IR 05000289/1981002
| ML20003D107 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Crane  |
| Issue date: | 01/20/1981 |
| From: | Ebneter S, Sassani A NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20003D105 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-289-81-02, 50-289-81-2, NUDOCS 8103190297 | |
| Download: ML20003D107 (4) | |
Text
-
-
.
.
--
.
-.
,
.
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT Region I Report No. _50-289/81-02
_
Docket No.
50-289
~
License ho.
DPR-50 Priority Category C
Licensee:
Metropolitan Edison Company P.O. Box 480
.
Middletown, Pennsylvania 17057 Facility Name:
Three Mile Island Nuclear Station, Unit 1 Inspection at: Middletown, Pennsylvania
'
Inspection conducted: January 5-9, 1981 Inspectors:
6MMW /J7 -
/- t 0 - P/
A. D. Sassani, Jr., Reactor Inspector date signed date signed
-
date signed Approved by:
tu b
[v1
/ - 3 0- 3 /
5. J' Ebneter, Cht'ef, Engineering Support date signed 56ction #2, RC&ES Branch Inspection Summary:
Inspection on' January 5-9, 1981 (Report No. 50-289/81-02)
Areas Inspected:
Routine, unannounced inspection _'by regional-based inspector-of work activities arTrecords associated with the Unit 1 Restart Program, including: elec-trical and instrumentation documents, records, and engineering design data associated i
with'high pressure safety injection cross connections (modification RM-14).
The inspection involved 35' inspection hours on site by one NRC regicnal-based inspector.
E t
Results: 1No item of noncompliance was identified.
Region I Form 12-(Rev. April 77)
.
-
.
..-81031gop g
-
.-.
-
... -.. -
-.-
-.
.
,
.-
.
DETAILS
.1.
Persons Contacted General Public Utilities Service Corporation (GPUSC)
'
8. 'Ballard, QA Modification / Operations Manager
- S. Deshukh, Engineering Electrical
- J. Fornicola, 0perations QA Supervisor
.
J. Fritzen, Engineering Manager
.
- L.' Harding, Supervisor of Licensing
- A. Rochino, Engineering Mechanics Manager
- J. Volence, Engineering Mechanics
.
- J. Wright, QC ' Manager
.
Metropolitan Edison Company
- J. Colitz, Manager Plant Engineering
- R. Harbin, Technical Analyst
- D. Mitchell, l.icensing L. Noll, Shift Supervisor
. *T. Fasano, Chief, Site Operations Section, TMI
- 9. ~ Haverkamp, TMI-1 Senior Resident Inspector
- W. Rekito, Reactor Inspector
- F. Young, THI-1 Resident Inspector
- Denotes personnel present at exit-interview.
- Denotes +elephone conversation with Parsippany office.
2.
High Pressure Safety-Injection Cross Connections (Task RM-14!
The inspector examined electrical and instrumentation documents, records,
~
'
and engineering design data associated with modification RM-14..The require-mer.ts' for the modification are detailed in the TMI-1 Restart Report, Section 8.3.15.
Additional requirements for this system are detailed in Sections 6 and 9 of the facility FSAR.
a.-
The: inspector examined documents, records, and engineering design data'
- to determine whether applicable requirements have been met in areas relating to design, procurement, installation and inspection.
,
.-
-
..
Areas inspected for this determination include:
Engineering Change Memorandum Package, ECM-S007, Revisions 0
--
thru SA Make Up and Purification System P&ID, C-302-661
--
System Design Description, 211A, Revision 2
--
~
Field, Questionnaire Report No. R-27
--
Quality Assurance Systems List
--
Purchase Requisition Nos. 86088 and 86089
--
Operational QA Plan, Revision 8
--
No item of noncompliance was identified.
b.
The inspector reviewed instrument calibration data sheets associated with the Make Up System flow instrument loop.
The data sheets for this instrument loop provided the following information on calibrations.
Instrument Device No.
Last Calibration Date
"
MU24-DPT 5-5-74
<
MU24-FT 10-2-72 MU24-FS 7-19-72 MU24-FI 12-30-71 Although this instrument loop is not a Technical Specifications requirement, the inspector identified this as an item of concern because operators utilize this process parameter during power opera-tion.
Additionally, emergency procedures refer the operator to thi:
parameter during transients.
A representative of the licensee's Quality organization indicated that Quality Deficiency Report No. HRH-139-80, dated 12-4-80 had been issued and addresses calibration intervals for installed instru-mentation.
A representative of the licensee's Instrument and Control organization indicated that a Preventive Maintenance Program is~ cur-rently under development to include selected instruments that are not Technical Specifications requirements.
,
. The inspector identified this as an unresolved item, which will be the subject of a;further review by an NRC inspector during a subsequent IE inspection (81-02-01).
__
...
__
-
..
.
3.
Electrical and Instrumentation QC Personnel
_
.
The inspector reviewed schedules for Unit 1 Restart Modification.
The schedules indicated an increase in electrical and instrumenta-tion construction, start-up, and maintenance activities in the next 6 months. The inspector observed the potential for not having ade-quate QC coverage for electrical and instrumentation activities during this period, because there are currently only 3 electrical QC inspec-
'
tors and no instrumentation QC inspectors.
A representative of the licensee's QC organization agreed that the potential existed for not providing the desired extent of QC coverage in these areas.
It was indicated that one electrical QC inspector and one instrumentation QC inspector were scheduled to be hired during the month of January and contractor inspection personnel could be available if needed.
The inspector noted that prompt and aggres-sive management action would be necessary to assure the adequate qualification and training of newly hired QC inspectors.
No item of noncompliance was identified.
~
4.
Unresolved Itan Unresolved items are matters about which more information is required in order to ascertain whether they are acceptable items,. items of noncompliance, or deviations.
The unresolved item disclosed during the inspection is discussed in paragraph 2b.
5.
Exit Interview The inspector met with the licensee representatives (denoted in paragraph 1) at the conclusion of the inspection on January 9, 1981. The inspector summarized the purpose and scope of the inspection and the findings. The licensee acknowledged the findings.
.