IR 05000272/1980031
| ML18086A764 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Salem  |
| Issue date: | 02/05/1981 |
| From: | Chung J, Greenman E NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML18086A760 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-272-80-31, NUDOCS 8107080044 | |
| Download: ML18086A764 (13) | |
Text
- ' '
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT Report No. 50-272/80-31 Docket No. 50-272 Region I License No. DPR-70 Priority Category c
Licensee:
Public Service Electric and Gas Company so*park Plaza -15A Newark~ New Jersey 07101 Facility Name:
Salem Nuclear Generating Station, Unit 1 Inspection at:
Hancocks Bridge, New Jersey Inspection conducted:
November 17-21, 1980 Inspectors:
Approved by:
,qj1/jJ~v--l--<-D J. W. Chung, React * Greenman, Chief, Nuclear Support Section No. 2, RO&NS Branch Inspection Summary:
Inspection on*November 17-21, 1980 (Report No. 50-272/80-31)
date signed Areas Inspected:
Routine, unannounced inspection by a region-based inspector of follow-up on prior identified items; administrative controls for facility procedures; conformance to Technical Specifications; verification of temporary and permanent procedure changes in conformance to Technical Specification requirements and licensee procedures; verification of procedural changes in conformance to 50.59(a) and (b)
requirements; verification that checklists and related forms., incorporated the 1atest changes; and contra lrooni and facility tour The inspection involved 29 inspector-hours onsite by one region-based inspecto Results:
Noncompliance:
None in six areas and one in one area (paragraph 4.c(l); Failure to properly implement certain facility procedures and to review other facility procedures and changes thereto.)
- '.
- Persons Contacted Principal Licensee Employees J. Bailey, Lead Engineer DETAILS
- J. D. Driscoll, Chief Engineer (Acting Plant Manager)
P. C. Kordigiel, ISI Engineer R. MacWatters, Senior Shift Supervisor
- M. Metcalf, QA Engineer, Resident Group J. Miller, Performance Engineer F. J. Robertson, Senior Maintenance Supervisor J. P. Ronafalvy, Senior Performance Supervisor, I&C
.*E. Rozovsky, EPD QA Engineer F. Schnarr, Operating Engineer
- J. L. Stillman, Station QA Engineer USN RC
- L. Norrholm, Senior Resident Inspector
- A. J. Mateo, Observer, Phillippine Atomic Energy Commission The inspector also interviewed other licensee employees during the inspection, including Reactor Operators, Technical Support, Maintenance, Performanc~,.and Administrative personnel. - -..-
- denotes those present at the exit intervie.
Licensee Action on Previous Inspection Findings (Open) Inspector Followup Item (80-01-06):
The diesel generator 11overcrank
trip is specified as 550 RPM increasing in Westinghouse Drawing 22666 During a functional test on July 13, 1979 this trip setpoint was recorded at 530 RPM increasing and no further adjustment could be made on the trip setpoint. A licensee representative stated that the diesel generator 11overcrank 11 trip switches were bypassed during emergency operation and the Engineering Department was reviewing the consequences of lowering the trip setpoint. The inspector verified the above by review of Design Change Request Form, l-SC-0341, submitted to the Engineering Department on April 2, 198 Thfs item remains unresolved pending NRC:RI re-inspection of the engineering evaluation package and subsequent actio ~.'..
- Facility Administrative Control Procedures The inspector reviewed on a sampling basis the minutes of Station Operations Review Committee (SORC) meetings and administrative procedures for conformance with Technical Specifications, Section 6, 11Administrative Controls", ANSI Nl8.7-1976, 11Administrative Controls for Nuclear Power Plants 11 and Regulatory Guide 1.33; 11Quality Assurance Program Requirements 11 with emphasis in the established controls for format, content, review, and approval of facility procedures. The review included:
Administrative Procedure (AP) No. 1, Administration Procedure Program, Revision 10, September 8, 198 AP-3, Station Documents, Revision 9, March 22, 1979 *
AP-4, Station Operations Review Committee, Revision 7, October 8, 1980 Performance Department Manual,Section II, Performance Instrumentation, and Control, Revision 9, March 21, 1979 Maintenance Administrative Procedures A-8, Document Control, Revision 0, April 16, 1979; A-11, Maintenance Department Procedure ~lriting/Revision Guidelines, Revision 19, July 9, 1980
Minutes of Station Operations Review Committee (SORC) meetings, 1977-1980 AP-27, Inservice Inspection Program, Revision 2, February 28, 1980 Salem Inspection Order System (AP-10), Computer Print-out, Outstanding Review Overdue List; Report Date, November 6, 1980 No unacceptable conditions were identifie.
Fae i 1 i ty Procedures The inspector reviewed facility procedures and temporary procedure changes, on a random basis to verify the following:
Procedures and changes, if any, were reviewed and approved in accordance with the requirements of the Technical Specifications and the licensee's administrative control The overall procedure. format and content were in conformance with the requirements of the Technical Specification...
Acceptance and operability criteria were in conformance with the requirements of the Technical Specification Procedures, checklists and related forms in plant working files are current with respect to revision and change in conformance with the requirements of the Technical Specification Appropriate Technical Specification limitations had been included in the procedur The applicable checklists were compatible with step-wise inst~uc tions in the procedure.*- Temporary changes were made in conformance with Technical Specifi-cation requirements and the licensee's administrative control The following procedures were randomly selected and reviewe (1) General Operating Procedures
- --
Operating Instruction (OI) I-3.1, Refueling to Cold Shutdown, Revision 6, June 5, 1978 OI I-3.2, Cold Shutdown to Hot Standby, Revision 6, June 5, 1978 Station Plant Manual, Book 2 and Book 4, Operating and Erner-_
gency Instructions, Index/List of Effective Revisions, Revi-sion 4, April 30, 1976 (2) System Operating Procedures OI II-1.3.1, Reactor Coolant Pump Operation, Revision 3, May 3, 1977
- --* QI II-3.3.1, Establishing Charging,. Letdown,: and Seal Injec-tion Flow, Revision 4, June 19, 1978 OI II-3.3.2, Operating the Charging Pumps, Revision 8, June 19, 1978
- --
OI II-3.3.3, Excess Letdown Flow, Revision 8, May 12, 1978
- procedures reviewed for technical adequacy
- OI II-9.3.12, New Fuel Handling Fixture, Revision 5, December 26, 1978
- -- * OI II-16.3.1, Containment Ventilation Operation, Revision 7, October 18, 1978 OI II-4.3.5, Flushing and Draining the Boron Injection Tank, Revision 0, June 19, 1978 OI II-11.3.3, Waste Evaporator - Normal Operation, Revisi.on 3, June 2, 1977 OI II-15.3.2, Personnel Locks and Containment Entry, Revision 2, March ~' 1978
- --
OI III-10.3.1, Auxiliary Feedwater System Operation, Revision 5, March 27, 1979 OI III-13.3.2, Steam Generator Slowdown - Normal Operation, Revision 4, December 6, 1978 OI IV-5.3.2, Battery Charger Operation, Revision 2, February 2, 1979 OI IV-8.3.1, Rod Control System - Normal Operation, Revision 3, November 15, 1978
- --
OI IV-16.3.1, Emergency Power - Diesel Operation, Revision 5, December 20, 1978 OI IV-12.3.1, Emergency Radio Transmission and Receiving Equipment Operation, Revision 2, July 9, 1980
- --
OI V-1.3.1, Service Water - Normal Operation, Revision 6, December 6, 1978 (3) *Emergency Procedures Emergency Instructions (EI) I-4.3, Reactor Trip, Revision 6, September 19, 1980
- --
EI I-4.8, Rod Control System Malfunction, Revision 6, September 5, 1980
- --
EI I-4.13, Loss of Circulating Water/Loss of Condenser Vacuum, Revision 4, March 10, 1980 EI I-4.22, Loss of Residual Heat Removal.Shutdown Cooling, Revision 3, July 17, 1980
- procedures reviewed for technical adequacy
".
(4) Alarm Response Procedures
{a) Annunciator Alarms Alarm Location (AL} B-6-;Service Water Header 11 High Pressure, Revision 1, February 2, 1979 AL B-7, Service Water Header 12 High Pressure, Revision 1, February 2, 1979
- --
AL A-37, Fire Protection C02 High/Low Pressure, Revision 1, February 2, 1979
~AL A-12, lB Vital Instrument Inverter Failure, Fuse
- Blown, Revision 1, February 2, 1979 AL C-1, Containment Fan Coil II Air Flow Trouble, Revi-sion 1, February 15, 1979
- --
AL C-8, Seal Water Injection Filter 1 High aP, Revision 1, February 15, 1979 AL C-20, Spent Fuel Pit High Temperature, Revision 1, February 15, 1979 AL D-16, Rod Insertion Low Low Limit, Revision 1, January 17, 1979
- --
AL D-27, Reactor Sump Overflow, Revision 1, January 17, 1979
- --
AL D-28, Spray Additive Tank Low Level, Revision 1, January 17, 1979 AL E-3, Reactor Coolant High Pressure, Revision 1~
January 17, 1979 AL E-19, Reactor Coolant Lo Pressure Coincidence 1/3, Revision 1, January 17, 1979 AL F-9, Reactor Coolant Lo Pressure Reactor Trip, Revi-sion 1, January 17, 1979
- --
AL G-30, C02 Storage High/Low Pressure, Revision 1, February 2, 1979 AL J-6, 4KV Group Bus lF Diff. or Overload, Revision 1, February 2, 1979
- procedures reviewed for technical adequacy
~.
(b)
Console Alarm Procedures (March 21, 1979)
-- * RHR System; Low CCW Flow, Bezel Drawing No. 202051-1, Revision 2 Hi-Hi Level FW Isolation, Bezel Drawing No. 202051-1, Revision 2
- --
Accumulator 11 (12) Hi-Lo Pressure, Bezel Drawing N, Revision 2
Service Water Start, Bezel Drawing No. 202066-2, Revi-sion 1 Steam Flow Deviation Fs > Fw, Bezel Drawing No. 202051-1, Revision 2 Pressurizer Level High/Low, Bezel Drawing No. 202061-2, Revision 1
- --
Water Treatment System:
Twelve alarm procedures associated with the Water Treatment System, Bezel Drawing No. 202074-3 (Reference Findings Detail 6.b)_
(5) *Maintenance Procedures (a)
I&C IPD-2.7.013, TE-441A/B, #14 Reactor Coolant Loop ~T/Tave Protection Channel IV, Revision 2, August 14, 1979 IPD-14.3.002, Instrument Response Time Test - Master, Revision 2, October 24, 1980 *
IPD-2.9.001, lLT-102, Boric Acid Tank #12 Lev~l Indi-cator and Alarm, Revision 0, October 27, 1976 (Reference Findings Detail 4.c.(l))
(b) Mechanical and Electrical M2D, Fuel Transfer System Operational Test, Revision 3, August 14, 1979 M3T, Uridervoltage and Underfrequency Trip Checks and Time Response Test, Revision 11, September 24, 1980
- procedures reviewed for technical adequacy
,..
M3R, Heat Tracing Testing, Revision 3, March 1, 1979 M6F, No. *11 and 12 S.G.F.P Disassembly (Inspection and Overhaul), Revision 2, January 29, 1979 M6A, CP Seal Disassembly, Inspection, and Repair, Revision 8, December 10, 1979 M8G, Control Rod Position Indicator Coil, Revision 2, March 1, 1979 M8K, CP Flywheel Inspection, Revision 5, November 6, 1978 MlOA, In-core Flux Thimble Retraction and Reinsertion, Revision 1, August 14, 1979 Ml3A(6), WPS Shielded Metal Arc Welding of Butt Joints with Backing Rings in Austenite Stainless Steel (p-8 to p-8), Revision 3, January 3, 1980 (c)
Inservice Inspection Ml?, Maintenance Department In-service Inspection Program, Revision 4, April 27, 1979 M17B, Coded Component and Pipe Support Visual Examination Nuclear Class 1, 2, and 3, Revision 6, August 28, 1980 Ml?D, Pump Surveillance Test Results Analysis, Revision 5, June 4, 1980 (d)
Preventive Maintenance Cards E-210, Procedure M3V, 28 Volt Battery lA/18 Month Battery Service Test E-500, No. 1 Generator Metering and Relaying E-110, SFl Breakers E-110, 11 Station Power Trans. and Neutral Ground Resistor
- procedures reviewed for technical adequacy
9 Findings (1) Technical Specification 6.8 addresses the requirements of plant procedures in that Paragraph 6.8.1 requires written procedures be established, implemented and maintained covering activities recom-mended in Appendix 11A 11 of Regulatory Gui-de 1.33, Revision 2, Feb-ruary 1978; Paragraph 6.8.2 requires each procedure including for-mat changes be reviewed by the SORC prior to implementation and periodically as set forth in administrative procedures; Paragraph 6.8.3 requires the review of "on the spot" procedure changes by SORC within 14 days of implementatio The following are examples of instances where plant written pro-cedures were either improperly implemented or not reviewed:
(a) Administrative Procedure AP-3 requires that the Station Pro-cedures be reviewed at least every two year Contrary to the above, the licensee had neither any objective evidence nor documentation of the procedure review in accor-dance with the administrative procedures. The inspector veri-fied by review of selected procedures that the following pro- *
cedures in the Control Room Master Files had not been reviewed during the last two year review cycl OI II-.-L3.'l,:.Re.v.ision 3, May 3, 1977 OI II-1.3~3, Revision 8, May 12, 1978 OI II-11.3.3, Revision 3, June 2, 1977 OI II-15.3.2, Revision 2, March 8, 1978 IPD-2.9.001, Revision O, October 27, 1976 (b)
(b)
The Index/List of Effective Revisions, Station Manual Books 2 and 4, in the Control Room Master Copies was last reviewed on April 30, 1976, and does not reflect the corresponding revision numbers and dates of the procedures in the Control Room Files, as required by Administrative Procedure AP-1, Paragraph 5.b, Index and List of Effective Page (c) The following procedure revision numbers and dates in the Control Room Files were pencil-changed without any objective evidence of review or corresponding references to SORC review, as required by AP-3, Section 6.0, Control of Station Material ".
OI II-1.3.1: Revision 3, May 3, 1977 was deleted and Revision 4 was entered in the procedure by penci OI II-3.3.2: Revision 7, February 18, 1977-was changed to Revision 8 using a penci (d)
The following on-the-spot permanent changes to procedures were not reviewed within 14 days of implementation by SORC in accor-dance with the Administrative Procedure OI II-3.3.1, permanent change (P-3), May 3, 1979; P-4, May 10, 1979; P-5, May 11, 1979 or V-1.3.1, D-7, April 29, 1979, which was reviewed on November 13, 1979, SORC No. 85-79 OI IV-16.3.1, P-6, September 6, 1980 ($)
Emergency Communication System Operating Instruction IV-1.1, Revision 2, July 9, 1980, had not been reviewed by SORC prior to implementation. This type of procedure is listed in Regulatory Guide 1.33, Appendix A, Item l The licensee representative acknowledged the inspector's findings, and stated that all of the station procedures are being reviewed or revised and would be updated by June 1, 198 The above findings are contrary to the requirements specified in Technical Specifications 6.8.1, 6.8.2, 6.8.3, and Administrative Procedure AP-3, and collectively constitute an item of noncompli-ance (272/80-31-01).
(2) Alarm procedures G-30 and A-37 specified the Fire Protection System C02 pressure low setpoint as 275 psig and 275 psi respectively, while the Technical Specification 3.7.10.3 requires a minimum C02 pressure of 285 psig. A licensee representative stated that the low pressure setpoint had been set conservatively, and therefore meets the Technical Specification requirements; and, that both pro-cedures would be changed by January 1, 1981 to reflect the correct low pressure setpoint of 285 psi in gauge pressure. This item is unresolved pending review of the revised procedures during a subse-quent NRC:RI re-inspection (272/80-31-02). Technical Content of Facility Procedures
- The inspector reviewed facility procedures on a sampling basis, using facility system descriptions, diagrams and technical specifications,.to verify that pro-cedures were sufficiently detailed and contained sufficient technical informa-tion to control tAe operation or evolution as described in Technical Specifica-tions and applicable requirement The procedures reviewed are marked with an asterisk (*) in Paragraph 4 (Facility Procedures) of this repor One inadequacy was identified (Reference Paragraph 4.c.(2)).
I
,r
'
- Procedure Changes* Resulting From License Amendment Licensee Amendments (numbers 13 through 26) were reviewed to verify the applicable changes in Technical Specifications were incorporated in asso-ciated procedures as necessary to reflect the amendment Findings The Console Alarm Procedures for the Water Treatment System, Bezel Drawing No. 202074-3, refer to Technical Specification 3.7.1.5 in their action statements. However, Licensee Amendment No. 25, April 22, 1980, deleted the Secondary Water Chemistry provisions in the Technical Speci-fications. A licensee representative acknowledged the finding and stated that the corresponding alarm procedures would be changed by June 1, 198 The procedures to be changed are:
SG Inlet High pH SG Inlet High Hydrazine SG Inlet Low Hydrazine Hotwell Outlet High Conductivity SG Slowdown High Conductivity Hi/Low Range Condensate Pump High Conductivity SG Slowdown High pH SG Slowdown Low pH SG Inlet Low pH SG Inlet High Dissolved 02 SG Inlet High Conductivity Condensate High Sodium This item is unresolved pending review of the listed procedure revisions during a subsequent NRC:RI inspection (272/80-31/03).
<"
,
12 Checklists and Related Forms Checklists, data sheets, acknowledgement forms, and other forms related to facility operating procedures were reviewed to see that current revisions and on-the-spot changes were poste No unacceptable conditions were identifie.
Changes to Procedures Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.59(a) and (b).
The inspector verified, on a random sampling basis, that changes made to facility procedures were in compliance with 10 CFR 50. 59 ( aJ requi*reinents and that records of these changes were maintained in compliance with 10 CFR 50-.59(b).
No unacceptable conditions were identifie Control Room Observations and Facility Tours The inspector observed Control Room Operations for control room manning, shift turnover and log sheets, and facility operation in accordance with the administrative procedures and Technical Specification requirement Inspection tours of turbfne/generator building and selected protected areas were conducte No unacceptable conditions were identifie Unresolved Items Unresolved items are matters about which more information is required to clarify whether they are acceptable items, items of noncompliance, or devi-ations. Unresolved items were identified and detailed in Paragraphs 4.c.(2)
and.
Entrance and Exit Interviews Licensee management was informed of the purpose and scope of the inspection at the entrance interview, and the findings of the inspection were periodically discussed with the licensee representatives as summarized in the following:
Date November 17, 1980 November 18, 1980 November 19, 1980 November 20, 1980 November 21, 1980 Reportable Details Covered Entrance Interview 4.c.(1).c.(1), 4.c.(2)
4.c.(1), 4.c.(2), 6.b, Exit
- The inspector conducted an exit interview with licensee representatives (denoted in paragraph 1) at the conclusion of the inspectio The licensee acknowledged the inspection findings.