IR 05000333/1979017
| ML19305B578 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | FitzPatrick  |
| Issue date: | 01/17/1980 |
| From: | Cowgill C, Kister H, Stetka T NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I), NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19305B571 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-333-79-17, NUDOCS 8003190912 | |
| Download: ML19305B578 (11) | |
Text
_- _
.
O U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT
REGION I
Report No.
79-17 Docket No.
50-333 License No. _ DPR-59 Priority Category C
--
_
Licensee:
Power Authority of the State of New York 10 Columbus Circle New York, New York 10019 Facility Name:
James A. FitzPatrick Nuclear Powe.- Plant Inspection At:
Scriba, New York Inspection Conducted:
December 11-14, 1979 cr. N j
j Inspectors:
/M
/ // 5'/ 80 T.
t'etka, Reactor Inspector
/ ddte
.
mil %
///rdo C.
J'.
Cow
, Reactor Inspector date
/
date
,
,
Approved by:
d h[ APT.
/-//-[O
. 8. Kisteg, Chie eac;or Projects cate Section Not 4, NSpnch Insoection Summary:
Irroection on December 11-14, 1979 (Report No. 50-333/79-17)
Areas Inspected:
Routine, unannounced inspection of plant operations, Licensee Event Reports (LERs), Personnel Qualifications, IE Bulletin and Circular re-sponses and licensee action on previous inspection reports.
The inspectors assisted an NRC Team review of the Small Break Loss of Coolant Accident (SBLOCA)
Procedure Implementation.
This report also documents in-office review of LERs.
The inspection involved 67 hours7.75463e-4 days <br />0.0186 hours <br />1.107804e-4 weeks <br />2.54935e-5 months <br /> onsite by two regional based inspectors.
Results:
No items of noncompliance were identified.,
Region I Form 12 (Rev. April 1977)
8003100 M;
!
.
.
.
DETAILS
_-
.1.
Persons' Contacted The following technical and supervisory level personnel were contacted:
Licensee Representatives
- V. Childs, Assistant to the Resident Manager
- R. Converse, Operations Superintendent
- M. Cosgrove, QA Site Engineer M. Curling, Training Instructor P. Frawley, Personnel Officer L. Johnston, Plant Engineer (Civil)
- H. Keith, I&C Superintendent
- J. Leonard, Resident Manager L. Milesi, Security / Safety Supervisor C. Orogvany, Reactor Analyst Supervisor
- R. Pasternak, Superintendent of Power
- K. Roberts, Station Shift Supervisor D. Tall, Training Coordinator V. Walz, Electrical Maintenance Engineer
.
NRC Representatives *
P. Boehnert, Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards Staff W. Hodges, Bulletin and Orders Task Force K. Mahan, Operator Licensing Branch P. Polk, Licensing Project Manager C. Thomas, Licensing Project Manager Others T. Rogers, Boiling Water Reactors Owners Group Other personnel contacted included office, operations, engineering, and health physics personnel.
- Present at the exit interview.
2.
Licensee Action on Previous Inspection Items (Closed) Unresolved Item (333/79-09-04):
Revisions to system drawings were completed on October 24, 1979.
(Closed) Unresolved Item (333/78-19-05):
Technical Specification Change has been submitted to relax torus water level limits while testing RHR pumps.
_ _.
_
,-..
.
(Closed) Unresolved Item (333/79-04-08):
A change to the Technical Specifications has been submitted reclassifying the affected valves.
3.
Review of' Plant Operations The inspector reviewed selected facility operations logs and toured areas of the facility to determine that operations were in accordance with the Technical Specifications. The facility was operating close to full power during the period of this inspection.
a.
Shift Logs and Operating Records The inspector reviewed tha following records:
(1) Operations Department Night Orders for the period September 1, 1979 to October 1, 1979 and November 1, 1979 to November 25, 1979.
(2) Station Shift Supervisor's Log for the period September 1, 1979 to November 4, 1979 and December 1, 1979 to December 10, 1979.
(3)
sumper/ Block Log for all outstanding entries and selected.
completed entries.
'
(4) Protective Tagging Logs for all outstanding entries and selected completed entries.
(5) Control Room Operator s Log for the period September 1, 1979 to October 30, 1979 and December 3, 1979 to December 12, 1979.
The review consisted of verifying adequate management review, correct identification of problem areas, completeness, and determination that conditions contrary to the Technical Specifications did not exist.
The inspector independently verified selected Jumper / Block log entries and Protective Tagging log entries.
The inspector noted several incomplete log entries in both the Control Room Operator's log and the Station Shift Supervisor's log.
Additionally, there were some inconsistent entries when the aforementioned logs were' compared.
The inspector discussed the circumstances surrounding each incomplete log entry with licensee representatives.
The inspector stressed the need for complete and accurate log entries.
The licensee representatives acknowledged the inspector's comments and stated that the need for improving the logs would be discussed with the operators. This item is unresolved.
(333/79-17-01)
_
_
._.
.
.
During the log' review, the inspector noted that the licensee was experiencing problems with APRM (F) thermal power trip circuits.
On several. occasions the instrument displayed a lock in trip light with no corresponding reactor protection system action.
-
The inspector discussed the problem with licensee representatives to determine what acticn was taken when the problem was first discovered and what long term corrective action was planned.
The licensee stated that the reactor protection system was tested and found to be operating satisfactorily each time the tripped light was discovered.
Further investigation by the licensee has determined that the most probable cause for the trip light being actuated was electrical interference in the circuitry.
The source of this interference has not been determined and analysis is still in progress.
This item is unresolved.
(333/79-17-02)
b.
Tour of Accessible Areat Facility tours were conducted of the following areas:
All levels of the reactor building;
--
Turbine Building;
--
Control Room;
--
Diesel Generator Rooms;
--
Relay Room;
--
.
West Crescent; and,
--
Pump House Screenwell.
--
During these tours the following observations were made:
_
(1) Monitoring Instrumentation. Thc fol'owing instrumentation was observed to verify that indicat ' parameters were in accordance with Technical Specifications (TS) Limiting Conditions for Operations (LCO):
Reactor Vessel Level and Pressure;
--
Recirculation Flow;
-.
Reactor Power;
--
-
Control Rod Position;
--
Equipment Operating Status;
--
l I
l'
._ _
.
.
f
Area Radiation and Stack Gas Monitors;
--
Reactor Coolant System Conductivity;
--
Process Computer Core Operating Parameters; and,
--
High Pressure Coolant Injection System Settings.
--
(2) Annunciator Alarms.
The inspector observed various alarm conditions existing during the tour.
These alarm conditions.
were discussed with the Station Shift Supervisor on duty who was knowledgeable of the alarms, the conditions causing these alarms, and the actions required by the alarms.
(3) Shift Staffing.
The inspector verified by spot checks that the operating shift met Section 6 of the Technical Specifications with regard to numbers and licenses.
(4) Radiation Areas.
Radiation control zones were observed to verify proper identification and implementation.
These observations included review of step-off pad conditions, disposal of anti-contamination clothing and area posting.
During various tours the inspectors independently verified that radiation levels throughout the plant were consistent with the posted levels.
The inspector noted that one step-off pad area was cluttered and identified the subject area to a licensee representative.
The condition was corrected.
The inspector had no further questions in this area.
(5) Plant Housekeeping Conditions.
Storage of material and components was observed with respect to safety and fire hazards.
The licensee is repairing or replacing pipe hangers as required by their Architect-Engineer (A-E) analysis.
Additionally, anchor bolts are being inspected and replaced in connection with IE Bulletin 79-02.
Because of the aforementioned work, many areas require cleaning.
Progress on housekeeping will be examined during subsequent inspections.
(6) Fluid and Steam Leaks.
No significant fluid leaks were noted.
During the tour of the turbine building a significant steam leak was observed on the second stage steam reheat system on the main turbine.
The steam leak is a result of a stem packing leak on RS-HL-V2 and a-body to bonnet leak on
RS-LL-V2 which are main turbine second stage reheater valves.
l The second stage reheat system has been isolated reducing but not eliminating the leak entirely.
No increase in airborne radioactivity was observed as, result of this condition and the licensee is continuing r, monitor the area. This condition will be examined during subsequent inspection.
.
-
(7) Piping Vibration.
No excessive piping vibration was noted.
(8) Fire Protection.
Fire extinguishers and fire fighting equipment
'
-were observed to be unobstructed and recently inspected for operability The inspector noted one cigarette butt in the Relay Room which is a designated no smoking area.
Licensee representatives were apprised of the inspector's findings.
This area will be examined again during a subsequent inspection.
m
.4
,
J
+
-,
- - - -, -
-
e-a r-
.,,, -
~,
'
.
THIS PAGE, CONTAINING 10 CFR 2.790 INFORMATION, NOT FOR PUBLIC DISCLOSURE, IS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK.
i
.
4; Review of Licensee Event Reports a.
The inspector reviewed Licensee Event Reports (LERs) to verify that:
The reports accurately describe the events;
--
The safety significance is as reported;
--
The report is accurate as to cause;
--
' The report satisfies requirements with respect to information
--
provided and timing of submittal; Corrective action is appropriate;
--
Action has been taken; and,
--
--
The event was reviewed and evaluated by the Plant Operations Review Conmittee (PORC).
LERs 79-56, 79-63, 79-68, 79-69, 79-70, 79-73, 79-75, 79-76, 79-78, 79-83, 79-90, 79-91, 79-92, 79-93, 79-94, 79-95, 79-96, 79-97 and 79-103 were reviewed.
This review identified the following i tems.
b.
LERs 79-83 and 79-93 reported that the Core Maximu.c Fraction of
,
Limiting Power Density (CMFLPD) had exceeded the Technical Speci-
'
fication (TS) limit.
The licensee's investigation of this event indicated that the core's expected gadolinium depletion is not consistent with the actual gadolinium depletion.
Since gadolinium depletion is a factor used to determine control rod patterns, the control ~ rod pattern at the time of the event was not consistent with what the pattern should have been for the amount of gadolinium
.
depl-on observed.
The licensee has initiated an administrative limi of 2 percent on the core thermal li its (i.e., MFLPD, m
Minimum Critical Power Ratio (MCPR), and Maximum average planar linear heat generation rate (MAPLHGR)) to prevent exceeding CMFLPD. A review of computer printouts (P-1) of core limits for November and December,1979 indicate that this administrative limit is effective in that the CMFLPD limit has not been exceeded since the limit was imposed.
This item is unresolved pending further review of CMFLPD limits during subsequent inspections and review of additional licensee actions.
(333/79-17-04)
c.
LER 79-96 reported that conductivity exceeded the Technical Specification (TS) limit.
During the review of this occurrence, the inspector noted that reactor coolant conductivity was 2.6 umho/cm.~ The Technical Specification limit is 5.0 umho/cm.
Discussion with licensee representatives revealed that the cause
,
.
..
.
of the increased conductivity is introduction of resin into the Reactor Coolant from the Reactor Water Cleanup System Ion Exchanger Septum.
The licensee is currently in the process of repairing the ion exchanger.
This item is unresolved pending licensee corrective action.
(333/79-17-05)
5.
Review of Personnel Qualifications The licensee has assigned an Acting Technical Services Superintendent and an Acting Radiation and-Environmental Services (RES) Superintendent to assume the responsibilities of these positions, including PORC membership, while the regular plant staff personnel attend training to obtain their Senior Reactor Operator (SR0) licenses.
The inspectors reviewed the qualifications of these acting superintendents to verify that they met the requirements of ANSI N18.1-1972 and Regulatory Guide 1.8-1975 as required by the Technical Specifications.
lio inadequacies were identified.
6.
NRC Team Review of the Small Break Loss of Coolant Accident (SPLOCA)
Procedures a.
Nuclear Reactor Regulation (NRR) has assigned teams to review the implementation of SBLOCA procedures at selected facilities which includes the FitzPatrick plant.
The NRR team review included a comparison of the licensee's SBLOCA procedures to the guidelines; licensed operator training progress; interviews with selected licensed operators; and determination of the adequacy of the instrumentation of various systems.
This implementation program is divided into two phases.
The first phase, which involved writing and implementing 58LOCA procedures and training of licensed operators, will be completed by December 31, 1979.
The second phase, which involves further procedure refinements, implementation of a new NRC program to oxamine licensed operators, and facility design changes to reduce the possibility or seriousness of the SBLOCA will be completed in the future.
Further actions and accomplishments in this regard will be described by NRR team reports.
.The inspectors observed the NRR team review and assisted the team when required.
The reviews identified the following two items.
b.
The immediate action sections of the SBLOCA procedures contain cautions that may cause confusion for operators when they are at-
.
tempting to use the procedures under emergency conditions.
The l
licensee will revise these procedures to simplify the caution notes and move these notes from the immediate action section to the subsequent action section of the procedure.
This item is unresolved (333/79-17-06)
l l-
-.
.
.
c.
The licensee has completed all specific operator training, howt.nr, the general operator training remains to be completed.
This item is_ unresolved pending completion of the general training. (333/79-17-07)
7.
Closecut of IE Bulletins and Circulars a.
Site documents related to the following IE Bulletins were reviewed to verify the licensee's responses were timely, accurate and adequate.
.
(1)
IEB 79-25, Failures of Westinghouse BFD Relays in Safety-Related Systems (2)
IEB 79-23, Potential Failure of Emergency Diesel Generator Field Exciter Transformer Review of the licensee's response to this Bulletin indicates that the Emergency Diesel Generators (EDGs) were run for
"several days (at somewhat below the full load rating)." The inspector queried licensee representatives as to the actual time and loads the EDGs were run. The licensee was unable to locate supporting documentation and will continue to search for this documentation.
This item is unresolved pending review of the EDG run times and loading.
(333/79-17-08)
b.
The inspector reviewed the licensee's action with respect to the following Circulars to determine if the licensee had received them and had taken appropriate action.
(1)
IEC 79-04, Loose Locking Nut on Limitorque Valve Operators The licensee has completed all pertinent recommended actions identified in the circular.
The inspector has no further questions on this item.
(2)
IEC 79-05, Moisture Leakage In Stranded Wire Conductors The licensee's review of this circular identified several areas where moisture leakage could occur in stranded wire conductors.
The required modifications have been completed with the following exceptions:
Installing qualified NAMC0 limit switches and connectors
--
in the place of existing components on sample valve 02-2-A0V039; and, Replacing two resistive temperature detectors (RTDs) in
--
the suppression pool.
l
,
_
_
-
-
-.
,-
__
_
.
,
...
'
.
-
This item remains unresolved pending) completion of the above listed modifications.
(333/79-17-09
~ 8.
NRC In-Office Review NRC:RI in-office' review of the following LERs has been completed with no unacceptable conditions identified:
79-53 79-67 79-86 79-54 79-71 79-87 79-55 79-72 79-88 79-57 79-73 79-89 79-59
- -77
'
79-60 19-79 79-61-79-80 79-62-79-81
79-64-79-82 79-65 79-84 79-66 79-85 9.
Unresolved Item; An item about which more infomation is required to detemine acceptability-is considered unresolved.
Paragraphs 3a, 3b, 4a, 4b, 6b, 6ci 7a and 7b contain unresolved items.
10. ' Exit Interview At the conclu:; ion of the inspection on December 14, 1979, the inspector held a meeting (see paragraph 1 for attendees) to discuss the inspection scope and findings.
The unresolved items were identified.
!
l l