IR 05000320/1977041
| ML19220A749 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Crane  |
| Issue date: | 11/23/1977 |
| From: | Coleman W, Davis A, Kellogg P NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19220A747 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-320-77-41, NUDOCS 7904240576 | |
| Download: ML19220A749 (13) | |
Text
.
.
.
.
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION OFFICE OF, INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT Region I
Report No.
50-320/77-41 Docket No.
50-320 License No. CPPR-66 Priority Category B-1
-
Licensee:
Metropolitan Edison Company P. O. Box 542
..
.
Reading, Pennsylvania Facility Name:
Three Mile Island Nuclear Station, Unit 2 Inspection at: Middletown, Pennsylvania Inspection conducte :, Octo r 25-28, r77 Inspectors: _
8b
~
nefc;or inspector ddte signed
.
h,j,yy
.
// $/72 W.,,p i n, neactor inspector da'te sfigned
,
yL ft._b I//x V7 7 K. g yp._ p--
41atloj) dpeclattst da'tp signed k. r_f A,- te r,
4.r_
N/25 /17 5._ppiono, actor inspector date sign d.
fh/
A h % /77
nan
neoe iope, neauwr inspector date signed date signed
Approved by' A. C. Cav n, Chiei, Reaceur Prvaects date signed Section No. 1, RO&NS Branch Inspection Summary:
Inspection on October 25-28, 1977 (Report No. 50-320/77-41)
Areas Insoected:
Routine, unannounced inspection of licensee's action on pre-
.vious inspection findings; preoperational test results evaluation; test results verification; installation status of piping supports; plant maintenance during preoperational testing; radiation monitoring system preoperational testing; pre-critical test procedure review; preeritical test procedure verification; initial criticality and low power test procedure review; and low power test procedure verification. The inspection involved 101 inspector-hours onsite by five NRC inspectors and accompanying personnel.
Results : No items of noncompliance were identified.
(
'
., x 0 Region I Form 12
-
1 90
~
._.. (Rev. April 77)
--
.
eggggg
_
.
DETAILS 1.
Persons Contacted Metrooolitan Edison Comoany Mr. M. Bezilla, PORC Secretary Mr. J. Hilbish, Senior Reactor Engineer
- Mr. J. Seelinger, Unit Superintendent - Technical Support General Public Utilities Service Corcoration (GPUSC)
- Mr. M. Nelson, Technical Engineer Mr. I. Porter, Engineer
'
Mr. J. Roberts, Engineer
'
- Mr. R. Toole, Test Mr. J. Ulrich, Engineer Burns and Roe Mr. J. Lucena, Engineer Catalytic Mr. G. Schmidt, Piping Supervisor Gilbert Associates Inc.
Mr. J. Robinson, Consulting Engineer
- denotes those present at exit interview October 28, 1977.
~
Other Accomoanyino NRC Personnel Mr. D. L. Caphton, Chief, Nuclear Support Section 1, RO&NS Branch 2.
Licensee Action on Previous Inspection Findinos (Closed) Unresolved item (320/77-23-02): Retest following installa-tion of MU-V-376.
The inspector reviewed the test data for the hydrostatic test of the ciping adjacer.t to MU-U-376.
The data indicated the test pressere of 3200 psig' was maintained for 10 minutes.
-
i, I
l 89-260
.
(Closed) Unresolved item (320/77-34-01): Revise TP 600/29.
Test Procedure (TP 600/29) has been changed (TCN-2) to require data extra-polation to maximum system temperature for comparison with acceptance cri teria.
(Closed) Noncompliance item (320/77-29-01): Radioactive material signs miss~ing. The inspector observed the entrance to the new fuel storage area and verified the licensee's corrective action for this item.
.
(0 pen) Unresolved item (320/77-26-04): Procedural coverage.
The inspector reviewed the following procedures:
-- AL 2204 - 311 series.
The following procedures are being prepared and will be reviewed at a subsequent inspection to complete the actions to resolve this item:
.
-- AP 1007, Control of TMI Records
-- AP 1011, Controlled Key Locker Control
-- AL 2204-7 Series AL 2204-12.Al
-- Surveillance Procedures
-- Fueling Procedures
-- Maintenance Procedures.
3.
Precoerational Test Results Evaluation a.
The inspector's evaluation of licensee's approved test results was performed for the following precperational tests:
TP 600/6 RC Coolant Drain Tank and Electrcmatic Relief Valve
-
Operational Test (MTX 126.7) Approved TWG - 10/27/77.
TP 600/11 Emergency Feed System and OT;d Level Control Test (MTX 59.8) Approved TWG - 10/27/77.
TP 600/15 RCS NNI Hot Operation Calibration (MTX 148.5) Approved TWG - 10/20/77.
TP 600/36 Shutdown from Outside the Control Ropm (MTX 147.5)
Approved TWG - 10/27/77.69-261
.
.
,
The evaluation parameters included:
-- Review of all test changes
-- Review of all test deficiencies
-- Review of the Test Summary and Evaluation
-- Review of "As-run copy of the test procedure
-- Review of OA inspection records
-- Verification of test result approval b.
Findinas (1) TP 600/15 RCS NNI Hot Operation Calibration The licensee's recorded data indicates a total RCS flow of 163.63E6 lb/hr was measured during the HFT. The FSAR (Table 4.4-1) presently indicates maximum expected flows
'
of 137.8E6 lb/hr. The value of RCS flow will again be determined after core loading by TP 200/11. The accept-ance criteria in TP 200/11 indicates a minimum of 142.lE6 and a maximum of IES.6E6 lb/hr.
The inspector requested the licensee to provide some documentary justification for these limits. This documentation is to provide assurance that the upper limit takes into account core stability and lift. This item will be reviewed at a subsequent inspection (320/77-41-01).
(2) TP 600/36 Shutdown from Outside Control Room
>
The review of test data included the various brush recorder charts that monitored O'
3 operating levels, RC locp temperature and pressur. ur level. The sensitivity band of the brush recorder chosen for this test did not allow
~
sufficient movement to accurately determine the change in monitored parameters. The inspector requested the licensee to review the sensitivity band of recorder versus the expected ranges of movement during the perfomance of TP 800/36 Shutdown from Outside Control Room (>l5". power).
This item will be reviewed during a subsequent inspection (320/77-41-02).
The inspector has identified no inadequacies in the evaluation of the test results other than items listed
-
above.
GT-QN I
.
(3) The inscector began a preliminary review of two pro-cedures completed during HFT.
These tests TP 600/14 and 600/29 pertain to themal expansion measurements during the HFT. The inspector discussed the test results, exceptions, and deviations with the coonizant engineer.
Furthei NRC evaluation of the test results will be conducted after licensee management review of these tests have been completed.
(4) The licensee has instituted a method. for ccmpletion of the test procedures that h&ve outstanding deficiencies.
The method includes TWG review prior to transfer of the deficiencies to a 700 series procedure (post core load -
precritical) and identifies necessary retests and plateaus of testing (200, 300", etc). The licensee has agreed to document justification for each item closecut.
The licensee agreed to change the Test Manual, Test Instructions No.18 to reflect this method of deficiency transfer. This item will be reviewed at a subsequent inspection (320/77-41-03).
4.
Test Results Verification The test results of the completed test, TP 235/1 Reactor Building Sump Test, has been reviewed to determine that the licensee has:
The cognizant engineering personnel responsible for evaluating
--
the test results have signified that the testing demonstrated system design requirements were met; The test results were specifically compared with established
-
--
acceptance criteria; and, The review, acceptance ard approval of the test data package
--
and ewaluation by the appropriate personnel were documented.
Findings: The test results indicated the flow rates of each build-ing sump pump. The, operating levels of each pump are documented in the calibration data forms per TP 250/2.
The results of the test are presently not incorporated into the Surveillance Proce.' e that verifies the proposed TS 4.4.6.2b.
This procedure requires the monitoring of containment sump inventory and discharge at least once per 12 hours1.388889e-4 days <br />0.00333 hours <br />1.984127e-5 weeks <br />4.566e-6 months <br />.
Pending licensee incorporation of sump pump operating parameters intn the surveillance procedure this item remains open.
(320/77-41-04)
-
,
I.
I 63 '263
5.
Installation Status of Pipe Hangers, Succorts, and Restraints The inspector teured the containment and reviewed licensee records to ascertain the installation status of pipe hangers, supports, and re-straints.
It was noted that several of these components are still to be installed.
During the tour, the inspector noted one mechan' cal snubber (NSH-281)
which was in contact with the concrete wall.
This condition could affect the snubber's operability.
The licensee stated that he would investigate the situation. This item is unresolved pending review of the licensee's action in this ama.
(320/77-41-05)
During review of licensee records the inspector noted that seven Engineering Change Memos (ECM) have been issued to modify certain hanger installations. This modification is necessary to allow for installation of shock absorbing material inside pipe whip restraints.
The inspector asked the licensee if this change in hanger positioning would affect the results of the thermal expansion tests performed during Hot Functional Test. The licensee stated that he would evaluate this problem. This item is unresolved pending review of licensee action on this item.
(320/77-41-06)
i 6.
Plant Maintenance Durino Preocerational Testing a.
Maintenance Activity The licensee's Test Manual (Rev. 5) specifies the methods to be used to control plant maintenance during the preoperational testing period. The areas of repair / maintenance are addressed in Test Instruction No.1, Repair Removal Authorization. The " Work Authorization" is used in conjunction with the " Work Request" to
-
control maintenance and the retest of systems.
StatiJn Administrative Procedure No.1026, Corrective Maintenance and riachinery History, Rev. O, 7/22/77 established the method of initiation of the corrective maintenance program. The inspectors discussions with Maintenance Supervisor and Maintenance Foreman indicated their understanding of contents of SAP #1026.
The inspectors review included the following items:
--
Review of three safety related maintenance activities.
Work requests 1031,1169 and 1267 were the subjects of this review.
L I
6<1 ZG4
!
'
-
Ascertain that previously performed preoperational testi
--
was not invalidated due to the performance of maintenance for those work requests selected for review.
-
Review of four non-safety related maintena
--
Determine that personnel associated with the completion of
.
--
the work request package were qualified to perform specific activi ty.
Generic aspects of maintenance were identified in area
--
of seal housing keyway (WR 1169) and has been documented by N.S.S. drawing (015737E).
Review of equipment history files in regard to maintenance
--
activities.
Preventive maintenance records have been include
--
system turnover packages.
b.
Findinas (1) General i
-
by the Test Manual, Test Instruction No.1.The lic fication for required Quality Control involvement has been System identi-addressed.
of licensee's " Work Request" control.No inadequacies we The work requests reviewed included No.1031, Sampling Nuclear System; No.1267, Nuclear Service C osed Cooli
_
Water Pump; No.1169, Reactor Coolant Pump Seal Flow
.
The inspector noted that work requests were r operly malfunction, Originator of request, Radiation
,
'
reruirements, Quality Control component identific? tion, requisites, Personnel assignment and crit I
-
retesting.
No inadequacies were identified.
l
.
6(r 265
.
(2) Work Reauest No. 1169 Work request No.1169 addresses a change in keyway design of reactor coolant pump seal package.
The licensee presently plans not to change seals to include this new design unless necessitated by leakage of seals.
This item is closed.
(3) Wprk Recuest No. 1106 Through No. 1109 The non-safety related work requests addressed repairs to au+.uators for HDV 48A, 48B, 75A and 85A. The method of ma'ntenance was consistent with licensee station admin-is :rative procedures. No inadequacies were identified.
(4) Machinary History File The licsnsee has addressed in SAP No.1026. Section 5.0, the methud for m Antaining the Machinery History File which includes the requirerents for a chronological recording of corrective maintenance for each significant event for each component. The work requests reviewed in the areas of Nuclear Sampling System and Nuclear Services Closed Cooling Water System were not considered significant maintenance events by the licensee.
The inspectors discussion with licensee resulted in the
-
following ccamitments:
(a) A re-review of completed work requests to identify ittms for inclusion in machinery history files.
(b)
Identify what items fall under the statement of sicnificant events.
_
This review will be ccmpleted by the licensee prior to Ja. !any 31,1978.
This item will be reviewed at a sub-sequent inspection.
(320/77-41-07)
7.
Area Radiation Monitors, Vent Monitors, Waste System Monitors and Other Monitors The inspector toured the facility on October 28, 1977 to observe prepara-tions for preoperational tests of the area radiation monitors, ventilation monitors, gaseous and liquid waste system monitors, and other system moni tors.
\\
'69-266 i
.
The licensee representative stated that the detectors for these monitors were available for installation but only the area radiation monitor detectors had been installed.
The control room instrument chassis for each of these monitors had been installed and had been calibrated; hcwever, none of the calibration labels were dated 1977 and recalioration checks had not been co These instrwents were not turned on when inspected.
The inspector will observe the precperational tests of selected instruments and review the preoperational test documentation on a subsequent inspection as this becomes available.
_
8.
Precritical Test Procedure Review _
TP 330/5 - Control Rod Drive Trio Test _
The inspector reviewed the approved procedure for conformance with The procedure ANSI N18.7 requirements and for technical content.
addresses:
Technical Specification Droptime requirements
--
Axial Power Shaping Rods (APSR) testing
--
Baron concentration precautions
--
Prerequisites for CRD venting, functional tes:ing, position indication verification and RPS -in-service.
--
The procedure confonns with requirements of Regulatory Guide-l.68 to test each rod during various conditions of core flow and core temperature and to test the slowest and fastest rod an additional
-
10 times for each condition.
The following inspector questions were discussed with the licensee:
Requirement for Inverse Count Rate plots.
--
Control room Audible Count Rate monitoring.
--
Source Range Monitor caution statements.
--
These items will be discussed with the licensee during a subsequent
'
This is an inspector followup item.
(77-41-08)
inspectica.
k 61r267
.
RCS Inventory 2301-301 and RCP Seal Return Peasurement 2301-M5 The inspector reviewed the approved procedures for conformance with ANSI N18.7 and technical content.
The procedures address:
Steady State operation of the RCS
--
--
Normal letdcwn flow
.
fiakeup tank level adequacy
--
Seal Flcw measurements
--
Technical Specification requirement.
--
These procedures are surveillance procedures and as such are not written for use only during Precritical Testing.
The procedures do, however, fulfill requirements of Req. Guide 1.68.
The inspector had no further questions in this area.
9.
Precritical Test Procedure Verification The inspector reviewed licensee procedures with respect to Pre-critical Testing requirements of Regulatory Guide 1.68.
Management approval was consistent with the requirements of the Test Manual and the test objectives of these procedures are consistent with the test title.
The,following procedures were reviewed:
,
TP 301/3D Determination and Setting of Detector Voltages.
--
TP GC0/13 Pressurizer Operational and Spray Flow Test.
_
--
TP 800/24 Incore Detector Testing.
--
TP 200/11 Reactor Coolant Pump Flow Test.
--
TP 200/12 Reactn* Ccelant Flow Coastdown Test.
--
Findings were acceptable.
.
.-
.
.
63--268
,
-
,
10.
Initial Criticality and Lcw Power Test Procedure Review The inspector reviewed the licensee's zero ocwer test procedure, TP 710/10 dated July 28, 1977 to ascertain that the procedures to be used for the initial approach to criticality, reactivity coefficient, control rod grouc worth-soluble poison worth and psendo rod ejection worth neasurements were consistent with regulatory recuirements.
Acceptance criteria and guidelines used for this review included the following:
--
FSAR, technical specification, and specific license provisions (as applicable) were incorporated; Procedure reviews and approvals were performed in accordance
--
with the licensee's administrative centrols; Procedure fermat was consistant with accepted practices;
--
Prerequisites were listed to include NI calibrations satis-
--
factorily ccmoleted with acceptable minimum count rate and signal to noise ratios, ideinification of systems required to be operable, special test equipment identified, initial status required on reactor protection system, initial conditions required for each measurement were specified, and the status of temporary jumpers and leads was addressed; Appropriate personnel and equipment precautions were incorporated;
--
--
Initial and expected control rod patterns at criticality were identified; Specific acceptance criteria were incorporated to provide pre-
_
--
dicted and/or regulatory limits to be ccmpared with measured results; Requirements to maintain inverse multiplication plots during
--
the dilution for initial criticality; Provisions to ensure adequate da a is taken;
--
--
Appropriate precautions were included to provide startup rate limits, dilution rate limits, increasing. nuclear power after initial criticality is established', boron sampli,ng frequency, (
G<f'i69
,
i
thermal cower (flux) limits, reactor coolant average temperature limits and limits for stepping RCS boron dilution during the approach to initial crit.tality;
--
Provisions were incorp.,rattd to verify acceptable overlap exists between the source and intermediate ranges; and,
--
Controls were established to provide for significant delays or interruptions in testing.
a.
Findincs (1) No items of nonccmpliance were identified; (2) The inspector identified the following items as areas
.
requiring further consideration by the licensee. The inspector stated that this itcm (320/77 41-09) was open pending further review of the licensee's actions in this area.
(a)
References to the appropriate plant ocurating pro-cedures should be incorporated into TP 710/1 steps; 6.6 for shutdown margin determination; 6.10 to ensure all applicable surveillance reauirements are satisfied; and 7.11 to establish the required letdown conditions.
(b)
Further clarification is required in step 8.2 to verify proper response of the scaler timers.
(c)
For step 9.1.3 and following a definition for stable count rate is required.
_
(d)
Stap 9.1.15 does not contain a provision to allow for further small amounts of dilution.
(e): Step 9.4.6 and data sheet 7 - the curve of boron worth vs. boron concentration provided in the procedure does not cover the baron concentrations for the AR0 rneasurements.
.(f) Appropriate precautions.need to be provided to address
-
the positive ITC during the initial stages of testing.
.
.
,
o 69-Z70
,
,
,
.
(g)
Step 11.12 does not contain tne expected value for the worth of rod H-14.
The expected measured worth is required for this measurement in view of the test methodology being employed.
(3) NRC review of the proposed stuck rod worth and pseudo ejected rod worth measurements procedure was not completed at this time and will remain open pending completion of this review (320/77-41-10)
11.
Lcw Power Test Procedure Verification The inspector reviewed the licensee's zero power physics test, TP 710/1 dated 7/29/77, to verify that a management approved procedure had been prepared for each of the following test measurements:
a.
boron reactivity worth b.
pseudo ejected control rod worth c.
moderator and isothermal temperature coefficients d.
control rod group worths e.
initial critical all ods out baron concentration.
The inspector noted that for each of the above tests, the test cbjectives were consistent with the test results.
'he inspector noted further that core flux distribution maps were neither required nor taken at the zero power test level due to the relative inaccuracies
'
of the fixed incore neutron detectors at low flux levels.
No items of noncompliance were identified.
12.
Unresolved Items
_
Items about which more information is required to determine ac ept-ability are considered unresolved.
Paragraph 5 of this report contains an unresolved item.
13.
Exit Interview The inspector met with licensee representatives (denoted in paragraph 1)
at the ccriclusion of the inspection on October 28, 1977.
The inspector summarized the purpose and scope of the inspection and the findings.
.
.
!
68-Z71 i
_
_