IR 05000334/1987014
| ML20236C005 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Beaver Valley |
| Issue date: | 10/19/1987 |
| From: | Keller R, Denise Wallace NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20236B998 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-334-87-14, NUDOCS 8710260453 | |
| Download: ML20236C005 (7) | |
Text
{{#Wiki_filter:, . W,u%P gr.
Mi , y g,a n , 7I - , , n., /t ? ; Jp .-p .jf p 5 3- ,. N., + ' sv . M\\ ' _... g 9 y*w ,f ,f
4 o t
t
\\ .'<j' '- ,. s.
(
-1 'N[ ,) '((l ,\\. < 't ., . . i '
U,S,' NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION .- REGION /I-W . ' ely ' . Report No.. 50-334/87-14 s g' y .a ' f ' ,p. Docket No.
50-334 4 \\ M.
M', %w < p <; /g U ' ..p
M License No.. DPR-66.., e) .. ' 0.
J a Licensee: Duquesne' Light' Company .), ll r F, [
Shippingport, Pennsylvania 15077tf i }j . g.( l
r.
Facility Name: Beaver Vallek Power St'atidn, pun,tpiog. ' . . .] i ' 'g;' s, Inspection At: tShippingport, Pennsylvania-O P '
- e >-
. ^ ' ... ' / p Inspection. Conducted:, August 31',.1987 - SeptemSer 4,L1987: ' 4< r , ,, , 3 . a y.
. w .j ~ Inspectors: d//A#d W/d/67 b . ' D. Wallace, Reactor. Engineer, DRS-date.
~ J' ,, _ lb//9 /fY Approved by:. Robert M. Keller, Chief _ date- > Pressurized Water Reactor-;Sectidn,, gle g Operations Branch, DRS r'
- c ', l
.1 _ y . , , . !-- Inspection Summary:' Routine, unannounced inspection' conducted-from " s.
August 31, 1987 to Seltemt er 4,1987 - ' ', . . (Report No.- 50-334/87t/4)
' , - c. t ... i . e
.. .
Areas Inspected: Routine, unannounced fpr.pection:of lic% see activities.in l the area of Maintenance and Quality Control / Maintenance (n(terfaces..The f j l inspection was conducted by one region-based inspector '! ' Noviola'tionsqrdeviationsjwere' identified.R(3> i i g ., Results: h9 ) > e , 3) '(+ )(:,
, [ , > . r, : 3- .b' e
?., l' (
b4 PDRf B710260453
I-h PDR ADDCK m VI f,,'.
G / ' e } s ' j [
- /t "
q . ' p i.
,{. ; ,,' " i, '\\ (
- (
- b
.q < , x .R
) c p . , r
<, ' , 1.0 Persons, Contacted Duquesne Light Company C. Bussick, Mechanical Maintenance' Supervisor
- R. Hansen, Director of Site Maintenance
- R. Hecht, Electrical Maintenance, Unit 1
- D. Hunkele, Director of Quality Assurance F. Lipchick, Senior Licensing Supervisor
- M. Orr, Maintenance Coordinator
- M. Pergar, Quality Control Supervisor
- B. Seoelak, Licensing Engineer
- R. Srnwden, Quality Control Coordinator l
L.
- J. V.!f.sollo, Director of Licensing US Nucibar Regulatory Commission l
- S. Pindale, Resident Inspector, BVPS
,
- Denotes those present at the exit meeting conducted on September 4, 1987.
t .2'. 0 Mcensee Action On Previous Inspection Findings (Closed) Unresolved Item (5C-334/85-27-03): The "B" Component' Cooling ' l
Water,? ump motor was declared inoperable on November 1, 1985, due to high lube M1 temperatures. After several unsuccessful licensee attempts to / identify:and correct the problem, unresolved item 85-27-03 was initiated for NRC Region I to track the corrective action.
, ' The' licensee's continued investigation of the problem was documented in s Report No. N02MEL: 0071, dated February 3,1986, which stated in part that the overheating was due to misalignment of the pump and motor.
Corrective action included realigning the motor and opening the inboard i ' bearing gap to 7 mils. The report went on to state that the motor performance was acceptable following the. corrective action.
Subsequently, the inspector's review did not identify further discrepancies in the > , motor's performance following the licensees corrective action.
! Based on the above, this item is closed.
, 3.0 Maintenance Review i ',The inspector reviewed the controls established to govern ' maintenance and caseryed maintenance activities in order to determine the effectiveness of the maintenance pr(gram at BVPS Unit 1.
q The foT,Eprq references constituted the basic requirements:
6.,, 10 CFR 5 0 Appendix B, Quality Assurance Criteria for Nuclear Power
Plants, i lt - 3 t i/ I) - - _ _ _ - _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ - _ - _ _ -
- '
t, . - -_ _ _ _ _ _ ._.
~
______7-_- . - (U 6 s / J) - N Y,
) / ' ,},)
r , ir) l ]$
, id i 'i,' ! ' ' ~3 j - ) j e (I -
) , . 4' j Regulatory Guide 1.33-1978, Quality Assurance Program Requirements, j f' - e ANSI N18.7-1976, Administrative ' Controls.and' Qxlity Assurcr,ce (qr
the Operational Phase of Nucleap id e Pla6ts,' b d I a
! l 'l ,' ^ i i i .., Beaver Valley Power Station (BVPS), In%1, Technidl Specifications.
f
-(\\ vl b /' 3.1 Maintenance Work Documentation;Aeview ', V ! i I n . - f The inspector reviestdlmaintedince documentation for several plant components.
This review consisted of verifying that the Technical !
Specification requirement for the five yeaq *etention of maintenance records has been implement 4d yid, checking to ensure that / Maintenance Work Reque.st (MWR) packages are adequately documenting i documents rerpiewed.) 'Tsa following atdributes were also verified ' 1.
l and controlling maintenance work.
(See 'Apperlix 1 for a listino..of , i during the Nnspector's redp! of MWR pMkager;! ,
i i ! . l ' ' " Initial Problem or Failure Descriptiu" section of the MWR: l
' adequately describes the hilure or problem, ) >- Adequate po'st-maintenance te.$ ting has been performed prior to
l returning the component or system to service, l . Applicable work procedures have been designated, or an adequate )
description of the work to be performed is documented on-the ! ' MWR, ! t "QualityContalCoverageReciuired"stamdsordd[b61dpoints } ' a are incorporated into the controlling documenti, o needed, ! l ' .
" Corrective Action" portion of the MWR is adequately completed
<t so that an accurate description of the work puformed.N, j documented, ' /) ' .,,
o Replacement par't's' nr materials are documented and referenced to
ensure traceability,
, I / }. l , Work authorization i,au been obtained prior to the commencement j
of work and has been performed'in accordance with station ~ policy, and i Maintenance and Test Equipment (M&TE) used for the work is I
documented in tho MIRgackage and is indicated as being , properly rglibrt.ted during use.,7 ,
- -
j j J ' , , 3.2 Maintenance Procedure Review A C
>; r [1 j The inspector reviewed selectedsnaictenance p ocedures in order to,. ' i ) determine their adequacj.; During this review, the following l' ) l attributes were verified: ~ ' l
l A , I Y' l l i I ' _ - - - - -
} - .
, j1 Procedures were approved and formatted in accordance with
station policy; l Quality Control hold points were incorporated into the
procedures in an acceptable manner; Instructions from vendor. manuals were used in the procedures as l
applicable; j Torque values were specified where required or needed; and,
Procedure instructions were technically adequate for the work
to be performed.
3.3 Observation of Maintenance Activities The inspector observed maintenance work being conducted on the following components: Control Room Air Conditioning Unit, AC-1A,
Fuel Pool Purification Pump and Motor, "A",'and
, Feedwater Regulating Valve, FCV-FW-478.
- During the performance of work on these components, the inspector specifically verified the following attributes:
Maintenance activities were authorized by Operations personnel
prior to the beginning of work; > Maintenance personnel conducting the work were familiar with
' the ongoing job; QC coverage appeared to be adequate; .
Procedures were followed where applicable;
Requirements specified on Radiation Work Permits (RWPs) were
followed where applicable; Maintenance personnel established cleanliness controls
appropriate for the' work; Housekeeping control of job sites was adequate;
Serial numbers and calibration dates of maintenance and test
l equipment used for the job were recorded in the applicable controlling documents; i
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ - .. i
Replacement parts were documented in the applicable controlling
document; Testing associated with the maintenance activity was performed " - adequately; and, Performance of the~ work was conducted in a safe manner.
- 3.4 Findings and Discussion Following a review of the maintenance histories for selected components, the inspector concluded that the licensee had an extensive maintenance data base.
This. data base covers a span from current maintenance activities to activities which are greater than five years old.
Upon request, the licensee was able to print out listings of preventive and corrective maintenance tasks performed on individual components.
Printouts for individual components were also obtained which described in detail the failure description and-corrective action, as well as other pertinent maintenance informa-tion.
This maintenance data base is supplementary to the microfilmed' maintenance packages maintained by plant records.- The inspector concluded, after his review of the requested historical maintenance i information, that the attributes listed in paragraph 3.1 of this report are adequately addressed in the available work documentation.
Based on personal observations of the ongoing work, the inspector concluded that the three activities observed were conducted in accordance with the requirements identified in paragraph 3.3 of this report.
The inspector did question maintenance personnel during-testing associated with work on the control room air conditioning unit concerning the possible hazards of inhaling Refrigerant-12 which-was discharging into a closed space during the test.
The inspector observed that the maintenance personnel exhibited no apparent concern even though a rather large amount of Refrigerant-12 was discharging into the test area through a leaking flange.
These maintenance personnel later stated to the inspector that they sho,uld be careful not to be exposed unnecessarily to the vapors. The inspector discussed this concern with management, who indicated that the matter would be examined in order to ensure safe work practices.~ The inspector had no further questions.
During his review, the inspector held discussions with various'sife personnel in order to determine the conduct and effectiveness of the Preventive Maintenance (PM) program at BVPS Unit 1.
The inspector subsequently concluded that PM trending analyses of plant. components are performed on a reactive basis and are not part of an ongoing program for most components at the site.
The inspector did identify several instances where components were.added to the PM program after work performed under corrective maintenance MWRs had identified activities that could be addressed on a preventive basis. One example -
- .
i of.this type'was noted by the inspector during a: review of l .. maintenance activities performed on the "A" Low-Head Safety Injection -{ Pump, where securing nuts for the wedge control rods were periodi-j cally tightened under corrective maintenance MWRs.
The inspector . observed that a periodic inspection of these nuts had been initiated ! on a preventive maintenance basis indicating a responsiveness of } maintenance personnel to a preventive maintenance philosophy, g No violations or deviations were identified.
4.0 Quality Assurance / Quality Control (QA/QC) - The inspector held discussions with Quality Control (QC) personnel; reviewed maintenance procedures and MWRs; and observed ongoing work in order to ascertain QCs role in maintenance.
The inspector determined that QC coverage of maintenance activities were adequate,'and that QC inspectors are familiar enough with the maintenance activities to perform their function properly.
In addition, maintenance work requests and _ maintenance procedures have an appropriate number and placement of hold.
~ ' points in order to assure adequate inspection of the work.
No violations or deviations were observed.
l l 5.0 Exit Meeting !l The inspector met with licensee representatives (denoted in paragraph 1.0) l at the conclusion of the inspection on September 4, 1987.
During this- ' exit meeting, the inspector summarized the. scope and findings of the inspection as described in this report.
j i At no time during the inspection was written. material provided to the _l licensee by the inspector. The licensee did not identify any information
presented as being proprietary.
-i
-l l l l \\ q l
..... APPENDIX 1-l DOCUMENTS REVIEWED ! Duquesne Light Company Nuclear Group, Site Administrative Procedures: Chapter 3D, The Maintenance Work Request, Rev. 3.
!
Chapter 8A, Maintenance, Rev. O.
J
Chapter 8B, Instrumentation And Control, Rev. O.
i
Chapter 33, Control and Coordination Of Surveillance Tests And
Calibrations, Rev. 1.
Corrective Maintenance Procedures: CMP 1-11SI-P-1A-1B-6M, Rev. 1, Changing of Rod Seals.
- CMP 1-7CH-P-1A-B-C-SM, Rev. 4, Charging Pump Change Out of Rotating
Element.
CMP 1-6RC-P-IA-B-C-1E, Rev. 3, Uncoupling Shaft Rotation and Recoupling -
of the IA, 18 or IC Reactor Coolant Pump Motor.
CMP 1-6RC-RVLIS-1M, Rev. 1, Removal and Reinstallation of Reactor Vessel j
Level Instrumentation System.
! CMP 1-06RC-TK-1-1M, Rev. 2, Pressurizer Manway Cover Gasket Replacement.
! a i CMP 1-6RC-RV-551A-B-C-3M, j
Rev. 2, DRAFT, Pressurizer Safety Valve Removal ' and Reinstallation.
CMP 1-7CH-P-1A-B-C-8M,
Rev. 9, Charging Pump Overhaul.
Preventive Maintenance Procedures: PMP 1-341A-C-1A-1B-1M, Rev. O, Containment Instrument Air Compressor
Maintenance Checks.
PMP 1-75-MOTOR-IE, Rev. 7, Pump Motor Inspection, Lubrication and
l Linestarter Inspection.
i PMP 1-11SI-P-1A-1E, Rev. 3, Safety Injection Pump Motor, Inspection,
l Testing and Lubrication.
Duquesne Light Company Report, ND1MEL:0071, February 3,1986, CCR-P-1B Failure , ! Investigation.
Maintenance Work Requests: MWR 860635, Purification Pump Discharge FCV.
!
l MWR 866690, Containment Instrument Air Compressor.
- MWR 866942, Low Head Safety Injection Pump 1A.
> MWR 860962, Low Head Safety Injection Pump 1A (LHSI).
- MWR 866135, Containment Instrument Air Compressor.
- MWR 851957, LHSI Pump 1A.
- MWR 840821, Purification Pump 4B Discharge FCV.
- MWR 841424, Containment Instrument Air Compressor.
- MWR 811260, LHSI Pump 1A.
}}