IR 05000277/1978026

IE Inspec Rept 50-277/78-26 on 780919-22 During Which 2 Items of Noncompliance Were Noted:Failure to Complete Procedure Prerequisites Prior to Performing Procedure & Failure to Observe Fuel Bundle During Movement

ML20062D880
Person / Time
Site:	Peach Bottom
Issue date:	10/02/1978
From:	Caphton D, Greenman E, Kalman G NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I)
To:
Shared Package
ML20062D862	List: IR 05000277/1978026 ML20062D859 ML20062D865 ML20062D869 ML20062D873
References
50-277-78-26, NUDOCS 7812010031
Download: ML20062D880 (7)

Text

.

.

.

. .

U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMILSION OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT Region I Report No. 50-277/78-26 Docket N License N OPR-44 Pr1ority --

Category C Licensee: Philadelohta Electric Comoanv 2301 Market Street -

Philadelchia, Penasylvania 19101 Facility Name: Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station, Unit 2

' spection at: Delta, Pennsylvania

'

Inspection conducted: September 19-22, 1978 Inspectors, w/ E /o[1/ M Gjfo'Pge Kapn, Reactor Inspector date signed Yk Ecward'Greenman, Reactor Inspector JO/NTP date signed

)f -

cate signed Approved by: d4 d. (b /d -

D. L. Caphton, Chief, Nuclear Suhort date signed Section No.1, RO&NS Branch Insoection Summary:

Insoection on September 19-22, 1978 (Recort No. 50-277/78-26)

Areas Insoected: Routine, unannounce:i inspection by two NRC regional band inspectors of preparation for refueling, refueling activith including:

facility tours and offshift observations of fuel movement; and, independent effort. The inspection involved 58 inspectce-hcurs onsite by two regional based inspector Results: Of the five areas inspected, no items of noncompliance were identi-fied in three areas. Two items of noncompliance were identified in two areas:

(Deficiency - failure to complete procedure prerequisites prior to perfor-ing procedt;res, paragraph 4.c; and, Infraction - failure to observe fuel bundle during :! ave.ent, paragraph 5.c).

781201003I l

l Region I Form 12 j (Rev. April 77)

!

!

. .. - . . . . . - - - . . - - . -

.

. . _

.

. -. .

,

-

.

,

i l

,

4 DETAILS

- Persons Contacted Principal Licensee Representatives

,.

• R. Fleischmann, Assistant Station Superintendent

'

• F. Polaski, Reactor Engineer ,

S. Roberts, Test Results Engineer ,

D. Smith, Outage Coordinator J. Spencer, Maintenance Engineer W. Tilton, Fuel Floor Superviso .

'

W. Ullrich, Station Superintendent-

' '

J. Winzenreid, Technical Engineer L Other licensee employees and contractor personnel were contacted- '

during the inspection. These included engineering personnel,

'

'

reactor operators, shift supervisors, . security personnel, health physicists and General Electric Technician * denotes those present at the exit intervie I Previous Insoection Item Uodate

,

1 (Closed) Item of Noncompliance (277/77-19-03): Unauthorized changes -

to procedures / failure to review tenporary changes within seven .

,

day !

- The inspector verified that procedure M 4.20 and procedure 21.4 were revised to include a workable sequence of steps and 3 '

noted that a statement was included in each. procedure cautioning agairst unauthorized deviations from the prescribed step The inspector had no further questions regarding this matter i at this time, Cognizant licensee personnel have been briefed on , requirements i regarding the review requirements on temporary procedural ~

changes. Technical Specification 6.8.3.c was changed and now requires PORC review of temporary changes within 14 days  !

versus 7 days. (Amendment 37, dated December 13, 1977). The

inspector had no further questions regarding this matter at  !

this tim ,

- ,

C.

< .

! f

'

i s

• he --- - g- r w - ,3 a-- m y -c m-- g gu ywi, -g -- y se y e- g -- - ,y

,. - _ . _ - - - . . _ -

,

,

i

.

.

r

. .

-

.

.

I (Closed) Item of Noncompliance (277/77-19-04): Failure' to follow procedure Procedure FH 6C was revised to pennit . fuel handling prior to -

. completing the refueling platform check-off sheet at the start of each shift. An inspection of the refueling related check-

,

off lists did not detect discrepancies. The inspector had no further questions regarding this matter at this tim . Plant Tour

,

The inspectors examined various areas of the Unit 2 and 3 facilities including the reactor building, Unit 2 containment process areas, turbine deck, Unit 2 refueling-floor, and exterior area Inspections were conducted to detarmine the general state of house-1 keeping, cleanliness, adherence to fire protection guides and to observe plant conditions. The inspectors checked equipment' status, operability and verified by comparison of selected. control. room in-

strumentation that, limiting conditions for operation were being-

satisfied at Unit 3, and that nuclear instrumentation indicated

. compliance with Technical Specificatien requirements for refueling

'

in progress at Unit 2. Status of off-normal alarms were discussed 1' with various operating personnel. Operators were knowledgeable re-garding these alares. The inspectors also verified that minimum i staffing requirements were satisfied, during the course of various control room tour ,

No ' unacceptable conditions were. identifie . Preparation for Refueling I Documents Reviewed (1) Procedure FH 5, Revision 14, July 19, l'78, 9 New Fuel

.

Inspecticn, Channeling and Placement in the -Fuel-

Pool, including Associated Check-Off List

!

(2) Procedure M 17.1, Revision 3, December 11, 1975,. Reactor-

'

Building Cr,ane Maintenance, including Associated Check-Off List l (3) Procedure M 4.17, Revision 0, October 15, 1975, Fuel Pre-paration Machine Inspection,' including Associated

Check-Off List (4) Fuel Receipt and Inspection Records for 260 New Fuel q

,

Assemblies

.

i

i

- - , -

--. . a , --,

.

. .

.

'

'

.

,

'

(5) Procedure FH 21.1.3, Revision 1, April 2,1976, Check-Out of the Refueling Platform Holst and Load Cells (6) Procedure M 4.20, Revision 1, July 28,1977, Refueling Platform Electrical Inspection, including Associated Check-Off List (7) Procedure FH 21.4, Revision 2, August 11, 1977 Fuel Preparation Machine Operational Check-Out, including Associated Check-Off List (8) Procedure FH 21.2, Revision 1. March 23, .1978, Check-Out of the Service Platform and Associated Protective In-terlocks, including Associated Check-Off List (9) Procedure M 4.18, Revision 0, October 15, 1975, Service Platform Mechanical Inspection, including Associated Check-Off List (10) Pttcedure M 4.19, Revision 1, Service Platform Electrical Inspection, including Associated Check-Off List (11) Procedure FH 21.1.1, Revision 0, October 23, 1975, Start-Up of the Refueling Platform, including Associated Check-Off List (12) Procedure FH 21.1.2, Revision 1, April 2,1976, Check-Out of Refueling Platform. Bridge, Trolley, Monorail and Hoists in the Fuel Pool, including Associated Check-Off List (13) Procedure FH 21.1.6, Revision 1, April 2,1976, Check-Out

'

of the Air Compressor, Air Lines and Solenoid Valves, including Associated Check-Off List (14) Procedure FH 21.1.7, Revision 1, April 2,1976, Check-Out of Refueling Platform Bridge, Trolley, Monorail and Hoists in the Reactor Cavity, including Associated Check-Off List ' Scope g The inspectors reviewed the receipt and inspection records as--

sociated with 260 new fuel assemblies. Refueling equipment, check-out procedures and associated check-off lists were also

'

reviewe <

. , ~.

.

.

. .

,

,

.

,

. Findings No discrepancies were noted in the new fuel receipt and in-spection documents. Through review of the maintenance request forms and check-off sheets, the inspector noted that procedure FH 21.2, Check-Out of the Service Platform and Associated Protective Interlocks, was completed prior to the completion of its prerequisite sectio Specifically, as a prerequisite to performing procedure FH 21.2, procedures M 4.18, Service Platform Mechanical Inspection, and M 4.19, Service Platform Electrical Inspection must be completed. -Examination of the completed check-off sheet for procedure FH 21.2 indicated that the prerequisite section had not been stoned off as required and subsequent investigation revealed that procedure M 4.18 was completed after procedure FH 2 A similar circumstance was found for the check-off sheet as-sociated with procedure FH 5, New Fuel Inspection, Channeling, and Placement in the Fuel Pool. In this case, the Maintenance Request Form for prerequisite procedure M 17.1, Reactor Building Crane Maintenance, was not signed off until after FH 5 was com-

, pleted. However, it was ascertained that the crane procedure

,

'

was satisfactorily completed prior to handling new fuel. Failure to complete procedure prerequisites is contrary to Technical Speci-fication 6.8.1 and constitutes an item of noncompliance (78-26-01). Refueling Activities Documents Reviewed-(1) Procedure FH 6C, Revision 5, March 14,1978, Fuel fiovement and Core Alteration Procedure During a Fuel Handling Outage (2) Refueling Floor Log Book Scope The refueling procedure was reviewed for compliance to Technical Specification requirements. Refueling activities including

LPRM removal and spent fuel transfer were observed. Refueling floor and control room manning, fuel status keeping, and control room to refueling floor communications were compared to applicable requirements. General refueling floor housekeeping and radiation

, protection practices ware inspected.

f

.I

.

, .

. - - - -. - - ~__ .- .

- - ..

.

. - -

.

^

, .

. .

.

i

'6

'

!

. Findings

!

] Items' inspected were acceptable with the exception of the

'

following item of noncompliance. Item 3.d under the pre-

caution section of procedure FH 6C states that the grapple

'

operator must watch, the fuel bundle when the fuel bundle is

.

approaching the upper grid'o'r the top of a fuel storage rack.

3 The inspector noted that during the removal of a spent fuel d

bundle from the core, the grapple operator did not once

- observe the fuel bundle as required by procedures from the 1 time -the fuel bundle was several feet from the top of it l vertical travel until after he had moved the bundle several

'

feet horizontally. At this time, fuel handling operations were suspended by the Senior Licensed Operator (SLO) and the

-

inspector reviewed the procedure with the two SL0s on the refueling floor. The SLO on duty reviewed the applicable

, procedural requirements with the grapple operator and fuel

handling operations were resumed. The above instance of failure to follow procedures .is contrary to Technical Specification 6.8.1 and constitutes an item of noncompliance (78-26-02).

l

4 Outage Related Maintenance Activities _ Documents Reviewed

^

-

(1) Procedure M 1.6, Revision 2, May 15,1978, Relief Valve Replacement

' '

4

. (2) Procedure M 12.21, Revision 1, September 21, 1978, R.W. i

,

System Chemical Cleaning Connection Removal (3) Modification Procedure 218, March 27, 1978 Scone The inspector reviewed the above referenced documents and in-

.

spected the modifications being done to valves MO 2-10-898, MO l 2-10-89C, MO 3-10-898 and MO 3-10-89C in accordance with

, modification procedure 218.

' Findings j

No discrepancies were identified in the inspection of the

above items.,-

b

, -

.,- , 4m- . , . .-, ,, .,, .- , - - , , , - ,. ,y-y . , . .y -. , , -w-r --- ---

, . _ _ . ._ _

- -

. , .

M

- .. ,

-

.

,

7 +

i Exit Interview At the conclusion of the inspection.onsite, the inspectors con-ducted an exit interview with licensee representatives, identified by an asterisk in Detail Items as described in the Details were discussed. The licensee acknowledged inspection findings.

,

,

,

,

l

't

.

$

l

'

.

I

'

.

i f

. . _ _ _ _ - . . _ _ .,