IR 05000272/1986010
| ML18092B131 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Salem  |
| Issue date: | 04/17/1986 |
| From: | Bissett P, Finkel A, Jerrica Johnson NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML18092B130 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-272-86-10, 50-311-86-10, NUDOCS 8604250188 | |
| Download: ML18092B131 (9) | |
Text
,----------
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
REGION I
Report No /86-10 50-311/86-10 Docket No License No DPR-70 *
DPR-75 Public Service Electric & Gas Company P. 0. Box 236 Hancocks Bridge, New Jersey 08038 Facility Name:
Salem Nuclear Generating Station Units 1 and 2 Inspection At:
Hancocks Bridge, New Jersey Inspection Conducted:
March 17-21, 1986 Approved by:
J. Johnson, C~Operational Programs Section, OB, DRS date l[fn t~t d'a te '
date Inspection Summary:
Routine, unannounced inspection on March 17-21, 198 (Report Nos. 50-272/86-10; 50-311/86-10).
Areas Inspected:
Routine unannounced inspection by two region-based inspectors of the maintenance program and associated maintenance activitie Results:
No violations were identifie I I
8604250188 860421 PDR ADDCK 05000272 G
/
DETAILS 1.0 Persons Contacted Public Service Electric & Gas C *R. Beckwith, Senior Staff Engineer, Licensing
- B. Horst, Engineer, Systems Analysis
- M. Levine, Principal Engineer, Engineering
- K. Miller, Assistant General Manager, Salem Operations
- D. Perkins, Manager, Station Quality Assurance
- D. Strong, Maintenance Engineer
- P. White, Maintenance Engineer
- J. Zupko, Jr., General Manager, Salem Operations U.S. NRC T. Kenny, Senior Resident Inspector The inspectors also held discussions with managers, supervisors and other licensee employees during the course of inspection, including operations, technical and administrative personne *Denotes those present at the exit meeting on March 21, 1986.
2.0 Maintenance Organization The Maintenance Manager, who reports directly to the Assistant General-Manager, is responsible for the overall conduct of maintenance activities at both Salem unit Two Maintenance Engineers, one electrical, the other mechanical, each having responsibility for both units, and a common engineering support group, headed by a Senior Engineer, report to the Maintenance Manage Two Senior Supervisors, one for each unit and a Support group, report to the Mechanical Maintenance Enginee A Senior Instrument and Controls (I&C) Supervisor and a Senior Electrical Super-visor, each having responsibility for both units and a Support group, report to the Electrical Maintenance Enginee Several organizational changes have occurred recently that indicate an increased awareness and commitment towards assuring quality during the conduct of maintenance activitie These changes include the formation of a centralized planning group (composed of a daily planning section and an outage planning section), and a systems engineering grou Both of these groups are in place, but are not yet entirely functioning as planned since training is still in progress and appropriate procedures are not in plac The centralized planning group will provide the necessary focal point from which maintenance activities can be planned and coordinated between
- the mechanical, electrical and I&C area Work activity requests can be processed and resultant work packages; including work orders, personnel requirements, tagging requests, radiation exposure permits, tool require-ments, etc., can be identified and assembled by designated planner The system engineering group will be made up of approximately 25 engineers who will be assigned to be knowledgeable of designated system Some of the responsibilities will include the following:
System walkdowns and identification of problems
System performance evaluations
Surveillance test and pump and valve data reviews
Technical reviews of temporary modifications
Maintenance of valve, equipment and room labeling program, and
Technical support for maintenance activitie The primary responsibility of system engineers will be to ensure the operability and maintainability of designated system The inspectors informed the licensee that the planning and engineering groups (once completely established) and their involvement with mainte-nance activities would be subject to review during a future inspectio The inspectors had no further questions at this tim.0 Maintenance Activities 3.1 Administrative Controls Administrative controls were reviewed to evaluate the licensee's program for implementing requirements associated with safety-related maintenance activitie The objectives were to assure that the licensee programs were consistent with the Technical Specifications, Regulatory Guide 1.33, ANSI N18.7 and Appendix B of 10 CFR 5 Documents reviewed are listed in Appendix.2 Program Implementation The inspectors held discussions with the Maintenance Manager and both Maintenance Engineers to evaluate those controls in place to identify, schedule, track, complete and document both preventive and corrective maintenanc Presently both an Inspection Order (IO) and a Work Order (WO) tracking system is in place, but the IO system is being phased out and the WO system will become part of the Managed Maintenance Information System (MMIS).
The MMIS is presently being developed by the licensee and will provide information in the following areas:
Component Historical Information Inventory Control Data Resource Data Recurring Data Maintenance Planning Data Procedures for implementing the MMIS are being prepared by the licensee, and are planned to be issued by April 198 However, full implementation of the MMIS program is not scheduled before mid 198 The scope of the MMIS program appears to encompass the necessary criteria required in the five areas listed abov This program will be evaluated by the NRC during future inspections after its full implementatio The inspector reviewed the records of both random and selected maintenance activities performed on safety-related equipment to verify that -
Required administrative approvals were obtained orior to initiation of work activities; Appropriate approved procedures, instructions and/or drawings were used;
Appropriate post maintenance testing was completed prior to returning equipment to operation;
Hold points were appropriately identified and completed;
Qualified test equipment and tools used were identified;
Procedures and appropriate data sheets were properly completed;
Acceptance criteria were met; and,
Records were assembled, stored, and retrievable as part of the maintenance histor Also, during the course of the inspection, observations were made of the following in-progress maintenance activities:
Coupling alignment for #22 component cooling water pump;
Speed reducer removal and replacement for #21 charging pump;
Limitorque motor operated valve testing utilizing the Motor Operated Valve Analysis and Testing System (MOVATS).
- These observations verified that the following was accomplished:
An approved, up-to-date procedure was use *
The procedure was adequately detailed to assure satisfactory performanc *
Operational personnel were notified prior to and upon completion of the tes *
Properly specified parts and materials were identified for the activit *
Calibrated test equipment was use The inspectors also reviewed those WO's associated with the No. 22 Component Cooling Pump Alignment and the Motor Operated Valve Analysis and Test System (MOVATS) for valve 2CS16 to assure that the requirements of the work order (WO) system were being complied wit In both instances the WO's were in accordance with the station's progra Special training was given to the maintenance personnel on the MOVATS progra In addition, technical support was provided by engineers from the MOVATS corporation during the testing of the licensee's Motor Operated Valves (MDV).
The inspector reviewed the. qualification summary records for the electrical and mechanical maintenance personnel performing mainte-nance on the No. 22 Component Cooling Pump Alignment and Limitorque
'Motor Operated Valve 2CS1 Test procedures and training courses that were required by the maintenance personnel before performing their task on the above items are listed in Appendix The inspec-tor also reviewed the MOVATS briefing information given to the maintenance personnel on March 19, 1986 by their superviso The I&C, Electrical, and Mechanical maintenance sections appear to be adequately staffed with 8 to 10 persons assigned to each Superviso No unacceptable conditions were observe.0 Measuring and Test Equipment (M&TE) Program The Measuring and Test Equipment (M&TE) Program was reviewed to assess the licensee's compliance with the requirements of the FSAR and the documen-tation listed in Appendix A random examination of M&TE equipment maintained by the maintenance department disclosed that the equipment sampled was within calibration dates listed on the stickers attached to the The records indicating the location of calibrated equipment were maintained-in an up-to-date status by the Maintenance Departmen *
During the MOVATS testing of MOV2CS16 and No. 22 Component Cooling Pump work, the inspector verified that the test equipment used for these tests was within the calibration period, and that the files identified their location and date of wor The M&TE area was an access-controlled area with controlled temperature and humidit Access to the storage area was locked and required approval for entranc The inspector reviewed the M&TE recall system and the qualification records of the M&TE technicians to determine their compli-ance to site procedures and FSAR criteria~ The files which contain the equipment history files and the qualification records of the personnel were in an up-to-date statu No violations were identifie.0 Technical Specification Revisions (T.S.)
The inspector examined the method employed by the licensee to assure that Technical Specification changes affecting the Maintenance Program for this site are identified and assigned to the proper organization for imple-mentatio The licensee's Technical Department Staff identifies depart-ments that are affected by a TS chang The departments are notified of a change on form AP-3 The*assigned departments are required to revise or issue the necessary documentation to address the required chang Maintenance procedure A-10, Revision 8, 11Technical Specification Surveil-lance Program 11 specifies the action to be taken by the Maintenance Depart-ment when an AP-30 form is receive The inspector reviewed the latest Technical Department AP-30 assigned to the Maintenance Department, and verified that the requirements were reflected in maintenance documen-tatio Reference to the Inspection Order (IO) system in procedure A-10, as the method used by the Maintenance Department to schedule TS surveillance requirements, is being changed to a Work Order (WO) syste At the time of this inspection both the !O's and WO's were being used to perform TS surveillance requirement No violations were identifie.0 Spare Parts Program The licensee has implemented a component data base system that has iden-tified an inventory of parts on han The Maintenance Department is preparing inputs into the MMIS previously discussed in paragraph 3.0 of this repor Maintenance and Plant Betterment is reorganizing procurement and material control to assure that spare parts are identified in suffi-cient quantities to meet the T.S. and FSAR commitment As discussed in paragraph 5.0, this program is planned to be part of the MMIS system which is scheduled for completion by mid 198 *
At the time of this inspection, the new spare parts program control was not fully implemente No violations were identifie.0 Quality Assurance/Quality Control Interface (QA/QC)
QA/QC has onsite personnel who independently monitor daily station activi-tie Discussions were held with the Station QA Manager, Quality Control Supervisor and other QC engineers in order to determine the extent of QA/QC involvement with maintenance activitie Up until the latter part of February 1986, QC had routinely reviewed all non-safety-related work orders to verify their proper safety classificatio However, a recent review of this practice indicated that few, if any, misclassifications were being found during the QC WO revie The licensee attributed the significant improvements in WO classification to the improved Master Equipment List (MEL), including its* accuracy and issuance as a controlled document; and an increased emphasis in training of the proper use of the MEL for personnel who classify or review work order Thus, the licensee determined that there was no longer a need for station QA review of non-safety-related work order The inspector reviewed the memo from the Station QA Manager which terminated their involvement in this process.
-Also noted during the discussions was the recent formation of a Task Force whose primary focus was to evaluate how station QC engineers might be more effectively used during the conduct of station activitie Much of a QC engineer 1s time is devoted to Inspection-Hold-Points (IHP) during the conduct of maintenance activitie *
The Task Force is to evaluate other alternatives to having QC Engineers be part of the IHP process, i.e., utilizing qualified first line super-visors responsible for the work activity instead of QC Engineer Final Task Force recommendations and subsequent actions are not due for comple-tion until mid or late 198 Licensee action in this area will be reviewed by the NRC during future inspection The inspector had no further questions at this tim.0 Facility Tours The inspectors conducted 11walk through 11 inspections of selected plant areas and observed work-in-progress to verify that facility operation was in accordance with the station procedures and Technical Specification requirement Areas inspected included:
Control Rooms
- Component Cooling Water Pumps and Heat Exchangers
Charging Pumps The inspectors noted acceptable plant housekeeping conditions, as evidenced by the followi.ng:
Equipment maintenance (i.e., painting, minimal leakage, etc.)
- Housekeeping postings
Equipment identification
Identification of valve packing leakage by the use of the Equipment Malfunction Identification Tag System (EMITS)
Collection of valve packing leakage The inspectors noted that a conscientious effort has been underway to upgrade and maintain the cleanliness of systems and components for both unit The painting effort also includes color coding of equipment to differentiate between the two units, and includes pumps, valves, switch-gear compartments, etc.; blue for Unit-1 and yellow for Unit-.0 Management Meetings The inspectors met with the licensee representatives denoted in Para-graph 1 on March 21, 1986 and summarized the purpose, scope and findings of the inspectio No violations were observed, however, there was some concern in reference to the time that elapsed prior to the inspector's gaining unescorted ac-cess to the site on March 17, 198 The difficulties encountered were brought to the attention of licensee management on March 17, and restated at the exit meeting on.March 21, 198 Corrective actions have been taken, which should prevent this problem from occurring during future inspection At no time during the inspection was written material provided to the licensee by the inspector *
APPENDIX 1 DOCUMENTS REVIEWED Final Safety Analysis Report, Sectio.n 1 Regulatory Guide 1.3 ANSI N45.2, 11Quality Assurance Program Requirements for Nuclear Power Plants
ANSI N.18.7-1976, 11Administrative Controls and Quality Assurance for the Operational Phase of Nuclear Power Plants 11 IEEE STd. 498-1980, 11Standard Requirements for the Calibration and Control of Measuring and Test Equipment Used in the Construction and Maintenance of Nuclear Power Generating Stations Station Administrative Procedures:
Administrative Procedure (AP)9, 11Maintenance Program 11 AP 10, 11 Inspection Order Program
AP 11, 11 Record Retention Program 11 AP 20, 11 Nonconformannce Program
AP 22, 11Calibration of Measuring and Test Equipment 11 AP 31, 11Station Housekeeping Program 11 Maintenance Department Manual Administrative Procedures:
A-10, 11Techn i ca 1 Speci fi cation Sur.vei 11 ance Program 11 A-20, 11Maintenance Department Preventative Maintenance Program 11 A-21, 11Maintenance Department Testing and Retesting*Notification Program 11 A-26, 11Maintenance Department Housekeeping Guidelines 11 Maintenance Department Maintenance Procedures:
M3L-l, 11 L imitorque Maintenance Surveil 1 ance and MOVA TS Test i ng 11 M3Z, 11 Electrical Trouble Shooting and Repair 11 M6D, 11Coupling Alignment 11 MllE, 11Mechanical Equipment Trouble Shooting and Repair 11 M6G, 11 Centrifugal Charging Pump Repairs 11 11Motor Operated Valve Analysis and Test System (MOVATS) 2000 11 11Motor Operated Valve Analysis and Test System Signature Analysis 11 Operations Department Procedures:
Operations Department (OD)-8, 11Tagging Operations 11 OD-10, 11 Removal and Return of Safety-Related Equipment 11 OD-17, 11 Housekeeping 11