IR 05000346/1978010
| ML19319B857 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Davis Besse  |
| Issue date: | 06/20/1978 |
| From: | Little W, Menning J NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19319B855 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-346-78-10, NUDOCS 8001280683 | |
| Download: ML19319B857 (4) | |
Text
.-
{
,
s U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT
REGION III
Report No. 50-346/78-10 Docket No. 50-346 License No. NPF-3 Licensee: Toledo Edison Company Edison Plaza 300 Madison Avenue Toledo, OH 43652 Facility Name: Davis-Besse Nuclear Generating Plant, Unit 1 Inspection At: Davis-Besse Site, Oak Harbor, OH Inspection Conducted: May 5, 9-11, and 14-18, 1978 A/h S
/
Inspector: /J. E. Menning ( / _.. 'f s
w
-,
.
g l
b r
//M./<rb:
Approved By: W: 3. Ultt16, Chief
'
Nuclear Support Section 2
/
Inspection Summary Inspection on May 5, 9-11, and 14-18, 1978 (Report No. 50-346/78-10)
Areas Inspected: Nonroutine, announced inspection of Burnable Poison Rod Assembly (BPRA) inspection activities including th2 procedures and surveillance testing related to the BPRA inspections. The inspection involved 63 inspector-hours onsite by one NRC inspector and included inspection effort conducted during offshift hours.
Results: No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
)
J 8001280 hb
-
__
_
.
O v
DETAILS 1.
Persons Contacted
- T. Murray, Plant Superintendent W. Green, Administrative Coordinator B. Beyer, Maintenance Engineer L. Stalter, Technical Engineer J. Hickey, Training Supervisor J. Lingenfelter, Nuclear and Performance Engineer W. Mills, Senior Assistant Engineer R. Flood, Shift Foreman S. Hall, Shift Foreman J. Tapley, Chemistry and Health Physics Foreman T. Lehman, Supervising Operator D. Snyder, Supervising Operator
- Denotes those present at the exit interview.
2.
Scope of NRC Inspector's Activities
The licensat a BPRA inspection program basically involved removing the BPRA's from associated fuel assemblies and examining the holddown latch assemblies for evidence of wear. The licensee originally
\\, -
intended to permanently remove all BPRA's from the reactor if any examined holddown latch assembly exhibited wear in the flat or land region. The licensee also originally intended to conduct all BPRA inspections in the reactor vessel without transferring any fuel assemblies. This plan could not be followed, however, when it was discovered that most of the BPRA's could not be removed from asso-ciated fuel assemblies in the reactor vessel using the main fuel handling bridge control component mast.
The licensee then decided to conduct inspections in the reactor vessel at all core locations at which BPRA's could be removed and to subsequently transfer the remaining BPRA's/ fuel assemblies to the transfer tube pit for BPEA removal / inspection.
The inspector left the plant on May 18, 1978, upon learning that the licensee had decided to permanently remove all BPRA's from the reactor. This decision was based upon observed wear indications in the chamfered regions of several holddown latch assemblies. At the time the inspector lef t the plant, the licensee had attempted to remove BPRA's from 61 of the 68 involved fuel assemblies.
BPRA's had only been removed from and inspections conducted at 11 core locations. None of the 11 initially examined holdown latch assemblies exhibited significant wear in the land or flat area.
(A'
-2-
!
I
!
-
'.
\\
.
i The NRC inspector's activities were principally concerned with preparations for and the performance of the initial inspections which were conducted in the reactor vessel (with no fuel assembly transfers). However, the inspector did review the procedure which the licensee intended to use to transfer BPRA's/ fuel assemblies to
the transfer tube pit for BPRA removal and inspection.
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
3.
Preparation for In-Vessel BPRA Inspection Activities
.
The inspector reviewed the licensee's procedure for BPRA inspection activities (PP 1502.04.3) and verified that an approved procedure was available for this work.
The inspector also reviewed the following records to verify that Technical Specification surveillance requirements had been satisfied.
a.
Reactor vessel baron concentration data was recorded in the Primary Chemistry Log. Reviewed data for the period of May 4-16, 1978.
b.
Source range nuclear instrumentation functional testing per-
's formed per ST 5091.01, " Source Range Functional Test."
Reviewed data for testing on May 13, 1978 (within 8 hours9.259259e-5 days <br />0.00222 hours <br />1.322751e-5 weeks <br />3.044e-6 months <br /> of the start
'
of core alterations),
s c.
Source range nuclear instrumentation channel check data recorded on Control Room Reading Sheets. Reviewed data for period May 13-17, 1978.
d.
Containment penetration status and containment purge and exhaust
,
isolation system operability testing performed per ST f092.01, l
"CTMT Penetration Lineup Refueling Check." Reviewed data for
'
testing on May 13, 1978 (within 100 hours0.00116 days <br />0.0278 hours <br />1.653439e-4 weeks <br />3.805e-5 months <br /> of the start of core alterations).
e.
Control rod and fuel assembly hoist testing performed per l
ST 5093.01, " Fuel Handling Bridge Load Test."
Reviewed data for testing on May 13,1978 (within 100 hours0.00116 days <br />0.0278 hours <br />1.653439e-4 weeks <br />3.805e-5 months <br /> of equipment use).
f.
Decay heat removal flow data recorded per ST 5099.2, " Daily Checks." Reviewed data for period May 9-16, 1978.
.
g.
Communication check results recorded in the Refueling Log.
Reviewed check results for the period May 15-17, 1978.
V-3-
l
.,
_
_ _.
_
_ - -.. _
-
i e*%
,
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
4.
In-Vessel BPRA Inspection Activities The inspector verified by direct observations that core monitoring during core alterations was in accordance with the Technical Speci-fications, that containment penetration status during core alterations was consistent with Technical Specification requirements, that BPRA movements were performed in accordance with the instructions / controls provided in the approved procedure, that core internals were stored to protect against damage, that housekeeping was proper, that reactor vessel boron concentrations were consistent with Technical Specifi-cation requirements, that the individual directing core alteration activities held a senior operator license and was present directly supervising activities, and that a licensed reactor operator was present in the control room and in constant direct communications with a member of the fuel handling crew when work was being performed that could affect the reactivity of the core.
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
5.
Preparation for BPRA Inspection Activities in The Transfer Tube Pit The inspector reviewed the licensee's procedure for BPRA inspection activities in the transfer tube pit (PP 3.502.04.4) and verified that an approved procedure was available for this work.
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
6.
Exit Interview The inspector met with Mr. T. Murray at the conclusion of the inspection on May 18, 1978. The inspector summarized the scope and findings of the inspection.
i i
G)
-4-
_ _.