IR 05000247/1982005
| ML20053A760 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Indian Point  |
| Issue date: | 05/06/1982 |
| From: | Baunack W, Koltay P, Rebelowski T NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20053A755 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-247-82-05, NUDOCS 8205270255 | |
| Download: ML20053A760 (15) | |
Text
_ _
_ _
s
.
.
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT Region I DSC 50247/820119 820112 Report No. 82-05 820206 820207 Docket No. 50-247 License No. DPR-25 Priority
--
Category C
Licensee: Consolidated Edison Company of New York, Inc.
4 Irving Place New York, New York 10003
Facility Name:
Indian Point Nuclear Generating Station, Unit 2
Inspection at: Buchanan, New York t
Inspection conducted: April 1-30, 1982 Inspectors:
5h O
<f L
'
T. RebelowsKi, Senior Resident Inspector date L
5l5l0S P. Koltayr Resident-Inspector
/ d6te 4/ 4 Approved by:
Il claue W.~Baunack, Acting Chief, Indian Point
' 'date Resident Section, Division of Project and Resident Programs
,
Inspection Summary:
Inspection on April 1-30, 1982 (Inspection Report 50-247/82-05)
Areas Inspected: Routine onsite, regular and backshift inspection including licensee action on previously identified inspection findings; operational safety verification; plant tours; containment isolation lineup; operability of engineered safeguard features; radiation protection controls; sampling prcgram review; radioactive waste system controls; surveillance observations; facility maintenance; review of monthly and periodic reports; independent limiting conditions for operation verification; physical security; licensee event reports followup; onsite licensee event followup; safety sy:: tem challenges; and, general site and emergency preparedness training. The inspection involved 163 inspector hours by the resident inspectors.
Results: No violations were identified.
8205270 1 %
,
..
.- _
-.
.
.
DETAILS 1.
Persons Contacted D. Anny, Maintenance Engineer J. Basile, General Manager Nuclear Power Generation A. Brescia, I&C Supervisor K. Burke, Director Regulatory Affairs W. Carson, Test Engineer J. Cullen, Radiation Protection Manager J. Curry, Chief Operations Engineer W. Ferreira, Radiation Protection Administrator J. Higgins, Chemistry Manager C. Jackson, Vice President Nuclear Power J. Mooney, Electrical Engineer A. Hespoli, Major Projects Manager R. Orzo, Senior Watch Supervisor J. Quirk, Test and Performance Engineer D. Rosh, General Manager Technical Support M. Skotzko, Security Administrator M. Smith, Chief Technical Engineer L. Volpe, Test Supervisor T. Walsh, Instrument and Control Engineer S. Wisla, General Manager, Environmental Health and Safety The inspectors also interviewed other licensee employees including ac%ers of the operations, health physics, technical support, maintenance, construction, corporate engineering staff, and security personnel.
2.
Licensee Action on Previously Identified Inspection Findings (Closed) Unresolved (50-247/81-20-02): The inspectors' review of surveillance procedure PTM 32, Condenser Pit Flood Alanns Operational Test, identified that the integrity of floats were not demonstrated. The licensee has tested floats and promulgated a change to PTM 32, Revision 2 that requires this test on an annual basis.
(Closed) Unresolved (50-247/81-20-04): The licensee identified a broken tie rod on the mounting bracket of snubber 70-SR-13. The licensee's metallurgical department has determined that the failure was due to a transverse impact load that would validate the licensee's claim as an inadvertent blow to tie rod during repairs to the pressurizer.
,.
.
.
_ _ _
.
-
.
_
.
3.
Operational Safety Verification Using a unit specific daily anc biweekly checklist, the inspector verified:
Proper control room manning and access control;
-
-
Operators adhering to approved procedures for ongoing activities; Adherence to limiting conditions for operations observable from
-
the control room; fio abnomalities on instrumentation and recorder traces;
-
-
Operators understood the reasons for annunciators which were lit, and that timely corrective action was being taken;
-
fluclear instrumentation and other reactor protection systems are operable; Control rod insertion limits are in confomance with technical
-
specification requirements;
-
Containment temperature and pressure indications in conformance with technical specification requirements;
-
fio abnomalities indicated on radiation monitor recorder traces; and,
-
Onsite and offsite emergency power sources available for automatic operation.
The inspector reviewed the control room log, shift supervisor's log, tag-out log, operating orders, significant occurrence reports, daily leakrate calculations, shift turnover check sheet, and diesel operability log to obtain information concerning operating trends and activities, and to note any out-of-service safety systems.
During routine entry and egress from the protected area (PA) and containment,
,
l the inspector verified:
Access controls are in conformance with security plan requirements l
-
for personnel, packages and vehicles; The required number of guards are present and alert;
-
l Gates in the PA barriers are closed and locked if not attended;
-
I l
l
.,.
-
.-.
-
-
. -.
--
.
.
Isolation zones are free of visual obstructions and objects that
-
could aid an intruder in penetrating the PA.
Personnel radiation monitoring equipment is operable, and that equip-
-
ment and materials are being monitored prior to release for unrestrict-ed use.
Findings:
The inspector witnessed the recovery evaluation, and return to power from an inadvertent turbine runback which occurred at 9:25 a.m., April 22, 1982. The runback occurred while rod drop turbine runback testing of NI Channel 41 was in progress. The runback initiated at 100% power, the operators verified no true runback conditions existed and terminated the runback at 91% power.
The runback was due to two terminal screws wedged in a relay preventing it from opening, thereby voiding the rod drop bypass switch.
Following the identi-fication of the cause of the problem, the unit was returned to full power.
An ENS notification of the occurrence was also made.
No violations were identified.
4.
Plant Tours During the course of the inspection, the inspector made observations and con-ducted tours of the following areas during regular and backshifts:
-
Turbine Building Control Rocm
-
Diesel Generator Rooms
-
-
Primary Auxiliary Building Security Control Building
-
Auxiliary Feed Pump Building
-
-
Cable Spreading Room M0 Building
-
Perimeter Fence
-
-
Transformer Yard
-
Intake Structure Spent Fuel Handling Building
-
The following items were observed or verified:
-
General plant / equipment conditions including operability and verification of standby equipment;
-
Inspected plant areas for fire hazards, fire alarms, extinguishing equip-ment, actuating controls, fire fighting equipment, and emargency equip-ment for operability;
.
.
Ignition sources and flamable materials are being controlled;
-
Combustible material and debris are promptly removed from the
-
facility; Plant housekeeping and cleanliness practices are in confomanci
-
with approved programs; Excess equipment and material is returned to storage areas;
-
Critical clean areas are controlled in accordance with pro-
-
cedures, when required; Activities in progress are being conducted in accordance with
-
adninistrative controls and approved procedures. Verified these activities do not interfere or have the potential to interfere with the safe operation of the facility; and, Reviewed a sample of equipment tagouts to verify compliance with
-
Technical Specifications limiting conditions for operation regard-ing removal of equipment from service.
Findings:
On April 20, 1982, during a tour of the PAB, the inspector noted that seven annunciators on No. 21 and eight annunciators on No. 22 Hydrogen Recombiner Control Board failed to light up during a lamp test. This condition was brought to the attention of the licensee.
Imme:tiate corrective action was initiated by the licensee.
On April 28, 1982, during a tour of the Turbine Generator Building, elevation 15 feet, the inspector examined storage containers for fire protection -
foam concentrate. The inspector noted that the manufacturer of the foam concentrate recommends a sample test of the product at 18 month intervals.
The manufacturing date on seven cans was 1974, while on six other cans the date was 1980.
Information on previous foam sample analyses was not avail-able at the site. The licensee stated that samples from each foam fire protection systems will be obtained during the week of May 10, 1982.
No violations were identified.
5.
Surveillance Observations A.
The licensee's surveillance equipment and program provides assurance that required pumps, fans, valves, and other instrumentation will perfom their required functions.
The inspector's verification of the licensee's surveillance program includes:
Review of surveillance procedure for confomance to technical
-
specification requirements, and verify proper licensee review /
approval;
.
.
Verification of test instrumentation calibration;
-
Observations of portions of system renoval from service.
-
Confirmation that LC0's are met when operationa' mode re-quirements are specified; Observation of portions of the conducted surveillance test;
-
Observation of portions of the system's restoration to service;
)
-
Review test data for accuracy and completeness.
Independent-
-
ly calculated selected test results to verify accuracy; Confirmation that surveillance test documentation is reviewed and
-
test discrepancies are rectified; Verification that test results meet technical specification re-
-
quirements; Verification that testing was done by qualified personnel; and,
-
Verification that surveillance schedule for this test was met.
-
The following surveillance test was witnessed:
PTM 17, Safety Injection Pumps Functional Test, Revision 16, dated
-
February 17, 1982, perfonned on April 21, 1982. This test is con-ducted to verify that the requirements of Technical Specifications Section 3.3 are met.
No violations were identified.
B.
Additional Surveillance Test Verification Portions of the following surveillance tests were witnessed, by the inspector.
The tests were:
-
Scheduled in accordance with the TS, where applicable;
-
Procedures were being followed; Testing was performed by qualified personnel;
-
LC0's were met, when applicable; and,
-
Restoration of systems was correctly accomplished.
-
,
-. -, - - - - -
,-
, -. - - -. - - =
--
,-
---m
..,r
- - - ~--
-
- -. - - - - - - + - -, - -
-
.
.
7 The tests witnessed were:
PT-M 14B, Safety Injection System Test, Revision 11, dated
-
October 25, 1979. The test was performed on April 21, 1982.
PT-M 21, Diesel Generator Functional Test, Revision 14, dated
-
January 12, 1982. The test was performed on April 23, 1982.
PT-M 31, Feedwater Flow Analog Test. The test was performed
-
on April 23, 1982.
No violations were identified.
6.
Facility Maintenance The inspector reviewed portions of safety-related maintenance, and deter-mined through observations and reviews of records that:
The maintenance activity did not violate limiting conditions
-
for operation; Redundant components are operable, if required;
-
-
Required administrative approvals, and tagouts were obtained prior to initiating the work, if required; Approved procedures were being used, where required;
-
-
The procedures used were adequate to control the activity;
-
The activities were being accomplished by qualified personnel;
-
Replacement parts and materials being used are properly certified;
-
Radiological controls are proper, and that they are being proper-ly implemented;
-
Ignition / fire prevention controls were appropriate, and were implemented, where required; QC hold points were observed, and provided independent verifi-
-
cation of specific points, if required; and, Equipment was properly tested prior to return to service.
-
-
-
-
,
_
_
.
.
Portions of the following maintenance activities were reviewed:
Feedwater Regulatinc Valve No. 24, MWR 2028, dated April 4,1982.
-
Licensee experiencec; sluggish operation of the valve while trying to maintain feed to steam generators.
Inspection of the valve re-vealed three broken frame bolts. The licensee removed and over-hauled the valve operator in accordance with Procedure 2CM-13.9, Revision 2.
The inspector reviewed the post maintenance inspection records, material list and associated QA tags.
-
No. 21 Emergency Diesel Generator Air Compressor, MWR 5648. The licensee replaced the failed compressor on April 30, 1982. The inspec-
,
tor reviewed the work step list and QA acceptance tags.
No violations were identified.
7.
Containment Isolation Lineup To ensure licensee's ability to maintain and exercise containment isola-tion, the inspector verified by observation:
-
That manual valves required to be shut, capped and/or locked met operating mode; That motor or air-operated valves were not mechanically blocked
-
and power was available where required.
The inspector conducted:
-
Visual inspection of piping between containment and isolation valves for leakage; and,
-
Inspection of selected electrical penetrations.
The following valves and penetrations were included in this inspection:
Valve No. PCV 1111-1 Containment Penetration Pressurization System
-
-
Valve No. PCV 1111-2 Containment Penetration Pressurization System Valve No, IA 500 Instrument Air
-
-
Valve No. IA 501 Instrument Air Valve No. FCV 1173 Containment Purge System
-
Valve No. FCV 1172 Containment Purge System
-
Valve No. PCV 1228 Instrument Air
-
Also, electrical penetrations 30, 43, 56 and 59 were inspected in the elec-trical penetrations area.
All electrical penetrations were verified to be pressurized to at least 60 psig (minimum requirement is 47 psig).
No violations were identified.
.
.
.
8.
Independent Limiting Condition for Operation Verification The inspector visually inspected the following hydraulic snubbers to verify hydraulic fluid reservoir level, fluid connections, and linkage connections to the piping and anchor to verify snubber operability:
SR-M1
-
SR-M50
-
SR-M51
-
SR-M6
-
SR-B-3
-
SR-B1
-
SR-B7
-
SR-88
-
SR-M 33
-
SR-M-27
-
SR-M52
-
No violations were identified.
9.
Operability of Engineered Safeguard Features A.
The inspector verified,through direct observation, and procedural review, the operability of a selecte~d~ESF system.
.
The inspection criteria included:
A walkdown of the accessible portions of selected system;
-
.
System lineups checked against plant drawings;
-
-
Verified hangers and supports were operable; Cleanliness of breakers, instrumentation cabinets;
-
Instrumentation is properly valved and calibrated;
-
-
Valves in proper position, power available, locked and sealed, as required by checkoff lists; and, Local and remote control positions correctly established.
-
The accessible valve lineups and flow paths for the component cooling loop with its associated check off list COL-5 was inspected.
l Findings:
COL-5 does not reflect the removal of the waste evaporator on
-
elevation 80 foot of the PAB.
Downstream of Valves 1857 B and D, component cooling heat ex-
-
changer elevation 80 foot, additional piping and valves have not been included in the COL-5.
I
. - -. -.-i.
-
e
' "
.
.
Component cooling pump flow test Valves 3201, 3202, and 3203
-
are located at elevation 98 ft. of the PAB.
COL-5 lists the valves at elevation 68 ft. of the PAB. Valves 3201, 3202, and 3203 are not identified.
-
Valves 817, A, B C, and H. J, K, located in the Sample Room Heat Exchangers are not identified.
The licensee was informed of the findings. A course for corrective action is being evaluated by the licensee.
No violations were identified.
B.
Additional ESF system operability was detennined by observatiott of:
-
Valves in the system flow paths in the correct position; Power supplies and breakers are aligned for components that
-
must activate upon initiation signals; Major component leakage, lubrication, cooling water supply,
-
and general conditions which might prevent fulfillment of their functional requirements; and, Instrumentation essential to system activation or performance
-
ESF systems inspected included portions of:
118V AC Instrument Busses,125V DC Distribution and Cathodic
-
Protection System; and, Containment and PAB cooling and filtration system.
-
Findings:
Containment and PAB Cooling and Filtration System The charcoal filter fire detection control panel, located on
-
i elevation 80 ft. of the PAB is not in service. The inspector verified that the licensee installed jumper J-340 on April 17, 1982 to defeat the control room annunciator associated with the charcoal filter fire protection system. The licensee issued Purchase Order N 901-2-0593 to obtain the services of a vendor for the repair of the control panel.
No violations were identified.
_
_
_
_
.-
.
.
10. Sampling Program Review The inspector reviewed sampling results for the following tests to verify confomance with regulatory requirements:
-
Boric Acid Tank Baron Concentration for 14 tests perfomed March 5, 1982 through April 19, 1982.
Spray Additive Tank Sodium Hydroxide Concentration for test per-
-
fomed April 12, 1982.
-
Boron Injection Tank Boron Concentration for six tests perfomed March 8,1982 through April 12, 1982. The boron concentration was
.1% above the maximum pemitted by Technical Specifications on March 8, 1982. This condition was promptly corrected and reported as required.
-
Refueling Water Storage Tank Boron Concentration for test perfomed March 25, 1982.
No violations were identified.
11. Radioactive Waste System Controls The inspector verified through observation and calculations, the liquid and gaseous release programs at the site.
The inspection parameter for liquid and gaseous releases included:
Releases were in accordance with approved procedures;
-
Release approvals were documented;
-
.
Samples were taken and analyzed; and,
-
!
-
Release control instrumentation was operable during release.
The inspector reviewed the liquid radioactive waste releases associated with the following permits:
Pemit No. 2237 released on April 22, 1982.
-
Pemit No. 2235 released on April 17, 1982.
-
Pemit No. 2231 released on April 12, 1982.
-
l
._
. _ _., ~ -.,
_.. _
. _ _
-. _..
-..
.,..,-...-.,-m..-
r,
_
_ _ _ _, -.
.
The inspector also reviewed the airborne radioactive releases associated with the following pemits:
Pemit No.1652 release of Large Gas Decay Tank (LGDT) No. 23 on
-
April 21,1982.
-
Pemit No.1653 release of LGDT No. 21 on April 21, 1982.
Pemit No.1645 release of LGDT No. 21 on April 16, 1982.
-
Permit No. 1643 release of LGDT No. 23 on April 15, 1982.
-
The inspector also reviewed the following pemits associated with contain-ment pressure reliefs:
Pemit No.1641 for release on April 15, 1982.
-
Pemit No.1644 for release on April 16, 1982.
-
,
Pemit No.1646 for release on April 17, 1982.
-
Pemit No.1647 for release on April 18, 1982.
-
No violations were identified.
12.
Radiation Protection Controls During routine facility tours, the inspectors verified radiation protection controls were properly established by:
-
Observing that licensee's HP policies / procedures are being followed;
-
Observing portions of area surveys perfomed by licensee's personnel, and confiming licensee's survey results by independent measurement;
-
Verifying by observation and review that the requirements of current RWP's are appropriate, and are being followed;
-
Observing proper completion and use of selected RWP's;
-
Observing proper use of protective clothing and respirators; Observing proper personnel monitoring practices; and,
-
Examining randomly selected radiation protection instruments that
-
were in use to verify operability and adherence to calibration frequency.
No violations were identified.
.-
_
.
13. Physical Security During the course of the inspection, the inspector's observed the imple-mentation of the security plan by noting:
The security organization is properly manned and that security
-
personnel are capable of perfoming their assigned functions; Persons and packages are checked prior to allowing entry into the
-
protected area; Selected vital area barriers are not degraded;
-
Vehicles are properly authorized, searched, and escorted or
-
controlled within the protected area; Persons within the protected area display photo identifvation
-
badges, persons in vital areas are properly authorized, and persons requiring escort are properly escorted;
-
Comunications checks are conducted and proper corrnunication devices are available; Compensatory measures are employed when required by security
-
equipment failure or impaiment; and,
-
Response to threats or alams or discovery of a condition that appears to require additional security precaution is consistent with procedures and the security plan.
(See NRC Report 50-247/82-07)
No violations were identified.
14.
Licensee Event Reports Followup Through direct observations, discussions with licensee personnel, and review of records, the following event reports were reviewed to detemine that re-portability requirements were fulfilled, imediate corrective action was accomplished, and corrective action to prevent recurrence had been accomplished in accordance with Technical Specifications.
-
LER 82-003/03L-0 Process Radiation Sample Pump Seized
-
LER 82-004/03L-0 No. 22 Charging Pump Inoperable
-
LER 82-005/03L-0 Vain Steam Isolation Valve *VSI-22 Failed to Close
-
LER 82-006/03L-0 Power Range N.I. Channel N-43 Erratic Indications
- The LER 82-005 has a typographical error which shows MSI-23 versus the correct valve MSI-22 failing to close.
No violations were identifie.
15.
Onsite Licensee Event Followup The following LER's were selected for onsite followup. This review was con-ducted to verify that the reporting requirements of Technical Specifications and Station Administrative Orders had been met, that appropriate corrective action had been taken, that the events were reviewed as required, and that continued operation of the facility conformed to Technical Specification limits.
Infomation concerning the selected LER's and records reviewed by the inspec-tor with comments are described below:
LER 82-003/03L-0: The inspector verified that the repaired pump (MWR 605)
had been modified.
MWR 777 details reinstallation of pump. The post main-tenance test was acceptable.
LER 82-004/03L-0: Maintenance Work Request 813 documents repairs to Charging Pump No. 22.
RWP 4972 and Procedure 2CM-3.4, Revision 4 were used to complete repairs which consisted of replacement of plunger and packing.
Post maintenance test demonstrated 91 gpm at 100% flow. No concerns were identified.
LER 82-006/03L-0: Attachment I to LER documents the history of perturbations of NI Channel 43. The runback feature of channel 43 has been defeated, and is documented in TPC 82-14, which allows continued operation of 100% power opera-tion.
A safety evaluation was perfomed (NS 2-82-02-1, February 19,1982).
No violations were identified.
16.
Safety System Challenges / Unit Trip On April 2,1982, at 1:39 a.m. the unit tripped due to low water level in steam generator No. 24. The inspector verified that all systems operated satisfactorily.
The cause of the low water level in the steam generator was due to the loss of No. 22 Main Feedwater Pump (MFWP). The licensee's investigation attributed the loss of MFWP No. 22 to impurities in the hydraulic oil resulting in erratic pump speed changes. The licensee also identified that No. 24 feed water reguletor The licensee valve had broken studs, limiting the valve to 75% flow capacity (See paragraph 6)
.
issued MUR 2028 to repair feedwater regulating valve No. 24.
During startup on April 4,1982, the licensee experienced two trips from 3%
reactor power level. The first trip was initiated by low steam generator water level, and the second trip was due to a spike in the P-7 reactor protection circuit. The licensee is investigating the cause of the P-7 spike by monitoring input from P-7 logic to detemine if abnomalities exist that could have caused the trip.
None were identified. The unit was returned to power on April 5,1982.
No violations were identifie '
,
.
17. General Site and Emergency Preparedness Training On April 27, 1982, the inspector attended a refresher training course that addressed site and emergency preparedness.
The training agenda consisted of a review on (1) Types of radiation and health physics practices to attenuate radiation, (2) Methods for proper protective clothing use, (3) Proper use of respiratory protection equipment to guard against airborne releases, (4) Discussion on requesting data to be recorded on Radiation Work Pennits, and (5) A discussion on emergency preparedness alarms and assembly areas.
At the conclusion of the training session, a qualifying test for materials presented was given to attendees. The inspectors reviewed scope and content of the test.
No violations were identified.
18.
Revit - of Monthly and Periodic Reports Monthly Operating Reports The Monthly Operating Report for March 1982 was reviewed. The review included an examination of selected Maintenance Work Requests, and an examination of significant occurrence reports to ascertain that the suninary of operating experience was properly documented.
Findings:
The inspector verified through record reviews and observations of maintenance in progress that:
-
The corrective action was adequate for resolution of the identified items; The infonnation in the repore vas identified as licensee event reports,
-
where required, per TS 6.9.1.7; and,
-
The Operating Report included the requirements of TS 6.9.1.6.
No violations were identified.
19.
Exit Interview At periodic intervals during the course of the inspection, meetings were held with senior facility management to discuss the inspection scope and findings.