IR 05000322/1986019
| ML20210A159 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Shoreham File:Long Island Lighting Company icon.png |
| Issue date: | 01/28/1987 |
| From: | Wiggins J NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20210A146 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-322-86-19, NUDOCS 8702060422 | |
| Download: ML20210A159 (6) | |
Text
.
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
REGION I
,
Report No.
50-322/86-19 Docket No.
50-322 License No.
NPF-36 Licensee:
Long Island Lighting Company P.O. Box 618 Shoreham Nuclear power Station Wading River, New York 11792 Inspection At: Wading River, New York Inspection Conducted:
November 16, 1986 - December 31, 1986 Inspector:
Clay C. Warren, Resident Inspector
.
Approved:
D Jj O
i[2&ff7
!
J.J. Wggiiis//@ivision of Reactor Projects ief, Reactor Projects date yection IB,T Summary: During the period covered by Inspection Report 86-19, November 16, 1986 through December 31, 1986, the facility remained in cold shutdown with the licensee performing normal preventive maintenance and surveillance activi-ties. The licensee continued to perform Type B Leak Rate Testing on contain-ment isolation valves in preparation for the upcoming Type A Containment Leak Rate Test. The inspector observed the conduct of surveillance and maintenance
,
l activities along with other routine resident inspection activities.
8702060422 870130 PDR ADOCK 05000322 G
.
.
DETAILS 1.
Status of Previous Inspection Items 1.1 (Closed) Response to Part 21 Report on Wooley Containment Emergency Escape Airlock 322/86-14-04:
The licensee conducted further testing on the Containment Emergency
,
Escape Airlock to verify that the operation of the airlock equaliz-ing valves does not violate primary containment.
The cam design at Palisades caused the inner equalizing valve to open when the outer door was open and the outer equalizing valve to open when the inner door was open which violated primary containment.
The testing conducted by the licensee has verified that the airlock operating mechanism at Shoreham does not have the same deficiency as the Palisades airlock and operation does not violate primary containment.
,
This item is closed.
2.
Review of Facility Operations 2.1 Plant Status Summary During the period covered by Inspection Report 86-19 the facility
.
'
remained in cold shutdown. The licensee conducted routine surveil-lance and maintenance items as required by Shoreham Operating
License NPF-36.
In addition to routine items, the licensee performed
'
Type 'B' Leak Rate Testing on numerous primary containment isolation valves in preparation for the upcoming Type 'A' Containment Integra-ted Leak Rate Test. The licensee also replaced one Intermediate Range Monitor Detector (See Section 6),
2.2 Operational Safety Verification l
The inspector toured the control room daily to verify proper shift
'
manning, use of and adherence to approved procedures, and compliance with Technical Specification Limiting Conditions for Operation.
Control panel instrumentation and recorder traces were observed and the status of annunciators was reviewed. Nuclear instrumentation
!
and reactor protection system status were examined.
Radiation moni-toring instrumentation, including in plant Area Radiation monitors I
and effluent monitors were verified to be within allowable limits,
,
'
and observed for indications of trends.
Electrical distribution panels were examined for verification of proper lineups of backup
,
I and emergency electrical power sources as required by the Technical Specification.
.
.
.
The inspector reviewed Watch Engineer and Nuclear Station Operator logs for adequacy of review by oncoming watchstanders, and for proper entries. A periodic review of Night Orders, Maintenance Work Requests, Technical Specification LCO Log, and other control room logs and records were made.
Shift turnovers were observed on a periodic basis.
The inspector also observed and reviewed the adequacy of access controls to the Main Control Room, and verified that no loitering by unauthorized personnel in the Control Room Area was permitted. The inspector observed the conduct of Shift personnel to ensure adher-ence to Shoreham Procedures 21.001.01, " Shift Operations" and 21.004.01, " Main Control Room - Conduct for Personnel".
No unacceptable conditions were identified.
2.3 Plant and Site Tours The inspector conducted periodic tours of the accessible areas of the plant and site throughout the inspection period.
These included:
the Turbine and Reactor Buildings, the Rad Waste Build-ing, the Control Building, the Screenwell Structure, the Fire Pump House, the Security Building, and the Colt Diesel Generator Build-ing.
During these tours, the following specific items were evaluated:
-
Fire Equipment - Operability and evidence of periodic inspec-tion of fire suppression equipment; HousMeeping - Maintenance of required cleanliness levels;
-
Equipment Preservation - Maintenance of special precautionary
-
measures for installed equipment, as applicable; j
QA/QC Surveillance - Pertinent activities were being surveilled
-
on a sampling basis by qualified QA/QC personnel;
,
Component Tagging - Implementation of appropriate equipment
-
tagging for safety, equipment protection, and jurisdiction; Personnel adherence to Radiological Controlled Area rules,
-
including proper personnel frisking upon RCA exit;
!
Access control to the Protected Area, including search activi-
-
ties, escorting and badging, and vehicle access control; and Integrity of the Protected Area boundary.
-
l No unacceptable conditions were identified.
<
.
.
-
3.
Licensee Reports 3.1 In-Office Review of Licensee Event Reports The inspector reviewed Licensee Event Reports (LERs) submitted to the NRC to verify that the details were clearly reported, including accuracy of the cause description and adequacy of corrective action.
The inspector determined whether further information was required from the licensee, whether generic implications were involved, and whether the event warranted on-site followup.
The following LERs were reviewed:
LER 86-011, Rev. 2: Ultimate Heat Sink, Accumulation of Sediment LER 86-045:
RBSVS/CRAC initiation with a 1/2 RPS actuation due to personnel error while an equipment operator was replacing a radiation monitor power supply light bulb LER 86-049, Rev. 2: Update on Local Leak Rate Tests which exceeded the Allowable Technical Specification Limits LER 86-051, Rev. 2: Update on HPCI check valve malfunction No unacceptable conditions were noted.
4.
Monthly Surveillance and Maintenance Observation 4.1 Surveillance Activities The inspector observed the performance of various surveillance tests to verify that:
the surveillance procedure conformed to technical specification requirements; administrative approvals and tagging requirements were reviewed and approved prior to test initiation; testing was accomplished by qualified personnel; current approved
I procedures were used; test instrumentation was currently calibrated; limiting conditions for operation were met; test data was accurately and completely recorded; removal and restoration of affected compon-ents was properly accomplished; and tests were completed within the i
required Technical Specification frequency.
i l
The following surveillances were observed by the inspector:
Channel Functional Test of Mode Switch Refuel Interlocks
-
!
Emergency Diesel Generator Start Test
-
'
Diesel Driven File Pump Operability Test
-
i No unacceptatle conditions were noted.
i l
l l
_ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _. - _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _
..
g..
4 4.2 Maintenance Activities The inspector observed the conduct of various maintenance activities throughout the inspection period.
During this observation, the inspector verified that: maintenance activities were conducted within the requirements of the plant's administrative procedures and technical specifications; proper radiological controls were imple-mented and observed; proper safety precautions were observed; and that activities which have the potential to impact plant operations are properly coordinated with the control room operators.
The inspector observed the following licensee maintenance activities during the inspection period:
.'
Emergency Diesel Generator EDG-103 Jacket Water Return Line
-
Leak Repair
-
Intermediate Range Monitor Detector Replacement No unacceptable conditions were noted.
5.
Review and Followup of I&E Notices, Bulletins, and Generic Letters 5.1 I&E Notices The inspector reviewed notices issued by the Office of Inspection and Enforcement during the inspection period. This review was to
determine if the subject of the notice was applicable to the Shoreham Nuclear Power Station, and if followup of the licensee's action was required by the inspector.
IE Notice 86-82, Rev. 1: Failures of Scram Discharge Volume Vent and Drain Valves IE Notice 86-95:
Leak Testing Iodine-125 Sealed Sources in Lixi, Inc. Imaging Devices and Bone Mineral Analyzers IE Notice 86-96:
Heat Exchanger Fouling Can Cause Inadequate Operability of Service Water Systems IE Notice 86-97:
Emergency Communications System l
IE Notice 86-98:
Off-site Medical Services
IE Notice 86-99:
Degradation of Steel Containments l
IE Notice 86-100:
Loss of Off-site Power to Vital Buses at
!
Salem 2 IE Notice 86-101:
Loss of Decay Heat Removal Due to Loss of Fluid Levels in Reactor Coolant System s
IE Notice 86-102:
Repeated Multiple Failures of Steam Generator Hydraulic Snubbers Due to Control
Valve Sensitivity IE Notice 86-103:
Respirator Coupling Nut Assembly Failures l
IE Notice 86-104:
Unqualified Butt Splice Connectors Identified in Qualified Penetrations r
.
.
.
D
IE Notice 86-105:
Potential Loss of Reactor Trip Capability at Intermediate Power Levels The inspector insured that the licensee has received the above notices and will follow licenree responses as part of routine resi-dent inspections.
6.
Intermediate Range Detector Replacement During the completion of the Five Percent Retest Program, one of the eight Intermediate Range Monitors failed to respond.
Troubleshooting efforts by the licensee identified the failed component to be the detec-tor and replacement of the failed detector was completed on November 5, 1986.
The inspector reviewed all licensee documentation of the replacement effort including the Maintenance Work Request, Quality Control Division Inspection Report, and Radiological Work Permit.
The inspector concluded that the job was adequately preplanned and performed.
No unacceptable conditions were noted.
7.
Management Meetings At periodic intervals during the course of this inspection, meetings were held with licensee management to discuss the scope and findings of this inspection.
Based on NRC Region I review of this report, and discussions with licen-see representatives, it was determined that this report does not contain information subject to 10 CFR 2.790 restrictions.
The inspectors also attended entrance and exit interviews for inspections conducted by region-based inspectors during the period.