IR 05000272/1979001

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
IE Insp Repts 50-272/79-01 & 50-311/79-01 on 790103-5.No Noncompliance Noted.Major Areas Inspected:Inservice Testing of Pumps & Valves (Unit 1);preservice Testing of Pumps & Valves (Unit 2)
ML18078A965
Person / Time
Site: Peach Bottom, Salem  Constellation icon.png
Issue date: 01/22/1979
From: Foley T, Higgins J
NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I)
To:
Shared Package
ML18078A967 List:
References
50-272-79-01, 50-272-79-1, NUDOCS 7903120481
Download: ML18078A965 (7)
v • d • e


Text

U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT Report N /79-01 Docket No~ 50-272/50-311 Region I License No. DPR-70/CPPR-53 Priority------

Licensee:

PublkService Electric. & Gas Co.

Category C

. ***-.:.

. *.... *:_**. *...

  • * *; * ao Park Place Newark, New Jersey 07101 Facility Name:

Salem Nuclear Generating Station Unit 1 & 2

"

  • Inspection at:

Hancocks.Bridge, New Jersey Inspection conducted: January 3, - Jan'uary 5, 1979-Inspectors:.. J~"'-. -~ * *.

.

T. Foley, eactorspector

Approved by: ~*

o::ccaptin, chief,NUclear Support Section No. 1, RO&NS Branch Inspection Summary:

. date signed 1 /2 l-/79

.

date signed.

1date signed Inspection on January 3-15, 1979 (Combined Report Nos~ *50-272/79-01 and 50-311/79-01)

Areas Inspected: Routine, unannounced inspection by regional based inspectors of Inservice Testing of Pumps and Valves (Unit l), and Pres_ervice Testing of Pumps and Valves (Unit 2). The inspection involved 42 inspector-hours (Unit 1-39 hours, Unit 2-3 hours) on site by two regional based inspector Results:

No items of noncompliance were identifie Region I Form 12 (Rev. April 77)

79031.20~g/

  • DETAILS Persons Contacted The technical and supervisory level personnel listed below were

.contacte *G. Duncan, ISI Maintenance Engineer L.* Fry, Senior Performance Supervisor

  • S. Gerstein, Engineer, Unit 2 A. Kapple, QA Staff Assistant
  • S. La Bruna, Maintenance Engineer
  • R. Lombard, Operations Engineer D. Lyons, QA Specialist E. Meyer, Project QA Engineer

- H. Midura, Manager Salem Generating Sta ti on

  • F. Schnarr, Operating Engineer
  • J. Stillman, Station QA Engineer

. *P. ~String, QA Staff Assistant

  • W. Treston, QA Engineer

,~,-._:*J-~: *Zupko, -~hief _ Erig:ineer

'

_,,.*;. ;,....:..-..i::*:*:*-..

i *:rt1e--*--1n-spe-ctor also, i ritervi ewed other licensee personnel during the

' course-or'thfa" 1nspection including maintenance and quality assurance personnel, reactor operators and performance engineer *denotes those present at the exit intervie.

Previous Inspection Item Update (Closed) Unresolved Item (311/78-29-02):

The licensee currently has a procedure (SP(O) 4.6. 1. 1) for Unit No. l which incorporates the necessary controls for subject valves. It is planned to incorporate the Unit 1 surveillance procedures into the Unit 2 procedures as the Unit becomes operationa This item is close.

Inservice Testing of Pumps (Unit 1) *oocuments*Reviewed Resident Quality Assurance Engineering Audit (RQAE) 78-03, Inservice Inspection Program dated November 30, 1978 Preliminary reply to RQAE audit 78-03 dated January 2, 1978 Surveillance Procedure, 11 Inservice Testing - Pumps 11 Unit No. 1, SP(O) 4.0.5.-P, Revision 4

  • Internal memorandum dated November 11, 1978 from Duncan to L. Lake, Problems in Coordinating ISI Test Results *.

-<:~*~:- **:PSE&GC letters ~o NRCdated February 28; 1977 and October

'll, l977*summarizing the Inservice Inspection _Program fpr

- Unit.. No. l **

-".. **_ _

. _,

_:: *."-.*~-

,_* _:.*.,,:

-

  • .. *

,.~_._.,.

.-__;*.,'

.. -.

';,*:

' ASME Bail er- ~nd-- Press~re Vesse 1 ' Code' -Section Xl ' Subsection IWP, 11 Inservice Testing of Pumps in Nuclear Power Plants

-* -. *.

' ~*.. - ' -.

-1974edition with Summer 1975 Addenda

_ "IRD Mechanalys.is 11 letter to M. Metcaff dated November 28, 1978 *scope

__ The inspector reviewed the licensee's* inservice pump test procedures and test results for conformance with Subsection IWP of Section XI of the ASME B&PV Code and with his submittals

-_ to the NR RQAE Audit 78-03, performed in November, 1978,_

identified noncompliances in the pump testing oroara The_

,,.,... __ _

  • recently issued SP( 0) 4. Oi5.;p,--,~'lnserv.ice-'Tesfi!lg-::...:--PU!'TIPS""~ Unit

-*

1, Revision 4 corrects several noncompliances identified in the audit. Actions necessary to correct the other noncompliances noted in the audit are presently being implemente The preliminary response to the RQAE Audit identifies the date of completion of all corrective action as February 1, 197 The fol lowing areas remained uncorrected at the comp.let ion of the

- inspection:

(1)

Comparisons or evaluations of operating pump data with appropriate acceptance criteria are not being conducted for pressures, temperatures and flows, as required by Subsection-IWP 3200; (2)

Reference values for all pump parameters have not been established in accordance with Subsection IWP 3110;

-- (3)

-.

.

.

.

.

.

Limits for bearing temperatures and inlet pressures have not been specified as-required by Subsection IWP-3210; and,

-(4)

Calibrations of thermocouples used for the determination of bearing temperatures have not been performed as required by Subsection IWP-411 These items are collectively unresolved pending correction of the above listed item (272/79-01-01)

.. **:.

    • .'. ~. '

c.

Licensee Event Report

. Technical Specification 6.9. 1.9.c. requires the reporting of observed, inadequacies in the implementation of administrative or* procedural control The. licensee stated that a report

  • .

would be submitted. concerning the deficiencies identified.in

          • '* ' RQAE Audit 7a;..03,, within.30 days of the formal reply to Audit
  • --_78-0 The. inspector. had no. *further questions in this are ' -~*:: ':*4. *.. 1riservi c~'Tes~ing of Valv~f-cunit 1 y....

. a...

General In addition to the items listed in paragraph 3a, the inspector also reviewed the below procedures:

., *..

Ml6E llContainmen.t Isolation Type B and C Tests 11 Rev. 11

. _dated 8/4/78 SP(0)4.0.S-V 11rnserv.ice Testing-Valves 11 Unit No. 1, Rev *

3. dated 1/18/78 SP(0}4.0.5-V (Maint)

11 Inservice Testing-Valves 11 Unit N * 1, Rev.*2 dated 1/18/78 Ml 7E 11Category IC' Valve Lift Set Tests 11 Rev. 1 dated 3/16/77 The inspector verified on a sampling basis that all valV;es listed in his submittals to the NRC were tested by properly approved procedures and that the procedures incorporated all

. requirements of subsection IWV of Section XI to the ASME

. Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code (IWV).

The inspector also reviewed* a sampling of completed test results to verify that the procedures were being properly execute With the exceptions of the below items, the inspector had no further questions in this are Leak Rate Testing ( l) *Leak.Rate Summation Paragraph III.B.3. (a) of Appendix J to 10 CFR 50 requires that the combined leak rate of all penetrations and valves subject to Type B and C tests be less than 0.60 La. Step 5.2.2. 1 of Figure 6 to procedure Ml6E allows the Type B and C summation to be calculated using the only lowest leak rate of two series containment isolation valves in one penetratio The inspector stated that the NRC position was to use the highest of the two series

~..;.,. ;

I I

I

.

I

. *.*',*...

  • .. **":'
  • valve leak rates for this summatio The licensee* s representative acknowledged this and during the inspection recalculated the current Type B and C summation using the more conservative value The results were still well within the 0~60 La limit. This item is unresolved pending revision of procedure Ml6E and in conjunction with the

. below: item is. designated item no. (272/79-01-02).

....

, (2}. Leak Rate Comparis.ons

...... *'

_:'.,

..,*

.. :**:*

  • .

,',.'

  • .. *... *

.The* 1 icensee-1 s.pr~c~dures. c*urrentl.y do-not.contain any

, - *:*

. provision for comparing the current leak_ rate with the previous leak rate to determine valve degradation for valves six inches or larger as required by IWV 3420(g)(2).

This item is unresolved pending revision of the appropriate procedure, as noted in 4.b(l) above.

..

c. '*valve*Position Indication-The licensee's procedures currently have no prov1s1on for performing the check of the valve position indication required by IWV-3300 for valves which are inaccessible for direct

  • : *observation during plant operation. Discussions with operations
  • personnel indicated that valves inside the biological shield would probably be inaccessible during plant operation. This item is unresolved pending incorporation of these checks into appropriate procedures (Item No. 272/79-01-03.). Check Valve Testing (1)

Dual Function Check Valves

.. (2)

Some check valves, such-as pump discharge checks, perform a dual function and are-sometimes normally open and sometimes normally closed. These valves, in accordance with IWV-3520, should be tested in both the open direction and the closed direction to demonstrate that they are able to fulfill.their design functio Nor~ally Closed Valves

- Paragraph IWV-3520(b)(2) describes detailed measurements to :be taken in order to determine that a normally closed check valve opens properl The licensee's procedures

  • currently do not incorporate these or equivalent methods nor have these items been identified to the NRC as an area where the plant is unable to comply with Section X These two items on check valve testing are considered unresolved and are designated Item No. (272/79-01-04).

... ;

.

  • 6 Valve Stroke Times Procedure SP(O). 4.0.5-V does not specify maximum stroke time limits for all power operated Category A and B valves as required. by IWV-3410 (c)(l).. This item is unresolved (Item No~ 272/79-01-05)
  • * f ~

Valve Retests *

..,. **: *.. __ *'*.,

,::~:.:~Procedure SP(O.) 4.0.5-V (MAINT) was apparently designed to

  • **.:.. * perform: retests of.valves requiri.ng maintenance or which did

"*: *..

<'not.meet.their stroke. time limit under SP(O) 4.0.5-V. The*

    • * <.*: **

procedure is being*used for some.retests, although not al The inspector noted that:.

( l) The procedure does not clearly specify which valves:- are~to be tested using the procedure;

  • (2}. The procedure does not clearly define the running log that it requires be kept in step 5. 1.1;

.*.**,

  • * (3). The running log being kept appears not to meet the intent of.step 5.1. l; and, (.4)

For many of the completed tests the shift supervisor

  • review required by step 5. 7 is not documente These items are unresolved and are designated Item No. (272/79-.

01-06). *Preservice Testing of Pumps and Valves (Unit,2)

The inspector reviewed a draft copy of SUP 48 11Preservice Testing of Pumps and Valves" dated December *rn, 1978 and SMII No. 17, Re *o, "Initial Inservice Testing of Pumps and Valves" dated November 10, 1977, to verify that all the requirements Subsections IWP and IWV of Section XI were incorporate The inspector had the following**

comments on the procedures:. SMII No. 17' ~s outdated in that it contains superseded revisions

  • of the Unit l procedures.SP(0)4.0.5.. -P and SP(0)4.0.5'."'V; Maximum Valve stroke. times are not specified for all power operated Category A and B valves;
  • Testing of dual purpose check valves in both the open and closed directions is not required; The procedure does not perform the detailed measurements required by IWV-3520(b)(2) for normally closed chec~ valves; There is no check of the valve position indicators for inaccessible valves;

..

~ :.. :..'

......'~

  • The procedure does not test or document already_ completed tests of Category C relief valves; The stabilization requirements of IWP-3500 are not specified-for a 1 l pumps tested; and,

' ' -*'

~~

.

-,

~-

.

~

_ -, h~ ~

  • The* pro~edure *does *not* tak~ the required. bearing temperature

._ :*;_,, and-vibration data for all pumps teste. _.

":. *.... '

The items are _ope~: and are designated as Item No. -(311/79-:-01-0T)

Plant Tour The inspector conducted a plant tour ~nd observed the licensee's

~~n~~~~a ~'. t!~~:i~~n~I ~n~u~~~r;~-~~l~~~:-~~hf~fi

¥.f~ci~~~-f~;~;~~~t
i8ment -

integrity. Valves in the station air, containment spray, component cooling, safety injection and diesel generator systems were observe _ During the-tour.the inspector* noted that the open pipe end downstream

--of valve 1SA905 was uncapped and that valve lSA905, although closed, had

  • no controls such as tagging lockwiring, etc. This valve is between the two containment isolation valves for the station air penetration and is of the type which is controlled by procedure SP(0)4.6. "Containment Systems -- Primary Containment", Rev. 5 dated 1/21/7 The procedure does not-currently list 1SA90 No other discrepancies were identified during the plant tou This item is unresolved pending a review by the licensee to determine that all required valves are included in procedure SP(0)4.6. 1. 1, this is designated as unresolved Item No. (272/79-01-07).

Unresolved* Items Items about which more information is required to determine accept-ability are considered unresolve Paragraphs 3, 4 and 6 of this report contain unresolved item. _ Exit Interview

  • At the inspecti.on' s end the inspectors held a meeting (see Detail 1 for attendees) to discuss the inspection scope and finding The unresolved items were identified.
Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=IR_05000272/1979001&oldid=5015065"