IR 05000286/1982008
| ML20058B866 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Indian Point  |
| Issue date: | 06/28/1982 |
| From: | Foley T, Kenny T, Kister H NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20058B851 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-286-82-08, 50-286-82-8, IEB-82-01, IEB-82-1, NUDOCS 8207260178 | |
| Download: ML20058B866 (12) | |
Text
__
.
.
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
REGION I
Report No. 50-286/82-08 Docket No. 50-286 License No. DPR-64 Priority
---
Category C
Licensee: Power Authority of the State of New York 10 Columbus Circle New York, New York 10019 Facility Name:
Indian Point Nuclear Generating Station, Unit 3 Inspection at: Buchanan, New York
-
Inspection conducted: May 16, 1982 to June 15, 1982 Inspectors:
T. Foley, SenirFr Resident Inspectcr date
!L b
cL 6 / //2%
2 T. J.' Kenny, Resident Inspector date y
s_-
A>
$ SW H. Kister,' Chief, Indian Point Resident
[
date Section, Division of Project and
Resident Programs Inspection Summary:
Inspections on May 16, 1982 to June 15, 1982 (Inspection Report 50-286/82-08)
Areas Inspected: Routine onsite regular and backshift inspections of plant operations including shift logs and records; plant tour; surveillance; maintenance; review of procurement and storage; calibration procedures review; review of monthly reports; and followup on IE Bulletin. The in-spection involved 130 inspector hours by the resident inspectors.
Results: Of the seven areas inspected, no violations were identified in six areas.
One apparent violation was identified in one area, (failure to followprocedures, details, paragraph 2.C.1).
e207260178 820629 PDR ADOCK 05000286 G
__
.
DETAILS 1.
Persons Contacted M. Albright, Instrument and Control Superintendent J. Brons, Resident Manager J. Dube, Security and Safety Supervisor D. Halama, Q.A. Superintendent W. Hamlin, Assistant to the Resident Manager W. Josiger, Superintendent of Power J. Perrotta, Radiological and Environmental Services Superintendent S. Munoz, Technical Services Supervisor E. Tagliamonti, Operations Superintendent J. Vignola, Maintenance Superintendent The inspector also interviewed and observed other licensee employees in-cluding members of the operations, health physics, technical services, maintenance, and security staffs.
,
2.
Plant Tour A.
Normal and backshift inspections were conducted during routine entries into the protected area of the plant, including the contrcl room,PAB, fuel building, and containment. During the inspection activities, discussions were held with operators, technicians (HP & I&C),
mechanics, foremen, supervisors, and plant menagement. The purpose of the inspection was to affina the licensee's comitments and compliance with 10 CFR, Technical Specifications, and Administrative Procedures.
Particular attention was directed in the following areas:
Instrumentation and recorder traces for abnormalities;
-
-
Proper control room and shift manning; I
-
Proper use of procedures; l
!
-
Review of logs to obtain plant conditions; l
Verification of proper radiologically controlled areas
.
-
'
and access points;
-
Verification of surveillance testing for timely completion;
Verification of safety related tagouts;
-
!
Plant housekeeping and cleanliness;
-
i
-
.
-
- -
-..
That protected area access controls were in conformance
-
with the security plan, including sufficient guards to perfom duties, and that selected gates and doors were closed and locked.
Selected liquid and gaseous samples to verify confomance
-
with regulatory requiremes.ts prior to release; and, Boric acid samples to confirm proper boric acid level
-
for plant shutdcwn conditions.
B.
During the inspection, the inspector reviewed the following procedures, documents, or evolutions:
-
Radioactive Waste Release Pemit (liquid)
Various shift turnover checklists
-
-
Security Station Logs and Radio Checks Jumper Log
-
-
Selected Operators' Logs
-
Selected Tagouts
-
Selected Radiation Exposure Authorizations (REA's)
C.
Findi m :
__
On May 27, 1982, during a routine tour of the vapor container 95 foot level, the inspector noted licensee representatives compacting radiological waste.
The waste, in large plastic bags, was being compressed into 55 gallon drums by a hydrau-lically operated baling machine. Often, parts of the bag over-lapped the sides of the drum, and in order to compress the entire bag, the operators would push the bag into the drum while the hydraulic piston was in progress of entering the drum. This practice could have resulted in the loss of an extremity, as a result of being caught under the moving piston.
The inspector asked for a copy of the procedure for opera-ting the baling machine. The procedure was not available inside the containment. The inspector subsequently question-ed the supervisor in charge of the rad waste operation, who provided the inspector with a copy of S0P-WDS-5, " Baling Machine Operation." Step 4.3 of this procedure required that the shroud door be closed (in order to make up an inter-lock which prevents piston movement with the door open to prevent personal injury to the operator). The interlock /
safety switch was taped in the closed position, and the door remained open during the compacting evolution.
. -.
__
_ -
-
.
.
Technical Specification 6.8.1 indirectly requires that written procedures be implemented for solid radioactive waste systems including baling machine operations. This is a violation.
The inspector discussed this with the Radiological Superintendent who terminated the evolution, and stated that, in the future, op-erators would follow established procedures. (50-286/82-08-01).
2.
Update on Steam Generator Metallurgical Problems (a) Steam Generator Tubes The Eddy Current Test program has been completed in all four steam generators.
Three types of inspections were required. The inspections and status of those inspections are as follows:
Types of Inspection Requirements 1) Technical Specification Performed in the hot leg
-
Inservice Inspection Each Around the tube bend to the top
-
Refueling Outage of the support in the cold leg.
Number of tubes to be inspected =
-
3xN% (where N=# of steam generators 3x(4)% = 12% or 400 tubes.
- 31 stea'n generator for this inspec- -
-
tion period.
Status: 449 tubes were examined and no degraded tubes
.
were identified.
2) Licensee Amendment #31
-
Perfonned in the hot leg (800 tubes)
Requires Inspection for
-
All four steam generators Gauging (denting)
-
To the 6th support plate
!
Results must be presented to the
-
'
NRC for approval prior to startup.
Status: The data obtained is still under evaluation by the licensee.
3) Licensee Amendment #41 100% of the cold leg to the 2nd
-
Requires a Cold Leg support plate Inspection
-
All steam generators
-
Results must be presented to the
'
NRC for approval prior to startup.
Status: #31 Steam Generator - 2975 tubes evaluated.
110 tubes
< 40% degraded 673 tubes 2 40%-< 65% degraded 325 tubes 2 65% degraded l
l l
._
_
._._
_ _ -. _
_
_-
.
.
Status:
- 32 Steam Generator 3062 tubes evaluated
-
410 tubes
<r40% degraded 488 tubes 2t 40% - < 65% degraded 264 tubes 2:65% degraded
- 33 Steam Generator - 3094 tubes evaluated 151 tubes
<r 40% degraded 553 tubes 2 40% - < 65% degraded 306 tubes 2 65% degraded
- 34 Steam Generator - 3077 tubes evaluated 147 tubes
<c 40% degraded 518 tubes 2: 40% - < 65% degraded
267 tubes Er65% degraded The licensee is currently evaluating the results of the above programs to respond to the NRC's concerns.
The licensee has removed two tubes from rows 1 and 2, through a secondary side hand hole. The tubes have been sent offsite
'
for evaluation as an aid to further identify the pitting phenomena.
(b) Steam Generator Girth Weld The licensee has completed nondestructive testing (NDT) on the girth welds of all four steam generators, and is currently in the process of qualifying a welding procedure to be used for the repair of the girth welds.
A piece of metal of the same physical qualities has been purchased by the licensee. Samples have been cut from the piece and analyzed to verify that the material possesses the same metallurgical characteristics as the steam generators.
Results of this testing indicated that heat treatment was I
necessary in order to duplicate the metallurgical qualities of the steam generators. The heat treatment process has been
'
completed, and the latest test results indicated that the material is now suitable to use during the welding procedure.
The piece of metal is currently being weld " prep'ed" in order
,
!
to test the welding procedure. The procedure will be quali-fied on site.
!
No violations were identified.
.-
_.
. - _ _ _
.
.
3.
Surveillance A.
The inspector observed portions of four surveillance activities being conducted on safety related equipment to ascertain the following:
-
That test instrumentation was properly calibrated;
-
That the redundant system or component was operable;
-
That properly approved procedures were used by qualified personnel; and,
-
That the acceptance criteria was met.
Tests observed:
-
3PT M 46 Component Cooling 3PT M 48 First Aid Locker
-
3PT Q 01 Station Battery Surveillance and Charging
-
3PT Q 10 Gas and Particulate Monitor
-
No violations were identified.
B.
The inspector conducted an indepth review of surveillance activities to ascertain the following:
That the conditions listed in "A" above were met;
-
,
-
That the test data was accurate and complete; That proper reviews, by the licensee, had been conducted;
-
That the results of the tests met Technical Specification
-
requirements; and,
!
-
That the testing was done within the required surveillance schedule.
,
,
a
. - - - -,,
.-...--.,._.
--
.
. -.
_
._
--_
,. -..
,
,,-
.
.
.
Tests reviewed:
3 PT M 21 Station Batteries Surveillance
-
3 PT M 36 Process Radiation Monitor
-
-
3 PT M 42 Main Fire Pump Operability Test 3 PT Q1 Station Battery Surveillance and Charging
-
-
3 PT Q8 Boric Acid Heat Tracing Test
-
3 PT Q21 Steam Generator Blowdown Valve Testing 3 PT W1 Diesel Generator Test
-
-
3 PT W3 Plant & Emergency Evacuation Fire Alann Test 3 PT W4 Fire Water Storage Tanks Minimum Water Volume
-
-
3 PT W6 Hose House Inspection
-
3 PT M 32 Seismographic Instrumentation 3 PT R 31 Seismograph
-
No violations were identified.
4.
Maintenance A.
The inspector selected maintenance activities being conducted on ESF equipment to ascertain that redundant trains were in service, and that approved precedures and qualified personnel were conducting the maintenance.
B.
The inspector observed portions of maintenance activities listed below to ascertain the following:
The activities did not violate a limiting condition for
-
operation;
-
That redundant components were operable;
-
That equipment was tagged out in accordance with licensee approved procedures; That approved procedures, adequate to control the activity,
-
were being used by qualified technicians;
.
.
That Q/C hold points were observed, and that materials were
-
properly certified; That radiological controls were proper and in accordance with
-
licensee approved radiation exposure authorization's; and, That the equipment was properly tested prior to return to
-
service.
1)
Inspection and Overhaul of Reactor Coolant Sustem Valves 455C and 456 Documents reviewed:
Work request No. 2631
-
Procedure 3-CM-GEN-6 Copes Vulcan Air Operated Control
-
Valve Overhaul
-
Radiation Exposure Authorizction 2243
-
Work Permit No. 5650
-
Purchase Orders 81-IP-2398 Various Parts 78-IP-2932 Packing, gaskets Certification Papers for the Above Parts
-
Drawing E 181209
-
-
Calibration Papers for Torque Wrench M-326 Gage No. OP 1087 2) Overhaul for Citywater Supply Valve to #31 Auxiliary Boiler Feed Pump
,
Documents reviewed:
Work request No. 2837 i
-
l Purchase Order 82-IP-1024, packing gaskets
-
Certification Papers for Parts
!
-
l l
Calibration for Torque Wrench M-308
-
l t
f
l (
l l
!
>
--.
.
-,,
.., _.., _ _ -...
_., -, _.,,,., _,,,,,,...
,
, -, - -,,. _. ~
- - -,
,
.., - -
.
.
3) Containment Flange Gasket Replacement on Flanges 14", 8" and 4" Documents reviewed:
Work request No. 2832
-
-
Purchase Order 6-10980, gaskets
-
Calibration for Torque Wrench M-323 No violations were identified.
5.
Review of Procurement and Storage A.
The inspector conducted an inspection of the licensee's storage area with special attention given to the following areas:
'
Verification that materials and spare parts are being re-
-
ceived by qualified personnel, and stored in accordance with proper procedures.
-
Verification that nonconforming items are segregated, and tagged properly. Segregated items reviewed were:
a) Purchase Order 82-IP-0054, Controllers which are in need of certification papers; and, b) Purchase Order 82-IP-1666, Teminal lugs which do not have IEEE certification papers.
Verification that environmental conditions in the warehouse
-
were in conformance with ANSI 45.2.2, Add. 1972.
B.
The inspector selected three safety related items (see paragraph 4 of this report), and verified traceability of these items and records including: purchase orders, receipt records, location of items in storage, issue record, and certification records.
C.
The inspector also reviewed the following procedures to verify conformance with 10 CFR 50, App. B, and ANSI 45.2.2, Add.1972:
a) Quality Assurance Procedure (QAP) 7.3 Receiving Inspection b) Quality Assurance Procedure 15.2 Control of Nonconfoming Material, Parts or Components c) Quclity Assurance Procedure 16.1 Corrective Action Control d) Quality Assurance Procedure 4.1 Procurement Document Review
.
.
D.
Findings:
The inspector noted that the licensee maintained a large number of items in the hold area. Discussions with plant management in-dicated that the problem was with purchase orders written by the New York Office (NY0), and contractor personnel. The inspector also identified that purchase orders written by the NY0 were written utilizing a different portion of QAP 4.1, than those utilized by the station. The inspector reviewed a memorandum written by the Resident Plant Manager, to the corporate office, which previously identified a similar concern. Subsequently, the inspector reviewed an additional memorandum written by the Resident Plant Manager to the corporate office which idertifies the current findings and requests for more affimative action.
No violations were identified.
6.
CaliLration Procedure Review The inspector conducted a detailed examination of the licensee's calibration procedures.
The inspector reviewed the current re-visions tc all calibration procedures to ensure the technical specification (TS) requirements were being implemented. The in-spector noted that the setpoints are set in the conservative direc-tion for all safety settings required by TS.
For example, minimum reactor coolant flow TS requirement is 2 90%, the setpoint for the calibration procedure is 93%. The inspector also noted that words delineated in the procedures alert the reviewer, that if certain parameters are out of calibration, TS action should be taken. The inspector noted that instrument drift had occurred, but in no case had the instruments drifted to the TS safety setting. The below listed completed procedures perfomed during this shutdown were reviewed:
3PC-R01A Reactor Coolant Loop RTD Passed
-
-
3PC-R05B 6.9KV Under Frequency Passed
-
3PC-R10 Refueling Water Storage Tank Level Passed 3PC-R12 Containment Pressure Passed
-
-
3PC-R16 Accumulator Level Passed 3PC-R02 Reactor Coolant Flow Failed
-
-
3PC-R01C Reactor Coolant Loop Wide Range Cold Leg Failed For those procedures that failed, the calibration test did not violate any TS limits, and the reasons for failure were noted in the completed procedure and corrective action was taken to restore the instrument to proper calibra-tion statu _-
-__ _
.. _
-
Several newly installed instrumentation systems required by NUREG 0737 do not currently have calibration procedures in place. Discussions were held with the licensee with regard to these procedures. The li-censee is currently in the process of preparing the proper calibration
'
procedure to be performed prior to the unit's startup.
f No violations were identified.
7.
Review of Monthly Report
A.
Monthly Operating Report The Monthly Operating Report for May,1982 was reviewed. The review included an examination of selected maintenance work requests, and an examination of significant occurrence reports
,
to ascertain that the summary of operating experience was i
properly documented.
B.
Findings:
The inspector verified through record reviews and observations
,
of maintenance in progress that:
i The corrective action was adequate for resolution of the
-
identified items; and,
-
The Operating Report included the requirements of TS 6.9.1.6.
The inspector has no further questions relating to the reports.
8.
Followup on IE Bulletin The inspector reviewed the following IE Bulletin.
In addition to his comments, he ascertained that:
The written response was within the time period stated in the
-
Bulletin;
!
l The written response included the information required to be
-
reported; The written response includes adequate corrective action comit-
-
ments based on the information presented in the Bulletin and licensee's response; The licensee's management forwarded copies of the written response
-
to the appropriate onsite management representatives;
l The infonnation discussed in the licensee's written response was
-
accurate; and,
-
The corrective action taken by the licensee was as described in the written response.
-. - - -.
. - - - - -
.. -.
-
.
. -. -
-
-
. -. -...
_.. -.
-.
.
.
'
(Closed) 82-BU-01 - Alteration of Radiographs of Welds in Piping Subassemblies: PASNY was not on the list delineated in the bulletin, and, therefore, does not have to respond. However, the inspector noted in his review that the QA department filed the information for future references with respect to dealings with the AP & E Company.
9.
Exit Interview At periodic intervals during the course of the inspection, meetings were held with senior facility management to discuss the inspection scope and findings. An additional exit interview was held on June 17, 1982 to summarize inspection findings, and to discuss plant status and current inspector concerns.
..
-
-
..
..
.-..