IR 05000315/1989007
| ML17326B569 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Cook  |
| Issue date: | 03/10/1989 |
| From: | Bongiovanni A, Maura F, Phillips M NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML17326B567 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-315-89-07, 50-315-89-7, 50-316-89-07, 50-316-89-7, NUDOCS 8903240149 | |
| Download: ML17326B569 (31) | |
Text
U. S.
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
REGION III
Reports No. 50-315/89007(DRS);
50-316/89007(DRS)
Docket Nos.
50-315; 50-316 Licensee:
Indiana Michigan Power Company 1 Riverside Plaza Columbus, OH 43216 Licenses No.
D.C.
Cook Nuclear Power Station, Units 1 and
Inspection At:
Bridgman, MI 49106 Inspection Co ucted:
February 9-15, 1989 Inspectors:
F.
A. Maura (Uui AQfr~ /jB+ pJrcLt A.
M. Bongiovanhi
~
~
~
Approved By:
M.
P. Phillips, Chief Operational Programs Section 3 Jo E'p'te ate
~/jo/Zz ate Ins ection Summar Ins ection on Februar 9-15 1989 (Re orts No. 50-315/89007(DRS)
- 1 reas ns ecte:
Routine, announced integr ated leak rate test (CILRT)
procedure; C
RT performance witnessing, review of CILRT and Appendix J Type B
and C testing results; and review of licensee actions on previous inspection findings.
NRC modules utilized during this inspection include 70307, 70313, 70323, 61720, 92701, and 92702.
Results:
Of the five areas inspected, no vioiations or deviations were
>dent>fied in three areas.
In the remaining two areas, three violations were identified:
(failure to follow procedure/inadequate corrective action
- 'Paragraph 4.b, failure to calculate the combined Type 8 and C test results in accordance with Appendix J requirements
- Paragraph 6. a.(1),
and failure to maintain penetration pressure at Pa during Type B and C tests
- Paragraph 6.b).
8@0324014~
0g000315 S~0313 PDR ADOCV, 0 P
G
DETAILS 1.
Persons Contacted Indiana Michi an Power Com an
"K. Baker, Operations Superintendent
+D. Climer, Performance Engineer
+"D. McWethy, Performance Engineer
+~T. Postlewait, Technical Engineering Superintendent
~J.
Rutkowski, Assistant Plant Manager
- J.
Sampson, Safety and Assessment Superintendent
~W. Smith, Plant Manager
+"J. St.
Amand, Performance Engineering, Mechanical Superintendent
~B. Svensson, Licensing Actions Coordinator
"J.
Woki k, Technical Performance Superintendent AEPSC
- S. Farlow, Electrical Assistant Manager
~D. Moeller, Nuc'lear Safety and Licensing
~S. Wolf, Site equality Assurance Auditor TER T. Renton, Consultant United States Nuclear Re ulator Commission
- M. Farber, Reactor Inspector
- R. Landsman, Reactor Inspector
+~D. Passehl, Resident Inspector The inspectors also interviewed other licensee employees including members of the technical and operations staff.
"Denotes those attending interim exit meeting on February 14, 1989.
+Denotes those attending exit meeting on February 15, 1989.
2.
Action on Previous Ins ection Items a.
(Closed)
LER 316/85005-LL)
and 0 en Item 315/85025-07(DRS)):
L)censee s use o
the msnsmum pathway met o
o ogy to compare Type B
and C tests results to 10 CFR 50, Appendix J/0.6 La acceptance criteria.
These items are discussed in Paragraph 6.a.(1)
and have been upgraded to a violation.
b.
(Closed)
0 en Item (315/85025-01(DRS)):
Maintain steam generator eve at post OCA con >talons.
s discussed in Paragraph 3.b.(9),
the purpose of requiring steam generator level control during the
'ct
CILRT is'o prevent the flooding of the main steam lines and the resultant water sealing of the MSIVs, unless that is the configuration called for in the post LOCA emergency procedures.
The inspectors verified that the water level is maintained below the MSL.
In addition, the licensee vented the steam generators outside of containment for the CILRT.
This item is considered closed.
(Closed)
0 en Item (315/85025-02(DRS
):
Penetrations No.
97 and 98, containment instrumentation is not exposed to the Type A test pressure.
The inspectors determined that the licensee has performed a review of containment instrumentation and has included their Type C local leak rate (minimum pathway)
as a penalty to the CILRT test results at the 95% UCL.
This item is considered closed.
(Closed)
Unresolved Item (315/85025-03(DRS)):
Lack of temperature survey to Justify ocation of sensors and weight fraction.
By letter M.
P. Alexich to J.
G. Keppler, dated November 18, 1985, the licensee acknowledged that they could not document that a
temperature survey had ever been performed prior to a CILRT.
Prior to this CILRT the licensee relocated several sensors (to within 25 ft of their previous position) to avoid possible local heat sinks or heat sources.
The new locations were not well documented in drawings or sketches of sensor location.
A two point temperature survey (three points for 28K of the RTDs) was conducted.
The maximum recorded temperature differential (sensors vs area average temperature).was 2.64 'F.
An after the fact procedure was prepared to describe how the temperature survey was conducted.
The licensee agreed to conduct a more detailed temperature survey prior to the next station CILRT which would document:
(1)
The actual location of all sensors.
(2)
A procedure, prepared in advance, which would indicate the number of readings to be taken based on the size of the subvolume in question, and the acceptance criteria.
(3)
The containment conditions for which the survey was applicable (fans running or shutdown, CILRT at beginning or end of outage, etc. ).
This item is considered closed based on the licensee's commitment to perform a well documented temperature survey during the next CILRT, the results of the less detailed survey performed prior to this CILRT, and the large number of sensors used during the test.
(Closed) Violation (315/85025-04(DRS)):
Failure to control the ca i rated con ition o t e owmeter used for the supplemental test.
By letter M.
P. Alexich to J.
G. Keppler, dated November 18, 1985, the licensee acknowledged the violation and described the actions taken at that time to correct the violation and to prevent similar violations.
The inspectors determined the licensee had
taken adequate corrective actions.
The two.flowmeters used.
during'his CILRT were properly calibrated and installed.
This item is considered closed.
(Closed)
0 en Item (315/85025-05(DRS)):
Technical Specification Paragraph 4.6, 1.2.c requirement for superimposed leak rate size is not consistent with ANSI N45.4-1972, ANSI 56.8-1981, or NRC's position.
While the Technical Specification paragraph in question is misleading, the licensee is aware of the requirement that the magnitude of the superimposed leak rate during the supplemental test be close to La as described in Paragraph 3.b.(7) of this report.
This item is considered closed.
g.
(Closed)
0 en Item (315/85025-08(DRS)):
Ensure correct methodology is use to ca cu ate as oun ype test penalty whenever repairs or adjustments are done to penetrations prior to the CILRT.
The inspectors reviewed the methodology to be used to obtain the as found Type A test results with members of the licensee's staff throughout the inspection.
The methodology discussed is described in Paragraph 3.b.(2) of this report.
The inspectors reviewed the licensee's calculated penalties.
The results of this review appears in Paragraph 5.d.
This item is considered closed.
Containment Inte rated Leak Rate Test Procedure Review a 0 Procedure Review The inspectors reviewed Surveillance Procedure No.
2 THP 4030 STP.202, Rev.
0, dated January 13, 1989,
"CILRT," relative to the requirements of 10 CFR 50, Appendix J, ANSI N45.4-1972; and the Technical Specifications.
All inspectors comments were satisfactorily resolved.
b.
Clarifications of A endix J Re uirements To ensure the licensee's understanding of Appendix J requirements, the inspectors conducted numerous discussions with licensee personnel during the course of the inspection.
The following is a summary of the clarifications discussed with the licensee.
(1)
The Type A test length must be 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> or longer to use the mass point method of data reduction.
If tests of less than 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> are planned, the Bechtel Topical Report, BN-TOP-l, must be followed in its entirety except for any Section which conflicts with Appendix J or Technical Specification requirements.
For either methodology, the acceptance criteria is that the measured leakage at the 95K upper confidence limit must be less than 75/o of the maximum allowable leak rate for the pressure at which the test was performed.
(2)
Periodic Type A, B, and C tests must include as-found results as well as as-left.
If Type B and C tests are conducted prior
to a Type A, the as-found condition of the containment must be calculated by adding any improvements in leakage rates, which are the results of repairs and adjustments (RA), to the Type A
test results using the "minimum pathway leakage" methodology.
This method requires that:
(a)
In the, case where individual leak rates are assigned to two valves in series (both before and after the RA), the penetration through leakage would simply be the smaller of the two valves'eak rates.
(3)
(4)
(b)
In the case where a leak rate is obtained by pressurizing between two isolation valves and the individual valve's leak rate is not quantified, the as-found and as-left penetration through-leakage for each valve would be 50%%u'f the measured leak rate if both valves are repaired.
(c)
In the case where a leak rate is obtained by pressurizing between two isolation valves and only one valve is repaired, the as-found penetration leak rate would conservatively be the final measured leak rate, and the as-left penetration through leak rate would be zero (this assumes the repaired valve leaks zero).
Penetrations which are required to be Type C tested, as described in the FSAR and SER, must be vented inside and outside the containment during the CILRT.
All vented penetrations must be drained of water inside the containment and between the penetration valves to ensure exposure of the containment isolation valves to containment air test pressure.
. The degree of draining of vented penetration outside of containment is controlled by the requirement that the valves be subjected to the post-accident differential pressure, or proof that the system was built to stringent quality assurance standards comparable to those required for a seismic system.
Whenever penetration configurations during a CILRT deviate from the ideal, the results of the LLRTs for such penetrations must be added as a penalty to the CILRT results at the 95% confidence level.
This penetration leakage penalty is determined using the "minimum pathway leakage" methodology.
This methodology is defined as the minimum leakage value that can be quantified through a penetration leakage path (e. g., the smallest leakage through two valves in series).
This assumes no single active
.;ilure of redundant leakage barriers.
Additionally, any
- ncrease in containment sump, fuel pool, reactor water, or suppression pool level during the course of the CILRT must be taken as a penalty to the CILRT results.
If penalties exist, they must be added (subtraction is never permitted) to the upper confidence level of the CILRT result The start of a CI.LRT must be noted in the test log at the time the licensee determines that the containment stabilization has been satisfactorily completed.
Reinitializing a test in progress must be "forward looking," that is, the new start time must be that time at which the decision to restart is made.
This also implies that the licensee has determined that the test has failed, and has enough data to quantify the leakage rate.
Any deviation from these positions should be discussed, and documented, with the NRC inspector (ILRT Specialist)
as they occur to avoid later invalidations of the test results.
Examples of acceptable deviations of reinitializing the start time of the test in the past are:
time at which a leaking penetration which has an obvious effect on the test data was secured, accidental opening and later closing of a valve which has an obvious effect on the test data, the time at which an airlock outer door was closed and the inner door was open.
The supplemental or verification test should start within one hour after the completion of the CILRT. If problems are encountered in the start of the supplemental test, data recording must continue and be considered part of the CILRT unti 1 the problems are corrected and the supplemental test can begin.
For the supplemental test, the size of the superimposed leak rate must be between 0.'75 and 1.25 time the maximum allowable leak rate La.
The higher the value, the better.
The supplemental test must be of sufficient duration to demonstrate the accuracy of the test.
The NRC looks for the results to stabilize within the acceptance criteria rather than the results being within the acceptance criteria.
Mhenever the HN-TOP-1 methodology is being used, the length of the supplemental test cannot be less than approximately one-half the length of the CILRT.
During a CILRT, it may become necessary to reject or delete specific sensors or data points due to drifting or erroneous sensors, or data outliers.
Data rejection criteria should be developed and used so that there is a consistent, technical basis for data rejection.
One example of an acceptable method for data outliers is described in an Appendix to ANSI/ANS 56.8-1981.
Sensor data rejection criteria should be plant specific and based upon a sensor's trend relative to the average scatter, slope and/or absolute output of the sensor.
The water level in the steam generators during the CILRT must be low enough to ensure it does not enter the main steam lines unless flooding of the main steam lines is called for in the loss of coolant emergency procedur (10)
An 'acceptable method for determining if the sum of Type 8 and C
tests exceeds the 0. 60 La Appendix J limits is to utilize the
"maximum pathway leakage" method.
This methodology is defined as the maximum leakage value that can be quantified through a
penetration leakage path (e. g., the larger, not total, leakage of two valves in series).
This assumes a single active fai lure to the better of two leakage barriers in series when performing Type 8 or C tests.
(ll) Test connections between containment isolation valves must be administratively controlled to ensure their leak tightness or otherwise be subject to Type C testing.
One way to ensure their leak tightness is to cap, with a good seal, the test connection after its use.
Proper administrative controls should ensure valve closure and cap re-installation within the local leak rate testing procedure, and with a checklist prior to unit restart.
(12) Whenever a valve is replaced, repaired, or repacked during an outage for which Type A, 8, and/or C surveillance testing was scheduled, local leak rate testing for the as-found as well as the as-left condition must be performed on that penetration.
In the case of a replaced valve, the as-found test can be waived if no other containment isolation valve of similar design exists at the site.
(13) The periodic retest schedule for each enetration subject to Type 8 or Type C testing, except or asr oc s an penetration employing a contNuous leakage monitoring system, shall be every refueling outage, but in no case shall the interval be greater than two years, 4.
Containment Inte rated Leak Rate Test Witnessin a.
The inspectors reviewed the calibration data and determined all the instruments used in the CILRT had been properly calibrated and that the correct weighting factors had been placed in the computer program as required.
The following instrumentation was used throughout the test:
RTDs Humidity Pressure gauges Flowmeter
~uanti t
7
2 b.
Witness of Test The inspectors witnessed portions of the CILRT on February 11-12, 1989, and noted that test prerequisites were met and that the appropriate revision to the surveillance procedure was followed
by test personnel.
Valve lineup for the following systems were verified correct except as noted, to insure that no fluid could enter the containment atmosphere and that proper venting and draining was provided.
Penetration Fuel Transfer Control Air to Containment Plant Air Lower Containment Airborne Nitrogen to Accumulators Nitrogen to PRT Accumulator Sample Isolation RCDT Gas Sample Meld Channel Pressurization Plant Air, Post Accident Sampling
29/74
32
32
81
93/94 The following valve lineup discrepancies were identified:
Required Valve Test Position XPX-110-Vl Open, Uncapped (Test Connection, Control Air)
2-CA-171 Closed (Control Air)
ZPZ-100-Vl Open, Uncapped (Test Connection, Control Air)
As-found Position Closed, Capped, Tagged Opened Closed, Capped CA-266 Open, Uncapped Closed, Capped, Tagged (Drain, Containment Penetration Pressurization)
CA-308 Open, Uncapped Closed, Capped, Tagged (Drain, Containment Penetration Pressurization)
Discussions with the licensee showed that the system lineups were not complete at the time of the inspectors walkdowns.
The inspectors noted that three of the discrepant valves were administratively tagged and were concerned with potential valve misalignments due to tagging prior to placing the valve in the desired test position.
The licensee explained that the tags for these valves were placed during the operators valve lineup per Procedure 2-0HP-4021.034.001, which was a prerequisite for the CILRT Procedure 2-THP-4030 STP.202.
The ".ags were used to identify systems and components which were impacted by the leak rate test.
During the last containment test performed on Unit 1 in late 1985, the licensee experienced numerous difficulties with valve lineups due to procedural inadequacies and the lack of administrative controls as stated in Inspection Reports No. 50-315/85025 and No. 50-315/85027.
In response to the violations,
~
II*
the licensee committed to implementing formal administrative controls which included tagging components and personnel training on their responsibilities related to these controls.
The inspectors reviewed Procedure 2-THP-4030.
STP.202 and directives related to the test and determined that the corrective actions were adequate.
On February ll, 1989 during the temperature stabilization period, the inspector reverified the position of the deficient valves.
Valves, CA-266 and CA-308 identified previously and CA-345, 7one
isolation valve, were found mispositioned.
The weld channel pressurization system was found pressurized to 12 psig which would have masked any potential leakage paths.
Upon further investigation by the licensee, an additional mispositioned valve, CA-246, Zone 3 isolation valve, was identified.
Review of the procedure showed these components had been independently verified to be in the correct test position.
Failure to maintain the proper valve lineup as described in the CILRT test procedure is contrary to
CFR 50, Appendix B, Criterion V, which states in part, that activities affecting quality shall be prescribed in documented instructions, procedures, or drawings of a type appropriate to the circumstances and shall be accomplished in accordance with these instructions, procedures, or drawings.
This is considered a violation (316/89007-01(DRS)
).
5.
Test As a result of the discrepancies and history of their past CILRT performance, the licensee committed to reverify the positions of all valves involved in the test and the valves stated above were placed in their proper test configuration.
The verification of all outside containment valves was completed prior to the start of the supplemental test.
After depressurization, the inspector performed a walkdown of selected vent and drain pathways inside containment and found no problems.
The complete reveri'fication by the licensee identified no other discrepancies.
Results Evaluation
'a
~
CILRT Data Evaluation A 24 hour2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> CILRT was performed during February 11-12, 1989, at 26.5 psia following satisfactory completion of the required temperature stabilization period.
Data was collected every
minutes.,
The inspectors independently monitored and evaluated leak rate data using mass point time formulas to verify the licensee's calculations of the leak rate and instrument performance.
There was good agreement between the inspectors'nd licensee's results as indicated by the following summary (units are in weight percent per day).
Heasurement Leak rate measured during CILRT fLam)
Lam at upper 95%
confidence level Licensee 0. 013 0. 015
~Ins ectors 0. 012 0. 015 Appendix J acceptance criteria at 95% UCL;
< 0.75 La = < 0. 1975 weight percent per day.
At the completion of the CILRT and the supplemental test, the changes in sump and reactor vessel water levels were calculated.
No correction to the calculated Lam at the 95% UCL, for volume change, was required.
Su lemental Test Data Evaluation After the satisfactory completion of the CILRT a known leakage rate (based on the inspectors'ndependent readings and calculations)
of 4. 13 scfm, equivalent to 0.268 weight percent per day was induced.
Data was collected and analyzed by the li'censee every 15 minutes.
The'inspectors independently monitored and evaluated leak rate data to verify the licensee's results.
After four hours, the supplemental test was terminated with satisfactory results as indicated by the following summary (units are in weiglit percent per. day).
The results were stable within the acceptable criteria.
Neasurement Licensee
~Ins ectors Heasured leakage rate, Lc, during supplemental test 0.270 0. 270 Induced leakage rate, Lo 0. 244 0.268 Lc-(Lo + Lam)
+0. 013-0. 010 Appendix J acceptance criteria:
-0.0625
< LLc-(Lo + Lam)] '< +0.0625.
CILRT Valve Lineu Penalties Due to valve configurations which deviated from the ideal penetration valve lineup requirements for the CILRT, the results of local leak rate tests for such penetrations must be added as a penalty to Lam at the 95% UCL.
The following penalties must be added using the minimum pathway leakage method:
Penetration Local Leak Rate Test Value (Units are in SCCM)
11-14 Reactor Coolant Pump Seal Water Lines 20. 1
35
ECCS Rel i ef Val ve Discharges CVCS Charging Lines Seal Water Return 20. 1 155. 4 30. 15 Boron Injection Tank Outlet Valve, ICM-250 Boron Injection Tank Outlet Valve, ICM-251 403. 4 352. 35
Containment Pressure Instruments:
PPA 312 and PPA 313 20. 1 Non-essential Service Water
=to and from containment 478. 8 Total Type C Leakage Penalty 1480. 4 After taking these local penalties into account, the upper confidence value for containment leakage is equal to 0.028 weight percent per day, well within the acceptable value of
<0. 1875 weight percent per day.
d.
As-Found Condition of CILRT The as-found condition is the condition of the containment at the beginning of the outage prior to any repairs or adjustments to the containment boundary.
The inspector reviewed the licensee's summary of the containment penetration local leak rate tests (Type B and C)
performed prior to the CILRT in order to determine the amount of leakage rate improvement due to repairs and adjustments.
Based on the results reviewed, it was determined that the amount of leakage improvement prior to the CILRT equaled 6922.6 sccm, or the equivalent of 0.063 wt X/day.
The as-found CILRT results for the containment was 0.091 wt
%%uo/day which is within the allowable limit of <0. 1875 weight percent per day.
No violations or deviations were identified.
6.
Review of Local Leak Rate Testin (T e
B and C) Pro ram a.
Procedure The inspectors reviewed Survei'llance Procedure 2 THP 4030 STP.203, Rev.
10, "Surveillance Test Procedure Type B and C Leak Rate Test Unit 2," relative to the requirements of 10 CFR 50, Appendix J,
and the Technical Specifications.
The inspectors'omments were satisfactorily resolved except as noted below:
During the Unit 1 CILRT performed in 1985 (Inspection Report No. 50-315/85025(ORS)),
the Region III inspector discussed with the licensee ('aragraph 4.b.(4)) the use of the
"maximum pathway leakage" methodology as an acceptable method for determining if the sum of Type B and C tests exceeded the
< 0.60 La Appendix J limit.
Later while reviewing the 1985 Type B and C results (Paragraph 7.b) the inspector again noted that the licensee was incorrectly summing the test results using of the minimum pathway methodology.
A rev i ew of Pr ocedur e 2THP 4030 STP. 203, Rev.
10, (Steps 4. 8, 5.8. 17, 5.9.2, and 5.9.3)
showed that the licensee has continued to use the maximum pathway method for determining if the Type B
and C test results exceeded the 10 CFR 50, Appendix J limit.
Appendix J Paragraphs III.B.3.(a) and III.C.3 require that the combined leakage rate of all penetrations and valves subject to Type B and C tests shall be less than 0.6 La.
The NRC accepts the use of the
"maximum pathway method" as satisfying the requirement for ".
.
. the combined leakage rate of all penetrations and valves
.
.
.."
The licensee's continued use of the minimum pathway method for determining if the Type B and C test results exceeded the Appendix J acceptance criteria is consider ecf a violation (315/89007-01(DRS);
316/89007-02(DRS))
The licensee has been requested to recalculate the combined leakage rate of as-found and as-left Type B and C tests, using the correct methodology for the last Unit 1 refueling outage and for the present and previous Unit 2 refueling outages.
This is an Open Item (315/89007-02; 316/89007-03(DRS))
pending NRC review of the submitted results.
(2)
A review of station drawings against the number of penetrations being local leak rate tested did not identify any discrepancies in the testing program.
However, the inspectors were not able to assure that all penetrations requiring Type B or C testing are being tested, since the licensee's Technical Specifications do not include a listing of all containment isolation valves, and neither penetration numbers nor the requirement for Type C
testing are listed in Table 5.4-1 in the USAR.
The inspectors did notice that the licensee performs Type C testing on penetrations which by their nature could be exempted from such testing (water sealed, closed loop inside containment, etc.
on safety grade systems).
The inspectors suggested to the licensee the desirability to perform a review of all containment penetrations and an updating of USAR Table 5.4-1 in line with the table presented in FSARs of more recent vintag b.
T e
B and C Test Pressure The inspectors reviewed the licensee's procedure and test practices and the leak rate monitor (LRM) used to pressurize the penetration and ueasure its leakage rate.
The penetration test pressure is monitored at the LRM.
According to the licensee, the longest length of 1/8" poly tubing used to connect the LRM to the component being tested is ~30 ft. using ~30 ft of tubing connected to a LRM the insp'tor measured a pressure drop of 1 psi at a flow rate of
~5000 sccm and 2 psi at ~17,000 sccm.
The inspector determined that the licensee has no method to ensure the test pressure is maintained at Pa (12 psig)
as the flow rate (penetration leakage rate) through the LRM increases.
It is the licensee's practice to determine the penetration pressure by isolating the air supply to the LRM and recording the pressure at the LRM gauge, however, a
review of the test performed on penetration CPN-74 on December 15, 1988, showed a recorded test pressure of 12 psig for a penetration leaking at a rate of 34,000 sccm.
Appendix J requires that the test pressure at the penetration or valve under test be at Pa.
Failure to ensure the pressure is maintained at Pa throughout the local leak rate test is a violation (315/89007-03; 316/89007-04(DRS))
7.
~aen Items Open items are matters which have been discussed
'with the 'licensee,. which will be reviewed further by the inspector, and which involve some action on the part of the NRC or licensee or both.
An open item disclosed during the inspection is discussed in Paragraph 6.a.(l).
8.
Exit Interview The inspector met with the licensee representatives (denoted in Paragraph 1) on February 14 and 15, 1989.
The inspector summarized the scope and findings of the inspection.
The licensee acknowledged the statements made by the inspectors.
The inspector also discussed the likely informati,onal content of the inspection report with regard to
~ documents or processes reviewed by the inspectors during the inspection.
The licensee did not identify any such documents/processes as proprietar NRC FORM766 IB Aa1 lf MC OSJS NSP CIOAS U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORYCOMMISSION INS P ECTOR'S R E PORT Office of Inspection and Enforcement PAINCIPAI.INSPf(,'tOR(Name. Iatl. Itrtl,andmtddrerhtlta!(
REVIEWER LICENSEE.VENOOR (Priff 6'6 n(
ocr!ECr.
TRANSACTION typf I
INSERT M
MOOIFY 0 - Oflftf R
RfPLACE I
~
OOCKET NO. IB IFIclOR UCfNSE NO. I8 Y PRO OVCTI (13 djjtcl le REPORT MO.
18 SEQ.
NEXTINSPEC. OATf YA.
MO.
PERIOOOF INVEStIGATIONIINSPECTION FAOM TO 0SG
OZI
MO.
OAY YR.
MO.
OAY YA.
INSPECTION PEAFORMEO BY OTHER I - REGLOMALOFFICES'tAFF AESIOE'NT INSPECTOR PERFORMANCE APPRAISALTEAM ORGAMIZAteMCODE OF REGeNIHO CONDUCT.
ING ACTMlY(See IEMC 0530 -Mantrpner Raper(.
-Wee Maherhrer Repdrt'" IOC Cede BAAM H I VIS AEG N
REGIONAL ACTION (Check one box only)
NRC FORM591 2 REGIONALOFFICE LETTER 02 SAFETY 03 INCIOENt 01 ENFORCFMENT
MGMT.AUDIT 06 MGMT.VISIT 07 SPECIAL 08 VENOOR
MAT.ACCT.
PLANTSEC
INVENT.VEA.
12 SHIPMENT/EXPORT
IMPORl'YPE OF ACTIVITYCONOVCTEO (Check one box oceyl la INQUIRY 15 INVESTIGATION
<<',rb+r t(~+:; lh'A'0+ 5 Le
%<<I'r +CIWL r,k+ aria!ITr 2'g.373( e..c~'rc:Ivlt"Q~cb c /.
~
4 ~<'r tc+gtttCP~+Pgh.
~'4
~ twg INSPECTIONIINVESII ATIONFINOINGS (Check one box onlvl
C TOTALNUMBER OF VeLAteMSANO OEVIAteNS FNFOACEMENTCONFERENCE HELO REPORT CONTAN2790 NFOAMATION Lf.'ITEROR AfPORT TRANSMITTALOATf I CLEAR 2 - VeIAteN 3 OEVIATIOM e VeIAteNd OEVIATION A
C
A
C
0 O3 I
YFS A
C
1-YfS NAC FORM 591 OA REG.
LETTER ISSVEO MO.
OAY YA REPORT SENT TO HQ FOR ACTION MO.
OAY YR.
Sc
~t>;~'a2 " d'etc
~rahcSt G4&14~Va3+Q-:~~-~+
MODULE INFORMA'IION MOOULENUMBER INSP.
MODULEREO. FOLLOWVP REC MOGUL\\NUMBER INSP.
MOOULEAf(LFOLLOWVP W
t cc
~Ir Ch Z
Z 4 cc W
C cc
W co cr
oC Os-chctrK
W Z
~
I
V g 0 w 0 0 O. V C
Ch I
Ch C
W r 4 ca C.r, o
co cc Z
Ch Z4 C
W Z 4 u
co o
Z 4C<CC-Z WZWW4 CQC-xcm ot=chwZ
W I
W W
I Z
W I
o. 0 w 0 0 e
V I
C W
I4 V
cc C
WO0
Z W
5 3CI QO3 0ol L7 C
IP f
2 0 5 "jo.g 07 OCI O ILIA C
/zan Of
'? 93 07 oSZ
~
rtt
W t 5 9z'.7,D 8
~
~
y 0 3z"3
/Og c
W +~70/
703'
CIRCLE SEOUENCf IF IOIATIOMOR OfVIATION 3ci 5'~
~
"~
12 13 '5
'l6
"nt18
20 21-rr"~~. r~26 t
5+<<
a
'~410 13 tr
16
+'IB 2trr.tt'rrr. ~
NRC IOitin l08 A I6 83 l IC MC 0535 INSPECTOR'S RFPORT (Continuation)
Office of Inspection and Enforcement OQCISC 1 NO. 18 niff 'l7I Oft LICCI<<S C
~SO,IPY PAOPVOll(l3C<<IISSI IICPOSII NQ, SCQ, MOOULC IIUMUCII sg vcs<<nt<<fsv scvtnitv OR OCVi<<t<<IR
3 <<5
0 SIIC IIELATCO S<
2$
SVsC.
vlolpTION QA0EvlhlioNgn tet isp le2(x chssscfess fefesch ffeni.ffthe lesf esceeds lhlfnssmbel, ff<<sfffbe necessity fe psssphfs se. I fmffflees fe Sffclvfscf<<vs esch I Y~od H rzocv 12.
19.
'I,
~
I 2<<.
.26.:
~
<<<<
I
\\
I I I
~
Ss:
I I
<<
I I
~
I
~,
I
~ '.
~.
I I
i:
~ I ~
~'.
~
~
I
'i
~
I ~C I
ii
<<
l it i ~ '
I
~ '
cfiO ~ 47 4ef U.S. NUCI.EAAACGULAYOAYCOMMISSION 5l I> ~ )9 v'vsn pW<<P v irsi ~ 'I 77(i
<<
fg
~
NRC IORM IVOA I6 631 lC MC 0<<35 INSPECTOR'S REPORT (Continuation)
Qffice of Inspection and Enforcement OOCKC1NO. (Sa<<(:(1(OR 4<<CCl<<SC NO, (GV RROOVC1((13 d<hs(
RCPORI I<<O.
SCO
MPPVLC llVMOCR VKXAlsaustvtnh v on o(VIAvkckk<<
SI(S RSLATSO
2 3 <<5
0 5 h
sve4.
v(ocA1(oN oh ocv(A1ON (Snler op to?<<00ch<<recters fore<<ch I(ere. Ifpke te<<l esceeds this nkrmber. IIkkol be nece seed Iop<<rrphrs so. ( Imttpnes le 50ch<<rect<<re ecch I 10.
15.
16.
~
~
~ '
1<<
k
~
I j.;
~
J
~
I
~
Ip'
l I
.'
<<
I l
~
'
I t
~
(
I T
l
~
$1.
I
~ (
~
I I
~
~.':
':<<i
~ ~
~
(
~
~
k
- (
.
I
'
'<<
~
~: t
. ~
~
. ':r
~ k,,...
~f
~
k
~
~
'
~
.
~
I ',w
~
k
~
r k
k
'l Crrp
~ ~
clko eet oe(
r 51 V.S. NVCLEAAACGVLATOAYCOMM(SSIO((
RP 1201B
a INSPECTION PLANNER S-siS
> l-eog-Facility:
Inspection Report No.: 50-fa PV CadP V Inspection Date(s):
-
cI Resident Notified:
d
+
r 2// >> Ij inspection Type:
Routine Reactive Team Allegation Other (speci y)
Announced~ Unannou'need SALP Neaknesses addressed~
) Inspection Focus (SALP Weakness, Core
)Program, Regional Initiative, Event
[ Fol lowup I
Module/TI No.
SALP Area/
Rating I
Open Item(
No. (OIL)l e
Ir>
Y z.Cnc(
I Wf-13~
I u'-i~,M bc ~
2.0 iV I
P gO/
d2.
I
~PA/
E>DZS --O
~@~ rkozs" ep
/ST-0 y/0 PQ ozp aenJ If;~-
~
-Oa d&+~7 OPS'5 oa
- cr alan Prepared 8!: gli1@5tle'pect Plan Approved By:
Section C ief Plan Reviewed By:,
Prospect Sec on Chief Oate:
D...:
~/7'ate:
Attachment
Rev. 07/07/88 s;) Ajsvl
V
'\\ IV
Submitt OUTSTANDING ITEN OIL TRACKING FORM Sec.
Chief Approval Item No.
3 I 5 / 8'6 O BG- 07 (Unit 1)
~I 4/ gZ gpss= LI (Unit 2)
Type Code QPhf LE, 0-Func.
Area Date Entered
/
/
Original Inspector Resp.
Sec.
aPS Note Responsible Inspector 3-/g QtLLA.
Close D>/ /a / gf Final Report g'P no 7 Inter im Insp.
Repor ts Followup Date Remarks:
Status Code I
~
p
AEO ALG BUL CAL CIR DEV GLR IAL INF LER NC NVK OPN TYP COD ABNORH. ENVIR. OCC.
ALLEGATION BULLETIN CONFIR.
ACTION LTR.
CIRCULAR DEVIATION GENERIC LETTER IHHEDIATE ACTION LETTER INFORHATION NOTICE LICENSEE EVEN.
REPORT, NON COMPLIANCE'i1 2 3 " 5)
NO VIOLATION 10 CFR 2, APP.
C SEC.
V.A OPEN ITEH ORD OTN P20 P2 I R3R REC RIP SEP SER SGR SSF TMI UNR WDN 55E ORDERS TO LICENSEE OTHER
CFR PART 20
CFR PART 21 REGION III REQUESTS RECOMHENDATIONS REGULATORY IHPROVEHENT PROGRAH SAFETY EVAL.
PROGRAM SAFETY EVAL. REPORT 73.71 SAFEGUARDS'EPORTS SIGNIFICANT SAFETY FINDING THREE-HILE ISLAND ACTION ITEHS UNRESOLVED ITEMS WITIIORAWN
CFR 50.55(e)
OPERATIONS 2.
RAD - CHEN 3.
HAINTENANCE II.
SURVEILLANCE 5.
EMERGENCY PREP 6.
SEC/SAFEGUARDS 7.
OUTAGES BI TRAINING 9.
LICENSING 10.
QUALITY ASSURANCE 11, OTHER 12.
FIRE PROT/N-K EPS PI A FRP P18 HLS P2A HOS P28 HPS P3A NH1 P38 NH2 PSS OL1 REC OL2 SCS OPS TSS Attachment I to RP 1201 Revised 12/04/87
Suba{ tted Iteo No.
R/~ /PS-C >g-g/'unit 1)
/
(Unit 2)
Type Code Func.
Area Sec. Chief Approval Date Entered
/
/
- Original Inspector 4. AQ~
Resp.
Sec.
QP Note Responsible Inspector F. ~~~
losed OP./ /5 / g'g Final Rcport ggc pg litter)a.Insp. Reports Fol lamp Date t l'.
Remarks:
, Status Code AEO ALG bUL CAL C Ilt OEV GLIt IAL INF LKR NC
'k Nl AbHORN. OIVllt. OCC.
ALLEGATION bULLETIN CONF IR. ACTION LTlt.
C I RCULAR OCVIAT ION GENERIC LETTElt IHHCDIATE ACTION LETTElt INFORHATION NOTICE LICENSEE KVCHT RCPORT NOH COHP1.IAICE (1 2 3 II 5)
NO VIOLATION 10 CFR 2, APP.
C 5KC, V.A OPEN ITCH ORO OTH P20 P21 R3R REC RIP SEP SER SGR SSF THI UHR 1IOH 55E OROERS TO LICEKSEE OTHER 10 CFR PART 20
CFR PART 21 REGION III REOUCSTS RECOHHEHOATIOHS REGULATORY INPROVCHEHT PROGRAH SAFETY EVAL, PROGRAH SAFETY EVAL. RCPORT 73'1 SAFEGUAROS REPORTS SIGHIFICAHT SAFETY FINOIHG THRCE NILE ISLAHO ACTIOH ITEHS UHRESOLVCO ITEHS MITHORAQH 10 CFR 50.55(e)
ITEHS OPERAT ION5 2,
RAO CHCH 3,
HAINTKNAHCC 4,
SURVEILLANCE 5,
CHERGCHCY PREP 6.
SEC/SAFEGUARO5 7.
OUTAGES b.
TRAINING 9.
LICENSING 10.
OUALITY ASSURAIICE 11.
OTHER 12.
F IRE PROT/H It KP5 P1/
FRP Ptt Ht.5 P2l HOS HP5 P3A NHI P3B IWC?
P55 OL 1 RCC SCS OPS TSO Attachment 1 to RP 1201 Revised 12/04/87
- Subaitted by:
OUTSTANDING ITEM LIST OIL TRACKING FORM Sec.
Chief Approval Itea No.
'iS / g'~g>~- Oa.
(Unit 1)
/
(Unit 2)
W Type Code Func. Area Date Entered
/
/
- Original Inspector f
Responsible Inspector
, ggv.~
Resp.
Sec.
lose Note Final Report
- Interim Insp. Reports
'Followup Date Remarks:
/
/
'Status Code AEO ALG BUI CAL CIR OEV GLR IAL IHf LER NC HVB OAl ABNORH. EHVIR.
OCC.
ALLEGATIOH BUI,LETIN COHFIR.
ACTIOH LTR.
CIRCULAR OEVIATIOll GENERIC LETTER IMMEDIATE ACTION LETTER IHfORNATIOH NOTICE LICENSEE EVEHT REPORT HOH-COHPLIANCE ( I"2 3 4 5)
HO VIOLATIOH IO CFR 2, APP.
C SEC.
V.A OPEN ITQl ORD OTN P20 P21 R3R REC RIP SE.P SER SCH SSF THI UNH MON 55E ORDERS TO LICENSEE 0 IIILH
CFH PART 20 10 Cf H PART 21 REGION III REOUESTS HICOMHENDATIONS REGULATORY IHPBOVEHENT PROGRAH SAIETY EVAL.
PHOGHAH SAFETY EVAL.
BEPOHT 73.71 SAfEGUAHOS HEPOBTS SIGNIFICANT SAFI'TY FIHDIHG TIIHIE-IIILE I SLANO ACT ION I TEHS UNHI:SOLVED'
TENS
'Hl flIOHAHH 10 CfR 50.55(a]
ITEMS 1.
2 ~
3 ~
4 ~
5.6.
7.
8 ~
9.
10.
11.
12.
OPERATIONS RAD - CIIEH H*IHTEHAHCE SUHVEILLAHCE EHERGEHCY PREP SEC/SAFEGUAROS OUIAGES TRAINING LICENSING QUALITY ASSURAHCE 01IIEH F I BE PROT/H-K EPS PIA fRP PIB HLS P2A HOS P28 HPS P3A HHI P38 NH2 PSS OL'I REC OL2 SGS OPS TSS Attachment 1 to RP 1201 Revised 12/04/87
Submitted b
OUTSTANDING ITEM LIST 'RACKING FORM Sec.
Chief Approval RP A'
Ie Item No.
~/ g~ >>M-D2 (Unit 1)
/
-
(Unit 2)
Original Inspector
=~. Hn,we Type Code
/~ p Resp.
Sec.
~c Func.
Area
. ~
Note
~
d
! ~
~
e e
Responsible Inspector t," r gPtLLRA C~oeed DQ/ iS / g~
l ~
.Final Report'-....
- . g0u~7 Interim Insp.
Reports Followup Date,.
Remarks:.
/
/
Status Code TYPC COD SECTIOfl
',i.
e~G
':JL
- IL
.iR
- V
.R IL IF
':N
'~
,<</8 AIINOAH. ENVIR. OCC.
ALLEGATION IIVI.LCI I N CONF IR.
ACTION LTR.
CIRCULAR DEVIATION GI.NCRIC LETTER IMMEDIATE ACTION LETTER INFOAHATION HOT ICC I.ICCNSCC CVCHT REPORT HOH-COHPLIAHCE ( 1-2-3"4-5)
NO VIOLATION 10 CFR 2, APP.
C SCC.
V.A OPEN 11CH ORD ORDERS TO LICENSEE OTH
-
OTIICR P20
"
CFR PART 20 P21
-
CFR PART 21 R3R
-
REGION III REQUESTS
'EC
"
.
BECOMHENDATIONS RIP REGULATORY IHPROVCMCNT PROGRAM SEP
-
SAFETY CVAL.
PROGRAM SER
-
SAFETY EVAL. REPORT SGR
-
13.11 SAFCGUARDS ACPOATS SSF SIGNIFICANT SAFETY FINDING TH I
-
TIIRCE"MILE I SLAt(0 ACT I OH I TEHS UNR
"
UNRESOLVED I TCHS HDH
"
M I T IIDAAHN
~~r
-
CFR 50.55to)
3 ~
4, 5.6.
7 ~
8.
tac ment I Revised 09/08/88 OPERATIONS RADIOLOGICAL CONTROLS MAINTENANCE/SURVEILLANCE EHEAGENCY PREPAREDNESS SECURITY ENGINEERING/TECH.
SUPPORT SAFETY ASSESS/QUALITY VERIF.
OTHERS CPS PIA I'RP P I II HLS P2A HOS P20 MPS P3A NMI P3II NM2 PSS OLI REC OL2 SGS OPS rSS
I '. '."- "'-.-'-'"., (Un>t-'2)..::.
Inspector.'.="'.
-..- '"",;.'.."'.;:-':',.-"':==.
,]A~'r=-w:="':-:-;.
'-,:-.'.:::.:-; -"=.'
crim I nsp..-.Reports,-".=::.,"..'.:;-
.:"-;;",-;".!:"..=.-'-'-.""-'-::-:,;-':.
'.::~'= -'
/
'-"/;-"'
Ilj L
-".".-.
-.'.--.-":"- -- Note
'
":.; Closed-;
'>( /5 j'g j":.
r
~
- .".:.::-.--':.- Remarks:"::; "~-
Resp..;Se
""~'pc'inal Ori pons ibl Res Int Fol Sta
~
.
- -'.-..:.". !"",-'<":.
-: -," ',:,
OUTSTANDING ITEN LIST "IL TRACKING
\\,
. Submitted..
"=" " '.AK'R4-'" -;-
3/'6 I-g@PW-;;". -',":,(Unit'-i):;;::-',;-;:..; ': jj5-'q.,
F
'.-.:..-':~;::-:.;.;S'ec-.-,chief,."Approval:-
K
'
-~P.- pRO PROERS TO LICENSEE AUNORM ENVIR'+OCC
..'
"".'.~'.'-,: ~....OTN
.
"- OTIIER LC
-.';:,*ALLEC o,;=;.".+...-,',"-" "."=.-",.~";,p2p -
~ ',. 10 CFR PAR UL, -
=-.OUI.LETIN
'
"~o'
'r =',", "x': "+'p21 c
-..'.. 10 CFR PART 21
-'. -'-: CONF IR ACTION'-LTR.:;=.;,'.'- <""-'R3R '
"-" REGIPN I I I REQUESTS'.
IP
-
.~:. 'CIRCULAR-'."-'i>"'(')'..."":i -"'>~ <<g>
REC.,
'--
RECOMHENOAT IONS EV
. -;: DEVIAT ION -'-"--'. ~~ "-'-'.":".':"'.', -".'EGULATORY IHPROVEHENT. PROC"AH
- -'.;Gl NERIC.LETTER.*.."~'
."-'".':.. ":~P:: SEP":
~ SAFETY FVAI PROGRAM
, AL
',,"<'HHEOIATE.ACTION
"L'ETTER >~..-'~r~
ER
- AFETY FVAL.. REPORT";
I
,: INFORMATION.N01ICE'".~.;~;;...;=;-'.;.
-
,
~1,SAFEGUAROS'REPORTS
~":;.'-:-..
'.".".'-",'LICENSEE EVENT'; REPORT:." -"l-';,,>,
F.
~..', SIGNIFICANT SAFETY FINOING
'!'"..
NON COHPL I ANCE '
2
4 5 ) ) ~"-'.",w'TMI '
TIIREF MILE I SLANO ACT I ON I TEHS'
Vg
-':::.,:;NP VIOLATIOK.IO;CFR 2,~;::." " UNR '" '. UNRFSOLVEO ITEMS q",
~
'PP, C -'EC, V.A,:~
...-" "
1ION
-
MITIIORAMN I PN
-
~.
. OPEN ITEH -;-.-..-=-".:. '.'-1.-'-.::.'aSF lo CFR 50,55(e)
ITEMS
~
~ ~ r~
~
g~jFRP.:.~$ ~'P I II'-'--:.
'=,~'MLS~~.1',..P2A '-'; ';,
~
gI:-r.",,
tac ment."1"..!i.'.=-~,.:,qw~"~s:.";~',".","-",."-.I, 3.
MAI NTENANCE/SURVE I LLANCE'-'~>>4=~='-
4.".> 'MERGENCY PRE PAREONESS;i~gg~g~~?~~~~
6.
- 'ENGINEERING/TECH.~SUPPORT'.:;g-'.~~",
7."'.,', SAFETY ASSESS/QUAL'ITY.'VERIF,'$J:
KING OUTSTANDING ITEM LIST L
TRAC
~. '-.
SU S
m1t e
- .Item.No -'..'-
- .'='~~..:;=..-'j':;---,.:";:;;:~:.: ~~."'!.';,.;:-.-;.', Type:Code
-,:"-.;"
.:',-;<.'-.Func.'. Area P I:.6'/ @m~J.-.--:i~~ (Un'it.i):;:~;.-...,---.gi'--"-4".
/ "
~
~
~ -'."',.'>'. r'"":'U t'. 2) ",.': "," "
~
r. =>>
,r Pp 12.
I F
Responsible.Inspector.;.'-;.-.".
".-'.;~,':.".-"..-:.'.'
-.'--- '..--:,'-..:.-'-".'osed"."-',.
'-.:-.:.:.'>>,-.-'-.-."'"-;=;-"..'~&~: Fin'al=';Report~@-'.~RISC>5~'~',.'."=".-,'R.:=
S
'>
EO LG
~ VL'L IR CV LR,
. AI..
Kf f.R C
vB PK AUKORH." ENV I R.'>> OCC.,'.'i.'i.;"'< yj~';..r, CONI IR.. ACTION"LTR, '"
.','I:KEN IC LETTER".:.-~'::,."::e.RI P
-;. '.:,... IHMEOIATE ACT ION'ETTER;:.'PP':i:-:'SEP INFORMATION NOT ICE
'.,~'.:+';:
>SER LICENSEE EVENT'REPORT.*";;"-;.;~."-SGR
- ';:.. NON-COMPLIANCE ( 1-2-3-4 5)'..'t.'sp'-.-"..'"-'.!
EHERGEIICY PREPAREONES ENGINEERING/TECH iSUPPORT""i.~P.'AFETY ASSESS/QUAL'ITY,'VERIF.'!f~i",
~+S CT10 b.:>q E PS:j~".,"-'
IA -';..':::-.
,'~, MPS";>,'P3A'>'."-.,"
j'OPS., --, TSS:<.-:,.=.
~ ~ ~
>>r
~
tac ment, 1:r.".'.=:,:."egg,.-.'.;.;.,>>.:;;. =.;.
s., Revised;09/08/88,":.:>--,'-.,,...',,
':".,'--.-".,",.
- .Submi,tted
':-"":-~>~i.:,..'""~""..".~.".-'., 'OUTSTANDING ITEM LIST '"IL 'RACKING Original-Inspector,',-"--'-'.
-".":-',.'."'-".';.'".::"".',-";." -."
'" 'esp..;Se
~'; 'g~g'g.;:.'.-
-....'.-'"=':..
'.::." --
-"-"'j~pr
'esponsible:.Inspector.
"..-.,-.",;-..:.-':,;:-",:."=.;:.':,';::.'..--,-
! P"
.""-"- -".'.",;;-,.::;-::-',;=;;;;:.,.".",...
rtAAiLkg'" ""
Inter im Insp." Reports:,.-.".--.';"..";.-.-'"":.':Ã.';"';":-'."::::-:,.-;-:;-.:g, -'-
r Fol 1 owup Date'*.;:";-": ".'?::..".'-.=:;;
/
":"i":-'":,.-..:-'-:.
":""'"'tatus Code:.
"."--:::=.'::::
~
>
'
yw..
O
>W>~ m ~
.
'UNORH.
ENVIR,".OCC,,
".>
UL
-
..DUI.LETIN 4L
.
~
CONf IR." ACT!ON"LTR.;;... ':,.-,.;.:.',
I R
':
C I RCULAR -)pj:;:~;i;-...- ->~
LR
.- -.
GENERIC LETTER~<.'.-'-
AL -..., IHHEDIATE ACTION LETTER '.
Hf -:
INFORHAT ION NOTICE ER. ~" '".'ICENSEE EVENI'. REPORT.'.. '-"+>+~:'SGR C
'.;:.. NON-COHPLIANCE-(1-2-3-4-5).';".';;:.S F
V5
"i;";NO VIOLATION 10 CFR 2i'-;
.'APP.
C-'.SEC.- V.A... '.-".':
.'UNR PN
-
.
OPEN I 1EH
~ '!
ORDERS TO LICENSEE OTHER
CFR PART 20.
CFR PART
REGION III REQUESTS
.RECOHHENDATIONS
'. REGULATORY IHPROVEHENT PROGRAH SAFETY EVAL.
PROGRAH
SAFETY EVAL. REPORT
~
73.71. SAFEGUARDS REPORTS SIGNIFICANT SAFETY FINDING.
TIIREE"NILE ISLAND ACTION ITEHS
.-- UNRESOLVED ITEHS MITIIDRAHN
CFR 50.55(0)
ITEHS U
C 1,
2 ~
3 ~4,.
5 ~6.
7 ~
8.
RADIOLOGICAL CONTROLS".-"-'>"'";N".a>'AINTENANCE/SURVEILLANCE"~kq"j",
EHERGENCY PREPAREDNESSp'.~,.'r>'>'.:.~I ENGINEERING/TECH SUPPORT";:.o.,'>A!
SAFETY ASSESS/QUALITY."VERIF.'~!:.
"P-~SFCT I 0
'-,,<<'HLS, i;
~ P2 A
.!. HOS;,';", P2II
'~'PS'~.'>-:
P3A:, =....
- ~! NHI:"~" P38:..
>os NH2,.".'SS:..'.
'-:.!'.
OL1 -;:.'-.
'"-.-";OL2."'.-.:
.. SGS '..
=..-
- ."'0ps-'...rss:,'..-.-:
tac ment, 1 -..:.':.='.:...;:-.:.:. =..-:.:...:.-
,: Revi sed Ogyps j88',".".,'.;-.'-.'-;;.-,"':,'~" -::"::
Submitted b
c
~//n)
OUTSTAND'ING ITEN LIST TRACKING FORM RP, Sec.. Chief, Approval;
Item No.
/
. =':-'. -'.".. ':. (Unit"1)..';.".-'-'
~
g 4 L'6 / ~ 0 ~ >7':;=.>:-I 'Unit"2').':
Original Inspector.-'-.-..-":
.
'ype.
Code Res Y
.:,....-.Func..;Area;.
C Sec.
'
..-: ":
Note gv)l4 i OKER NNj OP/
Responsible Inspector
, QP it":0 f/lA'j Cl osed -.-
-'r.
/
/
Interim Insp.
Reports IH 1'.
Followup Date;.
/
/
Status Code W,4g< o'~~6
/ o L i e nrem ~" nf Qd h,'g Qc'g Remarks:
rES
"Carr-/z oping /64':.'.AEjig-afj s 8:
TYP COD FU CTIO AL AR AS EO LG UL 4L IR EV LR AL
.9 I (N v5 PN AIIMORH, EMVIR. OCC.
ALLEGATION DUI.LETIM CONflR. ACTION LTR.
CIRCULAR DEVIATION GENERIC LETTER IHMCDIATE ACTION LETTER INFORHAT ION NOTICE LICENSEE EVENT REPORT NON-COHPLIANCE ( 1-2-3-4-5)
NO ViOLaTION 10 CFR 2, APP.
C SEC.
V.A OPEN ITEH ORD OTH P20 P21 R3R REC RIP ~-
%SF ORDERS TO LICENSEE OTIIER
CFR PART 20
CFR PART
REGION III REQUESTS RECOHHENDATIONS REGULATORY IHPROVEHENT PROGRAH SAfETY EV*L.
PROGRAH SAFETY EVAL. REPORT 73.71 SAfEGUARDS REPORTS SIGNIFICANT SAFETY FINDING THREE-HILE ISLAND ACTION ITEHS UNRESOLVED ITEHS MITIIDRAHN
CFR 50,55(e)
ITEHS 1.2.
3.
4 ~
5.6.7.
8.
EPS P IA fRP P10 HLS P2A HOS P2U HPS P3A NHI P3II NH2 PSS OL1 REC OL2 SGS ops rss tac ment
Revised 09/08/88 OPERATIONS RADIOLOGICAL CONTROLS HAINTENANCE/SURVEILLANCE EHERGENCY PREPAREDNESS
.
SECURITY ENGINEERING/TECH.
SUPPORT SAFETY ASSESS/QUALITY VERIF.
OTHERS
'UTSTANOING ITEM LIST L '-.TRACKING FORM
. -'..',:.";>>";:
.('.:.=.'.':"O'X>~ Q~+~"'.""'g:,,)'>~K>>'- "
"m~:.'",".'vr(i:."~'-':;i.-'-'-
/ 4/ AIrJ '7'"-'::-;,0':4:=- (Unit-'-2) ".:.-,
Original. Inspector,,'-'=:"-,.; ";:-,","-.':"'-.":;..'.:
V 1'Y(A:i.gA-"'..'esponsibl e.Inspector.
-.=';-.-,.-.-:,"=,',,",'."."..;,,'.:." ',
':.~'..'. ;;::.'.;:-'..;-.
Interim Insp."" Re orts,="r:,.-.'...;--;"-'-:-'.8';--"-." -"-:;-.:;;-
Resp..:Se
"g pS'...:-.
Cl ose'd..:"'.;
. -',:-., (...".".=>"..="..'-'~'-:,~~~:'."Fi n'a 1~ R'e'Dort'."~~;. ><'-"'>>~~'-:.'~ -:-'.~;-."'-'-.'~'
i~(
C'I, F
',;"~:..'-'.
". -; '":,-:..;.."',
.'-..-.;."=..
k
/
''" "+"'- '>>f -/9':!-/T "./.0 "'
. C4
'~ '"~j44Q '8"-."(5'n.g'ji$ '
'- ~ 'j'-'!'~P'- '-'" '"'*'.
'
~..ggi~$ d);~QQ'y~~gPF"."""'4~~r."-'- '
TYP 'C EO,-
'
AIINORM. ENVIR. OCC.
LG
- ';. ALLECATION.-.~s~,~
"-
':=- -,-...~:~~>>". P20 UL,.OUI.LET IH
.;":",...,'.f'..'
',';"e~...
<L. ". -:: CONf IR, ACT IOH 'LTR, '..=,,. ';:~
-:..~<., I MME0 I ATE. ACT ION
"LETTER,':.-'.wl.':,S Hf
. -"'
INFORMATION HOT ICE fR. "':-'ICEHSEE EVENT. REPORT::,.""'-'>"SGR
.-,'.;.... NON-COMPLIANCE-(1-2-3-4 5)
- ":":HO VIOLATIOH 10'CFR 2,".; '...,"...":-.:. >>I APP.
C 'EC.
V.A.
PH
-.,
OPEN I TEM.'.;,-
ORDERS TO LICENSEE.'THER
-
~
CFR PART 20.
10 CfR PART 21
- REGION III REauESTS
'..RECOMMENDATIOHS REGULATORY IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
'AffTY EVAL.
PROGRAM SAFETY EVAL. REPORT -'.
- '3.
71-SAF EGUARDS 'REPORTS.:;:.
SIGH I F I CANT SAF ETY. F IHDIHG THREE-MILE ISLAND ACTION ITEMS UNRESOLVED ITEMS
'W I TIIDRAWtI
CFR 50.55(0)
ITEMS l.
2 ~
3 ~
4 ~5.6.
7 ~8.
RADIOLOGICAL CONTROLS."'(~."-'"-:;~/~-
MAINTENANCE/SURVEILLANCE'~'.I~.=".:,"-,"
EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS'q~~'4'?
"..
ENGINEERING/TECH 'SUPPORT;"'(
r".',
'AFETY ASSESS/QUAL'ITY;VERIF;.:!$
z,'.~Sr C r i 0
.p>.EPS';:."'
IA --
-"
'.f RP-,~'-'=- PID..-
u'MLS w'(;! P2Ar':
- ,~. MOS
. '.-.'. P2II r'~>> MPS ~c'
'P3A'-...
".j~'MI;".'~. P3II
-~:; NM2,.-i.".. PSS;,:."",
- .i
- OLI;;',
- REC
~~(OPS;~':.
~. I'
S '..- -.:.:
r
~
tac ment, I:,:.:.'.--.(,:-,,:>.",.
,', Revi sed;09/08/88;.;~~,'-.,::
..~:.',--':.".
t. '
~ ~
~
14k
~
.
'
-""..-'.:..",,".,j>>."'.;,;,-."..'
~."".,
OU767AH I 6 I EH LIB
' '
IH6
~ "> i 'PggPg-:-='84'=.";.;(Unit":1)'-'"-"."=-'-;
- gP&:::.. -':-:: -""':.~8:
">
PA QIC i I'Jf@7:"i,:::g (u,;i-'2),: ':.
Origina 1 Inspector-::==.:
':::
.'.,'.;-'"- -j::; -::;-. -'.. Resp.; Sec..""-'".
'~,"=,-'"
- Note
...,. ---"~,,;...=->,;-'.,'",,.-,.>."-.,~~~4~~~: 6!.:>>-=:/'~g-'.: ='-'-,."--:!.=.=->~':-.", ~~=-"=.'-".-
IP h'f'-,/T:-,'
:,
'
'
~f ~
'
.
~
-
-'.: '
.. ~
.',. '-'.'-:.'.,~w"y.~:>g""":.;
~.
4'.~-
-,
p~ee%~<: p.
~
~
.a-i..>> c.,r:
4,~..
.- - P p~j; '.;-/..::,
l Responsible-'..Inspect'or,
-.:-"=,-. '-..':.'-.-'.: "':-
. =-..'
-
-.,::-
. Closed;,".,:..:..-,'." "',-': ':;.,>'=:'Fin'a]"'Re'p'or/<><sory"w'5:,";:,:.-:-;;-".'-':-..--;-'-'=:-:.
t i-: 'i'
': /
F
'.
" '.'"".:"'- '....:.-..:- ","-' '-,-'-,
".;":
-
.:;
%'-
p k ';; '-qi,'- <<
-:>>>>,
"'..'~'~.'i,
~!~i~.-~"~+ P~y?,";a~~'.
>>>>'~>>--~~/ P ~..~
I
. I-"-' i"""'Xgkjj'-'"P:: "W"."%~4h'-cf-'
6'447f'-dl>'...P'Q'p:-Q
'I lg TYP "'C
'-"'~"",i: ""
- .",'- '"
<,".:;ORD PRPERS TO LICENSEE.
'UHORM." EHVIR,"~OCC~ ~'~'w~'.',='TH
.
pTIIER LG
-
- ,, ALLEGATIOH,-
- .'~.,;~<.~."'
- "',""~" P20
-
~
1p CfR PART 20 UL -,
.OUI.LETIH::";.. '., ',
."-.'-"-"-.. P21
-
~
Ip CFR PART 21 AL -..'OHI'IR, ACTIOH"LTR.;--'..', 'i:..'='3R
- -.'EGIpN III REQUESTS IR
"":::: 'CIRCULAR r'<..'>> -'i.'." C't
-.'.
., >> w."~~+~>1g'REC"
...RfCOMMEHDAT!ONS EV
-
,.'EVIATION";.".'."<"..'...":.:;",",,'.-".".
..g IP
=,. REGULATpRY IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
'EHERIC I ETTER':.>>-'~".'-'"~"';"~+'EP-'
~'SAFETY EVAL, PROGRAM
-;. ~';-;!. IMMEDIATE.ACTION"L'ETTER;"'P~;"~'
-
-
SAFETY EVAL. REPORT ;
.
Hf
'-<<.>>I,;:INFORMATION.
NOTICE*
"','-';>"5"~" "'GR
" '
73 '1: SAfEGUARDS REPORTS
[R
~
'.j.-'; LICENSEE EVENT'(REPORT"',"".>>'"" ?" SSF
" -'IGNIFICANT SAfETY. FINDING C
-
.:.
-
CANON-COMPLIANCE'
( 1"2-3-,4-5)~~;..~:
TIIREE-MILE ISLAND.ACTION ITEMS
'g
~-:;.';Hp VIOLATIOH F 10:CFR 2i
",
j;:,"..j
'
UNRESpLVEp ITEMS ;;
~
,""i='".~~
. APP.
C '>>SEC.; V.A,,-.'
';" -'"'.. Hpk
"
1!ITIIDRA'HH PH
-
.
-
OPEN ITEM.'.'..:;..;.:..
.'
-'-"." '6sF
- 10 CFR 50,55(e)
ITEMS RAp I OLOG I CAL CONTROLS'"-"""-'.""~8'F.","..
3.
MAINTENANCE/SURVEILLANCE;'"'-:""'"".,;
'MERGENCY PREPAREDNESS 6,
.
ENGINEERING/TECH SUPPORT:=.'j>>:~.
7.'.,
SAFETY ASSESS/QUALITYlVERIFo,".f '.
/;,'SF C T I 0
.~<,".'>.EPSOM+,"..-
P IA-j:FRP
.<<~, MOS--'.:,'.,P2II.-"-
- ~
- -MPS '~'-'3A-:.-
"~i~c HMI'4w:% P3II
..-g.pLI,',~="'EC '-:"'.:;.
, '..'...';:.',"-".:; Revi sed:09/08 j88.",".~<sL'~+'.:-..l.",'.;,:-.';.-".)'=
Submitted b
.
OUTSTANDING ITEM LIST TRACKING FORM Sec.
Chief Approval A
Item No.
g
> & / ggge7 -'~Q (Unit I)
2i C / g'd s'i.;7- -,0'j (Unit 2)
Type Code
/c
~ g/
Func.
Area rh r
Note Resp..Sec.
Cl osed
-..
h"
/
/'emarks:
pz a /i gv(g g <~
A~i Ag, (.ioes h
r Original Inspector
.=
+~ f.lE ~>c(
Responsibl e,Ins'pector Interim Insp.
Reports..-
-'=-'.; -"-".
Followup Date;;- ", '-: ",-:.
-... '.;...."--,.
/
'".-D ~XL>'~i=" N) ~Me.~~~>
&0L~&j. L+
Status Code h
h
- h
.'- Final Report::.:-,- -::-'; :::-..'-;.) "::;.'=:;-'=.:-'."'=":
h
'~'-"-h
~
"~'
I G
JL 1L IR
- V R
.'Nl
'<F
":R
'~"r s8 7N
~"
AIINORH. ENVIR,.OCC..:;. =--.."".'-
ALLECATION.
",'::,-"
,
=.'~.,",.OTN OUI.LET IN
"": "
..'-.".P20 CONf IR. ACTION LTR,.-.,
'-";:.
P2I C I RCULAR
-,<,-". R3R DEVIATION
'.'
- '.:,'REC GLNERIC LETTER', "-
RIP IHHEOIATE ACTION LETTER::. - 'SEP INFORHAT ION NOTICE ',
SER LICENSEE EVEN'I REPORT
'GR NON-COMPLIANCE ( I"2-3 4-5)
SSF NO VIOLATION 10 CFR 2, THI APP.
C SEC.
V.A OPEN ITEM
, '1;,; ~
ORDERS TO LICENSEE OTHER
CFR PART 20
CFR PART 21 REGION III REQUESTS RECOHHENOATIONS REGULATORY IMPROVEHENT PROGRAM SAFETY FVAL.
PROGRAM SAFETY EVAL. REPORT 73. I1 SAFEGUAROS REPORTS SIGNIFICANT SAFETY FINDING TIIREE"HILE ISLANO ACTION ITEMS UNRESOLVEO ITEHS WITIIORAWN
CFR 50,55(0)
ITEHS
- < ~SF.CTI 0
',':;- "h
>""r, E PS:.-;,:-. P,] A'g.~'":,
g'- FRP;;...'.;.
P IB--'~,i -:,
P2A
';- HOS.;,"-'2II. ";-':
- ."'- NHI <<r-; "P30-'-'i.,
~: NH2::;;:PSS:~"'.',
~ ". OL1; REC ='";'",
- ..OL2
" SGS Y.""';:
OPS.:-
TSS';
tac ment I
.
Revised Og/Osj88':.-
lh*
OPERATIONS 2.
RADIOLOGICAL CONTROLS""'..'.:.l!.'-".-'.-'.
HAINTENANCE/SURVEILLANCEi':;-'-',.':~:.
4 ~
.-.~:;",.i.-,"'"'.
SECUR I TY ': ':;<,;."-! -'": "",'",-","
6.
.
ENGINEERING/TECH.; SUPPORT"::,
7.
,
SAFETY ASSESS/QUALITY, VERIFh"'i" 8.
OTHERS
, "I ~ '