IR 05000320/1976007
| ML19220B305 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Crane  |
| Issue date: | 05/25/1976 |
| From: | Canter H, Mccabe E NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19220B301 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-320-76-07, 50-320-76-7, NUDOCS 7904250611 | |
| Download: ML19220B305 (10) | |
Text
.
-
-
..
IE ' Form 12 (J 2... 75) Olcv)
.
U. S.1:UCLBiR REGULiTORY CC'UtISSIO:i
.
OFFICE OF 1:S?ECTIO:t A::D EliFORCD!E:7T REGIO:I I C
IE Inspec tion Report !!o:
_ License 1:o:
CPPR-66 Hetropolitan Edison Cocpany Licensce:
_
Priority:
Box 542 B1 Reading, Pennsylvania
_ Category:
Safeguards Group:
Middletown, Pennsylvania (TMI-2)
Location:
".
E (
'
Type of Licensee.
(
Routine,Tnannounced Type of Inspection:
May 11-13, 1976
_-
,
Dates of Inspection:
___
May 10-13, 1976 Dates of Prev _.us Inspection:
b/'2b!7b Q,h. f- &
DATE Reporting Inspector:
L. Canter, Reactor Inspector h.
Acco=panying Inspectors:
DATE D'AT E
_
~
.
DATE Other Accompanying, Y erscnnel:
DATE I!1f 76 O. O. &
, \\
DATE R
ved By:
E. C. McCabe, Section Chief, Nuclear Support Section #1
~
'
Reac*.or Operations and Nuclear Support Branch
'.
'a q ':59 n-
.
790425o/A d
-
_
_
-
.
.
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
=
Enforcement Action None
'
h ee Action on Previous 1v Identified Enforcement Items Not inspected.
Reportable Occurrences None identified.
Other Significant Findines A.
Current 1.
Acceptable Items These are items which were inspected on a sampling basis and findings did not involve an Item of Noncompliance, Deviation
or Unresolved Item (except as noted).
a.
Test Procedure Verification (Detail 3)
b.
Test Procedure Review (Detail 4)
c.
QC for Preoperational Testing (Detail 4.a)
d.
Vibrational Testing Prototype Category has been,pecified (Detail 5)
2.
Unresolved Items These are items for which more information is required to deter-mine whether the items are Acceptable or Items of Noncompliance, a.
76-07-1: Precautions will be added to TP 401/3, Station Batteries Charge and Discharge Test, related to High Hydrogen Concentrations in the Battery Rooms.
(Detail 4.b)
b.
76-07-2: TI 250/2, Generic: Testing and Checking of Mechan-ical and Electrical Equipment will be changed to better define the term " system instrumentation."
(Detail 4.b}
k_
g E 1.
j
.
,
.
_
-
-2-
.
.
c.
76-07-3: The source for the level setpoint acceptance criteria in TP 203/1, Boarated Water Storage Tank Functional Test is not listed in the procedure.
(Detail 4.c)
-
d.
76-07-4. Precautions will be added to SP2, Filter Ef ficiency Test, related to carbon filter contamination.
(Detail 4.d)
e.
76-07-5: * Valve Locations related to the Maximum Post Core Accident " Flood" Level in the Containment.
(Detail 6)
B.
Status of Previous 1v Unresolved it ems 1.
Item 76-03-1 on the additicn of TP 160/1 to an FSAR Table has been resolved.
(Detail 7.a)
2.
Item 76-03-2 on the addition of TP 380/1 to an FSAR Table has been resolved.
(Detail 7.b)
3.
Item 76-03-4 on Preoperational Personnel Training has been resolved.
(Detail 7.c)
C.
Status of Previous 1v Report ed Enforcement It ems Not insoected.
Management Interview An exit manage =ent interview was held onsite on May 13,1976 at the
completion of the inspection; the persons listed below were attendees.
General Public Utilities Service Corporation Mr. T. Hawkins, Assistant Test Superintendent
.
Mr. M. Nelsma, Technical Engineer Mr. R. Toole, Test Superintendent The following items were discussed at the exit inteniew:
A.
Test Procedure Verification.
(Detail 3)
B.
Test Procedure Review.
(Detail 4)
C.
QC for Preoperational Testing.
(Detail 4.a)
D.
Vibrational Prototype Specified.
(Detail 5)
E.
Post Core Accident " Flood" Level.
(Detail 6)
F.
Status of Previously Unresolved Items.
(Detail 7)
See Region I Inspection Report 50-320/76-03, Detail 14.a
k.
m y
7.z
-
,
-
....
O
-
._
.
DETAILS
-
1.
Persons Contacted Mr. R. Fenti, GPUSC Quality Assurance Auditor
.
Mr. T. Hawkins, GP11SC Assistant Test Superintendent Mr. M. Nelson, GPUSC Technical Engineer Mr. S. Poje, GPUSC Primary Plant Senior Engineer Mr. M. Stromberg, GPUSC Site OA Auditor Mr. R. Toole, GPUSC Test Superintendent Mr. J. Ullrich, GPUSC Training Coordinator 2.
Purpose of Insnection This inspection was directed towards a review of Categcry A* - Safety Related Test Procedures.
Also, as in past inspections, a Test Procedure Verification was perforced.
Finally, previously unresolved items and other items of interest were discussed.
3.
Test Procedure Verification *
The inspector verified that the licensee has the following procedures written, reviewed and approved, and that the test objectives are consistent with the test titles. The objective of this verification
'
was to review the scope of the licensee's test program to verify that adequate testing is planned to satisfy regulatory requirements and licensee co=mitments. The test procedure verification phase of IE's preoperational inspection program is an ongoing effort conducted prior to the issuance of an operating licens.
This item will, there-
.
fore, be followed up during future preoperational inspections.
(1)
(2)
(3)
]].
MIX Title Anproval Date SP2 (4)
Filter Efficiency Test 3/12/76 160/2 134.4 Rx. Eldg. Air Cooling Functional 4/15/76 17 2/2 33.6 Control Bldg. Vent. Func tional 3/12/76 201/2 40.5 Core Flood System Functional Test 4/29/76 220/3 175.6 Spent Fuel Cooling System 3/12/76 264/4 46.6 D.H. Closed Cooling System 3/12/76 301/2 108.1 N.I. Det. Cabling & Response Tests 4/1/76 301/3e 108.4 N.I. Preop. Cals. (Power Range)
4/1/76 301/3D 108.5 Deter. & Setting of Det. Voltages 4/1/76
.
401/3
' 4.4 Stat. Batt. Charge & Discharge Test 4/29/76
.
See Region I Inspection Report 50-320/76-03, Detail 12
k-I v s., c,
'
o y o
$
-
..
.
-4-
.
.
Lerend A Tests)
-
(1) Test Procedure Number (Categorf (2) Master Test Index Number TWG (Test Working Group) Preliminary Review Meeting Minutes (3)
Date The following MTX numbers apply to this procedure:
(4)
a 33.7 b.
124.7
'
c.
170.7 d.
2.5 e.
136.8 f.
138.6 g.
77.5 4.
Test Procedure Review (IE) Pl eoperational The Office of Inspection and Enforce =ent Inspection Progra= dealing with Test Procedure Review has the objective of reviewing saf ety related Category A tests for con-
sistency with regulatory requirements, guidance and license co=mitments.
Uniform criteria are applied in the test procedure review to assure This the technical and administrative adequacy of the procedures.
program is a sanpling program which is an ongoing effort conducted prior to the performance of said tests and therefore prior to the issuance of an operating license.
It is noted that the licensee documents all NRC ce=ments on procedure reviews and files this documentation in the related controlled pro-When the procedure file is pulled f or-use in the cedure's file.
significant comments will be ine.orporated performance of the test, Coc=ents of a lesser nature such as af ter appropriate TWG review.
typographical errors will be incorporated by an on-the-spot change method as appropriate.
The following approved Category A tests were reviewed:
Station Batterys Charge end Discharge Test.
- TP 401/3 Borated Water Storage Tank (BWST) Functional Test.
TP 203/1 TP 203/7 Decay Heat Removal System (DHRS) Saf ety Features Test.
TP 201/2 Core Flood System Functional Test.
(,
SP/2 Filter Ef ficiency Test.
-
l
.
,.,.. g l
,n
.
-
_
_
_
-5-
.
,
The inspector had no cuestions on the review of the above crocedures except as indicated in the following subparagraphs.
-
Generic Corment - OC For Preoperational Testine a.
The inspector commented on the fact that procedures do not appear to provide for quality control ve.rification of critical steps or parameters. The licensee's response to this item was that GPU Startup provide the OC function by virtue of being an independent organization whose sole purpose is to determine the quality of the plant; i.e., the Startup Test Group is an independent organization.
The Test Working Group (TWG), which is the coordinating body for the Startup Test Program and which consists of members from the licensee, A.E., and N.S.S.S. groups, provides reviews on approval for performance and the test results.
It is the Site Q. A. Auditor's task to audit tne administrative functions of the Test Group.
This Site QA Audit is to consist of verification of signatures, proper test briefings, proper data and log sheet entries and in general, ce=pliance with the requirements of the various Test Instructions (TI's).
As referenced in Region I Inspection Reports 50-289/73-10, Detail 2.b, 50-289/73-22, Detail 3.a. it is noted that Revision 2 to the QA Plan for Startup and Test - Three Mile Island Nuclear Station Units 1 and 2 was approved on November 12, 1973.
The inspector had no further questions on the QC for Preoperational Testing Program with respect to QA/QC procedure inclusion of verification of critical steps.
b.
TP 401/3. Station Batteries Charne and Discharge Test 76-07-1: Review of this procedure indicated no precautions against entering the Battery Room on indication of high hydrogen concen-trations in the air.
Section 7 of TP 401/3 states that :attery Room hydrogen detectors are in operation. The licensee stated that a precaution will be added to warn personnel involved in the test of potential dangers. Posting a similar warning en the Battery Room door was also discussed.
This item is unresolved pending licensee action, k.
,
.
L; c',
.o
,.
y,
- :
_
_
'A-6-
.
The inspector noted, during a nlant tour of the Battery
-
the charger DC voltmeters and 76-07-2:
that Room and adj acent rooms, ammeters were not calibrated.
=
according to TP 250/2 (the generic pro-13,
_
lt is determined that, cedure for testing and checking of electrical equipment), pageis to be comple system instrumentation calibration and check out The inspector asked
-
and documented prior to preoperational testing.
d d system whether the instruments mentioned above are consi ere instrumentation and therefore should be calibrated.
the ammeters are system instrumentation The licensee stated that The licensee then stated the voltmeters are trend indicators.
that TP 250/2 will be changed to better define " system instru-but b
d mentation" and that the ammeters in question will be cali rate.
TP 401/3 may be changed to include a line item verification that the meters were calibrated prior to their use.
This item is unresolved pending licensee action.
TP 203/1. Borated Water Storace Tank Functional Test c.
The inspector asked for the source of the acceptance The licensee 76-07-3:
criteria identified in scetion 19 cf the procedure.
d stated that the nu=bers F ven in the procedure are incorrect an i
that new setpoints are being developed for level and. alar =
indications on the BWST.
This item is unresolved pending inclusion of proper setpoints and the source of the Acceptance Criteria into the procedure.
SP2 - Filter Ef ficienev Tes t_
d.
Carbon filters deteriorate when brought in contact with 76-07-4:
The licensee was asked if he was aware certain solvent f umes.
on the use of of this fact and if any limits were in ef f ect potentially damaging solvents.
The licensee answered in the affirmative and agreed to add a precaution to SP2 stating "Do not circulate through the carbon filters if fumes f rom painting, fire or chemicals have been recently released in any ventilation zone co=municating with the system under test."
This item is unresolved pending inclusion into SP-2.
k e 3,~ c.-
i fh b
.
r
""
-
-
.
-7-
.
.
5.
Vibration Testinc
+
Regulatory Guide 1.20-1975, Comprehensive Vibration Assessment Program for Reactor Internals During Preoperational and Initial Startun Testing delineates the classifications which the licensee should use to cate-gorize the reactor Internals according to design, operating para-and the operating experience of potential prototypes.
meters, As mentioned in Region I Inspection Report 50-320/76-03, Detail 14,b, Oconee 1 is the valid prototype for Three Mile Island 2.
The inspector reviewed a letter dated 3/6/76 free E. C. Ward, Senior Project Manager for Babcock and Wilcox to Mr. R. W. Heward, Project Manager, GPUSC, nn the subj ect of the TMI-2 vibrational category.
Excerpts from this letter indicate th.t the TMI-2 reactor internals qualify in accordance wit'.1 paragraph 1.4 in Regulatory Guide 1.20-June 1975 as a Non-Prototype, Category I plant which is substantially of the same arrangement, design, size and operating conditions as the Valid Prototype, Oconee 1.
One difference in the two plants is the removal of the surveillance specicen holders.
The letter states that this dif f erence should have no eff ect on the overall vibratory response of the reactor internals.
The inspector had no further questions on this item.
6.
Post Core Accident " Flood" Level In Region I Inspection Report 50-320/76-03, Detail 14.a the inspector
_,
approached the subject of those remotely operated valves which may become submerged following a postulated loss-of-coolant accident and the consequences of their being flooded considering both short-tern and long-term ECCS functions, containnent isolation and other saf ety functions.
During this inspection the inspector reviewed a letter dated August 29, 1975 from A. W. Hagstem, Project Engineer for Burns and Roe to Mr. R. W. Heward, Jr., GFFSC. The letter addressed Single Failure Criteria and Submerged Valves for the subj ect mentioned above.
The inspector compared the submerged valve heights stated in the letter with his own measurements. The results of the comparison follows:
Valve Desiznation Given Reicht Measured Reicht (7)
IC - VIA (1)
28 9 ' T'
288'9" IC - VlB (1)
289'2"
>289'1" HD - VlA (2)
289'3" Not installed k
~,
. < (>
.
g 4,
-
b
=
_
-
-
_g_
_
MU - VlB (2)
289'3" Not installed
MU - V2A (3)
289'3" Not accessible MU - V2B (3)
289'3" 288'4"
-
WDL - V6 (4)
2C5'll" 285'11" ktL - V7 (5)
289'l 5/8" 287'4"
'
WDL -V22 (6)
289'l 5/8"
>289'1"
.
LePend_
(1)
Intermediate Cooling suction valves to the Letdown Coolers.
(2) Make-Up and Purification section valves to the Letdown Coolers.
(3) Make-Up and Purification discharge valves from the Letdown Coolers.
(4) In drain line to the Reactor Coolant Drain Tank, however this valve is to be removed.
(5) Bypass around Reactor Coolant Drain Pump (WDL-P-7).
(6) Containment Isolation Valve at the discharge of WDL-P-7.
(7) Based on a floor elevation of 282'6" and measured to the lowest electrical cable port in the operator.
The preceding table shows some ancmolies which need evaluation. The stated maximum " flood" level following a LOCA is 289'1" and the measured distances to the lowest cable port in the operator are lower in some cases than the given heights. Also, valve WDL-V6 is still in the plant even though a design change called for its removal. Also, Drawing 2632, Rev. 1 indicates that this valve is not installed.
This item is ur.cesolved (76-07-5) pending licen'see evaluation, rc= oval of WDL-V6, and luture inspection.
7.
Status of Previousiv Unresolved Items 76-03-1 is resolved by virtue of inclusion in kmendment 39 a.
of TP 160/1, Hydrogen Recombiner Test for FSAR Table 14.1-1, Page 14.1-10.
b.
76-03-2 is resolved by virtue of inclusion in Amendment 39 of TP 380/1, Co=munications System Functional Test for FSAR Table 14.1-1, Page 14.1-10.
(
~
_
-
.
'
-
&
-9-
.
c, 76-03-4 is resolved.
The inspector attended a 2 hour2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br /> lecture on Nuclear Instrumentation.
The lecture outlines are prepared by Startup Group engineers who also give the system lectures.
The schedule of tests and lectures and other T.I. 14 require-ments were reviewed with no discrepancies noted.
.
.
.
- _
,Lg
., _. -
.
,
.
.