IR 05000293/1980021
| ML19332A149 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Pilgrim |
| Issue date: | 07/18/1980 |
| From: | Martin T, Raymond W, Roberts K NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19332A148 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-293-80-21, NUDOCS 8009100877 | |
| Download: ML19332A149 (6) | |
Text
__
..
__
e U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT
REGION I
Report No.
50-293/80-21 Docket No.
50-293 License No.
DPR-35 Priority Category C
--
Licensee:
Boston Edison Company 800 Boylston Street Boston, Massachusetts 02199 Facility Name:
Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station, Unit I Inspection At:
Plymouth, Massachusetts Inspection Conducted:
May 4-16, and May 28-30, 1980 Inspectors:
__1.
N
K.".. Roberts, Residen nspector date
[Athd
/-
WW/rc G
W.Raymond,ReactorIpector date date Approved by:
[
2 /7 M T.~ T. Martin, Chief, Reactor Projects
' date Section No. 3, RO&NS Branch Inspection Summary:
Inspection on May 4-16, and May 28-30, 1980 (Report No. 50-293/80-21)
Areas Inspected:
Routine, unannounced inspection of refueling restoration plan-ning, startup testing-refueling, refueling surveillance activities, startup test-ing of new and modified systems, licensee's plans for coping with strikes, licensee's administrative controls for contcinment purging during normal opera-tions, and a review of plant oporations.
The inspection involved 84 inspector-hours onsite by one regional based and one resident inspector and included regular, backshift, and weekend tours of the facility.
Results:
No items of noncompliance were identified:
i Regior. I Form 167 8009100[k/
(August 1979)
.
.
.
DETAILS 1.
Persons Contacted G. Anderson, Wa+ah Engineer E. Cobb, Chief Operating Engineer W. Deacon, Staff Engineer G. Fiedler, Watch Engineer
- M. Hensch, Chief Radiological Engineer
- R. Machon, Assistant Station Manager
- C. Mathis, Methods, Training and Compliance Group Leader J. McEachern, Security Supervisor P. McGuire, Station Manager J. Nicholson, Technical Assistant to the Station Manager
- Denotes those persons present at the exit interview.
The inspectors also interviewed other licensee personnel including members of the Health Physics, Operations and Security Staffs.
2.
Refueling Restoration Planning a.
The inspector reviewed the following documents to ensure that they were in compliance with their respective station procedures and to ensure that conditions indicated by the documents would not have an adverse affect on the safe operation of the facility.
The inspector also verified that checklists reflected correct plant status.
" Lifted Wire and Temporary Jumper Log"
-
(Procedure 3.M.1.3-4, Rev. 7)
" Red Tag Log"
-
(Procedure.l.4.5, Rev. 8)
" Outstanding Work Request File"
-
(Procedure 1.5.3, Rev. 12)
The inspector also verified that the safety related work requests still outstanding contained specified retests which would ensure system operability.
Operating Procedure, 2.1.1, Rev. 28
-
"Startup from Cold Shutdown"
,
l Oper Form 01, "Startup Checklist"
-
l l
Oper Form 02, " Cold Startup Checklist"
-
,
Oper Form 15, " Rod Worth Minimizer Operability"
-
l
_
.-
-
-
, -
._ _
e
.
.
b.
The inspector reviewed the following systems to verify that they were operable and aligned in accordance with facility procedures.
The
-
review consisted of a valve lineup spot check, a switch and circuit breaker alignment check and an indicator / control position check.
Core Spray Systems A&B
-
RHR Systems A&B
-
HPCI System
-
RCIC System
-
!
Standby Liquid Control System
-
Primary Containment Systems
-
Secondary Containment Systems
-
Process Radiation Monitoring System
-
Cardox Fire Protection System
'
-
Control Rod Drive System
-
4.16 kv Station Electrical System
-
-
-
Salt Service Water Systea
-
Reactor Recirculation System
-
-
Nuclear Instrumentation System
-
No items of noncompi.'ance were observed.
3.
Startup Testing-Refueling The inspector reviewed the completed procedure 9.16.1, Rev. O, "Insequence
,
Critical for Shutdown Margin (SDM) Demonstration".
This test was performed to verify compliaFce wTth Technical Specification 3.3A/4.3A.
The required SDM for cycle 5 is -1.74% AK, and the demonstrated SDM was -2.66% AK.
The inspector observed operation of the facility at power on May 28-29, 1980, and verfied that the core thermal power was being calculated in
]
,
_
_ _. - -
.
.
. _. -
__-
-
..
.
.. -
-.
_ _., _,
.
-
accordance with station procedure, " Core Thermal Power Evaluation", 9.3, Rev. 7.
The inspector then verified that the core thermal limits were in accordance with Technical Specification 3.11.
The thermal limits checked were MCPR, LHGR and APLHGR.
The inspector also observed fuel preconditioning.
No items of noncompliance were identified.
4.
Refueling Surveillance Activities The following tests were witnessed by the inspector.
The inspector veri-fied procedure compliance and that the test results met the acceptance criteria, or that appropriate corrective action was taken if the accept-ance criteria was not met.
" Simulated Auto Initiation of Diesel Generators (Core Spray and RHR),"
-
8.M.3.1, Rev. 3.
The test was originally performed on May 13, 1980 and the 'B' core spray injection valve (1400-MOV-24B) failed to open.
A priority 'A' maintenance request was initiated, repairs made, and the valve retested satisfactorily on May 14, 1980.
The test also included a check of the shutdown transformer automatic transfer as required by Technical Specification 3.9/4.9.
" Main Stean High Temperature", 8.M.2-1.4-1, Rev. 6.
The test was
-
completed on May 16, 1980.
No items of noncompliance were identified.
5.
Startup Testing of New/ Modified Systems The inspector witnessed the following tests following system modifications:
A.
" Manual Opening of Relief Valves", 8.5.6.1A, and the pre-operational test of the safety-relief valve accoustic monitors.
The tests were performed concurrently on May 16, 1980 and were satisfactory.
B.
"ATWOS/RPT/AP.: Simulated Auto Initiation Test".
Initial testing fol-lowing the completion of the ATWOS/RPT/ARI modification identified
several problems.
Following repairs, the licensee conducted NRC requested tests, which consisted of the insertion of Low-Low-Level, Hi Pressure, and manual initiation signals which caused Recirculation Motor-Generator Set field breaker trips and/or Alternate Control Rod Insertion.
The circuits performed as designew and the design package was forwarded to the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation for review.
.
.
_ -_
- _ _ -
-
S 6.
Licensee's Plans for Coping with Strikes The inspectors conducted a detailed review of the licensee's preparations for a possible strike of nonexempt employees at 00:01 a.m., May 16, 1980.
The inspectors reviewed the qualifications of personnel assigned to cover vacancies created in the Operations, Maintenance, Health Physics. Chem-istry, Instrument and Control and Plant Management staffs.
All persons assigned met the requirements of ANSI N18.1-1971, and had their depart-mental training requirements up to date.
The security staff was not affected as their non-exempt employees belong to another union and have an anti-strike clause in their contract.
Security management had, however, made up a schedule assigning exempt personnel to cover necessary require-ments should the security officers honor the picket lines.
Arrangements had been made for police coverage at the picket lines.
The inspector verified that those persons assigned to the fire brigade were currently qualified and of sufficient numbers to meet the technical specification requirements.
The licensee had made provisions for food and fuel oil to be delivered as well as stocking up on those commodities prior to the strike deadline.
The radioactive waste systems, both solid and liquid, had been reduced to as low a volume as possible prior to the strike deadline.
The inspectors returned to the site 2 hrs. prior to the deadline to observe shift turnover and subsequent operations.
The strike was called off at 11:30 p.m., May 15, 1980.
The inspector had no further questions.
7.
Administrative Controls for Containment Purging The inspector verified that the licensee had received the generic letter of November 29, 1978, entitled " Containment Purging During Normal Operation" and the the proper administrative controls had been incorporated into station procedures to prevent the improper defeat of safety actuation sig-nals in accordance with the generic letter.
The inspector requested that the licensee " strengthen" the wording of the instructions found in Operating Procedure 2.2.70, Rev. 12, " Primary Con-tainment Atmospheric Controls".
The procedure was changed prior to com-pletion of the inspection.
The inspector had no further questions.
8.
Plant Operations a.
Facility Tours The inspector made several tours of the facility which included the following area:
Vital Switchgear Rooms; Cable Spreading Rooms; Bat-tery Rooms, Emergency Diesel Generator Rooms; R.P.S. and Vital M-G
_
_
-
--.
,
o
..
Set Rooms; the Reactor Building; the turbine area; and the screen house building.
During these tours the inspector made spot checks of valve lineups, control and breaker positions, fire protection equipment, radiation work permits, piping supports, and fluid leaks.
The inspector stated that more effort was required to bring the facility up to a good level of housekeeping.
The licensee concurred and increased effort in that area.
The inspector had no further questions in this area.
b.
HPCI/RCIC Testina On May 29, 1980, it was determined that the routine method of testing the HPCI and RCIC systems utilizing the " Test Potentiometer" did not test the automatic flow controllers.
These controllers are utilized when the systems are automatically initiated and must be tested to prove system operability.
The licensee immediately changed the method of testing to include the automatic flow controller and automatic mode.
The inspector had no further questions, c.
Emergency Diesel Generator 24 Hour Run The retest of the ' A' Emergency Diesel Generator stator exciter was observed.
The exciter had failed on May 5, 1980, during a 24 hr full load test run.
The inspector verified (at four times during the retest) that the 'A' EDG was at rated KW&KVA without exhibiting control instability.
The 24 hr retest was satisfactorily completed on May 8, 1980.
The inspector had no further questions.
9.
Exit Interview The inspector met with the licensee representatives (denoted in Paragraph 1)
at the conclusion of the inspection on May 29, 1980.
The inspector sum-marized the purpose, scope and inspection findings.
i
-
_
_