IR 05000334/1987013
| ML20235W599 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Beaver Valley |
| Issue date: | 10/07/1987 |
| From: | Lester Tripp NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20235W578 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-334-87-13, GL-87-14, NUDOCS 8710160328 | |
| Download: ML20235W599 (13) | |
Text
- _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - -
-
L
..
!
U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
REGION I
Report No.'
50-334/87-13 Docket No.
50-334 Licensee:
Duquesne Light Company One Oxford Center 301 Grant Street Pittsburgh, PA'15279 Facility Name: Beaver Valley Power Station, Unit 1 Location:
Shippingport, Pennsylvania
'
Dates:
August 18 - September 23, 1987 Inspectors:
F. I. Young, Senior Resident Inspector, BV-1 S. M. Pin ale, Resident Inspector, BV-1
,
/C 7 Approved By:
-
-
j
. E. T Chief, Reactor Projects Section 3A
~D' ate Inspection Summary: Inspection No. 50-334/87-13 on August 18-September 23., 1987 Areas Inspected:
Routine inspections by the resident inspectors (180 hours0.00208 days <br />0.05 hours <br />2.97619e-4 weeks <br />6.849e-5 months <br />)
of licensee actions on previous inspection findings, plant operations, physical security, radiological controls, housekeeping and fira protection, maintenance, surveillance testing and review of-licensee reports.
Results:
No violations were identified.
One unresolved item was identified concerning potential electrical qualification problems (Detail 4.2.4).
Five
-
previously open NRC items were reviewed and closed during this inspection; one remained open.
]
i j
1 I
l l
.,
8710160328 Q 8$334 PDR ADOCK PDR G
._______--_ _ _ -
. _ _
__
_ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _
i
.
.
TABLE OF CONTENTS I
l i
i Page 1.
Persons Contacted.......................
2.
Summary of Facility Activities................
3.
Followup on Outstanding Items.................
j
4.
Plant Operations....
)
...................
4.1 General.........................
4.2 Operations........................
)
4.3 Plant Security / Physical Protection.
..........
4.4 Radiation Controls.
l
...................
4.5 olant Housekeeping and Fire Protection
!
.........
5.
Maintenance Activities..
...................
6.
Surveillance Testing..
..............,
...
_7.
Review of Licensee's Response to Generic Letter 87-14.....
8.
Reporting of Sleeping / Inattentiveness of Licensee Staff....
1 9.
Review of Periodic and Special Reports...
'
.........
10. Unresolved Items.
...................
..
11.
Exit Interview
.......................
!
[
_.
_ _ _ _.. _. _ _ _ _ _ _ _.. _ -. _ _ _ _ _. - _ _ _ - - _ -
___
.
d l
DETAILS 1.
Persons Contacted-During the report period, interviews and discussions were conducted with members of licensee management and staff as necessary to support inspec-tion activities.
2.
Summary of Facility Activities i
At the beginning of the inspection on August 18, 1987, the plant was
operating at 100 percent power.
Full power operation continued until August 31, when there was a power reduction to 30 percent to repair a secondary plant heater drain tank level control valve (Detail 4.2.1).
Following the repairs, full power operation was resumed on September 1, and continued through the end of the inspection.
On September 22, the unit surpassed its continuous run record of 104 days.
3.
Followup on Outstanding Items The NRC Outstanding Items (01) List was reviewed with cognizant licensee personnel.
Items selected by the inspector were subsequently reviewed through discussions with licensee personnel, documentation reviews and field inspection to determine whether licensee actions specified in the OIs had been satisfactorily completed.
The overall status of previously identified inspection findings were reviewed, and planned / completed licensee actions were discussed for those items rt arted below:
3.1 (Closed) Violation (84-31-03):
The licensee was to include verifi-cation steps for licensed radioactive material packaging / loading
!
procedures to insure proper installation and sealing of drain line plugs.
The inspector verified that the appropriate procedures were revised to implement and verify manufacturer's recommendations regarding the proper use of sealant with each installation of drain line plugs.
This item is closed.
3.2 (Closed) Inspector Follow Item (85-09-02):
The licensee was to replace generic qualification checklists with detailed site specific on-the-job training (0JT) checklists for mechanics, electricians and meter and control repairmen (MCRs). The inspector found that the OJT checklists have been developed for activities that have been iden-tified as important and/or difficult.
The various station groups maintain current lists of personnel OJT certifications, and are indexed by specific work activities.
The OJT programs are included
}W
'
'
.,
%
y
.g
as : a' part of ~ the specific group ' training requirements.
The elec-i
'
trical and mechanical-maintenance training programs have not yet.been
- l
^INP0 accredited, however, the ' licensee's Self-Evaluation Report has.
- ]
been -comp'leted and' submitted, and the utility 'is awaiting INP0
' accreditation reviews. The effectiveness of, the mechanic, electri-L cian' and'MCR OJT programs will be reviewed through routine resident-
'
and specialist inspections. This item is closed.
3.3 (Closed) Violation (86-05-01):
The NRC issued a - violation for the shipment of licensed material in drums that were not packaged per 10 CFR 71.5 requirements.
In response to the violation, the licensee-j developed -Radiological Control Procedure No. 3.29, Inspection ~ of Radioactive Material Packaging Prior to Shipment.
The new procedure l
'
'
provides for formal inspection and documentation for specific. types of packages, and was implemented in February, 1986.
The inspector
,eviewed the procedure and found that the concerns identified in the
violation have been adequately addressed.
This item is closed.
'
.
l 3.4 (Closed) Violation (86-05-03):
A violation was issued for failing.
to review Radioactive Waste (RW) Procedure No. F0-0P-004 (Dewatering-Procedure for the 24" Diameter Pressure Demineralized Vessel Contain-
,
l-ing Ion: Exchange Resins) in accordance with the station's biennial i
procedure review program.
Immediate licensee corrective action was
to perform the biennial. procedure review of the affected procedure.
.
Additionally, a checklist to track the biennial reviews of all RW'
,
'
procedures was developed - and is maintained to ensure that the two
year review requirement is met.
Other station groups maintain similar mechanisms to ensure the procedure reviews are performed as required.
This item is closed.
3.5 (Closed) Inspector Follow Item (86-14-01):
The licensee.was to
'
revise special ~ nuclear material (SNM) accountability. procedures to
-)
assure effective control and accountability of SNM contained in l
neutron flux instrumentation detectors.
The inspector reviewed.the
>
changes made to the Nuclear Material Control Manual.
The changes-
-
addressed the inspector's concerns, however, it was noted that the i
Director, Administrative Services does not become informed of receipt.
of SNM that are less than 1 gram. This was brought to the licensee's l
attention, who. stated that an additional procedure change would be implemented to correct the additional concerns.
This change will be reviewed during a routine resident inspection.
This item is closed.
L 3.6- (0 pen) Unresolved Item (86-29-01): The licensee was to investigate i
the cause of failure for charging pump (CM-P-18). The licensee has received the results of a vendor metallurgical examination of the charging pump shaft, which determined that the shaft fracture was due to high cycle medium stress rotating bending fatigue.
The results have been forwarded to the licensee's Engineering Department, who I
will provide recommendations, if appropriate, to prevent recurrence of similar failures.
Pending completion and results of the Engineering review, this item remains open.
- _ - _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _
-
_
_
-_
_ -___
- _ _ _ _ _ _ _.
___ -
.J
'
+
'l
'
,
' 1,L
_
_l
.
- 4... Plant Operations 41.1 General
. Inspection tours of the following accessible plant areas were con-iducted during both day and night shifts' with respect to 1 Technical
~
Specification. (TS) compliance, housekeeping 'and cleanliness, fire protection,- radiation control, physical security / plant. protection and operational / maintenance administrative controls.
T
-- Control' Room
-- Safeguard's Area
-- Auxiliary' Building
-- Service Building
-- Switchgear Area
-- Diesel Generator Buildings-
-- Access Control Points
-- Containment
-- Protected Area Fence Line -- Yard Area
-- Turbine Building
-- Intake Structure 4.2 Operations During the course of the inspection, discussions were conducted with operators concerning knowledge of recent changes to procedures, facil_ity configuration and plant conditions. During plant tours, logs and records were ' reviewed to determine; if entries were properly made, and that equipment status / deficiencies were identified and communi-cated.
These records included operating logs, turnover sheets, ' tag-
~
out and jumper logs, process computer printouts, unit off-normal and draft incident reports. The inspector verified adherence to approved procedures for ongoing activities observed.
Shift turnovers 'were witnessed and staffing requirements confirmed. In general, inspector comments or questions resulting from these reviews were resolved by licensee personnel.
In addition to normal working hours, plant operations reviews were conducted 'during midnight shifts, holidays and weekends on the following dates and times: August 18, 6:30 pm -
10:00 pm; August 30, 2:00 pm - 6:00 pm; September 1,12:00 am - 3:00 am;. September 4, 4:00 am - 6:00 am; September 9,12:00 am - 1:00 am; September 13, 12:00 pm - 6:00 pm. The inspectors verified that plant operators were alert and displayed no signs of inattention to duty or
' fatigue.
4.2.1 Power Reduction Due To Heater Drain Tank Level Control Valve On August 31, a power reduction to 70% was initiated to investigate the heater drain tank level control valve (LCV-SD-106B) which was cycling excessively to maintain level in the tank. When 70% power was reached, the valve stopped cycling and the valve remained shut.
Subsequent i
1L
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - -
_ _
_ _ _
. _ - _ - - _ - _.
-_ _
-. -. _ - _ _ -
-
. _.
- - - - _ _ - _ _ _ - - _.
- _ - _ _ _ _ _ - - _. _ - - - _ _ _ _ _
.,.
( %L
'
.,
'
n
y
p.
l
- >
...,.
g.
-
J attempts to stroke the-valve from the local. control station demonstrated erratic valve motion, and the licensee sus-
- 9 pected'an internal valve problem. The licensee subsequently-initiated a further power reduction.to approximately 30% so that maintenance -personnel could disassemble LCV-SD-1068.
Power was reduced to; 30% later on August 31st. While at h
_
30% ' power, the licensee elected to investigate the
"A" feedwater regulating valve (FRV) due: to recent: noisy oper-ation of the valve. The FRV. actuator was removed by main-tenance personnel, who verified that the valve did not-rotate and the' stem could be raised easily,: indicating that no internal problems were apparent. The' actuator was sub-sequently replaced and the valve successfully stroke tested and returned to service.
The licensee found a sheared pin and damaged thread on the
'
stem of LCV-SD-1068. The valve and stem assembly was sub-sequently replaced on September 1.
Following the repair, a load increase was initiated. When 50% power was reached, plant operators noted that the LCV was not responding as expected. A subsequent investigation found debris (insula-l tion pieces and dirt) in the valve's controller. Following l.
removal of the debris, the valve functioned properly in l
automatic.
Full power was reached later on September 1.
As noted in previous NRC inspections, secondary plant com-
.ponents continue to cause operational problems. Addition-
~
ally, the identification. of and problems caused by the l
debris following the maintenance activities related to
!
LCV-SD-1068 reflects negat.ively on the plant housekeeping program.
For more detail on the housekeeping program find-ings identified during this. inspection, see Section 4.5.
The identification, repair and/or modification of these continuing secondary plant problems 'will continue to be reviewed during routine resident inspections.
No further deficiencies were identified.
4.2.2 Inoperable Containment Activity Monitors
On September 3, 1987, at 11:00 am, a radcon technician
noticed that containment activity monitors RM-215A and 8
indicated no flow through the monitor.
The technician
'
!
'
immediately notified the Shift Supervisor of this situa-tion.
Investigation by the Shif t Foreman found that the common discharge valve for RM-215A and B, - TV-CV-102 was shut and de-energized.
The valve had been de-energized as l
i
,
o
-
.
__
)
'
.
part of. a clearance for fuse block replacement for TV-SS-102A1.
The common breaker that supplies power to both the discharge valve for RM-215A and B and TV-SS-102A1 had been used 'as part of the clearance to de-energize the 102A valve. The Shift Supervisor immediately stopped work on TV-SS-102A1 and had the breaker reclosed allowing the discharge valve for'RM-215A and 8 to be reopened. Flow was restored to the containment activity monitors at approxi-mately 1:15 pm the same day. Further investigations by the licensee indicated that the low flow alarm associated with containment activity monitors did not light when the low flow condition was present.
The licensee repaired the. low flow condition light and it is now working properly.
The licensee's evaluation also characterized this as a person-nel error due to shift personnel not realizing that opening breaker 851 de-energized and closed TV-CV-102. As part of their review, the licensee's immediate corrective action was to affix local labels near the breakers to alert per-sonnel as to what radiation monitors are associated with each breaker.
In addition, caution tags will be hung and affixed to the power supplies to also alert operations personnel to what loads come off of the different power supplies.
The inspector reviewed the licensee's activities associated with the Unit Off-Normal Report 87-109 that addressed this event.
From discussions and review of the documentation associated with this event, the inspector concurred with the licensee's findings and characterizations of this event.
Review of the associated technical specifications j
3.4.6.1 action statement indicated that the licensee did
not violate the technical specification.
This technical specification allowed six hours for the plant to be shut-
]
down to Mode 3.
This condition was rectified within 2-1/2 hours.
However, if the Radcon technician had not noticed I
this, the licensee had the potential of violating the limiting conditions for operations associated with contain-ment activity monitors.
In general, the inspector considered this to be an isolated case.
The inspector, however, noted that this appeared to be another indication of lack of attention to detail by shift personnel.
The licensee's corrective actions were sufficient to assure that this type of event associated with containment activity monitors would not recur.
.
_ - - _
,,
_ _ _ _. _ _ _ _
-
l J
,
i V
v H
4.2.3 Receipt of New Fuel In. order. to' extend the operating cycle = from 12 months to
,
18. months, the' ' licensee submitted the necessary.documenta-tion and technical specification amendments to the NRC' to
. allow the use and-storage of fuel assemblies of enrichment:
'
- up.to 4'5E of U235. On' September 4, 1987, the NRC approved
.
the licensee's technical _ specification change No.
114,.
which allows the licensee to use and receive -shipment of a.
higher enriched fuel.
On September 9, 1987, the licensee received its first - shipment of ~12 highly enriched' fuel assemblies on site.. These 12 assemblie_s were brought in-ond. stored -in fresh fuel racks in Unit 1.
.The inspector reviewed Technical Specification Amendment No.
114 to
,
ensure that the licensee was in compliance with the change.
In addition, the inspector also reviewed and witnessed portions :of initial receipt. of shipment on September 9 and 10.
The inspector reviewed the handling procedure and the.
different records that were being maintained by the licen-see as part.of their~ receipt shipment procedure. In addi-tion, the inspector discussed with key personnel their involvement and responsibility in handling. of new fuel.
The. inspector discussed, reviewed and witnessed the filling out of records by QA on receipt of new fuel in accordance with the licensee's procedures.
The inspector determined that the licensee was fully prepared and' personnel were knowledgeable concerning fuel handling and receipt of new fuel.
Records reviewed at the time were complete and accurately filled out in accordance with applicable station procedures.
The portions of technical specifications which deals with upcoming reload' of the core using highly en-riched fuel will be reviewed during subsequent outage inspections.
4.2.4 Control Room Annunciator Anomalies On Septomber 7, several annunciator panels (AS, A8, A10)
began alarming, with various combinations of light and horn sequences, none of which were expected.by plant operators.
Upon investigation at the annunciator base, plant opera-j tions' personnel discovered a large puddle of water in front
of the base. Crews were immediately dispatched to clean up the affected area by the annunciator base.
Instrumentation and control personnel were notified of the event.
The licensee subsequently determined that this event was iso-lated to only a 'ew annunciators.
Plant operators, how-ever, responded normally to all control room alarms
{
throughout the event.
l
,
_
_ - - _ _ _ _ ___ _ _ - _
.
k'b T
'
,2 (
x
,
Further licensee investigation into : this. event.' identified :
that the source of the water was an underground cable 'run trench, 'southE of the _ Unit.2 control room.. The manhole through the trench was lifted, and the trench was' found i
nearly filled' with w~ater.
The licensee estimated that'the
~
trench was approximately 6 f ft. by 6_. f t y a nd _8 f t.
hi gh.
The water level was higher than 5 ft.. The licensee-deter-mined that rain water had accumulated in the trench over'an extended time period, leaked into the conduit' union ~ that carried safety related. cabling, flowed into the cable spreading area under the control room, exited through another conduit union and then flowed across ' the sloped.
,
floor onto the annunciator - base.
The licensee conducted ~
l fiilowup tours throughout the-plant and no additional water leaks were ' identified.
The area was cleaned up _ and all affected annunciators were returned to' normal.
'
The conduit involved in this case contained safety related cabling.
The inspector questioned the qualifications - of-the cables involved and other cables similarly located.
There are several similar cable run trenches located throughout the plant.
The licensee is currently conduct--
ing. an. investigation to address the inspector's concerns.
Additionally, an Engineering Memorandum was initiated to address long-term fixes to the af fected trenches.
Licen see -
interim corrective action included pumping the water out of the trench and sealing the manhole cover, which was believed to be the opening that provided a flow path for outside water to drain into the trench. The Engineering Group has performed a preliminary investigation, and has concluded that immediate safety concerns are not apparent; the cables involved are purchased.with specifications regarding water submergence.
However, further evaluation will continue for those and-similar cables. Pending completion of the licen-see's review of the details of this event, including cable
'
environmental qualification concerns, and determination and implementation of corrective actions, this item is Unresolved (UNR 50-334/87-13-01).
4.3 Plant Security / Physical Protection
>
Implementation of the Physical Security Plan was observed in various plant areas with regard to the following:
Protected area barriers were not degraded;
--
Isolation zones were clear;
--
'
___
___
___ _ - - _ _ - - - - _
_ _ - - _ _ _ _
_ _ _
.
-
l Persons and _ packages were checked prior to allowing entry into
--
the Protected Area;
--
Vehicles were properly searched and vehicle access to the Pro-tected Area was in accordance with approved procedures;
. Security access controls to Vital Areas were being maintained
--
and that persons in Vital Areas were properly authorized.
Security posts were adequately staffed and equipped, security
--
personnel were alert and knowledgeable regarding position requirements, and that written procedures were available; and j
l Adequate lighting was maintained.
--
No concerns were identified 4.4 Radiological Controls Posting and control of radiation and high radiation areas were inspected.
Radiation Work Permit compliance and use of personnel monitoring devices were checked.
Conditions of step-off pads, dis-posal of protective clothing, cleanliness of work areas, radiation control job coverage, area monitor operability and calibration (portable and permanent) and personnel frisking were observed on a j
sampling basis.
No concerns were identified.
4.5 Plant Housekeeping and Fire Protection Plant housekeeping conditions including general cleanliness condi-tions and control and storage of flammable material and other poten-tial safety hazards were observed in various areas during plant tours. Maintenance of fire barriers, fire barrier penetrations, and verification of posted fire watches in these areas were also observed.
During this inspection, it was noted that several plant areas have declined in the area of plant housekeeping.
In particular, in many areas of the Auxiliary Building, including high radiation areas, tools from previous jobs, trash, materials and other debris remained in those area.
The overall decline of plant housekeeping was dis-cussed with licensee management, who stated that they also noted a decline.
The need to further re-emphasize an upgrade of overall plant housekeeping was discussed and the licensee agreed to initiate corrective action.
Rcetine inspector tours will monitor the effec-tiveness of the licensee's action.
No further concerns were identified.
/
.
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
c
_.
,
--
-
.-_
-__ - - -
_ - _ _ - _
~ u l
.f
e-
.9 5.
Main'tenance' Activities-
'
,
JThe. inspector ' observed / reviewed various ' maintenance and problem identi-fication activitie's: for compliance with requirements and applicable' codes'
- and standards, QA/QC involvement, safety tags,. equipment., alignment /use of.
-
. jumpers,: personnel qualifications, radiological controls, fire protection,
'
s-retest and' deportability. The following activities were reviewed:
CMP 1-75-Refueling-1M, Site. Receipt and Handling. of New Fuel Assemblies and Their Shipping Containers.
MWR 871181:
Remove Feedwater Regulating Valve Actuator and Investigate for Internal Damage MWR 871171
~ Repai r LCV-SD-1068 -
6.
Surveillance Testina The inspector witnessed / reviewed selected surveillance tests to determine whether -properly approved procedures were in use, details were adequate, test instrumentation - was properly calibrated and used, technical speci-fications were satisfied, testing was performed by qualified' personnel and test-results. satisfied acceptance criteria or were properly dispositioned.
The following surveillance testing activities were reviewed:
OST 1.11.2 -
Safety Injection Pump Test OST 1.24.3 Motor-Driven Auxiliary Feed Pump Test OST 1.44A.8 Control Room A/C Unit Test OST 1.48.3A Control Board Checklist No discrepancies were noted.
7.
Review of Licensee Response to Generic Letter 87-14
~
On August 4,.1987, the NRC issued Generic Letter (GL) No. 87-14, Operator -
Licensing Examinations to the licensee. GL 87-14 requested that licensees provide the best estimate of, operating licensing examination needs for fiscal years 1988,1989,1990 and 1991 (October 1 to September 30 of each year).
The inspector verified that the licensee responded by the reques-ted date of September 15, 1987.
The appropriate information was provided-for both BV-i and BV-2.
No deficiencies were noted.
I
_
-_
- _ _ _ _ _ _
J
j l
..
,
10
)
i
=
.
8.
Reporting of Sleeping / Inattentiveness of Licensee Staff i
)
The Senior Resident Inspector discussed with a Senior Licensee Manager the recent Commission order to Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station addressing a
allegations of sleeping employees.
The licensee's representative stated -
that senior management at Beaver Valley, Unit 1, would not tolerate sleep-
)
ing or inattentive employees at the site and that the policy applies to
all employees whether they were licensed or non-licensed individuals.
The inspector questioned the Senior Manager to determine whether any inci-
,
dences of sleeping or inattentiveness have been noted at Beaver Valley.
The licensee's representative stated that the only example that had oc-
!
curred within the last several years was a guard that was found inatten-I tive in the screen house on August 4,1987.
(See NRC Inspection Report
50-334/87-12).
The inspector noted that this one instance that the
'
licensee was aware of had been quickly reported to the Senior Resident Inspector at the time.
The inspector questioned the licensee's represen-tative as to what the threshold the licensee would use in notifying the NRC.
The Senior Manager stated that any instances of inattention or sleeping on watch by an employee at Beaver Valley would be reported to the NRC through the Senior NRC Resident on site.
9.
Review of Periodic and Special Reports Upon receipt, periodic and special reports submitted pursuant to Technical Specification 6.9 (Reporting Requirements) were reviewed.
The review assessed whether the reported information was valid, included the NRC required data and whethar results and supporting information were consis-tent with design predictions and performance specifications. The inspec-tor also ascertained whether any reported information should be classified as an abnormal occurrence.
The following periodic and special reports i
were reviewed-
!
!
Monthly Operating Report for Plant Operations from August 1-31, 1987.
--
Semi-Annual Radioactive Effluent Release Report from January-
--
June, 1987.
No deficiencies were noted.
10, Unresolved Items
- i Unresolved items are matters for which more information is required in order to determine whether they are acceptable items or violations. An unresolved item identified during this inspection is discussed in para-graph 4.2.4.
i
f J
t f
_ _ _ _ _ _ _. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _. _ _ _ _ _
,__-_ - -.
.
'
1 11. Exit Interview Meetings.were held with senior facility management periodically during the course of this inspection to discuss the inspection scope and findings. A summary of inspection findings was further discussed with the licensee at the cenclusion of the report period on September 28, 1987.
l l
i l
l l
i i
i f
__ _--__-