IR 05000333/1985026
| ML20133P524 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | FitzPatrick  |
| Issue date: | 10/22/1985 |
| From: | Bissett P, Jerrica Johnson NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20133P517 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-333-85-26, NUDOCS 8511010045 | |
| Download: ML20133P524 (6) | |
Text
{{#Wiki_filter:r L - . . l ! l l l L U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION j
REGION I
Report No.
50-333/85-26 I Docket No. 50-333 License No. DPR-59 l_ Licensee: New' York Power Authority i P.O. Box 41 l Lycoming, New York l Facility Name: James A. FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant l Inspection At: Scriba, New York Inspection Conducted: September 23-27, 1985 Inspectors: 2A//'"</br>/8!cfd!7[</br>i Vf1Ntt,ReactorEngineer</br>/ dat(</br>!</br>f.</br></br>10/22 W Approved by:</br>,</br>l JVJohnsonVChief date l</br>Operational Programs Section, OB, DRS</br>,,</br>Inspection Summary:</br>Routine, unannounced inspection conducted on September 23-27.1985 (Report No. 50-333/85-26).</br></br>i Areas Inspected:</br>Preventive and corrective maintenance. The inspection r</br>'</br>involved 37 hours of onsite inspection by one region-based inspector and a supervisor.</br></br>Results: No violations were identified.</br></br>,</br>l G</br>l</br>.</br>-.</br>.</br>.</br>-</br></br>O</br>.</br>DETAILS 1.0 Persons Contacted</br>*R. Baker, Technical Services Superintendent F. Catella, Training Coordinator</br>*R. Converse, Resident Manager</br>*W. Fernandez, Superintendent of Power</br>*J. Flaherty, Assistant Instrument and Controls Supervisor B. Grandy, Electrical Supervisor N. Johnson, Mechanical Planning Engineer</br>*J. Kerflien, Quality Control Supervisor</br>*D. Lindsey, Operations Superintendent</br>*R. Liseno, Maintenance Supervisor B. Lonberger, Preventive Maintenance Coordinator</br>*R. Patch, Quality Assurance Superintendent R. Peters, Preventive Maintenance Supervisor</br>*D. Simpson, Training Superintendent</br>*R. Wiese, Assistant Maintenance Superintendent U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission A. Luptak, Resident inspector The inspector also interviewed other techni:41 and administrative personnel during the intrection.</br>* Denotes those present at the exit meeting on [[Exit meeting date" contains a listed "[" character as part of the property label and has therefore been classified as invalid.. 2.0 Maintenance 2.1 References 10 CFR 50, Appendix B, Quality Assurance Criteria for Nuclear -- Power Plants Regulatory Guide 1.33 - 1978 Quality Assurance Program -- Requirements ANSI N18.7-1972, Administrative Controls and Operational Quality -- Assurance for Operations ANSI N45.2.3-1973, Housekeeping for the Construction Phase of -- Nuclear Power Plants Generic Letter, 83-28, Required Actions Based on Generic -- Implementation of Salem ATWS Events 2.2 Program Review / Implementation The inspector reviewed the licensee's maintenance program to determine whether a preventive and corrective maintenance pregram was beir,g implemented in accordance with applicable regulations, guides
, - - - - - - -. - . - .. - -
. _ . - _ . .
and standards. The review of this program included a verification that: written procedures have been established for initiating requests -- for routine and emergency maintenance; work procedures have been established for special processes, -- fire protection, radiation protection, cleanliness and housekeeping; procedures and responsibilities have been established for equip- -- ment control; provisions have been established for the coordination of main- -- tenance activities and interface controls among participating organizations; personnel will be trained and qualified to perform maintenance ' - activities; criteria and responsibilities have been established to identify -- safety and non safety-related maintenance activities; criteria and responsibilities have been established for -- designating holdpoints and for performing work inspection; criteria and responsibilities have been established for review -- and approval of all maintenance requests; administrative controls have been established for preparing, -- assembling, reviewing and storing of maintenance records; a program has been established to review the corrective -- maintenance program; to access the adequacy of the preventive maintenance progr am; to identify repetitive failures of parts and components; and to identify design deficiencies.
The inspector examined the following documents to ensure that the above criteria was being met.
Administrative Procedure (AP)-3.1, Procedure for Maintenance -- Procedures AP-3.2, Control of Special Process Procedures -- AP-3.3, Procedure for Instrument Maintenance Procedures -- AP-4.4, Scheduled Testing and/or Calibration of Instrument and -- Controls Associated with Safety-Related Equipment and Systems AP-4.2, Control of Measuring and Test Equipment --
. .. - . .._ . . - - - -. - .-.-. - - - - _ - e ....
, AP-4.3, Test and Inspection System -- E Work Activity Control Procedure (WACP)-10.1.1 Procedure for -- Control of Maintenance WACP-10.17, Housekeeping and Cleanliness Control -- WACP-10.1.10, Control of Combustibles and Flammable Materials -- . WACP-10.1.15, Control of Preventive / Predictive Maintenance -- Plant Standing Order No. 5 - Control of Drawings and Tech.
-- Manuals During the course of the inspection, observations were made of on-going maintenance activities.
The licensee was currently inspecting and overhauling limitorque valve operators. The inspector observed a segment of the reassembly of MOV-12A limitorque operator by two electricians. The applicable procedure was being used and a QC-inspector was also present, Work was being conducted under Pre-ventive Maintenance Work Request (PMWR) No. 02377 in accordance with Maintenance Procedure (MP)-59.3. Other PMWRs reviewed included: PMWR 2401 PMWR 2436 -- -- PMWR 2520 PMWR 2377 -- -- PMWR 2519 PMWR 2378 -- -- Also reviewed were several completed maintenance work packages which l were currently being reviewed by QC prior to forwarding for permanent ! storage. The work packages consisted of Work Request / Event / ~ l Deficiency Reports, and associated parts lists, etc. The work activity packages reviewed covered maintenance activities on the main l steam flow transmitters, main steam safety relief valves, rod control sequence and the hydraulic control units for.the control rod drive , system.
l The inspector discussed with senior licensee representatives those j plans and proposals that were recently recommended by a Maintenance - Task Force study, which had been ongoing for more than one year.
Tentative areas of improvement include not only maintenance activi-ties but also those maintenance-related areas necessary to complement an effective, comprehensive maintenance program. Such areas of study j included: i . ' Equipannt list program
Detailed maintenance procedures
Spare parts program upgraded to support expanded preventive '
maintenance program Tooling program
Personnel training and qualification program
Planning and Scheduling program
! , e - r - -- -,,, - -w, .,,. .-n,.,e.,. --,,.-n _.,ng.. _ ,,e.
,-,ver, ..wr.
,e - - _, ,, - - - -.,,, -
F -,...
. History / Evaluation / Feedback program
Accounting and. Productivity program
Technical Support Document program (vendor tech manuals, P& ids,
etc.)- Work initiation and control system
Work scope and performance test programs
Work on many of the above areas has commenced and was reviewed by the inspector.
Significant improvements are evident in the thoroughness to which maintenance procedures are now written.
Previously, maintenance procedures typically referred oneself to appropriate technical, or
vendor manuals for completion of the work activity. Detailed information is now extracted from applicable manuals and placed into written procedures, whereupon they are often given a " dry-run" prior to final approval.
Discussions were also held with the Training Coordinator, who out-lined the new training and qualification process for mechanical, electrical and I&C personnel.
The training program is structured to meet the Institute-of Nuclear Power Operations accreditation require-ments. The inspector also toured the " hands-on" training facilities for all three disciplines.
This training program is essentially in effect, however formal introduction is scheduled for February,1986.
During the inspector's review of current maintenance activities, difficulty was experienced in locating the control room's copy of a particular PMWR.
Subsequently the inspector was informed of the development of a centralized work control center, scheduled for implementation in a few weeks, which should alleviate problems of this kind and others. The purpose of the work control center is to provide one central work place for issuing, monitoring and controlling ongoing work activities.
Representatives of various disciplines.(operations, maintenance, radiation control, QC, etc.)
would permanently support this station to control and track the progress of ongoing activities. This also will provide for a better interface of various groups for determining post maintenance testing requirements.
The creation of a more formal control room environment should also result, once the work control center is operational.
2.3 Findings No violations were observed. However, the inspector expressed the concern that present staffing levels could possibly delay accomplish-ing planned maintenance improvement objectives within a reasonable time frame.
This concern is particularly evident for the preventive maintenance (PM) area where only two individuals (one supervisor and one coordinator) are assigned for development and administration purposes. Also within the PM area, there interface with operations for the identification of post maintenance testing requirements as each new PMWR is developed (line item 34.b of the PMWR).
I? ......
3.0 Quality Assurance / Quality Control Interface (QA/QC) -QA/QC is represented onsite enabling this independent group to actively monitor daily station activities.
Discussions were held with the QA/QC Superintendent and the QC Supervision in order to determine their extent of involve.:ent with maintenance activities. QC routinely reviews all maintenance work requests and work tracking forms prior to initiation of work and upon final completion of the work activity. Detailed checklists-are utilized during the conduct of associated review, inspections, etc. to ensure all program and work activity aspects are completed as required.
As noted earlier, a major rewrite of all maintenance procedures is ' currently underway. QC's involvement includes their review and subsequent insertion of designated hold points for verification, witnessing and/or inspection.
From the inspector's review of revised maintenance proce-dures, it appears as if QC's involvement during the conduct of maintenance activities is quite thorough.
4.0 Exit Meeting The inspector met with the licensee representative (denoted in paragraph-1) on September 27, 1985 to summarize the scope and findings of the inspection activities.
At no time during the inspection was written material provided to the licensee by the inspector.
- , }}