IR 05000263/1977001
| ML20024G103 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Monticello  |
| Issue date: | 02/08/1977 |
| From: | Choules N, Fiorelli G NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20024G093 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-263-77-01, 50-263-77-1, NUDOCS 9102070534 | |
| Download: ML20024G103 (8) | |
Text
~~.
.
UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY C010tISSION
.
,
OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENTORCl}!ENT
('
'
REGION III
Report of Operations Inspection P
IE Inspection Report No. 050-263/77-01 Licensee: Northern States Power Corapany 414 Nicollet Hall Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401 Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant License No. DPR-22 Honticello, !!innesota Ca t ego ry : * C
_
,
Type of Licensee:
Type of Inspection:
Routine, Unannounced
Dates of 'nspection:
January 24-28, 1977 2)
Principal Inspector:
C. Ch e
~
/ (D's t e)
I Accompanying Inspectors: None i
Other Accompanying Personnel: None
/
h
/
,k fffYi y/)
,
Reviewed By:
. Fiore111, Chief Reactor Operations and
/(Date)
Nuclear Support Branch l
f
-
,
$
(
,
.
.
.
9102070534 770200
'
PDR ADDCK 05000263 O
-
- '-
--
+
~v-
--
,.., _ _, _
_
_
, _ _
_
_ _,
_
.
__. -
-. -
. _ - - _ - - -..
-
-
-.. -.. _ -
_ ~ - ~
- -
.
.
-
_.. _..
m
-.
.
StfMMARY OF FINDINGS
.
(
i l
Inspection Summary Inspection on January 24-28, 1977, (77-01): Review of design changes, maintenance procurement, and reportable occurrences. One item of
'
noncompliance related to installation of a temporary design change was
'
identified.
.
Enforcement Item
'
Deficiency Contrary to 10 CPR Part 50. Appendix B, Criterion V, a plant adminis-trative procedure was not adhered to as follows. A temporary design.
change was installed and removed from the residual heat removal sys-
-
tem without completing a Work Request Authorization (WRA) as required by 4 ACD 3.6, paragraphs 6.1 and 6.2.3.
(paragraph 4, Report Details)
Licensee Action on Previously Identified LNforcement Items
Not applicable.
Other Significant Items
'
A.
Systems and Components
'
The licensee is currently performing modifications on the torus to strengthen the welds between the torus shell and the support col.smns.
-
B.
Facility Items (plans and P ocedures)
None.
-
C.
Managerial Items
.
None.
_
D.
Deviations None.
E.
Status of Previously Reported Unresolved Items Not applicable.
-2-(
.
.
,
- ge oe ve*Nm-P
_ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
. -. -.
..
-
'
.
<
.
l Management Interview
-
.
,
(
A management interview was conducted with Messrs. Clarity. Antony and
.
Scheinost at the conclusion of the inspection on January 28, 1977.
The following was discussed:
A.
Procurement The inspector stated he had reviewed procurement records, receipt inspection records, and toured the licensee's warehouse, and no discrepancies were noted.
(Paragraph 2, Report Details)
B.
Maintenance The inspector stated he had reviewed several maintenance jobs and no noncompliance items were identified. The inspector stated that there has been improvement in the instructions provided on WRAc,
-
but further improvement could still be made. The licensee acknowl-edged the inspector's comment.
(paragraph 3. Report Details)
C.
Design Changes
The inspector stated that he had reviewed several design changes and one item of noncompliance was identified. The inspector stated that Temporary Design Change 76-M-064 was not installed and removed using the Work Req,uest Authorization process of Administrative Directive 4 ACD 3.6.
The inspector stated that even though the change was installed on an emergency basis, a WRA is required to I
bc prepared after installation to document the installation per 4 ACD 3.6.
The licensee acknowledged the inspector's statements and stated that they would review the requirements of completing WRAs for emergency work with personnel involved in preparing WRAs.
The inspector stated that this would be adequate corrective action and a written response would not be required.
The inspector also stated that his review of design changes showed that revisions to drawings and procedures are not always accom-plished in a timely banner.
The licensee stated they would take
,
steps to correct these discrepancies.
(Paragraph 4, Report Details)
D.
Reportable Occurrences 1.
RO 76-17_
The inspector stated that he understood that the licensee's initial corrective action for this occurrence was temporary
.
{
-3-
,
e
.
!
!
!
i
_-
... _.
.
-
.
.
.
,
,
'
.
'.
and that a permanent corrective action modification was planned to engage the stem clamp to the stem for valve
'
-
,.
MO-2008. The licensee confirmed this statement.
The (
inspector inquired as to whether or not they planned the
.
eame modification for any other valves. The licensee stated that they had not had any other stem clamp fail-ures, and did not plan modifications to other valves at least until they had proved the modification to MO-2008.
(Paragraph 5.a Report Details)
2.
RO 76-22 The inspector stated he had reviewed the licensee's correc-tive action for this occurrence and it appeared to be adequate.
(paragraph 5.b, Report Details)
E.
Significant Operating Event M-SOE-77-01
,
The subject SOE was discussed with the licensee.
(Paragraph 6
-
Report Details)
.
.
O
.
4
0 4-
-
t
!
,
(
.
.
.
_
-
..
.
--
.
.._.
_.
.. - _.
_
...
- _ - _. ~... _ -
_ _ _. _ _ _ _. - _ - _
- - _ _ _ - - _ - -. - - - - - - - - - _ _ - - - - - - - _ - - _ - - - _ - _ _ - - _ - - - _ _ _ _ _ _
.
.'
REPORT DETAILS _
,
,
.
1.
Persons Contacted
L. R. Eliason, Plant Manager M.11. Clarity, Superintendent, Plant Engineering and Radiation Protection W. E. Anderson, Superintendent, Plant Operations and Maintenance D. D. Antony, Plant Engineer, Operations W.11. Shamla, Plant Engineer, Technical W.11. Sparrow, Operations Supervisor W. J.11111. Engineer. Instruments B. D. Day Engineer D. E. Pedersen, Engineer D. E. Nevinski, Engineer, Nuclear
R. A. Goranson, Engineer 0. N. Iverson, Engineer
'
11. M. Kendall, Plant Of fice Supervisor P. A. Pochop, Quality Assurance Engineer R. L. Scheinost, Quality Assurance Engineer
J. D. Weyhrauch, Plant Administrative Specialist R. E. Grabinski, Plant Administrative Specialist M. J. Markiel, Plant Administrative Specialist 2.
Procurement The inspector reviewed the plant material procurement program.
I The review included a tour of the material storage varchouse, review of purchase order packages, quality assurance requirements, and receipt inspection as follows:
a.
Six 1976 procurement packages were reviewed, including pur-chase orders (P0s), quality assurance records, and receipt inspection records. The packages reviewed were M94780, CRDM Accumulators; M16086, Target Rock Relief Valve Parts; M15536 Turbine Stop Valve Parts; M87891,Ilydraulic Snubber Parts; M94120, Steel Plate for the Torus; and M22517, Level Control
'
Relay. No discrepancies were noted.
b.
Procurement records for the following items stored onsite were verified to exists (1)
Stainless Steel Tubing, PO M16886 (2)
Borax 10, PO M16218 (3)
Liquid Penetrant Cleaner, PO M94700
-
No discrepancies were noted in the review of these records.
,
(
-5-
,
.
-
.
__
-_
_
_
.
. _ -
__
_ _.
-
_
___
l
,
_ - _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ - _ _
__ __ - _ _ _____ -____ __- ______ _ --____ __ _--_ ___ - ___________ ______ _
. _ _ _
!
,
t
,
The inspector also reviewed the licensee's system of tracking
'
installed materials and components.
Safety related items (except
'
'
'
electronic parts) are stored in the warehouse. When they are
k withdrawn, the WRA number for which the item is used is recorded
,
on a history card. The licensee is working on a system to track electronic items at this time.
3.
Maintenance The inspector reviewed records for maintenance activities con-trolled by the following safety related Work Request Authorizations which were accomplished during the past year.
WRAs numbered 76-319,76-345, 76-381,76-344, 16-463,77-102,
77-103, 76-542,76-660, 76-790,76-799, 76-821,76-831, 76-850, 76-1158, 76-1151, 76-1152, 76-1716 and 1774.
.
The inspector verified that the above maintenance activities were
'
accomplished in accordance with the licensee's Administrative Procedures and Quality Assurance Program.
No significant dis-crepancies were ider.tified.
,
.
.
4.
Design Changes The inspector reviewed the following design change packages which were completed or partially completed during the past year.
76-M-002,Dr/wellTorusDeltaPSystem 76-M-026, RCIC Control Modification
76-M-029 Drain Line Vent Modification to Six Inch Moisture Separator Drain Line 76-M-033, Reactor Building Crane Interlock for Fuel Car.k 76-M-066, Removal of Open Torque Switch Bypass on Containment Cooling Isolation Valves 76-M-064, Temporary Residual licat Removal System (RHR) Test Instrumentation M-75-23 Turbine Building Roof Ventilation Modification One item of noncompliance was noted in the review of these design changes. Design Change 76-M-064 was a temporary design change which installed and removed instrumentation on the RHR system to determine the cause of water hammer on the shutdown coolang sys-tem. The instrumentation vae apparently installed on an emergency basis on October 15, 1976, and removed some time later. Apparently no record of installation or removal was made. Licensee Adminis-trative control Directive 4 ACD 3.6, paragraph 6.1.1, requires
.
-6-
.
t J
(
.
i
.
4
- m-~+-*.w.ee.,
..,
r*'
.
..
.
-
-
= _.
_-
- g. ;_
.-. __:
,-
-
-
-
-
- - -
- - - - - - - - - -
--- o
.
.
.
.i s
a WRA shall be used, with some exceptions, and design changes are
.
not included in the exceptions.
4 ACD 3.6, paragraph 6.2.3,
(
allows emergency werk to be started without completion of a WRA
'
with the Shift Supervisor's approval, but the WRA must be com-pleted after the work is started. This apparently was not completed i
for the above.
.,
Some minor discrepancies were noted for Design Changes 76-M-29 and
'
75-M-53.
In both design changes, procedures and drawings were
,
identified as needing revision, but these revisions had not been submitted or completed at the time of the inspection.
76-M-29 was completed Hay 22, 1976, and 75-M-53 was completed November 25, 1976. The licensec stated that these revisions would be com-pleted.
5.
Reportable Occurrences
,
_
The following reportable occurrences were reviewed by examination of logs, records, observations of equipment, and through dis-cussions with plant personnel. Occurrences were reviewed for completion of reporting requirements.. investigation and deter-
.
,
mination of cause, proposed corrective measures, and completion of corrective action.
MO-200& 7RO 76-lJ Failure of RHR Torus Cooling Injection Valse -
a.
This valve failed to open because the stem clamps loosened (
due to shearing of the set screws. Temporary corrective action was to weld the stem clamp to the valve stem.
The licensee plans to make a permanent modification using a key i
and keyway arrangement to engage the stem and stem clamp.
11 Diesel b.
RO76-22,2JailureofNo.2StartSystemonNo.
Generator-The No. 2 start system failed because rust particles appar-ently clogged the biced off orifice to the air relay which actuates the starting system. The inspector inquired if
'
cicaning the system was part of their preventive mainten-ance (pM) program. The licensee's representative stated that the PM program requires c1 caning every 6 months and the occurrence occurred 2 weeks prior to the scheduled
!
cleaning. The licensee's representative indicated they do not plan to increase the frequency of the FM as they feel this was an isolated occurrence and there is a redun-dant start system.
1/ RO 50-263/76-17, NSp to Region III, dtd 10/1/76.
2./ RO 50-263/76-22, NSp to Region III, dtd 11/1/76.
,
s-7-
- (
-
.
I
'
!
,
_. _ -..
.
.
--
--
-
!
-
-
_..
-
-
- ~.. - - - -
- - -
%
.
.
c.
The following reportable occurrences were reviewed in the
' '
c.
'
office sud are considered closed:
{
'
RO 76-2 mission of Functional Test of MSL Radiation (1)
Monitor-]f
'
RS 76-24. Turbine Bypass llender Drain Leak 5/
(2)
6.
Significant Operating Event M-SOE-77-01 During an audit of surveillance testing by the licensee's Surveil-lance Coordinator, it was discovered that evaluation of data for Surveillance Test 0083, Reactivity Anomaly Check, should have been completed before December 22, 1976, to comply with Technical Specification 4.3 E which requires an actual rod inventory com-parison to predicted at least every full power month. Data was
-
obtained for the test on December 13, 1976, and evaluated on January 3, 1977. Review of completed Surveillance Tests 00S3 for
,
1976 indicates the evaluations were not completed as required on three other occasions in April, August and September. The licensee had also identified these same failurcs to evaluate on time.
In'
all cases, data was obtained prior to. exceeding one full power month and no limiting conditions for operations were exceeded.
The licensee's investigation indicated that failure to evaluate the data on time was caused by a misunderstanding between person-nel required to complete the evaluation. The licensee has instructed the personnel involved on the proper timing of obtain-
,
ing and evaluating data for Surveillance Test 0083.
s
,
.
3/ RO 50-263/76-23, NSP to Region III, dtd 11/24/76.
I f/ IE Inspection Rpt No. 050-263/76-18.
5/ RO 50-263/76-24, NSP to Region III, dtd 12/27/76.
'
-8-(
.
,
.
i i
.
,
'. - -
....