenance and I&C supervisors includes assurance that the operability and maintainability of a designated system before and after l
maintenance is not impaired.
!
.
.
.
...
The inspectors review of the PMMS verified that the Technical Specification requirements for both preventive and corrective maintenance were identified and that the maintenance staff was complying with the listed scheduled dates.
No violations were identified.
3.0 Maintenance and Instrumentation Control Activities 3.1 Program Implementation The inspector held discussions with the Maintenance and I&C supervisors as well as managers in the technical functions, quality assurance and operations departments to evaluate controls in place to identify, schedule, track and docu~ ment preventive and corrective maintenance.
The work order (WO), which is one type of document that is an output of the Production Maintenance Management System (PMMS), is used for generating as well as tracking the maintenance and I&C activities.
,
The PMMS, an automatic maintenance management system, provides the following type of information:
A component data base containing equipment nameplate data, TS
--
schedules and maintenance status, On-line inquiry of Work Order status by component, work center
--~
or system, Storage of maintenance and I&C history by task, component and
--
system.
Identification of maintenance backlog, priorities and approval
--
delays, Scheduling of preventive and corrective maintenance tasks and
--
TS surveillances, and l
On-line updating on a per-shift basis.
--
l The PMMS program and the procedures associated with the program have been j
prepared and issued by the licensee. The implementation of this program has been in operation during 1986.
The inspector verified that the
,
'
automatic maintenance management system portion of the PMMS was issuing the above outputs'and that work orders were updated on-line by the maintenance staff.
The update is performed approximately every two weeks with the PMMS 2C-CM Backlog Indicator graph updated on an as-required basis. The PMMS 2C-CM graph charts the open to close status of the work orders in the system and is reviewed by both the Maintenance and I&C supervisors.
I
!.
i i
-.,
..,
_
.
_
.-
-
.
'
No violations were identified.
3.2 Documentation Review and Equipment Test Witnessed 3.2.1 Documentation Reviewed The inspector reviewed the records and work orders of selected safety-related equipment to verify that the following subject areas were controlled as required by the Technical Specification (TS) and the Quality' Assurance Program for this site.
Required administrative approvals were obtained prior to
-
initiation of work,
-
Appropriate approved procedures, instructions and/or drawings were used,
-
Post maintenance testing is required prior to returning equipment to service.,
-
Hold points were appropriately identified and implemented,
_
-
Qualified test equipment and tools were identified and serial numbers listed,
-
Procedures and appropriate data sheets were properly completed,
-
Acceptance criteria was identified and. complied with, and
-
Records were complete, stored and retrievable as part of the maintenance and I&C history.
During the course of this inspection the inspector verified that the procedures and data sheets reviewed included the above criteria as part of the licensee's data package.
No violations were identified.
3.2.2 Equipment Test Witnessed The inspector witnessed.the APRM channel 3 calibration test and the
station quarterly battery test and reviewed the test data for the Gas l
Turbine Analog Instrumentation test. The procedures reviewed by the inspector are listed in Appendix 1 of this report.
In each test either witnessed by the inspector or reviewed by the inspector the following criteria was verified to be part of the procedure requirement:
-
Acceptance criteria defined, l
-
References and Prerequisites listed,
!
.6
_... - - _
_
_ _., _
_
_
.
.
.
Precautions specified for the specific equipment,
-
-
The as found condition recorded before performing any adjusting,
'and
-
The test data approved by a supervisor after performing the required test.
The interviewed technicians were knowledgeable of the test they were to perform on the equipment-and reviewed the procedure with their supervisor before performing the test. A review of the test procedure with the supervisor is performed prior to performing testing. However, in some cases a senior or lead technician will perform the review for.the supervisor.
No violations were identified.
3.2.3 Preventive Maintenance In addition to the equipment reviewed above, the inspector reviewed the data taken on.the Gas Turbine.
Procedure IC 418J, titled " Gas Turbine / Electric Generator Vibration Monitor Calibration", Revision 5, February 1, 1985 is a procedure that simulates vibration levels that are used to verify alignment, trip and alarm setpoint values.
This
-
data is used in setting the instrumentation set points. The inspector reviewed the data from the last test and verified that the equipment was within the specification requirements.
No violations were identified.
3.3 Data Trending The licensee is using data trending techniques in reviewing both l
corrective and preventive maintenance records on a selected basis.
The area that the inspector reviewed was trending associated with the
'
l diesel generators and the gas turbine.
In each case the ISI engineer l
provides the trending results to the maintenance manager for use in
'
establishing both preventive and corrective maintenance decisions. A review of the trending results by the inspector verified that the components were well within their design specifications.
It should be noted that the trending data for these components are in the beginning stages of the program and the confidence levels are still being established.
l
'
No violations were identified, f
l i
f
!'
!
_
.
,
.
---
-
F
.
.
3.4 Trouble Reporting and Work Orders The Trouble Reporting System (TRS) is the method used to report problems. The TRS identifies the component and the problem but does not, in itself, constitute a work order.
The TRS allows personnel to report, inquire, update and approve problems requiring the.
generation of a work order and functions in the same manner as filling out a maintenance request. This information becomes part of the work order (WO) where the request is processed further and a formal work order is issued and tracked.
The work orders (WO) are used to control and document both safety-related and non-safety related work performed at Millstone Unit 1.
The vK) provides the following type of' data:
-
Identification of failures / problems requiring corrective action, Disposition of the work request and identification of the
-
approving authorityt
-
Identification and documentation of quality control requirements,
-
-
Documentation of the testing and functional status of equipment,
-
The status of work scheduled, in progress and completed, and
-
The data base for trending analysis.
On a random basis the inspector selected five W0's and verified that they were in compliance with the requirements of procedure ACP-QA-2.02C.
No violations were identified.
4.0 Quality Assurance / Quality Control Quality Assurance representation is established both at the Millstone Unit 1 site and at the corporate level, located in Berlin, Connecticut.
However, both corporate and on-site QA groups are separate from each other in that they report organizationally under different Vice Presidents. On-site QA activities are performed by the Northeast Nuclear.
Energy Company (hNECO), whereas corporate QA is part of the Northeast Utilities Service Company (NUSCO). Both NNECO and NUSCO Vice Presidents report to the same Senior Vice President.
NNECO QA activities are goverred under Administrative Control Procedures (ACPs) and NUSCO QA activities are governed under Nuclear Quality Assurance procedu~res (NQAs).
,
.
.
.,
The audits'that were conducted on the maintenance and I&C funcitons and reviewed by the inspector were performed at the site by the NUSCO organi-zation and were in accordance with Nuclear Quality Assurance Procedure (NQA) 2.06, Revision.1, June 26, 1986, titled, "A Conduct, Reporting and Followup of Audits". '-The following audits were selected by the inspector for compliance' with Regulatory Guide 1.144 Auditing of Quality Assurance Programs for Nuclear Power Plants September, 1980, ANSI-N45.2.12, 1977 and NVQAP Topical Report.
-
Audit NRB/QA audit No A60438, Requirements of Technical Specifications, Secticns 6.5.3.8 and 6.5.3.7, Audit A-40970, Maintenance of Environmentally Qualified Electrical
-
Equipment by NNECO, March 18, 1985 to May 31, 1985, and Audit. A-40975, Millstone Unit 1, February 27, 1986.
-
Audit No. A-60438 was a verification that Technical Specification (TS)
requirements were specified and documented in maintenance and I&C procedures and that the PMMS system was scheduling the various surveil-lance tests as. required by TS.
The audit findings have been closed with referenced corrective action completed. The audit findings of Nos.
A-40970 and A-40975 have also been closed. The inspector reviewed the audit findings, proposed closing actions, and-the corrective actions taken by the licensee.
No violations were identified.
5.0 Exit Interview The inspector met with licensee management representatives (see section 1.0 for attendees) at an exit meeting on September 26, 1986. The inspector summarized the scope and findings of the inspection at that time.
At no time during this inspection was written material provided to the licensee by the inspector.
_.
-, _
-
_ _.
.
..
Appendix 1 Administrative Procedures ACP-QA-1.01 Millstone-Administration, Revision 5, November 11, 1985 ACP-QA-1.02 Organization and Responsibilities, Revision 18, July 8, 1986 ACP-QA-1.04 Plant Operations Review Committee, Revision 22, April 8, 1986 ACP-QA-1.06 Quality Assurance / Quality Control Program, Revision 8, December 24, 1984 ACP-QA-1.10 Fire Protection Quality Assuranc~e Program, Revision 7, November 15,.1985
~ACP-QA-2 02C Work Orders, Revision 10, May 31, 1986 ACP-QA-2.06A Station Tagging Revision 12, July 1,1986 ACP-QA-2.06B Station Bypass / Jumper Control, Revision 6, July 26,1985 ACP-QA-2.06C Station Bypass / Jumper Control for Trouble Shooting, and Calibration, Revision 1, October 26, 1984 ACP-QA-10.04 Nuclear Power. Plant Records, Revision 27, August 12, 1986 Unit'l Instrumentation and Control Procedures IC-400A Calibration of Instruments used to Satisfy Tech. Spec. Requirements
-
and/or Computer Core Performance Calculation Inputs, Revision 12, March 26, 1986 IC-4008 Preventative Maintenance of Millstone 1 Instrumentation, Revision 1, September 18, 1985 IC-405A Nuclear Instrumentation (TIP Channels), Revision 2, October 18, 1985
'
IC-418K Gas-Turbine Analog Instrumentation Setup and Data Collection, Revision 3, March 11, 1986 SP-404C APRM Calibration, Revision 9, March 11, 1986