IR 05000289/1975027
| ML19256D553 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Crane  |
| Issue date: | 01/02/1976 |
| From: | Davis A, Kellogg P NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19256D548 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-289-75-27, NUDOCS 7910190514 | |
| Download: ML19256D553 (13) | |
Text
'
'
- I Form 12
,
.
an 75) (Rev)
NOTICE
- JiN. 2 rs'.
,
"
-
'-
.
AS OF
, anner m at o.ucce ~.'**7t C'h ".
E'+
REGION 1 HA3 f40! C'*
'
-
r..-
~
~
.
(' --
% S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY CdeiISSION OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND E:EORCD'.EITI 7.
.
REGION I
D
0 b
.
i
.
Docket No:
sn-2eo j
'
~, Inspection Report No:
~~sa c: n _9 e n f - _,,
Metropolitan Edison Company License No:
..
.icensce:
..
P. 0.' Box 542 Priority:
-
_ _ _
.
Reading, Penn'sylvania 19603 Category:
C
___ Scfcguards
.
G cup:
.ocation:
v f a a in ~.n,,,,p,,,p 33. 17,_,3 3,
e-t
,,,,,;;g,,,,,,7 gg
.
Cype of Licensce:
Pk'R, 2535 1F.?t (BMO
,
Routine, Announced
.
Ljg of Inspection:
-
.
N vember 17-21, 1975 h
,'of Inspection:
.
.
s of Previous Inspection:
November 11, 1975
,
-
/
/2./? I ~/ C
'
1Eporting Inspector:
..
k
"
' 71
-
.
- DME P. J. fk hods, Mctor IEspector.
teco=panying Inspectort.:
none-
_,
_ _,
,
_
DME.
.
-
-
USE
-
. -.
.
.
.
.
.
--
._
__
DAIE
.
._
F.her Acco=panying Personnel:
DATE
,
__
i f.;. l. ~".
-
" viewed g :
'/
v
..
.
y DAII.
~
-
-
A. B. Davis,.Section Leader 1451
<252.
.
.
g
-
-
.
.
.
7910100
$y
.
$
.
.
-
--'
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
.
.
Enforcement Action
.
,A.
Items of Noncomoliance 1.
Violations None Identified
.
2.
Infractions
.
a.
Contrary to the requirecents of Technical Specification - 6.1.1.2.b.6 the corporate technical staff has not reviewd a violation of Technical Specification 4.1.3.
(Detail.
4a)
.
3.
Deficiencies a.
Contrary to the requirements of Technical Specification 6.1.1.1.d.7 PORC review of violations of Technical'
~
Specifications ucs not conducted.
(Detail -3.b. 5)
- =
Licensee Action on Previous 1v Identified Enforcenent Items Ri
,
Not Inspected E
.
E Unusual Occurrences S
..
Not -routine report 75-08.
(Detail 9)
.
Desian Chances e
hec 11spected Other Sienificant Findines A.
Current Findines 1.
Acceptable areas
...
Review of Plant Operations.
(Detail 2)
Review of Startup Rcquirements.
(Detail 6)
Station Superintendent Change Review.
(Detail 8)
Unplanned release.
(Detail 9-)
1451 253
-
W '
e
.
-2-
..
2.
Unresolved Items General Office Review Board Minutes.
(Detail 5)
.
3.
Licensee Identified Items of Noncomoliance Infractions A.
Contrary to Technical Specification 3.3.1.2.a Core Flood Tank Volume was not maintained above the, stated
limits.
(Detail 7.b. (6))
B.
Contrary to Technical Specification 6.2.3 the plant was not operated in accordance with approved pro.cedures.
(Detail 7.b. (7))
Deficiencies A.
Contrary to Technical Specification 3.2.2 the Eor'ic Acid
,
Mix Tank which was designated to meet the concentrated boric acid supply of the above referenecd T.S. was in-operable.
(Detail 7.b. (9))
B.
Contrary to Technical Specification 3.2.2 the Boric Acid
'
Mix Tank which was designated te meet the concentrated
')
boric acid supply of the above referenced T.S. was in-
'
/
""
(Detail 7.b. (10))
C.
Contrary to Technical Specification 4.7.2.1 control rod programing was verified for each group vice each indi-
.-.
vidual rod.
(Detail, 7.b. (ll)
B.
Status of Previousiv Identified Unresolved' Items Not Inspected Fbna gement Interview An exit manage =ent interview was conductel at the site on November 21, 1975 with the followir.g licensee personnel present:
.
.. J. Colitz, Unit Superintendent P. Good, Technical Analyst III
.6.
^~
Mr. J. O'llanlon, Engineer, Senior I Mr. M. Slatto, Engineer, Associate I
1451 254
-
,
a m.
. e.:..
.
.
.
_3
\\.
.-
The following items were discussed.
'"'
1.
Review of Plant Operations.
(Detail 2)
2.
Review of.Nonroutine Reports.
(Detail 7)
3.
Review of PORC Require =ents.
(Details 3)
4.
Review of GORB Rcquirc=ents.
(Detail 5)
5.
Review of GRC Requirements.
(Detail 4)
6.
Review of Plant Startup Requirecents.
(Detail 6)
7.
Unplanned release.
(Detail 9)
,
.
,..
1451 255 e
m I
'
=
.
.
.
.
-
.
e
""
..
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
N DETAILS Lp (
)
ks fi...
%j
[
l 1.
' Persons Contacted T
i
'
.
Mr. J. Chwastyk, Shift Supervisor Mr. J. Colitz, Unit Superintendent Mr. D. Good, Technical Analyst III
,
Mr. C. Hartman, Engineer III Mr. G. Kunder, Supervisor Station Operations
,.,
-
Mr. J. O'Hanlon, Engineer, Senior I Mr. G. Reed, Chemistry Fore =an Mr. J. Romanski, Supervi'sor Radiation Protection and Chemistry Mr. B. Swayer, Engineer III, Nuclear Pe. N. Shatto, Engineer Associate I Mr. D. Shovlin, Supervisor Station Maintenance 2.
Review of Plant Oeerations a.
Shift Logs and Ocerating Records
.
The inspector reviewed the records listed below, held discussions with the plant staff and inspected the cain control room on November 19, 1975.
(1)
Auxiliary Logs:
Entries for the periods of July 15-25,
Septe=ber 10-20 were reviewed for ce=pleteness and detail
to co==unicate equipecnt s ta tu s.
(2)
Operating Orders:
Standing Orders for the period of July through September were reviewed.
So conflicts with tha intent of Technical Specificatien requirements vere observed.
The inspector observed that th'e Standing Orders do contain under the duties and responsibilities of the Shif t Supervisor authority to shutdown the Unit under adverse conditions.
(3)
Jumper (Bypass Log):
Docucentation for July through September 1975 relative to the use of jumpers and lif ted leads was re-viewed and no bypassing discrepancies with Technical Speci-fication requirements were observed.
(4)
Chemistry Logs: Records of reactor coolant fluoride analysis for the period of July through September were reviewed relative to the requirements of Technical Specification 3.1.5.3 through u.
3.1.5.5.
Findings were acceptable.
.
'
.
1451 256 r
'
- ;.L.
.. _..
.
-5-c
_
_a
-
\\.
(5)
Control Rod Drive Patch Panels:
Documentation con-cerning the control of keys for the control rod drive patch panel was reviewed for the period of July through
. September.
Findings were acceptable.
=
(6) Reactor Coolant System Cooldown Rates: Documentation of reactor coolant system pressure and temperature for the
,
"'~
period of July through Septe=ber were reviewed relative to Technical Specification 3.1.2.1.
Findings were acceptt.ble.
.
(7)
Condensate Storage Tank:
Control Room logs were reviewed relative to Technical Specification 3.4.4. for the period
.of July'through Septecher.
Findings were neceptable.
(8)
Station Manning Requirements:
Daily attendance sheets, Control Room Logs and Shif t Supervisor Logs were reviewed relative to Technical Specification 6.1.h.1 for the period of Septecber and October.
_
Discussion with the operators on duty Nove=ber 19, 1975 indicated they were familiar with the recuirenents on 10 CFR 50.54(!?)
.
(9)
Thercal Power and Power Itbalance:
Surveillance logs were j
reviewed relative to Technical Speqification 2.1.2 for the i
'""
period of Septe=ber and October 1975.
Findings were accept-able.
(10) Reactor Coolant Syste= Pressure:
Recorder charts of reactor
...'"
coolant system pressure fc. the period of Septet:er and October were reviewed relative to Technical Specification 2.2.1.
Findings were acceptable.
b.
Tour of Accessible Areas The. inspector observed operations in the Control Roo= and made
.
tours of the Auxiliary, Turbine and Reactor Buildings on I:ovember
19, 1975. The following observations were made:
_.
f :. - ?
(1) Monitoring Instrumentation:
Control Room indications for Reactor Building Pressure, Reactor Coolant Systen Pressure, and River Water delta - I were compared with Technical Speci-r-
fications.
No discrepancies were noted.
.
1451 257
-
-
/
T-
u
-
.
'
...
D D W 70 )9 P f-6-
'o JM Kink
}
w-(2) Annunciator Alarms:
The inspector observed various alarm indications that were present on the " sin Centrol Board due to the plant status.
Operators were kncwledge-able of the cause of the alarms.
(3)
Radiation Controls:
Radiation control areas in the Auxiliary Building and Turbine Building ucre inspected for proper post-
[*
,
ting, condition of step off pads and disposal of St.T clothing.
.
Findings were acceptable.
=
-
.
(4)
Plant Housekeeping Conditions:
Storage cf =2:erial and components was observed with respect to prevention of ae safety and fire hazards.
.:
r::. 9 No adverse conditions were noted.
,.,
d (5)
Existence of Fluid Leaks.:
The inspector noted water dripping
.
in the vicinity of core flood tank A.
The presence of the
water was
.'s.ediately reported to the control roc: and the
'
source located and isolated.
The cause of the leakage was a valve that had been utilized for P.CS venting earlier that day.
The water was collected and recoved pricr.to completion x
of the tour.
,
(6)
Existence of Piping Vibrations:
No excessive pi: ping vibra-
?
tions were observed during this inspection.
(7)
Pipe Hangers /Seisnic Restraints:
Several pipe _ hangers and seismic restraints (snubbers) on safety related s/stens were observed.
Findings were acceptable.
.
(8)
Valve positions /Equipeent Start Positions:
The supply and y
discharge valves of the service water pucps, and the controls for the emergency diesels were observed to be in accordance with Technical Specification requirerents.
(9)
Equip =ent Caution / Lockout Tag Information:
The active tag log was reviewed and the inspector observed the equipment under tag was consistent with the log.
(10) Plant Tour: The inspector was infor=ed that the last plant Rd tour nade by the Shift Supervisor occurred during that shift.
The Unit Superintendent conducted a tour on ::ovember 16, 1975.
.
.
-
l'451 258
~
.
-
.
.
.
D*
D
"D 7 dh
e
.
_ j\\,lnLa
-
-7-eeJ
>
.
3.
Review of PORC.Recuirements a.
The inspector reviewed the following records:
9L (1)
Minutes PORC Meeting 298 dated September 2-6, 1975
(2)
Minutes PORC Meeting 299 dated September 8-12, 1975 (3)
Minutes PORC Meeting 300-dated September 15-19, 1975
.
.
(4)
Minutes PORC Meeting 301 dated September 22-27, 1975 (5) Minutes PORC Meeting 302 dated Septe ber 29-October 5,1975 (6)
Minutes PORC Meeting 303 dated October 6-10, 1975 (7) Minutes PORC Meeting 304 dated October 13-17, 1975 (8)
List of PORC Mer.bers and Alternates dated September 5, 1975 b.
During this revicu and subsecueno, discussicn with netbars of the plant staff, the inspector verffied the following:
~
(1). A quoru= of the PORC was present for the =eetings held-during September and October.
(2)
The PORC reviewed all procedure changes and new procedures approved for implementation during September and October.
(3) No tests or er.periments were conducted which required a PORC review to determine whether or nct an unrev1:. red n=
,
)
safety questien was involved as req 2,csted by the Station
,
Superintendent for the period of Se;;te=ber and October.
-
a
'
(4)
The PORC reviewed violations of applicable federal statues,
"
codes, regulaticas and internal instructicn and station procedures occurring during September and C;ctober.
(5)
The inspector noted that the PORC was not docunenting review and recon = ended action to prevent recurrence for NRC identified violations of Technical Specifications. Inspection Report 50-289/75-16 contained an Iten of Moncompliance apcinst Technical Specification 2.3.lb. and Inspection Report 50-2S9/75~.
contained an Item of rencompliance apainst Technical Specificcfic!
6.5.c Appendix B.
No documentation of a PORC review of these~
items could be located.
Discussion with staff personnel indi-cated that an individual review by sete PORC nembers had been accomplished.
The lack of formal PCRC :eview of violations of Technical Specifications to prevent recurrence is contrary to the requirements of Technical Specification 6.1.1.d.7
_
This item is a deficiency.
.
1451 259
,
,
J
.
- .:
?
....
-8-
-
D 9D 3D p'
J A}lr@L, WJ
&
4.
Corporate Technical Support Staff
.
,
,
(
The inspector reviewed the following records to verify review a.
of abnormal occurrences and violations of Technical Specifica-tions and license requirements which occurred during September and October.
_
GRC 75-25 meeting held Septe=ber 11, 1975 GRC 75-26 ceeting be.id Septe=ber 25, 1975 GRC 75 27 meeting held October 14, 1975
~=-
GRC 75-28 meeting held October 21, 1975
,
GRC 75-29 meeting held October 30 & November S,1975 l-]l-This review indicated that abnormal Occurrences, ronreutine Re orts,
-
and Environtental Incidents were reviewed.
The inspector eculd find no record of review for violation of Technical Specification tabic 4.1.3.
This violation had received ?GRC review during mee.t'ng 299 held September 8-12, 1975.
=-
Generation Review Ccemittee minutes 75-01 dated January 30, 1975 sta':es in part, "The GRC, composed of corporate Technical Support
___"=
Staff, provides documentation that the necessary safety reviews have been acco=plished and that the staff has no safety concerns'."
The failure of the corporate technical staff to review violations of Technical Specifice. tion is contrary to Technical Specific:tien
,
6.1.1.2.b.6 and is considered to be an Infraction.
s s
5.
General Office Revicu Eoard (CORB)
.
.
.
The inspector attenpted to verify that revi'eus of ite=s recuired by
.
T.S. 6.1.1.3e for the period cf July thrauch Septenber had been con-ducted by the GORB.
The ninutes for the GORE =ceting held on Sept-ember 10, 11 were not availabic for review.
.
-
This item is unresolved.
6.
Plant Startue
The inspector reviewed the facility procedure, OP1102-2, Plant a.
Startup to verify the procedure provided for assuring the follow-ing Technical Specification conditions were net prior to criti-cality :
..
(1) 'T.S.
3.3.1.le Operability of both decay heat renoval pungs.
=.
(2)
T.S. 3.7.1.f Operability of the stat'. Dan batteries and
chargers.
145Y 260
'
\\
l
_
?~
..;
.....
.
~;;L..
DD gggg'gi-tnr, p-9- .j (3) T.S. 3.3.1.3a Operability of the reactor building spray nozzle headers.
... (4) T.S. 3.3.1.4a Operability of the nuclear service closed ., cycle cooling water pucps.
(5) T.S. 3.3.1.2d Operability of at least one core flood . pressure channel and one level channel per tank.
== (6) T.S. 3.3.1.2a Both core flood tanks filled and pressurized.
== (7) T.S. 3.7.la Operability of all engineered safefuards kusses, - engineered safeguards sutichgear, and engineered safetuards ' load shedding system.
(8) T.S. 3.6.3 Containrent integrity existent prier te rod =- movement or bcron dilution which =ight reduce shutdown margin to less than 1% LK/K.
EFE (9) T.S. 3.5-1 T 1 Operability of manual trip pushbutton for ][ the reactor'pr'otection system.
F (10) T.S. 3.3.1.3c Manual valves in the discharce lines of the sodium hydroxide and sodium thiosulfate tanks are 1ccked .) open.
,. p b.
The inspector also reviewd thi results cf Surveillance Protedures b ~ 1303-11.8, 1303-11.10, 1301-4.6, 1303-11.9, 1303-11.15, 1303-11.10', F 1303-5.2, 1302-5.15, and operating precedures 1102-1 (plant F.eatu? - to 5250F) which are utilized to verify sene of the Technical Speci-e ' fication require =ents noted in 6a.
. b.
No startups were conducted through the p'eried of July through .. @E September, 1975.
The inspector verified that the requirenents of 6a were met prior to the startup conducted on June 26, 1975.
F::; . 7.
Review of Nonroutine Event Reocrts a.
Selected Nonroutine Event Repoits were reviewed to verify that: (1).The cause was identified and that details were clearly reported to the NRC and facility canagement; .. _ . (2) Corrective action described in the licensee 's' report was taken to prevent recurrence; ~ 1451 261 . .. - ' * ': _,,
. . J J
~' / \\ (3) Each event was reviewed and evaluated as required by ,, the Technical Specifications; (4) Safety limits, limiting safety system settings, and Et limiting conditions for operations were not exceeded.
== s This review included inspection of PORC minutes, change / - Modification packages, Work Requests, Vendor Correspondence, and discussion with various staff personnel.
b.
The following Nonroutine Event Reports were reviewed.: ' , Nonroutine 10 day recorts (1) *A0 75-22 Socket weld joint leaks in the suction vent line for..ake-Up Furp (MU-PIA). . Weld repairs were conpleted by U. R. 10049 on July 19, 1975.
CH-461 when cocpleted will modify the vent line restraints to prevent recurrence.
- ... _ (2) A0 75-23 Failure of a up-to-frequency auxiliary relay for the "B" Diesel Generator to activate.
Inspection and ccrrective action on the retaininig MG-6 relays ^ , ) - was completed under NR 10202 on August 8, 1975.
-. i (3) A0 75-25 Failure of a frequency relay for the "A" Diesel Generator to activate.
.q Existing surveillance procedures for =ainte,nnnce and calibration of the relays were reviewed and no changes were . necessary.
(4) A0 75-27 Socket veld leak in the suction vent line for - Make-Up Pucp (MU-P-1A).
E Weld repairs on the suction vent line were ccepleted on
August 28, 1975.
CM-461 unen co=plete will modify the vent i line restraints to prevent recurrence.
~ (5) A0 75-29 railure of an Engineered Safeguards operated Reactor Building Containcent Isolation Valve (AE-V-lD) to close fully.
~] _ e 1451 262 . - . .
-
F e ..
. . -11-D *" 3 DD ~ @I)I Q oo14 bilb MLA L ] . -/ Position indication tarkings were placed on the valve actuators by work request 11135 completed on September 17, 1975.
CM-491 when complete 1 will in-corporate further nodifications recettended by the "- . manufacturer to prevent recurrence.
(6) A0 75-31 A core Flood Tank found to have a lower level than that required by Technical Specifications.
~ , This is a violation of T.S. 3.3.1.2a which was dis-i covered during a level transmitter calfbrcticn being '" conducted due to dif ferences in indication between re-dundant level channels. After calibration ti.e indica- .ted level was 12.2 ft.
2 crated uater was aided to re-store the volume of vnter to 1010 cubic ft.
(12.4 f t - level).
The long term trend nonitoring progran for problem in-dication is currently under preparation.
_... The licensee's corrective action appears adecuate and - no response is required for this Infraction.
- (7) A0 75-32 Two manual icolatien valves in air supply for Reactor Euilding Personnel Access Cocr closed.
' While perfor=ing a door seal ler.h t st, t o valves (PP-V-47 and 179) were found closed.
The ror=,al position of these valves is open.
Thin failure to felicw survaillanca procedure (1303-11.16) which requires tha valves to be re-opened af ter any testing is a violation of. Technical Spcci-fiation 6.2.3.
The licensee's corrective action appears adequate and no F.
response to this Infraction is required.
! (8) A0 75-33 Failure of (!!R-V-4A) De-Ice Make Up Valve to the Nucicar Services Cooling-River Water Circulating Water System to close.
Work Request 113S3 checked the control circuit for centinuity operation, running currents and travel ticc.
This work re-quest was completed on September 22, 1975.
' (9) A0 75-35 0bstructed Boric Acid Mix Tank Outlet Linc.
While the Boric Acid Mix Tonk (BAMT) was designated :.s the tank to coet T.S. 3.2.2, an attempt to transfer boric acid was conducted.
The attc=pted transf er Icd to tr.e discovery ' . , _,/ 1451 263 m ....
. u of the BAMT outlet line being obstructed and EM'T . mixer propeller being disconnected from the cotor _/ shaft.
The tank's outict lin'e was inrediately cicared returning the tank to an operable status.
The in-operability of the EAMT was a violation of T.S. 3.2.2.
is
- .-
The licensec's corrective action appears adequate and no .g response to this Deficiency is required, s_,
- - -
. (10} A0 75-37 Inoperabic Eoric Acid Mix Tank.
- +.:+ While the Boric Acid Mix Tank (BAMT) was designated as ' _ the source of concentrated boric acid solution to meet ... T.S. 3.2.2, a transfer was atte=pred.
This transfer re- }} sulted in the discovery that the cutlet strainer fren the , BAla was particily obstructed with beric ceid fines.
This - failare to have the LAMT opcrable ac a viele 1cn ci !.S.
+.2 . 3.2.2.
Upon discovery a plant shutdown wcs str.rted until the BAMT strainer was c1 caned and the BX.'T returne.d to operable status.
'#~ The licensce's corrective action appears adequate and no response to this Deficiency is required.
_ (11) A0 75-33 Inadequacy in the 1:plementation of a Centrol Rod Program Verification.
' . During a PORC review of the results. of the Control Rod - Progrcs Verification it was found thc.: the surve.illance regoirecents of T.S. 4.7.2.1 ucre not satisficd in that the surveillance was performed 'of =ov.ing a group oY reds in-stead of moving cach rod separately.
,._ The licensec's corrective action. appears adequate and no m response to this Deficiency is required.
(12) Non-Routine 30-Day Report 75-06 Sedicent accumulation in intake channel.
The Superintendent of the York Haven Hydro Station has been ( contacted by the Unit Superintendent and instructions for y the notification of the. Superintendnent of TMI-I will bc - sent to the Hydro Station by December 15, 1975.
c.
A review of selected safety related maintenance was conducted to _." - - ascertain if they should have been reported as defined by Teclinical Specifications.' The maintenance selected was Wcrh Request 11651.
A Diesel Generator, and 11652 Valve RC-V-1.
Findings wore accept-able.
m .; 1451 264 r .:
. - . . =3 , ( 8.
Station Superintendent Change Review Resnonsibili,es =- The inspector verified by procedure review, discussion with the Unit Superintendent and review of changc/ modification for=s, that all proposed changes to the facili;.y were reviewed and evaluated during the period of September and October.
, 9.
Unplanned Release During this inspection, the inspector'vas inforced of an un-planned release of radienctive material.
The releae occurred over a period of several hours and was caur.td by drawing radio-active gas through the atesa generate s.
The stean gencer.tcrs were being filled and were under a v.cuun.
Ihe ras var, drr n from the Reactor Coolant Drcin Tank throu;h the stczn f.ener acrs into the-condensor where the gas was e:chausted via the vacut:- puta to the turbine building vent.
Nen-Routine 10. day report 75-05 initial notification was cade en November 20, 1975.
The in-spector had no further questions at this ti=e.
. . -
1 .' . . . - .=. . . . .'$.Y . . . l451 265 ~ , -) . ' h.[ }}