IR 05000336/1982003
| ML20042B707 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Millstone  |
| Issue date: | 02/17/1982 |
| From: | Bettenhausen L, Petrone C NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20042B693 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-336-82-03, 50-336-82-3, NUDOCS 8203250555 | |
| Download: ML20042B707 (6) | |
Text
._
.,
_
-
-
--
-
,
.
U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT Region I Report No. 50-336/82-03 Docket No. 50-336 Category C
License No. DFR-65 Priority
-
Licensee: Northeast Nuclear Energy Company P. O. Box 270
Hartford, Connecticut 06101 Facility Name: Mi_11 stone Nuclear Power Station, Unit No. 2 Inspection at: Waterford, Connecticut
-
Inspection conducted: January 11-15, 1982 Inspector:
[
M
.f // 7/P1 C. Pat'rone, Reactor Inspector
'date signed
~
Test Program Section date signed date signed Approved by:
NM M/'7/O 4twm L. Bettenhausen, Ph.D., Chief date signeu
~
Test Program Section Inspection Summary:
Inspection on January 11-15,1982 (Report 50-3~,ti/82-03)
Areas Inspected:
Routine unannounced inspection by a region based inspector
of Refueling operations, outage-related maintenance and backshift operations.
The inspection involved 31 inspector hours onsite by one region based inspector.
Resuly : One item of noncompliance:
Failure to follow a written instruction.
4
'
8203250555 820308 PDR ADOCK 05000336 O
__.
_. -
-
-
..
.
.
.. _ _ - - -
.
.
DETAILS 1.
Persons Contacted Northeast Nuclear Energy Company
- E. Mroczka, Station Superintendent
- J. Kellt/, Unit 2 Superintendent J. Parillo, Reactor Engineer S. Scace, Operations Supervisor
- J. Heg, Operations Assistant
- P. Cassidy, Operations Technician A. Mazzulli, Assistant Maintenance Supervisor A. Weber, Shift Supervisor R. Burnside, Shift Supervisor D. Clark, Shift Supervisor
- R. Spurr, Outage Coordinator F. Donahue, Maintenance Foreman
- J. Keenan, Unit 2 Maintenance Supervisor
- J. Resetar Jr., Unit 2 Engineering
- A. Cheatham, Radiological Services Supervisor NRC
- J. Shedlosky, Senior Resident Inspector
- D. Lipinski, Resident Inspector The inspector also contacted other licensee employees including; reactor operators, health physics technicians, maintenance and security personnel.
- denotes those present at the exit interview.
2.
Maintenance a.
Auxiliary Feed Pump P-4 The inspector reviewed job order 282-144, and MP 2703A4, " Auxiliary Steam Generator Feed Pump Overhaul." The inspector witnessed portions of the pump overhaul and noted that:
- Maintenance was being performed by qualified personnel;
- Retest procedure was included;
- Tools and gages were properly calibrated;
- The system was tagged out;
- Quality control signoffs were included in the procedure and were being verified by a Quality Control Inspector;
- Housekeeping and cleaniness were satisfactory.
.
.
.
No items of noncompliance were identified.
b.
Functional Testing of Snubbers The inspector reviewed the results of the licensee's. Technical Speci-fication-related functional testing and inspection performed in accord-ance with SP 2733B, " Hydraulic Snubber Functional Test," and SP 2733A, " Hydraulic Snubber Inspection." The inspector noted that the lockup and bleed rates of the ten snubbers selected for functional testing were within the acceptance criteria of the functional test procedure. The inspector discussed these results with representatives of the maintenance department and with the responsible engineer No items of noncompliance were identified.
3.
Refueling Operations a.
Pre-Fuel Handling Activities The inspector determined by direct observation and record review, that the following pre-fuel handling activities had been completed satis-factorily:
- Technical Specification requirements;
- Refueling equipment operation;
- Radiation monitor surveillance;
- Source Range Monitor (SRM) surveillance;
- Baron concentration; and
- Ventilation requirements.
b.
Fuel Handling Activities The inspector verified by direct observation and record review that fuel handling activities were being conducted in accordance with approved procedures and Technical Specification requirements.
Items inspected included:
- Core monitoring during refueling;
- Boron concentration;
- Fuel insertion and removal;
- Control Element Assembly (CEA) shuffle;
- Fuel accountability;
- Refueling crew and control room staffing;
- A Senior Reactor Operator with no concurrent duties directly supervis-ing all fuel handling;
- Reactor vessel water level above 23 feet;
- Communication maintained between refueling operators and the control room;
- Containment integrity established per Technical Specifications; and
.
.
- Shutdown cooling flow maintained greater than 3000 gpm.
With the exception of the items below, the inspector had no further questions.
(1)
Inaudible SRM Count Rate While observing CEA shuffle from the refueling machine on January 14, 1982, the inspector was unable to hear the source range ntutron count as required by TS 3.9.2.
The neutron count indication was audible over headphones worn by the refueling operator, but background noise obscured the neutron count being transmitted over the loudspeaker. Upon questioning, the licensee's representa-tive stated they were in compliance with TS but agreed to investi-gate further. On January 15, the inspector observed that the loudspeaker volume had been increased significantly, allowing the neutron count to be clearly audible on the refueling machine.
The inspector had no further questions regarding this item.
(2) Housekeeping and Control of Loose Parts and Tools Near the Reactor Pool (Cavity) and Spent Fuel Pool On. January 14, the inspector observed that housekeeping in the immediate vicinity of the open Reactor Pool and Spent Fuel Pool was inadequate in that:
White paper covering the walkways on the refueling machine
-
was worn through, torn, and shredded in numerous places;
-
Numerous pieces of discarded yellow tape were stuck on the walls, floor, and railings adjacent to the Reactor Pool;
-
Herculite used to cover railings surrounding the Reactor Pool was torn in numerous places; Trash, including pieces of paper and a cotton glove, was
-
floating in the Spent Fuel Pool.
The inspector reported this to licensee management personnel who said they would correct the problem.
On January 15, the in,pector returned to the containment and noted there had been no significant improvement in housekeeping.
The inspector also e u mined the licensee's actions to prevent dropping articles into the Reactor Cavity and Spent Fuel Pool and noted the following conditions:
-
The tool control inventory list on the refueling machine had not been updated in two days.
It indicated that the tool
i
,
.
used for In Core Instrumentation (ICI) removal was present, although it had been removed from the area. Numerous items including a pair of' binoculars, vice grip pliers and a pipe wrench were present on the refueling machine, but were not indicated on the inventory list.
E Work was being performed on top of the pressurizer block
-
house, approximately twenty feet above the reactor cavity water level and within several feet of the edge of the cavity. The workmen used tools without lanyards. They were observed tossing staging pipe clamps down to workmen on the lower level with little regard for the open reactor cavity.
-
Work was being performed on the upper guide structure, (stored in the far end of the refueling pool) using tools without restraining or retrieving devices (lanyards).
In some cases these tools were supplied with lanyards, which the mechanics failed to use. A pile of trash, including rubber gloves and rags, was allowed to accumulate on the edge of the reactor pool, rather than placing it in a trash container.
-
Criterion V, Appendix B, 10 CFR 50, requires activities affecting quality to be prescribed by and accomplished in accordance with documented instructions.
Instruction MP-2-4987, dated December 4, 1981, " Administration During (Millstone)
Unit 2's Fourth Refuel Outage" requires that:
Managers of various departments monitor their activities
-
to ensure that housekeeping is adequate;
.
Personnel working near the reactor pool use restraining
-
or retrieving devices (lanyards) on tools or equipment; and
-
Personnel working on jobs over or near the reactor pool maintain a strict inventory of tools.
Failure to follow a documented instruction is an item of non-compliance (50-336/82-03-01).
Prior to leaving the reactor pool area the inspector noted that the tool control inventory list had been corrected.
4.
Exit Interview The inspector met with licensee representatives (see detail 1 for attendees)
at the conclusion of the inspection on January 15, 1982. The inspector summarized the scope and findings of the inspection at that time. The inspector expressed his concern that management had permitted housekeeping
,
.
and tool control requirements to be ignored. The licensee representative stated that they would investigate and take appropriate corrective action.
,
-