IR 05000315/1981009
| ML17319A970 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Cook  |
| Issue date: | 07/07/1981 |
| From: | Dubry N, Hayes D, Swanson E NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML17319A969 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-315-81-09, 50-315-81-9, 50-316-81-13, NUDOCS 8107240164 | |
| Download: ML17319A970 (10) | |
Text
U.S.
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT
REGION III
Reports No. 50-315/81-09; 50-316/81-13 Docket Nos. 50-315; 50-316 Licenses No. DPR-58; DPR-74 Licensee:
American Electric Power Service Corporation Indiana and Michigan Power Company 2 Broadway New York, NY 10004 Facility Name:
Donald C.
Cook Nuclear Power Plant, Units 1 and
Inspection At:
Donald C.
Cook Site, Bridgman, MI Inspection Conducted:
May 3-30, 1981 ac x~~
Inspectors:
E.'.
Swanson w c-t.'~t'et Approved By:
D.
M. Hayes, Chief Reactor Projects Section 1B 7-~-l/
~- e/
z-f/
Ins ection Summar Ins ection on Ma 3-30 1981 (Re orts No. 50-315/81-09.
50-316/81-13)
Areas Ins ected:
Routine, onsite regular and backshift inspection'by the resident inspectors.
Areas inspected include Operational Safety Verifica-tion, Inspection during Long Term Refuel.ing Shutdown, Monthly Surveillance Observation, Monthly Maintenance Observation, Review of Plant Operations, Containment integrated I,eak Rate Test and Plant trips.
The inspection involved a total of 152 inspector-hours onsite by two NRC inspectors in-cluding 44 inspector-hours during off-shift hours.
Results:
Of the nine areas inspected no items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
81072401b4 810708 PDR ADOCK 05000315
~
Persons Contacted DETAILS
+D ~ Shaller, Plant Manager
- B. Svensson, Assistant Plant Manager
- E. Townley, Assistant Plant Manager R. Keith, Operations Superintendent E. Smarella, Technical Superintendent R. Dudding, Maintenance Superintendent
>J. Stietzel, QA Supervisor The inspectors also conducted a number of interviews with operators, technicians, and maintenance personnel during the inspection.
-Denotes those present during the exit interview.
2.
0 erational Safet Verification The inspector observed control room operations, reviewed applicable logs and conducted discussions with control room operators during the month of May 1981.
The inspector verified the operability of selected emergency systems, reviewed tagout records and verified proper return to service ofaffected components.
Tours of Unit 2 Reactor Containment, the Auxiliary Building, and turbine building were conducted to observe plant equipment conditions, including potential fire hazards, fluid leaks, and excessive vibrations and to verify that maintenance requests had been initiated for equipment in need of maintenance.
The inspector by observation and direct inter-view verified that the physical security plan was being implemented in accordance with the station security plan.
The inspector observed plant housekeeping/cleanliness conditions and verified implementation of radiation protection controls.
During the month of May 1981, the inspector walked down the accessible portions of the Unit 2 Component Cooling Water System to verify operability.
The inspector also witnessed portions of the radioactive waste system controls associated with radwaste shipments and barreling.
These reviews and observations were conducted to verify that facility operations were in conformance with the requirements established under technical specifications, 10 CFR,
CFR and administrative procedures.
Ins ection Durin Lon Term Refuelin Shutdown The inspectors observed the refueling shutdown control room operation of Unit 2, reviewed applicable Iogs, and conducted discussions with operators and others during May 1981.
These inspections included checks of the operability of selected emergency systems and review of the Licensee's control of the overall outage program.
The inspectors verified that surveillance testing required by Technical Specifications and licensee's procedures were completed, and verified that the activ-ities were performed in accord with approved procedures and technical specification Observations of radiation protection controls, station security plan and radioactive waste controls were also made.
4.
Monthl Surveillance Observation The inspector observed technical specifications required surveil-lance testing and verified that testing was performed in accordance with adequate procedures, that test instrumentation was calibrated, that limiting conditions for operation were met, that removal and restoration of the affected components were accomplished, that test results conformed with technical specifications and procedure re-quirements and were reviewed by personnel other than the individual directing the test, and that any deficiencies identified during the testing were properly reviewed and resolved by appropriate management personnel.
The inspector also witnessed portions of the following test activ-ities including those scheduled and performed during the refueling outage of Unit 2:
2 THP 6040 PER.059
OHP 4030 STP.020 Zero Power And Power Ascension Test Component Cooling Water System Test (Quarterly Valve Check)
2 THP 4030 STP219 RCS Flow Verification Monthl Maintenance Observation Station maintenance activities of safety related systems and components listed below were observed/reviewed to ascertain that they were conducted in accordance with approved procedures, regulatory guides and industry codes or standards and in conformance with technical specifications.
The following items were considered during this review:
the limiting conditions for operation were met while components or systems were removed from service; approvals were obtained prior to initiating the work; activities were accomplished using approved procedures and were inspected as applicable; functional testing and/or calibrations were performed prior to returning components or systems to service; quality control records were maintained; activities were accomplished by qualified personnel; parts and materials used were properly certified; radiological controls were implemented; and, fire preven-tion controls were implemented.
Work requests were reviewed to determine status of outstanding jobs and to assure that priority is assigned to safety related equipment maintenance which may affect system performances The following maintenance activities were observed/reviewed:
1.
Repair and replacement of FRV-240 (Feed Regulator Valve) solenoid and effected diodes.
(Unit 2)
" 3 "
n 2.
Repair of Trip Breaker Bypass
"A" contacts.
(Unit 2)
3.
Repair of Control Bank "C"/Control Bank "D" overlap sequencing logic.
(Unit 2)
4.
MHP 4050 FDF "New and Spent Fuel Handling Crane Operation and Instructions" - Movement of new fuel from the vault to the pool.
(Unit 1)
With the exception of the repair effort on FRV-240 the inspector found the systems were properly returned to service following main-tenance.
In the repair effort on FRV-240, although the repair and return to service was professionally done, the licensee failed to conform to administrative procedures.
Specifically "Stores Material Issuing Control (12 AHP 3130 SMC.005)
was not adhered to in that the stores issue for a replacement solenoid coil was missing a job order designation.
An Emergency Job Order (Job Order, PMSO 2290) for the work effort was not initiated until seven days later when the resident inspector identified the lapse during his inspection follow up. It was also noted during this effort that diodes used in the repair effort were not issued from stores but were obtained from shop spares which had been cannibalized from other circuits no longer in use.
Immediate corrective action was taken by the licensee by initiating the proper paperwork ac-cording to procedures.
6.
Review of Plant erations During the refueling outage for Unit 2 (Cycle 2/3) the inspectors observed administrative controls, maintenance work, procedural com-pliance, and Technical Specification adherence.
Following the outage the inspector walked down portions of the Nuclear Instrumentation and Emergency Power, systems.
The inspector reviewed selected startup procedures to verify required surveillance tests were accomplished and that the startup was performed in accordance with technically approved procedures.
7.
Licensee Event Re orts Through direct observations, discussions with licensee personnel, and review of records, the following event reports were reviewed to determine that reportability requirements were fulfilled, immediate corrective action was accomplished, and corrective action to pre-vent recurrence had been accomplished in accordance with technical specifications.
Unit 2 LER 80-036/03L-0 Monthly Functional Test of Source Range Nuclear Instrument not performed During Technical Specification (T.S.) reviews prior to initial critic-ality this surveillance requirement (Item 6 of T.S. Table 4.3-1)
was omitted from the licensee's surveillance program for Unit 2.
Until
it's discovery by the licensee it had apparently not been performed other than as required prior to start-up.
This event was in noncom-pliance with Limiting Condition for Operation 3.3.1.1 (Table 4.3-1 Item 6).
LER 80-038/03L-0 Main Feedwater Check Valves not tested as required by T.S.
4.05 (ISI)
The valve tests were missed due to the check sheet for the test in-cluding three parts:
a quarterly test, one to be done while in Mode
and one to be done in Mode l.
Allowing portions of the page to be declared not applicable ("N.A.") permitted a review of the sheet with a completion signature at the bottom to be taken for a completed test of all necessary parts.
This event was in noncompliance with Specifica-tion 4.05.
The specific problem was corrected by putting the Mode
requirement on a separate check sheet.
Unit
LER 80-038/03L-0'SW Valve Cycling Surveillance missed.
During the period of February 13, 1979 to December 23, 1980, the re-quirements of Surveillance 4 '.4.1a.4 were performed on a 92 day instead of 31 day frequency.
Review of the plant records showed that the faulty procedure was approved by the Plant Nuclear Safety Review Committee (PNSRC)
on February 13, 1979, though there was no record of review pursuant to
CFR 50.59 available in the files.
The event was iden-tified by the offsite review committee during a formal audit conducted in December 1980, but not recognized as reportable for three months.
This event is in noncompliance with Technical Specification 4.7.4.1.
The procedure (01 OHP 4030 STP.022)
has been revised and now accurately reflects the requirements of T.S. 4.7.4.1a.4.
The issue of the missing
CFR 50.59 review and adequacy of PNSRC reviews is unresolved pending inspection of corrective actions taken to address a similar violation detailed in IE Inspection Reports No. 50-315/81-03-01,'50-316/81-03-01.
These three Iicensee Event Reports when combined with the results of other recent Inspection and Enforcement inspection findings (Reports No. 50"315/80-20, 50-316/80-16, 50-315/81-11 and 50-316/81-14)
generate acute concerns over the adequacy yf the Surveillance Program at the D.
C.
Cook Plant.
In a response,-/
dated May 28, 1980, to the Transmittal letter for IE Inspection Report No. 50-315/80-01 and No. 50-316/80-01, the licensee indicated that a review of Technical Specifications (T.S.)
requiring Surveillance Testing was conducted by cognizant Department Heads and that the -Plant's Surveillance Program was revised to include all T.S. requirements.
More thorough corrective action is expected relative to the above three IERs.
This matter is considered open pending further review.
(50-315/81-09-01, 50-316/81-13-01)
u AEP:NRC:0044, May 28, 1980.
-5"
~ '8.
Containment Inter rated Leak Rate Test The inspector witnessed portions of the CILRT on May 1, 2, and 4, 1981, and verified that the appropriate revision of procedure 12 THP 4030 STP.202 was in use, test prerequisites were met, and proper plant systems were in service.
The inspector reviewed interim and final licensee data and forwarded raw data to the regional USNRC office for agreement computations.
(Reference IE Report No. 50-316/81-09)
9.
Recei t of New Fuel The inspector verified prior to receipt of new fuel that technically adequate, approved procedures were available covering the receipt, inspection, and storage of new fuel; observed receipt inspections and storage of new fuel elements and verified these activities were per-formed in accordance with the licensee's procedures.
Following the plant trips of Unit 2 on May 21, 23, and 30, 1981, the inspectors ascertained the status of the reactor and safety systems by observation of control room indicators and discussions with licensee personnel concerning plant parameters, emergency system status and reactor coolant chemistry.
The inspector verified the establishment of proper communications and reviewed the correc-tive actions taken by the licensee.
All systems responded as expected, and the plant was returned to operation on May 21, and 23, 1981, respectively after verifying that causal factors of the trips were identified and corrected.
ll. Exit Interview The inspector met with licensee representatives (denoted in Para-graph 1) throughout the month and at the conclusion of the inspection and summarized the scope and findings of the inspection activities.
The licensee acknowledged the inspection findings and items discussed in Paragraphs 5 and