IR 05000267/1986026

Insp Rept 50-267/86-26 on 860908-12.No Violations or Deviations Identified.Major Areas Inspected:Maint Program & Implementation,Electrical Maint & Instrumentation & Control Sys Maint

ML20214P118
Person / Time
Site:	Fort Saint Vrain
Issue date:	10/20/1986
From:	Boardman J, Hunnicutt D NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV)
To:
Shared Package
ML20214P092	List: IR 05000267/1986026 ML20214P089
References
50-267-86-26, NUDOCS 8612040080
Download: ML20214P118 (9)

Text

e '

., ,

,

,

. APPENDIX U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

'

.  : REGION IV NRC. Inspection Report: 50-267/86-26 License: DPR-34-Docket: -50-267

' Licensee: 'Public Service Company' of Colorado P.O. Box 840 Platteville, Colorado 80201-0840 Fdcility Name: Fort St. Vrain Nuclear Generating Station (FSV)

Inspection At: ..Platteville, Colorado Inspection Conducted: . September 8-12, 1986 Inspector: kl M //to/f/'

J. R. Boardman, Reactor Inspector, Ddte Operations Section, Reactor Safety Branch Approved: M jMmW /cydo/fd D. M. Hunnicutt, Chief, Operations Section, Date '

Reactor Safety Branch Inspection Summary Inspection Conducted September 8-12, 1986 (Report 50-267/86-26)

Areas Inspected: Licensee maintenance program, maintenance program implementation, electrical maintenance, and instrumentation and control systems maintenanc Results: Within the four areas inspected, no violations or deviations were identifie DR 861125 ADOCK 05000267 PDR

--

-

_ .~ ,

m

,

• y .

, f . :s -, -

' a

,

' +

,

,

'

w .

~

gg . 4 2 '. .

,

's.f e

-

. ,

,

-

.; .- , .

"

[~ _ DETAILS

'

.

.e

'

,

~

~

" Persons Contacted -

, ,

'

~g .* C. Fuller, Station Manager .

^

W. Craine, Maintenance Superintendent ,

• R.:L. Craun, Nuclear Site Engineering Manager

.

R. Webb, Mechanical Supervisor Technical / Administrative Services Manager *

--

• J.,Novachek; jSuperintendent,' Nuclear Betterment-Engineering

• J.'J.fMcCaulley, .

~*M. J. Ferris, Manager, QA' Operations e .i x *T. C.-Prenger, Manager, QA Services

• J.~'K. Eggbroten, Superintendent, Technical Services Engineering' - -

' '

.*J. M. Gramline, Supervisor, Nuclear Licensing, Operations'

,

' *A. L.' GreenwoodbSupervisor, .QA. Auditing

• G.-L. Redmond, Supervisor; Maintenance QC-

'

.

• Jt ' K. Jackson, Supervisor, QA/QC '

M.- Stoecklein, Mainteriance Superviso '

'

'

,B. Burgess,'I&C Supervisor !~~

B.4 Cross, I&C Supervisor . ..

fJ.mBrooks,* Planning & Scheduling Superintendent

'-J. Wojtisek, Plant Engineering. Superintendent J. Petera,1 Electrical Supervisor

'

'

• G. Sansman,' Technica1 ' Services '

~ The NRC< inspector ' interviewed other licensee and contractor personne .

< -

, .

~

• Denotes.those present'at the exit intervie m l : Licensee-Maintenance Program ~

p _ l General

,'

The NRC-inspector interviewed. licensee maintenance personnel

.concerning their. areas of responsibility and their understanding'of.

'

<: ,

applicable licensee procedure .

..

Since April 1986, when the NRC team inspection was initiated (NRC

~

.

Inspection Report 50-267/86-09), the licensee's maintenance program '

has undergone changes in procedures, personnel, and' administrative controls. ' Mar.y of these changes were still in.a transition stage at the time of this inspection. Some procedures were completely updated and approved; others were undergoing revisions, or were scheduled for revision. This. inspection was based on the status of the maintenance program at the time of-the inspectio .

.P

7_

,

x,; .

.

3 Maintenance Personnel Turnover Rate and Use of Contractor Personnel for Maintenance-Interviews with supervision identified two areas of concern which related to personnel. The first was a high personnel turnover rate resulting in a low plant-specific experience level. Maintenance personnel interviewed during work observation averaged less than one year at the site. The second area of concern was that contractor personnel utilized to perform the same functions as licensee personnel did not appear to receive the same plant-specific training as licensee personne A positive addition to the maintenance program was the creation of

'the function of maintenance coordinator. The coordinator handles many'of the administrative duties ~previously performed by craft supervisors. This change allows supervisors more time to oversee the technical performance of their personnel. The coordinator also-

'~

serves as the; maintenance planning supervisor, interfacing regularly

'with the mairitenance superintendent and scheduling department. At the time of this inspection, the coordinator's job was filled.by a contracted engineer. The job has been posted as a permanent staff r

position by the licensee's management. The maintenance

, superintendent indicated that measures have been taken.to share the knowledge of the coordinator in the event of personnel turnover. It was noted that the maintenance superintendent will' retire in 1986,

, ,

'

Land that experienced personnel in key positions may not be available to oversee the transition and implementation of the maintenance program,

' Review of Preventive Maintenance During the week of the inspection,'no corrective maintenance activities were scheduled. The NRC inspector witnessed three preventive maintenance station service requests (SSR) Nos. 86509035, 86509918, and 86509919) to verify that licensee personnel were following applicable maintenance procedures, that procedures were adequate, and that all required procedures and materials were present at the work area. The results are discussed in Section 3 of this repor Five completed preventive maintenance activities (SSR Nos. 86507195, 85510802, 85509680, 86504264, and 86500955) were reviewe Licensee Maintenance Trending and Preventive Maintenance Periodicity It was noted that a plant wide trending analysis program did not appear to have been implemented. One case was identified during the inspection where trending was being performed. The NRC inspector reviewed the trending done for the station service batterie The maintenance trending was in great detail and appeared to be accurate enough to predict problem areas. The NRC inspector noted that the

- . . m _ _

'

, 5

.

.'.- . .

J

e licensee's preventive maintenance program was in tfansition and that all criteria had not been identified and, as'a specific example, the

'

maintenance program did not identify all required periodicities for o . maintenance activitie Normally, preventive maintenance actions

'

have a plus 25 percent periodicity that permits these actions-to-

, ' exceed the. required due date before they are considered delinquen Certain maintenance which does not.have a plus tolerance.on '

periodicity-(such as Agastat. relays).is, identified in the same way by the licensee, incorrectly assigning a plus 25 percent toleranc This method of scheduling maintenance could allow qualified safety-related equipment to become unqualifie Procedure Review i Two administrative procedures were reviewed.- These procedures and

,

'their respective programs were found to be undergoing changes, which ~a

. precluded a complete evaluation. Based upon the general' content of '

the: material, interviews with applicable personnel, and the manner.by which the proposed maintenance operating plan is purported to be implemented, no concerns were identified. The reviewed

,

~a dministrative procedures were:

~

,' * : Letter PPC-85-2679

'.

s ~ " Maintenance Operating Plan Program M-2,"

~. dated ~ July 8, 198 '

s

'

'

-* Maintenance Planning Desk Procedure, Revision-1 (Draft), dated

,

,

September 12,'198 ,.

.No violations or deviations were identifie Si j Maintenance Program Implementation The'NRC inspector' reviewed three station service requests (SSRs) covering

the following preventive maintenance:

Troubleshooting the control room annunciator for faulty position

. indication of the helium return line isolation valv *

Performance of the monthly inspection of standby diesel generator 1A air compressor 1 *

Performance of the monthly inspection of standby diesel generator 18 air compressor 1 The maintenance activities were identified as SSR Nos. 86509035, 86509918, and 86509919, respectively. Each SSR was checked for:

authorizing signatures,

spare parts control,

e- j- -

~

7 ,

f , ;, - , , e '<o d-

,

+

,

,

d:

t

-

7 - 5 1 cy

+ g .s A w

F

. inspection adequacy,

_

' qualification,

'

• -

- adequacy'of maintenance performed description, and

• -

post-maintenance functional testing and restoratio The SSRs were reviewed to determine compliance with the' requirements of the following administrative procedures:

. MAP-01, Issue 1 " Station Preventive Maintenance Program," dated August 9, 1985.'

MAP-11, Issue 1 " Maintenance Procedures," dated Aug'ust 19, 198 MAP-14, Issue 1 " Maintenance Operation Procedure Preparation,"

dated November 20, 198 SMAP-4, Issue 3 " Work Control, Preventive Maintenance," dated July 9, 198 *  ;

SMAP-23, Issue 1 " Post-Maintenance Testing Implementation," dated October 18, 198 P-7, Issue 10 " Work Control-Station Service Request Processing,"

dated March 21, 198 P-12, Issue 1 " Plant Maintenance-Mechanical Electrical, and Relay Shop," dated. August 7, 198 Troubleshooting of an isolation valve faulty position indication (SSR No. 86500935) was witnessed. The NRC inspector reviewed the job from the receipt of the work _ request by the planner, through the planner's search for reference data, his field verification of the equipment, and his written work order for technical services group to diagnose the problem, to the delivery of the approved SSR to schedulin The monthly inspections of air compressors 1A and 10 (SSR Nos. 86509918 and 86509919) were performed simultaneously by maintenance mechanics. The jobs were reviewed from work request receipt, to notification of appropriate QC personnel, receipt of lubrication oil from a storekeeper, task completion, and QC approva Maintenance Procedure PM 92-1, Issue 10, requires post-maintenance

, testing (PMT)'of the compressors to ensure that they start and stop at the appropriate air pressure set points. Procedure PM 92-1, step 5.1, lists the' acceptable pressure as "approximately 140 psig." Accomplishment of this-procedure determined that the compressor tripped at 148 to 150 psi The mechanics discussed the test results with their supervisor, and a new

c, .. . . . . _ _ . _ _ _ . .,

,

c

' -

, s ,

,

,.

. .i ', ,

- '

,

x

'

6' '

.

.

.

~

, :SSR.was generated (86510296) to address;recalibration of the pressure switch. The_new SSR was not referenced.in the'results section,of th .

original SSR as specified in SMAP-23; part 4.1.8(a). This situation was ,3 discussed with the licensee, including the need for specific engineered

_

-

'

tolerances in maintenance document '

No violations or deviations were. identifie . , Instrumentation Maintenance - Genera .

u J

^

Maintenance history, calibration records, qualification records, 4

- procedures,-work item tracking forms, and maintenance work request ,

,

forms were. reviewed. The following members of the I&C Maintenance Organization ~were' interviewed with respect to their area of responsibility, and qualifications:

'*'

Superintendent' Nuclear Betterment Engineering, , 7;

Instrument and Control Supervisors, ,

QC inspectors, and

Technicians. ' Review of Maintenance Activities

.

The NRC inspector witnessed two work activities'to determine if

. licensee personnel were following applicable maintenance procedure The two activ'ities werei :(1) calibration of a chart recorder for the process chromatograph using.SSR'No. 85503252 as the controlling

,

document, and (2) a circulator seal malfunction trip surveillance test implementing Procedure SR-RE-3-M (Issue 12). No concerns were

noted during the performance of these maintenance-related activitie Procedures and other documentation. associated with the following three completed maintenance activities were reviewe *

calibration of level-switch LS-2145, calibration and test alarm set points of. pressure

-

switch PS-1106-28, and

inspection and calibration of flow transmitter FT-11268- No concerns were noted during the review of the subject document J

4 .

- Calibration, Maintenance, and Testing of Safety-Related Electrical Relays and Breakers The NRC inspector reviewed the calibration, maintenance, and testing of safety-related electrical relays and breakers. No complete

. listing could be identified of either safety-related relays or breakers. Calibration records for safety related relays were not retrievable during the inspection. The category of safety-related relays identified by-the license were those having set points. The licensee presented no documentation that consideration had been given to safety-related relays requiring calibration, but having no set points, such as those which required a dead-band adjustment for proper operation. Licensee personnel could not provide documentation identifying the design base of all relay set points that were specified in licensee procedure Maintenance, calibration, and test records for safety-related brer.kers for the period from initial calibration and testing until January 1985 could not be retrieved by licensee personnel. The

" licensee's records center acknowledged the requirement for these records which they had not received. The licensee's maintenance department did not have these records. These records could have permitted verification of the adequacy of licensee maintenance and testing. A concern exists that the licensee apparently has tested safety-related breakers using alternating current (AC) voltage in lieu of direct current (DC) voltage. Using AC root mean square (RMS)

voltage for_ breaker tests imposes the higher AC peak-to peak voltage upon treaker cantacts. This condition can damage contacts and

. degrade breaker performance. All identified breakers have not had maintenance and testing performed upon them since January 1985-(previous records are niitsing as stated above). Recent maintenance and testing could have provided assurance of proper breaker functioning and could reduce the safety significance of the missing record In summary, the licensee could not provide documentation:

(1) that'all safety-related electrical relays had bt.en identified to ensure proper accomplishment of:

.

set points

dead-band adjustments l maintenance, and

replacement at the end of qualified life (such as Agastat '

)

relays).

(2) of the technical basis for all relay set points presently in licensee procedures s

_ _ -

, ,

T S A ,

.

.. .: . .s ,,

- , ,

..-

'_

,n G&. ,

~8

~

'

w ,

,

,'

(3) that' all safety-related_ breakers had been identified for 1

, performance of. required maintenance and testing, and- '

~ (4) that safety-related breakers have been tested using procedure ,

that preclude degrading breaker performanc Licensee ' maintenance, calibration, and testing of. safety-related electrical relays and breakers will remain an-unresolved item (50-267/8620-01) pending further review during a subsequent

' inspectio d.~ ' Maintenance of Rosemount Transmitters The procedures;for performing maintenance and maintaining component qualification of Rosemount transmitters had not been_ generated as the' .

. licensee's EQ. program-had not been completed. Maintenance personnel indicated they would ensure that all maintenance requirements were identifie . Electrical Maintenanc . General .

' Maintenance' history, work. item tracking forms, maintenance work

'

' requests', qualification -records, document control procedures, and replacement part control records were reviewed. The following

. Electrical Maintenance Organization personnel were interviewed to determine'their area of-responsibility and qualifications:

electrical supervisor

-*

electrician . Observation of Maintenance Activities-One maintenance activity was. witnessed to verify that the licensee personnel performing the maintenance followed the applicable maintenance procedures. This activity was the accomplishment of SSR No. 86509836, performing battery charge on a station battery, Documentation Review ~

Procedures and other documentation associated with the following four completed electrical maintenance activities were reviewe ,

SSR No. 86508152 (Inspection, Cleaning, and Repair of MCCs, Contractors and Breakers)

SSR No. 85512303 (Cleaning of 480 Volt MCCs)

,

%g

~ -

, , ,

, -

- ~ _ - w ,

7 [-

,

, ' >!

. -

.:- a J e ;'s -

.,

. .

f ; ,

}g " 9

,a y'

'

,

'*

'-

-SSR No. 85512304_(Annual Inspection of.480 Volt MCCs):

.

-*

-

-

SSR No.~85512305.(Annual Inspection of 480 Volt MCCs)'

.The, following' anomaly was identified during lthe NRC' inspector's -

,

. ; document review of SSR No. 86508152. This SSR was a work order to- ~

~

p jprovidelcontrolling documentation-for. performance of licensee -

-Procedure MPE-1612. " Inspection,' Cleaning',~and Repair of_MCC's, Contractors'and-Breakers," Issue:1, dated April-7,11986. The signed

.c off, copy of the procedures:for this work was reviewed. .One of the-

-

4.'stepskin-the. procedure l required a QC' signature,-the signature had not-w g Q been;obtained or marked'as.not applicable. This will be an open item

" V.( _ f n (50-267/8626-02)3to be completed.during a. subsequent-inspection.'

ew, pq 9 : , c '

s ' 14.^. ;- 'd.';- Limitorque Operators; t'; ,

..  ; ; .y_

h ' ,?M ' ' ] , ! Th'e electrjcal supervisor was quest.ioned.by the NRC inspector about

_

-

su n. , w. m (*7 tihe~ adjusting of limitorque actuat-ar switch -settings.-

_s,.

-

.

. .

,

• y*, e ~A g ..>,s

-- - ,

N,At the time of the inspection. no one at the site was familiar with i~ 'r;* _, ' i 'lthe procedure to'make the required adjustments. -It was stated that ta

.

'~

-J s 2 contractor wa's coming _to the plant to train licensee personnel in the

"

1. ?,~ V N 'ne'ar future. In addition to training concerns, it was not verifiable y ".<' / <

that switches were correctly adjusted in the past; therefore, all-j$ ' ' switch settings will1 require verificatio ~

,

Calibration'of Electrical Cable L'ug' Crimping Tools Ne:NRC inspector reviewed the licensee procedure for calibration of

' crimping tools, which was adequate to control required calibratio .- -Unresolved Items Unresolved items are matters about which more information is required in order to ascertain whether they are acceptable iter:s. violations, or deviations. One unresolved item identified during ne inspection is discussed in paragraph ~ .

~ ' Exit Interview The NRC inspector met with the licensee representatives denoted in paragraph 1 and with the NRC' resident inspectors at the conclusion of th inspection on September 12, 1986. The NRC' inspector summarized the scope and findings of inspection activitie .