IR 05000272/1979006
| ML18079A576 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Salem  |
| Issue date: | 04/27/1979 |
| From: | Keimig R, Nornholm L NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML18079A573 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-272-79-06, 50-272-79-6, 50-311-79-14, NUDOCS 7907230570 | |
| Download: ML18079A576 (9) | |
Text
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION OFFICE* OF INSPECTION ANrr ENFORCEMENT 50-272/79-06 Report No. 50-311/79-14 50-272 Docket No. 50-311-D-P~R--7~0---
Region I c
L i cens e No. CPPR-53 Priori ty ----""------...;...._---
Category -----=B-=-1 __ _
Licensee:
Public Service Electric and Gas Company 80 Park Place Newark, New Jersey 07101 Facil it,Y Name:
Salem Nuclear Generating Station - Units l and 2 Inspection at:
Hancocks Bridge, New Jersey_
24, 1979 Inspectors:
date signed date signed Approved bj~ *
¥hob?
.. "
Section Inspection Summary:
Ins ections on Februar 18 - March 24, 1979 Combined Re art No /79-06 and 50-311/79-14 ICiat e ?igTl &!
Unit l Areas Inspected: Routine inspections by the resident inspector of plant operations including tours of the facility and off-normal shift inspections; log and record reviews; and followup on previous inspection items~ The inspections invo-1 ved* *rn* inspector~hours -~y._, the. NRC resident inspecto *
Unit 2 Areas Inspected: Routine inspections by the resident inspector of plant preoperational.. testing including tours of the facility; test program controls; preparedness fdr an operating license; review of pro-posed Technical Specifications; and followup on previous inspection
-
s. The inspections involved 33 inspector-hours by the NRC resident ecto *
lts: One item of noncompliance was identified in one area with
.:....:.r..;;..es:;..:p.:....:.e....:.c..;;..t to Unit l (Infraction - Failure to perform surveillance of rod position indication with deviation alarm inoperable,, Paragraph 4).
No items of noncompliance were identified with respect to Unit {)57°
- DETAILS Persons Contacted Public Service Electric and Gas Company R. Griffith, Site QA Engineer C. Johnson, Startup Engineer S. LaBruna, Maintenance Engineer M. Metcalf, Site QAD A. Meyer, Site QA Engineer E. Meyer, Project QA Engineer H. Midura, Manager - Salem Generating Station F. Schnarr, Station Operating Engineer R. Silverio, Assistant to the Manager J. Stillman, Station QA Engineer J. Zupko, Chief En~ineer The inspector also interviewed other licensee personnel during the course of the inspections including management, clerical, mainten-ance, operations, performance, quality assurance, testing, and con-struction personne.
Status of Previous Inspection Items (Closed) Unresolved Item (272/78-01-03):
Assign cleanliness cla~si fications by syste Administrative Procedure 21, Cleanliness
~nd Housekeeping, Revision 1, was issued February 8, 1979, and includes system-specific cleanliness criteria as Attachment The inspector had no further questions on this ite (Closed) Unresolved Item (272/78-13-01):
Backup method for fuel burnup calculatio The inspector reviewed Station Plant Manual procedure I-2, Refueling, and verified that appropriate reference to fuel burnup calculations is now mad (Closed) Unresolved Item (272/78-13-02):
Incorrect dates for sub-mission of NRC-742 report The inspector reviewed Procedure 1-2.5.7, Semiannual Report and Piece Count, and verified that correct dates for report submission were referenced.
- Unit l *Shift Logs and Operating Records The inspector reviewed the following plant procedures to determine the licensee ~stablished requirements in this area in preparation for a review of selected logs and record AP-5, Operating Practices, Revision 8, August 24, 1977 AP-6, Operational Incidents, Revision 6, February 22, 1979 AP-13, Control of Lifted Leads and Jumpers, Revision 3, February 22, 1979 Operations Directive Manual AP-15, Tagging Rules, Revfsion 0, April 13, 1976 The inspector had no questions in this are Shift logs and operating records were reviewed to verify:~that:
Control room log sheet entries are filled out and initialed; Auxiliary log sheets are filled out and initialed; Log entries i nvol vi rig abnormal. conditiOns *provide :suf-'
ficient detail to communicate equipment status, lockout status, correction and restoration; Log book reviews are being conducted by the staff; Operating orders do not conflttt with Technical Specifi-cation requirements; Incident reports detail no violation of Technical Specifi-
_ cation LCO or reporting requirements; Logs and records were maintained in accordance with Technical Specifications and the procedures in abov *
- The review included the following plant shift logs and operating records as indicated and discussed with licensee personnel:
Log No. 1 - Control Room Daily Log, February 20, 21, 24, March 3, 5, and 6 Log No. 3 - Control Console Reading Sheet, Febnuary 20, 21, 24, March 3, 5, and 6 The inspector had no further questions in this are.
Plant Tour During the course of the'inspection, the inspector made obser-vations and conducted multiple tours of:
Control Room {daily)
Re1ay Room Auxiliary Building Yard Area Rad Waste Building Control Point Turbine Building The following determinations were made:
Monitoring instrumentation. The inspector frequently verified that selected instruments were functional and demonstrated parameters within Technical Specification limit Valve position The inspector verified that selected valves were in position or condition required by Tech-nical Specifications for the applicable plant mod Radiation control The inspector verified by observa-tion that control point procedures and posting require-ments were being followe The inspector identified no failure to properly post radiation and high radia-tion area Plant housekeeping condition Obs~rvations relative to plant housekeeping identified no notable condition Fluid leak No fluid leaks were observed which had not been identified by station pers*onnel with corrective action initiated, as necessar Piping vibratio No excessive piping vibration was noted during the plant tour Control room annunciators. Selected lit annunciators were discussed with control room operators to*JVerify that the reasons for. them were understood and corrective action, if required, was being take By frequent observation through the inspection, the inspec-tor verified that control room manning requirements of 10 CFR 50.54(k) and the Technical Specifications were being me In addition, the inspector observed shift turnovers to verify that continuity of system status was. maintaine Fire protectio The inspector verified t~at selected fire extinguishers were accessible and inspected on schedule, that fire alarm stations were unobstructed, and that car~
dox systems were operabl Jumpers and lifted lead The inspector selected two locations in which approval for jumpers had been docu-mented and verified that the jumpers were in place :between the points specifie *
Technical Specifications. Through log review and direct observations during tours, the inspector verified compli-ance with selected Technical Specification Limiting Con-ditions for Operatio The following parameters were sampled frequently: accumulator levels and pressures, RWST level, BIT temperature, AFST level, rod insertion limits, containment pressure and temperature, valve power lockouts, axial flux differenc In addition, the inspector conducted periodic visual channel checks of protective instrumentatio *
- The following acceptance criteria were used for the above item Technical Specifications Operations Directives Manual Inspector Judgment The following specific observations were made by the inspec-tor and id~ntified promptly to station managemen The inspector noted that several voltmeters, ammeters, and ohmmeters associated with the station batteries and located in the control room had stickers affixed which indicated that they were past due for calibration. Fur-ther investigation revealed that the calibration frequency had been changed from annual to tri-ennial coincident with a turnover of responsiblity from the Maintenance Department to the Performance Departmen All were found to be within the three year calibration interval based on entries in the Inspection Order syste Some original calibration data were not available for revie These items have been reverified and new calibration stickers applie The meters in question are not used to verify operability of the station batterie On March 1, 1979, the inspector noted on crossing from Unit 1 to Unit 2 at the Turbine Building 120 1 elevation security point, that the hand and foot monitor was inop-erable and a portable frisker was provided instea Check-out of Administrative Procedure 24, Radiological Safety Program, Revision 2, states in Section 6.9.3 that per-sonnel should monitor themselves when leaving the statio An operable frisker was immediately provided for this purpos During the course of this inspection period, the Rod Posi-tion Deviation Monitor alarm was inoperable. Technical Specification 4.1.3.1.1 requires that group rod positions be verified at least.once every four hours in this condi-tio On February 21 and March 3, the inspector noted that no rod position information had been recorded between the hours of 0800 and 1600 during power operation with the Deviation Monitor inoperable. This :constitutes non-compliance with Technical Specification 4.1.3.1.l (272/
79-06-01).
The licensee took corrective action including posting of the increased surveillance on the plant status board, informing all operators of the need for the four hour surveillance, and reporting of the missed surveillance in Licensee Event Report 79-22/03 *
Unit 2
No additional instance of missing this surveillance require*
ment has been identified by the inspecto In view of the apparent effectiveness of licensee corrective action, no further response will be required for this ite The inspector had no *fu*rther questions in this are.
Plant Tour The inspector conducted periodic tours of all accessible areas in the plant. During these tours, the following specific
- items were evaluated:
Hot wor Adequacy of fire prevention/protection measures use Fire Equipmen Operability and evidence of periodic inspection of fire suppression equipmen Housekeepin Minimal accumulations of debris and main-
. tenance of required cleanness levels in systems under or fo~lowing t~stin Equipment Preservation. Maintenance of special preserva-tive measures for installed equipment as applicabl Component Taggin Implementation and observance of equip-ment tagging for safety or equipment protectio Maintenanc Corrective maintenance in accordance with established procedure Instrumentation. Adequate protection for installed instru-mentatio Cable Pulling. Adequate measures taken to protect cable from damage while being pulle Communicatio Effectiveness of public address system in all areas of the sit Equipment Control Effectiveness of jurisdictional con-trols in precluding unauthorized work on systems in test or which have been teste '
- Log Completeness of logs maintained and resolution of identified problem Foreign Material Exclusio Maintenance of controls to assure systems which have been cleaned and flushed are not re-opened tq admit foreign materia Securit Implementation of security provisions. Parti-cular attention to maintenance df the Unit 1 protected area boundar Testing. Spot-checks of testing in progress were mad Portions of SUP 20.2, RPS operability check, were wit-nessed by the'inspecto The following specific comments apply to tours made<during this inspection perio Considerable progress was observed in attaining necessary levels of cleanliness and preservation in containment to support core loa The inspector did identify several containment instrument cabinets with construction debris deposited in the bottom of the cabine These were sub-sequently cleane *
The inspector had no further questions in thi~ are.
Operational Readiness CFR 50.57 states that~the issuance of an operating license is, in part, contingent upon a finding that construction of the facility has been substantially completed, in conformity with the construction permit and the application, as amended, the provisions of the Act, and the ru1es and regulations of.
the Commission; and that the facility will be operated in conformity with the applications as amended, the provisions of the Act, and the rules and regulations of the Commissio In order to provide a ba~is for this finding, the inspector is conducting a continuing review of licensee readiness to operate the facility. This review includes, but :is not :.
limited to, the following areas:
Completion of the NRC inspection program to assess con-struction, testing and operational preparedness.
Status of facility operating procedures and personnel trainin Status of all enforcement items and unresolved matter Status of the preoperational test program and the start-up test progra Status of construction activitie Review of proposed facility Techncial Specification Review of licensee outstanding items, particularly those identified for completion or resolution after core loa Implementation of corrective measures for Unit 2 as a result of items identified in Unit 1 from Reportable Occurrences, inspection findings, and IE Bulletin and Circular Operational safety concerns arising from the above reviews will be promptly identified to facility management for resoluti.on prior to the~tnspector reaching a finding of operational re~di nes No specific safety concerns have been identified to dat In addition to the above activities, duning thi.s :inspection period, the inspector attended a meeting held between NRR andthe applicant relating to the proposed facility Technical Specification.
Unresolved Items Areas for which more information is required to determine acceptability are considered unresolve Unresolved items are contained in Paragrah 2 of this report. * Exit Interview At periodic intervals during the course of this inspection, meetings were held with senior facility management to discuss inspection scope and findings.