IR 05000289/1976015
| ML19276H175 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Crane  |
| Issue date: | 06/08/1976 |
| From: | Hurd R, Lazarus W, Mccabe E NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19276H173 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-289-76-15, NUDOCS 7910150329 | |
| Download: ML19276H175 (19) | |
Text
{{#Wiki_filter:*
... .._;. II:I For= 12
- h0W c c'-
rr r 573 - ;,'g n 75) (Rev) ""' A.-- : -
- :- C w w;.. C ;;r: m,:;g pg., _..r - w e.c o m se m gm . U. S.1:UCLEAR REGULATORY CC":!ISSIO:t M OFFICE OF I:;SPECTIC:! A TD E:*FORCC:E:.T d...s.
REGIO:t I Mg: in II Inspection Report ::o: 50-239/76-15 Docket lio: 50-239 E Licensce: Metropolitan Edisen Conpany License !Io: DPR-50 P. O. Box 542 Priority: Reading, Pennsylvania 19603 Category: C - ... _ Safeguards Loca tio n: Three !!ile Island 1, }iiddletown, Pennsylvania ' =... _,. Type of Licensee: P G, 2535; IfJt, B&W _ 2 of Inspection: Routine, Unannounced Dates of Inspection: July 7-9, 12-15, 1976 Cates of Previcus Inspectien: June 14-16, 1976 , . Reporting Inspector: [/)/[[e[, /! M ff > h _ '. R/d/76 [1._ _ R.~0. Hurd,fRea-tor nspector DATE ' <
._ 6 M-c'% - [ -/ 7(. . Accc panying Inspector : ' #
f-r" X J. La:ftrus, Reactor Inspector DATE ' (July 8-9,1976) f DATE t; G... DATE 00 /k 04A $ Il(I76 Other Accc=panying, Per.<,onnel: . _. - - E. C. McCabe, Section Chief, Nuclear DA u _jg ~ _ ' ' . Support Section Nc. 1 Reactor Operations I/ 5 h b Revic.cd By: C G#~ Chi and Nuelear Sucem 3 ranch E. C. }!cCabe, Section Chief. Nuclear Support Section No. 1, DAT @.}U Reactor Operations and Nuclear Support Branch J ,, " 9 - 1413 149
~ 7910150 % z..... ... -.... _.. ... ..s. . _ __.
O SUS ^!ARY OF FIIDI:GS ._ .. m Enforce =ent Action m_ fT - V Items of '!once=oliance Infraction r- ~echnical Specification 3.5.2.4.d requires the core power quadrant tilt to be =onitored at a =ini=un frecuency of two hours, when core po-er exceeds 15 percent of rated power.
Contrary to the above the core quadrant tilt was not nonitored between 2303 on M.ay 26,1975 and 0120 on iby 27,1976 when the core power was above 15 percent of rated power.
(Details, 2.a) Other Siznificant Findines A.
Current Findings 1.
Acceotable Areas . _.. These are itens which were inspected on a sampling basis and findings did not involve an Ites of Nonconpliance, Deviation or "- an Unresolved Iten.
a.
Shift and Daily Checks.
(Details, 2.b) b.
Precritical Checklist.
(Details, 3) c.
Reactor ?rotection System Surveillance.
(Details, 4) d.
Reactor Building Pressure Setpoints.
(Details, 5) e.
?cwer Range Channel Calibration.
(Details, 6) - f.
Reactor Building Spray Channels.
(Details, 7) g.
Sampling of Spent Fuel Fool Water.
(Details, 8) h.
Pressuri:er Code Safety Valves Setpoint.
(Details, 9)
- .
i.
Operability of Steam Generators.
(Details, 10) j.
Heat Rate Linitation.
(Details, 11) . _ = till> 1413
0
_.. _ ,eee,
. . -2-k.
Te=perature Limit for Criticality.
(Details, 12) .5. 5 E'
== 1.
Limits on Oxygen in Reactor Coolant.
(Details, 13) glif E.L.
m.
Reactor Coolant Leakage.
(Details, 14) 152 Esa 5.artup Rate Control Red Hold.
(Details, 13) [_1 n.
o.
Channel Bypass Rey.
(Details, 16) " . _. p.
Verification of Core Pcwer Distribution.
(Details, 18) q.
Pressure Injection Actuation Serpoints.
(Details, 19) J.
r.
Containnent Integrity Require =ents.
(Details, 20) Followup Review of Refueling and Containment Leak Rate s.
Procedure.
(Details, 21) - t., Ha.1dling, Storage and Shipping Requirements.
(Details, 22) u.
S stem Modification.
(Details, 24) v.
F llowup Review of Facility Procedures.
(Details, 25) w.
S acus of Manual Contain=ent Isolation Valves.
(Details, 26) 2.
Curesolved Ite=s _ These are items for which more infor=ation is required in order to determine whether the items are acceptable or Items of Noncom-pliance.
7-a.
Maintenance of Reactivity Plots.
(Details, 17. a) b.
Holding Ti=es.
(Details, 17.b) c.
Reactor Building Purge System.
(Details, 21) ,p d.
Preventive Maintenance-Lubrication.
(Details, 23.b) x.
- i.'
1413 151 -.7 .... -.. _.... ,,. , "?'"'." .-7., ..
-
- 5..._
=~~~ h _. _ _ - 3 -- .:=X
b.h-sid-3.
Items of Nonce =oliance Identified bv Licensee . =3 jrhh.= ~ Deficienev
=1
Contrary to T.S. 6.8.1, Procedure A? 1016, Section 5.3.2 the 953= required developnent of Preventive Maintenance Schedules was l5 =j not accocplished for the first and second quarters of 1976.
E;E;g (Details, 23.a) jf 3.
Status of Previous Unresolved Items gg;
- E.
1.
The following itens have been resolved.
(j$hs 11-; - a.
Checkoff Lists.
(Details, 27.a) }h.[4 m b.
Source Range Operability.
(Details, 27.b) 35;;h .L.X c.
Nuclear Overpower Trip Setting.
(Details, 27.c) }[][[ ia=j d.
E=ergency Diesel Generator Monthly Test.
(Details, 27.d) g.; G.'
~ ~ ~ ~ e.
OP 1102-2, Plant Startup.
(Details, 27. e) _. _. . Temporary Change Notices.
(Details, 27.f) f.
7_ _-f 2.
The following ites renains unresolved.
Corporate Technical Staff Review.
(De tails, 27.g) 7- -: f..[. Manacenent Interviev - 1_= An exit meeting was held onsite on July 15, 1976 at the conclusion of the
inspection to discuss the findings of the inspection as detailed in this
- ._. _
report.
_.
Fi B The following licensee personnel were in attendance: W [h[[d Mr. J. J. Colitz, Unit No.1 Superintendent Mr. J. P. O'Hanlon, Senior Engineer Mr. R. E. Nedig, QC Specialist = ' .
. =:r : . ? S-
ar.;I O .. 55E .5:7 =,_ 5.
. _
i~Ep[ = - - - .. _
. . .=. ,n
. _ _.
- k--
-:
. DETAILS $.[ .=.z.:__ . . .=- ._ g:= 1.
Persons contacted Discussions were held with the following persons during the cenduct bi of the inspection activities documented in this report: M- . - - . " Ms. D. 3edair, Clerk Junior - Mr. M. L. 3eers, Shift Supervisor Mr. D. J. Holt =, Shift Fore =an Mr. T. L. Book, Shift Foreman ._ Mr. J. J. Colitz, Unit No. 1 Superintendent 33; Mr. W. E. Daniels, QC Engineer
- .:E:'
Mr. D. L. Good, Technical Analyst III - Mr. D. Harper, Instrunent Foreman
- 57'
Mr. J. Hilbish, Nuclear Engineer [[ Mr. G. A. Kunder, Operations Supervisor ..g Mr. D. McGettrick, I and C Engineer Mr. R. Menser, Instrunent Technician .f-Mr. H. Mitchell, Electrical Maintenance Supervisor T.E -
Ms. C. Nixdorf, Of fice Supervisor ..,. - . Mr. L. G. Noll, Shife Foreman Mr. J. P. O'Hanlon, Engineer, Senior I ~ ' = - Mr. M. A. Shatto, Engineer, Associata I T Mr. J. Smith, Msintenance Engineer ' Ms. R. Trout =cn, Maintenance Engineer Mr. G. Wallace, Shif t Supervisor e- = 2.
Shift and Daily Checks .ig The inspector reviewed the data sheets for SP 1301-1, Shif t and Daily =: 3 Checks perforned in April, May and June of 1976. The purpose of this - review was to verify that compliance with the Technical Specification requirements listed below was documented by completion and cpproval of the data sheets.
,7._. T.S. 4.1-1, Item 3, Daily Check of Power Range Amplifiers.
.- ::. != : T.S. 4.1-1, Item 7, Shif tly Check of Reactor Coolant Temperature Channels.
T.S. 2.2.1, Limit on Reactor Coolant System Pressure of 2750 psig.
.i.
l_i_.i.. T.S. 3.5.2.4.a., b. and c, Limit on Core Power Quadrant Tilt of 4*:. FJ . M-O . =. =- .- \\53 - g\\3- .::_- _ -, - ... _.... -......
- ?-
- - - - -;; - ..[ f^' =:
, . _ _. _ - _. u_=--- .. .. O - 5-
- .~_:._.
.. L'.* .. ^^T.
- ..
T.S. 3.5.2.4.d. M9nitoring Quadrant Tilt every 2 hours.
j;3h g.._._.g T.S. 3.5-1, Ite= 2, Operability of Pcwer Range Ins trument.
pgf? T.S. 3.5-1, Item 6, operability of Pressure - Tenperature . Channels.
{ T.S. 3.5-1, Item 2.a. Operability of LPI Reactor Coolant F#E-Pressure Channels.
Z- "" T.S. 3.5-1, Item 3.a. Operability of Reactor Building Isolation Channels.
ggj:- W T.S. 3.5.2.5.d, Limit on Core Power I: balance.
g
Based on the above review the inspector had the following findings.
a.
Quadrant Tilt Monitoring g.=
Technical Specification 3.5.2.4.d requires the core power quadrant ...- = tilt to be monitored at a mini =um frequency of two hours, when ~'gg
core power c=ceeds 15 percent of rated power.
Surveillance Proce-dure 1301-1, Shif t and Daily Checks requires that, every two hours, _ _ _ the indicated level of each power range channel be recorded and . the quadrant tilt be deter =ined when above 15 percent power.
In addition, the licensee stated that the hourly co=puter log printout also records core quadrant tilt. The inspector determined, .. _ by review of the Shif t Fore =an's Log and the Station Daily Log, that [2ji the core power exceeded 15% between 2100 on May 26,1976 and 0120 "~ )2 on May 27, 1976. The reactor tripped at 0120 on May 27, 1976. The 1? SP 1301-1 data sheets for this period of ti=e contained no entry [ for quadrant tilt.
The inspector requested the hourly computer if logs for this period. The licensee stated that, although the " computer was operational, the only co=puter logs available for n this period were at 2202 and 2303 on May 26, 1976. The inspector [ reviewed the logs and deter =ined that the quadrant tilt had been conitored and did not exceed the limit of 4% at 2202 and 2303 on [ May 26, 1976. However, contrary to T.S. 3.5.2.4.d the core quadrant i:g tilt was not monitored at a minimum frequency of 2 hours when the ~ reactor power was above 15 percent of rated between 2303 on.'by 26, 1976 and 0120 on May 27, 1976. This is an Infraction.
_ _. EMI+ M~2# .5EE '.5l:2 - MT O
- .=.=:
\\SA ' - -.
, - -=. = -.
6- - m b.
Other Areas Reviewed _ Mf" With respect to the other areas reviewed under this item the inspe:- gr# E tor found no inadequacies.
g :.=.. 3.
Prectitical Checklists L{- The inspector reviewed the " Precritical Checklist," 0F 1102-2, " Enclosure No. 1 completed prior to the reactor startup of my 24, 1976.
The purpose of this review was to verify that compliance with the Techni-cal Specification requirements listed belcw was documented by a sign-of f of a specific item in on the " Precritical Checklist."
b _ T.S. 3.1.1.3.a. Operability of Pressurizer Code Safety Valves.
,, =. T 3. 3.3.1.1.b, Operability of HPI Pumps.
..... T.S. 3.3.1.2.b, Core Flood Tank Boron Concentration greater than 2270 ppm-O T.S. 3.3.1.2.c, Care Flood Tank Discharge Valves open and breakers tagged open.
. T.S. 3.3.1.4.c, Operability of Decay Heat Cooling Water Pumps.
- -..=.-
T.S. 3.5-1, Item 2, Operability of Pouer Range Instrument Channels.
T.S. 3.5-1 Item 6, Operability of Pressure - Te t.arature Instrument Channels.
T.S. 3.5-1, Item 1.c, Operability o: EPI Manual Pushbuttons.
T.S. 3.5-1, Item 2.a, Operabil.* ty of Reactor Coolant Pressure Instrument Channels.
T.S. 3.5-1, Ites 3.a, Operability of Reactor Building Isolation Pressure N Instrument Channels.
I.1 F T.S. 3.7.1.a, Operability of ES Electrical Syste=s.
T.S. 3.7.1h,, c., and d, Operability of Unit Electrical Systems.
- T.S. 3.7.le, Operability of Emergency Diesel Generators.
= = _ ~. ~ = T.S. 3.7.lf, Operability of Station Batteries and Chargers.
.) O The inspector found no inadequacies in the above areas.
< ...,.. ..,3 ... -... - - - - ' ......
=m . _ '7 - . - 4.
Reactor Protection Svstem Surveillance =.., - - - =.
The inspector reviewed the data sheets for SP 1303.4.1, Reactor Protection Ms.1.
Syste=1 Surveillance, for tests performed during May and June, 1976. The Es_e purpose of this review was to verify that compliance with the Technical 5E9' Specification requirenents listed below was documented by proper comple- [f.. "' tion and approval of the data sheets.
.; . T.S. 2.3-1, Ite 5, Reactor Coolant Pressure low pressure setting greater than 1500 psig.
T.S. 4.1-1, Item 11, Monthly test of Reactor Coolant Pressure Temperature r "' Cceparator Instru=ent Channel.
The inspector found no inadequacies in the areas listed above.
.. 5.
Reactor Building Pressure Setooints . The inspec:or reviewed the data sheets for SP 1303-4.13. Reactor Building Emergency Cooling and Isolation System Analog Channels perfor=ed May 20, 1976 and June 7, 1976.
The purpose of this review was to verify that
conpliance with the Technical Specification require:en:s listed below was docu=ented by proper completion and approval of tha data sheet.
T.S. 2.3-1, Item 8, Reactor Building Pressure Trip Cha tel setpoint less than or equal to 4 psig.
T.S. 3.5.3.1, Reactor Building Pressure Channel Setpoict for Actuation of RS Cooling and Isolation less than or equal to,4 psig, gg.. =.. Th. inspector found no inadequacies in the areas listed above.
- 6.
Power Range Channel Calibration The inspector revitued SP 1302-2.1, Power I= balance Calibration, Revision . 4, Septe=ber 6, 1975 and TON 76-219, which nodifies SP 1302-2.1.
The E purpose section of this procedure states in part, "To verify that power i= balance calibration is in co=pliance with the requirements of T.S. 4.1-1, Item 4."
The inspector also reviewed RP 1550-04, Power Imbalance Detector , Correlation Test and the results of this procedure which was performed at 75" power during the initial power escalation following the refueling outage of February - May,1976.
The results of RP 1550-04 were used to - determine the ratio of the core imbalance measured by the incore detectors .; g to the out-of-core power range channel detectors. This ratio was incor-q.{17 porated into SP 1303-4.13 by TCN 76-219.
In addition, the inspector
- g reviewed the results of SP 1302-2.1 performed May 28, 1976, June 1, 1976,
.;.g g .as-G \\ -
=
- 3 _
- ---- 5 ..; - - - - -
- g;..
...; + - = =
. . --,--- _ - =- - .. tN-8-W -
- -
and June 13, 1976 to satisfy the requirements of T.S. 4.'-1, Item 4 ff,gg to perform a =onthly calibration of the power range channel imbalance.
Eg[=h -== = The inspector found no inadequacies in this area.
fTF".
_.. _. 7.
Reactor Building Soray Channels jh[k g=- Technical Specification 4.1-1, Item 21 requires calibration of the . = Reactor Building Spray Channels at a refueling cutage interval. The --- inspector reviewed SP 1302-5.11, Revision 2, September 5, 1975, Reactor _ ..y Building Spray Channel Calibration and the ccepleted data sheets for this procedure perforned Dece=ber 18, 1975. The licensee stated that ggj.. SP 1302-5.11 was performed prior to the February, 1976 refueling outage n=x to satisfy the requirenents of T.S. 4.1-1, Item 21.and to conform to _]_ the, "not to exceed 27 =onth requirement" of T.S.
1.2.8.
The perfor=ance
- l;s.;
of the surveillance test prior to the refueling outage had been previcusly "= inspected (refer to Inspection Report 75-11, Details, 4). 7= T.F The inspector found no adequacies in this area.
=?? +., Sa=oling of Seent Fuel Pool Water Sir
S.
' The inspector reviewed SP 1301-5.7, Revision 0, October 18, 1973, Spent Fuel Pool Surveillance Procedure and the co=pleted data sheets for this procedure perfor:ed monthly in April, May and June of 1976.
The data =-- sheets indicated that the Spent Fuel Pool Water boron concentration - was greater than 2000 ppo during this period.
T.S. 4.1-3, Item 4 requires that the concentration be maintained greater than 1800 ppm.
The inspector found no inadequacies in this area.
.. - = =TX 9.
Pressuri=er Code Safety Valves Seenoint = ~ _ The inspector reviewed SP 1303-11.2, Pressuricer Code Safety Valves Setpoint Verification which provides two methods to verify the set
pressures. The procedur~e provides instructions and documentation t.. _. for checking set pressure with the valve in place or using litrogen U pressure with the valve on a bench stand.
The iaspector reviewed - data sheets of SP 1303-11.2 for the bench stand tests performed on p;g; valve RC-RV-13 (April 12,1976) and valve RC-RV-1A CApril 25, 1976).
i =5 .= The set pressures were within one percent of 2435 psig, the value z.=- given in the bases for T.S. 2.2.
The inspector found no inadequacies . gu in this area.
gjgg j_= a O Expi- . s; s . = =_ . m.amm.
-
. - .. _ -9-10.
Operability of. Steam Generators-jgs
Technical Specification 3.1.1.2 requires that at least one steam T.T E== generator be operable when the reactor coolaat system temperature exceeded 2500F. The inspector verified that the following docu=enta-i3f& ~7= tion indicated that this require =ent was satisfied in April, May and June of 1976.
~ 1.. - . a.
OP 1102-1, Plant Heatup, Step 37, May 18, 1976.
b.
Shif t Fore =an's Log (April-June, 1976).
c.
SP 1301-1, Shift and Daily Check (April-June, 1976).
The inspector found no inadequacies in this area.
]p 11. Heatuo Rate Li.itation The inspector reviewed the recorder charts of the Reactor Coolant _ System te=perature and pressure recorded during the plant heatup
folloui.g the refueling outage. The plant heatup occurred from
May 18, 1976 to May 21, 1976. The inspector cocpared this data agcinst the li=1tations specified in T.S. 3.1.2.1, 3.1.2.3, 3.1.2.4 _ and Figure 3.1-1.
The inspector found'no inadequacies in this area.
12.
Te=cerature Limit for Criticality Technical Specification 3.1.3.2 requires that the reactor coolant - te=perature be greater than 5250F whenever the reactor is made critical. The inspector reviewed the completed Precritical Checklists for the eight reactor startups which occurred between July 1.
1975 and June 30, 1976. The review of the documentation incicated that .,. - the Reactor Coolant System temperature exceeded 5250F each ti=e the reactor was brougM ritical. The inspector found no inadequacies in this area.
13.
Li=its on Oxvgen in Reactor Coolant System
The inspector reviewed the data sheets for SP 1301-3 which documented the results of reactor coolant analyses conducted during April, Mav and June of 1976. The data indicated that the oxygen concentration did not exceed 0.03 ppm during reactor operations.
=,, .s Technical Specification 3.1.5.1 specifies a limit of 0.1 ppm during g = reactor operations.
The inspector found no inadequacies in this area.
- 4@ T@ = _
. Z - 10 - ;.. , 14.
Reactor Coolant Leakage .=.7 =: The inspector reviewed the Shif t Foreman's Log and the data sheets of Y~ SP 1303-1.1, RC System Leak F. ate Evaluation.
The purpose of this review {5 was to verify that the documentation indicated compliance with leak rate
- =
"== 11:1 ations of T.S. 3.1.6.3 (No leakage through a strength boundary) and t T.S. 3.1.6.8 (Recover:ble leakage greater than 30 ppm). c=f The inspector found no inadequacies in this area.
15.
Startus ! ce Control Rod Hold y Technical Specification 3.1.9.2 requires that the Startup Rate Control Rod Hold be ope-able during low power physics tests. The inspector . _.. verified that, prior to the perfor=ance of P.P 1550-02, Zero Power Physics, on May 24, 1976 the following tests were performed demonstating the operability of the Startup Rate Control Rod Hold of the source range and intermediate range nuclear instrumentation.
a.
SP 1303-7.2, source Range Channel.
O . b.
S? 1303 '.1, Inter =ediate Range Channel.
The inspector also reviewed documentation relating to Section 6.5.7 of SP 1303-7.2 and Section 6.7.7 of SP 1303-7.1.
This docu=entation indicated che Startup Rate Control Rod Hold feature of the source and intermediate range channels was operable. The inspector found no inade-quacies in this area.
16.
Channel Evoass Kev Technical Specification 3.5.1.2 requires that only one channel bypass key be available. The inspector reviewed the Key Log and inspected the key locker. This review and inspection indicated only one channel bypass key (key No. 13) was available. The inspector found no inadequacies in this area.
i.
17.
Power CutofE Level ~ Technical Specification 3.5.2.5.c requires that the xenon reactivity be within 10': of equilibrium and asymptotically approaching stability before increasing power above the "cutof f level" defined by Figures 3.5-2A and --E 3.5-23.
~he inspector reviewed OP 1102-2, Revisien 14, May 22, 1976 Plant Startup, which provides instructions and documentation to the +did N:E / ,_. ...... .... ..
_ - 11 - operation personnel for plant startup and power escalation to rated _= o - power. Section 2.3.2, Step 32, Part (10) of this procedure requires =7 ' that, prior to exceeding 80% power, a plot. of reactivity be made to @f-dete=ine c==pliance with T.S. 3.5.2.5.c and that the Control Room %:f. Operator or Shif t Fore =an initial this step indicating the require-F =ents of T.S. 3.5.2.5.c are satisfied before exceeding the " cutoff J 1evel."
p. - The inspector reviewed the records of OP 1102-2 completed for the eight plant startups which occurred between July, 1975 through June, 1976 and verified that Section 2.3.2, Step 32, Part (10) was properly initialed ,, indicating co=pliance with the requirement of T.S. 3.5.2.5.c.
The F inspector had the following co=ents on this area.
a.
Maintenance of Reactivity Plots The reactivity plots developed in accordance with OP 1102-2, Section 2.3.2, Step 32, Part (10) are not required to be maintaned.
= The inspector expressed concern that, since these plots are used to determine that the requirements of T.S. 3.5.2.5.c are satisfied G prior to exceeding the pcuer " cutoff level," they should be required to be maintained at the site. The licensee stated that OP 1102-2 veuld be revised to include this requirement. This item is unre-solved pending completion of the revision to 0F 1102-2.
b.
Holdi:2 Times The inspector noted that OP 1102-2 Section 2.3.2, Step 32, Part =" - (11) referenced a Figure 9 which had been deleted. The licensee stated this figure was no longer required and was applicable only to the previous fuel cycle, and that OP 1102-2 would be revised to delete the reference to Figure 9 and holding tines. This ites is - unresolved pending completion of the revision to 0F 1102-2.
The inspector had no further questions concerning this area.
18. '.'erification of Core Power Distribution y Technical Specification 3.5.2.7 requires that the core power distribution be recorded every ten days during power operation. The inspector reviewed SP 1301-9.S, Revision 0, February 1,1974, Core Power Distribution, which provides the instruction and docu=entation for compliance with T.S. 3.5.2.7.
E= S? 1301-9.8 (Including TCN-221) requires obtaining computer printout of [_ the following:
=
= + _
~ (~-
_ _ - 12 - _.
E a.
Core Ther=al Heat Balance.
.Q.4.. bli= b.
Three Dimensional Power Map.
g+E EM c.
Individual Fuel Asse=bly Power (MU).
d.
Ratio of Fuel Asse=bly Power to Average Asse=bly Power (Radial "Q Pcwer Factor).
A-The analysis of the data includes conpar,. son of Radial Power Factor to predicted values, determination of maximum heat generation rate and ~~ ~ conparisen of heat generation rates to Technical Specification limits.
The inspector reviewed the data sheets for SP 1301-9.8 performed since J cocpletion of the refueling outage. The inspector found no inadequacies gn. ; in this area.
""5 19.
Pressure Iniection Actuation Setooints -
- ".
The inspector reviewed SP,1303-4.11, Revision 10, June 17, 1976, High _ and Low Pressure Injection Analog Channels and the co=pleted data sheets G tor this procedure performed May 9,1976 and June 4, 1976. The purpose - cf this review was to verify that the actuation setpoints were greater thcn 1500 psts and 500 psig as required by T.S. 3.5.3.1.
The inspecter "== determined that setpoint were within the range specified by the proce- _ _ _ dure, ie., 1540 to 1550 psig and 540 to 550 psig.
The inspector found no inadequacies in this area.
20.
Contain=ent Integrity Recuirements b Technical Specification 3.6.3 requires containment integrity to exist prior to rod cove =ent or boron dilution which might reduce shutdown cargin to less than 1 ; Dk/k. The inspector reviewed OP 1102-1, Plant Heacup to 525 F and OP 1101-3, Containment, to deter =ine that the - requirements of T.S. 3.6.3 were contained in these procedures. The inspector also reviewed the documentation for 1101-3 completed May 17, 1976 which indicated that containment integrity was established prior to taking Reactor Coolant temperature and pressure above 300 psig and 2000F, or prior to any rod withdrawal or any boron dilution. The inspec-Em ~~ tor found no inadequacies in this area.
21.
Reactor Building Purce System =- Technical Specification 3.8.9 requires that the Reactor Building Purge
=g Syste=, including the radiation condtors which actuate purge isolation, p
be tested and verified to be operable within one week prior to refueling
operations. The inspector reviewed the following plant procedures sw;;
F relating to this require =ent.
O \\ , g\\t _ _
.,. =- _.
.. G - 13 - L.
a.
RP 1505-1, Core Asse=bly.
_ b.
RP 1505-2, Defueling.
g c.
SP 1303-10.1, Reactor Building Purge System Surveillance Test.
Ifi f.T-e d.
SP 1303-4.15 Radiation Moniter Monthly Surveillcnce Tests.
T-55-n.
The inspector also reviewed the docu=entatica for performance of the above procedures during the refueling outage of February 21, 1976 to May 27, 1976. Based on this review the inspector d2ternined that the
surveillance records for SP 1303-10.1 and SP 1303-4.15 and the signoffs of Ite=s 13 in RP 1505-1 and Ite: 15 of RP 1505-2 indicated co=pliance . = _ vith T.S. 3.8.9 prior to initiation of core defueling on March 3.1976 and core asse=bly on April 24, 1976. The inspector expressed concern - that the specific surveillance procedure which was perfor=ed was not E listed in EP 1505-1, Ite= 13 and RP 1505-2, Ite: 15.
== _- - The inspector also noted that SP 1303-10.1 did not require specific documentation for return of the radiation =enitor setpoint to the normal level. The licensee acknowledged the above co==ents and stated . O appropriate revisions would be made to RP 1505-1, RP 1505-2 and SP 1303-10.1.
This item is unresolved pending co=pletion of those revisions.
-. 21.
Followne Review of Refueling and Containment Leak Rate Procedure ,. _ The inspector reviewed the status of procedures discussed in Incpection Report 76-06, Details 2 and 8, to verify that any changes made to procedures in the period March 19 to Juna 30, 1976 were =ade and reviewed and approved in accordance with T.S. 6.8.1.
.. =. The inspector also reviewed the docu=ent control for=s and verified the procedure =sintain in the control room and docu=ent files were the latest revisions. Procedures reviewed follow.
E a.
EP 1505-1, Revision 0, February 22, 1976, Core Asse=bly.
b.
RP 1501-2, Revision 1, April' 19, 1976, Core Defueling.
c.
SP 1303-6.1, Revision 2, January 16, 1976, Reactor Building ILRT.
d.
SP 1303-11.18 Revision 6, January 26, 1976, Building Local I Leak Rate Testing.
e.
SP 1303-11.23, Revision 0, January 26, 1976, Fluid Block Systc=. .l[ f.
SP 1303-11.24, Revision 0, Local Leakage Penetration Pressurization.
O S k)( "" The inspector found no inadequacies in this area.
g \\ - - - m . = _
. . - 14 - 22.
Handling, Storage and Shiccing Recuirements
- ..
. e.. The inspector reviewed the following Purchase Order files to verify that cespletion of the Receiving Checklist / Inspection Report, CPF _ 4003.002 indicated compliance with the requirements of FSAR Appendix
- .__
1A, Operational Quality Assurance Plan, Section 12, Control of Purchased Material, Equip =ent and Services.
?.0. 18329, Pu=p 3 earings for WD Pu=ps, March 10, 1976.
a.
b.
?.0. 18809, Seals, Etc. for Reactor Eu11 ding, ::ovember 18, 1975.
P.O. 20080, Vent Valve Parts, December 3, 1975.
c.
d.
P.O. 20338, C?a Miscellaneous Parts, March 15, 1976.
e.
?.0. 13715, Main Stea= Isolation valve Jeg Switch, May 3, 1975.
"= Tne inspector found no inadequacies in this area.
,.. G 23.
Prcventive Maintenance FSAR Appendix 1A, Section 3.2 requires that proceduces be prepared, reviewed and approved for control of station maintenance. To ierify that such procedures were available and in use the inspector reviewed the plant procedures and doce=entation records listed below.
a.
A? 1001, Document Control.
b.
A? 1016, I=plementation and Control of Station Maintenance and Modification.
c.
Work Request 13322, Preventive Maintenance completed June 29, 1976 in Radiation Monitors.
d.
Work Request 15865, Lubrication completed June 29, 1976 on Control 3uilding Chilled Water Systes Compressor AH-C-4A.
E-2, Procedure used to "= egger Decay Heat Water Pump Motors.
e e.
Based on review of the abccr 4:e=s and subsequent discussions with cognizant licensee personnel the inspector had the following findings.
~# ... O - \\ O g\\S i - .. . _ =
. . - - -. - . _. _., _.,
- ,. .s 1.-
- 15 - -
- y:
_. _.. a.
Preventive Mcintenance Schedules .. .. _ =
- 2 Preventive maintenance schedules are required to be developed ss.ji quar terly by Section 5.3.2 of AP 1016. Contrary to this require-35f5 fey:
j cent the schedules were not developed for the first and second quarter of 1976.
Failure to follow the requirements of AP 101o 57=... is contrary to T.S. 6.8.1 which requires the i=ple=entation of 32+.2 approved procedures. This Deficiency was identified in G.D.
iyp1~ Audi 76-09, performed by licensee quality control personnel during the period June 14-21, 1976.
The licensce's actions to correct this Item of Noncempliance -[ and to prevent its recurrence were in progress consistent with 555-the requirements of the 00A Plan.
No inadequacies were identified }[;} with corrective action, and no response to this item is required.
? lda 'l;r:::E b.
Preventive Maintenance - Lubrication 57[[
- _-- : G
.. _ The licensee stated that the present lubrication program .Ar? performed was not controlled by AP 1016.
Inspector review of (j this area indicated that the lubrication was scheduled by a ~ =:
maintenance engineer.
The frapactor selected seven ite=s for which the engineer haa tequest lubrication work be performed in .:=.. May and June to detensine the status of this work. Of the seven - ite=s, one had been completed, five were awaiting co=pletion of m__ writing the procedure prior to the work request being assigned, and one item had not had the work request initiated.
The inspec-tor expressed concern that the present lubrication control sche =e . _ was not effective because there was no " loop closing" in that the ="t! engineer who requested the work did follow up to verify completion ggj; in a timely manner.
35){ Jg further the inspector questioned the practice of not including j[ the control of lubrication under AP 1016.
FSAR Appendix 1A, ip Section 8.2 specifically defines lubrication as preventive mainten-
- .x.
~- ance. The licensee stated that this area would be reviewed. This j52[L item is unresolved.
$$) 24.
System Modifications The inspector selected t'en station design changes made during May and . June of 1976. The inspector verified, by review of the completed work __g request packages for this ites, that the documentation indicated that ][][ the changes were inspected and tested in accordance with the Generation jpl p Engineering approved procedures. The docu=entation also indicated the j{3g test results were within the prescribed acceptance criteria. The inspec-gggg
ter found no inadequacies in this area.
ss:; s 55 4 \\@ - _ w x s.__ - x }._'" : _ m.
_.. _...
. . .---
E . ...* - - - 16 - m =A-l 25.
Follow-Un Review of Facility Procedures & The inspector reviewed the status of facility procedures discussed in )hhm NRC inspection Report 76-11, Details, 4-16, to verify that any changes 25t.
made t procedures in the period May 7 - June 31, 1976, including to per-sjip; ary changes, were nade and revieued and approved in accordance with gk.
Technical Specificaciens and the licensee's ad=inistrative procedures.
[l[. The inspector also revieved control roc = copics of the procedures which }3 had been changed to verify that they were the most recent revision.
The follcuing revised procedures were reviewed.
1102-1, Plant Heacup to 525CF, Revision 16, June 1, 1976.
A_ a.
_ b.
1102-2, Plant Startup, Revision 15, June 1, 1976.
,en 1102-4, Power Operation, Revisien 13, May 22, 1976.
c.
=. _ d.
1103-2, Reactor Coolant Fill and Vent, devision 13, May 10, 1976.
- 7- -
e.
1302-3.1, R.M.S. Quarterly Calibration, Revisien 15, June 4, 1976.
_.2
_.
f.
1200-31, Fire E=argency Procedure, Revision 2, June 1,1976.
_. _.. - Based on this review, no inadequacies were noted.
,. - = 26.
Status of Manual Containment Isolation Valves The inspector reviewed the valve checklist fro = Procedure 1101-3, Contain-ment Integrity and Access Limits.
It indica,ted that a valve lineup of -- =- manual containrent isolation vnives was completed satisfactorily on May 17, 1976 near the end of the refueling outage. The checklist was , properly reviewed by a shif t supervisor.
The inspector had no further questions in this area.
k.1 27.
Previousiv Unresolved Items = Check Off Lists . a.
- =:.
Reference: Report 50-289/76-11, Details, 17.b ... The reference report identified several instances in which valve 3p check lists and startup check lists were filled out and signed th.
by the same individual without review and approval by another 5= individual. The inspector reviewed the most recent checklists
- ji--
.._t_g
- _.
,e,^ .- \\ - =; . _
. . - 17 - for the procedures identified in NRC Report 76-11, Details, 17.b m. ; and noted that those checklists completed since that inspection .g7 . have been ret.eved by a licensed operator.
' - - - This ites is resolved.
, f22 ex - b.
Source Rance Ooerability e-ga Reference: a.
Report 50-239/76-03, Details, 2.b.
b.
Report 50-289/76-12, Details, 12.a.
E The inspector reviewed SP 1303-7.2, Revision 3, May 27, 1976 and verified that Item 6.2.2 had been expanded to include documenta-tion of recalibration data. This item is resolved.
._ c.
Nuclear Overooser Trio Setting
. Reference: a.
Report 50-289/76-03, Details, 4.b.
b.
Report 50-289/76-12, Details, 12.b.
.;
The inspector revicued OP 1102-11, Revision 11, June 23, 1976 and OP 1102-1, Revision 16 June 15, 1976 and determined that the procedures required resetting of the overpcwer trip setting during
. plant heacup and cooldown per OP 1105-2, Appendix I.
The inspector reviewed OP 1105-2, Revision 5, June 27,1976 and verified that Appendix I of that procedure provides instructiens and docu entation for this activity. This item is resolved.
.. =: d.
E=ergencv Diesel Generator Monthlv Test Reference: a.
Report 50-2S9/76-09, Details, 10.
b.
Report 50-289/76-12, Details, 12.f.
. The inspector reviewed the data sheet for SP 1303-4.16, Revision 10, June 10, 1976 and verified that changes made to this data sheet indicate revised temperature limits. This ite= is resolved.
e.
OP 1102-2, Plant Startuo rr - Reference: Report 50-239, Details, 7.
.: The inspector reviewed Enclosure No. 1 to OP 1102-2, Revision 15.
June 17, 1976 and verified that appropriate correcticas had been i made to Page 39.
This ites is resolved.
O
- e,.:-
.. \\ A\\h - .- _ m.s .... -esee=a
. .. ~ _,. . ... ' - 18 - .. _. _ f.
Temocrarv Chance Notices (TCus) g_ .=2_ . Reference: a.
Report 50-289/76-06, Details, 5.
?!k 23. : The inspector reviewed several TCNs during the course of this 95][ inspection. The inspector wcs able to trace the changes in the =+ procedure to TCNs which were attached to the procedure in all cases.
This ites is resolved, g.
Cor orate Technical Succort Staff Review Reference: a.
Report 50-289/76-09, Details, 17.
T-b.
Report 50-289/76-12, Details, 12.g.
The inspector deter =ined by review of =e=oranda from the Manager, Generation Engineering, to the Unic No.1 Superintendent that for PCRs implemented during January and February of 1976 PCRs 75-524, 75-496, 75--68, 75-457, 75-493, 75-543, 75-538, 75-480, 75-492, 76-018, 76-098, 76-129, 76-065, 76-104 and 76-105 have not been reviewed by the CTSS as required by T.S. 6.5.2.A.2.a.
This ites remains unresolved.
. = .. _ . ._ . ' ,:_ ~' W:. Q:_ ~~' .
- ^^':
,Nbl
. x% - . . ^ -: - .._ }}