IR 05000254/1988016

Insp Repts 50-254/88-16 & 50-265/88-16 on 880607-15. Violations Noted.Major Areas Inspected:Containment Integrated Leak Rate Test Procedure,Performance & Results, Local Leak Rate Test Results & LER Followup

ML20150B876
Person / Time
Site:	Quad Cities
Issue date:	07/01/1988
From:	Maura F, Mendez R, Phillips M NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III)
To:
Shared Package
ML20150B859	List: IR 05000254/1988016 ML20150B856 ML20150B869
References
50-254-88-16, 50-265-88-16, NUDOCS 8807120224
Download: ML20150B876 (20)

Text

-

.

,

'

-

. . ,. .

" .

V.S. fiUCLEAR~ REGULATORY COMMISSION

REGION III

Reports No.'50-254/88016(0RP);.50-265/88016(DRP)

Docket Nos. 50-254; 50-265 Licenses No. OPR-29; DPR-30-Licensee: Commonwealth Ediron Company

'

P.~0. Box 767-

-Chicago, IL 60690 Facility-Namet ' Quad Cities-Nuclear Power Station, Units 1 and 2 Inspection At: Cordova, Illinois Inspection Conducted: June 7-15, 1988 Inspectors: -R. Mendez N Date r

? $$

Date Approved By: Chief M Operational Programs Section Date Inspection Summary Inspection on June 7-15, 1988 (Reports No. 50-25,4/88016(DRS);

No. 50-265/88016(DRS))

Areas Inspected: Routine announced inspection by a Region-based inspector of the Containment Integrated Leak Rate Test (CILRT) procedure, CILRT performance witnessing, CILRT results, local leak rate test results, action on previous inspection findings, and licensee event report followu NRC inspection modules utilized during this inspection included 70307, 70313, 70323, 61720 and 9270 ,

Results: One violation was identified (failure to adequately follow procedures - Paragraph 5.b.(2)).

%[

G

$0 p l

l l

'- -

, _

,__ , _ . . . , , , - - _ _ . _ . - . . - - . - - , _. _ _ . . _

---

_ _ _ _ - - _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ - - . - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

P

,. ; ..

,, o j .

DETAILS 1. Persons Contacted Commonwealth Edison Company

• R. L. Bax, Station Manager

• R. Robey, Services Superintendent

• N. P. Digrindakis, Regulatory Assurance Engineer

• J. Kopacz, Tech Staff Supervisor

• M. Pacilio' Assistant Tech Staff Supervisor

,

• K. Sturtecky, Tech Staff Engineer

• R. Castro, Tech Staff Engineer J. Glover, Nuclear Services Technical K. Ainger, Nuclear Licensing Administrator K. Hill, Tech Staff Engineer W. Hanno, Tech Staff Engineer E. Weinferter,-Tech Staff Engineer T. R. Crippes, Modifications Coordinator

• Denotes persons attending the exit meeting on June 15, 1988.

The inspector also contacted other personnel including members of the technical, operating and regulatory assurance staf . Licensee Event Report Followup (Closed) Licensee Event Reoort (254/86001-LL): Several containment isolation valves were reporied as having failed their local leak rate test In the supplemental report to LER 254/86001, the licensee addressed the corrective actions to repair the isolation valves identified by this LER and Violation 254/86016-01; 265/86016-02 (see Paragraph 3.a for further details). (Closed) Licensee Event Report (254/87019-LL): The licensee issued this LER to report the failure of the Unit 1 CILRT. On September 13, 1987, the licensee began the stabilization phase of the CILRT. It became apparent during the stabilization phase that the measured leakage of approximately 2.13 wt. %/ day exceeded the allowable limit of 0.75 wt. %/ day. The licensee found that one or both main steam line drain Valves MO 1-220-1 and MO 1-220-2 were leaking in excess of the 0.6 La limit. The inspector reviewed local leak rate results and determined that the Clean Up Suction Valves MO 1201-2 and MO 1201-5 also exhibited a high leakage rate of approximately 0.35 wt. %/ day. Valves MO 1-220-1 and MO 1-220-2 were replaced and Valves MO 1201-2 and MO 1201-5 were repaired (see Paragraph 3 for further information). These valves were tested and successfully passed the as left local leak rate test . . . .-

.

.

. -

.

.

.

..,

F 3. Licensee Action on a Previous Inspection Finding-(0 pen) Violation (254/86016-01; 265/86016-02): Certain containment-isolation valves were _ consistently failing their local leak rate- tests (LLRT's) and the Technical Specification limit of 0.6 La had been

.

exceeded during every outage since.the initial Unit 2 startup' (Unit 1-has also experienced similar LLRT failures). The concern was that the licensee's corrective action program was not adequate to preclude

-

repetitio The following is a summary of the licensee's corrective action to resolve excessive and chronically leaking containment isolation-valves for both Unit 1 and Unit 2, Unit 1 (1) Main Steam Line Drain Valves (1-220-1, 2): These valves have had a history of failing local leak rate test The 1987 as-found CILRT -failure was due in part on the inability to pressurize between the valves. The cause of the failure of these valves to pass the LLRT during the 1987 outage was determined to be seating surface damage caused by steam erosio The licensee's corrective action was to replace-the original 900 pound class gate valves (Crane Model 783-U) with 1500 pound class split wedge gate valves (Anchor-Darling). The work was performed under Modification M-4'1(2)-85-48. The licensee's preliminary conclusion was that the split-wedge design combined with the higher pressure class would provide greater reliabilit Work was completed on the valves on December 14, 1987, and on December 16 they successfully passed the local leak rate tes (2) Drywell Drain Sump Valves (1-2001-3, 4): The licensee determined that the position of these valves caused the local leak rate test failure The original valves were installed p

'

in the inverted position and the air operators were positioned below the valves which caused sediment and crud to accumulate l- at the bottom. This prevented the air operator from tightly

'

seating the valve. The work to place the air operator above I the valves was performed under Modification M-4-1(2)-83- During the Fall 1987 outage the combined leakage was 60 SCFH or 0.12 wt. %/ day. The immediate corrective action wa0 to i lap the seats of both valves and grind the disc on the A-2001-4

'

valv Both valves were then successfully leak teste The licensee concluded that the valves may not be suited for their present application. The licensee plans to issue an Action

Item Request (AIR) to determine long term corrective actions l for these valves.

l

!

l l 3 .

.

.

.

a *

.

-

-(3) HPCI Steam Exhaust Valve (1-2301-45): The past LLRT performance history of this valve indicated a chronic proble The licensee concluded that the original check valve had proven inefficient for its application. Modification M-4-1-85-68 was initiated to replace the. original check valve. The licensee decided on a valve recommended by BWR Engineering. This valve was thought to t'c better suited for the environment present in-the HPCI steam exhaust line and was installed during the 1986 outage. The valve performed poorly when the local leak rate test was performed during the 1987 outage. The licensee determined that steam erosion of the seating material caused the poor LLRT results. The licensee replaced the valve with a Marlin Valve (Serial No. 3769). The licensee's preliminary conclusion on the vain is that the Marlin design protects the seating material against steam impingement to a greater degree than the previous valves. The licensee's preliminary conclusion was that no further action was necessary since the Marlin design should improve the LLRT performanc (4) FeedwaterCheckValves(1-22058A,58B;1-220-62A,62BJ:

These valves failed the LLRT performed on September 29, 1987, during the last Unit 1 outage. The combined leakage of Valves 1-220-588, 628 was indeterminate, that is, the test volume between the valves could not be pressurized. The licensee's revised maintenance Procedure QMMP 3200-1 was used t: repair the valves. The licensee determined that the primary problem with the feedwater check valves was that valves were used to isolate a high pressure line but wer'e tested with low air pressure (48 psig). The licensee issued Action Item Request (AIR) No. 85-12 to investigate the LLRT performance of the feedwater check valves and determine actions to improve the test result In addition, Procedure QMMP 3200-1, Feedwater Check Valve Disassembly, Inspection, Test, and Reassembly was revised by the licensee to aid valve maintenance. The procedure included reducing dimensional tolerances between the inside diameter of the disc and seat ring bushings-and the outside diameter of the hinge pin to provide better seating of the des The licensee has issued AIR No. 85-12 to investigate further corrective actio (5) Drywell Purge Butterfly Valves (1-1601-23, 24, 60): The

'.icensee issued Work Request No. 48234 to repair the excessively leaking valves. The licensee investigated the problem and found that by making adjustments to the valve disc, the valves were able to pass the as-lef t local leak rate tes These valves were tested during the 1987 outage and the combined leak rate was determined to be 18.0 SCFH in the as-found conditio . . .. -. -. . , _ - . .-

. .

,

-

., .

.

The licensee continues to pursue corrective actions relative to

,

excessively leaking valves and penetrations. During the Fall 1987 outage, the licensee replaced the HPCI Steam Exhaust valve and the Main Steam Line Drain Valves. However, no history was available on these valves to assess the effectiveness of the corrective action In previous outages,.the licensee modified the Drywell Purge Butterfly valves and the Drywell Drain Sump valves and appeared to have-corrected the problem with the butterfly . valves. The licensee continues. to obtain poor results from the feedwater check valve ~In addition to the valves mentioned above, the licensee experienced a high leak rate from the Llean Up Suction Valves 1-1201-2, 5 during the as-found LLRT performed on the valves. The high leak rate caused, in part, the failure of the 1987 Unit 1 CILRT. This item is open pending further review of LLRT results and maintenance performed on

< containment isolation valves, Unit 2 (1) HPCI Steam Exhaust (2-2301-45):. The licensee determined that this check valve did not function adequately for more than one cycle,-and consequently, was not the best' choice for the application. The licensee issued AIR No. 4-86-20, to investigate a replacement but had not changed the valve for Unit 2. Due to improved maintenance, this valve did successfully passed the as-found local leak rate tests in 1986 and 1988. The leak rates were 6.4 SCFH in 1986 and 0.0 SCFH in 198 (2) Drywell Purge Butterfly Valves (2-1601-23, 24, 60, 61, 62, 63):

The licensee inspected the valves and determined that their seating surfaces were at the end of their useful lif Work Requests were issued to replace 1601-23, 24, 60 and 63 with new valves during the 1985 outage. Replacement of the valves appears to have corrected the problem of excessive leakag The as-found leakage of these valves durirg the 1986 and 1988 outages was 9.0 SCFH and 0.0 SCFH, respectivel (3) Main Steam Line Drain Valves (2-220-1, 2): These valves were replaced under the same program as those on Unit 1. Work Request No. Q59198 was issued to replace the 900 pound class Crane gata valve with a 1500 pound class Anchor-Darling gate valve. Work was completed on May 20, 1988.

,

(4) Feedwater Check Valves (2-220-58A, 588; 2-220-62A, 62B):

During the last two outages, the feedwater check valves have failed the local leak rate tests. In the 1986, Unit 2 outage, i the combined leakage of Valves 2-220-58A and 62A was measured to be 381 SCFH or approximately 0.78 wt. %/ day. The Appendix J limit for all valves is 0.60 wt. %/ da In the present outage, Valves 2-220-58A and 62A leaked a total of 508 SCFH and Valves 2-220-588 and 628 leaked a total of 890.1 SCFH. Failure of these valves caused the current CILRT to fail in the as-found condition for Unit 2. These valves were repaired under maintenance Procedure QMMP 3200-1; however, the final as-left LLRT results were not available at the end of this inspectio m

_

.. - . .- - . .

o.-- .- ,

,

.; a'- .

This item is open pending further review of LLRT results and maintenance performed on containment isolation valve ,

4. Containment Integrated Leak Rate Test Procedure Review (Unit 2) (70307) Procedure Review The_ inspector reviewed the Quad Cities-test Procedures QTS 150-1,

, Revision 15 "Integrated Primary Containment Leak Rate Test (IPCLRT)"

and related supplements relative to the requirements of 10 CFR Part 50,

'

Appendix J, ANSI N45.4-1972 and the FSAR. The inspector's comments were discussed with the licensee during the course of the inspectio All inspector comments wore satisfactorily resolve C_1_arification of Appendix J Requirements To ensure the licensee's understanding of Appendix J requirements, the inspector conducted discussions with licensee personnel in the Region III office and during the course of the inspectio The following is a summary of the clarifications discussed with the license (1) The periodic retest schedule for each penetration subject to Type B or Type C testing, except for airlocks and penetrations employing a continuous leakage monitoring system, shall be every refueling outage, but in no case shall the interval be greater than two year (2) During a meeting with CECO representatives at the Region III office on June 7, 1988, the previously-issued clarifications <

were discussed. The licensee presented two proposals to determine the minimum pathway leakage of a penetration, which

the inspector found acceptable:

(a) In the case were a leakage rats is obtained by pressurizing from containment up to both closed valves, the minimum pathway leak rate is the actual measured value. This test will be in addition to the Type C test performed on the penetratio (b) For a multiple valve penetration the minimum pathway leak rate is the smaller of the sum of the leak rates of all the inner valves or the sum of the leak rates of all the outer valve . Containment Integrated Leak Rate Test Witnessing (Unit 2) (70313) Instrumentation The inspector reviewed the calibration data and determined that all the instruments used in the CILRT had been properly calibrated and ,

that the correct weighting fac;;r, had been placed in the computer program as required. The follusing instrumentation was used through the tes . _ - - -_ ,, _ -__ ~ _ , . _ _ _ . -- . _ _

. .

.

• -

..

Type Quantity RTD's 30 Dewcells 11 Pressure Gauges 2 Flowmeter 1 One RTD was deleted before the start of the CILRT. RTD No. 8 was deleted due to large step output readings. No other sensor or data sets were rejected during the test, Witness of Test (1) The inspector witnessed the CILRT on June 13, 1988, and noted tilat test prerequisites were met and that the appropriate revision to the surveillance procedure was followed by the test personnel. Valve lineups for the following systems were verified to ensure that no fluid could enter the containment atmosphere and that adequate venting and draining was provide System Pressure Suppression Containment Spray CAM System Service Air to Drywell Drywell Pneumatic ACAD System 02 Analyzer Fire Protection Drywell and Torus D/P Piping (2) On June 12, 1988, at approximately 10:50 a.m., the licensee started the stabilization phase of the CILRT. During stabilization, the licensee monitored the test instrumentation for information only and determined that the drywell leakage rate of 1.3 wt. %/ day was in excess of the allowable limit of 0.75 wt. %/ day. During the course of the day, the licensee attempted to find the cause of the leak. On June 13, 1988, at approximately 2:25 a.m. a Tech Staff engineer found a Containment Atmospheric Monitoring (CAM) inch line (which i

was out-of-service) blowing into the Reactor Building. The

'

er.gineer found that safety-related CAM Valve 2-2499-20A, which was part of the valve linetp for the CILRT, was, in its proper open position but that the CAM piping was disconnected inside the 2A CAM Post Accident H2 and 02 monitoring pane The licensee issued a change request to place the valve in the closed position for the CILRT and take the penalty for not venting this penetration. Valve 2-2499-20A was closed and the CILRT was started shortly afterwards at 4:05 a.rr.

l

!

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

-

-

, .

• '

..

As a result of the problems experienced above, the inspector reviewed the work request and out-of-service checklists

-

. associated with the 2A CAM Post Accident H2 and 02 monito On August 11, 1987, Work Request No. Q59410 was issued to repair the monitor. The monitor was sent for repairs under purchase order No. 762517 after authorization was given on February 24, 1988. Subsequently, on March 30, 1988, the panel Inlet Valve 2-2499-20A and Outlet. Valve 2-2499-21A were closed and placed out-of-service by an Instrument Mechanic (IM)

supervisor under master out-of-service card No. 500-8 A temporary lift of the master out of service card was requested on June 12,1988, at 2:20 a.m. and both valves were changed to the open position for the CILRT in accordance with valve lineup Procedure QTS 150-57. The change in valve positions required that the shift control room engineer (SCRE)

be notified and a temporary 11ft requested from persons having the out-of-service cards on the equipment. This was accomplished prior to opening the valves. Discussions with the IM supervisor also indicated that the IM supervisor had notified the SCRE that the monitor was disconnected. Procedure QAP 300.14 in Sections C.10 and C.16 and Master out-of-service checklist QAP 300 S.5 required that all safety-related out-of-services and temporary lifts shall be independently field verified after evolutions are performed by an operator of equal or higher classificatio However, the operator who opened the valves under the temporary lift master out-of-service card No. 500-88 did not perform an adequate field verification to determine whether the 2A CAM monitor was connected to the piping of Valve 2-2499-20A. Consequently, this failure to determine the status of out-of-service equipment resulted in excessive leakage into the Reactor Building prior to the start of the CILRT. This failure by the licensee to assure that procedures were adequately followed is considered a violation of 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix B, Criterion V (265/88016-01).

6. Test Results Evaluation (70323) CILRT Data Evaluation A six hour short duration, CILRT was performed on June 13, 1988, at approximately 63.5 psia following satisfactory completion of the required temperature stabilization period. Data was collected every ten minute The inspector independently monitored and evaluated leak rate data using total time (Bechtel Topical Report BN-TOP-1, Revision 1) formulas to verify the licensee's calculatiens of the leak rate and instrument performanc There was excellent agreement between the inspector's and licensee's results as indicated by the following summary (units are in weight percent per day):

,

-

~ . .

• ' *

- .

E Measurement Licensee Inspector Leak rate measured '0.416 0.416 during CILRT (Lam)

Lam at upper 95% 0.462 0.462-confidence level -

Appendix J-acceptance criteria at 95% UCL: <0.75La = <0.75 weight percent per day, Supplement Test Data Evaluation Af ter the satisfactory completion of the CILRT a known leakage rate (based on inspector's independent readings and calculations) of 8.824 SCFM, equivalent to 1.081 weight percent per day at accident pressure, was induced. Data was collected and analyzed by the-licensee every ten minutes. The inspector independently monitored and evaluated leak rate data to verify the licensee's result After 3.2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br /> the supplemental test was terminated with excellent results as indicated by the following summary (units are in weight'

percent per day):

Measurement Licensee Inspector Measured leakage rate, .

1.354 -1.358 Lc, during supplemental test

' Induced leakage rate, 1.081 1.081 Lo Lc-(Lo+ Lam) -0.143 -0.139 J

Appendix J acceptance criteria: -0.250 $ [Lc-(Lo+ Lam)] 1 + 0.250 No violations or deviations were identifie CILRT Valve Lineup Penalties Due to penetration configurations which deviated from the penetration requirements for the CILRT, the results of local leak rate tests for each penetration must be added to Lam at the 95 percent UCL. At the conclusion of the CILRT, the licensee had not tested all penetrations that had not been vented and draine The licensee has committed to quantify the minimum pathway leakage for the following penetrations or leak paths:

-

.

15 *

.

. ,

. g.: e

,

%

Penetration RCIC Steam Exhaust RCIC Drain TIP Purge Check Valves-ACAD Primary Sample Valves RHR Loops A and B Drywell Equipment Orains Feedwater Drywell Floor Drains HPCI Drain HPCI Steam Exhaust All Electrical Penetrations 02 Analyzer CAM Isolation Valves MSIV Drain Valves While the penalties for the above penetration have not been determined to date, it is not anticipated that the total will exceed 0.29 wt. %/ da However, it is the licensee's responsibility to ensure that the results of local leak rate tests on the above penetrations do not cause the containment to leak in excess of the allowable limit at the time containment integrity is require As-Found Condition Of CILRT Results The as-found condition is the condition of the containment at the >

beginning of the outage prior to any repairs or adjustments (ras)

to the containment boundary. If ras are made to the containment boundary prior to the Type A test, local leak rate tests must be performed to determine the leakage rates before and after the ra The as-found Type A test result can then be obtained by adding the

. difference between the affected path leakages before and after ras to the overall Type A test result The inspector reviewed as-found and as-left local leak rate test results to determine an as-found Type A test result. The following (not including valve lineup penalties) is a summary of the as-found containment leak rate (units are in wt. %/ day):

Measurement Leak Rate Penalties incurred due to repairs or adjustments prior to the CILRT As-Left Type A test results 0.462 Total As-found s .. _- -

'

.

.

As indicated above, the as-found condition exceeded that allowable by 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix J. This excessive as-found condition was largely due to leakage through the feedwater check valves. The CILRT performed in 1986 also exceeded the as-found Appendix J limit due to leakage through the drywell head gasket. Since two consecutive as-found conditions have failed to meet the required acceptance criteria, 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix J, Section III.A 6.(b) requireu that the next Type A test shall be performed at the next plant shutdown for refueling unless exempted by the NR . Exit Interview The inspector met with licensee representatives denoted in Paragraph 1 during and at the conclusion of the inspection on December 15, 198 The inspector summarized the scope and results of the inspection and discussed the likely content of this report. The licensee acknowledged the information and did not indicate that any of the information disclosed during the inspection could be considered proprietary in natur _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ - _ - _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ ___

-

-

. -

. ATTACHMENT A

,

RIII REPORT / LETTER TRAVELLER Total days to issue:

,

'. Licensee: Draft Completion Date: Report No(s):

COMMONWEALTH EDISON COMPANY 5 Initial Typing: Inspection End Date:

Facility (s): p,d /.::G /9(8

-

Received Start End QUAD CITIES NUCLEAR POWER STATION * Inspector Review: Inspector (s):

UNITS 1 & 2 Start End ggaz7/2 License No(s): pgg DPR-29; DPR-30 Date Receivedt R_eview Process **

Data Mget. Unit Do '

Insp/PM Out In Out In Out In Out In Out In Out Ferrat In Out In Q3 c. /2 7 0/1e Y)VisY9h -

?lh'AL

"- ^

Ik/g> 'b/d f WlH #YPg Skflg

.

337g3 ,,

Issue Date:

..

acte 9+/f Licensee HQ(DMB)

t Cot =ent Proprietary Review Noti Telephone Due Received Written Due Received Licensee Response

l

'

Due Issued Received l

Thank You Letter:

!

Due Iscued Form 591 Applicable?

f Yes No l

Issued From:

Field Office __

l _

-

>

• Resident Inspector.3 Only A1 I **V nJhwToe to Add Addit'ional Reviewers or Notes --

"

)......

-

.

u. uc uumm ----a

'

.. l

. ,

.

L =C' am ///co W 7 #

- WSPECTOR,8 REPORT ,

.

• • '*

Office of lespection and Enforcement .h/'//os Sfp[gf j

i  %,<b', - s N ~2Oml .

\ *

• • • o*' '* **nc. man uCs suma.00= '*^"&C'** e0Catti0 e p uCei u

=0 ev ra00vCTma eww ,, ma u m hwnnaMf/ f~% s>u $ '*-8

~ *00'"

• • '

2 59 0 0 2 51 4 8 8' G /6 s _

CO 40 2 C 5 51 f( g /g- e 10 srs W 08 /.~ 7's a e & ] _

D - DILEM C g ,/ 2 m - fitPLAct e O l.,Y **/C'.['D/M Yd'd ,*)i?/l 5 / d'.d hN I4Y )

PEA 40 08 MyllTGAtiosethlPtCtCN sitPtCTON Plasoawt0 0Y ORGANJAfs0N C00t tir atCs0ediseo CoseDLt."1

1. 1. 0W 70 g 1 - atGces At Of fICI $1 Af f CTMER y, y M0 DAY T WO DAY Ya 2 - atSctNT >$PtCT04 RE G8DN D't ON FANCM al?. oI9 r17 ol.e A5 71r - n"=Wi Pl **nimit n4W _

G G /

p ....g ,, . ,e .

,. ., 7 ,7- -- --- - , ,, -- ,, ,,

DIGIONAL ACTON .

' . Pt of ACYlvtT Y C0%DvCitD iCw ere bos orevt j

" #' * M 02 - 8 Af(TY 08 - WGUT.vilrf 10 - PLANT SE WQV A Y

, - kmC PDAW W1 03 - vvClotNT 07 - SPECIAL 11 - WylNT,vit t$ - psytSTsGAtCM 2 - C.t cices AL O*Foti LETTI A 04-thf0RCEWENT og-vt4004 12 - SnaPWINT/ EXPO 41 06 - WGMT Av0:1 08 - W At ACC1 t).uwpoat f

-

.

g. g . . . . ,s- '

yf u " - '"T':'- ,' g ' '" " ..g., y h5FICTg ET T 4%D %G 6 TOT At revust a t%p0acf wthT C0%f tRENCE REPon1CONTA8%2 N LtTTia 0a ptP0aT T* AhlWrTT AL DAfi 08 VCtAtiONS AND Mtt0 h'Oa w At o%

8 0 Omtml ,, C ,3, M g , , , ,,, 9 $ , ,

X 1 - CLE.Am 08 l0 LITTim'is ivic

'O MO ' O'

ACfo%

_

3 - OtviAtch A B C 0 A e C 0 A B C D WO DAv vp Wo DAv va

-

4-vouvoNa0 m to= mo oi / i i '-"5

'

i - vts Ol'7 C1/ 11 # .I I i

.. .. .

. u .- . . .a . - . p. , . ...c--.- . . ~.w -

. 30 i WOOutt i%s oa w ATC% Wooggt se.sDaw ATC%

"' MOOutt hvWIIa 'N5'-

E3 C c200vttsivueta msp cg y Wo0vtlato FOLL0wve d3 0I { '00VLI 't0 'O'LO*V'

Ifi !!

' . . i . . . I!ip ! !!!!! !! il

.

.

1 11 ll !! ! !! !!!p! !  !! ! ! !! il !illiisi  ! ! ! !!!o! 11 i e if S3io l7,dJk '

On M i , i lil= 65k / l 'holl' C10iG ii i IiiI'

'

O Cif i i i liiI * OiOiG ii i l i 2_L ( Iiil c

ii i s i liil i i i i i e

in i , i liil '

i i i i i liil

. P r 7oL30i71 ^

D@ii i i lii /iN M /l *

OiCW ii i liiI

di M . . i liil * doW i n i liil e

i i i , i li,1 c i , i ., i liil o

i i , , , I.,1 0 i , if i I,il

'

'

. 0 5 7cl3ird *

GM C i , i IiiI.li iIiii* i i ii i IiiI

, 4 e5 , i i liiI '

i i ii i i u_1.

,

c

, , i , i liil <

i i i, i Iiil l =

i s i , i 1.il -

o i , ii

'

i liil 1 . 0 8 7 61951 a doi C i i i lii i iliil* i i ii i liil

• i liil

-

cuit ii i liil i i i, e

i i . . , liil e i i i, i liil' S',.taJ" '1AT= a m 11ul - -- --- -- - _ _ m m-- 1Lu ... ,

unc emu ne A o ne m t woovteavween [jg; ' soeg

"oa',,,o d ',n'.ne 8e ,u Si-)l43g G F>is%gJt +;

FJcb .,o . u; -

INSPECTCR'S REP!RT C (9 0 0 2 G 5 h & R9 / 6 a

• ^ ' *" " " * " c* " T*" !! 3

• : : . ac (Continuation) 4 s e

, Office ofInspection and Enforcement C *o X

,ou .. m21...,~ ., . ~ .-- --,~..... .- ~ .. -..-2. - ~ ~. -~ ~ .

\

t t 3 g h jf4 4 __

l

_1 e .

10

_

-

--

1, "

. _ . _

1

it .

to

.

v

to o

N I 17

i M

y- __

,

l si

_u l'

y __

1 .

I

!

as

, suo es,.sei U.S. NUCLEAR REQ ULATORY COM MISSION

~~

. ... 4,w,

'

'

'

-

,

.

RP 1201d

.

INSPECTIDH PLAN FAC1LITY: (QUA)) Girise t w t1;r /_A M/) ffto/c, Pgo/g:}

SCHEDULED DATE(s): 6 /f- / 5 /ff INSPECTOR (s): 4/x/4E ~

) MODULE N '

% COMP l INSPECTION FOCUS l ASSIGNED ~TO I

/0 Ofa /)PMA&/X J - bd44) A%O_

l l l I I I Q.7447" Anstk A l l /Mw A:,/fr l l 1 l ~/ l

l l & PAMdms4 l l' /' l l l l l 7s30 ? l l6dQJM 'l l l

l l

l i

l l M /FMd M i l_

I I I

i i

i l I DAs oAd swA)

l I l'

l I I l  !

I*?o323 l I I l6x/

I

/ d '/r A '

I I I N4 Me/E I I I I I I70 3 / 3 I I s>u 6 * A A_dd l

'

I I I l# l I

I l /n2 sA f/ DJkm I i 16'/ 7 M l I!sxl & W /n Y ' ' ~

l I

l i ,

i l'/d x.44 Md1I l

I

~

l l I

I I I i l v> w l l m - ~ uas ' _

N #>a4t_ ' Ml l l l l l l I l I l i I I I I PLAN PREPARED BY:M DATE: Cd/fr(_

PLAN APPROVED BY:

-

DATE: 6 N

, _ , PLAN REVIEWED BY: DATE: _

(PROJECT SECTION CHIEF)

7 Attachment 2 01/06/88

.. - _ - _ - -- ._ . , - - - . = - . - _ . - . - ._. -- - -

--

,

-

OUTSTANDING ITEM LIST (OIL) TRACKING FORM , .

Selimitted by: [7 #

v Sec. Cht:f Approval q

~

Iten N Type Code Func. Area Date Entered 7_5y/ _T_7_c/ /_9- L_ p (Unit 1) 4/4 ef

_ _ --

gg,--

' - - -

___/_____ __ (Unit 2)

Original Inspector Resp. Se Note

___________________ ___ ________

Responsible Inspector Closed Final Report

___________________ off ZEl M ET2L_G .

Icterim Insp. Reports _____ _____ _____ _____ _____

Followup Date .

Remarks:

. / /__ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _______

e j .

__________________________________________________ .

a Status Code __________________________________________________

-

_ __________________________________________________

FU8tCT108tAL AREA gggg,g

,

TYPE C00E .

RAT gpg p,,

, AEO -

AsseORM. E88VIR DC ORD - ORDERS TO LICENSEE f*.

ALC ALLEGAT40st OTH - OTHER Pt

-

P20 10 CFR PART 20 MAINTENANCE ,F

,ggRP pg SUL - SULLETIN -

. 5 v N CAL -

CONFIR. ACTlost LT P21 - 10 CFR PART 21 g p pp p 84 0 S PPS CIR R3R - REGION iIl REQUESTS - peps P3a

- CIWCULAR SEC/SAFEMM DEV - D[vl AT Iost REC - RECOMMENDATIONS "#3 Nett P3s I- IsqF PS3 CLR -

CtM[RIC LEYtER RIP - RECULATORY IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM 8- I "I"O 8AL -

IMMf 08 ATE ACilOef LETTER SEP -

SAFETY EVAL. PROGR/.M LICENS N OLt RC INF -

INFORMATIOst le0TICE SER - SAFETY EVAL.- REPORT V ^$ Ole SGS LER -

LICENSEE EV[NT REPORT SCR - 73.71 SAFECUARDS REPORTS

OPS TSS

- O IeC -

NO80-COMPLI AasCE ( l-2-3-Es-5 ) SSF - SIGNIFsCANT SAFETY TsNotNC 1 ave -

of0 VIC9.AT IO88 10 CFR 2, TMt - THREE-MILE ISLAND ACTION ITEMS FIRE N A-K APP. C 3EC. UNR - UfeRESOLVED ITEMS oen -

oPEN ITEM woM - wiTwoRAwN Attachment I to R' 1201 .

55E -

in CrA 5o.55(.) :TEMS Revised 12/04/87 '

__

.

OUTSTANDING ITEM LIST (OIL) TRACKING FORM .

Submitted by: 8 bM/ u Sec. Cht:f Approval

'

Type Code func. Area Date Item N Entered g['{l ff_00_(- p_L (Unit 1) {g Q//

26 / Z 21 ff

-

___l_____ __ (Unit 2)

Original Inspector Resp Se Note

___ ________

___________________

Responsible Inspector Closed Final Report

___________________ 92/ !&l ES H?LG .

Icterim Insp. Reports _____ _____ _____ _____ _ _ , , _ _

Fellowup Date .

Remarks:

-

__/__/__ ____________________________ _____________________

t

-

__________________________________________________ '

status Code __________________________________________________

.

_ ________ _________________________________________

FV80CT f gelAL AREA BECTIm TYPE C0oE EPS Pld

, AEO ALC

-

-

A8eeORM. EffWIR. OC ALLEGAT80eg ORD OTH

-

-

ORDERS TO LICENSEE OTHER f** FRP P98 BULLEiges P20 10 CFR PART 20 3* ""I" E 8eLS PPA SUL - -

U*

CAL -

COserIR. ACT8001 LT P28 - 10 CFR PART 21 p,gp IIOS P2E CtR R3R - REClON Ill REQUESTS $*

-

CfrCULAR SEC/ SAFE M OS 8ePS, P3 DEV -

DEVI AT IOff REC - RECOMMENOATIONS ,,, p3 ,

GLR 8AL

-

-

CINERIC LETTER IMMIDI ATE ACT 8088 LETTER R:P SEP

-

-

REGULATORY IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM SAFETY EVAL. PROGRAM I*

g'

9 gg k 38EF OLI PSS REC enr -

INFORMATIOst NOTtCE SER - SAFETY EVAL. REPORT 10* QUALITY ASSUftAEICE SCS LER -

LICEstSEE EVEsIT REPORT SCR - 73.71 SAFECUARDS REPORTS yy' OTHER 80C -

4000-COMPLI A80CE ( 1-2-3-al-5) SSr - Sec4 F CANT SAFETY FINDl80C 12* FIRE pitot /M-K 80VE -

880 VIOLAT 8080 10 CFR 2, TMI - THREE-MILE ISLAND ACTION ITEMS APP. C SEC. UNR -

U80 RESOLVED 8TEMS Attachment I to RP 1201 oPm - OPEm TEM won - wIinORAww ,

55E -

10 CFR 50.55te) :TEMS Revised 12/04/87 '

'

OUTSTANDING ITEM LIST (GIL) TRACKING FORM

-

setaitted by:__ # % 4. - Sec. Cht:r Approval .

o

'

Type Code Func. Ar-a Date Item N Entered i 2 [f / _SQ_Off- Q_f (Unit 1) QQ[ gf (l~6 / 3 2- / S V

~~ --

gf[/ fg_0_/_f- pJ (Unit 2)

.

i Original Inspector Resp, Se Note BDMfZ------------- --- --------

Closed Final Report Responsible Inspect r

/ /

/_11_f _Mf_f]-_____________

.

Icteria Insp. Reports f[p/,(, _____ _____ _____ _____

Fcilowup Date nemarks:

-

-- l - l- -- ---------------------------------------------_-___

.

.

_____ _-----------------------------------~~-~~'*. -

.

Status Code ______________,____________________________________

\--

---

--------_..-____________

-

I FU80CT104AL ME pgg TYPE C00E .

, RAT gpg pyg AEO A8800RM. [88VIR .OC ORO - ORDERS TO LICENSEE

,

-

OTHER

• FRP P99 ALG - ALLECAf l0el OTH - MAINTENAseCC ,,g g pyg DUL - BULLETIN P20 - 10 CFR PART 20 S N el_LAasCE ,,,g pyg CAL -

Cose F I R. ACTIOst LTR* P21 - to CFR P/MT 21 WRCN NP ,,,g p3 ,

CIR - CIRCULAR R3R - REGION III REQUESTS SEC/ SAFE N OS ,pe, p3, DEV -

DEVIAT8085 REC - RECOMMEMOAff0NS I* "#3 RIP REGULATORY IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM IN PSS GLR -

CINERIC LETTER - TRAIIIIIIC O AEC IAL - IMMfolt.YE ACTepel LETTER SEP - SAFETY EVAL. PROGRAM LICE 8BSIIIC g g lr - s ur ORMAT 30el 880T ICE SER - SAFETY EVAL. REPORT IO* OUALIIY AIbUUIAI'~I OPS 333 LER - LICE 8BSEE EVEssi REPORT SCR - 73.71 SAFECUARDS 'tEPORTS 11 OTHER IIC SSF - SIG8tlFICART SAFETY FifeUppG 1 FIRE N M-K

-

se0el-Cos4PLI AseCE (1-2-3-as 5)

d - 850 VIOLATIOft 10 CFR 2, TMI - THREE-MILE ISLAND ACTIOft ITEMS APP. C SEC. UNR - U80 RESOLVE 0 ITEMS Attachment ! to RP 1201 orm won - wrcMORAwg

- OPEm itM Revised 12/04/87 '

55E - 10 CFR 50.551.) BTEMS

\

' ..

.. .

. _ . . . . . . . - - . _ _ - ,

.

• .

_0UTSTANCING ITEM LIST (OIL) TRACKING FORM , .

Sutmitted by: [- M'Av &'

Sec. Chi;f Approval .

.

Ites N Type Code Func. Area Date Entered 2.G57_88/6- pf (Unit 1) B(g Qg d.Gl22/EC

___/_____ __ (Unit 2)

Original Inspector Resp. Se Note Mf4Of------_-------

-

--- --------

.

Responsible Inspector Closed Final Report 8f_MffE_____________ / / ,____

Interim Insp. Reports _____ _____ _____ _____ _____

.

,

.

Followup Date Remarks:

]

'

o

. / /- Ed.L & .y B.c_ fa _ BDfe u a z~& .cgr_ Eg.? 4 a W_ .P.s f f{Pr!{E _ 22_ _ _ _ - _ - _

j -

.Cf!!!2ddOf &L E.Z3 4H 11/ f2e't f ^2Wf Q(>Z' G f Et d2'.(2 f-----

- - -

0 Status Code 2. .

.- - --------------------------------------------------

!

l FUNCTIONAL AREA * BECTBh

.

TYPE CODE -

RAT gpg pyg I, AE3 ALC

-

-

A8MORM. EltVIR. OC ALLECATIOII ORD OTH

-

-

ORDERS TO LICENSEE OTHER f.*

MAINTENANCE FRP Pt3 gLg g.pg SUL -

BULLETIN P20 - 10 CFR PART 20 3 CAL - COgrIR. ACTiong LTR, P21 - 10 CFR FART 21 *

,, gp feOS P2e

ClO - CIRCULAR R3R - REGION lli REQUESTS M,Ps, P3 DEV -

DEVIATIOel REC - RECOMMENOAT!ONS SEC/SAFECUARDS , p3 ,A O ,,gy ,3, CLQ -

CENERIC LET.iR RIP - REGULATORY dMPROVEMENT PROCRAM [*. p IAL -

IMMEDIATE ACTION LETTER SEP - SAFETY EVAL. PROGRAM Lyg(,$,gg OLi tEC 9 CS IEF -

INFORMATIO88 30TICE SER - SAFETY EVAL. REPORT QUALITY ASSURAIDX LER -

LICENSEE EVENT REPORT SCR - 73.71 SAFECUARDS REPORTS 10, y '* OTHER TSS

'

IIC -

NON-COMPLIAleCE ( 1 - 2 - 3 - 81 - 5 ) SSF - SIGNIFsCANT SAFETY FINDING 82* FIRE Plt 0T/M-K IfV$ -

NO VIOLATIO88 10 CFR 2, TMI - THREE-MILE ISLAND ACTION ITEMS i l APP. C SEC. UNR - UNRESOLVED ITEMS oPM -

OPEN : TEM woM - wiinORAwn Attachment I to RP 1201 .

55E -

iO CrR 50.55(e) ITEMS Revised 12/04/87 '

. _ _ _ _--

.

.

.

-

,. .

,

.,

'

RP 05168

.

5 ALP FUNCTIONAL AREA ASSESSMENT AND PRELIMINARY INSPECTOR EVALUATION FORM

,

Factilty: 6 J dd u-/v A Inspectton Report No.: 50orwiWGl 2 M/frod l_ FUNCTIONAL AREAS I/l1 II i III I IV l V Dev IUnitlRating'

l PLANT DPEPATIONS l l l l l l l l l l I I I I l RADIOLOGICAL CONTROLS l l l -

l l l l l ll 1 l 0l l MAINTENANCE l l l l l <

l Pl l l- l 11 l El l 5URVEILLANCE l

l FIRE PROTECTION l/

l l

l

!

l l

I l

l l l 11 l

'?l 2ll Al l l Rl Tl l l l 11 l l

' "

l ll l Il l EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS l l ll l l l l l l 0l l 1 I I I i I I l l Nl l SECURITY l l l l l l l l l Sl i I I I I I i l I I l l t

l OUTAGES l l l l l l l l l l l l l l 1 I I I I I l

• *

l

'

lQUAllTY PROGRAMS & ADMI l l l l l l l l l CONTROLS AFFECTING QUALITY I l l l l 1 l l l

• *

l LICENSING ACTIVITIES l l l l l l l l .l l l l l l l l I I I l

• *

l TRAINING & QUALIFICATION l l l l l l l l l l

l EFFECTIVENESS I I l' I I l l l l l l S0ILS AND FOUNDATIONS l l l l l l l l l l l l l l 1 I I I I I l Cl l CONTAINMENT, SAFETY-RELATED l l l l l l l l l l~ 0l l STRUCTURES & MAJOR STEEL SUPPORTSI I I I I I I l l l Nl l PIPING SYSTEMS & SUPPORTS l l l l l l l l l l Sl l l l l l l l I I I l TI l SAFETY-RELATED COMPONENTS l l l l l l l l l l Rl

'

l MECHANICAL l l l ! 1 1 1 I l Ul l AUXILIARY SYSTEMS l l l l l l l l .

l Cl l l l l I I I I I I l TI l ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT AND CABLES l l l l l l l l l l Il i I I I I I I I l l 0l l INSTRUMENTATION l l l l l l l ,

l l Ni l l l l l l l l l l l l

• Functional areas for Construction and Operations CRITCRIA FOR DETERMINING CATEGORY RATING Management Involvement in Assuring Qualit . Approach to Resolution of Technical Issues from a Safety Standpoin . Responsiveness to NRC Initiative . Enforcement Histor . Operational and Construction Event . Staffing (including management).

l RATING KEY: (For Categories 2 - Declining and 3, provide narrative basis for

.

conclusion)

l Category 1 Category 2 - Declining Category 2 Category 3 l $ Inspector (s) concerns adequately addressed or

,

l[lInspectionEvaluationFormbeingprocesse f j Lead Inspector /2 h A 4 /2 / Cr Section Chief [ $4 /Y (Signature)9 (Date) (Signature) _(Date)

March 3n 1986