IR 05000302/1973010
| ML19326A786 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Crystal River  |
| Issue date: | 10/19/1973 |
| From: | Kidd M, Murphy C NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | |
| References | |
| 50-302-73-10, NUDOCS 8003040732 | |
| Download: ML19326A786 (10) | |
Text
-
. -. -
-
_--.-
-....-.. -
-
--..
-...
-
..
-
.
!.
,-u
!
,
<.-lq;~; a. '.,\\
ATot,11C C-G 7 C% :.!!OT' !
-
.'
.'
.
UNITr3. /.Tce, r
,~
NMP g
'
"<N'ci.,j>f
-
". '
DIT.:1:';OI:1.TI: OF ;c. JUJ;' _',I cN..: spic::.;
.
'
-
uc<.,e n u-w,e.
Q.-
.-c/
m o e a e i t, c.,.4 e,, ~..,...,,
Q.t i:.L,'
,
' ' ' ~ ~ " ' ' " " * " " '
srs.s ncn,ca nu....n n
-
I i
I RO Inspection Report No. 50-302/73-10
i l
)
.
=Licenace:
Florida Power Corporation
,
3201 34th Street,.:outh
P.-0. Box 14042
[
St. Petersbur,:, Florida 33733 (
Facility Name: Crystal River 3
'
Docket No.:
50-302
-
4 License *:o.:
CPPR-51
!
Category:
B1 i
j'
Location:
Crystal River, Florida
.
!
Type of Licenac:
B&W, PUR, 2452 Mat
j Type of Inspection: Routine, Announced l
i j
Datos of Inspection: October 10-12, 1973
,
l Dates of Previous Inspection:
September 20-21, 1973
Principal Inspector:
M. S. Kidd, Reactor Inspector
,
Facilities Test and Startup Branch
l Acco:apanying Inspector:
W. W. Peerf, Radiation Specialist Radiological and Envircnmental Protection Branch
.h r/) [,
'
Principal Inspector:
~
'0* h 7 j
. M.
S'. kidd, Reactor Inspecto r Date j-Facilities Test and Startup Branch f* *'. './,k / ',
'
~ '
..
.?
.
. Review. i by :
/
'
'
C. E. Murphy, Chief Date
'
Facilities Test and Startup Brcnch
!
!
- A L
)
vby' c I
Ioao40732 8
.
e i=
. -a, _..
. -
.. -
-
-
u,,,_.,,.._.
. _ _.-._._,
. _ _ _...,. _..
.. -. _., _... _. _,,,
, _
,
,.-
.
.-
_. - _. _. _-
- -
- _ ~ _ --..-
. _..- -..
_. -.
.... -
_
__
I r
,
RO Rpt!. No. - 50-3^ 73-10-2-
- .
.
,
.
"
%..
SU!O!ARY'0F FINDINGS.
'
f i-I.. Enforcement !!atters I
^A.
Violations i
l
-
None
'
.
B.
Safety Trems'
i i
j
-. None.
II.
Licensee Action on Previously Identified Enforceecnt Matters
,
.
Not applicable.
i III.
New Unre: 'ved Itemu
,i
'
-
k
73-10/1 Prcorerational Environmental !!onitorine Prnornm 1.
I The preoperations; environmental monitoring program, as i
implemented,-does not appear to meet the intent of the program descriptica in Section 2.6 of *he FSAP..
(Details II, j
paragraph 2)
IV.
Status of Previously Identified Unrrsolved Items
].
,
l Not applicable.-
i
4~
'
V.
Unusual Occe"rences
/
None
-
,
,
VI.
Other Sirnificant Findincs
.,
None
!
VII. Management Interviev
i
.A management intervic. was held at the conclusion of the inspection i
October. 12, 1973. The following persons attended:
r L
71or'd-Power Corporation (FPC)
,
!
- Cen ration Conntruction Denartment
' I
H. L.'Bennett'- Director, Generation Construction
~
J."C. Hobbs, Jr. - Superintendent. Mechanical and Electrical Systems N
1.
1:
/
.
+
.f
' -- -
w i Y-M s
v
,
er -~
N rN +
+=--nw
- - ~ - -
e,---r,
-a v- ",+ e
~w
<-w-
- ~ ~ ~,, - -
n-e-
-
v-a
-
s'-,-
--s----~w
-
--r-----w w
'
'
-
.
.
.
..-
-
-.
-.
,
-
'
.
,
y s.
-
,
(
~
R0 Rpt. No. 50-302/73-10-3-
-
-
,
.
-b I
Generation Engineering Department i
+
J.~ C. Clapp - Manr.ger, Quality Surveillance Audits
'
.P.
G. Davis
~ Manager, Power Testing B. E. Holmes - Engineer, Generation Environmental and Regulatory Affairs R. W.' Slater - Site Quality Engineer J
Probiction Denartment J. Alberdi - Nuclear Plant Superintendent G. P..Beatty - Production Staff Engineer D. W. West - Chemistry and Radiatica Protection Engineer
,
Gilbert Associates Incornorated (CAI)
'
J.
D.' Green - Testing QA Coordinator
-
University of Florida (UF)
J. C. Locht /. Project Manager, Radiological Surveillance
"'
A. 'Freonorational Test Program
'
'#
. The inspector discussea his finding on this item. Details are given in Detn11s I,' paragraph 4.
The licensee commitments discussed in t,e referenced paragraph were reaffirmed.
B.
Test Procedure Commen.t_s_
The general comments on tect,rocedures tyiven in Details I, paragraph 5, were' discussed. Managemen. positions were reit.:ated.
.
C.
Preonerational Environ = ental Monitoring Program o
.The results of the inspection in-this area were discussed.
i Details are given in Details II, parcigraph 2.
The unresolved item in.Section III of _this. report summary was - discussed with a licensee representative'via telephone October 16, 1973, who stated that FPC would revise the FSAR to reflect tae' program as implcnented.
i c
l
,
% '
y
,~
, _ _, _
-. - - - ~.,
--
- - -- ---
sq,
.. o
-
,
-
>,
.f
.
p.
,
1
..
~..
1R0 Report No.-. 50-302/73-10
~ I-1 l
y O
,9 DETAILS I Prepared'by:
. / R!
/'
M/. "1
'
r
-
.
' M. S. Kidd,-Reactor Inupector
/ Date Faci 11 tics Test a'nd Startup Dranch
,
Dates of Inspection:
October 10-12, 1973
~
Reviewud by: - J.- s.,//
'
Sl ee/
i
l
/,
/ 4
'
C. E. Murphy, Chief,,.
/Date
_
Facilitics Test and Startup Branch
,
t 1.
Personnel Contacted Florida Power Corporation (FPC)
m
!
H. L. Bennett '- Director, Generation Construction P. G. Davis.- Manager, Power Testing
,
sR. W. Slater - Site Quality Engineer.
E. E. <roats - Ihnager, Site Surveillance J. Alberdi - Nuc1 car Plant Superintendent W. P. Stewart - Assistant Plant Superintendent
Gilbert' Associates. Incoroornted (GAT)
' J. ' Green - Testing. QA Coordinator 2.
Personnel-Chances-R. W.' Slater, previously assigned as an engineer II, electrical, in
.
the site' quality assurance (QA) group, has replaced D.~ E. Pedrick.as site quality engineer.
Slater joined FPC in June of 1973 af ter approximately tr.n years of'QA work in the aerospace industry.
_
,
-Pedrick transferre-to'the productio: department and is assigned as compliance engineer on the staff of the nuclear plant
- superintendent..
3.- - QA Procrari For Testing-Gilbert Associates Incorporated (CAC hasrbeen hired as an'
~
indep adent QA' contractor for the preoperational tect program.
.The staff will consist of two men initially, increasing'to five or.
- morc-ts needed. ; GAI will ' perform formal preplanned 'nudits of
.tcsting1 activities as-well as randon inspections.
FPC Generation Quality and Standards personnel will also audit and inspect, but
~
-
on-a-less; frequent, basis.
.
.f,
,
c
-
,
.
,
~
j
--g-p-
=rts ws t *a' wum'a
?-N = vr -%
r f 9-f fpp-*e fy
- Mm
'ls' w we= Wr+ 1we
- -*=e'ete W-kF
_
. _.
- ,
'
,+
.
_RO Rsport No.-50.s2/73-10 I-2
.
.'
i
,
(
V N'
Discussions with CAI personnel revealed that procedures and checklists needed'for audits and inspections were being developed and should be ready for use in the near future.
The insp 4 tor was also informed that the FPC QA manual was being completciy revised and that approxinately thirty implementing procedures for the operational OA program were being written.
-The' manual should be revised within three months.
4.
Reviev of the~Preoperational Test Program The organization and administrative controls for the preoperaticual test program for Unit 3 was discussed with licensee personnel. Discussions contered around-Section 13 of the Unit 3 Final Safety Analysis Report (FSAR) and the Test Program Guide (TPG) and covered all. facets of testing from development of test procedures to revicu and approval cf test results.
The FPC lianager, Power Testing, is directly responsible for the test program..Three pouer test sup~rvisors report to him and
-
assist in the developuent and administration of the test program.
Test procedur s are being written by FPC engineering, test, and s.
operating pocsonnel, Babcock and Wilcox (B&W), and GAI. All
)
procedures are written to a common format.
Review and approval N __/
of test procedures is described by Figure 13-3 of the FSAR. All test procedures are grouped into three classes as defined by Section 13.2.5 of the FSIR, Class I being a test to detonstrate proper operation or physical integrity of a nucicar safety related systeu. The inspector asked licensee personnel why
. hydrostatic tests on safety systems were not Class I.
A licensee representative stated that they would be changed from Class II to Class I.
Class II includes indirectly safety related tests, while Class III tests are those on non-safety related systems.
The i>spector asked uhat documents defined controls over equipment being released from construction for testing.
He was informed that a neu appendix to the TPG enti11ed " Transition Control Document" would cover items such as checking for completion of construction, proper-tagging, the turnover of QA documentation, etc.
Als-the. FPC safety clearance procedure provides certain-controls in'this area.
The lianager, Power Testing, approves the release of test procedures for field testina. Testin will be accomplished using FPC test, construction and operations personne1'under the supervision of the
. power test. supervisors.
.m
-
i
.!
!
y-
,
_y
. -,
'
.
n.-
RO~Rpt.'No.50-302/73-10 I-3
.!
\\'
.\\v /~
. Revisions.to test procedures are discussed in Section 2.7.1 of the
'TPG.
The inspector asked if the definitions of minor and major changes could be clarified. is licensee representative
- stated-that examples of these changes would be given. Hinor revisions can be maie with the approval of the responsible power test supervisor, whereas a major change requires the same review and approval as the original procedure received.
Deficiencies found in procedures or equipment during testing are recorded on a test deficiency sheet which uill be part of-the test package.
Deficiencies are reviewed by the 'I st Uorking Group (TUG) and corrective nctions, including retesting shere appropriate, are taken by this group.
~
Test instrument control'is defined by Appendix 2 of the TPG.
In. discussing centrols over temporary test devices such as electrical'and mechanical jumpers and bypasses, a licensee representative stated that a detailed iuplementing procedure for control of temporary test devices uculd be written aad included in the TPC as Appctdix 5.
Review and approval of test results is discussed in Section 2.6 (O of the TPG and Figu?
13-4 of the FSAR.
The inspector asked
,/.
what mechanism existed for reducing voluminous test data into meaningful form for review.
He tus informed that this would be accomplished by the power test supervisor before review by the TWG.
The TPG will be revised to reflect this function.
The above commitments regarding reclassificatina of hydrostatic tests, clarifying major and minor changes to procedures, and development of a transition control document and a control.
document for temporary test devices were reiterated during the-management interview.
5.
Revieu of Test Procedures Four draft preoperational test procedures were reviewed and resulting comments discussed with licensee personnel. The procedures-discussed were:
TP 170.10, " Diesel Generator Rooms 3A and 3B Ventilation Systeus
. Functional Test" TP-201.01, " Core Flooding Systsa Hydrostatic Test" TP 201'.02, " Core Flood System' Electrical Test"
= n{}
- TP,201.03, =" Core Flooding System Functional Test" N.j D""D
"]DP [i/L
$'
o Ju A k J
oj
- '
-
-
.
-
.
-
..
.
-
-. -
-
M t
-
f'
y-
_
-
['~'t *
'R0 Rpt.[No. 50-302/73-10
..1-4 l
(v '
,
.
Comme..ts on the first three procedures above were of the follcuing nature:
i-s aa.. Spaces for initials and dates should be provided beside the
'
steps in the. prerequisites section of each procedure.
b Licensee persranel ar, reed with the conment and stated that opaces would' ba added and that all. other procedures would be checked to assure that all had such spaces.
,
4 b.. Certain steps lack details in the instructions given for performing a given function.
For example, step 7.7 of TP 201.01 states that systen instrumentation which will not withstand the test pressure' must he isolated, but does not
define what instrumentation this is.
Licensee personnel wera in general agreetent uith the specific examples discussed and stated that details would i
be.added where a need is recognized.
,
,
'
In addition to the two general cctments above, other comments
were given on TP 201.03 as followa:
~
mf a.
The procedure provides anioption of using temporary p * ping to s
demonstrate the~ficw path from the core flood tank co the re::ctor.
TE inspector questioned the desirab lity of using temporary piping.-
'
A licensee representative stated that this would be studied.
b.- The iden:1fication numbers of the core flood tanks used
'
'
throughout the' procedure appear to be-incorrect.
- A licensee representative stated that these would be corrected.
Y c.' The procedure does not check the actuation point of the tank
. low prassure alarm. Also, it instructs the user to check the
.
'
. point Ac which the low pressure alarm clears by reducing tank
.
- .
pressure.
..A: licensee representative stated that the procedure would be
. revised'to correct these problems.
'
'N-ws.
I
"
~
m a
War--'
1 V
- --N---
4M'T
- m-7
?
1rW -
T vy
- T rww~F-^
q-f y7-
tY** tty--
(
7CP--'
$ ?
T'*
Y"W9*-
_.
_
._
r
[y-R0 Rpt'.No~. 50-302/73-10-11-1
.
,
t kj DETAILS Il Prepn red by:jd./'E
!'3;,_-
Thf
/
W. W. Pecry, Udiation Specialist
'Date Radiological and Environmental
-
Protection Branch Dates of Inspection: October 1C-12,1973 Reviewed by:
[O'
G,
/'
M W 'T
'
J'. T. Sutherland, Chief, Radiological Date-I an.' Environmental Protection Branch 1.
I_ni'.viduals Contacted J. Alberdi - Nuc1 car Plant Superintendent
H. J. Dennett - Director,. Generation Construction G. P. Seatty - Production Staff Engineer B. E. Holmes - Engineer, Generation, Environnental and Regulatory Affairs
,
D. W. West - Chenistrj and Radiation Protection Engineer J. C. Lochamy - Project !!anager, Environmental Study Contract, University of Flo Lda 2.
Pre-Onerat lonal P.adiolacical Environnental idonitorin-Program The licensee's pre-operational radiolo;;ical envi-onmental menitoring a.
D proc. ram has been contracted to the University of F'orida, Department of Eavironmental EnL ncering for the on-site program and the off-site i
program contracted to the State of florida Department of Health and l
Rehabilitativo Services (Radiological and Occupational Health
'
S ection'; under a grant arrangement.
Some overlap e::ists betueen the two programs. The scope of this inspection included an examinatica and discussion with the licensee of the FSAll co= tit-monts on the pre-operational environmental monitoring program, j
examination of data and inspection of various on-site and off-site
'
monitoring. stations.
b.
It is. implicit in the licensee's FSAR, Section 2.6,. Site Environ-mental Radiological IIonitoring Program, that the pre-operatienal environmental.uonitoring program delineated therein vill be per-formed _ up -to operation of Crys tal River, Unit 3, after which the
'
or 2 rational environmental monitoring program wi.11 be initiated.
In Florida Power Corporation's Environmental Status Report., published
,
i
. April 1973, fourth quarter 1972 and first quarter of 1973 it it stated on Page I:
in the section covering the University of Florida pre-operatio.al monitoring program that marine and marshland sampling was completed in-October 1972, freshwater sampling completed in 1972 and terrestrial completed in the spring of-1973.
The licensec's positien is that this was the intent of the sampling program.
It was pointed-(p
'
out.to liccasec management that this intent does not clearly coincide
%j with that contained in the FSAR which does not speak to completion of any phase of ' the program prior to the start of reactor operation.
,
W
'
-, -
,-
r-w s-en-
,
_ -.
_.
_
_
. _ _
. _. _.
- - _ _ - --
_
,
,
Jy-i
-
-
)
"-
.
,
.
s.-
- RO. Rp t. Iro. - 50-302/73-10-
- II-2-
.
.
1.
I
-. ;
-I On Octotuir. 16',_1073, this item was' discussed with a licensee representa-
tive who' stated that the Flotid. Pouer Corporation (FPC) will revise
-
,
the _ FSAR to 'reficct the program as implemented.
a i
c.- The examination of data available at the site revealed a number of omisi'ons, conflicts-and errors.
Additicnal data brought to the plant site by personnel from the FPC home office in St. : Petersburg, Florida and University of Florida personnel from Tainesville, Florida I
were -examined and discusced with these personnel. The u.:a included l'
raw Leomputer data and this 'along teith refined data from the Florida i
Department-of Health and the University of Floride. appe red to satis-l fy the basic data needs for. the pre-operational environt ntal moni-toring program.
Licenace representatives noted the rema:
2.n g l
- '
omissions, conflicts or errors and stated that the omisaicas and errors will be corrected in a needed comp 1c te re-compilation of data fren the prograr and conflicts-clarified in the revision to the FSAR
,
to be made by IJC as stated in paragraph b. above.
liacagement was informed that the' understanding had been reached with licensec per-1 -
sonnel that the r 'nor crrors and omissicas will'be corrected and they
- agreed. - 111nor conflicts, other than the one referred to in paragraph '
'h -
b. above, were' enumerated and management agreed that these also uould be included-in the revision of the FSAR for clarification, o
a
.
' %_/
d.
The inspection of sampling stations and equipment revealed them to
,
be as represented in the FSAR tnd in a state of good order _ with L
apparent sati factory - operation of equipment.
,
i-t
.
,
i :-
i k( -
.
'4-o
,.
A,_s/
.
.
.'
1:-
x a
~
,.
g,
..,
y ' s'-
3...
-,
e -
- + -
%
.._
.
...
.. _. _ _ _.. _ _ _ _ _.. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
.. _.... _ _. _ _ _ _ _ _.,
.
l :-
.W :.
,yi
-
i
~
s
.
.
,
-
pA-a
.
.
~W
.i
'
'
',
_.l.
- yp;
' ' ~
_.
y
-
.i
'
.
,
g
.a l
b ~.,.
.I
_;
'
l l
l
!
l Florida Power Corporation i
crystal. River 3 OCT 3 01973
'
'RO. Inspection Report !!c.-50-302/73-10
-
!
cc w/ encl:
H.'D. Thornburg~ RO RO:!IQ. (5)
, DR Contral Files M-A
,. -
- - -
7 Julatery Standards (3)
l Directorate of Li.cencing (13)
{-
-J.
R. Lundy, L i-
cc encl. only:
-*PDR
- Local PDR
,
- !'S!C
- DTIis, OR.
~
- Statc
- To be dispatched at-a later date.
i
...
..
.
_'
)
A.3
.
,
~
r L
-
y ye wg N 'w _ _.- - - _. - -,.. - - _
-
4'
-- -- - -