IR 05000275/1986030
| ML17083B835 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Diablo Canyon  |
| Issue date: | 11/14/1986 |
| From: | Clark C, Richards S NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION V) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML17083B834 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-275-86-30, 50-323-86-28, IEIN-85-071, IEIN-85-71, NUDOCS 8612090170 | |
| Download: ML17083B835 (16) | |
Text
U. S.
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
REGION V
Report Nos. 50-275/86-30 and 50-323/86-28 Docket Nos. 50-275 and 50-323 License Nos.
DPR-80 and DPR-82 Licensee: Pacific Gas and Electric Company 77 Beale Street Room 1451 San Francisco, California 94106 re p/~g Inspector:
Facility Name:
Diablo Canyon Units 1 and
Inspection at:
Diablo Canyon Site, San Luis Obispo County, California i
Inspection Conducted:
October 20-29, 1986 I
C. Cl k, Reactor Inspector Date Signed Approved by:
S.
ards, C
e Eng neering Se tion
D e
gned
~Sammaa Ins ection durin the eriod of October 20-29, 1986 (Re ort Nos. 50-275/86-30 and 50-323 86-28)
t Areas Ins ected:
This reactive unannounced inspection consisted of a review of open items, selected areas of the program plan, procedures, and records pertaining to the Diablo Canyon Inservice Testing Program for pumps and valves.
During this inspection, inspection procedure 92701 was covered.
Results:
Of the specific items inspected, there were no violations or deviations identified.
8b12090170 Bb1118t PDR ADOCK 05000275 PDR,
') -E 0(
f,"<)EE SE, E) E, E
I'ler.Ef ii.li)E>>
ITC" )"'
'E
E ) f Edl ~
)hi Jf (
h, E
E E)I)
'i t>,)')Q E
f)+'.)" (
h il. )
E)
'X4~'9))'<
E E
,I - EE&
~ E'E
) E>" ~C)
E SN~);l,,'0-(),':
') >gE ':") ~r)
)).E Il f WCEQ hy I
)
>>) )"'~ ") ))'))"I l)""* - ~'~If" i h>>'t. 'lf f') l'I'3
)E) <<E)%t-h
~
E,f
',)jan~'E)
) g))E) hl I
JE fE.)
)
' )'.
')
.E i E
"~ '<<,) )
', >'X'~>>
)f'fE."")"','
'.;f'.".
<)q)~hfdf)Pi,
)IE )
E
li ger)
I E,hE Il E
-
~
E
DETAILS 1.
Persons Contacted
- R. Thor'nberry, Plant Manager
- D. Vosburg, Engineering Manager
- D. Taggart, Director, Quality Support QA
- L. Womack, Operations Manager
- D. Miklush, Maintenance Manager M. Angus, Work Planning Manager
- C. Eldridge, Quality Control Manager T. Grebel, Regulatory Compliance Supervisor R. Flohaug, Quality Support Supervisor S. Benton, Sr.
Power Production Engineer J. Hjalmarson, Power Production Engineer P. Derks, Power Production Engineer D. Cramins, Senior Quality Control Inspector R. Rogalski, Quality Control Specialist
.
A. Young, Quality Assurance Auditor C. Marlett, Quality Support Analyst
- Denotes those personnel in attendance at the exit meeting on October 24, 1986.
The inspector also held discussions with other licensee and contractor employees involved with inservice testing activities.
2.
Licensee Action on Previousl Ins ector Identified Items a.
(Closed)
Follow-U Item No. 50-275/85-21-01:
Administrative Procedure is Weak in Definin the S ecific Res onsibilities of the En ineerin Staff Controllin the Inservice Testin (IST) Effort The licensee Administrative Procedure (AP) Number AP C-80, Revision 1, "Inservice Inspection Program" was weak in defining the specific responsibilities of the engineering staff controlling the IST effort.
A licensee Action Request (A/R) number A0001110 was initiated July 11, 1985 to request correction of the weakness.
Revision 2 to procedure AP C-80 was approved October 16, 1985, to provide additional instructions to aid in defining the specific responsibilities.
The A/R was evaluated completed on June 16, 1986.
The inspector reviewed revision 2 to procedure AP C-80, and found it appeared to provide the additional instructions necessary to resolve t'e concern addressed in this follow-up item.
This item is close Ti Jlk<<
~ ->>
>7 f
J>>U ii...
II
'I ) ir'>>fh',
f P)'f)f J?
F>V
h f If I: UUU)
fl)
f<<
- ~ >>U w>> g>)( f)
N I
~ ~ FN'>I)'UF
. 'ff.'.U jjh<<PT,
~ 7,\\w fy)
~
V Uff "+ f
w" 'f)
f P
h hw
>
f Ihy h ~
NU ]
y g,
'
~)Nf P
e
<<'IITWJU J '~hffe>>
'
",
')UJ<<h
~,'PJJ i
J )
h IU I.h ".UC>
mf" ff~ <<+
I >> 'hfyk e""
" h>>'Jf N)
" f ew
',"
) PJ)
f we
~ ~'f }j 7 hff hi f>>:~
'
<<lj
~ J
~
e P.
I'
I P '-II.) )t (p h
I
>
'
J
)
F 7"y '" 'f, liih '",
'>>>>>>
T>> ">>
J yp
>
))I
>>
'%'>
g I)
"N fh'I
<< 'i'w e
I i"
e
- <<,,h)
frw>>)
)hr') Iwr>),
I, '.<<h"l $
,
Ii 4) N" I')P<<
J hhl w
N'
~ >>
~,
hi rhf,,fi 7'Uy.jf
~f)
N
, ) JfJ);)"f) f, f
)'U
)
Uwl)','"+, ',,'N,,)<<)
~
"
N 7 ~
f
',I PU'hp
>
P
'f ')
I
>I J.r>
"
I
)
) h'e
>'h>P
'
<<NUU I 'T J
'7 N
J
~>>ft h>f<<'If) P'U'g
)
T
'.'7'i(f '
" Jfh')
"'"
.'lf (
I)Ufi'r=h JT'P
>> )
'
7>>" f"
"
'
N "7 Ferw) J>)
>" ~
>> I, II) $ ',
i, f?i P
Fwp,,i
>I
)r>%
',",",
>
)
ll ')'
i
) I'>h J (f'> '7>)
hh
'
7" " h)r
'l F Ii
)
)
~
>
U)>>U>
he
'P (
'
ll J U>f 7>
"<<7 ~ 7, o
>I;Uli)f f
w h '<<e)'huff")'N J
I'fk'1"'~ff J
'y>>
h 7,)
'w+
()$
')
ii ff J
y>ih I )f,i
>>I'
UUUJ J
'<<l)>>
I h f U) >
~ J
<<
'l)i ~ ~J)w f ),
TFU 7, frt'>>lg,h>>r)~f).,
<
>e b. (0 en) Follow-U Item No. 50-275/85-21-02: Pum Routine Surveillance Test Acce tance Criteria Did Not S ecif "Alert Ran e" Criteria for Pum Bearin Tem eratures or Identif Source of Reference Values The licensee Plant Manual Volume 9, Temporary Procedure and Instructions,Section III, Table II B-1 (and associated tables) Revision 11, entitled "Pump Routine Surveillance Test Acceptance Criteria" did not specify "Alert Range" criteria for pump bearing temperatures as described in the applicable ASME Code,Section XI; Subsection IWP-3210 and Table IWP-3100-2. Also, the Individual Pump Data Tables did not identify the source of the listed reference values, e.g. test procedure and date. E A licensee Action Request (A/R) Number A0001112 was initiated July 11,'985 to follow this item. On July ll, 1986 a licensee representative answered the subject A/R with the following statement, "The data sheets are not the proper place to put information such as test dates. This information is already contained in the pump acceptance criteria calculations, All of 'the primary system pumps now have alert limits for bearing temperatures." The subject A/R was evaluated completed on July 17, 1986. ASME Code Section XI, Subsection IWP-3210 and Table IWP-3100-2, reference a note (3) for the bearing temperature (T ) under the alert range low and high values. Note (3) states "kb shall be within the limits specified by the owner in the record of tests (IWP-6000) The inspector reviewed selected sections of the latest issue of Table IIB-1 (and associated tables) revision 12, and found the following: (1) The licensee has specified alert high bearing temperature values for individual primary system pumps, which are degrees Fahrenheit below the action high bearing temperature values. (2) The licensee has not specified an alert range for the secondary pumps in the same tables. (3) The bearing temperature reference values listed in Table T-llB-5, Revision 3, dated June 26, 1986, were not the current March 14, 1986 values identified in. the pump acceptance criteria calculations, maintained by the Power Production Engineering Group. It appears that when this latest table revision was generated, that reference bearing temperature values from a previous test/table were used, and not checked against the latest reference test data. The action high bearing temperature values did not change. (4) Table T-llB-13, Revision 0, dated May 9, 1984 lists vibration values in units of velocity (in/sec) for auxiliary saltwater I 'p 4",I <)I't<<,.air If Ia)'7 F'. I> I > 4 jw'y ),, I"')',' ', i)J>><<ri )r7 V I W'l V JI f I Jt) ) I~ If lft )>l <<7'rr i'a I' ,r F >j 4 ytl' >>I ttlf I i ) r <<V I t ri, "," rr WI>>I 'I <<W I) "'1 4>lr fi 'I << ),,'4 ,))) y Pl i' 4 rr'It' " '.",,q r; <<ra, ~ rv'vv>"4'I ~ > ~ I m ~) ~ )>>vr a r I, I JI I I 4';'," ~ <<I"' ag ril C<<r ~., il >v tit n << ~ I I y If W << 'I " >>4 I y ~ t ' I, It I r ry 'J '<<g r ,<< rrh I ft ty I' il >t II," > "- .",I l ' jag F ~ I ) ra,", ~ ) "r, V I '1 Q,I , ~7<< I<<y i III , ~ v' ya) - I I-IF>j'Ii I 4 4) I' f,h, " ly>J'<<Ill >' ) 'a r I,fl) i yf)) I If It F >, ".-)a j I 7 i-rett "t .ll 4 h ,ra 4 ~ a Ii I r II%>> I-lf QC7,<< il ~ I t n ~ I y<<P' > ' 'f,r.<<)I >J i <<Ik v< '7>>f<<JJ W J I' I a ('a>" I I, v, l'> v I ~ r I'r ' r W '~ F ti<< ~ 'tlh P'g . 'g>> ~ ":Irf JI, , I'r , rh, vf yv) yr rf 'l EDW'f~ Ja p ~ WIJ I '4 << II> 'I '," "'. X ' J CI If ~ pump l-l, while table T-llB-14, Revision 1 dated June 6, 1986 lists vibration values in mila for auxiliary saltwater pump 1-2. Tables T-11B-20 and -21 for fire water pumps O-l and -2 lists vibration values in velocity (in/sec). Since the licensee has stated recently that they will measure/evaluate. displacement vibration amplitude (mila) for all pumps in the IST program, it appears the subject tables need to be changed. (5) The reference flow rate in Table T-11B-13 is not in agreement with the pump acceptance criteria calculations maintained by the Power Production Engineering group. The above discrepancies were identified to licensee representatives. This item will remain open until the licensee has reviewed and updated the subject tables to ensure that the current test acceptance criteria is provided. c ~ (0 en) Follow-U Item No. 50-275/85-21-03: Procedure AC-Pl to 17, Revision 2 Data Did Not A ear to be Well Or anized Catalo ued Data in Procedure AC-Pl to 17, Revision 2, "Acceptance Criteria for Pump Routine Surveillance Test" did not appear to be well organized/catalogued, and had not been updated to reflect the current reference values provided in volume 9 for the auxiliary feedwater pumps. The licensee agreed to review and revise as necessary. A licensee action request'A/R) number A0001114 was initiated July ll, 1985 to follow this item. On April 8, 1986 a licensee representative answered the sub)ect A/R with the following statement "No changes required. AR can be closed". Subject A/R was evaluated completed April 14, 1986. Since there are still some unanswered questions on follow-up item numbers 50-275/85-21-02, -04, -05 and -06, this item will remain open. d. (0 en) Follow-U Item No. 50-275/85-21-04: Review of Surveillance Test Procedures (STP) Identified Five Items of Concern During the original IST inspection of STP's, five items of concern were identified which the licensee agreed to review and make changes 'ecessary to resolve the concerns. The licensee identified three action request (A/R) documents issued July Ll, 1985 on some of the concerns, they are noted below. I (1) A/R number A0001115 addressed the concern that there was no 'provision for a summary of pump corrective actions. On April 9, 1986 a licensee representative answered this A/R with the following statement "new pump record data sheets have been placed in pump record folders which contain remarks section for entering this information", and it was evaluated completed on '=, 'ay 2, 198 ~ I I WW fj" ) j" ) ~ I" jl,') 'I P~,W a' ~ 1 I ', 'ttwtj I' ~wyI, ~ jj, )y"
- ,F WF
')III y 4'.V <<, F f ,, te)) ,) '" I"' IIt I FWW W e
- 'I 1 h j
lt, I WW.. ye,w W h lt ~ -( e F I yyj jt j., W II I I F)k Ij 14>I"FI e/ ~ wt tl I'\\ ,Wjj y')'W I tt 'll 'I W jj)J II p y I W Wet 'l Ij 0 '3 y I 4' W '<<4 > '., ) wwWj'Jte W. I w,el WWIF t F ') Wy ',I je, ~ . 4)" ! ')4)ef 4, I W fyt .1 W W e I ..yX. Wl FW ' V ) y ~.) t ~ > g)lj' IJ V F W) a "IFII ~ '. y F tj I I I I'jlejy I ytty Ilye) F ' F N E I Wl IIW, e 'Iy') ~ ~ WWFFP ~ jl',) -y III y I I I ( 4 I ) 1 f I ~ ~ I ye 'y F) II Il,ll,f I ., k<y-e ) IIW)WWI,WWWW 'IF e 1 Wtl jt II I. FIIF I I y ll \\' W)>> " I F' ~ Wll'W I I I W",I Il IWpg e ~, y Wlllj " II I , y W 4) p I y 4F4 14 ) ~ 1 t I 1'J " I'I 'Jtjy ) y'1 W, "'W ,'K et" llj, f~g t ,Ih tt, 1'I w H ",' The inspector noted that the new data sheets were not in all pump folders, such as component cooling water pump 1-2 (STP P-SB), which had test data recorded from June 13, 1986, July 27, 1986 and September 21, 1986 tests on the original pump inservice test record sheet. A licensee representative stated that in addition to the new pump record data sheets they consider that the pump maintenance records/equipment history cards were another summary of pump corrective action, which would soon be available in the Plant Information Nanagement System (PIMS). The current accessibility of the summary of pump corrective actions, requires additional clarification. (2) A/R number A000118 addressed the concern that pump test procedures did not specify any tolerance for establishment of system flow rates used to determine and verify acceptable differential pressure values. On April 9, 1986 a licensee representative. provided an initial response, that stated "This information should not be contained in the pump data sheets/pump procedures. It, should be contained in Vol. 9 of the'lant manual." On July ll, 1986 another licensee response stated, "A11 the primary system pumps have tolerances for flow in vol. 9 data sheets,", and was evaluated completed on July 17, , 1986. The licensee replies to this A/R did not address the status of'secondaiy system pumps in the volume 9 data sheets. I (3) A/R number A0001119 addressed the concern that valve stroke timing'rocedures did not have a specific 'recaution/requirement to take data, on the first operation of the valve. On July,ll, 1986 a licensee representative answered this A/R with the following statement "STP V-3 has been revised to include a precaution against pre-cycling the valve before taking test data". The inspector reviewed STP V-3, Revision and verified the, licensee has resolved this concern. The licensee did not identify any A/R's addressing the remaining two concerns of this item, that is, the scheduling of safety and relief valve tests, and leakage rate trending of all applicable reactor coolant system pressure isolation valves. NRR is reviewing the last concern, noted above and the first will,be, reviewed after this first refueling outage. This item will remain open until all the concerns identified above, have been. resolved. (0 en) Follow-U Item No. 50-275/85-21-05: Review of Pum IST Records Identified Discre ancies The licensee agreed to review the identified discrepancies and take the necessary actions required to evaluate and resolve the discrepancies. The licensee identified two action request (A/R) documents issued July 11, 1985, to resolve the identified discrepancie t')HH r H, ~ Hf 4 J VV"1 f )Hi ~ H ' f H,(H ) 'rr i' t HI>> b',J ."I')' V H) I It<<>>") V 1 N'll" W I t>> ) '1 H 1 t I' 'y">>'- '", ~ 'l tt'H) l r ,<<V )till H ~>>ff f r't ) ~ l I, if 'N i' Hf f 'g II>>II ' t j I' 1'r 111 W) ) 1' lfi'II t , Wl, tr>>l' t IHHV7 Vt ') 7H>> W t7 'Ht >>fV g t I) iV) + ~ - fl 7 '5~)HH,H )) 7)')1 .'1 ' I 1 tt>>) tt t I ~ I ~7,, ) )j hj W 1 j Ht <<IH<<m )f<<H
- tr )WW
~ ' 'it>> ) ,' "1 "'I>>t>>H) f.'f I jf '$ VW )I) ) I H ) ft .V)>>f) J ~ W">> ', f <<flan '" V "~'H 1 l>>'llH) << '1>> l," i'r, If.",1 r t ) " '. HH)f)IH f 1')'." ', H 1 '1,) '. f tf41)r,")f,',H)X"") )>>. /'l 1/lt "jff l >>J'HVH .I V'f>> W)"," ,),", ) f'f 1 1 I ' I, tl 1) 1, Ill ', ll ~ HH t 1 tlr ~ >> ,, H, H 1 f .rl 1 ~', Hf* I ')"Hit( 'H. V 1 f I 'H '7 itll-1 HHII I'W Hl fjf V Wr) HH 7, H A/R number A0001122 addressed the item that pump inservice test records did not include reference valves nor indicate the person entering the data or the date of encoding. On April 9, 1986 a licensee representative placed an initial answer on this A/R that stated "reference values are shown in volume 9 of the plant manual and the acceptance criteria calculations.... The power production engineer that reviews the data sheet also enters the trending data on the pump record per the data reduction section of the procedure. The power production engineer then signs the data sheet, so a record of the person entering the data does already exist." The data sheet discussed above, is the new one issued after the initial inspection. This A/R was evaluated completed on May 2, 1986. During this inspection, the inspector found examples of where the reference values/data of volume 9 did not agree with the acceptance criteria calculations/data maintained., in the power production engineering group green book. From review of the applicable IST records in the time available, the inspector could not identify which of the above documents was used to evaluate the latest test data. Test data appeared to be within the high and low action limits, where applicable, of both sets of acceptance criteria. This area will require additional review, in a future inspection. (2) A/R number A0001124 covered other discrepancies investigated by the licensee, but will require additional review in a future inspection. A/R number A0001126 covered the item on SX pump no. 2 bearing temperature surveillance. After the original IST inspection, the licensee performed bearing temperature surveillances on May 18, 1985 and February 19, 1986. This A/R was evaluated completed May 6, 1986. It appears the licensee has taken appropriate action to resolve this item and the inspector has no additional concerns on this item. ) (0 en) Follow-U Item No. 50-275/85-21-06: Review of Valve IST Records Identified Discre ancies The licensee agreed to,r'eview the identified discrepancies and resolve them. The licensee identified two action request (A/R) documents issued July 11, 1985 to, resolve the"discrepancies. A/R number A0001127 addressed 'the valve PCV-20 stroke time and the question. of "new ba'seline",, entries on test record summary sheets; this was answered August'1, 1986 and evaluated completed March 28, 1986., It was n'oted that the above A/R dat'es do not agree, and will require a change. The licensee has identified that a nuclear plant problem report (NPPR) 'C1-84-RS-P0004 was written on valve PCV-20 unacceptable seconds stroke time, requiring repair and retest. The retest was acceptabl htk'$<<'4 7ki 4 >>IJC] grt ) ')>> tk'f>> 7 i' I I >> g ) t '4>>, ~ 4 It )S 4 r '
r) g 1h r ) I >> t >>,4)g>> 'I)1 ', ) "~4: '", >>Vr<< U>>) ~ ' 'I it) <) ','$ <<).X '4) y I"7 ) li lt.>>4 I ~I~ 4 I,'t $ rtk UU) 4, t,f) XU'), t ttl J II rhk I >>4 4 <<!I' ~ ',)r ~ ~ h<<,rr "'!. .4*ltrf '<< 4 >>i) ) X j>>kt '" 'I I rl 't j-,( 4, ~ ~ . I l>>g r'.,t', 7,, )(Uv I 7 l4 i) 4 ~, trg I'1 Vkr<< ) <<7 t 4 rll I r'li',I,!I 4 I l Cr,,', I,' ntq ~ l, '7 )77'<< 'j lr ~ >>)f I
L <<he 't h) 4) t),IQF, xg'h fit >> )'7 I I II I ' r rt r,) tl($ ~ ". ),I 4$ )7". r V II) I II Vgt V 4 ,,<<1 '4 II l ='r,frk 4.<<t.)i 'j K- ~ >> II I I V "I ))) 7>>," ,I gt It $ rglth 44 I)) I I II '1)N t Iv 4 4 ', ~.J- ) A<<hh)N >> it r 141 I lt 4 I') !44th rg I 4 I,'tl )>>! t r1 ) It >>',-"47>>$ ~ I v Ult4 <<I' $r) T fl ' U,l>>I!$'PP ks) "i).X!t/) 7 fd.t )-.. >>r t) ' r~ I I I I The answer to this A/R did not address the question of entering "new baseline" without referencing a nuclear plant problem report or other technical justification. (2) A/R number A0001127 addressed the plotting of valve leakage rates for trending, and was still open October 23, 1986. The inspector reviewed new forms used to plot valve leakage for valves tested per STP's V-2J, -4B, 3S2, -600, -V3R1, and found that this latest plotting appeared to be an improvement and up to date. Since there are still some questions on this item, it will require additional review during a future inspection. g. In the summary of the original IST inspection report, number 50-275/85-21, the inspectors identified that "the adequacy of procedural guidelines and the implementation of requirements by engineering needs to be evaluated and upgraded." The licensee stated they would review the IST program and make any changes necessary. A/R number A0001129 was issued July 11, 1985 to address this review. On July 11, 1986 a licensee representative identified . on this A/R, that "The IST program was reviewed in detail in December 1985, and several procedural discrepancies were found....numerous other procedural problems, not resulting in missed surveillances were also found". This A/R was evaluated completed July 17, 1986, without identification of what management plans, were for corrective actions to make any changes necessary to ensure the IST program met all applicable requirements. The inspector. did not find documentation of the corrective actions required or taken as a result of the above December 1985 review. During this inspection, the inspector identified several changes/improvement's in the IST program, but it appears additional management attention is required to effectively implement the site IST program. Management involvement in establishment of a plan for improving the IST program, will be reviewed in future inspections. Follow-U on Licensee ualit Assurance and ualit Control Involvement With the IST Pro ram, Since the Start of Unit 1 Commercial 0 eration. on a. The quality support group identified two surveillance reports on surveillance of IST activities, these were reviewed by the inspector. This group is planning on increasing its surveillance activities in this area, in the future. b. The quality control department identified approximately thirty two surveillance reports, covering IST activities. Twenty-six of these reports were available for review by the inspector during this inspection. Some reports had valuable findings (where no A/R was written) and observations/recommendations. However the inspector could not identify a formal licensee program for review and evaluation of the findings (where no AR was written) and , IP Ii I I g I 1 f t yp I') t , f(tj II't LN ! E,lyy, 4 I', It Y, NP 71II I IIEF (II f N ', 1)'I I'IN+ '"I, I.l " ','.'f) 4 Am 4 II EI) II ~ '1 1 4 EN( I "1 l"' I I(. 4 IF I', I! y hf >>'II II 'N$ 7 ~I't IIFN ( f if ( I I ~ ( I*( I h II, I I I Ef f ".II I, ~ 14': Nl( ~ I k 4 y I l tilt f I E yp 4 ~ t Lt ~ II ~ II tl 4 ~ 4 II tl Wy l f( I' I If I r ll Wljf I I, II! 'I II II% N'I I P I I ,1 I(t ~ ( lf EI ~, Nr,m fm I" t 7 t(t I,'! It P,m" "NF 'I f il IIE
- N 4 1
'll ) lf ','C ! I '.N '1 Nt1 I lt I J Y rm. Y tt ) jrw3 ) I I > 1',.I "1tff, ' f.N tf II' m,ftf
- (>~
y W,I I Fgfm EN( 'WIN ~ 't 4, Elf / t fl I I P I'lfy lf1 Ig( fc observation/recommendations. The licensee follow-up on the above items will be reviewed in a future inspection. II '1 I 4. Follow U on IE Information Notice No. 85-71: Containment Inte rated Leak Rate Tests for Units 1 and On August 13, 1985 the licensee issued A/R number A0004488 to revise procedure STP M-7, "Surveillance test procedure containment integrated leakage rate test (ILRT), Type A". On April 2, 1986, the following statement, was added to the subject A/R, "This revision should take into account ISE Notice 85-71". As of October 23, 1986 this A/R is still open and STP M-7 has not been revised. I'he inspector held a discussion with the licensee representative who had recently been assigned the lead for the next ILRT; he stated that the IE information notice would be factored into the next revi'sion of STP M-7. The revision is scheduled to be issued in the first quarter of 1987, for the Unit 2 ILRT. The inspector met with licensee management representatives denoted in paragraph 1 on October 24, 1986. The scope of the inspection and the inspector's findings were discussed. The inspector identified that additional information gathered during this inspection still had to be reviewed, and any findings would be included in this repor A ~ ' r <<I<<P C)<<y<<<< ' << '>> q)<<4 r, <<tl >;.f', ~ i<<<<': ','."I'90 ) << - 4.", <<<)<<,. ~).'J.J b. ~ <<$. <<C~ 4 '4 ~JO <<<<3.z",'l<l 54' ) I JL r) l ) l ll (<<f)<<lt~KJL)'L<<, 'll;Q << ~ ) .>> i ) "'>Jll',j$ II'J 'I " ),)f, q g, << 'I '"I"1 ll >>'s $'.)'< I)f I "ll y )<<<< ') ~ ', I I j~ ll <<IJ<<H I ) <<JI<<i<<<<j Jll )'l. 8"1 ) I) <<g << 't <<<<, >>g', f<y y r i<<<<,g<< << ">fg "Pt)f 'lt i '1 >) I)k))'l 4'" i<<> 'W'>> ) << ') ) ) <<ll)t J "),l'I) .J) k")'C l(F<<), <<.I <<Il )I <<~1'l l '>> X, l) a'J )r/) ~ <<, ) .x '<< <<g) ')',, <<J "<<) I<<<<) )<< lI ) << I I > )