IR 05000320/1976014
| ML19220B349 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Crane  |
| Issue date: | 09/28/1976 |
| From: | Canter H, Davis A, Fasano A NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19220B348 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-320-76-14, NUDOCS 7904250661 | |
| Download: ML19220B349 (10) | |
Text
.
-
_.
II:I Form 12 (Jan 75) (Rev)
U. S. NUCLEAR REGUI.ATORY CC'CIISSION OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCD'.ENT
REGION I
IE Inspection Report No:
50-320/76-14 Docket No:
50-320 Licensee:
Metr p litan Edison Co=pany License No: CPPR-66 Box 542 Priority:
--
Reading, Pennsylvania 19603 B
Ca tegory.
.
Safeguards
__
Group:
'
Location:
u < m,
r,.
,
p,.,,,e,,,,,,,,4., rewr_ n Type of Licensee:
{
'e of Inspection:
Routine, unannounced
.
Dates of Inspection:
September 14-17, 1976 Dates of Previous Inspection:
September S-9, 1976
-
.
Reporting Inspector:
[ /7
"
9/27/7/
e-
<%o
'
DATE A. N. Fasano, ac r Inspector
Accc=panying Inspectors:
.t)
Q_^,
b 7!O7!7 b
!
H. L ute, R ctor, (Part time)
.
Yf2]f7h l
ctorIn1s l
!
m
'
T. A. Rebelowski, ReEctor Inspector DATE i
l
,
DATE
Other Accompanying Personnel:
None i
DATE Reviewed By:
N
_ 7[2.J' 7 6 '
_
~
' DATE'
A. B. Davis, Section Chief, Reactor Prr.jects C
Section No. I
-
- i
,b 192 f
,
< S0425 O(,(, j
'
.
-
,
-
--
.
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS Enforcement Action None.
,0ther Sicnificant Findines A.
Current 1.
Acceptable Items These are areas which were inspected on a sampling basis and findings did not involve an Item of Noncompliance, Deviation or Unresolved Item (except as noted):
,
a.
Preventive Maintenance, Detail 3a.
b.
Plant Maintenance (Corrective), Detail 3b.
Overload Protection, Nuclear Safety Related Motor c.
Operated Valves, Detail 4.
d.
Test Procedure Verification, Detail 6.
i e.
Test Procedure Review, Detail 8.
2.
Unresolved Items These are items for which more information is required to determine whether the 1: ems are acceptable or lte=s of Noncompliance:
76-14-1: Implementation Points, Detail 3b.
76-14-2: Vibration Assessment Program, Detail 5.
B.
Status of Previousiv Unresolved Items (Detail 7)
The following items have been resolved:
.
76-05-1
-
76-05-2 76-05-3 76-07-2
-
C.
Status of Previousiv Renorted Enforcement Items Not inspected.
t'n
!
~
-
.
j w 193
.
-
_
-
-2-Management Interview An exit management interview was held on site on September 17, 1976.
Persons in attendance were:
Mr. R. P. Fenti, GPU Mr. J. Hilbish, Met-Ed Mr. L. Levin, GPU Mr. G. P. Miller, Met-Ed Mr. M. A. Kelson, G"U Mr. D. Shovlin, Met-Ed Mr. R. J. Toole, GPU Mr. N. A. Williams, Met-Ed Mr. A. N. Fasano, USNRC Mr. T. A. Rebelowski, UShTC ltens Discussed A.
Preventative Maintenance, Derail 3a.
B.
Corrective Maintenance, Detail 3b.
C.
Overload Protection, Nuclear Safety Related Motor Operated Valves, Detail 4.
D.
Vibration Assess =ent Program, Detail 5.
E.
Test Procedure Verification, Detail 6.
F.
Status of Previously Unresolved Items, Detail 7.
G.
Test Procedure Review, Detail B.
.
%
nt - 1 4 'A
'
-
1J.
e.1
_
.
.
l
-
.'
_
-
DETAILS
-
1.
Persons Contacted Mr. J. Barton, Start Up and Testing Manager, GPU Mr. W. Desh, Shift Foreman, Met-Ed Mr. R. F. Fenti, QA Auditor, CPU Mr. J. Hilbish, Reactor Engineer, Met--Ed Mr. S. Kakarla, QC Supervisor, UE&C Start Up Mr. S. Levin, Unit 2 Project Engineer, GPU Mr. C. Miller, Unit 2 Superintendent, Met-Ed Mr. M. Nelson, Technical Engineer, CPU Mr. D. Rhyne, Group Leader Mechanical Engineer, UE&C Mr. J. Roranski, Health Physics & Chemistry Supervisor, Met-Ed Mr. J. Schmidt, QC Engineer Mr. D. Shovlin, Maintenance Supervisor, Met-Ed Mr. M. Stromberg, Senior Site QA Auditor, CPU Mr. R. J. Toole, Test Superintendent, GPU Miss L. Weir, Nuclear Engineer, Met-Ed Mr. N. A. Williams, Procedure Engineer, Met-Ed Mr. M. J. Wright, Site Quality Assurance Manager i
2.
Purpose and Scone of Inspection This inspection was primarily directed toward the preoperational test program phase of construction.
In addition a review of
'
preventative and corrective maintenance administrative controls that addrese pre-turnover, turnover and operations was conducted.
Also, the vibration assesment program and previously identified unresolved items were inspected.
The inspection included a tour of the Refueling Building, Control Room, Reactor Cavity and Steam Generator areas. A check on tags in use by GPU, and Met-Ed was conducted during the tour.
.
3.
Maintenance Program a.
Preventative Maintenance
!
The preventive maintenance adelnistrative controls were reviewed to verify that equipment protection during and following preoperational testing had been established including:
b
.
e
, fles
.
,
'
-
-
~
_4_
-
Periodic surveillance.
--
Platection from environmental extremes.
--
=
Implementation of periodic maintenance.
--
Maintenance of cleanliness.
--
Retention of records.
--
The following procedures were reviewed on a sampling basis and this review verifies that administrative controls exist include the above elements:
and CCP-4-2, " Field Change to Construction Procedure - Unit
--
No. 2," March 10, 1976 (with respect to Preventive Maintenance.)
SP-4, " Preventive Maintenance, TMI-Unit #2," August
--
16, 1976.
--
TP250/2, " Testing and Checking Mechanical and Electrical Equipment," January 30, 1975.
Unit No. 2, Preventive Maintenance M-82, " Maintenance of
--
Idle Equipment."
Preventive Maintenance Procedure E-42, " Generic Elec-
--
trical."
Preventive Maintenance Procedure E-30, " Stored Equipment
--
Check."
.
QC-ll-2 Rev. 2
" Cleaning and Cleanliness Controls."
--
TP-250/4, " General Procedure for Cleaning and Flushing
--
Systems and Compont Ms."
FS-II-2, " Specification - Site Cleaning and Cleanliness
--
Control."
QC 3-2, " Storage control."
--
QC23-2, "Use of Clean Rocms and Clean Areas."
--
QC27-2, " General Specification of Foreign Material Entry
--
and Control of Tools."
Station Administrative Procedure 1020 " Cleanliness
--
Requirements."
Three Mile Island Nuclear Station Administrative Pro-
-
cedure 1016, " Implementation of Control of Station
,
Maintenance and Maintenance and Modifications."
The inspector also reviewed the co=puterized method that is in
.
use for the retention of preventative maintenance schedules.
This method is adopted when the equipment is turned over to the licensee (MET-Ed.).
i I.
s
.
.
-
{
, s. 4 o.. c;
-
sJ
.
e
_
-
-5-Based on the revietr of the above listed procedures the inspector has verified that preventive maintenance is performed on equipment from receipt and storage to the operational phase.
Controls exist over periodf surveillance, protection from environmental extremes and cleanliness.
P.ecords show that preventive maintenance has been i=ple=ented and is continued regardlers of ownership of the equip =ent.
The inspector had no further questiens on this item at time, this b.
Plant Maintenance (Corrective Maintenancq)
The maintenance administ~rative controls were reviewed to verify that the Licensee and his representatives have a managerial system to assere that:
Plant maintenance is perfor=ed in accordance with admin-
-
istrative controls.
Methods are established to approve and srhedule main-
-
tenance.
Methods are established for the control of parts receipt
--
and storage.
Controls are established for use of qualified personnele
--
Also, the review included a sa=pling of procedures to essure that:
There is a basis for determining when maintcnan~e pro-
-
c cedures will be provided.
Methods are available for preparing, reviewing and
-
approving naintenance procedures.
Methods are available to assure use of approvnd pro-
.
-
cedures.
Inspection of Maintenance work is performed and t_esting
-
is performed following maintenance.
Controls are available for measure =ent equipment.
-
The following procedures were revie. red on a sa=pling basis to verify appropriate coverage of these areas:
Administrative Procedure 1016, "Imple=entation and
-
Control of Station hintenance and Modifications."
" Stores Procedure #5."
-
GP4005, " Review of Procure =ent Documents," Rev.
-
August 13, 1975.
1, Job Classification
-
Ad=inistrative Procedure 1022, " Control of Measuring and
-
(
Test Eysipment."
.
-
.
4 W'
g s)
"g
,
.
_.
-
-
- 6-
.
Corrective maintenance during the preoperational phase on turn over to the licensee is performed under the above procedures.
.
Where specific proccdures are required for a specific mainten-ance effort, the maintenance supervisor determines the need for detailed approved procedures.
The licensee has the option to turn back equipment to construction for naintenance.
.
Based on the review of the above procedures and discussions with the licensee there are procedures in use that provide for control over corrective maintenance methods during the preoper-stional phase.
The inspector has one concern with Administrative Procedure 1016, paragraph 2.1 crncerning implementation Points.
This paragraph states that the preventive maintenance program and operational surveillance program are to be implemented at the beginning of cocmercial operation.
This appears to be incon-sistant with implementation currently in practice.
This item, 76-14-1, is unresolved pending review and evaluation by the licensee and a subsequent review by the inspector.
4.
Overload Protecticn of Nuclear Safety Related }btor Operated Valves The inspector reviewed the licensee's action to size the Engineered
'
Jafeguards motor operated valve overloads to a value of approxi-cately 300% of full load current during the valve operating cycles.
,
The licensee has documented the full load currents, based on oper-ational data obtained from Unit 1 testing and engincaring data on fractional horsepower mote-service factor multipliers.
The electrical drawings reviewed under the classification of huclear Safety Related MCC Buses, indicated that the licensee has required a 300% overload protection for his safety related valves.
~
The inspector requested the licensee to deter =ine if the cr1teria outlined in Regulatory Guide 1.106, Regulatory Position C2 was used to determine conservative sizing.
The licensee stated that this information would be.available to the inspector at a subsequent inspection. The inspactor has no further questions on this item at this time.
.
L-
.
.
.
-
, w -199
.
.
..
-7-5.
Vibration Assessment Pronram
.
Reference: (1) FSAR Supplement 2 41.7/14.1.1 (2) FSAR Supplement 2 11.6/3.9
"
a.
Vibration Program The licensee has stated in references (1) and (2) that his
.
intention is to perform an applicable initial test program in conf ormance with regulatory position D.2 of Regulatory Guide 1.20.
(Safety Guide 20), December, 1971.
The interpretation made by the licensee is that the pre hot-f unctional inspection of vessel internals as described in Regulatory Guide 1.20, Rev. 1 under Non-Prototype, Category 1, paragraph 2.3, is not required.
Additional review of this licensee position by the inspector is necessary. This item (76-14-02) is unresolved pending discussion and final decision as to the interpretation of Regulatory Guide 1.20 (Safety Guide 20), December, 1971 with NRR.
b.
Procedure 86
" Installation of Reactor Vessel Internals" The licensee's NSS has completed the assembly of the vessel components under Field Construction Procedure Nu=ber 86.
This
.
procedure has been approved and results accepted by the licensee.
The inspector rcviewed the documentation of results of reactor component assembly.
Items included in Procedure No. 86 include material certification, velder qualification, fit up readings on internal guide blocks and dimensional inspections of outer seal gap between the core support shield and the reactor
vessel.
The licensee has not installed the eight internal vent valves which is to be co=pleted prior to hot functional testing.
The inspector has no furthur questions on this procedure at this time.
6.
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:
.
- See NRC:I Inspection Reports 50-320/76-03, Detail 12 and 76-07, Detail 3.
I
', v-199
-
i
-
.
.
-8-APPROVAL DATE(3)
~
g(1)
MTy.(2)
TITLE 151/1 133.5 Rx. Bldg. Isolation Valve Leak Test 7-1-76 151/2 133.6 Rx. Bldg. Penetrations Leak Test 6-23-76
,
160/3 135.6 Rx. Bldg. Emerg. Cooling Functional 6-3-76 160/6 138.4 Rx. Bldg. Purge Supply & Exhaust Functional 6-17-76 176/2 52.4 D/G Bldg. Ventilation Functional 5-13-76 200/1 147.3 Ex. Internals Vent Valve Insp. Test 7-1-76 204/3 141.6 Rx. Bldg. Spray System Functiont.1 6-3-76 305/1B 151.3 RPS Preoperational Calib.
6-17-76 600/6 126.7 RCDTSElectromatic Relief Valve Op.
Test 6-17-76 250/1 Generic General Hydro. Tests 250/2 Ceneric Mechanical & Electrical Equip. Tests 250/4 Generic Flushes & Cleaning of Systems & Com-ponents (1) Test Procedure Number (Category A Tests)
(2) Master Text Index Eu=ber (3)
TWG (Test Working Group) Preliminary Review Meeting Minutes Date 7.
Status of Presiousiv Unresolved Items i
a.
76-07-2: TI 250/2, Generic: Testing and Checking of Mech-anical and Electrical Equipment, was changed in TCN-5 to TI 250/2 to define " Instrumentation" as " Instruments used for interlocks, alarms, and normal plant records, but not instru-cents used as indicators only."
This item is resolved, b.
76-07-5: Attachment II to a letter dated February 26, 1976, R. C. Arnold, Vice President of Met Ed to the Director of NRR addresses the analysis of the ef fect of submerged valves (Post LOCA.) All ano=olies have been explained, but WDL-V6'is still in place.
This item remains unresolved, pending the removal of the valve.
76-05-1 (March 18-19, 1976)
c.
The inspector verified that the licensee reviewed Chapter 17.3 to the FSAR and that, in addition to the specific incon-sistencies centioned in NRC:I Report 50-320/76-05 (March 18-19,. 1976), other inconsistencies found between the FSAR
,
i L_.
.
.
<b 200
'
'
.
-
.
.
.
_9_
.
Chapter 17.3 and the QA Plan were apparently resolved by Amendment 41 to the FSAR (June 8, 1976) and Revisions 4 and 5 (March 1976 and July 1976 respectively) to the Metropolitan Edison Company Quality Assurance Plan for Startup and Test.
This item is resolved.
d.
76-05-2 (March IS-19, 1976)
Page 27 of the QAP for Startup and Test now addresses quali-fications and training of QA/QC personnel.
Revision 4 to the plan acco=plished this change.
This item is resolved.
e.
76-05-3 (March 18-19, 1976)
The inspector reviewed QAP-7-18-02 which was issued on June 1, 1976 and became effective on June 1, 1976.
Implementation of this procedure was verified by review of the Record of Lead Auditor Qualificaton Forms (QA-739) for the GPUSC Quality Assurance Auditors at TMI 2.
These findings resolve item 76-05-03.
t 8.
Test Procedure Review The inspector performed a preoperational test procedure review of TP 20'.~3, Reactor Building Spray System Functional Test (MTX141.6).
The procedure received approval on June 3, 1976 at TWG meeting nu=ber 37.
The inspector noted no discrepancies in his review.
The licensee informed the inspector that design modifications are planned on this system and that revisions to TP204/3 are contem-plated.
The inspector stated that revisions to TP204/3 may be reviewed when appropriate.
The inspector had no further co=ments on this item.
1_.
.
l
's b 12 0 1.
-
.
4