IR 05000289/1974013
| ML19253B735 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Crane  |
| Issue date: | 03/29/1974 |
| From: | Brickley R, Mccabe E NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19253B733 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-289-74-13, NUDOCS 7910180720 | |
| Download: ML19253B735 (15) | |
Text
.
.
,
~
f, P00RDulal4[
~
-
.
- U. S. ATOMIC D;ERGY COSNISSION g,,
DIRECTORATE OF REGULATORY OPERATIONS
REGION I
.
'
RO Inspection Rep 9rt No.:
50-289/74-13 Locket No.: 50-289 Licensee:
Metrecolitan Edison Co many License No.: CPPR-40 Three Mile Island Unit 1 Priority:
.
Category:
B1
.
Location:
Middletown, Pa.
Type of Licensee:
Type of Inspection:
Routine -
Dates of Inspection:
March 12-15, 1974
Dates of Preiious Inspection:
March 9, 1974
-
Reporting Inspector:
T /N ra!f
.9[,29[M R. H. Brickley, Reacto/ Inspector Date
'
Accompanying Inspectors:
$ b k O.\\s 3 ['E9 f74
'
E. C. McCabe, Senior Reactor Inspector Date
.
.
Date
.
Other Acco=panying Personnel; None Date
,
Reviewed By:
@d
,b 3!22!7 4 E. C. McCabe, Senior Reactor Inspector, Date Reactor Operations Branch
,
,
i
,q9101
-
l
._2
.
/
'
.
-
/
s '
'
.
.
EU:OfARY OF FINDI':GS N-Enforcenent Items None Unusual Occurrences
,,
e None identified Licensee Action on Previously Identified Enforcement Items Not inspected Other Sienificant Findings
.
A.
Current
,,
1.
Fourteen preoperational test results were reviewed.
(Details, Paragraph 2)
_
t 2.
The status of the off-site review of facility procedures was obtained.
(Details; Paragraph 13)
,
3.
The off-site review board's function was /eviewed.
(Details, Paragraph 4)
4.
The control red program surveillance procedure was reviewed.
(Details, Paragraph 5)
-
.
.
5.
Constitution of the PORC and PORC minutes were reviewed.
(Details, Paragraph 6)
'
B.
Status of Previous 1v Reported Unresolved Items 1.
Four Preventive Maintenance Procedures were submitted for review by RO:I.
(Details, Paragraph 7)
2.
Guard force training has been conducted.
(Details, Paragraph 8)
3.
The licensee has implemented corrective action to prevent recur-rence of the recent makeup pu=p failure.
(Details, Paragraph 9)
,
i 1445 161 l-
-
.
.
I
!
.
I
,/
/
~
-2-
.
4.
Twenty-two additional facility procedures have been approved.
(Details, Paragraph 10)
N-5.
Previous cocments on emergency procedures have been incorporated.
(Details, Paragraph 11)
.
6.
RO:I review of 6 facility procedures has been conducted, with
.,
no deficiencies outstanding.
(Details, "aragraph 12)
7.
The Emergency Flood Control Procedure has been revised.
(Details, Paragraph 14)
C.
New Unresolved Items 1.
Deficiencies in data recording were identified.
(Details, Paragraphs 2.a. (3) and 2.a. (4)).
,
2.
A deficiency in the facility procedure approval sequence was identified.
(Details, Paragraph 3)
.
3.
Deficiencies in the control rod surveillance procedure were identified.
(Details, Paragraph 5)
>
4.
Deficiencies in PORC minutes and off-site me=ber participation were identified.
(Details, Paragraph 6)
~
~
Management Interview
.
-
The. management interview was held at the site on March 15, 1974.
'
,
Personnel Attending
~~
Metrocolitan Edison Comoany
.
.
-
Mr. E. E. Bulmer, Engineer
-
Mr. J. J. Colita. Station Engineer Mr. J. G. Herbein, Station Superintendent Mr. J. P. O'Hanlon, Nuclear Engineer Mr. W. E. Potts, QC Supervisor Mr. D. N. Shovlin, Maintenance Supervisor Mr. R. L. Su=mers, Plant Engineer General Public Utilities service Corocration Mr. S. Levin, Unit 1 Project Engineer Mr. G. P. Miller, Test Superintendent Mr. G. F. Roshy, Auditor
,
l Mr. M. J. Stromberg, Site Auditor
-
Mr. W. T. Sturgeon, QA Auditor 1445 162 l
i I
-
~
L-
'
/,.
...
' ~ ~
.
~
.
- _ - -..
-%.
~
-3
.
.
The following su==arizes the items discussed.
A.
Review of preoperational test results.
(Details, Paragraph 2)
B.
Facility procedures approval sequence.
(Details, Paragraph 3)
C.
Functions of the off-site review board.
(Details, Paragraph 4)
,
,
'.
D.
Review of the control rod program surveillance procedure.
(Details, Paragraph 5)
E.
Constitution of the plant operations review committee.
(Details, Paragraph 6)
F.
Preventive maintenance procedures provided for RO:L's review.
(Details,, Paragraph 7)
,
,
G.
Guard Force training conducted.
(Details, Paragraph 8)
H.
Implementation of corrective actions following the makeup pump failure.
(Details, Paragraph 9)
-
I.
Facility procedures approval.
(Details, Paragraph 10)
o
-
J.
Revision of emergency procedures.
(Details, Paragraph 11)
<-
K.
Independent review of additional facility procedures.
(Details,
Paragraph 13)
.
..
.
.
.
.
-
.
.
.
..
e-1445 163
.
,
. -.
.-
.
..
N
-
.
,
!
s
.
ags DETAILS
..
1.
Persons Contacted Metropolitan Edison Cocoany
.
Mr. E. E. Bulmer, Engineer
..
Mr. J. J. Colitz, Station Engineer
.
Mr. B. C. Getty, Project Engineer Mr. C. E. Hartman, Engineer Mr. J. G. Herbein, Station Superintendent Mr. J. P. O'Hanlon, Nuclear Engineer Mr. W. E. Potts, QC Supervisor Mr. R. A. Rice, Security Specialist Mr. R. L. Su=mers, Plant Engineer
.
General Public Utilities Serrice Co'rooration Mr. S. Levin, Unit 1 Project Engineer Mr. G. P. Miller, Test Superintendent Mr. M. Nelson, Technical Engineer Mr. G. L. Roshy, Auditor
-
Mr. M. J. Stromberg, Site Auditor Mr. W. T. Sturgeon, QA Auditor m..
2.
Preoperational Test Results a.
The inspector reviewed the results of nine accepted preoper-ational tests with the following findings.
.
(1) TP 201/11C - Reactor Coolant Pumo Flow Test - Part C There were no deficiencies identified with TP 201/11C.
-(2) TP 305/lA - Reactor Protection System, Initial Power Application
,
There were no defic encies identified with TP 305/1A.
(3) TP 600/23 - Reactor Protection System Data sheets No. 6, 6A, 7, 7A, 8, SA, 9, and 9A vere found to have been* filled out in pencil vice ink.
The inspector stated that this practice is unsatisfactory, The licensee concurred and co=mitted to take the necessary corrective 1445.I64
.
,
--
-.-..
...
.... -.
. w -......
..... m.um-h.
!
-
.
j'" *
__
-
.. r"
~
-
,
.
l ~ ~~~ ~
'
l-S-
...
action to prevent recurrence.
This item is unresolved pending implementation of this committent.
,4) TP 305/lB - Reactor Protection System, Preocerationg l
-
Calibration Data sheet No. 2, Channel C, Sheet 7 was found to have entries
'
that had been erased and new data entered.
In addition, data
-
sheet No. 2, Channel D, Sheet 8 was found to have data entries (Sec. 9.3.1.6 thru 9.3.1.13) that were blanked out and new data entered.
The inspector stated that this practice is unsatisfactory.
The licensee concurred and committed to take the necessary corrective action to prevent recurrence.
This
.
.
item is unresolved pending implementation of this cocmitment.
(5) SP 200/5 - Reactor Coolant System Leak Test
There were no deficiencies idsntified with SP 200/5.
(6) TP 200/12C - Reactor Coolant Flow Coastdown Test Part C-Hot, No Core
[
There were no deficiencies identified with TP 200/12C.
(7)-TP 600/10 - Reactor Coolant System Hot Leakane Test There were no deficiencies identified with TP 600/10.
I (8) TP 203/7 - Decay Heat Removal ES Test There vere no deficiencies identified with TP 203/7.
(9) TP 160/2 - Reactor Building Emercenev Cooline Water l
,
]
.
There were no deficiencies identified with TP 160/2.
- i b.
The inspector verified that the licensee had reviewed and accepted the following test results.
l (1) TP 330/4 - Integrated CRD System Test.
!
j (2) TP 600/6A - Liquid Waste Disposal System Operational Test.
!
(3) TP 600/7 - Intermediate Cooling System operational Test.
.
!
1445 165
,
-
..
w..u..a....:..
.
w.u
- m u.._,s
-
-
lK
.
'
-
. ' '
-6-
'
"t=
_
(4) TP 330/3 - CRDM Functional Test.
(5) SP 330/1 - CRD Preoperational Calibration (Retest Attachment).
3.
Facility Procedure Aeproval Secuence
,
The inspector observed that station procedures were approved by the
Station Sup'erintendent above the certification of incorporation of
PORC co==ents.
In at least one case, (Plant Start-up Procedure 1102-2),
certification of incorporation of PORC co==ents was dated subsequent to the date of Station Superintendent approval.
The inspector observed that the procedure flow chart in the latest revision of Docu=ent Control Procedure 1001 (presently in the approval chain) clearly indicates that such changes are to be accomplished prior to Station Superintendent approval.
The licensee indicated that the standard procedure cover
sheet would be modified to provide for certification of ircorporation of com=ents above (before) the Station Superintendent's signature, and that a letter would be pro =ulgated certifying Station Superintendent approval of procedures promulgated before the cover sheet change. The inspector indicated that such action would be considered acceptable.
This item is unresolved pending completion of corrective action.
'
4.
GORB Function
%
.
.
The inspector observed that FSAR Article 15.6.I.3 and the GORB (General Office Review Board) Charter identify the function of the GORB to be to foresee potentially significan't nuclear and radiation safety pro-lems, to recommend a means of avoidance of such safety proble=s, to periodically review the audit program for compliance with technical specifications and ANSI-N18.7-1972, and to advise the licensee's president concerning nuclear and radiation safety aspects covered by the Operating License.
The inspector noted that the minutes of the November 1, 1973 sdRB Meeting No. 10 state in part, for Action Iten
-
No. 4, that: " Serious concern was genercted by the GORB with respect to the potential delays in fuel loading and consequently startup in the event late evaluation and approval of procedures occurs". The inspector questioned whether the GORB perfor=ed as an independent review organization e. valuating safety or as a cost and schedule conitor.
The licensee stated,during the exit interview, that this item had been reviewed with the GORB after the inspector had raised the question and that it was the GORB's concern that licensing might have to be held up because of the absense of review, with no GORB intent to allow inadequate procedures or procedure reviews being involved. The inspec-tor had no fut;her questions on this item.
.
1445 166
.........--
-.....
,_
- --
.~
.
!.
-
-
'
-7-
% ~
-5.
Control Rod Patch
~
'
The inspector asked what controls were provided to assure that the cor. trol rod group assignments were properly made and maintained.
He was shown Control Rod Program Surveillance Precedure ;o. 1301-92, Revision 0 dated July 13, 1973 and an unapproved typed draft of Controlled Key Locker Control Procedure AP 1011.2, Revision 0 dated
',
',
February la,1974.
The following coc=ents were provided to the licensee.
,
Patch verification is accomplished without specific assurance
-
a.
that the cabinets are properly locked prior to verification.
I b.
Although specific valves are specified as being required to be locked open or locked shut, there is no specific provision that
'
the cabinets listed be locked, only that the keys be controlled.
,
The CRD (Control Rod Drive) Power and Logic Cabinets are specified c.
, on the list of cabinets wi th controlled keys, but the CRD Transfer C.inets which contain the CRD power patch are not so listed.
The licenses indicated that specific provisions covering the co==ents would be incorporated.. Dais item is unrcsolved.
'
'
v 6.
PORC Constitution
'
.
The inspector compared PORC (Plant Operations Review Cocmittee) assign-ments and identified no deficiencies.
He questioned the absence of off-site me=ber presence dering review of 14 work requests recorded
-
as being accomplished in PORC meeting 217 under circumstances for which the technical specifications require two off-site members.
He
-
was informed that the PORC minutes were erroneous and that the work requests reviewed involved no changes.
Each work request was
'
listed in PORC meeting 217 minutes as a repair request.
Spot check of three of the listed requests showed specific classification that there was no change or modification to an existing system or co=ponent involved.
The inspectors asked how circumstances requiring off-site PORC membership were identified and was informed that no such cir-cumstances had arisen.
This item is unresolved pending correction of PORC minutes and clearance with Licensing of the necessity for off-site (independent) me=ber participation in PORC proceedings.
7.
Preventive Maintenance Procedures The following procedures were obtained for off-site review by RO:I.
.
a.
Flow Loop Calibration, b.
. Electric Motors; Lubrication of Greased Bearings.
44} }hf
.
_/
_
_1 ~ C,_ ~ L m,,,., 3,,.glm
,...,,,7. a o m
Au'
n_
,
- %
.
f s
'
-8-
=
c.
Building Inspections.
-
d.
Main and Auxiliary Vacuum Pumps - Overhaul.
8.
Guard Force Trainine
.
The inspector reviewed the licensee's docu=entation of the
.
training provided the guard force between February 23 and
.
March 5, 1974.
There were no questions on this item at this time.
9.
Failure of IB lbkeue Puno
'
The inspector verified the licensee's i=ple=entation of the correc-tive action recommended to prevent recurrence of this failure.
The following corrective action has been taken.
.
a.
The Supervisor of Operations issued Standing Order No. 14 on February 21, 1974, requiring the following actions.
(1) The Shift Foreman must insure that status boards are main-tained up-to-date on a shift basis.
(2) All components to be tagged for any one job must be tagged
,'
on one tagging application.
(3) A valve line up must be perfor=ed when restoring a system or parts of a system to service after maintenance and a log entry made in the CR0 Log noting the fact.
.
(4) A re-e=phasis of the necessity of following Administrative Procedure 1012 concerning log entries.
(.i) A statement of policy on reporting problems or unusual
,
events to the Supervisor of Operations.
b.
The Supervisor of Operations issued Standing Order No. 13 on February 21, 1974, officially promulgating the "Do-Not-Operate Log" and specifying the following.
.
(1) Do-Not-0perate tags are hung on a piece of equipment if any type of equipment dacage =ay result from its operation.
(2) The Shif t For*e=an is responsible for the proper use of the log.
(3) The log shall be kept in the control room.
.
(4) There will be a page for each Do-Not-operate tag in existence 1445 168
~
-
,
_---
.. -.
. - -
- -.. -.
l l
.
/
,
\\
/
,
-9-
,
(5) Each time a tag is used the fact will be recorded on the applicable page, noting the date hung, the component, auth-
'
s,,_.
orized by, reason, date removed, etc.
(6) Weekly, the Shif t Foreman shall have an audit of the Do-Not-Operate Log conducted to insure that all tags shown on the log as issued are, in fact, in place.
,
'
'
Administrative Procedure 1012 has been revised to include the c.
following.
(1) Improved gt '. dance on watch relief and log review.
(2) Requirements for initialing the logs af ter review.
(3) A requirement that each nidnight entry in the CR0 log
,
includes a complete list of'out-of-service equipment.
d.
Administrative Procedure 1002 has been revised to require that the pump breakers be tagged open any time the suction valves are tagged shut.
'
_
There are no furtnen questions on this ites at this time.
(R0 Inspection Report No. 50-289/74-02, Paragraph 10)
,
m
.
10. Facility Procedures Approval The inspector verified that the following procedures have received final approval.
,
.
a.
Operatine Procedures (1) 1104-28, Solid Waste Disposal
-
b.
Administrative Procedures
.
(1) 1001, TMI Document Control.
(2) 1,006, Procedures for the Conduct of the Retraining Program.
(3) 1004, Site Emergency Plan.
c.
Health Physics Procedures (1) 1616, Use of P;h. tratory Protection Devices.
(2) 1652. Ra' i ef anitoring System Quarterly Calibration.
I L
1445 169-
_
l
.
.
I
/
, '
\\ fh
'
i
~ '
-10-
.
(3) 1675, Radioactive Liquid and Gaseous Effluent Release Records and Reporting.
(4) 1773, Monthly Source Check.
(5) 1656, Environmental Monitor Calibration.
(6) 1695, Occurrence of Unsuspected High Radiation.
.
d.
Corrective Maintenance Procedures (1) 1401-5.1, CRDM Stator Removal and Replacement.
(2) 1403-1, Nuclear Detector Removal and Replacement.
e.
Surveillance Test and Calibration Procedures
,
,
(1) 1301-4.5, Secondary Coolant - Weekly.
(2) 1301-6.3, Waste Evaporator Condensate Storage Tank.
,
(3) 1301-9.6, Condenser Partition Factor.
4.
,. c
.
s_/
(4) 1303-1.1, Reactor Coolant System Leakage.
(3) 1302-5.24, Environmental Monitoring.
,
(6) 1303-4.15, Radiation Monitoring System.
(7) 1303-8.2, Ring Girder Inspection Program.
.
-
(8) 1300-1, Inservice Inspection.
'
(9) 1303-11.2, Pressurizer Safety Valves.
(10) 1203-11.3, Main Steam. Safety Valves.
The inspector noted that nine additional procedures are awaiting final approval (1104-50, 1709, 1740, 1301-6.4, 1301-9.1, 1301-4.7, 1303-2.1 - Weekly, 1303-2.1 - Monthly, and 1303-11.18).
Procedure 1303-5.11 has been deleted from the Surveillance Procedure Index.
(Also, see RO Inspection Report No. 50-289/74-05, Paragraph 7).
These 9 additional procedures remain unresolved.
11. Emercency Procedures The inspector reviewed and verified that the emergency procedures have
.
!
been revised to incorporate previous inspection co=ments.
The following t
I.
1445 170 i
,
.
..
'
-
t.
-
r__
c._-,
... ;. m
.....,_2...
_._.
.c.
r.. m. o 2t t __
_
-
/-
~...
.-
.,
.
.rT
_
t
~.-
'
-11_
procedures are resolved.
(Report 50-289/74-05, Details, Paragraph 2)
a.
1202-02, Station Blackout, Rev 1 (1) Alarms and changes in system operations which will aid in identifying the emergency have been identified.
.
-
(2) The'cooldown curve for natural circulation cooldowns has been referenced.
b.
1202-02A, Station Blackout with Loss of Diesel Generator, Rev 1 (1) The action to be taken in the event diesel generators do not
-
start in Step 2A.2.B.4 has been specified.
.
'
'
(2) The restoration of gas pressure (Step 2A.3.5.g) was auto-matically accomplished in Step 2A.3.5.f.
c.
1202-04, Reactor Trio, Rev 1
_
.
(1) Step 4.2 was revised to require initiation of a manual trip.
,
d.
1202-06, Loss of RC/RCS Pressure. Rev 1 m
(1) The manual actions the operator must take have been specified in Step A.6.2.B.l.
.
,
(2) Precise limits have been specified in Steps A.6.2.3.4, B.6.3.B.4, and B.6.2.5.
(3) The reference to the Decay Heat Re= oval System Emergency Procedure has been deleted.
(4) Step A.6.B.3.8 was revised to specify a Site Emergency as
.
defined in the IMI Radiation Emergency Plan.
(5) Radiation levels were not included in Step B.6.3.c since this item is covered under a Site Emergency.
,
e.
1202-08, Control Rod Drive Svstem Malfunction. Rev 1 (1) The note at the bottom of Page 1 has been revised to specify the method of determining the correct rod group overlap.
(2) The point at which the one hour time period co=mences has been specified in Step 8.3A.3f.
.
1~445 171
.,
- -.. -
-
, - - -
--
/-
~.
_
-
_
_ ___ _
.
~rm -
.
-12-
'
.
f.
1202-11, H12h Activity in Reactor Coolant, Rev 1 (1) Step 11.3.8 has been revised to specify that the reactor be returned to or remain at 100% power.
g.
1202-12, Excessive Radiation Levels, Rev 1
.
(1) App'endices have now been attached.
'
h.
1202-16, RC Pumo and Motor E=ereencies, Rev 1 (1) Step 16.1.1.2.a.2 has been revised to specify that power be reduced to 75% and Step 16.2.1.2.a.2 has been deleted.
(2) The case where total injection flow is high' (>42gpm) would
'
result from a calfunction of MUV-32 which is covered as an alarm response, therefore this item was deleted.
i.
1202-19, River Water System Malfunction, Rev 1 (1) The follow up actions have been specified.
-
-
j.
1202-20, Nuclear Services Closed Cooline Svstem Failure, Rev 0
,.
(_. -
,
(1) The procedure has been reclassified as an abnormal procedure and assigned the number 1203-20.
,
.
k.
1202-24, steam Sunolv Svstem Ruoture, Rev 1 (1) The procedure now specifies a check of the ES Status Board (Procedure 1106-06) to verify that contain=ent is intact.
(2) The procedure now specifies that the operator alert plant
-
personnel of the emergency over the Page System.
1.
1202-26, Loss of Steam Generator Feed, Rev 1 (1) Step 26.2.B.l.has been revised to specify the necessary corrective action.
(2) Operating Procedures OP 1107-1, OP 1107-2, and OP 1106-6 are completed prior to reactor startup which insure that power is supplied to the motor driven feed pumps.
Subsequently, 1445 172 u
-:
-
u.
_1......
..u-...
.... -. -...
.
-m.
1 *-
L
--
t
.
,
.
/
'
~
.
-13-if power is removed from the motor, the associated switch is tagged alerting the operator that power is not available.
m.
1202-28, Hydrocen Purce, Rev. 0
.
(1) The procedure has been reclassified as an Abnormal Pro-cedure and assigned Number 1203-28.
.
.
e (2) Appendices I and II have been attached. Appendix III, a sample calculation, has been deleted.
n.
1203-37, Cooldown from outside the Centrol Room, Rev. 1
.
(1) The procedure now includes a table of locations and the action to be taken to maintain hot standby from outside the control room.
(RO Inspection Report 50-289/74-08,
.
Paragraph 2.d. (2))
o.
1202-38, Nuclear Services River Water Failure, Rev 1 (1) Step 7.a now specifies that plant load be reduced to 15%.
(2) The cooldown was' initiated per EP-1202.02.
p.
1202-28, Hydrogen Puree, Rev 1
-
,
(1) Step 28.3.9 has been revised to allow a staff authorization to increase the purge rate when the downwind dose rates are less than that allowed. When the downwind dose rate is
-
approaching the allowable limit and the purge rate has to be increased, for safety reasons, the staff must obtain con-currence of the state (local public evacuation) and the AEC prior to changing the purge rate.
,
q.
1202-24, Steam Suoolv System Ruoture, Rev. 1
'
(1) Step 7, under the i= mediate manual actions, now provides specific instructions to locate and isolate the rupture.
12. RO:I Review of Facility Procedures a.
An off-site review of the following facility procedures was con-ducted with no'de"ficiencies identified.
(1) OP-1102-2, Plant Startup.
!
1445 173
!
i
i. a....-. :L...-
- ?. -"A L -
L
"
~
-
-
--..
-.
"
..
,
-
,
.
-14-
?ut
-
(2) OP-1102-4, Power Operation.
(3) OP-1102-ll, Plant Cooldown.
(4) OP-1102-10, Plant Shutdown.
.
(5) OP-1102-1, Plant Heatup to 5250F.
.
This item is resolved.
(R0 Inspection Report 50-289/74-05, Paragraph 4)
b.
An off-site review of IFI-101, Polar Crane, and a comparison with ANSI B30.2.0 was conducted with no deficiencies identified.
This item is resolved.
(R0 Inspection Reports 50-289/73-06, Paragraph 10 and 50-289/74-05, Paragraph 4)
.
13. Indeoendent Review of Facility Procedures Of fifty-six Facility Procedures selected by the General Office Review Board (GORB) for independent review fif ty-four have been returned with coccents.
(R0 Inspection Report 50-289/74-05, Paragraph 7.f. (6)) This item remains unresolved.
%-
14. E=ercency Flood Control Procedure The licensee has issued Rev 2 to. Emergency Procedure 1202-32, Emergency Flood Control, to add the words "for flood use only"
,
to the statement covering storage and control of sandbags and plastic sheets.
This item is resolved.
(R0 Inspection Report
'
50-289/74-05, Paragraph 8.k.)
.
'
I
'
t
'
i
-
l
.
.
..
.
.
lil45 i74