IR 05000289/1972018
| ML19260A071 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Crane  |
| Issue date: | 11/14/1972 |
| From: | Brunner E, Dante Johnson, Mcleod B NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19260A065 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-289-72-18, NUDOCS 7910290695 | |
| Download: ML19260A071 (12) | |
Text
{{#Wiki_filter:- ... . . l.
- . . . . . . .
. .g.t . . , n . . - . U. S. ATCMIC ENERGY COMMISSION ' . DIRECTORATE OF REGULATORY OPERATIONS . . '
REGION I
- RO Inspection Report No.: 50-289/72-18 Docket No.: 50-289 Licensee: Metropolitan Edison Company License No.: CPPR-40 . .. , Three Mile Island - Unit 1 Priority: l Category: B ' Location: Middletown, Pennsylvania ! . Type of Licensee: PWR 831 MWe (B & W) ..
i Type of Inspection: Unannounced, routine .. Dates of Inspection: October 18 and 19, 1972 .." gs . Dates of nevious Inspection: September 18 and 19, 1972 l Principal Inspector: . 11/14/72 l C. F. Jo dson, Reactor Inspector . Date l Procedure Specialist . Accompanying Inspectors: - B. K. McLeod, Reactor Inspector Date h-M& // /d fb ' T. A. Rebelo ski,' Reactor Inspector Date Other Accompanying Personnel: , Reviewed By: / " // // '7 Y l ' E. 3. Brunner, Chief, Reactor Testing and Date l Startup 3 ranch .- . . . . , - . t . . N91 o gggffg ' , ' ! 1479 217 . . . . . . _., _ .
, - . - - _ _ _ _... . .. _ - ..,.. ,,;l . . 1.
- - 't '0 7s -
\\ -
p h - a SUFD9Jur OF FINDINGS ,_ ik.
- oN Enforcement Action r .G ? rl .1 Violations ' m f None .N
Safety .'$j ,'j? None
,l Licensee Action on Previousiv Identified Enforcement Items .! i None 'Y . , 7.i Design Changes I.t ,( None Unusual Occurrences None - .s py, other Sienificant Findings .j ' !t Current . T [. None .' Njj Status of Previousiv Recorted Unresolved Items-1 . e: None ra .] Management Interview 'N A management interview was conducted at the conclusion of the inspection
(October 19, 1972) at the site with Messrs. J. L. Wise, Station Superin- ., d tendent, R. Klingerman, Assistant Station Superintendent, J. G. Herbien, Station Engineer, J. Colitz, Supervisor of Operations.
Items discussed , were as follows: . .- O 1479 218 . ,0 -. . , , . .
.,N,. -2-7\\, .' . . q A.
F_aciliiv Procedures )
7.} 1.
Administrative Procedures . .: The inspector stated that the scope of coverage for adminis- ' trative procedures indicated by the index given to RO by the , , licensee is inadequate.
Particular deficiencies were pointed , e ?j ~.l out to the licensee. The inspector further stated his concern - over the lack of progress in the preparation of procedures.
Jif.4 .. (Refer to Details, Paragraph 2) ] The licensee stated that draft procedures were prepared and - ;f a more concentrated effort'will be put forth to attain finali- .2 zation of these procedures.
The licensee agreed to review fa existing procedures for possible revision pursuant to the in- ! apectors comments.
'-
- !
wp 2.
..9 _ Emergency Procedures - j The inspector stated that the emergency procedures are toc gen-
eralized and should contain more specific detail on overall
- %
plant response, expected parameters and operator action.
(Refer ' (.' to Details, Paragraph 3) - The licensee agreed to revise the format of emergency procedures - to include a discussion section or augment the symptom area and I review the procedures with consideration for inclusion of more , details to provide further operator guidance.
A detailed review of individual procedures was held between the , ' inspector and licensee representatives resulting in resolution
i of noted deficiencies.
(Refer to Details, Paragraph 3) 3.
Operating Procedures ~ i The inspector stated, after review of the operating procedures . index, it appears that significant procedures have been omitted.
(Refer to Details, Paragraph 4) A detailed review of individual procedures resulted in deficiencies in procedure content.
These deficiencies were discussed with licen-see representatives.
(Refer to Details. Paragraph 4) . s . % ' 1479 219 ._._.
_ _ _ _
k' i ' & f { -3-N . I J.j The inspector stated that RO:I review of Facility Procedures '. is a sampling inspection and that it is not intended to identify every deficiency in every procedure.
He stated that he expected <- his comments to be applied broadly and that the licensee should D' review all Facility Procedures for similar deficiencies.
l The licensee stated that the inspectors comments were so inter-i preted.
4.
Surveillance Test and Calibration Procedures ' the inspector discusssd with licensee representatives the ten- ., l tative Surveillance Test Program.
His findings following the j discussion and review A the Surveillance Test and Calibration j Index, indicated the licensee intent was to prepare only those 9 j procedures necessary, for fuel loading.
O l The inspector stated RO position: that all Surveillance and Test Procedures should be completed and through final review i prior to licensing.
p ' The licent4e responded and stated, with a fev~ exceptions, all Surveillance and Test Procedures will be written prior to licens-ing.
. The inspector stated Surveillance Test and Calibration Procedures , will be reviewed for status of completion in subsequent inspec- " tions.
i .i
5.
Procedure Anoroval and Review
h The inspector reviewed Administrative Procedure No. I "Adminis-trative Procedure for Control of IMI Operating, Emergency, Main- , tenance and Surveillance Procedures (Including Review)" and his findings were that the licensee's provisions for review and approval of Facility Procedures consisted of review by the Plant Operations Review Committee only and approval by the Plant Superintendent.
The inspector stated that certain procedures involving adminis- , trative control, safety, emergencies and engineering safeguards should have off-site review o'r approval.
The licensee stated that consideration will be given to include additional review or approval of certaia Facilities Procedures I ll) 1479 220 . """ n ._..
_-. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _. . __ _..__.. , . I ~ N.
-4_
.
by the, General Office Review Board.
i 6.
Procedures Comoletion Status ,4 i a.
Information obtained during this inspection * indicated the fol-i loving status of completion regarding the Facility Procedures l Program.
! - 1 (1) Administrative Procedures 10% - . i (2) Emergency Procedures 48% - (3) operating Procedures 58% - - ; (4) Surveillance and Test Procedures 25% -
i . I
i
. k.. i I .
9
4 e ' I m 1479 221 _.
.
_.
_ _. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _. , _ _ __ __ _ _ _. . . Y < ,D
. l DETAILS 1.
Persons Contacted J. L. Wise, Station Superintendent R. Klingerman, Assistant Station Superintendent . J. G. Herbien, Station Engineer ' , ' J. Colitz, Supervisor of Operations J. R. Floyd, Nuclear Engineer 2.
Administrative Procedures a.
The folicwing questions and statements were directed to the li-censee as a result of the inspectors review of the Administrative Procedures index and procedure control.
(1) The following areas of coverage appear to be la: king as in-cated by the index of proposed procedures: (a) Containment Access Requirements ~s g' ' ' Licensee's Co= ment - Instructions and requirements for access to containment will be spelled out in the Health Physics Rrocedures.
(b; Responsibilities and Authority of Station Ooerating Personnel for the Safe Ooeration and Shutdown of the , Plant
Licensee's Cor::aent - Administrative Procedure No. 9 l " Station Organization and Chain of Cot: mand" when written ' will cover this area, i l (c) Procedures for Evoass of Safety Functions as Juceer l Control , i j Licensee's Co= ment - The licensee stated he would write a procedure for these conditions.
l (d) Luckine ar;d Taecine Procedures ! ' Licensee's Comment - Administrative Procedure No. 2 " Rules for the Protection of Men Working on Electrical - and Mechanical Apparatus" will be written to include
1 O 1479 222 ' .
.- . - - - - . - - - - -. - - - -.. - - -- - -.. . .] ' -6-1' . i t.; locking and tagging procedures.
. " .!
(e) Schedule for Surveillance Testing and Calibration Licensee's Corrent - Administrative Procedure No. 10 . " Implementation and Control of Station Maintenance" , .
vill reference testing and calibration.
.I i (f) Standbv Personnel Recall } . d Licensee's Coc= tent - A list of telephone numbers of
all off-duty personnel will be in the Control Room.
m j In addition one of the off shifts is designated as ,j the standby shfit.
J Inspector's Response - A procedure should be written '
for the implementation of personnel recall to the plant . and be placed in the Control Room.
j (g) Shift and Relief Turnover -
D Licensee's Comment - The technical specifications state shift crew requirements and relief. The licensee stated this is sufficient, a procedure is not necessary.
Q Inspector's Response - A procedure shotid be written to specify what must be done by a relief shif t prior to - assuming control of the plant. An alternative is to , i amend the technical specifications with more specifics , and reference this in a procedure.
, (2) Temporary changes to procedures should be noted in the oper- - ating log, properly dated and initiated and operators informed of the change.
' The licensee agreed to revise Paragraph 3 of Administrative Procedure No. 1 " Control of Plant Procedures" to include
the inspector's comments.
(3) How do you intend to insure that obsolete procedures are removed from circulation? ' The licensee stated that responsibility would be assigned to the Administrative Assistant to insure all copies of outdated procedures are returned.
.
.
. -
. - - - _. - -.. -. _ -. _. . _ - - - -. .- .. -.- - -
. . i
% - , ( -7-
. .
(4) The procedure for distribution does not 3.csure that all re-l sponsible persons will have access to the latest issue.
! The licensee stated a copy of all late'st updated and approved .. procedures would be routed to the Station Engineer, Supervisor e of Operations, and the Supervisor of Maintenance.
They shall obtain additional copies and distribute within their respec- , I tive departments.
In addition a copy of all the approved procedures will be placed in the Control Rc3m for availa- , ~j bility to all operating personnel.
! (5) How are Instructions given to t.e authors of proct.iures to ', insure correct format, cl ssification and guidance so con-tent? ,
' The licensee stated the authors were inrtructed to adhere to
ANS 3.2 Standard for Administrative Corcrois for Nuclear i Power Plants.
' (6) A master list of procedures indicating status i.e., drafted, . I' reviewed, approved, etc., should be maintained.
. The licensee stated he will provide this document.
3.
Emergency Procedures The following procedures appear to be lacking after review of the a.
- index of Emergency Procedures.
, ! i (1) Emergenev Boration The licensee stated this would be covered under Operating Procedure No. 1103-4 " Soluble Poison Concentration Control" , or 1103-4 " Soluble Poison Concentration Cot. trol."
(2) Fire in Control Room The licensee stated Emergency Procedure 1202-37 "Cooldown from outside Control Room when written will cover fire in Control Room.
(3) Loss of Containment Integrity The licensee stated he would look into this for possible __ addition to the emergency procedures.
1479 224 . !.- . . ' ,4-8- -.- k.1 - , . I b.
Detailed Comments on Emergency Procedure 1202-07, " Loss of Boron" I t ! (1) Symotons !, ' (a) Step 1 What magnitude or change of boron concentration indicates an emergency condition.
The operator needs more specifics in procedure and more guidelines to , recognize emergencies.
, I ! The licensee agreed to revise procedure pursuant to the
inspector's comments.
I ! (b) Step 2 What approximate level change would the operator j see? s The licensee agreed to-include magnitude of change.
(c) Step 3 A power level increase - is this a slow or a sudden spike? Further specifics are needed for oper-ator recognition.
7s The licensee agreed and will revise to include inspec- - tors comments.
- , (d) The Inspector noted the use of abbreviations, without ex-i planation'vithin the " body of the procedure." System ! and component abbreviations when used, should be written ! out the first time they appear in the procedure to insure understanding by everyone.
I
p The licensee agreed to look into this matter in all pro-I cedures for possible revision.
. (2) Manual Action Caution statements within the body of a procedure should be capitalized and double spaced to insure they stand out.
, The licensee agreed to incorporate inspectors comments.
' (a) Step 3 The statement reads, stop all pumps with no further directions.
This is too general and should state . {lg 1479 225 . - - -
- -
- I 'l , ^N.
. -9-La
'*t I ,] specifics i.e. what pumps, what valves, etc.
.cj h The licensee agreed and will add more details as ap-
propriate.
L3y (b) Step 2 Who samples for boron concentration and how ,
is sample obtained? 1l
The licensee agreed to include more information within !! the procedure.
D r,1 J c.
Detailed Comments on Emergency Procedure 1202-26 " Loss of Instrument Air ,.-a ,' "j (1) A discussion section should be added to include equipment "i and processes affected by a loss of instrument air.
.d
The licensee agreed to expand the symptom section to in- '.'.1 clude the above.
~ ' The inspector stated the procedure is written with the as- /N^ sumption that a slow loss of pressure developed with an almost \\ immadiate recovery to normal operation.
Is this a valid assumption? , ll i The procedure is too generalized, should be more specific 'fj in detail of plant response to the failure, and operator
action.
.
The licensee concurred and will revise the procedure 1202-26 ! " Loss of Instrument Air."
- 4
.- 4.
Operating Procedures , ~ The following procedures appear to be lacking after review of the a.
index.of Operating Procedures.
~ . '{ (1) Scram Recovery -. The licensee stated this would be covered with a separate pro- } cedure or included as part of Operating Procedure 1102.10, " Plant Shutdown."
.-
(2) Refueling
,' The licensee stated that this procedure will be written.
1479 226 - . = = = - .. , _, ,, %.
. _ ._ _. _ _ _ _ _ _ _.. __ _ _. _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ - - - - _ - -. _ - -- .. . . . . q - 10 - . r ' . - (3) Containment Hydrogen Removal Syste$ , 1, The licensee stated that this is included in Emergency Pro-cedure 1202-28, " Post Accident H2 Purge."
. (4) Communication System The licensee agreed to write instructions on the use of . . communication systems.
b.
Detailed Comments on Operating Procedures 1103-6, Reactor i Coolant Pumo Operation (1) Procedure Steo 1 references other procedures, if this information is iuportant it should be in the i procedure.
The licensee stated he will reword to reference data sheet in procedure.
(2) Step 14 statement reads " carefully observe all - paramete'rs" without stating the parameters.
The licensee agreed to add parameters of concern to
the procedure.
llh (3) 6.3 D How does operator know if the pump has stopped and anti-reverse rotation has been verified? The licensee agreed to include parameters necessary ' for operator verification.
Detail Comments on Ocerating Procedure 1104-4, " Decay c.
Heat Removal Svstem" (1) Procedure step 4.4.2.2 Inspection items should be stated not referenced.
The licensee stated they will be added if necessary, i if not deleted from p';ocedure.
l (2) Precautions should be in the body of the procedures preceeding a specific step.
Example: "Do not allow D. H. pump flow etc."
- 1479 227 i O . . . . ' , ~ -....;
.b , ~ y . .; - ' .. . - - 11 - ix i . The licensee stated he will revise procedure to in-a .j clude cautions within the body of the procedure.
. -l d.
Operating Procedure 1102-01, " Plant Prestartuo Check" - . Does this procedure cover olant heat up <~.; The licensee stated the procedure is in original draft _ + i form but will be reviewed to insure that heat up is -{ covered.
.l -
- , ! ! !
1 i ! .i O fI ' . , ! ' , . ! . h
. e 1479 228 $ _ }}