IR 05000335/1981025
| ML17212B077 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Saint Lucie  |
| Issue date: | 10/29/1981 |
| From: | Bibb H, Dance H, Elrod S NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML17212B076 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-335-81-25, IEB-80-06, IEB-80-6, IEC-81-02, IEC-81-2, IEIN-81-25, IEIN-81-26, IEIN-81-27, IEIN-81-28, IEIN-81-29, IEIN-81-30, NUDOCS 8112070445 | |
| Download: ML17212B077 (13) | |
Text
I I
I
~S RECT+
~4
~o ClO I
O~
+sI*a+
~
~
UNITEDSTATES
'UCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
REGION II
101 MARIETTAST., N.W., SUITE 3100 ATLANTA,GEORGIA 30303 Report No. 50-335/81-25 Licensee:
Florida Power and Light Company 9250 West Fl'agler,Street Miami, Florida 33101 Facility Name:
St. Lucie Unit No.
Docket No. 50-335 License No. DPR-67 Inspection at S
. Lucie Site near Ft. Pierce, Florida Inspector:
S. A. Elrod C g~
H. E. Bibb t
Approved by:
H. Dance, Ch ef Reactor Project Section 2C
/d 2.~g Pf ate Signed fO 4g
$f ate igned o
z-g/
D te igned SUMMARY Inspection on September 11 through October 10, 1981 Areas Inspected This routine inspection involved 198 resident inspector-hours on site in the areas of followup of previously identified areas of concern, maintenance, plant operations, survei llances, ci rculars, information notices, licensee action on previous inspection findings, preparation for refueling, and refueling activi-ties.
Results Of the 9 areas inspected, no violations or deviations were identified.
I'o 0~ooos 81'
S ~000 S~ZO OSOOOOSSS
---+0
t
'Jc
'
f p
h l,
/
'l
DETAILS Persons Contacted Licensee Employees
"C. M. Wethy, Plant Manager J.
H. Barrow, Operations Superintendent J.
E. Bowers, Maintenance Superintendent D. A. Sager, Operations Supervisor N. G. Roos, Quality Control Supervisor R. J. Frechette, Chemistry Supervisor C.
F. Lepplar, Instrument & Control Supervisor P.
L. Fincher, Training Supervisor R.
R. Jennings, Technical Department Supervisor B.'W. Mikell, Outage Coordinator R. K. Ryall, Reactor Engineering Supervisor H. F. Buchanan, Health Physics Supervisor J.
H. Ruby, Plant Administrative Supervisor J.
G. West, Security Supervisor 0.
D. Hayes, Nuclear Plant Supervisor L. W. Pearce, Nuclear Plant Supervisor N. D. West, Nuclear Plant Supervisor C. L. Burton, Nuclear Plant Supervisor M. B. Vincent, Assistant Plant Superintendent-Electrical T. A. Dillard, Assistant Plant Superintendent-Electrical A. W. Bailey, Quality Assurance Supervisor J. Krumins, Engineer
.Other licensee employees contacted included construction craftsmen, techni-cians, operators, mechanics, security force members and office personnel.
"Attended exit interview Exit Interview The inspection scope and findings were summarized on October 15, 1981 with those persons indicated in paragraph 1 above.
Licensee Action on Previous Inspection Findings a
~
(Closed)
Infraction 50-335/80-08-01:
Audible count rate in contain-ment during refueling.
This item is closed based on the inspector's observance of the temporary Hookup of the wide range nuclear instrument audible count rate circuit to two of the plant's GAI-Tronics communi-cation system speakers in containment.
Count rate was audible and clea, b.
(Closed)
Violation 81-14-01:
Failure to conspicuously post a high radiation arear'he inspector has reviewed licensee response L-81-340, dated August 6, 1981, and has observed radiation area postings since that time.
No recent problems have been identified.
The inspector had no further questions regarding this isssue.
(Closed)
Unresolved Item 50-335/80-21-04, Frequency of Testing Fire Detection Systems.
This item involved interpretation of technical specification 4.3.3.7. 1, surveillance of fire detection instruments.
It remained open in inspection report 50-335/81-09, paragraph 3.d.,
pending licensee inclusion of all smoke detectors in the surveillance program vice the minimum required by technical specifications.
Instru-mentation and control procedure 1800051, Revision 5, dated September 9,
1981, has been reviewed by NRC Region II Fire Protection inspectors and appears to adequately test the smoke detectors and associated systems.
The inspectors had no further questions on this item.
(Closed)
Unresolved Item 50-335/79-13-04:
Superceded Drawing Still under Effective Drawing Control.
This item concerned a case where two revisions of the same basic vendor drawing were issued under two separate Ebasco drawing numbers (both effective)
rather than two revisions of the same Ebasco drawing number.
The inspector reviewed the on-site semi-annual drawing audit results, discussed this item with the Records Vault Supervisor, reviewed corrective action request 7-12-39 and associated memoranda, and conducted a spot check of a
number of drawings.
The conditon referenced above was corrected by cancelling one of the Ebasco drawings as being superseded by the other.
One other condition was found during that same time frame.
A drawing, No. 8770-G-093, Revision 6, was issued from Ebasco without all the approval signatures.
This revision was not on the master index'ubsequently, the system has been changed such that all drawings are issued by Backfit Document Control, a Florida Power and Light (FP&L) office, at the site.
No subsequent problems were iden-tified.
Drawing 8770-G-093, Rev 6, was removed from the files.
These findings were discussed with IE Region II['anagement.
The regional position is that these two instances do riot reflect a pattern of weakness in the control of some 40,000 drawings and this unresolved item will not be elevated to a violation.
4.
Unresolved Items Unresolved items were not identified during this inspectio II
5.
Previously Identified Areas of Concern (Closed)
Inspector Followup Item 50-335/78-09-05:
Review of Crane-Related Procedures against ANSI B30.2, 1976.
The inspector reviewed three procedures and confirmed that the necessary actions had been taken to closed this item.
Operating Procedure No.
1630024, Rev.
13, Refueling Machine Operation, was revised to provide a range of Accept-able Load Limits in lieu of a single value normal limit; Administra-tive Procedure 0010438, Rev. 0, Control of Heavy Load Lifts, provided the necessary guidance to comply ANSI B30.2-1976; and new Maintenance Operating Procedure 3400022, Rev.
0, Polar Crane Inspection, provides the response discussed in paragraph 5.b. of IE Report No. 50-335/79-32.
b.
(Closed)
Inspector Followup Item 50-335/79-26-01; Licensee is to determine method to calibrate reactimeter for negative reactivities and widen range of input potentiometer s.
The inspector reviewed two revised procedures:
Operating Procedure No. 0110052, Rev.
2, Zero Power Physics Tests after Reload and Instrumentation and Control ( I&C)
Procedure No.
1400165, Rev.
4, Reactivity Computer Functional Test.
The necessary steps have been taken in the procedures to insure that both positive and negative reactivity calibrations are'done with both simulated and real signals prior to proceeding with the remainder of the zero power physics tests.
The inspector noted, however, that OP-0110052 did not specifically reference I&C Procedure No.
1400165.
This was discussed with the Reactor Engineering Supervisor, who assured the inspector that thi s would be added to an impending revi sion.
Additionally, discussion with the I&C supervisor indicated that the reactivity computer has been modified to include wider range potentio-meters to cover the condition of certain of the six group beta effec-tive values supplied by CE that could not be simulated by the reacti-meter.
This item is closed based on the above review.
d.
(Closed)
Inspector Followup Items 50-335/80-24-01 and 02:
Review of rod drop procedure by core physics and quality assurance inspector groups.
This item resulted, because contrary to procedure recommen-dation (Off-Normal Operation Procedure No.
0110030, Rev. 5),
the licensee had not remained at the existing post-rod-recovery power level for at least one hour.
This inspector, after reviewing the procedure, concurs with FP&L that this is not a hard-and-fast time requirement, but is set as a
time goal to permit time for reactor engineering personnel to assess power distribution limits and/or azimuthal tilts.
This is done expeditiously now by the Shift Technical Advisor and does, not require a full hour.
This item is closed.
(Closed)
Inspector Followup Item 50-335/80-25-02:
Improve procedure for prediction of critical condition.
This item concerned an
occurrence of June 30, 1980 where the predicted critical configuration of RCS boron concentration and CEA insertion was in error by gr'eater than 1% (delta K)/K.
The inspector at the time reviewed licensee actions taken, however improvements in the procedure had not been completed.
Recent review of operating procedure 0030126, Estimated Critical Conditions and Inverse Count Ratio, Revision 5, dated January 30, 1981, by an IE Region II inspector indicates that the problems which contri-buted to missing the estimated critical conditon on June 30, 1980, have been addressed in the revised procedure.
Specifically the effect of neptunium 239 decay has been accounted for by construction of a curve of the mixed effects of neptunium decay and Samarium buildup versus time after shutdown.
Further, the boron-worth curves were revised.
There were no further questions.
6.
(Open) IE Bulletin 80-06:
Engineered Safety Feature Rest Controls.
This IE Bulletin requires, in action No.
2 that licensees conduct a test to determine actions of engineered safeguar'd instrumentation and controls upon reset of removal of actuation signals.
This test was conducted during the Periodic Intergrated Test of Engineered Safety Features (paragraph ll d. of t
thss report)
7.
IE Circulars The following IE Circulars were reviewed to determine whether they had been received by station management, reviewed for applicability and appropriate action had been taken or planned:
a.
(Closed)
IEC 81-02:
Performance of NRC licensed individuals while on duty.
This item is closed based on the inspector's review of Correc-tive Action Request 2-10-81 and inter-office memo dated March 13, 1981 to all department heads.
These actions are seen to meet the recom-mended actions in the circular.
8.
IE Information Notices The following IE Information Notices were reviewed to ensure their receipt and review by appropriate management.
IE Information Notices are considered closed upon receipt and review.
IEN-81-30:
IEN-81-29 IEN-81-28 VELAN SWING CHECK VALVES Equi pment Qualification Testing Experi ence Failure of Rockwell-Edward Main Steam Isolation Valves
IEN-81-27 Flammable Gas Mixtures in the Waste Gas Decay Tanks in PWR Plants IEN-81-26 IEN-81-25 Compilation of Health Physics Related Information Items Open Equalizing Valve of Differential Pressure Transmitter Causes Reactor Scram and Loss of Redundant Safety Signals 9.
Monthly Maintenance Observation a.
The inspector audited maintenance procedures.
An in-depth look was taken at eleven attributes
= including compliance with limiting conditions for operation, proper removal from service, use of approved procedures, qualified personnel, use of certified parts, proper radiological controls, equipment properly tested prior to return to service, etc.
No violations or deviations were identified in this area.
10.
Review of Plant Operations The inspector observed routine control room operations, reviewed applicable logs and conducted discussions with control room operators during the report period.
The inspector verified the operability of selected emergency systems, reviewed tagout records and verified proper return to service of affected components.
Tours of the auxiliary and turbine buildings were conducted to observe plant equipment conditions including potential fire hazards, fluid leaks, and excessive vibrations and to verify that maintenance requests had been initiated for equip-ment in need of maintenance.
The inspector, by observation and direct interview, verified that the physical security plan was being imple-mented in accordance with the station security plan.
The inspector observed plant housekeeping/cleanliness conditions and verified implementation of radiation protection controls.
These reveiws and observations were conducted to verify that facility operations were in conformance with the requirements established under technical specifications, 10 CFR and facility procedures.
No violations or deviations were found in the area.
11.
Surveillance Observation a.
The inspector observed technical specifications required surveillance testing during Mode 6, Refueling, on the boron concentration, wide range logarithmic neutron flux monitors, decay time, containment penetrations communications, manipulator crane operability, crane travel (spent.fuel storage building), shutdown cooling circulation,
~
~
~
containment isolation, water level above irradiated fuel assemblies, and fuel pool ventilation.
The inspector verified that testing was performed in accordance with adequate procedures, test instrumentation was calibrated, limiting conditions for operation were met, removal and restoration of the affected components were accomplished, test results met requirements and were reviewed by personnel other than the indi-vidual directing the test, and that any deficiencies identified during the testing were properly reviewed and resolved by appropriate manage-ment personnel.
b.
The inspector also witnessed extensive portions of the fuel movement during unloading and reloading the core from the refueling platform, spent fuel pit, new fuel storage area, and control room.
No violations or deviations were identified in this area.
C.
The inspector observed portions of the 45 ton load test, conducted by September 19, 1981, of the new extension added to the turbine platform crane.
Portions of the safety battery 1A emergency load profile test, maintenance procedure 0960062, Revision 5,
were observed that same date.
No violations or deviations were identified in the above area.
d.
The inspectors observed portions of the Periodic Integrated Test of Engineered Safety Features conducted Septemper 12, 1981 in accordance with operating procedure 0400050.
This particular test included steps to physically verify and document the actions of each active component upon ESFAS reset (I.E.Bulletin 80-06).
Specific data sheets were provided and special data recorders briefed and stationed.
The in-spectors had no comment concerning the conduct of the test.
Test data will be reviewed by the licensee, the inspectors will examine this area in a future inspection (IFI 50-335/81-25-01).
12.
Preparation for Refueling a.
The inspector verified that technically adequate procedures were approved for the following refueling related activities.
NUMBER 1600022 1600023 1600024 REV. ¹ PROCEDURE TITLE UNIT ¹1 REFUELING OPERATION REFUELING SEQUENCING GUIDELINES FILLING AND DRAINING THE REFUELING CANAL AND CAVITY 1600025 FUEL HANDLING BLDG. VENTILATIONSYSTEM PERIODIC TEST
~
~
~
V
1600060
SOURCE HANDLING AND INSTALLATION 16010020
RECEIPT AND HANDLING OF NEW FUEL 1630021
NEW FUEL ELEVATOR OPERATION 1630022
SPENT FUEL HANDLING MACHINE OPERATION
.1630023
FUEL TRANSFER SYSTEM OPERATION 1630024
REFUELING MACHINE OPERATION 1630028
NEW FUEL HANDLING CRANE OPERATION b.
The inspector verified that the licensee had submitted a proposed core reload technical specification change to NRR for a requested extension of the thermal power li~it to 2700 megawatts.
Additionally, a
CFR 50.59 safety evaluation was performed and showed that prior NRR review is not required.
The request was submitted by FPKL letter serial No. L-81-439 dated October 8, 1981.
c.
No violations or deviations were identified in this area.
13.
Refueling Activities The inspector verified that prior to the handling of fuel in the core, all surveillance testing required by the technical specifications and licensee's procedures had been completed; verified that during the outage the periodic testing of refueling related equipment was performed as required by tech-nical specifications; observed-portions of 16 shifts of the fuel handling operations (removal, inspection and insertion)
and verified the activities were performed in accordance with the technical specifications and approved procedures; verified that containment integrity was maintained as required by technical specifications; verified that good housekeeping was maintained on the refueling area; and, verified that staffing during refueling was in accordance with technical specifications and approved procedures.
No violations or deviations were identified in this are ~
~
v